Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Prepared for: Prepared by: Cumberland County Planning Commission Michael Baker Jr., Inc. County Business Center, Suite 102 1818 Market Street, Suite 3110 18 North Hanover Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013

Approved on:

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Cumberland County Hazard Mitigation Plan Certification of Annual Review Meetings

The Cumberland County Hazard Mitigation Steering Committee has reviewed this Hazard Mitigation Plan. See Section 8 of the Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan for further details regarding this form. The director of the Hazard Mitigation Steering Committee hereby certifies the review.

DATE OF PUBLIC OUTREACH YEAR SIGNATURE MEETING ADDRESSED?* 2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

*Confirm yes here annually and describe on record of changes page.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Cumberland County Hazard Mitigation Plan Record of Changes

DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE MADE, CHANGE MADE BY CHANGE MADE BY DATE MITIGATION ACTION COMPLETED, OR (PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE) PUBLIC OUTREACH PERFORMED Revisions to the draft plan were made based on comments received from PEMA, FEMA, and Steve Eberbach 6/14/2010 local communities during the approval-pending- Jim Bennett adoption review period between 12/7/2010 and 6/1/2010 (see revisions #1-22). Removed cause information for wildfire events from Table 4.3.9-1. Added additional text for Steve Eberbach 9/2/2010 the structure identified in the levee failure Eric Hoerner hazard profile describing it as insignificant. Documented as revisions #23 and #24.

REMINDER: Please attach all associated meeting agendas, sign-in sheets, handouts, and minutes.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Revision Summary Table

REVISION REVISION DESCRIPTION NUMBER Mitigation action revisions received from J. Bennett on 12/30/2009. Revisions based on email and 1 follow-up discussion; no actions deleted. 2 Comments received from R. Ihlein on 1/12/2010. 3 Comments received from A. Wrightstone on 1/22/2010. 4 Comments received from A. Weltman on 2/4/2010. 5 Changes made to more clearly define communities responsible for each mitigation action. Mitigation action added which addresses buyout and other property protection measures for RL and 6 SRL properties (see Action 13). 7 General changes made for quality control. 8 Comments received from R. Deppen on 3/29/2010. 9 Text revised in Section 4.2.2 to clarify which hazards were profiled in the 2010 HMP update. 10 Text revised in Section 3.5 to include a summary of participation in the previous 2004 HMP. A mitigation action has been added to re-initiate training and certification of community members in the 11 NOAA NWS Ice Observer Program (see Action 14). Added Kirk Stoner, Cumberland County Director of Planning, as the lead for the HMSC in plan 12 maintenance efforts. 13 A map showing the location of specific wildfire events was added. The nationwide PSDI map was replaced with a PA PSDI probability map which highlights Cumberland 14 County. The "Wind Zones in the United States" (a.k.a. "Design Wind Speed Map for Community Shelters") map 15 was revised to show PA only with Cumberland County highlighted. The "Tornado Activity in the U.S." map was revised to show PA only with Cumberland County 16 highlighted. 17 Reference to the location of dam inundation maps was added to the Dam Failure profile. Discussion of how the NFIP is implemented at the local, state, and federal level was improved in 18 Section 5.2.2. The role of PA DCED in managing the NFIP and availability of the PA model floodplain ordinance is now included. 19 RL and SRL tables have been revised with updated totals and structure type information. 20 Political Capability assessment results added (see Section 5.2.6) 21 Self Assessment results added (see Section 5.2.7) Numerous revisions made based on review comments received from FEMA on 6/1/2010 (see plan 22 review crosswalk included in 6/14/2010 submission). 23 Wildfire cause information removed from previous events (Table 4.3.9-1). 24 Edited text for structure identified in levee failure hazard profile. Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table of Contents

1. Introduction ...... 10 1.1. Background ...... 10 1.2. Purpose ...... 10 1.3. Scope ...... 10 1.4. Authority and References ...... 11 2. Community Profile ...... 12 2.1. Geography and Environment ...... 12 2.2. Community Facts ...... 12 2.3. Population and Demographics ...... 12 2.4. Land Use and Development ...... 14 2.5. Data Sources ...... 16 3. Planning Process ...... 17 3.1. Update Process and Participation Summary ...... 17 3.2. The Planning Team ...... 20 3.3. Meetings and Documentation ...... 21 3.4. Public & Stakeholder Participation ...... 22 3.5. Multi-Jurisdictional Planning ...... 23 3.6. Existing Planning Mechanisms ...... 24 4. Risk Assessment ...... 25 4.1. Update Process Summary ...... 25 4.2. Hazard Identification ...... 26 4.2.1. Table of Presidential Disaster Declarations ...... 26 4.2.2. Summary of Hazards ...... 27 4.3. Hazard Profiles ...... 34 NATURAL HAZARDS ...... 34 4.3.1. Drought ...... 34 4.3.1.1. Location and Extent ...... 34 4.3.1.2. Range of Magnitude ...... 34 4.3.1.3. Past Occurrence ...... 36 4.3.1.4. Future Occurrence ...... 37 4.3.1.5. Vulnerability Assessment ...... 39 4.3.2. Earthquake ...... 40

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

4.3.2.1. Location and Extent ...... 40 4.3.2.2. Range of Magnitude ...... 40 4.3.2.3. Past Occurrence ...... 42 4.3.2.4. Future Occurrence ...... 44 4.3.2.5. Vulnerability Assessment ...... 44 4.3.3. Flood, Flash Flood & Ice Jam ...... 44 4.3.3.1. Location and Extent ...... 44 4.3.3.2. Range of Magnitude ...... 48 4.3.3.3. Past Occurrence ...... 50 4.3.3.4. Future Occurrence ...... 55 4.3.3.5. Vulnerability Assessment ...... 55 4.3.4. Hurricane, Tropical Storm, & Nor’easter ...... 56 4.3.4.1. Location and Extent ...... 56 4.3.4.2. Range of Magnitude ...... 56 4.3.4.3. Past Occurrence ...... 57 4.3.4.4. Future Occurrence ...... 58 4.3.4.5. Vulnerability Assessment ...... 60 4.3.5. Landslide ...... 60 4.3.5.1. Location and Extent ...... 60 4.3.5.2. Range of Magnitude ...... 63 4.3.5.3. Past Occurrence ...... 63 4.3.5.4. Future Occurrence ...... 63 4.3.5.5. Vulnerability Assessment ...... 63 4.3.6. Pandemic ...... 64 4.3.6.1. Location and Extent ...... 64 4.3.6.2. Range of Magnitude ...... 64 4.3.6.3. Past Occurrence ...... 64 4.3.6.4. Future Occurrence ...... 65 4.3.6.5. Vulnerability Assessment ...... 65 4.3.7. Subsidence & Sinkholes ...... 65 4.3.7.1. Location and Extent ...... 65 4.3.7.2. Range of Magnitude ...... 67 4.3.7.3. Past Occurrence ...... 68 4.3.7.4. Future Occurrence ...... 69 4.3.7.5. Vulnerability Assessment ...... 69 4.3.8. Tornado & Windstorm ...... 69 4.3.8.1. Location and Extent ...... 69 4.3.8.2. Range of Magnitude ...... 70 4.3.8.3. Past Occurrence ...... 72 4.3.8.4. Future Occurrence ...... 75 4.3.8.5. Vulnerability Assessment ...... 76 4.3.9. Wildfire ...... 79 4.3.9.1. Location and Extent ...... 79 4.3.9.2. Range of Magnitude ...... 81 4.3.9.3. Past Occurrence ...... 81

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

4.3.9.4. Future Occurrence ...... 83 4.3.9.5. Vulnerability Assessment ...... 83 4.3.10. Winter Storm ...... 87 4.3.10.1. Location and Extent ...... 87 4.3.10.2. Range of Magnitude ...... 87 4.3.10.3. Past Occurrence ...... 87 4.3.10.4. Future Occurrence ...... 89 4.3.10.5. Vulnerability Assessment ...... 90 HUMAN-MADE OR TECHNOLOGICAL HAZARDS ...... 90 4.3.11. Civil Disturbance ...... 90 4.3.11.1. Location and Extent ...... 90 4.3.11.2. Range of Magnitude ...... 90 4.3.11.3. Past Occurrence ...... 91 4.3.11.4. Future Occurrence ...... 92 4.3.11.5. Vulnerability Assessment ...... 92 4.3.12. Dam Failure ...... 92 See Appendix F Dam Failure Hazard Profile ...... 92 4.3.13. Environmental Hazards ...... 92 4.3.13.1. Location and Extent ...... 92 4.3.13.2. Range of Magnitude ...... 93 4.3.13.3. Past Occurrence ...... 93 4.3.13.4. Future Occurrence ...... 95 4.3.13.5. Vulnerability Assessment ...... 95 4.3.14. Levee Failure ...... 97 4.3.14.1. Location and Extent ...... 97 4.3.14.2. Range of Magnitude ...... 98 4.3.14.3. Past Occurrence ...... 98 4.3.14.4. Future Occurrence ...... 98 4.3.14.5. Vulnerability Assessment ...... 98 4.3.15. Nuclear Incidents ...... 98 4.3.15.1. Location and Extent ...... 98 4.3.15.2. Range of Magnitude ...... 99 4.3.15.3. Past Occurrence ...... 100 4.3.15.4. Future Occurrence ...... 100 4.3.15.5. Vulnerability Assessment ...... 100 4.3.16. Terrorism ...... 102 4.3.16.1. Location and Extent ...... 102 4.3.16.2. Range of Magnitude ...... 103 4.3.16.3. Past Occurrence ...... 103 4.3.16.4. Future Occurrence ...... 103 4.3.16.5. Vulnerability Assessment ...... 104 4.3.17. Transportation Accidents ...... 105 4.3.17.1. Location and Extent ...... 105 4.3.17.2. Range of Magnitude ...... 105

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

4.3.17.3. Past Occurrence ...... 105 4.3.17.4. Future Occurrence ...... 108 4.3.17.5. Vulnerability Assessment ...... 108 4.3.18. Urban Fire ...... 109 4.3.18.1. Location and Extent ...... 109 4.3.18.2. Range of Magnitude ...... 109 4.3.18.3. Past Occurrence ...... 109 4.3.18.4. Future Occurrence ...... 110 4.3.18.5. Vulnerability Assessment ...... 110 4.3.19. Utility Interruption ...... 110 4.3.19.1. Location and Extent ...... 110 4.3.19.2. Range of Magnitude ...... 110 4.3.19.3. Past Occurrence ...... 111 4.3.19.4. Future Occurrence ...... 111 4.3.19.5. Vulnerability Assessment ...... 111 4.4. Hazard Vulnerability Summary ...... 111 4.4.1. Methodology ...... 111 4.4.2. Ranking Results ...... 113 4.4.3. Potential Loss Estimates ...... 114 4.4.4. Future Development and Vulnerability ...... 120 5. Capability Assessment ...... 125 5.1. Update Process Summary ...... 125 5.2. Capability Assessment Findings ...... 125 5.2.1. Emergency Management ...... 125 5.2.2. Participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) ...... 126 5.2.3. Planning and Regulatory Capability ...... 127 5.2.4. Administrative and Technical Capability ...... 129 5.2.5. Fiscal Capability ...... 130 5.2.6. Political Capability ...... 131 5.2.7. Self-Assessment ...... 132 5.2.8. Existing Limitations...... 132 6. Mitigation Strategy ...... 133 6.1. Update Process Summary ...... 133 6.2. Mitigation Goals and Objectives ...... 141 6.3. Identification and Analysis of Mitigation Techniques ...... 145 6.4. Mitigation Action Plan ...... 146 7. Plan Maintenance ...... 173

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

7.1. Update Process Summary ...... 173 7.2. Monitoring, Evaluating and Updating the Plan ...... 173 7.3. Incorporation Into Other Planning Mechanisms ...... 174 7.4. Continued Public Involvement ...... 174 8. Plan Adoption ...... 176 9. Apppendices ...... 180 Appendix A – Bibliography Appendix B – Meeting and Other Participation Documentation Appendix C – Hazard Survey Results Appendix D – Critical Facilities Appendix E – SARA Title III Facilities Appendix F – Dam Failure Hazard Profile Appendix G – 2004 HMP Flood Loss Calculation Appendix H – Mitigation Projects Appendix I – Local Municipality Flood Vulnerability Maps

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

1. Introduction 1.1. Background Across the United States, natural and human-made disasters have led to increasing levels of deaths, injuries, property damage, and interruption of business and government services. The time, money and effort needed to recover from these disasters exhausts resources, diverting attention from important public programs and private agendas. Since 1955 there have been forty-two Presidential Disaster Declarations and four Presidential Emergency Declarations in Pennsylvania, eleven and three of which affected Cumberland County, respectively. In addition to these Presidential Declarations, there have been four Gubernatorial Declarations or Proclamations affecting Cumberland County since 1954. The emergency management community, citizens, elected officials and other stakeholders in Cumberland County, Pennsylvania recognize the impact of disasters on their community and support proactive efforts needed to reduce the impact of natural and human-made hazards.

Hazard mitigation describes sustained actions taken to prevent or minimize long-term risks to life and property from hazards and create successive benefits over time. Pre-disaster mitigation actions are taken in advance of a hazard event and are essential to breaking the disaster cycle of damage, reconstruction and repeated damage. With careful selection, successful mitigation actions are cost-effective means of reducing risk of loss over the long-term.

Accordingly, the Cumberland County Hazard Mitigation Steering Committee (HMSC), composed of government leaders from Cumberland County, in cooperation with the elected officials of the County and its municipalities, have prepared this Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) update. The Plan is the result of work by citizens of the County to develop a pre-disaster multi-hazard mitigation plan that will not only guide the County towards greater disaster resistance, but will also respect the character and needs of the community.

1.2. Purpose This Hazard Mitigation Plan was developed for the purpose of: • Providing a blueprint for reducing property damage and saving lives from the effects of future natural and human-made disasters in Cumberland County; • Qualifying the County for pre-disaster and post-disaster grant funding; • Complying with state and federal legislative requirements related to local hazard mitigation planning; • Demonstrating a firm local commitment to hazard mitigation principles; and • Improving community resiliency following a disaster event.

1.3. Scope The Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan has been prepared to meet requirements set forth by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency (PEMA) in order for the County to be eligible for funding and technical assistance from state and federal hazard mitigation programs. It will be updated and maintained to address both natural and human-made hazards determined to be of significant

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan risk to the County and/or its local municipalities. Updates will take place following significant disasters or at a minimum, every five years.

1.4. Authority and References Authority for this plan originates from the following federal sources: • Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C., Section 322, as amended; • Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 44, Parts 201 and 206; • Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, Public Law 106-390, as amended; and • National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.

Authority for this plan originates from the following Commonwealth of Pennsylvania sources: • Pennsylvania Emergency Management Services Code. Title 35, Pa C.S. Section 101; • Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code of 1968, Act 247 as reenacted and amended by Act 170 of 1988; and • Pennsylvania Stormwater Management Act of October 4, 1978. P.L. 864, No. 167.

The following FEMA guides and reference documents were used to prepare this document: • FEMA 386-1: Getting Started. September 2002. • FEMA 386-2: Understanding Your Risks: Identifying Hazards and Estimating Losses. August 2001. • FEMA 386-3: Developing the Mitigation Plan. April 2003. • FEMA 386-4: Bringing the Plan to Life. August 2003. • FEMA 386-5: Using Benefit-Cost Review in Mitigation Planning. May 2007. • FEMA 386-6: Integrating Historic Property and Cultural Resource Considerations into Hazard Mitigation Planning. May 2005. • FEMA 386-7: Integrating Manmade Hazards into Mitigation Planning. September 2003. • FEMA 386-8: Multijurisdictional Mitigation Planning. August 2006. • FEMA 386-9: Using the Hazard Mitigation Plan to Prepare Successful Mitigation Projects. August 2008. • FEMA Local Multi-Hazard Mitigation Planning Guidance. July 1, 2008. • FEMA National Fire Incident Reporting System 5.0: Complete Reference Guide. January, 2008.

The following PEMA guides and reference documents were used prepare this document: • PEMA: Hazard Mitigation Planning Made Easy! • PEMA Mitigation Ideas: Potential Mitigation Measures by Hazard Type; A Mitigation Planning Tool for Communities. March 6, 2009. • PEMA: Draft Standard Operating Guide. October 9, 2009.

The following additional guidance document produced by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) was used to update this plan: • NFPA 1600: Standard on Disaster/Emergency Management and Business Continuity Programs. 2007.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

2. Community Profile 2.1. Geography and Environment Cumberland County covers approximately 550 square miles and is located in the south-central portion of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. It lies within the Cumberland Valley, a wide fertile valley between two chains of the Appalachian Mountain Range running from northeast to southwest across eastern and south-central Pennsylvania. From the Borough of Shippensburg to the west to the Susquehanna River to the east, it stretches approximately 42 miles across. It is bordered by Blue Mountain and North Mountain to the north, South Mountain to the south, and the Susquehanna River separating the east edge of the County from the City of Harrisburg. The western edge of the County has no significant natural border. Two major tributaries to the Susquehanna River, Yellow Breeches Creek and Conodoguinet Creek, traverse the County in an approximately west-east direction. Water bodies make up approximately 0.18% of the County geographic area.

Adjacent counties include Perry County to the north, Dauphin County across the Susquehanna River to the east, Adams and York Counties to the south, and Franklin County, which shares the Borough of Shippensburg, to the west.

2.2. Community Facts Cumberland County was established as a political entity on January 27, 1750 by order of Governor James Hamilton. The County was named in honor of Cumberland, England and at one time covered 35,252 square miles. Other counties were created from the original county territory until its present size was achieved in 1855. Today, the County consists of 22 townships and 11 boroughs which are listed in Table 2.3-1. Several colleges and universities are located in the County, including: Central Pennsylvania College, Dickinson College, Messiah College, Penn State Dickinson School of Law, Shippensburg University and U.S. Army War College. There are nine public school districts throughout the County.

2.3. Population and Demographics According to the 2000 Census, the population of Cumberland County is 213,670. The US Census estimates that in 2008, Cumberland County's population reached 229,361 people. Population density is highest in the vicinity of Harrisburg, commonly known as the West Shore Area, the Boroughs of Carlisle (the County seat) and Shippensburg. Table 2.3-1 provides a distribution of County population per municipality obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau, Population Estimates Program. Note that 2008 populations are estimated projections based on 2000 Census results. Unless otherwise indicated, the 2008 population estimates are used for various assessments throughout this HMP.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 2.3-1: List of municipalities in Cumberland County with associated populations. 2000 2008 ESTIMATED PERCENT MUNICIPALITY POPULATION POPULATION CHANGE (%) Borough of Camp Hill 7,636 7,378 -3.38 Borough of Carlisle 18,155 18,379 1.23 Township of Cooke 117 158 35.04 Township of Dickinson 4,702 5,296 12.63 Township of East Pennsboro 18,271 19,817 8.46 Township of Hampden 24,116 27,017 12.03 Township of Hopewell 2,096 2,275 8.54 Borough of Lemoyne 3,995 3,949 -1.15 Township of Lower Allen 17,437 17,466 0.17 Township of Lower Frankford 1,820 1,834 0.77 Township of Lower Mifflin 1,620 1,572 -2.96 Borough of Mechanicsburg 9,038 8,721 -3.51 Township of Middlesex 6,665 6,894 3.44 Township of Monroe 5,530 5,797 4.83 Borough of Mount Holly Springs 1,925 1,909 -0.83 Borough of New Cumberland 7,349 7,048 -4.10 Borough of Newburg 372 361 -2.96 Borough of Newville 1,367 1,303 -4.68 Township of North Middleton 10,012 10,956 9.43 Township of North Newton 2,169 2,354 8.53 Township of Penn 2,812 3,063 8.93 Township of Shippensburg 4,504 5,247 16.50 Borough of Shippensburg 4,467 4,435 -0.72 Borough of Shiremanstown 1,521 1,464 -3.75 Township of Silver Spring 10,598 13,179 24.35 Township of South Middleton 12,939 14,393 11.24 Township of South Newton 1,285 1,296 0.86 Township of Southampton 4,787 6,342 32.48 Township of Upper Allen 15,338 18,030 17.55 Township of Upper Frankford 1,807 1,838 1.72 Township of Upper Mifflin 1,347 1,441 6.98 Township of West Pennsboro 5,266 5,527 4.96 Borough of Wormleysburg 2,607 2,622 0.58 TOTAL 213,670 229,361 7.34

Significant population changes were seen in the Township of Silver Spring and Township of Southampton. These municipalities have experienced a large number of residential subdivisions. The Township of Cooke saw a significant percentage change as well; however

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan this is a minor increase when considering the Township’s small population size. Most decreases in population occurred in County Boroughs which in general have been losing population since 1990.

It is important to note that the County’s population increases significantly during Carlisle Events. Carlisle Events, the largest car, truck and motorcycle collector event in the country, is held annually at the old Carlisle Fairgrounds (~88 acres) in Carlisle Borough and North Middleton Township. There are eight specialty shows held between April and October, plus spring and fall events which serve as the basis for the spring and fall Collector Car Auctions. The spring and fall events bring 150,000 to 300,000 people to the area with the spring show being the organization’s biggest draw of the year. Population values used for Carlisle Borough, North Middleton Township and other surrounding municipalities in the hazard assessments included in this HMP do not directly account for the large volume of people attending Carlisle Events. However, the potential impact of a hazard event occurring during Carlisle Events on an above normal population is recognized by the County and affected municipalities.

The median income of households in Cumberland County is $60,285. This is approximately $10,000 more than the national median household income (U.S. Census, 2008). However, seven percent of the Cumberland County population lives in poverty; seven percent of related children under 18 are below the poverty line, compared with six percent of people 65 years or older. The median age of the County population is 39.8 years with twenty-one percent of the population under 18 years of age and fifteen percent 65 years or older. Seventy-five percent of housing units in the County are single-unit structures, twenty percent are multi-unit structures and six percent are mobile homes. The median monthly housing costs for mortgaged home- owners is $1,411 and non-mortgaged owners is $441. Renters pay an average of $738 per month. Ninety-three percent of the County population is White, three-percent is Black or African-American, two percent is Hispanic, and two percent is Asian (U.S. Census, 2009).

2.4. Land Use and Development The northeast and southern portions of Cumberland County are mountainous and forested with most development occurring in the relatively flat valley between North and South Mountains. The suburbs of Harrisburg extend across the Susquehanna River into the eastern portion of the County. The central and western sections of the County are primarily rural with significant agricultural development.

There are two major (interstate) highways that traverse the County from east to west: I-81 and the Pennsylvania (PA) Turnpike (I-76). Other major highways include I-83, US Routes 11, 15, 11/15 and PA Route 581. The County is part of the Harrisburg metropolitan statistical area and a significant amount of east-west traffic crosses the Susquehanna River on bridges for the three interstate highways. A map of the County is provided in Figure 2.4-1. Additional discussion of future land development is provided in Section 4.4.4.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Figure 2.4-1: Map of Cumberland County showing municipal boundaries, major roads, railroads, water bodies and surrounding counties.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

2.5. Data Sources The Cumberland county tax assessment database was used as an inventory of structures and parcels throughout the County. The list of critical facilities provided in Appendix D was developed based on information available from the Cumberland County Department of Public Safety, Cumberland County GIS Department and comments submitted by individual communities. Information on the location of hazardous material facilities was provided by the Cumberland County GIS Department. The countywide Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map, published on March 16, 2009, was downloaded from the FEMA Map Service Center. This data provides flood frequency and elevation information used in the flood hazard risk assessment. Traffic crash analysis data was provided by the Tri-County Regional Planning Commission (TCRPC). Other GIS datasets including wooded areas, downstream users and dam locations were provided by the Cumberland County GIS Department. Population data from the 2000 Census and 2008 estimated populations were obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau (2009). The County is confident in the precision of the 2008 population values even though they are considered estimates.

Additional information used to complete the risk assessment for this plan was taken from various government agency and non-government agency sources. Those sources are cited where appropriate throughout the plan with full references listed in Appendix A.

Several data limitations were encountered during development of the 2010 HMP. Estimating potential losses that may occur as a result of hazard events requires a full range of information and accurate data. There are a number of site-specific characteristics that reduce a given structure’s vulnerability and consequential losses. Examples include first-floor elevation, the number of stories, construction type, foundation type and the age and condition of the structure. While the County maintains a property tax assessment database that includes information on the age and value of structures, specific information on building height, construction type and first floor elevations is not available.

Throughout the risk and vulnerability assessment included in Section 4, descriptions of limited data indicate some areas in which the County and municipalities can improve their ability to identify vulnerable structures and improve loss estimates. As the County and municipal governments work to increase their overall technical capacity and implement comprehensive planning goals, they should also attempt to improve their ability to identify areas of increased vulnerability. The County and municipalities would be capable of producing an even more robust vulnerability assessment in future updates to the HMP by taking two actions. First, the County and municipal building permit and data collection systems should be modified to require and keep on file elevation certificates for all new construction, elevated structures and other substantial improvements within the 100- and 500-year floodplain areas. Secondly, tax and GIS databases should include information on foundation type, construction type, basement presence and first-floor elevations for each structure. These recommendations are noted under Action 7 in the Mitigation Action Plan (see Section 6.4).

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

3. Planning Process 3.1. Update Process and Participation Summary Development of the Cumberland County Hazard Mitigation Plan has undergone several phases. A Hazards/Vulnerability Analysis was developed in August 1984 by the Cumberland County Office of Emergency Preparedness in cooperation with PEMA. This report provided an analysis of natural and human-made hazards using criteria including history, vulnerability, maximum threat and probability of occurrence (Cumberland EOP, 1984). Documented previous events and other information considered still-valid from the 1984 assessment was included in the 2010 HMP.

The Cumberland County HMSC was first formed in 2004 to construct a plan in order to review hazards that affect the County, assess potential damages from those hazard events, select actions to address the County’s vulnerability to such hazards and develop an implementation- strategy action plan in order to mitigate potential losses. The County contracted the services of URS Corporation to aid in the development of the 2004 HMP. The County HMSC met several times from May, 2003 to August, 2004; all meetings were open to the public.

The County’s current plan is a product of the 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan update. An update to the 2004 HMP was initiated in August, 2009. With funding support from FEMA, PEMA selected Michael Baker Jr., Inc. (Baker), a full-service engineering firm that provides hazard mitigation planning guidance and technical support, to assist the County through the update process. The 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan was completed for submission to PEMA and FEMA on December 7, 2009. Based on comments received from communities, PEMA, and FEMA, revisions were made and the plan was re-submitted to PEMA and FEMA on June 14, 2010.

The 2010 HMP follows the Standard Operating Guide and outline developed by PEMA in 2009 which provides a standardized format for all local hazard mitigation plans in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. As a result, the format of the 2010 HMP contrasts significantly with the previous 2004 version. These changes are summarized in Table 3.1-1 which should be used as a tool to cross-reference information contained in the 2004 vs. the 2010 HMP. In addition, summaries describing how the Risk Assessment, Capability Assessment, Mitigation Strategy, and Plan Maintenance portions of the plan have been updated are provided in Sections 4.1, 5.1, 6.1 and 7.1, respectively.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 3.1-1: Summary of format changes to the 2004 and 2010 versions of the Cumberland County HMP. 2010 HMP SECTION 2004 HMP SECTION REVIEWED NEW Executive Summary (II) Executive Summary Purpose (XIII) Section 1.2 About Cumberland County (XIII) Section 2

Cumberland County Hazard Mitigation Steering Committee (xiv) Section 3.2

Public Involvement (xv) Section 3.4 Multi-Jurisdictional Approach (xvi) Section 3.5 Introduction Process Planning Regulatory Compliance (xvii) Section 1.4 About this Document (XVIII) Section 1.3 & Section 8 Floods (Section 1.1) Section 4.3.3 Hurricanes (Section 1.2.1) Section 4.3.4 Tornadoes and Windstorms (Section1.2.2) Section 4.3.8 Winter Storms ( Section 1.2.3) Section 4.3.10 Drought (Section 1.2.4) Section 4.3.1 Fires (Section 1.3) Section 4.3.9 & Section 4.3.18 Hazardous Materials Releases (Section 1.4.1) Section 4.3.13 Terrorism (Section 1.4.2) Section 4.3.16 Nuclear/Radiological Accidents (Section 1.4.3) Section 4.3.15 Earthquakes (Section 1.5.1) Section 4.3.2

Hazard Vulnerability Assessment Landslides/Subsidence (Section 1.5.2) Section 4.3.5 & Section 4.3.7 Dam Failure (Section 1.5.3) Section 4.3.12 Aviation Incidents (Section 1.5.4) Section 4.3.17

Cumberland County (Section 2.1) Section 5.2

& Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (Section 2.2) Section 5.2 Mitigation Resources Capabilities Federal Resources (Section 2.3) Section 5.2

Terminology (Section 3.1) Section 6.1

Goals (Section 3.2) Section 6.1 Section 6.2 Goals & Mitigation Objectives Objectives (Section 3.3) Section 6.1 Section 6.2

Introduction (Section 4.1) Section 6.3 & Section 6.4 Alternative Flood Mitigation Actions (Section 4.2) Section 6.1 Section 6.4 Alternative Severe Weather Mitigation Actions (Section 4.3) Section 6.1 Section 6.4 Alternative Fire Mitigation Actions (Section 4.4) Section 6.1 Section 6.4 Alternative Hazardous Materials Release Mitigation Actions (Section 4.5) Section 6.1 Section 6.4 Alternative Terrorism & Nuclear Incident Mitigation Actions (Section 4.6) Section 6.1 Section 6.4 Actions to Guide Future Developments & Promote Public Awareness (Section 4.7) Section 6.1 Section 6.4 Related Response & Recovery Issues (Section 4.8) Section 6.1 Section 6.4 Alternative Mitigation Actions Conclusions (Section 4.9) Section 6.4

Implementation Strategy (Section 5.1) Section 6.4

Monitoring and Evaluation of the Plan (Section 5.2) Section 7.2

Public Involvement (Section 5.3) Section 7.4 Strategy Implementation

Mitigation Plan & Updating the Plan (Section 5.4) Section 7.2

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 3.1-1: Summary of format changes to the 2004 and 2010 versions of the Cumberland County HMP. 2010 HMP SECTION 2004 HMP SECTION REVIEWED NEW Critical Facilities (Appendix A) Appendix A Flood Loss Estimation Tables (Appendix B) Appendix G Alternative Hazard Mitigation Actions (Appendix C) Section 6.3 Federal Technical Assistance and Funding Matrix (Appendix D) Section 5.2

Drawings (Appendix E) throughout HMP & Appendix I FIRM Ages (Appendix F) Section 4.3.3 Future Development Trends (Appendix G) Section 4.4.4

Appendices Public Involvement Documentation (Appendix H) Appendix B Documentation of Involvement of Other Communities & Agencies (Appendix I) Appendix B Crosswalk (Appendix J) Section 8 PEMA Project Opportunity Forms (Appendix K) Appendix H Adoption Resolutions (Appendix L) Section 8

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

3.2. The Planning Team During development of the 2004 HMP, the following individuals served as members of the HMSC: • John Connolly, County Chief Clerk • Gary Eichelberger, County Commissioner • Augie Ginter, Central Cumberland Task Force, Western COG • Richard Schin, West Shore COG • Patrick Slattery, County Department of Public Safety • Kirk Stoner, County Planning Department • Ted Wise, County Emergency Management Coordinator

The HMSC for the 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan Update included: • Jim Bennett, County Planning Department Coordinator • Eric Hoerner, Emergency Management Chief of Operations • Kirk Stoner, County Planning Department Director • Robert Shively, Emergency Management Deputy Director

Additionally, the community representatives shown in Table 3.2-1 served on the 2010 countywide planning team and actively participated in the planning process through attendance at meetings, completion of assessment surveys, or submission of comments. Participants representing multiple jurisdictions are listed more than once. Also, Barry Shughart, representing Carlisle Barracks, and Justin Smith from the Cumberland County GIS Department participated in the plan update.

Table 3.2-1: Municipalities represented by the 2010 HMP and local community representatives who participated in the planning process. MUNICIPALITY PARTICIPANT(S) Borough of Camp Hill Ward Adams Borough of Carlisle Michael Snyder Township of Cooke Andre Weltman, Robert Kough, Jr. Township of Dickinson Ron Reeder Township of East Pennsboro James Bumgardner Township of Hampden Keith Metts, Doug Gochenaur Township of Hopewell Ed Chamberlin Borough of Lemoyne Robert Ihlein, Charlie Gipe, Jason Frank Township of Lower Allen Frank E. Williamson, Jr. Township of Lower Frankford Jim Burkholder Township of Lower Mifflin Ritchie Price Borough of Mechanicsburg Ronald Trace Township of Middlesex Edwin Beam Township of Monroe Marjorie E. Metzger

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 3.2-1: Municipalities represented by the 2010 HMP and local community representatives who participated in the planning process. MUNICIPALITY PARTICIPANT(S) Borough of Mount Holly Springs Grey Hain Borough of New Cumberland Steve Sultzaberger Borough of Newburg Ed Chamberlin Borough of Newville Fred Potzer Township of North Middleton Debi Ealer, Scott Winters Township of North Newton Dennis Powell Township of Penn Robert Kough, Jr., Gary Martin, Ernest Beecher Township of Shippensburg Tom Moriarty Borough of Shippensburg Steve Oldt, Tom Moriarty Borough of Shiremanstown Albert Wrightstone, Jr. Township of Silver Spring Jim Hall Township of South Middleton Brian O’Neill, Ronald Hamilton Township of South Newton David McBeth Township of Southampton Tom Moriarty Township of Upper Allen Bill Coulson, Scott Fraser Township of Upper Frankford Vonda Kelso Township of Upper Mifflin Robert Shively, Jr. Township of West Pennsboro David Twining, Richard Adler Borough of Wormleysburg Charlie Gipe, Jason Frank

3.3. Meetings and Documentation The following meetings were held during the plan update process. Audio recordings from the meetings can be obtained from Baker. Invitations, agendas, sign-in sheets and minutes for these meetings are included in Appendix B:

August 18, 2009: Internal Hazard Mitigation Steering Committee meeting held at the Cumberland County Planning Department Office to discuss project scope, schedule, goals, agenda and handouts for upcoming kick-off meeting with local municipalities.

August 26, 2009: Community kick-off meeting held at the Cumberland County Planning Department Office to introduce the project to local municipalities, inform community representatives of the HMP update process and schedule, and make a formal request for response to Risk Assessment Worksheets, Capability Assessment Surveys and 5-year Hazard Mitigation Plan Review Worksheets.

September 21, 2009: Community meeting held mainly with Local Emergency Management Coordinators at the Cumberland County Department of Public Safety to present and discuss preliminary risk and capability assessment results. This meeting also provided community representatives with an opportunity to ask any outstanding questions regarding surveys and worksheets previously distributed.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

October 28, 2009: Mitigation strategy workshop meeting held at the Cumberland County Planning Department Office to evaluate previous mitigation goals, objectives, actions and projects, and develop new actions to be included in the updated HMP. Communities were provided with an opportunity to comment on results of the risk assessment.

November 16, 2009: Public meeting held concurrently with a regularly scheduled Local Emergency Management Coordinators meeting at the South Middleton Township Building. The Mitigation Action Plan was reviewed and discussed in detail. Several additional mitigation actions were provided for inclusion in the County mitigation strategy. Final comments on previous hazard events, areas of vulnerability and mitigation issues of critical concern were received.

3.4. Public & Stakeholder Participation Each municipality was given multiple opportunities to participate in the HMP update process through invitation to meetings, review of risk assessment results and mitigation actions, and completion of worksheets and surveys. All participants were also given the opportunity to comment on a final draft of the HMP. The three tools listed below were distributed with meeting invitations to solicit data, information and comments from all 33 local municipalities in Cumberland County. Responses to these worksheets and surveys are included in Appendix B:

1) Risk Assessment Worksheet: Capitalizes on local knowledge to obtain information on identified hazards, historical records or studies that may have been performed on hazards, available inventory assets, updated loss estimates and new data sources.

2) Capability Assessment Survey: Collects information on local planning, regulatory, administrative, technical, fiscal, political and resiliency capabilities that can be included in the countywide mitigation strategy.

3) 5-Year Hazard Mitigation Plan Review Worksheet: Evaluates previous mitigation goals, objectives, actions, and projects for the purpose of determining whether they should be continued, modified, or removed from updated plan. This worksheet also aims to record progress made on actions contained in the 2004 HMP.

Public comment was encouraged throughout the planning process. The Cumberland County Planning Department Office posted the public announcement shown in Figure 3.4-1 on their website on August 27, 2009. A newspaper notice was published in the Carlisle Sentinel on November 3, 2009 and November 10, 2009 to notify the citizens of Cumberland County of the public meeting held on November 16, 2009. A copy of this notice is shown in Figure 3.4-1. Additionally, notification of the HMP update sent to representatives from neighboring counties is included in Appendix B.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Figure 3.4-1: Public notice of HMP update posted on Cumberland County Planning Department website and proof copy of newspaper notice for November 16, 2009 public meeting published in the Carlisle Sentinel.

3.5. Multi-Jurisdictional Planning This hazard mitigation plan was developed using a multi-jurisdictional approach. With funding support from PEMA, County level departments had resources such as technical expertise and data which local jurisdictions lacked. To undertake such a regional planning effort, the County depended on involvement from local municipalities. This involvement was critical to the collection of local knowledge related to hazard events. Local municipalities also have the legal authority to enforce compliance with land use planning and development issues. The County undertook an intensive effort to involve all 22 townships and 11 boroughs in the planning process.

A participation matrix is provided in Appendix B which documents community presence at the meetings described in Section 3.3 and other involvement from each jurisdiction throughout the planning process. In addition to Cumberland County, 33 of 33 local municipalities participated in the plan update. This is an improvement in community participation compared to the 2004 HMP when 25 of 33 local municipalities participated in the planning process (see Table ii in 2004 HMP); note that 31 of 33 municipalities adopted the 2004 HMP (see Table 8-1).

Note that part of Shippensburg Borough is in Franklin County. This plan only addresses the risks to Cumberland County residents. Shippensburg Borough must adopt both the Cumberland County and Franklin County hazard mitigation plans.

On January 1, 1998, West Fairview Borough merged with East Pennsboro Township. While information for these communities may have been presented separately in the 2004 HMP, West Fairview Borough and East Pennsboro Township are identified in the 2010 HMP as a single jurisdiction.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

3.6. Existing Planning Mechanisms There are numerous existing regulatory and planning mechanisms in place at the state, County and municipal level of government which support hazard mitigation planning efforts. These tools include the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Standard All-Hazard Mitigation Plan, local floodplain management ordinances, the Cumberland County Stormwater Management (Act 167) Plan, the Cumberland County Comprehensive Plan, Local Emergency Operation Plans, local zoning ordinances, the Cumberland County Traffic Management Plan. These mechanisms were discussed at community meetings and are described in Section 5.2. They enhance the County’s mitigation strategy and are therefore incorporated into several of the mitigation actions identified in Section 6.4.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

4. Risk Assessment 4.1. Update Process Summary This risk assessment provides a factual basis for activities proposed by the County in their mitigation strategy. Hazards that may affect Cumberland County are identified and defined in terms of location and geographic extent, magnitude of impact, previous events and likelihood of future occurrence. This hazard profile structure differs from what was used in the 2004 HMP; however all information from the previous plan has been included or updated in the 2010 HMP, unless otherwise indicated.

The HMSC identified natural and human-made hazards which have the potential to impact Cumberland County. The occurrence of a past hazard event in the County provided an indication of future possible incidence, but the fact that a hazard event has not previously occurred did not exclude the hazard from further investigation. Hazard profiles were then developed in order to define the characteristics of the hazard as it applies to Cumberland County.

Following hazard identification and profiling, a vulnerability assessment was performed to identify the impact of natural or human-caused hazard events on people, buildings, infrastructure and the community. Each natural and human-made hazard is discussed in terms of its potential impact on individual communities in Cumberland County, including the types of structures and infrastructure that may be at risk. The assessment allows the County and its municipalities to focus mitigation efforts on areas most likely to be damaged or most likely to require early response to a hazard event. A vulnerability analysis was performed which identifies structures, critical facilities or people that may be impacted by hazard events and describes what those events can do to physical, social and economic assets. Depending upon data availability, assessment results consist of an inventory of vulnerable structures or populations.

Section 4.2 provides an updated summary of previous disaster declarations affecting Cumberland County as well as a review of hazards identified as having the potential to impact the County in 2010. Earthquake, coastal storm (i.e. hurricanes, tropical storms, and nor’easters), landslide, pandemic, subsidence and sinkhole, civil disturbance, dam failure, levee failure, transportation accident, and utility interruption hazards were not fully profiled in the 2004 HMP or previous risk assessments, but were included in the 2010 HMP update. A more detailed storyline summary of risk assessments completed for Cumberland County dating back to 1984 and the hazards identified through those efforts is provided in Section 4.2.2. Only the most current and credible sources were used to complete the hazard profiles included in Section 4.3. In some instances, sources providing improved information have superseded those used in the 2004 HMP; see citations and Appendix A for source details.

Results of structure inventory analyses for various hazards may differ from what was previously shown in the 2004 HMP. For example, the 2004 HMP identified 418 structures located in the 1%-annual-chance floodplain for the Township of Hampden while Table 4.3.3-1 now identifies 252 structures in the 1%-annual-chance floodplain. These differences are generally a result of more recent structure inventory data and values provided in the 2010 HMP should be

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan considered most up-to-date best estimates. In the case of structure inventory assessments for flood hazards specifically, differences between 2004 and 2010 values are also a result of new floodplain mapping described in Section 4.3.3.1.

4.2. Hazard Identification 4.2.1. Table of Presidential Disaster Declarations Presidential Disaster and Emergency Declarations are issued when it has been determined that state and local governments need assistance in responding to a disaster event. Table 4.2-1 identifies Presidential Disaster and Emergency Declarations issued between 1955 through 2009 that have affected Cumberland County. Additional declarations beyond 2009 can be found on the FEMA website at: http://www.fema.gov/news/disasters_state.fema?id=42. Table 4.2-2 lists Gubernatorial Disaster Declarations or Proclamations that have been issued for Cumberland County between 1954 and 2009. Both Presidential and Gubernatorial actions provide preliminary information on previous hazard events.

Table 4.2-1: Presidential Disaster and Emergency Declarations affecting Cumberland County. DECLARATION NUMBER DATE EVENT 1649 June, 2006 Severe Storms, Flooding, Mudslides 3235* September, 2005 Hurricane Katrina Evacuee Assistance 1557 September, 2004 Tropical Depression Ivan 1497 September, 2003 Tropical Storms Henri & Isabel 3180* February, 2003 Severe Winter Storm 1294 September, 1999 Hurricane Floyd 1138 September, 1996 Hurricane Fran 1085 January, 1996 Severe Winter Storm 1093 January, 1996 Flooding 1015 January, 1994 Severe Winter Storm 3105* March, 1993 Severe Winter Storm 523 October, 1976 Severe Storms, Flooding 485 September, 1975 Hurricane Eloise 340 June, 1972 Hurricane Agnes * Presidential Emergency Declaration

Table 4.2-2: Gubernatorial Disaster Declarations or Proclamations affecting Cumberland County. DATE EVENT February, 2002 Drought July, 1999 Drought July, 1991 Drought November, 1980 Drought September, 1963 Drought

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Since 1955, declarations have been issued for various hazard events including hurricanes or tropical storms, severe summer and winter storms, mudslides, flooding and drought. A unique Presidential Emergency Declaration was issued in September, 2005. Through Emergency Declaration 3235, President George W. Bush declared that a state of emergency existed in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and ordered federal aid to supplement Commonwealth and local response efforts to help people evacuated from their homes due to Hurricane Katrina. All counties within the Commonwealth, including Cumberland County, were indirectly affected by Hurricane Katrina as a result of evacuee assistance.

4.2.2. Summary of Hazards Table 4.2-3 summarizes hazards identified in the 1984 Cumberland County Hazards/Vulnerability Analysis (Cumberland EOP, 1984). While this report should not be considered a comprehensive Hazard Mitigation Plan, there is significant historical information included in the analysis that proved valuable in completing this plan update.

Table 4.2-3: Natural and human-made hazards identified in the 1984 Cumberland County Hazards/Vulnerability Analysis. HAZARD TYPE HAZARD Floods Winter Storms Tornadoes, Hurricanes, & Windstorms Natural Hazards Droughts & Water Supply Deficiencies Earthquakes Landslide & Subsidence Dam Failures Hazardous Materials Transportation Accidents Human-made Hazards Fire Hazards Fixed Nuclear Facility Energy Emergencies Nuclear Attack

Table 4.2-4 summarizes hazards identified through the risk assessment included in the Cumberland County Hazard Mitigation Plan developed in 2004.

Table 4.2-4: Natural and human-made hazards identified in 2004 risk assessment. PREVIOUS HAZARD EVALUATION OCCURENCES Past disaster events in the Profile and vulnerability Floods County assessment performed Frequent occurrences in Profile and vulnerability Hurricanes & Tropical Storms the County assessment performed Frequent occurrences in Profile and vulnerability Tornadoes & Windstorms the County assessment performed Frequent occurrences in Profile and vulnerability Winter Storms the County assessment performed Frequent occurrences in Profile and vulnerability Drought the County assessment performed

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.2-4: Natural and human-made hazards identified in 2004 risk assessment. PREVIOUS HAZARD EVALUATION OCCURENCES Frequent occurrences in Profile and vulnerability Fires (natural and man-made) the County assessment performed Hazardous Material Releases Past occurrences in the Profile and vulnerability (Fixed facilities & Transportation) County assessment performed One previous documented Profile and vulnerability Nuclear incidents occurrence near County assessment performed Past occurrences in the Profile and vulnerability Terrorism County assessment performed Past occurrences in the Described and considered low Earthquake state risk, therefore not profiled Past occurrences in the Described and considered low Landslides/Subsidence state risk, therefore not profiled Past occurrences in the Described and considered low Dam failure state risk, therefore not profiled Past occurrences in the Described and considered low Aviation incidents state risk, therefore not profiled Avalanche None Not profiled

Coastal storms (coastal erosion) None Not profiled

Tsunamis None Not profiled

Volcanoes None Not profiled

Of the hazards shown in Table 4.2-4, the potential impacts of flooding, severe weather (i.e. hurricanes, tornadoes, wind storms, winter storms, drought), wildfires, urban fires, hazard material releases, nuclear incidents and terrorism on Cumberland County were significant enough to warrant further investigation through hazard profiling and vulnerability assessment in 2004. The remaining eight hazards identified (earthquake, landslides/subsidence, dam failure, aviation incidents, avalanche, coastal erosion, tsunamis and volcanoes) were considered to be of low or no risk. Therefore, hazard profiles and mitigation actions were not previously developed for these hazards.

A community survey organized by PEMA in conjunction with the Pennsylvania State University Environmental Resources Research Institute was performed in 2000 in order to identify natural and technological or human-made hazards that could affect jurisdictions in Cumberland County (Evans et al., 2000). A copy of the results from this survey is included in Appendix C. The County had a 100% participation rate for this hazard identification survey; all municipalities responded. At the September 21, 2009 community meeting, the County and local municipalities recognized that results from this survey are still valid. It provides a comprehensive list of hazards that should be considered in Cumberland County. All hazards identified in the survey results were included in the 2004 Hazard Mitigation Plan with the exception of civil disturbance, transportation (other than aviation) accidents and power failure. These hazards are now included in the 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan Update.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

The HMSC was provided a comprehensive list of all hazards to be considered for evaluation in the 2010 HMP. This list was obtained primarily from the 2007 Edition of the National Fire Protection Association’s NFPA 1600: Standard on Disaster/Emergency Management and Business Continuity Programs (NFPA, 2007). Following review of the comprehensive hazards list, nineteen hazards were considered in need of risk assessment in the 2010 HMP update, including all hazards profiled or identified in previous versions of the Cumberland County HMP. Table 4.2-5 contains a complete list of the nineteen hazards which have the potential to affect Cumberland County as identified through previous county risk assessments, the 2000 PEMA survey, and input from those that participated in the 2010 HMP update. Hazard profiles are included in Section 4.3 for each of these hazards. FEMA has recently identified one levee in Cumberland County through the completion of the Region III Mid-term Levee Inventory. Therefore, levee failure has been identified as a new potential hazard. Also, due to the recent rise of H1N1 influenza virus infections, several communities requested that pandemic events be recognized as a potential hazard. Avalanche, coastal erosion, tsunami and volcano hazards were not profiled since they do not affect the Cumberland County area.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.2-5: List and description of natural and human-made hazards profiled in the 2010 HMP. HAZARD HAZARD HAZARD DESCRIPTION TYPE Drought is a natural climatic condition which occurs in virtually all climates, the consequence of a natural reduction in the amount of precipitation experienced over a long period of time, usually a season or more in length. High temperatures, prolonged winds, and low relative humidity can exacerbate the severity of drought. Drought This hazard is of particular concern in Pennsylvania due to the presence of farms as well as water-dependent industries and recreation areas across the Commonwealth. A prolonged drought could severely impact these sectors of the local economy, as well as residents who depend on wells for drinking water and other personal uses (National Drought Mitigation Center, 2006). An earthquake is the motion or trembling of the ground produced by sudden displacement of rock usually within the upper 10-20 miles of the Earth's crust. Earthquakes result from crustal strain, volcanism, landslides, or the collapse of underground caverns. Earthquakes can affect hundreds of thousands of square miles, cause damage to property measured in the tens of billions of dollars, result Earthquake in loss of life and injury to hundreds of thousands of persons, and disrupt the social and economic functioning of the affected area. Most property damage and earthquake-related deaths are caused by the failure and collapse of structures due to ground shaking which is dependent upon amplitude and duration of the earthquake (FEMA, 1997). Flooding is the temporary condition of partial or complete inundation on normally dry land and it is the most frequent and costly of all hazards in Pennsylvania. Flooding events are generally the result of excessive precipitation. General flooding is typically experienced when precipitation occurs over a given river basin

for an extended period of time. Flash flooding is usually a result of heavy localized precipitation falling in a short time period over a given location, often along mountain streams and in urban areas where much of the ground is covered by Flood, Flash impervious surfaces. The severity of a flood event is dependent upon a Flood, & Ice combination of stream and river basin topography and physiography, hydrology, Jam precipitation and weather patterns, present soil moisture conditions, the degree of vegetative clearing as well as the presence of impervious surfaces in and around flood-prone areas. Winter flooding can include ice jams which occur when warm

Natural Hazards Natural temperatures and heavy rain cause snow to melt rapidly. Snow melt combined with heavy rains can cause frozen rivers to swell, which breaks the ice layer on top of a river. The ice layer often breaks into large chunks, which float downstream, piling up in narrow passages and near other obstructions such as bridges and dams. All forms of flooding can damage infrastructure (USACE, 2007). Hurricanes and tropical storms are classified as cyclones and are any closed circulation developing around a low-pressure center in which the winds rotate counter-clockwise (in the Northern Hemisphere) and whose diameter averages 10- Hurricane, 30 miles across. While most of Pennsylvania is not directly affected by the Tropical devastating impacts cyclonic systems can have on coastal regions, many areas in the state are subject to the primary damaging forces associated with these storms Storm, & including high-level sustained winds, heavy precipitation and tornadoes. Areas in Nor’easter southeastern Pennsylvania could be susceptible to storm surge and tidal flooding. The majority of hurricanes and tropical storms form in the Atlantic Ocean, Caribbean Sea and Gulf of Mexico during the official Atlantic hurricane season which extends from June through November (FEMA, 1997). A landslide is the downward and outward movement of slope-forming soil, rock and vegetation reacting to the force of gravity. Landslides may be triggered by both natural and human-caused changes in the environment, including heavy rain, rapid snow melt, steepening of slopes due to construction or erosion, earthquakes Landslide and changes in groundwater levels. Mudflows, mudslides, rockfalls, rockslides and rock topples are all forms of a landslide. Areas that are generally prone to landslide hazards include previous landslide areas, the bases of steep slopes, the bases of drainage channels, developed hillsides and areas recently burned by forest and brush fires.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.2-5: List and description of natural and human-made hazards profiled in the 2010 HMP. HAZARD HAZARD HAZARD DESCRIPTION TYPE A pandemic occurs when a certain disease spreads through a human population resulting in the number of cases of the disease substantially exceeding the number of expected cases over a given period of time. Such a disease may or may not be Pandemic transferable between humans and animals. Pandemic events can occur subsequent to or be exacerbated by other hazard events such as water/food contamination or flooding. Subsidence is a natural geologic process that commonly occurs in areas with underlying limestone bedrock and other rock types that are soluble in water. Water passing through naturally occurring fractures dissolve these materials leaving underground voids. Eventually, overburden on top of the voids causes a collapse Subsidence & which can damage structures with low strain tolerances. This collapse can take Sinkholes place slowly over time or quickly in a single event, but in either case. Karst topography describes a landscape that contains characteristic structures such as sinkholes, linear depressions and caves. In addition to natural processes, human activity such as water, natural gas and oil extraction can cause subsidence and sinkhole formations. A tornado is a violent windstorm characterized by a twisting, funnel-shaped cloud extending to the ground. Tornadoes are most often generated by thunderstorm activity (but sometimes result from hurricanes or tropical storms) when cool, dry air intersects and overrides a layer of warm, moist air forcing the warm air to rise rapidly. The damage caused by a tornado is a result of high wind velocities and wind-blown debris. According to the National Weather Service, tornado wind speeds can range between 30 to more than 300 miles per hour. They are more likely to occur during the spring and early summer months of March through June Tornado & and are most likely to form in the late afternoon and early evening. Most tornadoes are a few dozen yards wide and touch-down briefly, but even small, short-lived Windstorm tornadoes can inflict tremendous damage. Destruction ranges from light to inconceivable depending on the intensity, size and duration of the storm. Structures made of light materials such as mobile homes are most susceptible to Natural Hazards Natural damage. Waterspouts are weak tornadoes that form over warm water and are relatively uncommon in Pennsylvania. An average of over 800 tornadoes are reported annually nationwide, resulting in an average of 80 deaths and 1,500 injuries (NOAA, 1995). Based on NOAA Storm Prediction Center Statistics, the number of recorded F3, F4, & F5 tornadoes between 1950-1998 ranges from <1 to 15 per 3,700 square miles across Pennsylvania (FEMA, 2009). A wildfire is a raging, uncontrolled fire that spreads rapidly through vegetative fuels, exposing and possibly consuming structures. Wildfires often begin unnoticed and can spread quickly, creating dense smoke that can be seen for miles. Wildfires can occur at any time of the year, but mostly occur during long, dry hot spells. Any small fire in a wooded area, if not quickly detected and suppressed, can get out of Wildfire control. Most wildfires are caused by human carelessness, negligence and ignorance. However, some are precipitated by lightning strikes and in rare instances, spontaneous combustion. Wildfires in Pennsylvania can occur in fields, grass, brush and forests. 98% of wildfires in Pennsylvania are a direct result of people, often caused by debris burns (DCNR, 2009). Winter storms may include snow, sleet, freezing rain, or a mix of these wintry forms of precipitation. A winter storm can range from a moderate snowfall or ice event over a period of a few hours to blizzard conditions with wind-driven snow that lasts Winter Storm for several days. Many winter storms are accompanied by low temperatures and heavy and/or blowing snow, which can severely impair visibility and disrupt transportation. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has a long history of severe winter weather.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.2-5: List and description of natural and human-made hazards profiled in the 2010 HMP. HAZARD HAZARD HAZARD DESCRIPTION TYPE Civil disturbance hazards encompass a set of hazards emanating from a wide range of possible events that cause civil disorder, confusion, strife, and economic hardship. Civil disturbance hazards include the following: • Famine – involving a widespread scarcity of food leading to malnutrition and increased mortality (Robson, 1981). • Economic Collapse, Recession – Very slow or negative growth, for Civil example (Economist, 2009). Disturbance • Misinformation – erroneous information spread unintentionally (Makkai, 1970). • Civil Disturbance, Public Unrest, Mass Hysteria, Riot – group acts of violence against property and individuals, for example (18 U.S.C. § 232, 2008). • Strike, Labor Dispute – controversies related to the terms and conditions of employment, for example (29 U.S.C. § 113, 2008). A dam is a barrier across flowing water that obstructs, directs, or slows down water flow. Dams provide benefits such as flood protection, power generation, drinking water, irrigation and recreation. Failure of these structures results in an uncontrolled release of impounded water. Failures are relatively rare, but immense

damage and loss of life is possible in downstream communities when such events occur. Aging infrastructure, hydrologic, hydraulic and geologic characteristics, Dam Failure population growth and design and maintenance practices should be considered when assessing dam failure hazards. The failure of the South Fork Dam, located in Johnstown, PA, was the deadliest dam failure ever experienced in the United States. It took place in 1889 and resulted in the Johnstown Flood which claimed made Hazards made - 2,209 lives (FEMA, 1997). Today there are approximately 3,200 dams and reservoirs throughout Pennsylvania (PADEP, 2008). Environmental hazards are hazards that pose threats to the natural environment the built environment, and public safety through the diffusion of harmful substances, materials, or products. Environmental hazards include the following: • Hazardous material releases – at fixed facilities or as such materials are in transit and including toxic chemicals, infectious substances, biohazardous waste, and any materials that are explosive, corrosive, flammable, or radioactive (PL 1990-165, § 207(e)). • Air or Water Pollution – the release of harmful chemical and waste materials into water bodies or the atmosphere, for example (National Technological and Human and Technological Environmental Institute of Health Sciences, July 2009; Environmental Protection Agency, Hazards Natural Disaster PSAs, 2009). • Superfund Facilities – hazards originating from abandoned hazardous waste sites listed on the National Priorities List (Environmental Protection Agency, National Priorities List, 2009). • Manure Spills – involving the release of stored or transported agricultural waste, for example (Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Impacts of…, 1998). • Product Defect or Contamination – highly flammable or otherwise unsafe consumer products and dangerous foods (Consumer Product Safety Commission, 2003). A levee is a human-made structure, usually an earthen embankment, designed and constructed in accordance with sound engineering practices to contain, control, or divert the flow of water so as to provide protection from temporary flooding (Interagency Policy Review Committee, 2006). Levee failures or breaches Levee Failure occur when a levee fails to contain the floodwaters for which it is designed to control or floodwaters exceed the height of the constructed levee. 51 of Pennsylvania's 67 counties have been identified as having at least one levee (FEMA – Region III, 2009).

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.2-5: List and description of natural and human-made hazards profiled in the 2010 HMP. HAZARD HAZARD HAZARD DESCRIPTION TYPE Nuclear accidents general refer to events involving the release of significant levels of radioactivity or exposure of workers or the general public to radiation (FEMA, 1997). Nuclear accidents/incidents can be placed into three categories: 1) Criticality accidents which involve loss of control of nuclear assemblies or power reactors, 2) Loss-of-coolant accidents which result whenever a reactor coolant Nuclear system experiences a break or opening large enough so that the coolant inventory Incidents in the system cannot be maintained by the normally operating make-up system, and 3) Loss-of-containment accidents which involve the release of radioactivity. The primary concern following such an incident or accident is the extent of radiation, inhalation, ingestion of radioactive isotopes which can cause acute health effects (e.g. death, burns, severe impairment), chronic health effects (e.g. cancer) and psychological effects. Terrorism is the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives. This hazard is highly unpredictable Terrorism and is therefore difficult to anticipate. Urban areas of Pennsylvania tend to be at greatest risk, but the nature of the hazard prevents ruling out any location as a possible target. Transportation accidents can result from any form of air, rail, water, or road travel. Transportation It is unlikely that small accidents would significantly impact the larger community. However, certain accidents could have secondary regional impacts such as a Accidents hazardous materials release or disruption in critical supply/access routes, especially if vital transportation corridors or junctions are present. An urban fire involves a structure or property within an urban or developed area. For hazard mitigation purposes, major urban fires involving large buildings and/or

made Hazards made multiple properties are of primary concern. The effects of a major urban fire - include minor to significant property damage, loss of life and residential or business Urban Fire displacement. Explosions are extremely rapid releases of energy that usually generate high temperatures and often lead to fires. The risk of severe explosions can reduced through careful management of flammable and explosive hazardous materials. Utility interruption hazards are hazards that impair the functioning of important utilities in the energy, telecommunications, public works and information network sectors. Utility interruption hazards include the following: • Geomagnetic Storms – including temporary disturbances of the Earth’s magnetic field resulting in disruptions of communication, navigation, and

Technological and Human and Technological satellite systems (National Research Council et al., 1986). • Fuel or Resource Shortage – resulting from supply chain breaks or secondary to other hazard events, for example (Mercer County, PA, 2005). • Electromagnetic Pulse – originating from an explosion or fluctuating magnetic field and causing damaging current surges in electrical and electronic systems (Institute for Telecommunications Sciences, 1996). • Information Technology Failure – due to software bugs, viruses, or improper Utility use (Rainer Jr., et al, 1991). Interruption • Ancillary Support Equipment – electrical generating, transmission, system- control, and distribution-system equipment for the energy industry (Hirst & Kirby, 1996). • Public Works Failure – damage to or failure of highways, flood control systems, deepwater ports and harbors, public buildings, bridges, dams, for example (U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, 2009). • Telecommunications System Failure – damage to data transfer, communications, and processing equipment, for example (FEMA, 1997). • Transmission Facility or Linear Utility Accident – liquefied natural gas leakages, explosions, facility problems, for example (United States Department of Energy, 2005). • Major Energy, Power, Utility Failure – interruptions of generation and distribution, power outages, for example (United States DOE, 2000).

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

4.3. Hazard Profiles NATURAL HAZARDS 4.3.1. Drought 4.3.1.1. Location and Extent Droughts are regional climatic events, so when these events occur in Cumberland County, impacts are felt across the entire county as well as areas outside county boundaries. The spatial extent for areas of impact can range from south-central Pennsylvania to the entire mid- Atlantic region. Areas with extensive agricultural land use can experience particularly significant impacts. The distribution of agricultural land by municipality in Cumberland County is included in Section 4.3.1.5.

4.3.1.2. Range of Magnitude Hydrologic drought events result in a reduction of stream flows, reduction of lake/reservoir storage and reduced groundwater levels. These events have a significant adverse impact on public water supplies for human consumption, rural water supplies for livestock consumption and agricultural operations, water quality, natural soil water or irrigation water for agriculture, soil moisture, conditions conducive to wildfire events and water for navigation and recreation.

The Commonwealth uses five parameters to assess drought conditions: 1) Stream flows (compared to benchmark records) 2) Precipitation (measured as the departure from normal, 30 year average precipitation) 3) Reservoir storage levels in a variety of locations (especially three New York City reservoirs in upper Delaware River Basin) 4) Groundwater elevations in a number of counties (comparing to past month, past year and historic record) 5) The Palmer Drought Severity Index – a soil moisture algorithm calibrated for relatively homogeneous regions which measures dryness based on recent precipitation and temperature (see Table 4.3.1-1).

Table 4.3.1-1: Palmer Drought Severity Index (PSDI) classifications (NDMC, 2009). SEVERITY CATEGORY PSDI VALUE Extremely wet 4.0 or more Very wet 3.0 to 3.99 Moderately wet 2.0 to 2.99 Slightly wet 1.0 to 1.99 Incipient wet spell 0.5 to 0.99 Near normal 0.49 to -0.49 Incipient dry spell -0.5 to -0.99 Mild drought -1.0 to -1.99 Moderate drought -2.0 to -2.99 Severe drought -3.0 to -3.99 Extreme drought -4.0 or less

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Phases of drought preparedness in Pennsylvania in order of increasing severity are: • Drought Watch: A period to alert government agencies, public water suppliers, water users and the public regarding the potential for future drought-related problems. The focus is on increased monitoring, awareness and preparation for response if conditions worsen. A request for voluntary water conservation is made. The objective of voluntary water conservation measures during a drought watch is to reduce water uses by 5 percent in the affected areas. Due to varying conditions, individual water suppliers or municipalities may be asking for more stringent conservation actions. • Drought Warning: This phase involves a coordinated response to imminent drought conditions and potential water supply shortages through concerted voluntary conservation measures to avoid or reduce shortages, relieve stressed sources, develop new sources, and if possible, forestall the need to impose mandatory water use restrictions. The objective of voluntary water conservation measures during a drought warning is to reduce overall water uses by 10-15 percent in the affected areas. Due to varying conditions, individual water suppliers or municipalities may be asking for more stringent conservation actions. • Drought Emergency: This stage is a phase of concerted management operations to marshal all available resources to respond to actual emergency conditions, to avoid depletion of water sources, to assure at least minimum water supplies to protect public health and safety, to support essential and high priority water uses and to avoid unnecessary economic dislocations. It is possible during this phase to impose mandatory restrictions on non-essential water uses that are provided in the Pennsylvania Code (Chapter 119), if deemed necessary and if ordered by the Governor of Pennsylvania. The objective of water use restrictions (mandatory or voluntary) and other conservation measures during this phase is to reduce consumptive water use in the affected area by fifteen percent, and to reduce total use to the extent necessary to preserve public water system supplies, to avoid or mitigate local or area shortages and to assure equitable sharing of limited supplies. • Local Water Rationing: Although not a drought phase, local municipalities may, with the approval of the PA Emergency Management Council, implement local water rationing to share a rapidly dwindling or severely depleted water supply in designated water supply service areas. These individual water rationing plans, authorized through provisions of the Pennsylvania Code (Chapter 120), will require specific limits on individual water consumption to achieve significant reductions in use. Under both mandatory restrictions imposed by the Commonwealth and local water rationing, procedures are provided for granting of variances to consider individual hardships and economic dislocations.

Environmental impacts of drought include: • Hydrologic effects – lower water levels in reservoirs, lakes and ponds; reduced streamflow; loss of wetlands; estuarine impacts; groundwater depletion and land subsidence; effects on water quality such as increases in salt concentration and water temperature • Damage to animal species – lack of feed and drinking water; disease; loss of biodiversity; migration or concentration; and reduction and degradation of fish and wildlife habitat • Damage to plant communities – loss of biodiversity; loss of trees from urban landscapes and wooded conservation areas

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

• Increased number and severity of fires • Reduced soil quality • Air quality effects – dust and pollutants • Loss of quality in landscape

4.3.1.3. Past Occurrence Declared drought status for Cumberland County from November, 1980 to February, 2008 is shown in Table 4.3.1-2. Descriptions for drought status categories (i.e. watch, warning and emergency) are included in Section 4.3.1.2. Between 1930 and 2009, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania experienced seven significant droughts extending from 1930-1934, 1939-1942, 1953-1955, 1961-1967, 1980-1983, 1991-1992 and 1999-2003. These were considered emergency events. The 1980-1983 event resulted in $196,000,000 in damages to crops across the Commonwealth and required the implementation of unusual consumption restraints in Cumberland County. Table 4.2-2 shows that since 1954, there have been five Gubernatorial Declarations or Proclamations issued (1963, 1980, 1991, 1999 and 2002) in response to drought conditions within Cumberland County and other areas of the Commonwealth. Through the 1999 Proclamation of Disaster Emergency, Governor Tom Ridge declared a drought emergency in 55 of the 67 Pennsylvania counties following extended dry weather through much of the summer. Water usage was restricted. Precipitation deficits for many counties for the months of May through July averaged between 5 and 7 inches. Precipitation departures for the 365 day period ending in mid-July were over 1 foot below normal in many places. This is about one-third of total annual normal precipitation in most areas. Streams were empty, wells dried up, and the Susquehanna River hit record low flows.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.3.1-2: Cumberland County Declared Drought Status from 1980 to 2009 (PADEP, 2009). DROUGHT DROUGHT DATE DATE STATUS STATUS Nov 18, 1980 - Apr 20, 1982 Emergency Mar 15, 1999 - Jun 10, 1999 Watch Apr 26, 1985 - Jul 29, 1985 Watch Jun 10, 1999 - Jun 18, 1999 Warning Jul 29, 1985 - Oct 22, 1985 Watch Jun 18, 1999 - July 20, 1999 Warning Oct 22, 1985 - Oct 29, 1985 Watch Jul 20, 1999 - Sep 30,1999 Emergency Oct 29, 1985 - Dec 19, 1985 Watch Sep 30, 1999 - Dec 16, 1999 Watch Jul 7, 1988 - Aug 24, 1988 Watch Dec 16, 1999 - Feb 25,2000 Watch Aug 24, 1988 - Dec 12, 1988 Watch Feb 25, 2000 - May 5, 2000 Watch Jun 28, 1991 - Jul 24, 1991 Warning Aug 8, 2001 - Aug 24, 2001 Watch Jul 24, 1991 - Aug 16, 1991 Emergency Aug 24, 2001 - Nov 6, 2001 Watch Aug 16, 1991 - Sep 13, 1991 Emergency Nov 6, 2001 - Dec 5, 2001 Warning Sep 13, 1991 - Oct 21, 1991 Emergency Dec 5, 2001 - Feb 12, 2002 Warning Oct 21, 1991 - Jan 16, 1992 Warning Feb 12, 2002 - May 13, 2002 Emergency Jan 17, 1992 - Apr 20, 1992 Warning May 13, 2002 - Jun 14, 2002 Emergency Apr 20, 1992 - Jun 23, 1992 Warning June 14, 2002 - Aug 9, 2002 Emergency Sep 1, 1995 - Sep 20, 1995 Warning Aug 9, 2003 - Sep 5, 2002 Emergency Sep 20, 1995 - Nov 8, 1995 Warning Sep 5, 2002 - Nov 7, 2002 Emergency Nov 8, 1995 - Dec 18, 1995 Watch Nov 7, 2003 - Dec 19, 2002 Emergency Jul 17, 1997 - Oct 27, 1997 Watch Dec 19, 2002 - Jan 8, 2003 Watch Oct 27, 1997 - Nov 13, 1997 Watch Apr 11, 2006 - Jun 30, 2006 Watch Dec 3, 1998 - Dec 8, 1998 Watch Aug 8, 2007 - Sep 5, 2007 Watch Dec 8, 1998 - Dec 14, 1998 Watch Sep 5, 2007 - Oct 5, 2007 Watch Dec 14, 1998 - Dec 16, 1998 Warning Oct 5, 2007 - Jan 11, 2008 Watch Dec 16, 1998 - Jan 15, 1999 Warning Jan 11, 2008 - Feb 15, 2008 Watch Jan 15, 1999 - Mar 15, 1999 Warning

4.3.1.4. Future Occurrence It is difficult to forecast the severity and frequency of future drought events in Cumberland County. Central Pennsylvania has averaged 3.4 dry periods (defined as ten or more consecutive days having less than 0.01 inch of precipitation) per year from 1950 through 1992. Based on historical events, Cumberland County is expected to experience seven to eight drought events per century which reach emergency status, with each event typically lasting two to four years. Note that this estimate is based on the occurrence of past events over a short period of time and is not the result of detailed statistical sampling.

Based on data from 1895 to 1995, Cumberland County is in severe or extreme drought 5-10% of the time (see Figure 4.3.1-1). This is equivalent to a Palmer Drought Severity Index value less than or equal to -3 which represents drought warning conditions.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Figure 4.3.1-1: Percent of time areas of the United States have PSDI values <= -3 (NDMC, 2009).

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

4.3.1.5. Vulnerability Assessment The most significant losses resulting from drought events are typically found in the agriculture sector. The 1999 Gubernatorial Proclamation was issued in part due to significant crop damage. Preliminary estimates by the Department of Agriculture indicated possible crop losses across the Commonwealth in excess of $500 million. This estimate did not include a 20% decrease in dairy milk production which also resulted in million dollar losses (NCDC, 2009).

Cumberland County ranks 16th out of the 67 Commonwealth counties in total acres of farmland and 13th in the total number of farms (Cumberland County Comprehensive Plan, 2003). The agriculture industry has a significant presence in the western portion of the County with products including dairy, meats, fruits and vegetables. Large producers include Land O’ Lakes Butter and Holly Milk in South Middleton Township.

Therefore, drought events can severely impair the local economy with prolonged drought negatively impacting the livelihood of residents within agricultural communities particularly. Table 4.3.1-3 summarizes the distribution of agricultural land by community using County land- use data. Without mitigation strategies in place, the Township of North Newton, Township of West Pennsboro and Township of Shippensburg are most vulnerable to a drought based on the proportion of land within those communities dedicated to agricultural use. According to County land use data, 51.6% of land in the county is considered agricultural.

Table 4.3.1-3: Summary of agricultural land by acreage and percent of total land per municipality. PERCENT AGRICULTURE MUNICIPALITY TOTAL ACRES AGRICULTURAL ACRES LAND OF TOTAL Township of North Newton 12002.3 14235.9 84% Township of West Pennsboro 15363.3 19442.0 79% Township of Shippensburg 539.5 761.7 71% Township of Lower Frankford 6445.9 9372.2 69% Township of Penn 12575.6 18363.0 68% Township of Hopewell 11981.9 17781.0 67% Township of Upper Frankford 8128.8 12190.1 67% Township of Monroe 10578.1 16436.5 64% Township of Middlesex 9870.2 16211.8 61% Township of Lower Mifflin 9144.7 15170.8 60% Township of North Middleton 8639.9 14736.4 59% Township of Upper Mifflin 7636.2 13845.0 55% Township of Silver Spring 10525.3 19747.0 53% Township of South Newton 3427.6 6612.7 52% Township of South Middleton 15654.9 30730.4 51% Township of Southampton 14657.3 33021.0 44% Township of Dickinson 13157.7 30186.5 44% Borough of Mount Holly Springs 344.0 869.2 40% Township of Upper Allen 2683.4 7840.5 34%

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Township of Lower Allen 1052.9 5981.1 18% Borough of Mechanicsburg 183.0 1377.5 13% Township of Hampden 1027.2 9933.1 10% Township of East Pennsboro 422.5 6168.8 7% Borough of Carlisle 77.6 3045.5 3% Borough of Lemoyne 10.3 812.2 1% Township of Cooke 56.5 11080.4 1% Borough of Camp Hill 0.0 1159.7 0% Borough of New Cumberland 0.0 880.8 0% Borough of Newburg 0.0 91.7 0% Borough of Newville 0.0 248.0 0% Borough of Shippensburg 0.0 1493.1 0% Borough of Shiremanstown 0.0 203.1 0% Borough of Wormleysburg 0.0 374.8 0% TOTAL 176186.6 341161.4* 51.6% * Total acreage includes 758 additional acres not associated with a municipality, because it is identified as river/stream/right-of-way land-use. Also, total acreage equals approximately 533 squares miles, which is approximately 17 square miles less than the County’s total area. This is due to the fact that some land within the County is not associated with a parcel.

The County Comprehensive Plan indicates that the 36 public water systems in the County obtain water supplies from surface water and wells. Smaller systems typically use wells and have undersized storage facilities that are incapable of providing adequate operating, emergency and fire reserves. Communities with other water-dependent industries and recreation areas are vulnerable as well.

4.3.2. Earthquake 4.3.2.1. Location and Extent Earthquake events in the Pennsylvania region including Cumberland County are mild. When events occur, they impact very small areas less than 100 kilometers in diameter.

4.3.2.2. Range of Magnitude Earthquake magnitude is often measured using the Richter Scale, an open-ended logarithmic scale that describes the energy release of an earthquake. Table 4.3.2-1 summarizes Richter Scale magnitudes as they relate to the spatial extent of impacted areas. Based on historical events, earthquakes in the Pennsylvania region do not exceed magnitudes greater than 6.0.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.3.2-1: Richter scale magnitudes and associated earthquake size effects. RICHTER EARTHQUAKE EFFECTS MAGNITUDES Less than 3.5 Generally not felt, but recorded. 3.5-5.4 Often felt, but rarely causes damage. At most, slight damage to well-designed buildings; can cause major damage to Under 6.0 poorly constructed buildings over small regions. 6.1-6.9 Can be destructive in areas where people live up to about 100 kilometers across. 7.0-7.9 Major earthquake; can cause serious damage over large areas. Great earthquake; can cause serious damage in areas several hundred 8.0 or greater kilometers across.

The impact an earthquake event has on an area is typically measured in terms of earthquake intensity. Intensity is most commonly measured using the Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) Scale based on direct and indirect measurements of seismic effects. A detailed description of the Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale is shown in Table 4.3.2-2. The earthquakes that occur in Pennsylvania originate deep with the Earth’s crust; not on an active fault. Therefore, little or no damage is expected. No injury or severe damage from earthquake events has been reported in Cumberland County.

Table 4.3.2-2: Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale with associated impacts. CORRESPONDING SCALE INTENSITY DESCRIPTION OF EFFECTS RICHTER SCALE MAGNITUDE I Instrumental Detected only on seismographs II Feeble Some people feel it <4.2 III Slight Felt by people resting; like a truck rumbling by IV Moderate Felt by people walking V Slightly Strong Sleepers awake; church bells ring <4.8 Trees sway; suspended objects swing; objects fall VI Strong <5.4 off shelves VII Very Strong Mild alarm, walls crack, plaster falls <6.1 Moving cars uncontrollable, masonry fractures, VIII Destructive poorly constructed buildings damaged <6.9 Some houses collapse, ground cracks, pipes IX Ruinous break open Ground cracks profusely, many buildings X Disastrous <7.3 destroyed, liquefaction and landslides widespread Most buildings and bridges collapse, roads, XI Very Disastrous railways, pipes and cables destroyed, general <8.1 triggering of other hazards Total destruction, trees fall, ground rises and falls XII Catastrophic >8.1 in waves

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Environmental impacts of earthquakes can be numerous, widespread and devastating, particularly if indirect impacts are considered. Some examples are shown below, but are unlikely to occur in Cumberland County: • Induced tsunamis and flooding or landslides and avalanches • Poor water quality • Damage to vegetation • Breakage in sewage or toxic material containments

4.3.2.3. Past Occurrence No earthquake epicenters have been measured in Cumberland County. However, minor tremors or aftershocks have been reported as a result of earthquake events with epicenters in nearby Lancaster County (Cumberland EOP, 1984). Figure 4.3.2-1 shows recorded earthquake events in Pennsylvania between 1990 and 2006. Earthquake events are shown in other areas of Pennsylvania, with a particular concentration of events occurring to the east of Cumberland County between Lancaster and Reading. Two events are shown in nearby York County. Prior to 1960, an earthquake event occurred on the eastern border of York County which had a magnitude measured greater than four on the Richter Scale.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Figure 4.3.2-1: Map showing the location of significant earthquake epicenters in Pennsylvania.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

4.3.2.4. Future Occurrence One way to express an earthquake's severity is to compare its acceleration to the normal acceleration due to gravity. Peak ground acceleration (PGA) measures the strength of ground movements in this manner. PGA represents the rate in change of motion of the earth's surface during an earthquake as a percent of the established rate of acceleration due to gravity.

Figure 4.3.2-2 shows the relative earthquake hazard zones in Pennsylvania identified by the Department of Earth Sciences at Millersville University. According to this map, earthquake hazards are “slight” for most of Cumberland County, meaning the PGA ten percent probability of exceedance over a 50-year period equals 5-10 PGA. In general, ground acceleration must exceed 15 PGA for significant damage to occur, although soil conditions at local sites are extremely important in controlling how much damage will occur as a consequence of a given amount of ground acceleration.

Figure 4.3.2-2: Map of Pennsylvania earthquake hazard zones (Millersville University Department of Earth Sciences, 2009).

4.3.2.5. Vulnerability Assessment Cumberland County is located in a zone where minor earthquake damage is expected (Cumberland EOP, 1984). No damage or casualties have been reported from earthquake events.

4.3.3. Flood, Flash Flood & Ice Jam 4.3.3.1. Location and Extent Flood sources within Cumberland County include rivers and streams. For inland areas like Central Pennsylvania, excess water from snowmelt or rainfall accumulates and overflows onto stream banks and adjacent floodplains. Floodplains are lowlands, adjacent to rivers, streams

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan and creeks that are subject to recurring floods. The size of the floodplain is described by the recurrence interval of a given flood. Flood recurrence intervals are explained in more detail in Section 4.3.3.4. However, in assessing the potential spatial extent of flooding it is important to know that a floodplain associated with a flood that has a 10% chance of occurring in a given year is smaller than the floodplain associated with a flood that has a 0.2%-annual-chance of occurring. The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) for which Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) are published identifies the 1%-annual-chance flood which is used to delineate the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) and identify Base Flood Elevations. Figure 4.3.3-1 illustrates these terms. The Special Flood Hazard Area serves as the primary regulatory boundary used by FEMA, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and Cumberland County local governments.

Figure 4.3.3-1: Diagram identifying Special Flood Hazard Area, 1%-annual-chance (100-Year) floodplain, floodway and flood fringe.

Countywide Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps (DFIRM) were published for Cumberland County on March 16, 2009. All communities within the County are now shown on a single set of countywide FIRMs. Previous FIRMs and Flood Boundary and Floodway Maps (FBFM) were digitized to produce a DFIRM that is compatible with geographic information systems. Prior to the publication of this digital data, flood hazard information from FEMA was available through paper FIRMs and Q3 data. An example of the mapping products published is shown in Figure 4.3.3-2. FIRMs for the entire county can be obtained from the FEMA Map Service Center (http://www.msc.fema.gov). These maps can be used to identify the expected spatial extent of flooding from a 1%- and 0.2%-annual-chance event.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Figure 4.3.3-2: FIRM Panel 42041C0118E, effective March 16, 2009, showing flood hazard areas along the Conodoguinet Creek and Susquehanna River in East Pennsboro Township and Wormleysburg Borough.

Flood sources identified in the most recent mapping project include: Conodoguinet Creek, Dogwood Run, Green ridge Run, Gum Run, Hogestown Run, Letort Spring Run, Long Pine Run, Middle Spring Creek, Middle spring Creek Tributary, Mountain Creek, Navy Ship Parts Control Center Drainage Channel, Old Town Run, Potteiger Run, Susquehanna River, Taggerts Run, Trindle Spring Run, Trout Run, Wertz Run, Yellow Breeches Creek and Yellow Breeches Creek Northern Split. Figure 4.3.3-3 shows the location of watercourses in Cumberland County. The location of approximate and detailed (include Base Flood Elevations) Special Flood Hazard Areas are shown. Flood events caused by ice jams are limited primarily to the Susquehanna River.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Figure 4.3.3-3: Map showing the location of watercourses and flood zones throughout Cumberland County.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

4.3.3.2. Range of Magnitude Floods are considered hazards when people and property are affected. Injuries and deaths can occur when people are swept away by flood currents or bacteria and disease are spread by moving or stagnant floodwaters. Most property damage results from inundation by sediment- filled water. A large amount of rainfall over a short time span can result in flash flood conditions. Small amounts of rain can result in floods in locations where the soil is frozen or saturated from a previous wet period or if the rain is concentrated in an area of impermeable surfaces such as large parking lots, paved roadways, or other impervious developed areas.

Several factors determine the severity of floods, including rainfall intensity and duration, topography, ground cover and rate of snowmelt. Water runoff is greater in areas with steep slopes and little or no vegetative ground cover. The County has sloping terrain, especially near the South and Blue Mountains, which can contribute to more severe floods as runoff reaches receiving water bodies more rapidly over steep terrain. Also, urbanization typically results in the replacement of vegetative ground cover with asphalt and concrete, increasing the volume of surface runoff and stormwater, particularly in areas with poorly planned stormwater drainage systems.

In Central Pennsylvania, including Cumberland County, there are seasonal differences in how floods are caused. In the winter and early spring (February to April), major flooding has occurred as a result of heavy rainfall on dense snowpack throughout contributing watersheds, although the snowpack is generally moderate during most winters. Winter floods also have resulted from runoff of intense rainfall on frozen ground, and local flooding has been exacerbated by ice jams in rivers, streams and creeks (i.e. especially Conodoguinet Creek).

Summer floods have occurred from intense rainfall on previously saturated soils. Summer thunderstorms deposit large quantities of rainfall over a short period of time that can result in flash flood events. In addition, as detailed in Section 4.3.4, the County occasionally experiences intense rainfall from tropical storms in late summer and early fall.

The most severe flooding in Central Pennsylvania has been associated with the Susquehanna River Basin, which drains directly into the Chesapeake Bay and is the largest river basin on the U.S. Atlantic Coast. Cumberland County lies within the Lower Susquehanna River Basin, which means it is subject to heavy precipitation events that may occur outside of the County in the upper reaches of the Basin.

Using 2009 county tax assessment data, 3,104 out of 122,076 (2.5%) of structures in the County are located in the (SFHA). These structures have identified building types including: barn, commercial, firehouse, government, house of worship, industry, library, post office, residence, school, town hall, warehouse, and unspecified. Of the structures 3,104 structures in the SFHA, 2,451 have base flood elevation information available while base flood elevations are not available for the 653 remaining structures. Table 4.3.3-1 shows the distribution per municipality of the 3,104 structures located in the Special Flood Hazard Area, including the percentage of those structures identified as manufactured homes or commercial trailers using land use codes 108 – mobile home and 302 – mobile home park in the County tax assessment data. Note that while the database indicates both of these land use codes refer to mobile

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

homes, there is slight uncertainty regarding whether some of these structures are considered commercial (non-residential) trailers.

Table 4.3.3-1: Number of total structures and structures identified as manufactured homes or commercial trailers located in the 1%-annual-chance floodplain by municipality. NO. OF STRUCTURES PERCENT OF TOTAL TOTAL NO. WHICH ARE STRUCTURES WHICH MUNICIPALITY OF MANUFACTURED HOMES ARE MANUFACTURED STRUCTURES OR COMMERCIAL HOMES OR COMMERCIAL TRAILERS TRAILERS Borough of Mount Holly Springs 260 96 37% Township of Hampden 252 5 2% Township of Monroe 251 96 38% Borough of Carlisle 217 0 0% Township of South Middleton 205 1 <1% Township of Southampton 191 58 30% Township of Upper Allen 175 0 0% Borough of Shippensburg 147 0 0% Borough of New Cumberland 144 0 0% Township of Silver Spring 132 2 2% Township of North Middleton 129 3 2% Township of East Pennsboro 119 2 2% Township of Lower Allen 101 0 0% Township of Dickinson 90 6 7% Borough of Wormleysburg 78 0 0% Township of Hopewell 74 0 0% Township of Penn 66 0 0% Township of Shippensburg 66 20 30% Township of Upper Frankford 61 11 18% Township of Middlesex 59 13 22% Township of South Newton 48 0 0% Township of Lower Mifflin 47 2 4% Township of West Pennsboro 46 2 4% Borough of Mechanicsburg 38 0 0% Township of Lower Frankford 22 2 9% Borough of Shiremanstown 21 0 0% Borough of Camp Hill 15 0 0% Borough of Lemoyne 13 0 0% Township of North Newton 10 0 0% Township of Upper Mifflin 10 4 40% Borough of Newburg 8 0 0% Borough of Newville 7 0 0% Township of Cooke 2 0 0%

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Floods are naturally occurring events that benefit riparian systems which have not been disrupted by human actions. Such benefits include groundwater recharge and the introduction of nutrient rich sediment improving soil fertility. However, the destruction of riparian buffers, changes to land-use and landcover throughout a watershed, and introduction of chemical or biological contaminants which often accompany human presence cause environmental harm when floods occur. Hazardous material facilities are potential sources of contamination during flood events. These facilities are discussed in Section 4.3.12; however it is important to note that there are eleven hazardous material facilities in the 1%-annual-chance floodplain and four hazardous material facilities in the 0.2%-annual-chance floodplain (see Appendix E to identify specific facilities). Other environmental impacts of flooding include: water-borne diseases, suffocation of tree species non-tolerant to excess water, heavy siltation, damage or loss of crops and drowning of both humans and animals.

4.3.3.3. Past Occurrence Cumberland County has a long history of flooding events. Bordered to the east by the Susquehanna River and traversed by two of its tributaries, Yellow Breeches Creek and Conodoguinet Creek, the County has suffered damage from numerous major floods and localized flash flooding. Ten of the fourteen Presidential Disaster and Emergency Declarations affecting Cumberland have been in response to hazard events related to flooding (see Table 4.2-1). Frequent flooding occurs at the confluence of Yellow Breeches Creek and the Susquehanna River in the Borough of New Cumberland. Flooding events, including those associated with Disaster Declarations, are listed in Table 4.3.3-2. Other information on previous flood events and historical losses can be found in Section 2.3 of the Cumberland County FIS report.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.3.3-2: Flood and flash flood events impacting Cumberland County from 1936-2009 (SHELDUS, 2009, NCDC, 2009, & community surveys). Note that property damage values are estimates based on best available information. “Countywide” indicates several locations in the County were affected. ESTIMATED PROPERTY DATE LOCATION & DESCRIPTION DAMAGE ($) 11/28/1993 Countywide not provided Countywide; Thunderstorms with very heavy rain produced significant poor drainage 8/25/1994 not provided flooding throughout the County. 1/20/1995 Countywide not provided 6/30/1995 Countywide; Heavy rain caused basement flooding within Cumberland County. not provided Countywide; Severe thunderstorms throughout the County. Trees were uprooted in Mechanicsburg and within nearby Upper Allen Township. Eastern Cumberland County 7/6/1995 not provided experienced three inches of rain within in an hour. The heavy rain caused flooding of basements and streets and created sinkholes in Mechanicsburg. Countywide; One flood-related death occurred in Cumberland County resulting from a 1/19/1996 352,000 vehicular accident involving a 32-year old male near Middlesex. Western Areas of the County; Newville had 9.8 inches of rain. One flood-related death 9/6/1996 not provided resulting from a vehicular accident involving a 26-year old woman. 9/13/1996 Western areas of the County not provided 12/13/1996 Countywide not provided 9/11/1997 Countywide not provided 11/7/1997 Western areas of the County not provided 1/8/1998 Countywide not provided 3/21/1998 Countywide not provided Eastern Areas of the County; Streets and underpasses were flooded in Shiremanstown 9/6/1999 10,000 and other eastern areas as heavy rain from Tropical Storm Dennis. 9/16/1999 Countywide 15,000 Northeast Areas of the County; Heavy rains caused mud and water to flow into a couple 7/30/2000 not provided of homes near an area under road construction. Mechanicsburg; Eight homes and one apartment were flooded in East Pennsboro 9/1/2000 50,000 Township. Rising waters on Conodoguinet Creek at Hogestown caused the river gauge to reach its 1/3/2003 not provided flood stage of 8 feet briefly between 8 and 9 pm. Rainfall of over 1 inch caused the Yellow Breeches Creek at Camp Hill to exceed its 3/20/2003 flood stage of 7 feet. Minor flooding was reported, with several roads closed along the not provided creek in the Carlisle area. Rainfall of over 1 inch caused the Conodoguinet Creek at Hogestown to exceed its 3/21/2003 not provided flood stage of 8 feet. Minor flooding of low lying areas was reported. Heavy rainfall caused Yellow Breeches Creek at Camp Hill to exceed its flood stage of 7 6/7/2003 not provided feet. 6/8/2003 Heavy rainfall caused Conodoguinet Creek at Hogestown to reach flood Stage of 8 feet. not provided Boiling Springs; Heavy rains caused rapid rises in streams and closed several roads in southern Cumberland County near the town of Boiling Springs. Lerew Road, 6/21/2003 not provided Petersburg Road and Mount Zion Road, all directly adjacent to Old Town Run and Lerew Creek, were closed. Heavy rainfall caused Yellow Breeches Creek at Camp Hill to exceed its flood stage of 7 9/23/2003 not provided feet. 12/11/2003 Heavy rainfall caused the Conodoguinet Creek at Hogestown to exceed flood stage. not provided 12/11/2003 Heavy rainfall caused Yellow Breeches Creek at Camp Hill to exceed flood stage. not provided

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.3.3-2: Flood and flash flood events impacting Cumberland County from 1936-2009 (SHELDUS, 2009, NCDC, 2009, & community surveys). Note that property damage values are estimates based on best available information. “Countywide” indicates several locations in the County were affected. ESTIMATED PROPERTY DATE LOCATION & DESCRIPTION DAMAGE ($) Shiremanstown; Heavy rain caused flash flooding along Yellow Breeches Creek in 8/1/2004 Cumberland County. Several homes were isolated by flood waters, accessible only by not provided boat. One road was also flooded and impassable. 8/1/2004 Heavy rain caused flooding along Yellow Breeches Creek at Camp Hill. not provided Countywide; As a result of this excessive rainfall from Hurricane Ivan and antecedent heavy rainfall from the remnants of Hurricane Frances one week earlier, widespread flooding occurred throughout central Pennsylvania from 9/17/2004 through 9/20/2004. Flood levels at many locations ranked in the top 5 for all flood events, with many river forecast points cresting above levels reached in the January 1996, flood. Moderate to 9/17/2004 1,515,152 major flooding was experienced on the larger tributaries of the Susquehanna River. The widespread flooding closed hundreds of roads and bridges across central Pennsylvania, causing a significant adverse impact on commerce and transportation for several days. Preliminary monetary estimates of flood damage from the remnants of Ivan across the state were over 260 million dollars. Heavy rain caused the Conodoguinet Creek at Hogestown to exceed its flood stage of 8 9/18/2004 not provided feet. Heavy rain caused the Yellow Breeches Creek at Camp Hill to exceed its flood stage of 9/18/2004 not provided 7 feet. Heavy rain caused the Yellow Breeches Creek at Camp Hill to exceed its flood stage of 9/28/2004 not provided 7 feet. Countywide; The remnants of Hurricane Jeanne moved northeast along the east slopes of the Appalachians during Tuesday, September 28th, eventually moving off the mid Atlantic Coast by early Tuesday evening. However, a large plume of tropical moisture to the northwest of the system produced widespread heavy rainfall across south central 9/28/2004 not provided Pennsylvania during Tuesday, with rainfall amounts of 2 to 4 inches. This rainfall, combined with excessively wet soil and swollen rivers from the remnants of 2 antecedent tropical systems, produced mainly minor flooding across portions of south central Pennsylvania, with several road closures and some basement flooding reported. Heavy rain caused the Conodoguinet Creek at Hogestown to exceed its flood stage of 8 9/29/2004 not provided feet. Heavy rain and local runoff caused the Yellow Breeches Creek at Camp Hill to exceed 9/29/2004 not provided its flood stage of 7 feet. Countywide; A low pressure system combined with abundant low level moisture drawn from the Gulf of Mexico and western Atlantic Ocean produced very heavy rainfall across 3/28/2008 not provided the lower Susquehanna Valley. As a result of the heavy rainfall, numerous streams overflowed their banks onto adjacent roadways, resulting in road closures. 3/28/2005 Heavy rain caused Yellow Breeches Creek at Camp Hill to flood. not provided 3/29/2005 Heavy rain caused Conodoguinet Creek at Hogestown to flood. not provided Heavy rain caused the Susquehanna River at Harrisburg to flood, exceeding 17 ft. flood 3/30/2005 not provided stage. Countywide; Widespread heavy rainfall across the lower Susquehanna Valley. Average rainfall amounts of 1 to 3 inches occurred during this time. This heavy rainfall led to 4/2/2005 not provided numerous road closures as smaller streams and creeks overflowed their banks during Saturday afternoon and evening. 4/2/2005 Heavy rain caused Yellow Breeches Creek at Camp Hill to flood. not provided 4/3/2005 Heavy rain caused Conodoguinet Creek at Hogestown to flood. not provided 4/3/2005 Heavy rain caused the Susquehanna River at Harrisburg to flood. not provided Countywide; Heavy rain associated with a stalled frontal boundary, interacting with the 6/27/2006 not provided remnants of a weak tropical system, caused flash flooding throughout central and

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

There are no known significant flood events in Cumberland County which can be attributed directly to an ice jam. However, the presence of river ice has compounded the impact of certain winter flood events such as the January 1996 flood. The January 1996 event was the result of very rapid snowmelt punctuated by short, but intense rainfall and compounded by ice movement and jamming along the Susquehanna River. The Susquehanna River rose nearly 13 feet in 2 hours on the evening of Friday, January 19th in Harrisburg. This was the fastest rate of rise on the Susquehanna River ever recorded at Harrisburg in more than 100 years of record-keeping and was partly due to ice jams (NOAA – NWS, 1998). The event resulted in the collapse of portions of the pedestrian and bikeway Walnut Street Bridge (“The People’s Bridge”) which connected the Eastern and Western Shores of the Susquehanna River. High floodwaters and significant ice flow lifted two spans of the bridge off their foundations and carried them downstream.

The National Flood Insurance Program identifies repetitive loss properties as structures insured under the NFIP which have had at least two paid flood losses of more than $1,000 over any 10- year period since 1978. A property is considered a severe repetitive loss property either when there are at least four losses each exceeding $5,000 or when there are two or more losses where the building payments exceed the property value. Tables 4.3.3-3 and 4.3.3-4 show the number and type of repetitive loss and severe repetitive loss properties in Cumberland County, respectively. Based on input from the Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development, an assumption is made that non-residential type is anything other than

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

“residential” including, but not necessarily limited to “commercial” building types. Also, ASMD Condo type refers to a situation where an individual owns the structure, or portion of the structure, but not any of the land. As of October 31, 2009, there were 132 repetitive loss buildings in Cumberland County, 98 of which are identified as single family. Most of these properties are located in Camp Hill Borough, East Pennsboro Township and New Cumberland Borough. In addition, there are four severe repetitive loss properties in Cumberland County.

Table 4.3.3-3: Summary of the number and type of Repetitive Loss properties by municipality (FEMA, 2010). TYPE SUM OF REPETITIVE MUNICIPALITY NON- OTHER SINGLE 2-4 FAMILY LOSS RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL FAMILY PROPERTIES Borough of Camp Hill 14 14

Borough of Carlisle 1 1

Township of East Pennsboro 16 16

Township of Hampden 1 5 6

Borough of Lemoyne 1 1

Township of Lower Allen 6 6

Township of Lower Frankford 1 1

Borough of Mechanicsburg 1 1

Township of Monroe 1 3 4

Borough of Mount Holly Springs 1 1

Borough of New Cumberland 9 14 3 28 54 Township of North Middleton 1 1

Township of Silver Spring 5 5

Township of South Middleton 1 1

Township of South Newton 1 1

Township of Upper Allen 3 3

Township of Upper Frankford 3 3

Borough of West Fairview 5 5

Borough of Wormleysburg 1 4 1 2 8 TOTAL 10 19 5 98 132

Table 4.3.3-4: Summary of the number and type of Severe Repetitive Loss properties by municipality (FEMA, 2010).

TYPE SUM OF SEVERE MUNICIPALITY REPETITIVE LOSS OTHER RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTIES

Township of East Pennsboro 1 1

Township of Lower Allen 1 1

Township of Upper Frankford 1 1

Borough of Wormleysburg 1 1

TOTAL 1 3 4

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Comments received indicate that following roads and intersections commonly experience flooding problems: • Pine Road and Centerville Road (both state roads) where the flow of a mountain stream is impeded by a bridge structure in Penn Township. • 6445 Carlisle Pike and Millers Gap due to poor drainage in Silver Spring Township. • 1200 Block of Hummel Avenue in Lemoyne Borough. • Market Street in “the bottleneck” affecting the Borough of Lemoyne and Borough of Wormleysburg. • Pine Road (SR 3006) and Centerville Road (SR 233) in Penn Township at Keck’s Store. During heavy rains, the streams from Beetem Hollow and Kellars Gap Hollow flood the intersection.

In addition, a small subdivision at Pinebrook in Cooke Township experienced stormwater and flooding issues.

4.3.3.4. Future Occurrence In Cumberland County, flooding occurs commonly and can take place during any season of the year. Every two to three years, serious flooding occurs along one or more of Pennsylvania’s major rivers or streams and it is not unusual for such events to happen several years in succession. Floods are described in terms of their extent (including the horizontal area affected and the vertical depth of floodwaters) and related probability of occurrence. Historical records are used to determine the probability of occurrence (percent chance) for a flood of specific extent to occur.

The NFIP recognizes the 1%-annual-chance flood, also known as the base flood, as the standard for identifying properties subject to federal flood insurance purchase requirements. A 1%-annual-chance flood is a flood which has a 1% chance of occurring over a given year. The DFIRM published on March 16, 2009 can be used to identify areas subject to the 1%- and 0.2%- annual-chance flooding. Areas subject to 2%- and 10%-annual-chance events are not shown on maps; however, water surface elevations associated with these events are included in the flood source profiles contained in the Flood Insurance Study Report.

4.3.3.5. Vulnerability Assessment Cumberland County is vulnerable to flooding that causes loss of lives, property damage, and road closures. For purposes of assessing vulnerability, the County focused on community assets that are located in the 1%-annual-chance floodplain. While greater and smaller floods are possible, information about the extent and depths for this floodplain is available for all municipalities countywide, thus providing a consistent basis for analysis. Flood vulnerability maps for each local municipality showing the 1%-annual-chance flood hazard area, critical facilities and transportation routes are included in Appendix I.

Table 4.3.3-1 reveals that the Borough of Mount Holly Springs, Township of Hampden, Township of Monroe, Borough of Carlisle and Township of South Middleton each contain over 200 structures that are vulnerable to the impacts of a 1%-annual-chance flood. The Township of Hampden in particular has experienced stormwater management and continued land development issues related to flooding. The Township of Monroe, Borough of Mount Holly

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Springs and Township of Southampton have more manufactured homes or commercial trailers within the 1%-annual-chance floodplain than any other municipality, amounting to 38%, 37% and 30% of all structures identified in this hazard zone, respectively.

Past occurrence shows that flooding events of varying extents taken place annually. These events have caused loss of life, repetitive inundation of roads, and significant dollar losses (see Section 4.3.3-2 and Section 4.4.3). A majority of the Repetitive Loss structures within the County are located in the Borough of Camp Hill, Township of East Pennsboro and Borough of New Cumberland. These communities are particularly vulnerable to repeated flood damages and ensuing flood insurance claims.

There are fifteen hazardous material facilities located in the 1%- and 0.2%-annual-chance floodplain (see Appendix E). Communities where these facilities are located and communities downstream are vulnerable to hazardous material contamination during significant flooding events. Critical facilities located in the 1%- and 0.2%-annual-chance flood zones are identified in Appendix D.

4.3.4. Hurricane, Tropical Storm, & Nor’easter 4.3.4.1. Location and Extent Tropical storms impacting Cumberland County develop in tropical or sub-tropical waters found in the Atlantic Ocean, Gulf of Mexico, or Caribbean Sea. Cyclones with maximum sustained winds of less than 39 miles per hour (mph) are called tropical depressions. A tropical storm is a cyclone with maximum sustained winds between 39-74 mph. These storms sometimes develop into hurricanes with wind speeds in excess of 74 mph. While Cumberland County is located over 150 miles from the Atlantic Coast, tropical storms can track inland causing heavy rainfall and winds. Nor’easters typically develop as extra-tropical storms which can produce winds equivalent to hurricane or tropical storm force as well as heavy precipitation, sometimes in the form of snow. These storms are regional events that can impact very large areas hundreds to thousands of miles across over the life of the storm. Therefore, all communities within Cumberland County are equally subject to the impacts of hurricanes, tropical storms, and Nor’easters. Areas subject to flooding, wind, and winter storm damage are particularly vulnerable.

4.3.4.2. Range of Magnitude The impacts associated with hurricanes and tropical storms are primarily wind damage and flooding. It is not uncommon for tornadoes to develop during these events. Historical tropical storm and hurricane events have brought intense rainfall, sometimes leading to damaging floods, northeast winds, which, combined with waterlogged soils, caused trees and utility poles to fall.

The impact tropical storm or hurricane events have on an area is typically measured in terms of wind speed. Expected damage from hurricane force winds is measured using the Saffir- Simpson Scale. The Saffir-Simpson Scale categorizes hurricane intensity linearly based upon maximum sustained winds, barometric pressure and storm surge potential (characteristic of tropical storms and hurricanes, but not a threat to Cumberland County), which are combined to estimate potential damage. Table 4.3.4-1 lists Saffir-Simpson Scale categories with associated

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan wind speeds and expected damages. Categories 3, 4 and 5 are classified as “major” hurricanes. While major hurricanes comprise only 20% of all tropical cyclones making landfall, they account for over 70% of the damage in the United States.

Table 4.3.4-1: Saffir-Simpson Scale categories with associated wind speeds and damages (NHC, 2009). WIND STORM SPEED DESCRIPTION OF DAMAGES CATEGORY (mph) MINIMAL: Damage is limited primarily to shrubbery and trees, unanchored 1 74-95 mobile homes and signs. No significant structural damage. MODERATE: Some trees are toppled, some roof coverings are damaged 2 96-110 and major damage occurs to mobile homes. Some roofing material, door and window damage. EXTENSIVE: Some structural damage to small residences and utility 3 111-130 buildings, with a minor amount of curtain wall failures. Mobile homes are destroyed. Large trees are toppled. Terrain may be flooded well inland. EXTREME: Extensive damage to roofs, windows and doors; roof systems 4 131-155 on small buildings completely fail. More extensive curtain wall failures. Terrain may be flooded well inland. CATASTROPHIC: Complete roof failure on many residences and industrial 5 >155 buildings. Some complete building failures with small utility buildings blown over or away. Massive evacuation of residential areas may be required.

The likelihood of these damages occurring in Cumberland County is assessed in Section 4.3.4.4. It is important to recognize the potential for flooding during hurricane, tropical storm, and Nor’easter events; the risk assessment for these events is included Section 4.3.3. Environmental impacts associated with hurricanes and tropical storms are consistent with the impacts described for flooding in Section 4.3.3.2 and tornadoes and windstorms in Section 4.3.7.2. The impact of severe winter weather which sometimes occurs during Nor’easter events is discussed in Section 4.3.10.2.

4.3.4.3. Past Occurrence Previous tropical storm and hurricane events that have impacted Cumberland County are listed in Table 4.3.4-2. With the exception of Tropical Storm Beryl, Presidential Disaster Declarations were issued for all of these events.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.3.4-2: Previous tropical storm events affecting Cumberland County (NCDC, 2009). YEAR EVENT 1972 Tropical Storm Agnes 1975 Hurricane Eloise 1994 Tropical Storm Beryl 1996 Hurricane Fran 1999 Hurricane Dennis 1999 Hurricane Floyd 2003 Tropical Storm Henri 2003 Tropical Storm Isabel 2004 Tropical Depression Ivan

Of the storms listed in Table 4.3.4-2, Tropical Storm Agnes was the most devastating event the County experienced. Agnes made landfall in Florida as a minimal hurricane. However, as it combined with a non-tropical low over the Mid-Atlantic Region to produce rainfall amounts of up to 19 inches in some locations. Table 4.3.3-2 states that flooding caused $40,725,000 in damages. Table 4.3.4-3 provides a breakdown of the damages by municipality and flood source, some of which are located in adjacent York County.

Table 4.3.4-3: Distribution of flood damages by municipality and flood source from Tropical Storm Agnes. MUNICIPALITY FLOOD SOURCE DAMAGES ($) Enola Susquehanna River 2,212,000 Carlisle Borough Letort Spring Run 5,151,000 Camp Hill Borough Conodoguinet Creek 14,833,000 Shippensburg Borough Middle Spring Creek 854,000 Wormleysburg Borough Susquehanna River 4,588,000 New Cumberland Borough Susquehanna River 9,092,000 Goldsboro Borough (York County) Susquehanna River 1,712,000 Lemoyne Borough Susquehanna River 708,000 Dillsburg Borough (York County) Dogwood Run 614,000 Mount Holly Springs Borough Mountain Creek 639,000 Huntsdale Yellow Breeches Creek 49,000 Boiling Springs Yellow Breeches Creek 219,000 Grantham Yellow Breeches Creek 54,000

4.3.4.4. Future Occurrence Although hurricanes and tropical storms can cause flood events consistent with 100- and 500- year levels, their probability of occurrence is measured relative to wind sped. Table 4.3.4-4 shows the probability of winds that reach the strength of tropical storms and hurricane conditions in Cumberland County and surrounding areas based on a statistical sample region of more than 30,000 square miles over a period of 46 years.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.3.4-4: Annual probability of tropical storm and hurricane strength wind speeds in Cumberland County and surrounding areas (FEMA, 2000). ANNUAL CORRESPONDING SAFFIR-SIMPSON WIND SPEED (mph) PROBABILITY OF TROPICAL STORM/HURRICANE CATEGORIES OCCURRENCE (%) 45-77 Tropical Storms and Category 1 Hurricanes 91.59 78-118 Category 1 to 2 Hurricanes 8.32 119-138 Category 3 to 4 Hurricanes 0.0766 139-163 Category 4 to 5 Hurricanes 0.0086 164-194 Category 5 Hurricanes 0.00054 195+ Category 5 Hurricanes 0.00001

Table 4.3.4-4 includes wind speeds for all types of storms and is not specific to cyclonic winds. In Cumberland County and surrounding areas, the annual probability for winds that equal the strength of tropical storms (over 39 mph) is over 90 percent. The probability for winds at category 1 or 2 hurricane strength (78-118 mph) is greater than 8% in any given year. Using Table 4.3.4-1, these wind speeds correspond to minimal or moderate expected damages. The annual probability of winds exceeding 118 mph is less than 0.1 %.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Hurricane Research Division published the map included as Figure 4.3.4-1 showing the chance that a tropical storm or hurricane will affect a given area during the entire Atlantic hurricane season spanning from June to November. Note that this figure does not provide information on the probability of various storm intensities. However, based on historical data between 1944 and 1999, this map reveals there is a 6-12% chance of Cumberland County experiencing a tropical storm or hurricane event between June and November of any given year.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Figure 4.3.4-1: Seasonal probability of hurricanes or tropical storms for various areas affected by the Atlantic Basin (NOAA – HRD, 2009). See small black box identifying the Cumberland County area.

4.3.4.5. Vulnerability Assessment Cumberland County is vulnerable to the impact of flooding and severe wind caused by hurricanes, tropical storms, and Nor’easters. Flood vulnerability is addressed in Section 4.3.3.5 and vulnerability to wind damage is addressed in Section 4.3.7.5. The County is also vulnerable to severe winter weather impacts caused by Nor’easters which are evaluated in Section 4.3.10.5.

4.3.5. Landslide 4.3.5.1. Location and Extent Rockfalls and other slope failures can occur in areas of Cumberland County with moderate to steep slopes. Many slope failures are associated with precipitation events – periods of sustained above-average precipitation, specific rainstorms, or snowmelt events. Areas experiencing erosion, decline in vegetation cover and earthquakes are also susceptible to landslides. Human activities that contribute to slope failure include altering the natural slope gradient, increasing soil water content and removing vegetation cover.

The Department of Conservation and Natural Resources describes landslide susceptibility in Cumberland County as generally low, but includes local areas of high to moderate. Figure

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

4.3.5-1 shows areas of low, moderate and high landslide susceptibility as determined by the U.S. Geological Survey. The majority of Cumberland County, including populated areas such as the Borough of Carlisle and the Borough of Mechanicsburg, has low susceptibility. However, there are areas of moderate and high susceptibility, such as the North and South Mountain regions.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Figure 4.3.5-1: Map of general landslide hazard areas in Cumberland County.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

4.3.5.2. Range of Magnitude Landslides cause damage to transportation routes, utilities and buildings. They can also create travel delays and other side effects. Fortunately, deaths and injuries due to landslides are rare in Pennsylvania. Almost all of the known deaths due to landslides have occurred when rockfalls or other slides along highways have involved vehicles. Storm induced debris flows are the only other type of landslide likely to cause death and injuries. As residential and recreational development increases on and near steep mountain slopes, the hazard from these rapid events will also increase. Most Pennsylvania landslides are moderate to slow moving and damage things rather than people.

The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation and large municipalities incur substantial costs due to landslide damage and to extra construction costs for new roads in known landslide-prone areas. A 1991 estimate showed an average of $10 million per year is spent on landslide repair contracts across the Commonwealth and a similar amount is spent on mitigation costs for grading projects (DCNR, 2009).

The most serious historical landslide event in Cumberland County was the 2009 Colonel Denning State Park event discussed in Section 4.3.5.3. However, no documented events have resulted in fatalities.

4.3.5.3. Past Occurrence A rock slide occurred along Route 233 southwest of Colonel Denning State Park during a heavy rain and flash flooding event on May 28, 2009. The event caused a road closure in Upper and Lower Mifflin Township and campers were evacuated from the Park. There have been several landslides in the Commonwealth, but no other significant events of record in Cumberland County. Landslide inventory maps were created in late 1970s and early 1980s by the U.S. Geological Survey as part of an Appalachians-wide study of landslides. These maps show landslides and related features that were identified mainly from aerial photographs; however, Cumberland County was not included in this inventory (DCNR, 2009).

4.3.5.4. Future Occurrence Based on historical events, significant landslide events are unlikely in the County. However, mismanaged intense development in steeply sloped areas could increase their frequency of occurrence. Figure 4.3.5-1 shows that a majority of the County has low incidence of landslide events.

4.3.5.5. Vulnerability Assessment Most communities in Cumberland County are not particularly vulnerable to landslides. Comments received from those who participated in the 2010 HMP indicated that landslides do not pose a significant threat to the County. Any events that do occur would take place in steeply sloped areas such as those mentioned around North and South Mountains in Upper Mifflin Township, Lower Mifflin Township, Cooke Township, Dickinson Township, Penn Township, Southampton Township, South Newton Township, South Middleton Township, Monroe Township, and Mount Holly Springs Borough.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

In addition, places where landforms have been altered for purposes of highway construction or other development may be uniquely vulnerable to landslide hazards. This is especially true if development is located at the base or crest of cliffs or near large highway cut-outs. These areas should be considered vulnerable to landslides, particularly if mitigation measures have not been implemented.

4.3.6. Pandemic 4.3.6.1. Location and Extent Pandemic events cover a wide geographical area and can affect large populations, including the entire Cumberland County population. The exact size and extent of an infected population is dependent upon how easily the illness is spread, mode of transmission and the amount of contact between infected and uninfected individuals. Cumberland County is primarily concerned with the possibility of a pandemic flu outbreak. The H1N1 virus, colloquially known as swine flu, is of particular concern. This virus was first detected in people in the United States in April 2009. On June 11, 2009, the world health organization signaled that a pandemic of 2009 H1N1 flu was underway (CDC, 2009).

4.3.6.2. Range of Magnitude Advancements in medical technologies have greatly reduced the number of deaths caused by influenza over time. In terms of lives lost, the impact various pandemic influenza outbreaks have had globally over the last century has declined (see Table 4.3.6-1). The severity of illness from the 2009 H1N1 influenza flu virus has varied, with the gravest cases occurring mainly among those considered at high risk. High risk populations considered more vulnerable are described in Section 4.3.6.5. Most people infected with swine flu in 2009 have recovered without needing medical treatment. However, the virus has resulted in many deaths, including fourteen in Pennsylvania as of October 2009. According to the CDC, about 70% of those who have been hospitalized with the 2009 H1N1 flu virus in the United States have belonged to a high risk group (CDC, 2009).

4.3.6.3. Past Occurrence There have been several pandemic influenza outbreaks which have occurred over the past 100 years. A list of events worldwide is shown in Table 4.3.6-1.

Table 4.3.6-1: List of previous significant outbreaks of influenza over the past century (Global Security, 2009; World Health Organization, 2009). DATE PANDEMIC NAME/SUBTYPE WORLDWIDE DEATHS (APPROXIMATE) 1918-1920 Spanish Flu/H1N1 50 million 1957-1958 Asian Flu/H2N2 1.5-2 million 1968-1969 Hong Kong Flu/H3N2 1 million 2009-November Swine Flu/H1N1 6000 (as of November 2009)

Deaths occurred in the United States as a result of the Spanish Flu, Asian Flu, and Hong Kong Flu outbreaks. Most deaths resulting from the Asian Flu occurred between September, 1957 and March, 1958. The first cases of the Hong Kong Flu in the U.S. were detected in September of 1968 with deaths peaking between December, 1968 and January, 1969 (Global Security,

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

2009). Specific information on the number of cases or deaths in Pennsylvania or Cumberland County is unknown. As of October, 2009, there were 41 confirmed cases of Influenza A/H1N1 in Cumberland County. None of these cases resulted in death. Adjacent York and Dauphin Counties report 61 and 46 cases, respectively (Pennsylvania Department of Health, 2009).

4.3.6.4. Future Occurrence Based on historical events, Cumberland County is expected to experience pandemic influenza outbreaks approximately every 11 to 41 years. The precise timing of pandemic influenza outbreaks is unpredictable (U.S. HHS, 2009).

4.3.6.5. Vulnerability Assessment Certain population groups are at higher risk of swine flu infection. This population group includes people 65 years and older, children younger than 5 years old, pregnant women and people of any age with certain chronic medical conditions. Such conditions include but are not limited to diabetes, heart disease, asthma and kidney disease (CDC, 2009). Schools, convalescent centers, and other institutions serving those younger than 5 years old and older than 65 years old, are locations conducive to faster transmission of the 2009 H1N1 virus since populations identified as being at high risk are concentrated at these facilities. The highest concentration of schools, retirement homes and senior centers is found in Carlisle Borough and West Shore areas (Appendix D).

4.3.7. Subsidence & Sinkholes 4.3.7.1. Location and Extent Subsidence potential in Cumberland County is primarily associated with the solution of carbonate bedrock such as limestone and dolomite by water. Water passing through naturally occurring fractures and bedding planes dissolve the bedrock leaving voids below the surface. Eventually, overburden on top of the voids collapse, leaving surface depressions resulting in karst topography. Characteristics structures associated with karst topography include sinkholes, linear depressions and caves. Often, sub-surface solution of limestone will not result in the immediate formation of karst features. Collapse sometimes occurs only after a large amount of activity, or when a heavy burden is placed on the overlying material. Abrupt or long- term changes in the ground surface may also occur following sub-surface fluid extraction (e.g. natural gas, water, oil, etc…). Figure 4.3.7-1 shows that much of Cumberland County lies in an area of Pennsylvania where limestone, dolomite, or both are present near ground surface, thus making it most susceptible to natural sinkhole development. The map includes locations of larger towns and cities that are adjacent to these areas of underlain by carbonate bedrock.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Figure 4.3.7-1: Map of areas in eastern and central Pennsylvania susceptible to subsidence based on the presence of underlying carbonate rock formations with urban areas shown in black (Kochanov, 1999).

Due to the nature of geology in the region, karst features typically occur along southwest-to- northeast deposits of limestone. These are located along an approximately 10-mile wide band that passes through the center of the County, roughly parallel to the counties’ northern and southern borders. The deposits are predominantly Ordovician- and Cambrian-period layers, exposed at the surface through folding, faulting and long-term erosion.

In addition, the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources created a series of maps showing the density of identified karst features for most of the band of carbonate rock running through Cumberland County (see Figure 4.3.7-2 for map of Cumberland County). Within this band, the density of karst features ranges from 0 to approximately 400 per square mile. There is wide variation in the size of these features. Fewer karst features have been mapped in the existing urban areas of the County. However, this is likely a result of development activities that disguise, cover, or fill existing karst features rather than an absence of the features themselves.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Figure 4.3.7-2: Density of karst features in Cumberland County (DCNR, 2003).

4.3.7.2. Range of Magnitude Based on the geologic formations underlying much of Cumberland County, subsidence and sinkhole events may occur gradually or abruptly. Events could result in minor elevation changes or deep, gaping holes in the ground surface. Subsidence and sinkhole events can cause severe damage in urban environments, although gradual events can be addressed before significant damage occurs. If long-term subsidence or sinkhole formation is not recognized and mitigation measures are not implemented, fractures or complete collapse of building foundations and roadways may result. While the photograph shown in Figure 4.3.7-3 was taken at a location in outside of Cumberland County, it provides an example of the severe damage sinkholes can inflict to buildings. General recommendations have been published for site investigations prior to construction of buildings due to the potential for karst subsidence (Root, 1978). These recommendations vary depending on the rock type immediately underlying soil cover and include thorough geotechnical investigations to identify un-collapsed karst features and potential excavation to solid rock prior to construction.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Figure 4.3.7-3: Sinkhole at Corporate Plaza Building in Allentown, Lehigh County, PA in February, 1994 (Photograph by William E. Kochanov - DCNR, 2009).

Groundwater in limestone and other similar carbonate rock formations can be easily polluted, because water moves readily from the Earth’s surface down through solution cavities and fractures, thus undergoing very little filtration. Contaminants such as sewage, fertilizers, herbicides, pesticides, or industrial products are of concern.

4.3.7.3. Past Occurrence Cumberland County does not have a record of a significant subsidence-based disaster. However, the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources provides an online Sinkhole Inventory Database which lists 382 sinkholes (some of which have been filled) identified across the County. Table 4.3.7-1 shows the number of sinkholes per municipality recorded in this inventory.

Table 4.3.7-1: Number of sinkholes per municipality in Cumberland County (DCNR, 2009). MUNICIPALITY NUMBER OF SINKHOLES Township of South Middleton 78 Township of Southampton 77 Township of Silver Spring 43 Township of Lower Allen 28 Township of North Newton 27 Township of Penn 26 Township of Dickinson 24 Township of Upper Allen 19

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.3.7-1: Number of sinkholes per municipality in Cumberland County (DCNR, 2009). MUNICIPALITY NUMBER OF SINKHOLES Township of South Newton 17 Township of Monroe 13 Borough of Shiremanstown 9 Township of Hampden 4 Township of Middlesex 4 Township of West Pennsboro 4 Borough of Carlisle 3 Township of Hopewell 2 Borough of Shippensburg 2 Borough of Lemoyne 1 Borough of New Cumberland 1

4.3.7.4. Future Occurrence Based on geological conditions and the presence of previously formed sinkholes, subsidence events are likely to occur in the future for the areas of Cumberland County underlain by carbonate rock.

4.3.7.5. Vulnerability Assessment The eastern portion of the County is most vulnerable to the effects of natural subsidence events. Local roads need annual repair and damage to gas lines, telephone and electrical entry road facilities could occur in highly populated areas (Cumberland EOP, 1984). Based on historical events, the Township of South Middleton, Township of Southampton and Township of Silver Spring are vulnerable to sinkhole events. These municipalities all have more than forty identified sinkholes. However, there are sixteen other municipalities in Cumberland County where at least one sinkhole event has occurred (see Table 4.3.7-1).

4.3.8. Tornado & Windstorm 4.3.8.1. Location and Extent Both tornado and windstorm events can occur throughout Cumberland County. Tornado events are usually localized. However, severe thunderstorms may result in conditions favorable to the formation of numerous or long-lived tornadoes which may travel over extended distances. Tornadoes can occur at any time during the day or night, but are most frequent during late afternoon into early evening, the warmest hours of the day, and most likely to occur during the spring and early summer months of March through June. Tornado movement is characterized in two ways: direction and speed of spinning winds and forward movement of the tornado, also known as the storm track. The forward motion of the tornado path can be a few hundred yards or several hundred miles in length. The width of tornadoes can vary greatly, but generally range in size from less than 100 feet to over a mile in width. Some tornadoes never touch the ground and are short-lived, while others may touch the ground several times.

Straight-line winds and windstorms are experienced on a more region-wide scale. While such winds usually accompany tornadoes, straight-lined winds are caused by the movement of air

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan from areas of higher pressure to areas of lower pressure. Stronger winds are the result of greater differences in pressure. Windstorms are generally defined with sustained wind speeds of 40 mph or greater lasting for one hour or longer, or winds of 58 mph or greater for any duration.

4.3.8.2. Range of Magnitude Each year, tornadoes account for $1.1 billion in damages and cause over 80 deaths nationally (NCAR, 2001). Previous events in Cumberland County are estimated to have caused approximately $1,195,000 in total damages (see Table 4.3.8-2). While the extent of tornado damage is usually localized, the vortex of extreme wind associated with a tornado can result in some of the most destructive forces on Earth. Rotational wind speeds can range from 100 mph to more than 250 mph. In addition, the speed of forward motion can range from 0 to 50 mph. Therefore, some estimates place the maximum velocity (combination of ground speed, wind speed and upper winds) of tornadoes at about 300 mph. The damage caused by a tornado is a result of the high wind velocity and wind-blown debris, also accompanied by lightning or large hail. The most violent tornadoes have rotating winds of 250 miles per hour or more and are capable of causing extreme destruction and turning normally harmless objects into deadly missiles. Wind speeds from the strongest recorded tornado in Cumberland County did not exceed 206 mph (see 4/3/1961 event in Table 4.3.8-2).

Damages and deaths can be especially significant when tornadoes move through populated, developed areas. The destruction caused by tornadoes ranges from light to inconceivable depending on the intensity, size and duration of the storm. Typically, tornadoes cause the greatest damages to structures of light construction such as mobile homes. The Enhanced Fujita Scale, also known as the “EF-Scale,” measures tornado strength and associated damages. The EF-Scale is an update to the earlier Fujita Scale, also known as the “F-Scale,” that was published in 1971. It classifies United States tornadoes into six intensity categories, as shown in Table 4.3.8-1, based upon the estimated maximum winds occurring within the wind vortex. Since its implementation by the National Weather Service in 2007, the EF-Scale has become the definitive metric for estimating wind speeds within tornadoes based upon damage to buildings and structures. F-Scale categories with corresponding EF-Scale wind speeds are provided in Table 4.3.8-1 since previous tornado occurrences listed in Table 4.3.8-2 as well as the annual probability of tornado events shown in Table 4.3.8-4 are based on the F-Scale.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.3.8-1: Enhanced Fujita Scale (EF-Scale) categories with associated wind speeds and description of damages. WIND EF-SCALE F-SCALE SPEED TYPE OF DAMAGE POSSIBLE NUMBER NUMBER (mph) Minor damage: Peels surface off some roofs; some damage to gutters or siding; branches broken off trees; shallow-rooted trees EF0 65–85 F0-F1 pushed over. Confirmed tornadoes with no reported damage (i.e., those that remain in open fields) are always rated EF0. Moderate damage: Roofs severely stripped; mobile homes EF1 86-110 F1 overturned or badly damaged; loss of exterior doors; windows and other glass broken. Considerable damage: Roofs torn off well-constructed houses; foundations of frame homes shifted; mobile homes completely EF2 111–135 F1-F2 destroyed; large trees snapped or uprooted; light-object missiles generated; cars lifted off ground. Severe damage: Entire stories of well-constructed houses destroyed; severe damage to large buildings such as shopping EF3 136–165 F2-F3 malls; trains overturned; trees debarked; heavy cars lifted off the ground and thrown; structures with weak foundations blown away some distance. Devastating damage: Well-constructed houses and whole frame EF4 166–200 F3 houses completely leveled; cars thrown and small missiles generated. Extreme damage: Strong frame houses leveled off foundations and swept away; automobile-sized missiles fly through the air in EF5 >200 F3-F6 excess of 100 m (300 ft); steel reinforced concrete structure badly damaged; high-rise buildings have significant structural deformation.

Figure 4.3.8-1 shows wind speed zones developed by the American Society of Civil Engineers based on information including 40 years of tornado history and over 100 years of hurricane history. It identifies wind speeds that could occur across the United States to be used as the basis for design and evaluation of the structural integrity of shelters and critical facilities. Cumberland County falls within Zone II and Zone III, meaning design wind speeds for shelters and critical facilities should be able to withstand a 3-second gust of up to 200 mph, regardless of whether the gust is the result of a tornado, hurricane, tropical storm, or windstorm event. Therefore, these structures should be able to withstand speeds experienced in an EF4 tornado.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Figure 4.3.8-1: Design wind speeds for community shelters across the United States (ASCE, 2010).

Since tornado events are typically localized, environmental impacts are rarely widespread. However, where these events occur, severe damage to plant species is likely. This includes loss of trees and an increased threat of wildfire in areas where dead trees are not removed. Hazardous material facilities should meet design requirements for the wind zones identified in Figure 4.3.8-1 in order to prevent release of hazardous materials into the environment.

4.3.8.3. Past Occurrence Tornadoes have occurred in all seasons and all regions of Pennsylvania, including Cumberland County. The northern, western and southeastern portions of the Commonwealth have been struck more frequently. One of the deadliest tornadoes in Pennsylvania occurred during a May, 1985 storm which killed six people, injured sixty, and destroyed campers, manufactured homes, homes and businesses across Lycoming, Union and Northumberland Counties. While this event did not occur in Cumberland County, it took place only about sixty miles to the north. Between 1854 and 1979, there were six official tornadoes within Cumberland County (Cumberland EOP, 1984). A list of tornado events that have occurred in Cumberland County between 1961 and 2009 is shown in Table 4.3.8-2 with an associated F-Scale magnitude (see Table 4.3.8-1 for corresponding EF-Scale magnitude). A map showing the approximate location for most of these events is included in Figure 4.3.8-2.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.3.8-2: Previous tornado events in Cumberland County (NCDC, 2009). ESTIMATED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED MAGNITUDE LOCATION DATE PROPERTY DAMAGE LENGTH WIDTH (F-SCALE) ($) Countywide 4/16/1961 not provided not provided F3 250,000 Countywide 6/3/1964 not provided not provided F1 25,000 Countywide 3/21/1976 3 miles 70 yards F0 0 Countywide 3/21/1976 5 miles 90 yards F1 25,000 Countywide 7/31/1985 3 miles 20 yards F1 250,000 Countywide 4/9/1991 3 miles 20 yards F0 250,000 Countywide 4/9/1991 0 miles 20 yards F1 250,000 Shippensburg 7/30/1996 3 miles 50 yards F1 0 Carlisle Springs 6/21/2000 0 miles 30 yards F0 0 Lemoyne 8/4/2004 1 mile 75 yards F0 20,000 Newville 8/4/2004 3 miles 125 yards F1 50,000 Oakville 9/17/2004 2 miles 50 yards F1 0 Mechanicsburg 8/31/2005 2 miles 100 yards F1 0 Wormleysburg 9/28/2006 3 miles 100 yards F1 75,000

There are over 160 high wind events recorded in Cumberland County since 1950. In 1979, the County experienced straight line winds from a thunderstorm in excess of 90 mph. This storm caused severe tree and related property damage to the population center in the eastern portion of the County. A list of events that have occurred since 2005 is shown in Table 4.3.8-3. Windstorm events may be the result of thunderstorms, hurricanes, tropical storms, winter storms, or nor’easters.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Figure 4.3.8-2: Tornadoes that have touched down in Cumberland County between 1950 and 2004.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.3.8-3: Previous windstorm events in Cumberland County (NCDC, 2009 & community surveys). ESTIMATED WIND SPEED ESIMATED PROPERTY LOCATION DATE (knots) DAMAGE ($) Enola 6/9/2005 50 not provided Doubling Gap 6/9/2005 50 not provided Shippensburg 6/13/2005 60 not provided Camp Hill 7/19/2005 50 not provided Carlisle 8/14/2005 50 not provided Carlisle 6/22/2006 50 not provided Countywide 7/4/2006 50 not provided Countywide 12/1/2006 45 not provided Countywide 2/5/2007 not provided not provided Countywide 2/5/2007 not provided not provided Shippensburg 6/8/2007 50 not provided Bonny Brook 6/13/2007 50 not provided Newburg 6/19/2007 50 not provided Williams Grove 6/19/2007 50 not provided Shiremanstown 6/19/2007 62 not provided Newville 7/28/2007 50 not provided Oakville 8/9/2007 50 not provided Carlisle 8/25/2007 50 125,000 Enola 8/25/2007 50 not provided Countywide 12/23/2007 50 not provided Bloserville 6/29/2008 50 not provided Mount Holly Springs 6/29/2008 50 not provided Barnitz 7/23/2008 50 not provided Newville 8/2/2008 50 not provided Shiremanstown 8/7/2008 52 not provided Countywide 12/31/2008 50 10,000 Countywide 2/12/2009 50 50,000 North Middleton 8/21/2009 68 not provided

4.3.8.4. Future Occurrence According to the National Weather Service, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has an annual average of ten tornadoes with two related deaths. The annual probability of being in the path of a tornado in Cumberland County is relatively minimal – on the order of 0.03%. This is essentially equivalent to saying a given spot in Cumberland County is likely to be hit by a tornado once every 3,000 years. However, this is not to say that an area could not be hit more than once or multiple times over that period of time. Table 4.3.8-4 shows the annual probability of occurrence for F0 to F5 tornadoes in Cumberland County and surrounding areas.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.3.8-4: Annual probability of tornado events by F-Scale Category (FEMA, 2000). F-SCALE NUMBER ANNUAL PROBABILITY OF OCCURRENCE (%) F0 0.00036 F1 0.00435 F2 0.00571 F3 0.00320 F4 0.01866 F5 0.00000

While the chance of being hit by a tornado is small, the damage that results when the tornado arrives is devastating. An F4 tornado, with a 0.019% annual probability of occurring, can carry wind velocities of 200 mph, resulting in a force of more than 100 pounds per square foot of surface area. This is a “wind load” that exceeds the design limits of most buildings. Based on historical events between 1950 and 1998, Cumberland County lies within an area that has experienced <1 to 5 F3, F4, or F5 tornadoes per 3,700 square miles (see Figure 4.3.8-3).

Figure 4.3.8-3: Number of recorded F3, F4, & F5 Tornadoes per 3,700 sq. miles based on historical events between 1950 and 1998 (FEMA, 2009).

4.3.8.5. Vulnerability Assessment While the frequency of windstorms and minor tornadoes is expected to remain relatively constant, vulnerability increases in more densely developed areas. Since high wind events may affect the entire County, it is important to identify specific critical facilities and assets that are most vulnerable to the hazard. Due to their light-weight and often unanchored design,

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

manufactured homes and commercial trailers are extremely vulnerable to high winds. Table 4.3.8-5 lists the number of these structures in each municipality with an associated dollar value based on information contained in the 2009 Cumberland County tax assessment database. Estimated total values represent potential dollar losses to manufactured homes or commercial trailers in the event of a tornado or windstorm event for a given municipality.

Table 4.3.8-5: Number of primary manufactured homes or commercial trailers per municipality using land use codes 108 – mobile home and 302 – mobile home park in the County tax assessment database. The estimated total value of manufactured homes or commercial trailers was determined using an average structure value of $31,600 calculated from the building value attribute of the county tax assessment database. PERCENT OF TOTAL ESTIMATED TOTAL TOTAL NO. OF NUMBER OF STRUCTURES VALUE OF MANUFACTURED THAT ARE MANUFACTURED MUNICIPALITY HOMES OR MANUFACTURED HOMES HOMES OR COMMERCIAL OR COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL TRAILERS TRAILERS TRAILERS ($) Township of Middlesex 754 19% 23,826,400 Township of Hampden 509 4% 16,084,400 Township of Southampton 428 10% 13,524,800 Township of North Middleton 422 7% 13,335,200 Township of Silver Spring 386 6% 12,197,600 Township of South Middleton 336 4% 10,617,600 Township of Shippensburg 278 29% 8,784,800 Township of West Pennsboro 261 6% 8,247,600 Township of Lower Mifflin 232 16% 7,331,200 Township of Upper Frankford 210 12% 6,636,000 Township of Dickinson 163 4% 5,150,800 Township of Monroe 159 4% 5,024,400 Township of Lower Frankford 128 8% 4,044,800 Township of Upper Allen 118 2% 3,728,800 Borough of Mount Holly Springs 111 10% 3,507,600 Township of Penn 105 4% 3,318,000 Township of Upper Mifflin 76 6% 2,401,600 Township of Hopewell 63 3% 1,990,800 Township of North Newton 59 3% 1,864,400 Township of East Pennsboro 40 <1% 1,264,000 Township of South Newton 18 2% 568,800 Borough of Carlisle 15 <1% 474,000 Borough of Newville 10 1% 316,000 Township of Cooke 4 1% 126,400 Township of Lower Allen 1 <1% 31,600 Borough of Mechanicsburg 1 <1% 31,600 Borough of Shippensburg 1 <1% 31,600

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Based on the number and value of manufactured homes or commercial trailers in each community, the Township of Middlesex, Township of Hampden, Township of Southampton, Township of North Middleton and Township of Silver Spring are at greatest risk from high winds and tornadoes. In terms of the impact of these events on the percentage of total structures in a given municipality, the Township of Shippensburg (29%) and Township of Middlesex (19%) are most vulnerable.

Additional evaluation criteria include building age and building codes that may have been in effect at the time of construction, type of construction and condition of the structure (i.e. how well the structure has been maintained). With the exception of building age, this information is not available for structures countywide. However, tax assessment data includes year built information. Figure 4.3.8-4 shows that most structures in Cumberland County were built since 1950, yet 18,563 structures, approximately 15% of all primary structures in the County, are 60 or more years old. The estimated corresponding total assessed building value (as of 2010) for structures built prior to 1950 is $1,834,690,430. Note that this value should be treated as approximate and is likely an overestimate due to do how data is presented in the county tax assessment database. Additional information on construction type and building codes enforced at time of construction would allow a more thorough assessment of the vulnerability of structures to tornadoes and severe wind.

Figure 4.3.8-4: Distribution of the number of primary structures identified in the county tax assessment database as main-building built in each decade between 1700 and 2008. Note that structures built in the 1700s and 1800s are summed by century, not decade. Also, the large number of structures built in the 1900 decade may be a result of “1900” serving as a default value for structures built in the 19th century with an unknown construction date.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

4.3.9. Wildfire 4.3.9.1. Location and Extent Wildfires take place in less developed or completely undeveloped areas, spreading rapidly through vegetative fuels. They can occur any time of the year, but mostly occur during long, dry hot spells. Any small fire, if not quickly detected and suppressed, can get out of control. Most wildfires are caused by human carelessness or negligence. However, some are precipitated by lightning strikes and in rare instances, spontaneous combustion.

Wildfires in Pennsylvania can occur in open fields, grass, dense brush and forests. Much of the western half of Cumberland County consists of forested areas surrounded by cropland and pastures. Under dry conditions or droughts, wildfires have the potential to burn forests as well as croplands. The greatest potential for wildfires is in the spring months of March, April and May, and the autumn months of October and November. In the spring, bare trees allow sunlight to reach the forest floor, drying fallen leaves and other ground debris. In the fall, dried leaves are also fuel for fires. 98% of wildfires in Pennsylvania are caused by people, often by debris burns (DCNR, 2009). Several fires have started in a person’s backyard and traveled through dead grasses and weeds into bordering woodlands.

Portions of the Michaux (District 1) and Tuscarora (District 3) State Forests are located in Cumberland County. These forests, as well as several State Gameland areas, are of particular concern for wildfire events due to the large area of expanded woodland. Figure 4.3.9-1 shows the specific location of some of the previous wildfire events identified in Section 4.3.9.3.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Figure 4.3.9-1: Map of wildfire locations in Cumberland County and across Pennsylvania. Note that only events for which latitude/longitude information was reported are shown (DCNR – BOF, 2010).

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

4.3.9.2. Range of Magnitude Wildfire events can range from small fires that can be managed by local firefighters to large fires impacting many acres of land. Large events may require evacuation from one or more communities and necessitate regional or national firefighting support. The impact of a severe wildfire can be devastating. While some fires are not human-caused and are part of natural succession processes, a wildfire can kill people, livestock, fish and wildlife. They often destroy property, valuable timber, forage and recreational and scenic values. Severe erosion, silting of stream beds and reservoirs and flooding due to a loss of ground cover may follow a fire event.

4.3.9.3. Past Occurrence There have been 35 reported wildfire events in the County since 2002 (see Table 4.3.9-1). The Pennsylvania Department of Conservation of Natural Resources, Bureau of Forestry, estimates that these reported events may only be approximately 15% of the total number of events that have actually occurred over that time (DCNR – BOF, 2009). Information on wildfire events occurring on private land is not available.

Table 4.3.9-1: List of wildfire events reported in Cumberland County from 2002-2008 (DCNR – BOF, 2009). YEAR MUNICIPALITY AREA (acres) 2008 Township of Cooke 9 2008 Township of Penn 5 2008 Township of Dickinson 0.4 2007 Township of Cooke 9.8 2007 Township of Cooke 5 2007 Township of Cooke 1.5 2007 Township of Dickinson 1.5 2007 Township of Lower Mifflin 0.3 2007 Township of Cooke 0.1 2006 Township of Dickinson 55 2006 Township of Dickinson 12 2006 Township of Southampton 7 2006 Township of Dickinson 1 2006 Township of Southampton 1 2006 Township of Southampton 0.8 2006 Township of South Middleton 0.3 2006 Township of South Middleton 0.25 2006 Township of Dickinson 0.1 2006 Township of Dickinson 0.1 2006 Township of Southampton 0.1 2005 Township of Dickinson 23 2005 Township of Southampton 22 2005 Township of Cooke 16

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.3.9-1: List of wildfire events reported in Cumberland County from 2002-2008 (DCNR – BOF, 2009). YEAR MUNICIPALITY AREA (acres) 2005 Township of Southampton 7.5 2005 Township of Hopewell 4.3 2005 Township of South Middleton 2 2005 Township of South Middleton 1.5 2005 Township of Lower Mifflin 0.6 2005 Township of South Middleton 0.1 2003 Township of South Middleton 3 2002 Township of Dickinson 30 2002 Township of South Middleton 4.5 2002 Township of Dickinson 4 2002 Township of Dickinson 0.4 2002 Township of Hopewell 0.01

Wildfire information obtained from the Pennsylvania Bureau of Forestry prior to 2002 is aggregated by state forest. Table 4.3.9-2 shows acreage burned in Michaux and Tuscarora State Forests between 1995 and 2002, some of which includes areas outside of Cumberland County. Of the 394.3 acres that burned in Michaux State Forest in 2001, 234 acres burned in Cooke Township on May 1, 2001 and 125 acres burned in Southampton Township on November 8, 2001.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.3.9-2: List of wildfire events in Michaux and Tuscarora State Forests prior to 2002. YEAR STATE FOREST AREA BURNED (acres) Michaux 39.0 2002 Tuscarora 34.8 Michaux 394.3 2001 Tuscarora 6.3 Michaux 15.9 2000 Tuscarora 21.8 Michaux 74.5 1999 Tuscarora 12.6 Michaux 24.0 1998 Tuscarora 41.5 Michaux 5.6 1997 Tuscarora 68.1 Michaux 1.5 1996 Tuscarora 7.0 Michaux 12.0 1995 Tuscarora 22.2

4.3.9.4. Future Occurrence Over the five year period between 2003 and 2007, 18,132 acres of state forest have burned in Pennsylvania and at least 175 acres have burned in Cumberland County. Previous events indicate that annual wildfire occurrences in the County are expected. Weather conditions like drought can increase the likelihood of wildfires occurring. Any fire, without the quick response or attention of fire-fighters, forestry personnel, or visitors to the forest, has the potential to become a wildfire.

There is virtually a 100% chance of a forest fire of some size occurring in any given year within Cumberland County. However, the likelihood of one of those fires attaining significant size and intensity is unpredictable and highly dependent on environmental conditions and firefighting response.

4.3.9.5. Vulnerability Assessment Using structure inventory data provided by the County, Table 4.3.9-3 shows there are 160 structures scattered throughout the Michaux and Tuscarora State Forests in Cumberland County. There are five municipalities where these structures are located. Of these municipalities, Cooke Township is most vulnerable, with more than 36% of its structures located within forested areas. It is worth noting that 92% of Cooke Township is state land (e.g. State Forest and Pine Grove Furnace Park). It is likely that many of these structures are used for recreation and not as year-round residences. In addition, there is one building located within State Game Lands #23 in the Township of Middlesex.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.3.9-3: Number of structures in the Michaux and Tuscarora State Forests per municipality. NUMBER OF STRUCTURES IN NUMBER OF STRUCTURES IN MICHAUX STATE FOREST TUSCARORA STATE FOREST MUNICIPALITY (percent of total buildings in (percent of total buildings in municipality that are in State Forest) municipality that are in State Forest) Township of Cooke 136 out of 370 (36.76%) not provided Township of Dickinson 15 out of 3918 (0.38%) not provided Township of Lower Mifflin not provided 6 out of 1450 (0.41%) Township of Penn 1 out of 2555 (0.04%) not provided Township of Southampton 2 out of 4253 (0.05%) not provided

The Cumberland County GIS Department provided a “wooded areas” dataset which was used to identify the number and estimated value of structures in each municipality located within a wooded area (see inset on Figure 4.3.9-1). This GIS layer did not include information needed on tree type to evaluate wildfire fuel concentrations. Results of this assessment shown in Table 4.3.9-4 indicate that the Township of Cooke is most vulnerable to wildfire events with 12.4% (see footnote in Table 4.3.9-4) of all structures located within a wooded area. One percent or more of structures in the Township of Penn, Township of Upper Mifflin, Township of Dickinson, Township of Southampton and Township of South Newton are within wooded areas. Throughout Cumberland County, buildings with potential vulnerability to wildfire hazards due to their location in wooded areas have an estimated total value of $59,239,910.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.3.9-4: The estimated number and total value of structures identified in wooded areas for each municipality in Cumberland County. Note that municipalities with no structures identified are not included in this list. ESTIMATED CUMULATIVE PERCENT OF TOTAL NO. ESTIMATED ESTIMATED BUILDINGS IN OF TOTAL NO. OF ASSESSED VALUE MUNICIPALITY MUNICIPALITY BUILDINGS BUILDINGS IN OF BUILDINGS WITHIN IN WOODED MUNICIPALITY WITHIN WOODED WOODED AREAS AREAS AREAS Township of North Middleton 17 5984 $7,148,850 0.3 Township of South Middleton 22 8227 $2,214,000 0.3 Township of Lower Allen 15 7271 $2,891,450 0.2 Borough of New Cumberland 8 4126 $914,550 0.2 Township of Silver Spring 11 6951 $7,466,350 0.2 Township of Middlesex 6 4007 $477,960 0.1 Borough of Lemoyne 3 2433 $322,580 0.1 Township of Monroe 4 3938 $889,840 0.1 Township of Hampden 12 12088 $1,710,440 0.1 Township of Upper Allen 7 7057 $2,443,750 0.1 Borough of Wormleysburg 1 1125 $1,264,830 0.1 Borough of Shippensburg 1 2166 $156,190 0.0 Borough of Camp Hill 1 3949 $68,230 0.0 * Comments received from the Cooke Township Planning Commission indicate that the percentage of structures in the Township that are located within wooded areas is much higher than reported in this table (12.4%). The Planning Commission suggests that virtually all structures in Cooke Township should be considered in wooded areas. In order to keep consistent in how values were determined for each municipality, the calculation of 12.4% was not revised in this table. However, please note that as many as 100% of structures in Cooke Township are effectively “in the woods” and therefore subject to wildfire events.

The Pennsylvania Bureau of Forestry conducted an independent wildfire hazard risk assessment for the various municipalities across Cumberland County. Results of that assessment are shown in Figure 4.3.9-2. Wildfire hazard is defined based on conditions that affect wildfire ignition and/or behavior such as fuel, topography and local weather. Based on this assessment, the Township of Cooke, Township of Dickinson, Township of Monroe, Township of South Middleton, Township of South Newton and Township of Southampton all have a high wildfire hazard potential. Additionally, according to the Bureau of Forestry, the Township of East Pennsboro is considered at high wildfire risk due to the presence of human activity that could result in the ignition of a wildfire.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Figure 4.3.9-2: Wildfire hazard potential per municipality in Cumberland County.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

4.3.10. Winter Storm 4.3.10.1. Location and Extent Winter storms are regional events which affect Cumberland County, adjacent counties, other areas of the Commonwealth, or even the larger northeastern U.S. Region.

4.3.10.2. Range of Magnitude Winter storms consist of cold temperatures, heavy snow or ice and sometimes strong winds. They begin as low-pressure systems that move through Pennsylvania either following the jet stream or developing as extra-tropical cyclonic weather systems over the Atlantic Ocean called nor’easters. Due to their regular occurrence, these storms are considered hazards only when they result in damage to specific structures or cause disruption to traffic, communications, electric power, or other utilities.

A winter storm can adversely affect roadways, utilities, business activities, and can cause loss of life, frostbite and freezing conditions. These storms may include one or more of the following weather events: • Heavy Snowstorm: Accumulations of four inches or more in a six-hour period, or six inches or more in a twelve-hour period. • Sleet Storm: Significant accumulations of solid pellets which form from the freezing of raindrops or partially melted snowflakes causing slippery surfaces posing hazards to pedestrians and motorists. • Ice Storm: Significant accumulations of rain or drizzle freezing on objects (trees, power lines, roadways, etc.) as it strikes them, causing slippery surfaces and damage from the sheer weight of ice accumulation. • Blizzard: Wind velocity of 35 miles per hour or more, temperatures below freezing, considerable blowing snow with visibility frequently below one-quarter mile prevailing over an extended period of time. • Severe Blizzard: Wind velocity of 45 miles per hour, temperatures of 10 degrees Fahrenheit or lower, a high density of blowing snow with visibility frequently measured in feet prevailing over an extended period time.

Any of the above events can result in the closing of secondary roads, particularly in rural locations, loss of utility services and depletion of oil heating supplies. Environmental impacts often include damage shrubbery and trees due to heavy snow loading, ice build-up and/or high winds which can break limbs or even bring down large trees. Gradual melting of snow and ice provides excellent groundwater recharge. However, high temperatures following a heavy snowfall can cause rapid surface water runoff and severe flooding.

4.3.10.3. Past Occurrence Cumberland County and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania have a long history of severe winter weather. In the winter of 1993-1994, the state was hit by a series of protracted winter storms. The severity and nature of these storms combined with accompanying record-breaking frigid temperatures posed a major threat to the lives, safety and well-being of Commonwealth residents and caused major disruptions to the activities of schools, businesses, hospitals and nursing homes.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

The first of these devastating winter storms occurred in early January, 1994 with record snowfall depths in excess of 33 inches across southwest and south-central portions of the Commonwealth, including Cumberland County, strong winds and sleet/freezing rains. Numerous storm-related power outages were reported and as many as 600,000 residents were without electricity, in some cases for several days at a time. A ravaging ice storm followed, affecting the southeastern portion of the Commonwealth, which closed major arterial roads and downed trees and power lines. Utility crews from a five-state area were called to assist in power restoration repairs. Officials from PP&L stated that this was the worst winter storm in the history of the company; related damage-repair costs exceeded $5,000,000.

Serious power supply shortages continued through mid-January because of record cold temperatures at many places, causing sporadic power generation outages across the Commonwealth. The entire Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland grid and its partners in the District of Columbia, New York and Virginia experienced 15-30 minute rolling blackouts, threatening the lives of people and the safety of the facilities in which they resided. Power and fuel shortages affecting Pennsylvania and the East Coast power grid system required the Governor to recommend power conservation measures be taken by all commercial, residential and industrial power consumers.

The record cold conditions resulted in numerous water-main breaks and interruptions of service to thousands of municipal and city water customers throughout the Commonwealth. Additionally, the extreme cold in conjunction with accumulations of frozen precipitation resulted in acute shortages of road salt. As a result, trucks were dispatched to haul salt from New York to expedite deliveries to Pennsylvania Department of Transportation storage sites.

During January and February 1994, Pennsylvania experienced at least 17 regional or statewide winter storms. In January 1996, another series of severe winter storms with 27- and 24-inch accumulated snow depths was followed by 50 to 60 degree temperatures resulting in rapid melting and flooding (see Table 4.3.3-2)

Cumberland County averages 34 to 36 inches of snow annually. Four of the fourteen Presidential Disaster and Emergency Declarations affecting Cumberland have been in response to hazard events related to winter storms (see Table 4.2-1). In addition to the events described above, other winter storm events, including those associated with Disaster Declarations, are listed in Table 4.3.10-1.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.3.10-1: Previous winter storm events impacting Cumberland County (NCDC, 2009 & Cumberland EOP, 1984). Only significant events are shown prior to 2003, while all events since 2003 are listed. LOCATION DATE TYPE PROPERTY DAMAGE ($) Statewide 1981 Major Winter Storm not provided Several Counties 1/6/1994 Record Snowfall 988,000 Statewide 1/7/1996 Blizzard 635,000 Several Counties 3/4/2001 Heavy Snow 150,000 Several Counties 2/6/2003 Heavy Snow not provided Statewide 2/16/2003 Heavy Snow 263,000 Several Counties 12/5/2003 Heavy Snow not provided Several Counties 2/6/2004 Ice Storm not provided Several Counties 3/19/2004 Heavy Snow not provided Several Counties 2/24/2005 Heavy Snow not provided Statewide 3/1/2005 Heavy Snow not provided Statewide 12/9/2005 Heavy Snow not provided Statewide 12/16/2005 Winter Storm not provided Several Counties 2/12/2006 Heavy Snow not provided Several Counties 2/13/2007 Winter Storm not provided Several Counties 3/16/2007 Heavy Snow not provided Several Counties 12/13/2007 Winter Storm not provided Several Counties 12/15/2007 Winter Storm not provided Several Counties 2/1/2008 Winter Storm not provided Several Counties 2/12/2008 Ice Storm not provided Statewide 1/6/2009 Ice Storm not provided Statewide 1/27/2009 Winter Storm not provided

4.3.10.4. Future Occurrence Winter storms are a regular, annual occurrence in Cumberland County. Approximately thirty- five winter storms occur across Pennsylvania and about five occur in Cumberland County annually. Table 4.3.10-2 shows the snow depths expected for 10%-, 4%-, 2%- and 1%-annual- chance snowfalls over a 1-day, 2-day and 3-day period in Cumberland County. These depths are based on data collected at the weather station in Carlisle, PA between 1894 and 1980. Data was available for 73 years of this 86 year time period; additional data collection would improve statistical calculation of annual probabilities.

Table 4.3.10-2: Extreme snowfall amounts measured in inches for 10%, 4%, 2% and 1%-annual probability of occurrence storms in Cumberland County (NCDC, 2007). ANNUAL PROBABILITY OF OCCURENCE TIME FRAME OBSERVED MAX 10% 4% 2% 1% 1-DAY 15.4 18.7 21.1 23.5 26.0 2-DAY 18.6 22.9 26.0 29.1 29.0 3-DAY 19.7 24.2 27.4 30.6 31.0

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

4.3.10.5. Vulnerability Assessment Since winter storms have become a regular occurrence in Cumberland County, as well as other counties throughout the Commonwealth, strategies have been developed to respond these events. Snow removal and utility repair equipment is present to respond to typical events. The use of auxiliary heat and electricity supplies such as wood burning stoves, kerosene heaters and gasoline power generators reduces the impact winter storm events have on individuals who have this equipment available. Locations lacking adequate equipment to protect against cold temperatures or significant snow and ice are more vulnerable to winter storm events. Even for communities that are prepared to respond to winter storms, severe events involving snow accumulations that exceed six or more inches in a twelve hour period can cause a large number of traffic accidents, interrupt power supply and communications, and cause the failure of inadequately designed and/or maintained roof systems.

Similar to the vulnerability assessment discussion for tornadoes and severe wind, vulnerability to the effects of winter storms on buildings is dependent on the age of the building type, construction material used and condition of the structure. As mentioned previously, Figure 4.3.8-4 shows that most structures in Cumberland County were built since 1950, yet 18,563 structures, approximately 15% of all structures in the County, are 60 or more years old. The corresponding total assessed building value (as of 2010) for structures built prior to 1950 is $1,834,690,430. Note that this value should be treated as approximate and is likely an overestimate due to do how data is presented in the county tax assessment database. Additional information on construction type and building codes enforced at time of construction would allow a more thorough assessment of the vulnerability of structures to winter storm impacts such as severe wind and heavy snow loading. Based on the information available, all communities in Cumberland County are essentially equally vulnerable to the direct impacts of winter storms.

HUMAN-MADE OR TECHNOLOGICAL HAZARDS 4.3.11. Civil Disturbance 4.3.11.1. Location and Extent The scale and scope of civil disturbance events varies widely. However, government facilities, local landmarks, prisons, and universities are common sites where crowds and mobs may gather. There are two prisons within Cumberland County; the Cumberland County Prison in the Borough of Carlisle and the White Hill State Prison in the Township of Lower Allen. The Tressler Wilderness School, a juvenile correction facility, is located in the Township of South Middleton. College and universities in the County include Central Pennsylvania College, Dickinson College, Messiah College, Penn State Dickinson School of Law, Shippensburg University and U.S. Army War College.

4.3.11.2. Range of Magnitude Civil disturbances can take the form of small gatherings or large groups blocking or impeding access to a building, or disrupting normal activities by generating noise and intimidating people. They can range from a peaceful sit-in to a full scale riot, in which a mob burns or otherwise destroys property and terrorizes individuals. Even in its more passive forms, a group that blocks

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan roadways, sidewalks, or buildings interferes with public order. There are two types of large gatherings typically associated with civil disturbances: a crowd and a mob. A crowd may be defined as a casual, temporary collection of people without a strong, cohesive relationship. Crowds can be classified into four categories (Juniata County, PA MJHMP, 2008): • Casual Crowd: A casual crowd is merely a group of people who happen to be in the same place at the same time. Violent conduct does not occur. • Cohesive Crowd: A cohesive crowd consists of members who are involved in some type of unified behavior. Members of this group are involved in some type of common activity, such as worshipping, dancing, or watching a sporting event. Although they may have intense internal discipline, they require substantial provocation to arouse to action. • Expressive Crowd: An expressive crowd is one held together by a common commitment or purpose. Although they may not be formally organized, they are assembled as an expression of common sentiment or frustration. Members wish to be seen as a formidable influence. One of the best examples of this type is a group assembled to protest. • Aggressive Crowd: An aggressive crowd is comprised of individuals who have assembled for a specific purpose. This crowd often has leaders who attempt to arouse the members or motivate them to action. Members are noisy and threatening and will taunt authorities. They may be more impulsive and emotional, and require only minimal stimulation to arouse violence. Examples of this type of crowd could include demonstrators and strikers, though not all demonstrators and strikers are aggressive.

A mob can be defined as a large disorderly crowd or throng. Mobs are usually emotional, loud, tumultuous, violent and lawless. Similar to crowds, mobs have different levels of commitment and can be classified into four categories (Juniata County, PA MJHMP, 2008): • Aggressive Mob: An aggressive mob is one that attacks, riots and terrorizes. The object of violence may be a person, property, or both. An aggressive mob is distinguished from an aggressive crowd only by lawless activity. Examples of aggressive mobs are the inmate mobs in prisons and jails, mobs that act out their frustrations after political defeat, or violent mobs at political protests or rallies. • Escape Mob: An escape mob is attempting to flee from something such as a fire, bomb, flood, or other catastrophe. Members of escape mobs are generally difficult to control can be characterized by unreasonable terror. • Acquisitive Mob: An acquisitive mob is one motivated by a desire to acquire something. Riots caused by other factors often turn into looting sprees. This mob exploits a lack of control by authorities in safeguarding property. • Expressive Mob: An expressive mob is one that expresses fervor or revelry following some sporting event, religious activity, or celebration. Members experience a release of pent up emotions in highly charged situations.

4.3.11.3. Past Occurrence There is one known significant civil disturbance event in Cumberland County. There was a riot at the White Hill State Correction Prison in 1989. The event actually consisted of two aggressive mob uprisings, the second taking place the day after the first.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

4.3.11.4. Future Occurrence Minor civil disturbances may occur in Cumberland County, but it is not possible to accurately predict the probability of future occurrence for civil disturbance events over the long-term. However, it may be possible to recognize the potential for an event to occur in the near-term. For example, an upcoming significant sporting event at one of the colleges or universities in the County may result in gathering of large crowds. Local law enforcement should anticipate these types of events and be prepared to handle a crowd so that peaceful gatherings are prevented from turning into unruly public disturbances.

4.3.11.5. Vulnerability Assessment In general, Cumberland County is not particularly vulnerable to civil disturbance events. Most civil disturbance events, should they occur, would have minimal impact. Sites previously identified in Section 4.3.11.1 are locations where such events are more likely to occur and therefore should be considered more vulnerable. Adequate law enforcement at these locations minimizes the chances of a small assembly of people turning into a significant disturbance.

4.3.12. Dam Failure See Appendix F Dam Failure Hazard Profile

4.3.13. Environmental Hazards 4.3.13.1. Location and Extent Environmental hazards in Cumberland County focus mainly on hazardous material releases which can occur wherever hazardous materials are manufactured, used, stored, or transported. Such releases usually occur at fixed site facilities or along transportation routes. I-81, I-76, I-83, US Routes 11, 15, 11/15 and PA Route 581 are considered major transportation routes in Cumberland County. There are several points where these transportation routes cross streams within the watershed that serves as a part of the County’s domestic water supply.

Transportation of hazardous materials on highways involves tanker trucks or trailers. Unsurprisingly, large trucks are responsible for the greatest number of hazard material release incidents. Hazardous material releases from rail transport are also of concern due to collisions and derailments that result in large spills. Severe rail events have reportedly occurred in the Enola and Lemoyne railyards.

Facilities that use, manufacture, or store hazardous materials in Pennsylvania must comply with both Title III of the federal Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), also known as the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), and the Commonwealth's reporting requirements under the Hazardous Materials Emergency Planning and Response Act (1990-165), as amended. The community right-to-know reporting requirements keep communities abreast of the presence and release of chemicals at individual facilities. There are 161 SARA Title III facilities in Cumberland County (Appendix E). Note that the list of SARA Title III facilities is not an exhaustive, fully-comprehensive inventory of all hazardous material locations within the County and therefore, should not be used as such.

Key information about the chemicals handled by manufacturing or processing facilities is contained in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Toxic Release Inventory (TRI)

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan database. Facilities which employ ten or more full-time employees and which manufacture or process 25,000 pounds or more, or otherwise use 10,000 pounds or more, of any SARA Section 313-listed toxic chemical in the course of a calendar year are required to report TRI information to the USEPA, the federal enforcement agency for SARA Title III, and PEMA. Additional hazardous materials are contained at the military installations within and surrounding Cumberland County (e.g. Carlisle Barracks U.S. Army Garrison).

4.3.13.2. Range of Magnitude Hazardous material releases can contaminate air, water and soils, possibly resulting in death and/or injuries. Dispersion can take place rapidly when transported by water and wind. While often accidental, releases can occur as a result of human carelessness, intentional acts, or natural hazards. When caused by natural hazards, these incidents are known as secondary events. Hazardous materials can include toxic chemicals, radioactive materials, infectious substances and hazardous wastes. Such releases can affect nearby populations and contaminate critical or sensitive environmental areas.

With a hazardous material release, whether accidental or intentional, there are several potentially exacerbating or mitigating circumstances that will affect its severity or impact. Mitigating conditions are precautionary measures taken in advance to reduce the impact of a release on the surrounding environment. Primary and secondary containment or shielding by sheltering-in-place protects people and property from the harmful effects of a hazardous material release. Exacerbating conditions, characteristics that can enhance or magnify the effects of a hazardous material release include: • Weather conditions: affects how the hazard occurs and develops • Micro-meteorological effects of buildings and terrain: alters dispersion of hazardous materials • Non-compliance with applicable codes (e.g. building or fire codes) and maintenance failures (e.g. fire protection and containment features): can substantially increase the damage to the facility itself and to surrounding buildings

The severity of the incident is dependent not only on the circumstances described above, but also with the type of material released and the distance and related response time for emergency response teams. The areas within closest proximity to the releases are generally at greatest risk, yet depending on the agent, a release can travel great distances or remain present in the environment for a long period of time (e.g. centuries to millennia for radioactive materials), resulting in extensive impacts on people and the environment.

4.3.13.3. Past Occurrence Since the passage of SARA, Title III facilities which produce, use, or store hazardous chemicals must notify the public through the county emergency dispatch center and PEMA if an accidental release of a hazardous substance meets or exceeds a designated reportable quantity, and affects or has the potential to affect persons and/or the environment outside the plant. SARA, Title III and Pennsylvania Act 165 also require a written follow-up report to PEMA and the County. These written follow-up reports include any known or anticipated health risks associated with the release and actions to be taken to mitigate potential future incidents. In

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan addition, Section 204(a)(10) of Act 165 requires PEMA to staff and operate a 24-hour State Emergency Operations Center (SEOC) to provide effective emergency response coordination. There were 12 hazardous material release incidents in Cumberland County reported to the SEOC in 2007 and 16 reported in 2008. There were no deaths reported as a result of these incidents in either year (PEMA, 2007 and PEMA, 2008). Additional incident information for years prior to 2007 may be obtained from annual reports submitted to PEMA.

The USEPA TRI reports that 166,337 pounds of chemicals were released from facilities located in Cumberland County in 2007. Table 4.3.13-1 lists the release of these chemicals by company. Many of these companies have or are federally listed SARA Title III facilities. Other prior year TRI information can be found on the EPA Toxic Release Inventory Database website.

Table 4.3.13-1: Summary of 2007 Toxic Release Inventory data in Cumberland County (USEPA, 2009). COMPANY CHEMICALS RELEASED MUNICIPALITY Copper, Manganese, & Zinc ADM Alliance Nutrition, Inc. Borough of Camp Hill Compounds ADM Milling Company Chlorine Borough of Camp Hill Ames True Temper, Inc. Lead, Manganese Borough of Camp Hill Atlas Roofing Corporation Diisocyanates Borough of Camp Hill Antimony Compounds, Decabromodiphenyl Oxide, Diisocyanates, Polycyclic Carlisle Syntec, Inc. Borough of Carlisle Aromatic Compounds, Thiram, Toluene, Xylene, Zinc Compounds Polycyclic Aromatic Compounds; Carlisle Tire & Wheel Company Borough of Carlisle Zinc Compounds Dairy Farmers of America, Inc. Nitrate Compounds, Nitric Acid Borough of Mechanicsburg Copper, Diisocyanates, Domestic Casting Company, LLC Township of Shippensburg Manganese Chromium, Lead, Manganese, Frog Switch & Manufacturing Molybdenum Trioxide, Nickel Borough of Carlisle Company Compounds IAC Carlisle, LLC Diisocyanates Borough of Carlisle JLG Industries Inc. Ethylene Glycol, Zinc Compounds Township of Southampton Land O' Lakes Nitrate Compounds, Nitric Acid Borough of Carlisle Land O' Lakes Purina Feed, LLC Manganese Compounds Borough of Camp Hill Manganese Compounds, Nestle Purina Petcare Company Borough of Mechanicsburg Propylene, Zinc Compounds PPG Industries Carlisle Plant Works 6 Lead Compounds Borough of Carlisle Ethylene Glycol, Lead, Polycyclic Safety-Kleen Systems Township of Silver Spring Aromatic Compounds Lead & Nickel Compounds, Tyco Electronics Building Borough of Carlisle Copper

In 2008, across the Commonwealth, there were 867 highway related hazardous material incidents totaling $1,537,665 in damages and 29 railway related incidents totaling $88,270 in damages (PHMSA, 2009). Other prior year incident information for Pennsylvania can be found

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan on the U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration website. The Pennsylvania’s Hazardous Material Emergency Planning and Response Act 1990-165 - 2008 Annual Report states there were 116 “transportation emergency” incidents in 2008 in Cumberland County (PEMA, 2008). However, the definition of “transportation emergency” is not clearly defined.

4.3.13.4. Future Occurrence While many hazardous material release incidents have occurred in Cumberland County in the past, they are generally considered difficult to predict. An occurrence is largely dependent upon the accidental or intentional actions of a person or group. Intentional acts are addressed under Section 4.3.16.

4.3.13.5. Vulnerability Assessment Transportation carriers must have response plans in place to address accidents, otherwise the local emergency response team will step in to secure and restore the area. Quick response minimizes the volume and concentration of hazardous materials that disperse through air, water and soil. There are thirty-eight water supply facilities in the County (see Appendix D). While a thorough assessment has not been completed to identify which facilities would be impacted by a given spill, information is available on the streams from which these facilities withdraw water. Five facilities draw from the Conodoguinet Creek, four facilities draw from Letort Spring Run and twenty-nine facilities draw from the Yellow Breeches Creek.

Recent expansion of the Mechanicsburg Fuel Terminal to provide increased storage for ethanol products has increased vulnerability to residents of the Township of Silver Spring. Potential risk is increased not only by the fixed facility itself, but also rail and truck transport to and from the facility.

Most of the population in Cumberland County lives within 1.5 miles of a SARA Title III facility that stores extremely hazardous substances (EHS). A significant portion of the County population also resides within ¼ mile of major highways and railways. Table 4.3.13-2 shows the distribution of these populations by municipality. Note that there is some overlap among these vulnerable populations. For example, an individual that lives within 1.5 miles of a SARA Title III facility may also live within a ¼ mile of a major road. Appendix E lists the population within 1.5 miles of each SARA Title III facility as well as a map of the facilities and major transportation routes used to identify vulnerable populations.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.3.13-2: Estimated 2008 population within 1.5 miles of a SARA Title III facility and ¼ mile of major roads and railways. POPULATION POPULATION POPULATION WITHIN 1.5 MILES WITHIN 1/4 MILE MUNICIPALITY WITHIN 1/4 MILE OF SARA TITLE III OF MAJOR OF RAILROADS FACILITY ROADS Township of Upper Allen 17,334 6,327 411 Township of Lower Allen 16,729 4,072 3,255 Township of South Middleton 13,451 958 1,188 Township of Silver Spring 10,329 2,486 2,431 Borough of Mechanicsburg 8,631 0 4,741 Borough of Camp Hill 7,278 4,169 1,056 Township of North Middleton 9,090 1,964 486 Borough of New Cumberland 7,055 739 2,146 Borough of Shippensburg 4,452 3,603 1,633 Borough of Lemoyne 4,058 1,646 3,398 Township of Middlesex 5,897 1,255 415 Borough of Wormleysburg 2,820 1,731 2,122 Township of Southampton 4,756 902 854 Township of Shippensburg 5,211 388 216 Township of Monroe 4,000 326 437 Township of Dickinson 2,444 519 907 Township of West Pennsboro 2,114 1,126 0 Borough of Mount Holly Springs 1,911 0 1,167 Borough of Shiremanstown 1,494 0 1,258 Township of North Newton 1,481 80 108 Township of Penn 1,177 137 306 Borough of Newville 1,276 0 331 Township of Upper Frankford 741 40 0 Township of South Newton 47 219 414 Township of Hopewell 193 205 0 Township of Lower Mifflin 315 55 0 Township of Upper Mifflin 21 221 0 Township of Lower Frankford 228 0 0 Township of Cooke 0 0 0 Borough of Newburg 0 0 0

Populations should be considered vulnerable to hazardous material releases in every municipality except the Township of Cooke and the Borough of Newburg. The Borough of

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Carlisle, Township of Hampden, Township of East Pennsboro, Township of Upper Allen and Township of Lower Allen are all considered exceptionally vulnerable to exposure to hazardous materials due to their proximity to major transportation routes and the presence of SARA Title III facilities near significant populations. In the event of an accidental or intentional release, the size and type of chemical released would be critical determinants of the effects on nearby residents and the environment.

4.3.14. Levee Failure 4.3.14.1. Location and Extent FEMA completed an inventory of all known levees across Pennsylvania in 2009. There is one structure which has been identified in Cumberland County, located along Yellow Breeches Creek in Monroe Township (FEMA, Mid-Term Levee Inventory, 2009). It is not certified to protect against the 1%-annual-chance flood and is not accredited on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) published on March 16, 2009. Figure 4.3.14-1 shows the portion of FIRM Panel 42041C0244E where this structure is identified (note that its delineation extends onto FIRM Panel 42041C0263E). County and community officials confirmed that this structure is insignificant in size and provides no protection to the surrounding community from flooding. After further investigation, officials clarified that this structure is actually a historic canal which connects runoff from Boiling Springs Lake to Yellow Breeches Creek. Recent drainage improvements at Boiling Springs Lake keep the canal essentially dry. Small amounts of water are diverted from the lake and discharged into Yellow Breeches Creek; however, water levels in the canal remain low even during times of high water. This area is included as part of the Wittlinger Nature Preserve and is surrounded by permanently protected open space.

Figure 4.3.14-1: Containment structure along Yellow Breeches Creek as shown on FIRM Panel 42041C0244E.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

The 2004 Cumberland County Hazard Mitigation Plan stated that flood control projects on the Susquehanna River since the major floods of the 1970s have reduced the risks from floods. However, none of these projects are known to be located within Cumberland County.

4.3.14.2. Range of Magnitude A levee failure or breach causes flooding in landward areas adjacent to the structure. The failure of a levee or other flood protection structure could be devastating depending on the level of flooding for which the structure is designed and the amount of landward development present. The environmental impacts of a levee failure are more significant that those associated with a typical flood event. Large volumes of water may be moving at high velocities, potentially causing severe damage to buildings, infrastructure, trees and other large objects. Hazardous materials may be released and distributed widely across the floodplain. In addition, severe erosion is likely which can impact local ecosystems. The potential for these impacts to occur in Cumberland County is minimal or nearly nonexistent since there are no significant levee systems located within the County.

4.3.14.3. Past Occurrence There are no known previous levee failures in Cumberland County.

4.3.14.4. Future Occurrence Similarly to dam failures, given certain circumstances, levee failures can occur at any time. However, the probability of future occurrence can be reduced through proper design, construction and maintenance measures. Most levees are designed to meet a specified level of flooding. While FEMA focuses on mapping levees that will reduce the risk of a 1%-annual- chance flood, other levees may be designed to protect against smaller or larger floods. Design specifications provide information on the percent-annual-chance flood a structure is expected to withstand, provided that it has been adequately constructed and maintained. Future occurrence of levee failures is not expected in Cumberland County since there are no known significant levee systems.

4.3.14.5. Vulnerability Assessment With the exception of potential impacts from failed upstream flood protection structures outside of Cumberland County, there are no communities that are particularly vulnerable to levee failures. This is mainly due to the fact that there is only one known structure in the County and any levees that are yet unidentified are not large enough to create significant losses if they were to fail. The structure along Yellow Breeches Creek is not accredited on FIRM Panel 42041C0244E; therefore, any flooding caused by failure or overtopping should not exceed areas already at risk from the 1%-annual-chance flood.

4.3.15. Nuclear Incidents 4.3.15.1. Location and Extent The Nuclear Regulatory Commission encourages the use of Probabilistic Risk Assessments (PRA) to estimate quantitatively the potential risk to public health and safety considering the design, operations and maintenance practices at nuclear power plants. PRAs typically focus on accidents that can severely damage the core and that may challenge containment. FEMA, PEMA and county governments have formulated Radiological Emergency Response Plans to

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan prepare for radiological emergencies at the five nuclear power generating facilities in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. These plans include a Plume Exposure Pathway Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) with a radius of ten miles from each nuclear power facility and an Ingestion Exposure Pathway EPZ with a radius of fifty miles from each facility.

Cumberland County is affected by both the ten mile Plume Exposure Pathway EPZ and fifty mile Ingestion Exposure Pathway EPZ for the Three Mile Island (TMI) nuclear facility, located approximately nine miles southeast of the boundary of Cumberland County, along the Susquehanna River in Dauphin County, PA. New Cumberland Borough and Lower Allen Township are located within ten miles of TMI. The entire County is within the fifty mile Ingestion Exposure Pathway EPZ for TMI.

In addition, the southeastern edge of the County is within the Ingestion Exposure Pathway EPZ of the Peach Bottom nuclear facility located in Lancaster County. The remaining three nuclear plants in Pennsylvania are more than fifty miles away from Cumberland County. This distance exceeds the Plume Exposure and Ingestion Exposure Pathway EPZs for nuclear emergencies; therefore, these facilities are considered a minimal threat to the County. However, in the event of an emergency, evacuees from distant EPZs may seek shelter in Cumberland County.

4.3.15.2. Range of Magnitude The Plume Exposure Pathway refers to whole-body external exposure to gamma radiation from a radioactive plume and from deposited materials and inhalation exposure from the passing radioactive plume. The duration of primary exposures could range in length from hours to days. The Ingestion Exposure Pathway refers to exposure primarily from ingestion of water or foods such as milk and fresh vegetables that have been contaminated with radiation. The County Radiological Emergency Response Plan, which is part of the County Emergency Operations Plan, includes the following: • Preventive and emergency protective actions; • Response levels and associated protective action guides for food; • Recommended protective action guides within the Ingestion Exposure Pathway EPZ; and • Information for farmers to assist in protection of their livestock and crops from radioactive contamination.

Nuclear accidents are classified into three categories: • Criticality accidents: Involves loss of control of nuclear assemblies or power reactors. • Loss-of-coolant accidents: Occurs whenever a reactor coolant system experiences a break or opening large enough so that the coolant inventory in the system cannot be maintained by the normally operating make-up system. • Loss-of-containment accidents: Involves the release of radioactivity from materials such as tritium, fission products, plutonium, and natural, depleted, or enriched uranium. Points of release have been containment vessels at fixed facilities or damaged packages during transportation accidents.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Nuclear facilities must notify the appropriate authorities in the event of an accident. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission uses four classification levels for nuclear incidents (NRC, 2008): • Unusual Event: Under this category, events are in process or have occurred which indicate potential degradation in the level of safety of the plant. No release of radioactive material requiring offsite response or monitoring is expected unless further degradation occurs. • Alert: If an alert is declared, events are in process or have occurred which involve an actual or potential substantial degradation in the level of safety of the plant. Any releases of radioactive material from the plant are expected to be limited to a small fraction of the EPA Protective Action Guides (PAGs). • Site Area Emergency: A site area emergency involves events in process or which have occurred that result in actual or likely major failures of plant functions needed for protection of the public. Any releases of radioactive material are not expected to exceed the EPA PAGs except near the site boundary. • General Emergency: A general emergency involves actual or imminent substantial core damage or melting of reactor fuel with the potential for loss of containment integrity. Radioactive releases during a general emergency can reasonably be expected to exceed the EPA PAGs for more than the immediate site area.

After a nuclear incident, the primary concern is the effect on the health of the population near the incident. The duration of primary exposure could range in length from hours to months depending on the proximity to the point of radioactive release. External radiation and inhalation and ingestion of radioactive isotopes can cause acute health effects (e.g. death, severe health impairment), chronic health effects (e.g. cancers) and psychological effects. Additional potential impacts include the long-term effects of environmental or agricultural radioactive contamination.

4.3.15.3. Past Occurrence There has been one nuclear incident above the Alert classification in the United States. In March 1979, a Site Area Emergency event occurred at Three Mile Island - Unit 2. This event is the most serious commercial nuclear accident in United States history. The resulting contamination and state of the reactor core led to the development of a ten-year cleanup and scientific effort. Despite the severity of the damage, no injuries due to radiation exposure occurred. There were however, significant health effects reported due to the psychological stress on the individuals living in the area.

4.3.15.4. Future Occurrence Across the United States, a number of Unusual Event and Alert classification level events occur each year at the 100+ nuclear facilities that warrant notification of local emergency managers. Of these, Alert emergencies occur less frequently. For example, in 1997, there were forty notifications of Unusual Events and three Alert events nationwide. Based on historical events, Site Area Emergency and General Emergency incidents are very rare.

4.3.15.5. Vulnerability Assessment New Cumberland Borough is located entirely within the Plume Exposure Pathway EPZ while Lower Allen Township (Allendale & Beacon Hill Subdivisions) is partially within this planning

100

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan zone. Table 4.3.15-1 shows the population for these municipalities within the Plume Exposure Pathway EPZ, approximately four percent of the total County population.

Table 4.3.15-1: Population by municipality located within the ten mile TMI Plume Exposure Pathway EPZ. MUNICPALITY 2000 POPULATION 2008 ESTIMATED POPULATION Township of Lower Allen 1,720 out of 17,437 (10%) 1,721 out of 17,466 (10%) Borough of New Cumberland 7,349 out of 7,349 (100%) 7,048 out of 7,048 (100%)

While health and environmental consequences from exposure to radiation levels can have serious long-term effects, most of the literature related to nuclear incidents indicates that effects are experienced well within the fifty mile Ingestion Exposure Pathway Emergency Planning Zone. Nonetheless, 3% of the County population is within ten miles of TMI and considered vulnerable to direct radiation exposure if a significant event were to occur. Figure 4.3.15-1 shows the evacuation plan map that would be used in the event an evacuation from the Three Mile Island Area would be necessary. Most of Cumberland County is outside of the emergency evacuation zone; however, the entire County would be affected on some level by such an event as is therefore considered at risk.

Figure 4.3.15-1: Evacuation plan map for the Three Mile Island area (Excelon, 2007).

101

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

In addition to the risk of a nuclear event at TMI, there is also potential for a nuclear accident to occur on the major roads and railroads that run through Cumberland County. The municipalities and populations vulnerable to events that may occur on these transportation routes are addressed in Section 4.3.12-5.

4.3.16. Terrorism 4.3.16.1. Location and Extent An important consideration in evaluating terrorism hazards is the existence of facilities, landmarks, or other buildings of international, national, or regional importance. While Cumberland County has many notable landmarks from a local historic perspective, there are no sites which are considered significant landmarks in terms of national or international importance. However, the Pennsylvania state capital located to the east of the County across the Susquehanna River and Gettysburg National Military Park located to the south in Adams County are potential terrorist targets.

Nonetheless, terrorism can take many forms and terrorists have a wide range of personal, political, or cultural agendas. Therefore, there is no location that is not a potential terrorist target. Two types of terrorist activity are particularly relevant to Cumberland County: agriterrorism and intentional hazardous material releases. Agriterrorism is the direct, intentional, generally covert contamination of food supplies or introduction of pests and/or disease agents to crops and livestock. Cumberland County is semi-rural with about 51% of its land area dedicated to agriculture.

There are also a number of SARA Title III facilities and major transportation routes that traverse the County; making intentional hazard material releases a potential threat to citizens and the environment. This hazard is addressed in Section 4.3.12. Critical facilities including police stations, hospitals, fire stations, schools, wastewater treatment plants, water supply facilities, may be potential terrorist targets. A complete list of these facilities is included in Appendix D. The County has also identified the following potential terrorist targets within and outside of county boundaries, including areas which may be targets due to the gathering of large crowds: • Army Barracks and War College (Township of North Middleton) • Navy Support Facility (Township of Hampden) • Defense Actives Region East (DDRE) (York County) • Letterkenny Army Depot (Franklin County) • Three Mile Island Nuclear Power Plant (see Section 4.3.14) • Old Carlisle Fairgrounds – Carlisle Events (Carlisle Borough & North Middleton Township) • Ken Mullen Stadium (Carlisle Borough) • East Pennsboro School District (East Pennsboro Township) • West Shore Stadium (Lower Allen Township) • Cumberland Valley High School Stadium (Silver Spring Township) • Boiling Springs High School (South Middleton Township) • Big Spring School District (West Pennsboro Township) • Messiah College (Upper Allen Township) • Dickinson College Stadium (Borough of Carlisle) • Norfolk-Southern Railyards

102

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

In addition, all bridges and railways (discussed in Section 4.3.17) across the County are considered potential targets. The Township of Middlesex experienced a suspected bomb incident in 2005 at the Pilot Truck stop located on Harrisburg Pike (Route 11). A suitcase was detonated by bomb team experts after it was believed to contain explosives. While it was later found not to be a bomb, the incident was a learning experience and served as a live exercise. Response to the incident was adequate; an important finding since the intersection of I-81 and I- 76 is located within the Township.

4.3.16.2. Range of Magnitude The term “terrorism” refers to intentional, criminal, malicious acts, but the functional definition of terrorism can be interpreted in many ways. Officially, terrorism is defined in the Code of Federal Regulations as “…the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives” (28 CFR §0.85).

Terrorist attacks can take many forms, including agriterrorism, arson/incendiary attack, armed attack, biological agent, chemical agent, cyberterrorism, conventional bomb, intentional hazardous material release, nuclear bomb and radiological agent. The severity of terrorist incidents depends upon the method of attack, the proximity of the attack to people, animals, or other assets and the duration of exposure to the incident or attack device. For example, chemical agents are poisonous gases, liquids or solids that have toxic effects on people, animals, or plants. Many chemical agents can cause serious injuries or death. In this case, severity of injuries depends on the type and amount of the chemical agent used and the duration of exposure.

Biological agents are organisms or toxins that have illness-producing effects on people, livestock and crops. Some biological agents cannot be easily detected and may take time to develop. Therefore, it can be difficult to know that a biological attack has occurred until victims display symptoms. In other cases, the effects are immediate. Those affected by a biological agent require the immediate attention of professional medical personnel. Some agents are contagious which may result in the need for victims to be quarantined.

4.3.16.3. Past Occurrence Cumberland County experiences terrorist incidents annually. In 2002, 13 terrorist incidents (i.e. bomb threats) were reported while in 36 incidents were reported in 2001. More recently, 18 incidents were reported in 2008 while 21 were reported in 2007 (PEMA 2007 & 2008). Specific details regarding these incidents are not available. Additional incident information for years prior to 2007 may be obtained from annual reports submitted to PEMA.

4.3.16.4. Future Occurrence Based on historical events, Cumberland County can expect to experience several terrorist incidents each year. Note that this estimate is based on the occurrence of past events over a short period of time and is not the result of detailed statistical sampling. Although previous events have not resulted in what are considered significant terrorist attacks, the severity of a future incident cannot be predicted with a sufficient level of certainty.

103

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

4.3.16.5. Vulnerability Assessment Since the probability of terrorism occurring cannot be quantified in the same way as that of many natural hazards, it is not possible to assess vulnerability in terms of likelihood of occurrence. Instead, vulnerability is assessed in terms of specific assets. By identifying potentially at-risk terrorist targets in a community, planning efforts can be put in place to reduce the risk of attack. All communities in Cumberland County are vulnerable on some level, directly or indirectly, to a terrorist attack. However, communities where the previously mentioned potential targets are located should be considered more vulnerable. Site-specific assessments should be based on the relative importance of a particular site to the surrounding community or population, threats that are known to exist and vulnerabilities including: • Inherent vulnerability: - Visibility – How aware is the public of the existence of the facility? - Utility – How valuable might the place be in meeting the objectives of a potential terrorist? - Accessibility – How accessible is the place to the public? - Asset mobility – is the asset’s location fixed or mobile? - Presence of hazardous materials – Are flammable, explosive, biological, chemical and/or radiological materials present on site? If so, are they well secured? - Potential for collateral damage – What are the potential consequences for the surrounding area if the asset is attacked or damaged? - Occupancy – What is the potential for mass casualties based on the maximum number of individuals on site at a given time? • Tactical vulnerability: Site Perimeter - Site planning and Landscape Design – Is the facility designed with security in mind – both site-specific and with regard to adjacent land uses? - Parking Security – Are vehicle access and parking managed in a way that separates vehicles and structures? Building Envelope - Structural Engineering – Is the building’s envelope designed to be blast-resistant? Does it provide collective protection against chemical, biological and radiological contaminants? Facility Interior - Architectural and Interior Space Planning – Does security screening cover all public and private areas? - Mechanical Engineering – Are utilities and HVAC systems protected and/or backed up with redundant systems? - Electrical Engineering – Are emergency power and telecommunications available? Are alarm systems operational? Is lightning sufficient? - Fire Protection Engineering – Are the building’s water supply and fire suppression systems adequate, code-compliant and protected? Are on-site personnel trained appropriately? Are local first responders aware of the nature of the operations at the facility?

104

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

- Electronic and Organized Security – Are systems and personnel in place to monitor and protect the facility?

4.3.17. Transportation Accidents 4.3.17.1. Location and Extent For the purposes of this plan, transportation accidents are defined as incidents involving highway, air and rail travel. Within Cumberland County, there are over 2,400 miles of roads, 552 bridges and approximately 270 miles of railways. Key freight routes include I-81, I-76, I-83, PA 581 and PA 34/94. The Norfolk Southern Railroad runs along the entire eastern border of the Borough of New Cumberland. There is a potential for major accidents on any of these roads, bridges or railways.

The county has three private airports; Carlisle Business Airport, Shippensburg Regional Airport and Newville Regional Airfield. There are no public airports in Cumberland County, but there is a considerable amount of commercial air traffic from two airports located outside of the County; Harrisburg International airport in Dauphin County and Capital City airport in York County. Commercial air traffic flyovers not only bother residents with noise, but they also present the possibility of injury, damage to structures and fire, if an aircraft were to crash. A five-mile radius around each airport can be considered a high-risk area since most aviation incidents occur near landing or take-off sites. While Harrisburg International Airport is the largest airport in the area, it is greater than five miles away from the County.

4.3.17.2. Range of Magnitude Significant transportation accidents can result in death or serious injury or extensive property loss or damage. Road and railway accidents in particular have the potential to result in hazardous materials release (see Section 4.3.12).

4.3.17.3. Past Occurrence Based on previous events, the following intersections and corridors have been identified by the Harrisburg Area Transportation Study for safety initiatives in order to reduce fatalities, major injuries and economic loss to society (TCRPC, 2007): • Camp Hill Bypass (US 11) – 21st Street to Walnut Street • PA 944 – Oris Bridge Road to Good Hope Road • Simpson Ferry Road – St. Johns Church Road to Wesley Drive • East Lisburn Road (PA 114) – South Market Street to Mt. Allen Drive • Intersection of PA 34 and PA 174 • Intersection of PA 233 and US 11 • Intersection of PA 34 and PA 641/US 11 • Harrisburg Pike (US 11) – I-76 interchange to I-81 interchange • PA 997 – US 11 to Orrstown Road in Shippensburg Borough • Intersection of Newville Road and US 11 in Shippensburg Borough • Intersection of King Street and Queen Street in Shippensburg Borough • Intersection of PA 114 and US 11 in Silver Spring Township

105

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

In addition, the Tri-County Regional Planning Commission has identified roads across the County which commonly experienced traffic crash incidents between 2000 and 2006 (see Figure 4.3.17-1).

106

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Figure 4.3.17-1: Cumberland County crash analysis map (TCRPC, 2007).

107

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Two plane crashes occurred within the Borough of New Cumberland in 1983 and 1984; both in highly populated areas. One occurred beside an active playground. The other accident involved a crash into a residential property, killing both the pilot and an occupant of the house and threatening several others. All other plane crashes of past years have occurred in mountainous terrain and resulted in death or injury to occupants of the aircraft only.

4.3.17.4. Future Occurrence The number of transportation related accidents is expected to increase with growing populations. East Pennsboro Township, which has experienced an 8.46% increase in population since 2000, notes increased traffic congestion on Routes 11, 15, I-81 and railways. New highway construction in Lower Allen Township will result in increased trucking and traffic congestion. There were approximately 65,000 long haul trucks operating daily in Cumberland County in 2003, 60,000 of which were traveling through (e.g. not considered inbound or outbound trucks) the County. It is anticipated that by 2030, over 120,000 long haul trucks will operate daily in the County, 110,000 of which will be traveling through (TCRPC, 2007). This is a result of the presence of interstates and other freight routes that traverse Cumberland County.

Figure 4.3.17-1 provides traffic crash rates measured in crashes per million vehicle miles for major roads throughout Cumberland County. Rates measure between 0.01 and greater than 5.0 crashes per million miles based on historical 2000-2006 data from the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation. These rates provide a basis for estimating the number of future traffic crash incidents on given roads across the County. Crashes are likely to continue or increase without mitigation.

The average rate of aviation accidents nationwide is 8.47 accidents per 100,000 flight hours. Therefore, the likelihood of an aviation incident in the County is considered low. Information on previous railway accidents is insufficient to assess the probability of future occurrence. However, collection of this data is incorporated into the County Mitigation Action Plan.

4.3.17.5. Vulnerability Assessment A transportation related accident can occur on any stretch of road or railway in Cumberland County. However, severe accidents are more likely along major highways such as I-81, I-76, I- 83, US Routes 11, 15, 11/15 and PA Route 581 which experience heavier traffic volumes including heavy freight vehicles. The Borough of Shippensburg, Township of Shippensburg, and Township of Southampton have all indicated that truck and rail traffic is increasing in the area.

The Township of Middlesex has indicated that “Miracle Mile,” a one mile stretch of Harrisburg Pike (Route 11) which serves as the connector route between I-81 and I-76, experiences a very large volume of traffic. Tractor trailers make up a large portion of this volume. Due to congestion, it is an area which has been a challenge for emergency response. The Township of Middlesex is currently working on a plan to that will be completed in 2010 which will specifically address the traffic situation in this area.

The Borough of Newville has expressed concerns over the use of the Cumberland County mobile 911 communications truck that serves as the primary back-up to the County 911 center. The communications truck has been used as a mobile command post in recent years to

108

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan respond to emergencies throughout Cumberland County. As a result, this critical piece of public safety equipment is at greater risk to an automobile accident that could easily take it out of service for an extended period of time. Such an incident would leave Cumberland County without an alternate 911 service. Plan update participants recognized that while this is a valid concern, a regional 911 back-up process is in place to address the issue. If a 911 call cannot or could not be received from the Cumberland 911 system, it is relayed to the 911 system of a surrounding county. Therefore, it was agreed that this is not a serious concern and Cumberland County did not need to address this issue in the Mitigation Strategy.

Approximately 100,000 people live within five miles of at least one of the Cumberland County airports. Population totals within these high-risk areas are listed for each airport in Table 4.3.17- 1. In addition, New Cumberland Borough and East Pennsboro Township are located beneath routine flight paths for Harrisburg International and Capital City Airports.

Table 4.3.17-1: Population within 5-miles of airports located in and adjacent to Cumberland County. AIRPORT 2000 POPULATION 2008 ESTIMATED POPULATION Carlisle Business Airport 45,746 48,514 Shippensburg Regional Airport 15,270 17,553 Newville Regional Airfield 10,867 12,198 Capital City Airport 35,734 35,334

4.3.18. Urban Fire 4.3.18.1. Location and Extent Significant urban fires are limited to more densely populated areas that contain large and/or multiple buildings. Such fires may start in single structure, but spread to nearby buildings or throughout a large building if adequate fire control measures are not in place.

4.3.18.2. Range of Magnitude Severe urban fires result in extensive damage to residential, commercial and/or pubic property. Lives may be lost and people are often displaced for several months to years depending on the magnitude of the event.

4.3.18.3. Past Occurrence Cumberland County experiences a number of urban fires every year, most of which are small and affect one to a few structures. However, a list of previous significant urban fires is included in Table 4.3.18-1.

109

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.3.18-1: List of previous significant urban fire events in Cumberland County. DATE LOCATION AGENCY ACTION Mechanicsburg Borough September 2009 (4 row house fire at Market & None Allen Streets) Shippensburg Borough May 2007 None (King Street) Borough of Lemoyne Small Business Administration Loan applied November 2001 (Market Street) for, but not accepted December 1999 Borough of Carlisle Small Business Administration Loan received Borough of Lemoyne February 1999 Small Business Administration Loan received (West Shore Farmer’s Market) Borough of Carlisle December 1993 Small Business Administration Loan received (Bartolli’s Warehouse)

4.3.18.4. Future Occurrence Based on historical events, Cumberland County is expected to experience three to four significant urban fire events per decade. Note that this estimate is based on the occurrence of past events over a short period of time and is not the result of detailed statistical sampling.

4.3.18.5. Vulnerability Assessment Areas where large buildings are located or development is densely spaced should be considered more vulnerable to urban fire events. In order to adequately assess vulnerability to urban fires, detailed information on the design specifications, specifically fires codes, used for construction of individual buildings is required. As of November, 2009, all 33 municipalities have adopted the Uniform Construction Code which assures buildings are designed to address structure fire hazards. However, these regulations will only affect new construction, as well as additions and renovations to existing structures. Older buildings that do not meet the criteria established in modern fire codes continue to remain vulnerable. The County will seek to identify these properties through Action 28 listed in the Mitigation Action Plan (see Section 6.4).

4.3.19. Utility Interruption 4.3.19.1. Location and Extent Utility interruptions in Cumberland County focus primarily on power failures which are often a secondary impact of another hazard event. For example, severe thunderstorms or winter storms could bring down power lines and cause widespread disruptions in electricity service. Strong heat waves may result in rolling blackouts where power may not be available for an extended period of time. Local outages may be caused by traffic accidents or wind damage. Utility interruptions and power failures can take place throughout the County.

4.3.19.2. Range of Magnitude Most severe power failures or outages are regional events. A loss of electricity can have numerous impacts including, but not limited to food spoilage, loss of heat or air conditioning, basement flooding (i.e. sump pump failure), lack of indoor lighting, loss of water supply (i.e. well pump failure) and lack of phone or internet service. These issues are often more of a nuisance

110

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan than a hazard, but can cause damage or harm depending on the population affected and the severity of the outage.

4.3.19.3. Past Occurrence Minor power outages occur annually. A significant outage occurred on December 16, 2007. Approximately 75,000 Pennsylvania Power and Lighting customers were without power across south-central Pennsylvania due to heavy icing. Some customers were without power for up to three days.

4.3.19.4. Future Occurrence Minor power failure events (i.e. short outage) events may occur several times a year for any given area in the County, while major (i.e. widespread, long outage) events take place once every few years. Power failures are likely occurrences during severe weather and therefore, should be expected during those events.

4.3.19.5. Vulnerability Assessment Emergency medical facilities, including retirement homes and senior centers are particularly vulnerable to power outages. While back-up power generators are often used at these facilities, loss of electricity may result in hot or cold temperatures for which elderly populations are particularly vulnerable. Appendix D provides a list of where those facilities are located in Cumberland County.

Pennsylvania Power and Lighting recently implemented a new dispatch communications system called Mobile Operations Management (MOM). This system links every Pennsylvania Power and Lighting crew to a central emergency response coordination center. This technology has reduced average outage times in Pennsylvania from an average of 108 minutes between 2004 and 2008 to 71 minutes in 2009.

4.4. Hazard Vulnerability Summary 4.4.1. Methodology Ranking hazards helps communities set goals and priorities for mitigation based on their vulnerabilities. A Risk Factor (RF) is a tool used to measure the degree of risk for identified hazards in a particular planning area. The RF can also be used to assist local community officials in ranking and prioritizing those hazards that pose the most significant threat to their area based on a variety of factors deemed important by the planning team and other stakeholders involved in the hazard mitigation planning process. The RF system relies mainly on historical data, local knowledge, general consensus opinions from the planning team and information collected through development of the hazard profiles included in Section 4.3. The RF approach produces numerical values that allow identified hazards to be ranked against one another; the higher the RF value, the greater the hazard risk.

RF values were obtained by assigning varying degrees of risk to five categories for each of the nineteen hazards profiled in the 2010 HMP. Those categories include: probability, impact, spatial extent, warning time and duration. Each degree of risk was assigned a value ranging from 1 to 4. The weighting factor agreed upon by the planning team is shown in Table 4.4-1. To calculate the RF value for a given hazard, the assigned risk value for each category was

111

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan multiplied by the weighting factor. The sum of all five categories equals the final RF value, as demonstrated in the example equation:

Risk Factor Value = [(Probability x .30) + (Impact x .30) + (Spatial Extent x .20) + (Warning Time x .10) + (Duration x .10)]

Table 4.4-1 summarizes each of the five categories used for calculating a RF for each hazard. According to the weighting scheme applied, the highest possible RF value is 4.0.

112

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.4-1: Summary of Risk Factor approach used to rank hazard risk. RISK DEGREE OF RISK WEIGHT ASSESSMENT VALUE CATEGORY LEVEL CRITERIA INDEX UNLIKELY LESS THAN 1% ANNUAL PROBABILITY 1 PROBABILITY What is the likelihood POSSIBLE BETWEEN 1 & 10% ANNUAL PROBABILITY 2 of a hazard event 30% occurring in a given LIKELY BETWEEN 10 &100% ANNUAL PROBABILITY 3 year? HIGHLY LIKELY 100% ANNUAL PROBABILTY 4 VERY FEW INJURIES, IF ANY. ONLY MINOR PROPERTY DAMAGE & MINIMAL DISRUPTION ON QUALITY OF LIFE. TEMPORARY MINOR SHUTDOWN OF CRITICAL FACILITIES. 1

MINOR INJURIES ONLY. MORE THAN 10% OF PROPERTY IN AFFECTED AREA DAMAGED OR IMPACT DESTROYED. COMPLETE SHUTDOWN OF In terms of injuries, LIMITED CRITICAL FACILITIES FOR MORE THAN ONE 2 damage, or death, DAY. would you anticipate

impacts to be minor, 30% MULTIPLE DEATHS/INJURIES POSSIBLE. limited, critical, or MORE THAN 25% OF PROPERTY IN AFFECTED catastrophic when a CRITICAL AREA DAMAGED OR DESTROYED. COMPLETE 3 significant hazard SHUTDOWN OF CRITICAL FACILITIES FOR event occurs? MORE THAN ONE WEEK.

HIGH NUMBER OF DEATHS/INJURIES CATASTROPHIC POSSIBLE. MORE THAN 50% OF PROPERTY IN 4 AFFECTED AREA DAMAGED OR DESTROYED. COMPLETE SHUTDOWN OF CRITICAL FACILITIES FOR 30 DAYS OR MORE. NEGLIGIBLE LESS THAN 1% OF AREA AFFECTED 1 SPATIAL EXTENT

How large of an area SMALL BETWEEN 1 & 10% OF AREA AFFECTED 2 could be impacted by 20% a hazard event? Are MODERATE BETWEEN 10 & 50% OF AREA AFFECTED 3 impacts localized or

regional? LARGE BETWEEN 50 & 100% OF AREA AFFECTED 4

WARNING TIME MORE THAN 24 HRS SELF-DEFINED 1 Is there usually some (NOTE: Levels of lead time associated 12 TO 24 HRS SELF-DEFINED warning time and criteria 2 with the hazard event? that define them may be 10% Have warning 6 TO 12 HRS SELF-DEFINED adjusted based on 3 measures been hazard addressed.) implemented? LESS THAN 6 HRS SELF-DEFINED 4

LESS THAN 6 HRS SELF-DEFINED 1 (NOTE: Levels of DURATION LESS THAN 24 HRS SELF-DEFINED warning time and criteria 2 How long does the that define them may be 10% hazard event usually LESS THAN 1 WEEK SELF-DEFINED adjusted based on 3 last? hazard addressed.) MORE THAN 1 WEEK SELF-DEFINED 4

4.4.2. Ranking Results Using the methodology described in Section 4.4-1, Table 4.4-2 lists the Risk Factor calculated for each of the nineteen potential hazards identified in the 2010 HMP. Hazards identified as

113

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan high risk have risk factors greater than 2.5. Risk Factors ranging from 1.9 to 2.4 were deemed moderate risk hazards. Hazards with Risk Factors less than 1.5 are considered low risk.

Table 4.4-2: Ranking of hazard types based on Risk Factor methodology.

HAZARD RISK ASSESSMENT CATEGORY HAZARD NATURAL (N) RISK RISK or SPATIAL WARNING FACTOR PROBABILITY IMPACT DURATION MAN-MADE (M) EXTENT TIME

Flood, Flash Flood, Ice Jam (N) 3 2 3 3 3 2.7 Winter Storm (N) 4 1 4 1 3 2.7

Tornado & Windstorm (N) 3 3 2 4 1 2.7 Drought (N) 2 2 4 2 4 2.6 HIGH Pandemic (N) 3 2 3 1 4 2.6 Subsidence & Sinkholes (N) 4 1 4 2 1 2.6

Environmental Hazards (M) 3 2 2 4 3 2.6

Wildfire (N) 4 1 2 2 3 2.4 Dam Failure (M) 1 3 2 4 3 2.3

Hurricane, Tropical Storm, Nor’easter (N) 2 2 3 1 3 2.2 Terrorism (M) 1 3 2 4 2 2.2 Transportation Accidents (M) 4 1 1 4 1 2.2 MODERATE Nuclear Incidents (M) 1 2 2 4 4 2.1 Utility Interruption (M) 3 1 2 3 1 2.0 Urban Fire (M) 2 2 1 4 1 1.9 Earthquake (N) 1 1 1 4 1 1.3

Landslide (N) 1 1 1 4 1 1.3

LOW Civil Disturbance (M) 1 1 1 3 1 1.2 Levee Failure (M) 1 1 1 2 2 1.2

Based on these results, there are seven high risk hazards, eight moderate risk hazards and four low risk hazards in Cumberland County. Mitigation actions were developed for all high, moderate, and low risk hazards (see Section 6.4). The threat posed to life and property for moderate and high risk hazards is considered significant enough to warrant the need for establishing hazard-specific mitigation actions. Mitigation actions related to future public outreach and emergency service activities are identified to address low risk hazard events (i.e. earthquakes, landslides, civil disturbance, and levee failure).

4.4.3. Potential Loss Estimates Based on available data, general loss estimates were established for flood, winter storm, wildfire and wind storm events. The potential loss incurred by hurricanes and tropical storms are associated with the impacts of flooding and high wind. Estimates provided in this section are based on previous events, cumulative assessed values for property located in high risk areas and geospatial analysis.

114

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Several deaths and millions of dollars worth of property damage have been caused by floods in Cumberland County. Previous flood events listed in Table 4.3.3-2 have caused an estimated $50,000,000 throughout the County. Approximately eighty percent ($40,000,000) of these losses were caused by Tropical Storm Agnes in 1972. In is important to note that loss estimates are not available for many of the previous flood events which have occurred in the County. Historical loss estimates are available for only fifteen of the sixty events listed in Table 4.3.3-2. Therefore, it is likely that $50,000,000 is a minimum estimate of historical flood losses.

Potential loss estimates have four basic components, including: • Replacement Value: Current cost of returning an asset to its pre-damaged condition, using present-day cost of labor and materials. • Content Loss: Value of building’s contents, typically measured as a percentage of the building replacement value. • Functional Loss: The value of a building’s use or function that would be lost if it were damaged or closed. • Displacement Cost: The dollar amount required for relocation of the function (business or service) to another structure following a hazard event.

Many of the potential loss estimates provided in the 2010 HMP update are based on building values provided in the county tax assessment database. These values are representative of replacement value along; content loss, functional loss, and displacement cost are not included. However, in 2007, PEMA conducted a Statewide Flood Study using Hazards U.S. Multi-Hazard (HAZUS-MH), a standardized loss estimation software package available from FEMA. The flood study provided estimates of total economic loss, building damage, content damage, and other economic impacts that can be used in local flood response and mitigation planning activities. While this information is extremely valuable, potential loss estimates due to flooding were recalculated using HAZUS-MH during development of the 2010 HMP for two reasons: 1) Since 2007, an updated version of HAZUS-MH has been released (i.e. version MR-3 replaced version MR-2). Several improvements to data and methodology were made to version MR-3, including: new Dun & Bradstreet 2006 commercial data, updated building valuations, revised building counts based on census housing units for RES1 (i.e. single- family dwellings) and RES2 (i.e. manufactured housing) structures, and an optimized building analysis methodology. 2) The economic loss GIS data available from PEMA includes Total Damage (in thousands of dollars), Building Damage, Content Damage, and a host of other economic loss estimates for each affected census block. However, the data is limited to Residential occupancy type, omitting Commercial, Industrial, Agriculture, Religious/Non-Profit, Government and Education occupancy types. While losses from these occupancy types were included in the Community Summary Report’s total economic loss, they were not captured in the GIS data needed for mapping.

Using HAZUS-MH Version MR-3, total building-related losses from a 1%-annual-chance flood in Cumberland County are estimated to equal $330,600,000. This is 65.6% of the total tax assessed value for all buildings located in the Special Flood Hazard Area, estimated to be

115

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

$504,080,360. Residential occupancies make up 53.7% of the total estimated building-related losses. Figure 4.4.3-1 shows a distribution of building-related losses by census block across Cumberland County. Total economic loss, including replacement value, content loss, functional loss and displacement cost, from a countywide 1%-annual-chance flood are estimated to equal $335,070,000.

116

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Figure 4.4.3-1: Distribution by census block of the potential total economic loss expected from a 1%-annual-chance flood in Cumberland County.

117

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

The 2004 Cumberland County HMP calculated potential loss estimates from flood hazards using the County tax assessment database. Several assumptions were used to calculate flood depths at each structure. The first-floor elevation of all structures was assumed to be the ground-surface elevation at the centroid of each parcel. Ground surface elevations were interpolated using digital 2-foot contour topographic data obtained from the Pennsylvania Geospatial Data Clearinghouse. The difference between the 1%-annual-chance flood elevation and the estimated first-floor elevation was calculated as the depth of flooding.

Additional assumptions were used to calculate replacement value, contents loss, functional loss, and displacement cost. The market value of structures was used to calculate replacement value. Contents replacement value was assumed to equal 25% of the structure replacement value. The average daily operating budget used to calculate functional loss for a residence and commercial/agricultural structure was $0 and $1,000, respectively. The displacement cost per day for a residence and commercial/agricultural structure was $100 and $500, respectively.

Using the above assumptions, total flood losses across Cumberland County for a 1%-annual- chance-flood, including structural loss, contents loss, functional downtime, and displacement time, were estimated to equal more than $287,000,000 in 2004. This calculation was not repeated during the 2010 HMP update due to significant uncertainty regarding flood depth and total loss calculations; the HAZUS result (i.e. $335,070,000) is a more accurate estimate of potential economic loss from a 1%-annual-chance flood. However, details of the 2004 flood loss calculations are provided in 0 for future reference.

Historical loss information for winter storms is limited. However, property damage information available for events listed in Table 4.3.10-1 ranges from $150,000 to $988,000. A high percentage of losses from winter storms are usually in the form of repairs to damaged utility poles, wires and other infrastructure.

Since 1960, tornado events in Cumberland County are estimated to have caused $1,195,000 in damages. Accurate loss estimates for previous general windstorms are currently not available. A significant portion of dollar losses from windstorms and tornadoes are often a result of damage to manufactured homes and commercial trailers. These structures are typically made of lightweight materials. Without adequate anchoring, they are particularly vulnerable to high winds. The estimated average value of a manufactured home or commercial trailer in Cumberland County is $35,967. Table 4.4.3-1 shows the distribution by municipality of cumulative assessed value for these structures.

118

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.4.3-1: Distribution of cumulative estimated assessed value for manufactured homes and commercial trailers. Note that municipalities which do not contain any of these structures are not listed. CUMULATIVE ESTIMATED ASSESSED VALUE OF MUNICIPALITY MANUFACTURED HOMES AND COMMERCIAL TRAILERS Township of Silver Spring $13,883,262 Township of South Middleton $12,084,912 Township of Shippensburg $9,998,826 Township of West Pennsboro $9,387,387 Township of Lower Mifflin $8,344,344 Township of Upper Frankford $7,553,070 Township of Dickinson $5,862,621 Township of Monroe $5,718,753 Township of Lower Frankford $4,603,776 Township of Upper Allen $4,244,106 Borough of Mount Holly Springs $3,992,337 Township of Penn $3,776,535 Township of Upper Mifflin $2,733,492 Township of Hopewell $2,265,921 Township of North Newton $2,122,053 Township of East Pennsboro $1,438,680 Township of South Newton $647,406 Borough of Carlisle $539,505 Borough of Newville $359,670 Township of Cooke $143,868 Township of Lower Allen $35,967 Borough of Mechanicsburg $35,967 Borough of Shippensburg $35,967 TOTAL $175,806,696

Historical loss estimate information for wildfires is very limited. Costs of wildfire events are typically associated with the cost of fire-fighting response and damage to structures. Table 4.4.3-2 shows the estimated value of structures in wooded areas across Cumberland County. While the Township of Silver Spring and the Township of North Middleton have relatively few structures located within wooded areas compared to other municipalities in the County (see Table 4.3.9-4), they rank first and second in terms of the estimated cumulative value of these vulnerable structures.

119

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.4.3-2: Distribution of cumulative estimated value of structures located within wooded areas. Note that municipalities which did not have a structure identified in a wooded area are not listed. CUMULATIVE ESTIMATED ASSESSED VALUE OF MUNICIPALITY BUILDINGS WITHIN WOODED AREAS Township of Silver Spring $7,466,350 Township of North Middleton $7,148,850 Township of Dickinson $4,854,500 Township of Southampton $4,436,490 Township of East Pennsboro $3,864,490 Township of Cooke $3,198,500 Township of Lower Allen $2,891,450 Township of Penn $2,798,520 Township of Upper Allen $2,443,750 Township of North Newton $2,412,660 Township of West Pennsboro $2,396,980 Township of South Middleton $2,214,000 Township of Hampden $1,710,440 Township of Upper Frankford $1,399,720 Township of South Newton $1,320,420 Borough of Wormleysburg $1,264,830 Township of Upper Mifflin $1,247,660 Borough of New Cumberland $914,550 Township of Lower Frankford $903,220 Township of Lower Mifflin $895,600 Township of Monroe $889,840 Township of Hopewell $829,830 Borough of Mount Holly Springs $712,300 Township of Middlesex $477,960 Borough of Lemoyne $322,580 Borough of Shippensburg $156,190 Borough of Camp Hill $68,230 TOTAL $59,239,910

4.4.4. Future Development and Vulnerability Total population in Cumberland County has increased 7.3% over the eight year period between 2000 and 2008 from 213,670 to 229,361. However, this increase is not equally distributed across the County. Populations increased in some municipalities, but declined in others (see Table 2.3-1). Countywide populations are expected to continue increasing in the future. This will result in increased development pressure on both urbanized areas such as the Borough of

120

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Carlisle as well as undeveloped rural areas such as agricultural land. There are exceptions to trend to this future trend. For example, no significant development is anticipated in the near future in Cooke Township.

Table 4.4.4-1 shows percent vacant land calculated using the following property types identified in the County tax assessment data: vacant land – ten acres or more (V), vacant land – exempt – ten acres or more (VX), vacant lot – less than one acre (L1), vacant lot – one acre or more, but less than five acres (L2) and vacant lot – five acres or more, but less than ten acres (L3).

Table 4.4.4-1: Estimation of percent vacant land per municipality. TOTAL PARCEL VACANT PARCEL MUNICIPALITY PERCENT VACANT ACREAGE ACREAGE Township of Monroe 16436 4701 28.6% Borough of Mount Holly Springs 865 204 23.6% Township of South Middleton 30612 7061 23.1% Township of Upper Frankford 12254 2826 23.1% Township of Upper Mifflin 13778 2970 21.6% Township of Silver Spring 19868 4224 21.3% Township of North Middleton 14640 3037 20.7% Township of Lower Mifflin 15039 3004 20.0% Township of Penn 18619 3612 19.4% Township of Lower Frankford 9487 1807 19.0% Township of Hopewell 17362 3167 18.2% Township of Dickinson 28863 5073 17.6% Township of Middlesex 16051 2623 16.3% Township of South Newton 7153 1126 15.7% Township of Upper Allen 7826 1170 15.0% Township of Southampton 32191 4201 13.1% Township of Shippensburg 1521 189 12.4% Township of Hampden 10006 1242 12.4% Township of East Pennsboro 6044 719 11.9% Township of North Newton 14471 1578 10.9% Township of West Pennsboro 18923 1996 10.5% Township of Lower Allen 6002 535 8.9% Borough of Wormleysburg 409 34 8.3% Borough of Newburg 109 9 8.3% Borough of Lemoyne 811 50 6.2% Borough of Shippensburg 745 42 5.6% Borough of Carlisle 3121 171 5.5% Borough of Newville 246 13 5.3% Borough of New Cumberland 905 42 4.6% Township of Cooke 12606 442 3.5%

121

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.4.4-1: Estimation of percent vacant land per municipality. TOTAL PARCEL VACANT PARCEL MUNICIPALITY PERCENT VACANT ACREAGE ACREAGE Borough of Shiremanstown 164 4 2.4% Borough of Mechanicsburg 1382 27 2.0% Borough of Camp Hill 1143 8 0.7%

Results of the vacant parcel analysis show more than twenty percent of the parcels in Township of Monroe, Borough of Mount Holly Springs, Township of South Middleton, Township of Upper Frankford, Township of Upper Mifflin, Township of Silver Spring, Township of North Middleton and Township of Lower Mifflin are considered “vacant.” These vacant parcels and the municipalities they are located in should be considered particularly vulnerable to development pressure unless adequate planning measures are in place.

Many of the vacant parcels identified in Table 4.4.4-1 are located within areas subject to hazard events. Table 4.4.4-2 shows the number of vacant parcels in each municipality that are at least partially located in flood, hazardous material release, or wildfire hazard areas. All vacant parcels in the Borough of New Cumberland are within the 10-mile Plume Exposure Pathway EPZ for TMI. These vacant parcels are considered areas of potential growth and future development of these parcels will be vulnerable to hazard events. In some cases, development in these areas will increase vulnerability to the community as a whole (i.e. development in the floodplain). Local municipalities should focus efforts to protect future development from hazard events on these vacant properties.

Table 4.4.4-2: Number of vacant parcels in each municipality which are at least partially located in areas vulnerable to flood, hazardous material release, or wildfire hazards. NO. OF VACANT NO. OF VACANT NO. OF VACANT PARCELS IN 1%- PARCELS WITHIN 1½ PARCELS MUNICIPALITY ANNUAL- MILES OF SARA TITLE III WITHIN CHANCE FLOOD OR ¼ MILES OF RAIL OR WOODED ZONE MAJOR ROAD AREAS Township of Monroe 37 206 189 Borough of Mount Holly Springs 22 62 43 Township of South Middleton 37 591 371 Township of Upper Frankford 31 45 133 Township of Upper Mifflin 22 18 153 Township of Silver Spring 72 508 296 Township of North Middleton 70 422 273 Township of Lower Mifflin 25 16 101 Township of Penn 7 153 243 Township of Lower Frankford 29 20 143 Township of Hopewell 111 57 226 Township of Dickinson 49 266 294 Township of Middlesex 38 342 212

122

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 4.4.4-2: Number of vacant parcels in each municipality which are at least partially located in areas vulnerable to flood, hazardous material release, or wildfire hazards. NO. OF VACANT NO. OF VACANT NO. OF VACANT PARCELS IN 1%- PARCELS WITHIN 1½ PARCELS MUNICIPALITY ANNUAL- MILES OF SARA TITLE III WITHIN CHANCE FLOOD OR ¼ MILES OF RAIL OR WOODED ZONE MAJOR ROAD AREAS Township of South Newton 8 40 45 Township of Upper Allen 48 510 159 Township of Southampton 38 263 202 Township of Shippensburg 9 34 16 Township of Hampden 59 707 296 Township of East Pennsboro 77 451 282 Township of North Newton 6 75 67 Township of West Pennsboro 24 103 114 Township of Lower Allen 52 306 131 Borough of Wormleysburg 12 52 19 Borough of Newburg 2 0 2 Borough of Lemoyne 1 71 33 Borough of Shippensburg 2 44 16 Borough of Carlisle 9 189 34 Borough of Newville 6 27 8 Borough of New Cumberland 4 64 19 Township of Cooke 0 0 54 Borough of Shiremanstown 1 5 0 Borough of Mechanicsburg 3 61 9 Borough of Camp Hill 2 34 5

The Tri-County Regional Planning Commission identified areas of expected development as part of the Regional Growth Management Plan 2020. These growth areas are shown in Figure 4.4.4-1. Primary growth areas include all of eastern Cumberland County to the base of North Mountain, the area surrounding Carlisle and Mount Holly Springs, and the Shippensburg Township area. The Borough of Shippensburg and Borough of Newville were identified as core areas were rural growth is expected.

Losses from hazard events are expected to rise with increasing populations. These areas of expected growth are vulnerable to all of the moderate and significant hazards described in this plan, including some of the more localized hazards such as flooding, hazardous material release and dam failures. In addition, eastern Cumberland County growth area is within the 10- mile Plume Exposure Pathway EPZ of Three Mile Island Nuclear Power Plant.

123

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Figure 4.4.4-1: Cumberland County planned growth areas through 2020 (TCRPC, 2003).

124

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

5. Capability Assessment 5.1. Update Process Summary Cumberland County has a number of resources it can access to implement hazard mitigation initiatives including emergency response measures, local planning and regulatory tools, administrative assistance and technical expertise, fiscal capabilities, and participation in local, regional, state and federal programs. The presence of these resources enables community resiliency through actions taken before, during and after a hazard event.

The 2004 HMP identified the presence of local plans, ordinances and codes in each municipality. It also specified local, state and federal resources available for mitigation efforts. Through responses to the Capability Assessment Survey distributed to all municipalities and input from the HSMC, the 2010 HMP provides an updated inventory of the most critical local planning tools available within each municipality and a summary of the fiscal and technical capabilities available through programs and organizations outside of the County. It also identifies emergency management capabilities and the processes used for implementation of the National Flood Insurance Program.

While the capability assessment serves as a good instrument for identifying local capabilities for, it also provides a means for recognizing gaps and weaknesses that can be resolved through future mitigation actions. The results of this assessment lend critical information for developing an effective mitigation strategy.

5.2. Capability Assessment Findings 5.2.1. Emergency Management The Cumberland County Department of Public Safety coordinates countywide emergency management efforts. Each municipality has a designated local emergency management coordinator who possesses a unique knowledge of the impact hazard events have on their community. A significant amount of information used to develop this plan was obtained from the emergency management coordinators. The Emergency Management Services Code (PA Title 35) requires that all municipalities in the Commonwealth have a Local Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) which is updated every two years. All municipalities in Cumberland County have or are in the process of updating their local EOP. A countywide EOP also exists. Municipalities are not required to sign on to the County EOP, because county staff prefers to keep municipal emergency management coordinators actively engaged at a more local level.

In addition to local emergency management efforts, the South Central Task Force (SCTF) is a regional all-hazards emergency preparedness task force for eight counties in South Central Pennsylvania. The task force encompasses Adams, Cumberland, Dauphin, Franklin, Lancaster, Lebanon, Perry and York Counties. SCTF's preparedness activities address planning, prevention and response. It enhances regional coordination capabilities in case of incidents that exceed the capabilities of a single county or jurisdiction. Emphasis is also placed on collaborating with the private sector to endure the security and resilience of privately owned businesses and infrastructure, especially those critical to countywide public health and operational continuity such as the energy, telecommunications, food processing and

125

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan transportation sectors. Though SCTF is an all-hazards group, it began as a counter-terrorism organization and maintains an extensive training program to mitigate the threat of terrorism for local emergency response entities as well as for the private sector.

5.2.2. Participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) With the exception of the Borough of Newburg (see Table 5.2-1), all municipalities in Cumberland County are participants in the NFIP. The program is managed by local municipalities participating in the program through ordinance adoption and floodplain regulation while the County provides an oversight and coordination role. Similarly, permitting processes needed for building construction and development in the floodplain are implemented at the municipal level through various ordinances (e.g. zoning, subdivision/land development and floodplain ordinances). All compliance and enforcement mechanisms are instituted through municipal codes and enforced by local zoning officers.

Additionally, FEMA Region III makes available to communities, an ordinance review checklist which lists required provisions for floodplain management ordinances. This checklist helps communities develop an effective floodplain management ordinance that meets federal requirements for participation in the NFIP. The Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development (DCED) provides communities, based on their 44 CFR 60.3 level of regulations, with a suggested ordinance document to assist municipalities in meeting the minimum requirements of the NFIP and the Pennsylvania Flood Plain Management Act (Act 166). Act 166 mandates municipal participation in and compliance with the NFIP. It also establishes higher regulatory standards for hazardous materials and high risk land uses. As new Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps (DFIRMs) are published, the Pennsylvania State NFIP Coordinator at DCED works with communities to ensure the timely and successful adoption of an updated floodplain management ordinance by reviewing and providing feedback on existing and draft ordinances. In addition, DCED provides guidance and technical support through Community Assistance Contacts (CAC) and Community Assistance Visits (CAV).

Publication of the countywide Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map on March 16, 2009 greatly enhanced mitigation capabilities as they relate to identifying flood hazards. The digital flood hazard information provided by FEMA is a significant improvement to the previously effective paper Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Residents and municipal officials are provided with mapping assistance from the Cumberland County GIS Department, Cumberland County Planning Department and the Cumberland County Department of Public Safety upon request.

It is important to recognize that there are five municipalities in the County where flood elevations have not been identified. Flood zones on the effective Flood Insurance Rate Maps in the Township of Cooke, Borough of Newville, Township of Penn, Borough of Shiremanstown and Township of Upper Mifflin are identified as approximate 1%-annual-chance flood hazard areas without Base Flood Elevations determined or 0.2%-annual-chance flood hazard areas. There are no communities in Cumberland County participating in the NFIP Community Rating System (FEMA CIS, 2009).

126

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

5.2.3. Planning and Regulatory Capability Some of the most important planning and regulatory capabilities that can be utilized for hazard mitigation include comprehensive plans, building codes, floodplain ordinances, subdivision and land development ordinances and zoning ordinances. These tools provide mechanisms for the implementation of adopted mitigation strategies. Table 5.2-1 summarizes their presence within each municipality.

Table 5.2-1: Summary of planning tools adopted by each municipality in Cumberland County (Cumberland County Planning Department, 2009).

FLOODPLAIN SUBDIVISION & COMPRE- BUILDING ORDINANCE LAND ZONING COMMUNITY HENSIVE CODE – NFIP DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PLAN PARTICIPANT ORDINANCE

Borough of Camp Hill Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Borough of Carlisle Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Township of Cooke Yes Yes Yes Yes No Township of Dickinson Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Township of East Pennsboro Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Township of Hampden Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Township of Hopewell Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Borough of Lemoyne Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Township of Lower Allen Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Township of Lower Frankford Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Township of Lower Mifflin Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Borough of Mechanicsburg Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Township of Middlesex Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Township of Monroe Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Borough of Mount Holly Springs Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Borough of New Cumberland Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Borough of Newburg No Yes Suspended Yes Yes Borough of Newville Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Township of North Middleton Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Township of North Newton Yes Yes Yes Yes No Township of Penn Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Township of Shippensburg Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Borough of Shippensburg Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Borough of Shiremanstown Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Township of Silver Spring Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Township of South Middleton Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Township of South Newton Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Township of Southampton Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Township of Upper Allen Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

127

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 5.2-1: Summary of planning tools adopted by each municipality in Cumberland County (Cumberland County Planning Department, 2009).

FLOODPLAIN SUBDIVISION & COMPRE- BUILDING ORDINANCE LAND ZONING COMMUNITY HENSIVE CODE – NFIP DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PLAN PARTICIPANT ORDINANCE

Township of Upper Frankford Yes Yes Yes Yes No Township of Upper Mifflin No Yes Yes Yes No Township of West Pennsboro Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Borough of Wormleysburg Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Comprehensive Plans promote sound land use and regional cooperation among local governments to address planning issues. These plans serve as the official policy guide for influencing the location, type and extent of future development by establishing the basis for decision-making and review processes on zoning matters, subdivision and land development, land uses, public facilities and housing needs over time. The existing countywide Comprehensive Plan for Cumberland County was developed in 2003. In addition, all but two municipalities (the Borough of Newburg and Township of Upper Mifflin) have adopted local Comprehensive Plans. County governments are required by law to adopt a comprehensive plan, while local municipalities may do so at their option. Future comprehensive plan updates and improvements will consider 2010 HMP findings.

Building codes regulate construction standards for new construction and substantially renovated buildings. Standards can be adopted that require resistant or resilient building design practices to address hazard impacts common to a given community. In 2003, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania implemented Act 45 of 1999, the Uniform Construction Code (UCC), a comprehensive building code that establishes minimum regulations for most new construction, including additions and renovations to existing structures. All 33 municipalities in Cumberland County have since adopted the UCC. The 2006 International Codes issued by the International Code Council is currently in use under the UCC. On December 31, 2009 the Commonwealth plans to adopt regulations of the 2009 International Code Council’s codes. Since all municipalities in Cumberland County have adopted the UCC they will be required to enforce the 2009 building code regulations for all building permits submitted after December 31, 2009.

Through administration of floodplain ordinances, municipalities can ensure that all new construction or substantial improvements to existing structures located in the floodplain are flood-proofed, dry-proofed, or built above anticipated flood elevations. Floodplain ordinances may also prohibit development in certain areas altogether. The NFIP establishes minimum ordinance requirements which must be met in order for that community to participate in the program. However, a community is permitted and in fact, encouraged, to adopt standards which exceed NFIP requirements. Through participation in the NFIP, all municipalities within the County except the Borough of Newburg have a floodplain ordinance in place.

128

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Subdivision and land development ordinances are intended to regulate the development of housing, commercial, industrial or other uses, including associated public infrastructure, as land is subdivided into buildable lots for sale or future development. Within these ordinances, guidelines on how land will be divided, the placement and size of roads and the location of infrastructure can reduce exposure of development to hazard events. All jurisdictions within Cumberland County have adopted and enforce a subdivision and land development ordinance.

Zoning ordinances allow for local communities to regulate the use of land in order to protect the interested and safety of the general public. Zoning ordinances can be designed to address unique conditions or concerns within a given community. They may be used to create buffers between structures and high-risk areas, limit the type or density of development and/or require land development to consider specific hazard vulnerabilities. All but three jurisdictions within Cumberland County have adopted and enforce a zoning ordinance.

5.2.4. Administrative and Technical Capability Administrative capability is described by an adequacy of departmental and personnel resources for the implementation of mitigation-related activities. Technical capability relates to an adequacy of knowledge and technical expertise of local government employees or the ability to contract outside resources for this expertise in order to effectively execute mitigation activities. Common examples of skill sets and technical personnel needed for hazard mitigation include: planners with knowledge of land development/management practices, engineers or professionals trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure (e.g. building inspectors), planners or engineers with an understanding of natural and/or human caused hazards, emergency managers, floodplain managers, land surveyors, scientists familiar with hazards in the community, staff with the education or expertise to assess community vulnerability to hazards, personnel skilled in geographic information systems, resource development staff or grant writers, fiscal staff to handle complex grant application processes.

Based on assessment results, municipalities in Cumberland County have adequate administrative and technical staff needed to conduct hazard mitigation-activities. However, there seems to be a common lack of personnel for land surveying and scientific work related to community hazards. This result is not necessarily surprising since these tasks would typically be contracted to outside providers. Many communities have personnel skilled in geographic information systems. The County GIS Department is also able to provide these services. All municipalities in the County have an identified emergency management coordinator. Some of these coordinators are responsible for more than one jurisdiction.

Additionally, the presence of regional organizations enhances Cumberland County mitigation capabilities. SEDA-COG (Susquehanna Economic Development Association - Council of Governments) is a regional multi-county development agency which, under the guidance of a public policy board, provides leadership, expertise and services to communities, businesses, institutions and residents. With their partners, the region's chamber of commerce and industrial development groups, SEDA-COG provides services free of charge to companies in an 18- county service area in Central Pennsylvania. In the future, Cumberland County and SEDA- COG can partner to implement public awareness actions by helping in bulk mailings, printing

129

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan brochures and developing the County's web site to include information about hazard mitigation initiatives.

Other local organizations that could act as partners for future mitigation activities include several Council of Governments groups (Central Cumberland Task Force, West Shore COG and the Western COG), non-profit environmental organizations such as the Susquehanna River Basin Commission, the Merrill Linn Conservancy, local watershed associations, business development organizations such as the Chamber of Commerce and Rotary Club, and historical or cultural agencies such as the Cumberland County Historical Society.

State agencies agency which can provide technical assistance for mitigation activities include, but are not limited: • Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development • Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources • Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection • Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency

Federal agencies which can provide technical assistance for mitigation activities include, but are not limited to: • Army Corp of Engineers • Department of Housing and Urban Development • Department of Agriculture • Economic Development Administration • Emergency Management Institute • Environmental Protection Agency • Federal Emergency Management Agency • Small Business Administration

5.2.5. Fiscal Capability The decision and capacity to implement mitigation-related activities is often strongly dependent on the presence of local financial resources. While some mitigation actions are less costly than others, it is important that money is available locally to implement policies and projects. Financial resources are particularly important if communities are trying to take advantage of state or federal mitigation grant funding opportunities that require local-match contributions. Based on survey results, most municipalities within the County perceive fiscal capability to be limited to moderate.

State programs which may provide financial support for mitigation activities include, but are not limited to: • Community Conservation Partnerships Program • Community Revitalization Program • Floodplain Land Use Assistance Program • Growing Greener Program • Keystone Grant Program

130

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

• Local Government Capital Projects Loan Program • Land Use Planning and Technical Assistance Program • Pennsylvania Heritage Areas Program • Pennsylvania Recreational Trails Program • Shared Municipal Services • Technical Assistance Program

Federal programs which may provide financial support for mitigation activities include, but are not limited to: • Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) • Disaster Housing Program • Emergency Conservation Program • Emergency Management Performance Grants (EMPG) • Emergency Watershed Protection Program • Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) • Flood Mitigation Assistance Program • Non-insured Crop Disaster Assistance Program • Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program • Repetitive Flood Claims Program (RFC) • Section 108 Loan Guarantee Programs • Severe Repetitive Loss Grant Program (SRL) • Weatherization Assistance Program

5.2.6. Political Capability One of the most difficult capabilities to evaluate involves the political will of a jurisdiction to enact meaningful policies and projects designed to mitigate hazard events. The adoption of hazard mitigation measures may be seen as an impediment to growth and economic development. In many cases, mitigation may not generate interest among local officials when compared with competing priorities. Therefore, the local political climate must be considered when designing mitigation strategies, as it could be the most difficult hurdle to overcome in accomplishing the adoption or implementation of specific actions.

The Capability Assessment Survey was used to capture information on each jurisdiction’s political capability. Survey respondents were asked to identify examples of political capability, such as guiding development away from hazard areas, restricting public investments or capital improvements within hazard areas, or enforcing local development standards that go beyond minimum state or federal requirements (i.e. building codes, floodplain management ordinances, etc…). These examples were used to guide respondents in scoring their community on a scale of “unwilling” (0) to “very willing” (5) to adopt policies and programs that reduce hazard vulnerabilities. As this is a notably sensitive subject for local government employees, participation in this section of the Capability Assessment Survey was low. Of the fourteen municipalities that responded, scores ranged from 1-5 with an average score of 3.5.

131

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

5.2.7. Self-Assessment In addition to the inventory and analysis of specific local capabilities, the Capability Assessment Survey required each local jurisdiction to conduct its own self-assessment of its capability to effectively implement hazard mitigation activities. As part of this process, county and municipal officials were encouraged to consider the barriers to implementing proposed mitigation strategies in addition to the mechanisms that could enhance or further such strategies. In response to the survey questionnaire, local officials classified each of the capabilities as either “limited,” “moderate” or “high.” Table 5.2-2 summarizes the results of the self-assessment survey as a percentage of responses received. For example, 65% of communities who responded indicated the community had moderate planning and regulatory capabilities related to hazard mitigation activities that reduce hazard vulnerabilities.

Table 5.2-2: Summary of self-assessment capability responses expressed as a percentage of responses received. CAPABILITY CATEGORY LIMITED MODERATE HIGH Planning & Regulatory 18% 65% 18% Administrative & Technical 24% 47% 29% Fiscal 41% 29% 29% Political 12% 59% 29% Community Resiliency 0% 59% 41%

5.2.8. Existing Limitations As mentioned, there are no communities in Cumberland County participating in the NFIP Community Rating System. However, all municipalities in the County are floodprone. Community participation in this program can provide premium reductions for properties located outside of Special Flood Hazard Areas of up to 10% and reductions for properties located in Special Flood Hazard Areas of up to 45%. These discounts can be obtained by undertaking public information, mapping and regulations, flood damage reduction and flood preparedness activities (FEMA, 2009).

Based on the capability assessment results, it appears that many municipalities within the County do not have an adopted stormwater management plan. Nine municipalities indicated that a stormwater management plan is in place while two municipalities indicated that a plan is under development. A stormwater management plan is designed to address flooding associated with stormwater runoff. These plans typically focus on design and construction measures that are intended to reduce the impact of more frequently occurring minor urban flooding. The presence of a stormwater management plan would greatly enhance mitigation capabilities needed to address flood and transportation hazards.

There is an excellent level of participation in the NFIP from municipalities throughout the County. However, the Borough of Newburg was suspended from the program on March 25, 2009. Flood hazards exist within this community. In order to reduce the community’s vulnerability to flood hazards and assist property owners located in the 1%-annual-chance-

132

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan floodplain (at least eight structures have been identified in this flood hazard area) in obtaining flood insurance through the NFIP, the Borough should fulfill requirements to achieve reinstatement in the program.

Numerous roads and intersections where flooding issues repeatedly occur were identified in Section 4.3.3.3. Some of these roads and intersections are state routes. The County and local municipalities face challenges in mitigating flood events on state routes since these roads are owned and maintained by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Local municipalities do not have the authority to independently carry out a mitigation project. In these situations, the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation must decide to undertake the project. Since the Department of Transportation is often most concerned with larger, critical transportation routes, smaller state roads and intersections which significantly affect a local community may not get the attention they need for the Commonwealth to take on a mitigation project.

White Rock Acres Development in Monroe Township is the only community in Cumberland County which established a Community Wildfire Protection Plan and participates in the Firewise program. However, there are numerous communities identified as vulnerable to wildfire hazards. The Pennsylvania Firewise Community Program assists planned and existing communities in implementing management practices which reduce the risk of wildfire events. Firewise communities are those that avoid potential fire emergencies by addressing and correcting fire hazards and preparing for the threat of a wildfire event (DCNR – BOF, 2009). Improved participation in this program will reduce the loss of lives, property and resources to wildfires by building and maintaining communities using practices that are compatible with their natural surroundings.

Finally, limited funding is a critical barrier to the implementation of hazard mitigation activities. The county will need to rely on regional, state and federal partnerships for financial assistance. 6. Mitigation Strategy 6.1. Update Process Summary The mitigation strategy for Cumberland County has been revised in the 2010 HMP to reflect vulnerabilities and needs identified through the risk assessment as well as results of the review of mitigation goals, objectives, and actions identified in the 2004 HMP. Goals, objectives, and actions have been added or removed as indicated in Sections 6.1, 6.2, and 6.4.

Mitigation goals are general guidelines that explain what the County wants to achieve. Goals are usually expressed as broad policy statements representing desired long-term results. Mitigation objectives describe strategies or implementation steps to attain the identified goals. Objectives are more specific statements than goals; the described steps are usually measurable and can have a defined completion date. There were eight goals and twenty-six objectives identified in the 2004 Cumberland County Hazard Mitigation Plan. Goals one through five are hazard-specific while goals six through eight address broader hazard mitigation concerns. A list of these goals and objectives as well as a review summary based on comments received from stakeholders who participated in the 2010 HMP update process is included in Table 6.1-1. These reviews are based on responses received from communities to the 5-Year Hazard

133

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Mitigation Plan Review Worksheet and comments received from county officials. Appendix B includes a summary of responses to the 5-Year Hazard Mitigation Plan Review Worksheet.

Table 6.1-1: List and review summary of 2004 mitigation strategy goals and objectives. Goal 1: Reduce potential injury/death and damage to existing community assets due to flooding. Objective 1A: Identify by municipality and evaluate protection of existing critical facilities with the highest relative vulnerability in the 100-year floodplain. Objective 1B: Identify and evaluate strategies for Review: Flooding continues to be the repetitive-loss properties. number one hazard affecting Cumberland Objective 1C: Provide public outreach/education regarding County. Objective 1E is discontinued in strategies (e.g. flood-proofing) for property owners in the the 2010 HMP since updated countywide 100-year floodplain. Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps were Objective 1D: Address identified data limitations regarding published on March 16, 2009. lack of detailed information about individual structures Communities agreed that all other located in the 100-year floodplain. objectives should be continued. Objective 1E: Obtain updated detailed flood studies and FIRMs (including 500-year flood) for areas with the greatest potential damage and threat to residents. Goal 2: Reduce potential injury/death and damage to existing community assets due to severe weather. Objective 2A: Identify by municipality the most-vulnerable Review: This goal was written to group and critical existing structures and infrastructure due to the severe weather hazards into events effects of severe weather. related to droughts, hurricanes, Objective 2B: Evaluate communities that require warning tornadoes/windstorms and winter storms. systems and storm shelters. Several communities agreed that they Objective 2C: Address identified data limitations regarding lacked the resources to implement lack of detailed information about characteristics of Objective 2B; however, most agreed that individual structures. all objectives should be continued. Objective 2D is revised to be associated Objective 2D: Assess the adequacy of municipal with 2010 Goal 15 so that adequacy of zoning/land-use ordinances and building-code ordinances and building codes is implementation. assessed for all hazards rather than severe weather alone. Goal 3: Reduce potential injury/death and damage to existing community assets due to fires. Objective 3A: Identify by municipality (especially in Review: This goal was written to group Dickinson, Cooke, South Middleton and Southampton) the wildfires and urban fires into a single most-vulnerable and critical existing structures to wildfires. category. The 2010 HMP restates this Objective 3B: Address identified data limitations regarding goal and associated objectives to identify lack of detailed information about individual structures (e.g. these hazards separately. Communities roof and siding construction materials) located within areas agreed that these objectives should more prone to wildfire. continue. Goal 4: Reduce potential injury/death and damage to existing community assets due to hazardous material releases. Objective 4A: identify by municipality the most-vulnerable residents and critical existing facilities. Review: Communities agreed that that Objective 4B: Develop comprehensive approach to this goal and associated objectives reducing potential injury/damages for nearby critical should be continued. Objective 4C was facilities and vulnerable populace.

134

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 6.1-1: List and review summary of 2004 mitigation strategy goals and objectives. Objective 4C: Evaluate potential contamination of drinking noted as a particularly high priority. water sources along transportation corridors. Goal 5: Reduce potential injury/death and damage to existing community assets due to terrorism and nuclear incidents. Objective 5A: Identify by municipality the most-vulnerable Review: Regarding Objective 5A, and critical structures and infrastructure relative to Middlesex Township noted an updated terrorism. assessment of critical assets along the Objective 5B: Assess the inherent and tactical Miracle Mile Corridor is being performed. vulnerability to terrorism of critical structures/infrastructure. Comments indicated that dams and Objective 5C: Enhance response capability of County and bridges should be given particular municipal services. attention for Objective 5B. Communities agreed that this goal and its associated Objective 5D: Increase public awareness of actions to take during an emergency. objectives should continue in order to address terrorism and nuclear incidents. Goal 6: Promote disaster-resistant future development. Objective 6A: Encourage and facilitate the development or revision of comprehensive plans and zoning/land-use Review: Adoption of the Uniform ordinances to limit development in high-hazard areas. Construction Code by all municipalities Objective 6B: Encourage and facilitate the adoption of since the 2004 HMP eliminates the need building codes that provide protection for new construction for Objective 6B. Therefore, this objective and substantial renovations from the effects of identified hazards. is discontinued in the 2010 HMP. Communities agreed that other objectives Objective 6C: Provide adequate and consistent enforcement of ordinances and codes within and between should be continued. jurisdictions. Goal 7: Promote hazard mitigation as a public value in recognition of its importance to the health, safety and welfare of the population. Objective 7A: Provide public education to increase awareness of hazards and opportunities for mitigation. Objective 7B: Promote partnerships between the Review: Communities unanimously municipalities and the County to continue to develop a agreed that these objectives should be County-wide approach to identifying and implementing continued. A comment was made that mitigation actions. Objective 7B promotes consistency and Objective 7C: Continue the promotion of disaster agreement among municipalities. resistance in the business community via the hazard mitigation planning initiative. Goal 8: Improve response and recovery capabilities. Objective 8A: Increase awareness by residents (i.e. Review: Communities unanimously through public outreach/education) of actions to take during agreed that these objectives should be an emergency. continued in order to improve response ad recovery capabilities. Public service meetings and township newsletters were Enhance response capability of County and Objective 8B: suggested to address Objective 8A. municipal fire, police and emergency medical services personnel to special populations. Recruitment, education and retention issues were identified as important in achieving Objective 8B.

135

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Actions provide more detailed descriptions of specific work tasks to help the County and its municipalities achieve prescribed goals and objectives. There were forty-four actions identified in the 2004 Cumberland County Hazard Mitigation Plan, ten of which have been fully or partially completed. A list of these actions as well as a review and summary of their progress based on comments received from stakeholders involved in the Hazard Mitigation Plan update process is included in Table 6.1-2. For purposes of identification, these hazards are listed as they correspond to individual hazard type or mitigation factor they are intended to address.

Table 6.1-2: List and review summary of 2004 mitigations actions. FLOOD HAZARDS Review: This action has not been performed. Action 1: Conduct cost-benefit analysis of protection Due to fiscal, technical and personnel of existing critical facilities with the highest relative limitations, this action is not included in the vulnerability. 2010 HMP. Review: The number of repetitive loss structures in each municipality has been Action 2: Conduct cost-benefit analysis of protection identified, but this action has not been of repetitive-loss assets. performed. Due to fiscal, technical and personnel limitations, this action is not included in the 2010 HMP. Action 3: Work with township/borough officials to increase awareness of model floodplain ordinances and with property owners, including informational Review: This action has not been performed. mailings to property owners in the 100-year floodplain Due to fiscal, technical and personnel and sponsoring a series of workshops about the costs limitations, this action is not included in the and benefits of: a) acquiring and minimizing the cost 2010 HMP. of flood insurance, and b) property acquisition, relocation, elevations, dry flood-proofing and wet flood-proofing. Review: This action has not been performed, but it is included in the 2010 HMP as a Action 4: Evaluate at the township/borough level the mitigation action intended to take advantage of suitability of CRS for insurance premium reduction flood mitigation assistance provided by the (and flood damage reduction). National Flood Insurance Program. See Action 5 in Table 6.4-1. Review: This action has not been performed, Action 5: Consider using "success stories" from other but is being revised to be more specific in Pennsylvania communities for flood risk management. terms of implementation. See Action 8 in Table 6.4-1. Review: Assessed property values which can be used to make replacement cost calculations have been obtained for all structures in the Action 6: Obtain information for structures in the County which are not tax-exempt. The County areas with the highest relative vulnerability to is committed to obtaining information on the determine the best property protection methods. The presence of a basement and number of stories information to be obtained includes: a) lowest-floor by working with the Tax Assessment Office. elevation, b) number of stories, c) presence of a Full collection of lowest-floor elevation data will basement, d) market and/or replacement value. be difficult to achieve at a county or municipal jurisdiction level. However, this information will be documented whenever it is available. See Action 7 in Table 6.4-1.

136

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 6.1-2: List and review summary of 2004 mitigations actions. Action 7: Obtain information for all remaining structures in the 100-year floodplain to determine the best property protection methods to promote with Review: This action has not been performed, individual property owners. Techniques for gathering but has been revised with respect to overall information over time should include developing and community capabilities and is included as a implementing a program for integrated information component of Action 13 in Table 6.4-1. "capture" at key points in normal township administrative procedures, including applications for building permits at township/borough offices. Review: The Flood Insurance Rate Maps issued on March 16, 2009 incorporate revised Action 8: Apply to PEMA for funding to undertake discharge values for Dogwood Run which detailed flood studies for the County's high-hazard modified Base Flood Elevations. No other areas to determine BFE and a full range of flood- detailed studies have been performed in the recurrence intervals (2, 5, 10, 25, 50 and 100-year County. This action is included in the 2010 events) for use in future refinements of the mitigation HMP, although the County is not certain where plan. these studies will take place and what level of funding is available from PEMA. See Action 10 in Table 6.4-1. Action 9: Apply to FEMA for updates of the most Review: This action has been completed. outdated FIRMs for high-hazard areas that include Effective Flood Insurance Rate Maps were input from state data. issued on March 16, 2009. SEVERE WEATHER HAZARDS Action 1: Conduct qualitative evaluation process for Review: This action has been started, but critical facilities and infrastructure to determine relative further evaluations will take place through vulnerability and gather information for subsequent Action 34 in Table 6.4-1. refinements of this mitigation plan. Action 2: Identify critical facilities with the highest Review: This action has been completed. relative vulnerability to the effects of power outage (i.e. These critical facilities are identified in hospitals, nursing homes, fire, police, rescue and Appendix D. emergency management). Review: This action has not been performed. Action 3: Develop action plan for reducing potential Due to fiscal, technical and personnel damage and loss of function at identified critical limitations, this action is not included in the facilities and infrastructure. 2010 HMP. Review: This action has not been performed. Action 4: Identify residents with the highest relative Due to fiscal, technical and personnel vulnerability to the effects of severe weather and limitations, this action is not included in the prepare implementation plan. 2010 HMP. Review: This action has not been performed. Action 5: Conduct qualitative evaluation process for Due to fiscal, technical and personnel managing stranded travelers (e.g. temporary shelters) limitations, this action is not included in the 2010 HMP. Action 6: If warranted, implement additional storm shelters and warning systems near vulnerable communities, including: a) Identify structures that can Review: This action has not been performed, be used as tornado safe rooms (some may require but is included as a component of Action 24 in structure modifications), b) community sirens, c) real- Table 6.4-1. time weather data for emergency management personnel, d) NOAA weather radios for vulnerable populace, or e) "Reverse 911" systems.

137

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 6.1-2: List and review summary of 2004 mitigations actions. Action 7: Develop a linkage between the County tax assessment records and parcels in the County GIS to Review: This action has not been performed, allow future revisions of this plan to more easily but is included as Action 7 in Table 6.4-1. incorporate information about construction type, age, conditions, presence of basement, etc… Review: This action has not been performed. Action 8: Evaluate cost-effectiveness of increasing Due to fiscal, technical and personnel design wind and/or snow load for future development. limitations, this action is not included in the 2010 HMP. Action 9: Work with township/borough officials to Review: This action has not been performed, increase awareness among mobile-home owners (e.g. but is included as a component of Action 25 in informational mailings, workshops) about Table 6.4-1. requirements for proper anchoring for wind protection. FIRE HAZARDS Action 1: Perform detailed assessments of facilities including presence or absence of vegetation in close proximity to buildings, power-supply lines, communication lines, etc. In the cases where Review: This action has not been performed. vegetation is present, follow-on efforts would include Due to fiscal, technical and personnel an assessment of the available fuel within the forested limitations, this action will not be included in the areas, type of construction materials on the facility (in 2010 HMP. particular the roof, siding and window coverings), etc., to determine more detailed assessments of vulnerability and risk. Action 2: Develop action plan for reducing potential damage at identified critical facilities. In cases where vulnerability and risk are considered to be relatively Review: This action has not been performed, high (e.g. high fuel levels, close proximity of but is included as a component of Action 30 in vegetation, combustible materials), follow-on efforts Table 6.4-1. should include investigating the extent to which "defensible space" practices would alleviate the problems in a cost-effective manner. Action 3: Develop a linkage between the County tax assessment records and parcels in the County GIS to Review: This action has not been performed, allow future revisions of this plan to more easily but is included as Action 7 in Table 6.4-1. incorporate information about construction materials. Review: A forest cover GIS layer has been Action 4: The HMSC should work with state and created that was used in the risk assessment federal foresters to determine existing forest cover for the 2010 plan update. Specific information extent and content to provide the basis for a more on tree cover type is not included. Future work detailed fuel model for future quantitative loss with state and federal foresters will take place analyses. through Action 30 in Table 6.4-1. HAZARDOUS MATERIAL RELEASE HAZARDS Action 1: Conduct qualitative evaluation process to Review: This action has not been performed, determine relative vulnerability of residents and critical but is included as a component of Action 4 in facilities; gather information for subsequent Table 6.4-1. refinements of this mitigation plan. Review: This action has not been performed. Action 2: Develop action plan for reducing potential Due to fiscal, technical and personnel injury/death and damage at identified vulnerable limitations, this action is not included in the populace and critical facilities. 2010 HMP.

138

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 6.1-2: List and review summary of 2004 mitigations actions. Action 3: The HMSC should work with facility owners and operators identified as having the greatest potential impact (based on population in the immediate vicinity) to ensure: a) facilities are in Review: This action has not been performed. compliance with all relevant local, state and federal Due to fiscal, technical and personnel requirements, b) neighboring property owners limitations, this action is not included in the understand the potential extent of the risk, c) traffic 2010 HMP. routing signs and trucker education are adequate, and d) alert warning systems are appropriate to the situation. Action 4: Install warning systems around hazardous Review: This action has not been performed. material facilities when and if it is determined that Due to fiscal, technical and personnel existing warning systems are inadequate for the limitations, this action is not included in the purposes of alerting neighboring property owners. 2010 HMP. Action 5: Obtain detailed topographic and planimetric surveys for areas along interstate highways in Cumberland County identified as crossing points for Review: This action has not been performed. tributaries that feed drinking water reservoir(s). Due to fiscal, technical and personnel Follow-up efforts would include preliminary limitations, this action is not included in the engineering studies to determine earthwork and/or 2010 HMP. other diversions needed to prevent hazardous material spills in these areas from contaminating drinking water supplies. TERRORISM & NUCLEAR INCIDENT HAZARDS Review: This action has not been performed. Critical facilities located within the 10-mile Action 1: Identify by municipality existing critical Plume Exposure Pathway EPZ for TMI are facilities with the highest relative vulnerability. identified during the 2010 HMP (see Appendix D). Potential terrorist targets were also identified during the 2010 HMP process. Action 2: Develop action plan for reducing potential Review: This action has not been performed, injury/death and damage at the identified critical but is included as a component of Action 15 in facilities. Table 6.4-1. Action 3: Conduct a detailed evaluation process to Review: This action has not been performed. determine inherent and tactical vulnerability of critical Due to fiscal, technical and personnel facilities; gather information for subsequent limitations, this action is not included in the refinements of this mitigation plan. 2010 HMP. Review: This action has not been performed. Action 4: Consider reducing vulnerability of a select Due to lack of specific details needed for number of critical facilities. completion, it is not included in the 2010 HMP. Action 5: Work with PEMA, FEMA and the U.S. Review: The Cumberland County Department Department of Homeland Security to stay abreast of of Public Safety has and continues to work developments in procedures for identifying and closely with PEMA and FEMA to mitigate determining benefits/costs for potential mitigation terrorist activities. See Action 23 in Table 6.4- actions for terrorist activities. 1. Action 6: Work with South-central Regional Review: This action has been completed and Counterterrorism Task Force to plan and prepare for will continue as described in Action 22 in Table terrorist activities, including training and exercises. 6.4-1. ALL HAZARDS - FUTURE DEVELOPMENT Action 1: Distribute and promote the inclusion of Review: This action was completed as part of vulnerability analysis information as part of periodic the 2010 HMP process. It is a requirement of

139

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 6.1-2: List and review summary of 2004 mitigations actions. plan review and revisions at the township/borough any hazard mitigation plan update process. level. Therefore, it is not specified as a mitigation action for future plan reviews and revisions. Review: This action has not been specifically performed. However, the majority of Action 2: Present cost/benefit analysis to communities in Cumberland County all have townships/boroughs that do not have comprehensive Comprehensive Plans as well as zoning/land- plans and/or zoning/land-use ordinances. use ordinances. Therefore, the County did not believe this was a critical action that needed to be continued. Review: A comprehensive evaluation has not been performed. However snow-removal and Action 3: Integrate evaluation of snow-removal and emergency access considerations are an emergency access logistics with new development element of new development planning in the planning. County. This action is included as a component of Action 33 in Table 6.4-1. Review: This action has not been performed, Action 4: Evaluate ordinance to standardize hydrant but is included as a component of Action 33 in connections for new development. Table 6.4-1. Review: Adoption by all thirty-three municipalities of the Universal Construction Code ensures that new construction (including Action 5: Evaluate adequacy of township/borough additions and renovations to existing building codes. structures) meet minimum requirements established by the Commonwealth in all municipalities. However, this action is included as a component of Action 33 in Table 6.4-1. Review: This action has been completed. As described in Section 5.2.3, all thirty-three municipalities in Cumberland County have adopted the Uniform Construction Code which Action 6: Encourage adoption of International currently uses the 2006 International Building Building Code in all townships/boroughs. Code. All municipalities will be required to enforce future updates to the International Building Code since they have adopted the Uniform Construction Code. Action 7: Train the municipal building inspectors to Review: This action has been completed. consistently enforce the building code from jurisdiction Municipal building inspectors are trained to to jurisdiction. enforce the Uniform Construction Code. ALL HAZARDS - PROMOTE HAZARD MITIGATION & REDUCE LOSSES Review: This action has not been performed, Action 1: Identify and publicize success stories as but is being revised to be more specific in part of an overall consistent public relations program. terms of implementation as it relates to flooding. See Action 8 in Table 6.4-1. Action 2: Convene regular meetings of a restructured Review: This action was not previously HMSC to discuss issues and progress related to the performed. However, it is included in the 2010 implementation of the plan. HMP as part of the plan maintenance process. Review: This action has not been performed. Due to lack of specific details needed for Action 3: Renew and expand commitments to hazard completion, it is not included in the 2010 HMP. mitigation planning among partner organizations. Removal of this action does not indicate a lack of commitment to partnership and coordination

140

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 6.1-2: List and review summary of 2004 mitigations actions. with organizations such as PEMA, South- Central Task Force, FEMA, the Tri-County Regional Planning Commission, local emergency response and planning groups, etc… Review: All telephone books within the County that are commercially produced include a section regarding response actions to nuclear power plant incidents at Three Mile Island. These books are updated during annual Action 4: Increase awareness by residents of actions printing with the most current information. Due to take during an emergency, including sheltering and to lack of specific details needed for evacuation procedures. Methods to be used can completion, this action is not included as include through public outreach (i.e. website, mailings, described in the 2010 HMP. However, several workshops, media coverage) and education. actions included in the 2010 HMP identify specific measures of public outreach or include participation in broader hazard mitigation programs that have public outreach components. Review: This action has been completed. Action 5: Identify special populations requiring Critical facilities were special populations are additional emergency response. located (schools, retirement homes, hospitals, etc…) have been identified in the 2010 HMP. Review: This action has not been performed. Action 6: Evaluate means to enhance response Due to fiscal, technical and personnel capability for those residents. limitations, this action is not included in the 2010 HMP.

6.2. Mitigation Goals and Objectives The list of goals and objectives for the County has expanded due in part to the identification of new hazards. Other goals and objectives were revised for reasons explained in Table 6.1-1. Table 6.2-1 shows the mitigation goals and objectives established for the 2010 HMP. There are eighteen goals identified, fourteen of which are hazard-specific. The remaining four are related to promoting hazard mitigation in general or reducing overall vulnerability to all hazards in the County.

Table 6.2-1: List of 2010 mitigation strategy goals and objectives. GOAL OBJECTIVE(S) Goal 1 (NEW): Reduce potential injury/death and Objective 1A: Complete Emergency Action Plans damage to existing community assets due to dam for all high hazard dams in the County. failures. Objective 2A: Improve the use of water Goal 2: Reduce potential damage to existing conservation and burn ban restrictions during community assets due to droughts. drought emergencies. Objective 3A: Identify by municipality and Goal 3: Reduce potential injury/death and evaluate protection of existing critical facilities with damage to existing community assets due to the highest relative vulnerability in the 100-year flooding. floodplain.

141

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 6.2-1: List of 2010 mitigation strategy goals and objectives. Objective 3B: Identify and evaluate strategies for repetitive-loss properties. Objective 3C: Provide public outreach/education regarding strategies (e.g. flood-proofing) for property owners in the 100-year floodplain. Objective 3D: Address identified data limitations regarding lack of detailed information about individual structures located in the 100-year floodplain. Objective 4A: Identify by municipality the most- vulnerable residents and critical existing facilities. Goal 4: Reduce potential injury/death and Objective 4B: Develop comprehensive approach damage to existing community assets due to to reducing potential injury/damages for nearby environmental hazards or hazardous material critical facilities and vulnerable populace. releases. Objective 4C: Evaluate potential contamination of drinking water sources along transportation corridors. Objective 5A: Identify by municipality the most- vulnerable and critical structures and infrastructure relative to terrorism. Objective 5B: Assess the inherent and tactical Goal 5: Reduce potential injury/death and vulnerability to terrorism of critical damage to existing community assets due to structures/infrastructure. nuclear incidents. Objective 5C: Enhance response capability of County and municipal services. Objective 5D: Increase public awareness of actions to take during an emergency. Goal 6 (NEW): Reduce potential injury/death and Objective 6A: Improve planning efforts for damage to existing community assets due to response measures needed in the event of a pandemic incidents. pandemic event. Goal 7 (NEW): Reduce negative impacts and Objective 7A: Reduce outage time during potential injury/death and damage to existing significant power failures. community assets due to power failures. Objective 8A: Enhance public awareness of the Reduce potential injury/death and Goal 8 (NEW): potential impacts of subsidence hazards. damage to existing community assets due to Improve identification of areas subsidence and sinkholes. Objective 8B: prone to significant subsidence events. Objective 9A: Improve adequacy and efficiency of emergency response in the event of traffic Reduce potential injury/death and Goal 9 (NEW): accidents. damage to existing community assets due to Enhance planning efforts to transportation accidents. Objective 9B: account for increased railway traffic throughout the County. Objective 10A: Identify by municipality the most- vulnerable and critical structures and infrastructure relative to terrorism. Goal 10: Reduce potential injury/death and damage to existing community assets due to Objective 10B: Assess the inherent and tactical terrorism. vulnerability to terrorism of critical structures/infrastructure. Objective 10C: Enhance response capability of

142

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 6.2-1: List of 2010 mitigation strategy goals and objectives. County and municipal services.

Objective 10D: Increase public awareness of actions to take during an emergency. Goal 11: Reduce potential injury/death and Objective 11B: Improve understanding and damage to existing community assets due to urban identification of structures vulnerable to significant fires. urban fires. Objective 12A: Identify by municipality (especially in Dickinson, Cooke, South Middleton and Southampton) the most-vulnerable and critical Goal 12: Reduce potential injury/death and existing structures to wildfires. damage to existing community assets due to Objective 12B: Address identified data limitations wildfires. regarding lack of detailed information about individual structures (e.g. roof and siding construction materials) located within areas more prone to wildfire. Objective 13A: Identify by municipality the most- vulnerable and critical existing structures and infrastructure due to the effects of severe weather. Goal 13: Reduce potential injury/death and Objective 13B: Evaluate communities that require damage to existing community assets due to warning systems and storm shelters. windstorms & tornadoes. Objective 13C: Address identified data limitations regarding lack of detailed information about characteristics of individual structures. Objective 14A: Identify by municipality the most- vulnerable and critical existing structures and infrastructure due to the effects of severe weather. Goal 14: Reduce potential injury/death and Objective 14B: Evaluate communities that require damage to existing community assets due to warning systems and storm shelters. winter storms. Objective 14C: Address identified data limitations regarding lack of detailed information about characteristics of individual structures. Objective 15A: Assess the adequacy of municipal zoning/land-use/floodplain ordinances and building-code implementation. Objective 15B: Encourage and facilitate the Goal 15: Promote disaster-resistant future development or revision of comprehensive plans development. and zoning/land-use/floodplain ordinances to limit development in high-hazard areas. Objective 15C: Provide adequate and consistent enforcement of ordinances and codes within and between jurisdictions. Goal 16 (NEW): Reduce vulnerability of critical Objective 16A: Update and improve critical facilities to all hazard events. facility information across the County. Objective 17A: Provide public education to increase awareness of hazards and opportunities Goal 17: Promote hazard mitigation as a public for mitigation. value in recognition of its importance to the health, Objective 17B: Promote partnerships between safety and welfare of the population. the municipalities and the County to continue to develop a County-wide approach to identifying and implementing mitigation actions.

143

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 6.2-1: List of 2010 mitigation strategy goals and objectives. Objective 17C: Continue the promotion of disaster resistance in the business community via the hazard mitigation planning initiative. Objective 18A: Increase awareness by residents (i.e. through public outreach/education) of actions Goal 18: Improve response and recovery to take during an emergency. capabilities. Objective 18B: Enhance response capability of County and municipal fire, police and emergency medical services personnel to special populations.

144

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

6.3. Identification and Analysis of Mitigation Techniques Appendix 7 of the 2009 Standard Operating Guide developed by PEMA provides a comprehensive list of hazard mitigation ideas. Cumberland County used this guide to identify mitigation techniques and develop mitigation actions. There are six categories of mitigation actions which Cumberland County considered in developing its Mitigation Action Plan. Those categories include: • Prevention: Government administrative or regulatory actions or processes that influence the way land and buildings are developed and built. These actions also include public activities to reduce hazard losses. Examples include planning, zoning, building codes, subdivision regulations, hazard specific regulations (such as floodplain regulations), capital improvement programs, and open-space preservation and stormwater regulations. • Property Protection: Actions that involve modifying or removing existing buildings or infrastructure to protect them from a hazard. Examples include the acquisition, elevation and relocation of structures, structural retrofits, flood-proofing, storm shutters and shatter- resistant glass. Most of these property protection techniques are considered to involve “sticks and bricks;” however, this category also includes insurance. • Public Education and Awareness: Actions to inform and educate citizens, elected officials and property owners about potential risks from hazards and potential ways to mitigate them. Such actions include hazard mapping, outreach projects, library materials dissemination, real estate disclosures, the creation of hazard information centers and school age / adult education programs. • Natural Resource Protection: Actions that, in addition to minimizing hazard losses also preserve or restore the functions of natural systems. These actions include sediment and erosion control, stream corridor restoration, forest and vegetation management, wetlands restoration or preservation, slope stabilization, and historic property and archeological site preservation. • Structural Project Implementation: Mitigation projects intended to lessen the impact of a hazard by using structures to modify the environment. Structures include stormwater controls (culverts); dams, dikes and levees; and safe rooms. • Emergency Services: Actions that typically are not considered mitigation techniques but reduce the impacts of a hazard event on people and property. These actions are often taken prior to, during, or in response to an emergency or disaster. Examples include warning systems, evacuation planning and management, emergency response training and exercises, and emergency flood protection procedures.

Table 6.3-1 provides a matrix identifying the mitigation techniques used for hazards identified in Cumberland County. Specific actions associated with these techniques are included in Table 6.4-1. Mitigation projects associated with some of these techniques (e.g. structural project implementation for flood hazards) are included in Appendix H.

145

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 6.3-1: Mitigation techniques used for the moderate and high risk hazards in Cumberland County. MITIGATION TECHNIQUE PUBLIC HAZARD NATURAL STRUCTURAL PROPERTY EDUCATION EMERGENCY PREVENTION RESOURCE PROJECT PROTECTION AND SERVICES PROTECTION IMPLEMENTATION AWARENESS Civil Disturbance   Dam Failure    Drought   Flood, Flash       Flood, & Ice Jam Earthquake   Environmental   Hazards Hurricane, Tropical Storm, &      Nor’easter Landslide   Levee Failure   Nuclear Incidents    Pandemic    Subsidence &   Sinkholes Transportation    Accidents Terrorism    Tornado &   Windstorm Urban Fire   Utility Interruption    Wildfire   Winter Storm   

6.4. Mitigation Action Plan Following the risk assessment stage of the update process, a mitigation workshop was held on October 28, 2009 to develop a framework for the County Mitigation Action Plan (see meeting minutes in Appendix B). Table 6.4-1 lists actions which were developed at this workshop, during the public meeting held on November 16, 2009, and at other times during the update process based on identified needs and community comments received. At least one mitigation action was established for each hazard in Cumberland County. More than one action is identified for several hazards. Each mitigation action is intended to address one or more of the goals and objectives identified in Section 6.2. Actions five, six, twelve, thirteen, and thirty-three address continued compliance and improved participation in the National Flood Insurance Program.

146

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 6.4-1: List of 2010 mitigation actions with information including community or communities affected, action category, hazard addressed, action description, lead agency/department and general implementation schedule. COMMUNITY: Cumberland County and local municipalities downstream of high-hazard dams, including South Middleton Township, North Middleton Township, Cook township, Lower ACTION: Participate in the development and Frankford Township, Dickinson Township, Mount continued update of Emergency Action Plans. Holly Springs Borough, West Pennsboro Township, and Monroe Township ACTION NO: 1 Public Education and Awareness; Emergency Category: Services Hazard(s) Addressed: Dam Failure Exercise appropriate oversight and coordination in the development of dam Emergency Action Plans to Description: ensure that stakeholders understand and are competent to carry out specified responsibilities. Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County Department of Public Safety Participate as Emergency Action Plans are being Implementation Schedule: developed or updated. COMMUNITY: Cumberland County, Camp Hill Borough, Carlisle Borough, Cooke Township, Dickinson Township, East Pennsboro Township, Hampden Township, Hopewell Township, Lemoyne Borough, Lower Allen Township, Lower Frankford Township, Lower Mifflin Township, Mechanicsburg Borough, Middlesex Township, Monroe Township, Mount Holly Springs Borough, New Cumberland Borough, Newburg Borough, Newville Borough, North Middleton Township, ACTION: Form a drought emergency working group North Newton Township, Penn Township, to resolve water conservation enforcement issues. Shippensburg Township, Shippensburg Borough, Shiremanstown Borough, Silver Spring Township, South Middleton Township, South Newton Township, Southampton Township, Upper Allen Township, Upper Frankford Township, Upper Mifflin Township, West Pennsboro Township, and Wormleysburg Borough ACTION NO: 2

Category: Prevention

Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought Form a working group composed of concerned local law enforcement officers and code officials, representatives from the state governor’s office, the Description: County Drought Emergency Board and Troop H of the Pennsylvania State Police to explore ways of better enforcing water conservation rules during drought emergencies. Past experiences have

147

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 6.4-1: List of 2010 mitigation actions with information including community or communities affected, action category, hazard addressed, action description, lead agency/department and general implementation schedule. shown it is very difficult for local municipalities to enforce state directives. Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County Department of Public Safety Convene the working group when significant drought Implementation Schedule: events occur. COMMUNITY: Cumberland County ACTION: Issue countywide “advisory” burn bans. ACTION NO: 3

Category: Public Education and Awareness

Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought The Emergency Operations Coordinator shall issue advisory countywide burning bans in consultation with municipal officials when necessary during Description: severe droughts. These bans would then be adopted locally where they can be implemented more efficiently. Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County Department of Public Safety Issue advisory bans as deemed necessary when Implementation Schedule: significant drought events occur. COMMUNITY: Cumberland County, Camp Hill Borough, Carlisle Borough, Cooke Township, Dickinson Township, East Pennsboro Township, Hampden Township, Hopewell Township, Lemoyne Borough, Lower Allen Township, Lower Frankford Township, Lower Mifflin Township, Mechanicsburg Borough, Middlesex Township, Monroe Township, Mount Holly Springs Borough, New Cumberland Borough, Newburg Borough, Newville Borough, North Middleton Township, ACTION: Update and provide more detail to the North Newton Township, Penn Township, countywide downstream users inventory. Shippensburg Township, Shippensburg Borough, Shiremanstown Borough, Silver Spring Township, South Middleton Township, South Newton Township, Southampton Township, Upper Allen Township, Upper Frankford Township, Upper Mifflin Township, West Pennsboro Township, and Wormleysburg Borough ACTION NO: 4

Category: Public Education and Awareness

Hazard(s) Addressed: Environmental Hazards Identify points in streams and rivers that feed drinking water reservoir(s) and/or downstream users Description: that are vulnerable to contamination from hazardous materials leakages from both fixed facilities and transportation corridors. Incorporate information on

148

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 6.4-1: List of 2010 mitigation actions with information including community or communities affected, action category, hazard addressed, action description, lead agency/department and general implementation schedule. these locations and vulnerable downstream users into a new map and database that can be used to prioritize future mitigation actions. Local municipalities will be given an opportunity to provide user information and locations where hazardous materials are more likely to occur (e.g. railroad tracks along a stream bank). Post spill response signs along major roads and interstates. Cumberland County Planning Department; Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County GIS Department Meet with local municipalities in 2010 to present the purpose of this data collection and comments on an appropriate approach. Begin updates and revisions Implementation Schedule: to currently identified facilities in 2010. Add new location-specific information on users and vulnerable watersheds through 2013. COMMUNITY: Camp Hill Borough, Carlisle Borough, Cooke Township, Dickinson Township, East Pennsboro Township, Hampden Township, Hopewell Township, Lemoyne Borough, Lower Allen Township, Lower Frankford Township, Lower Mifflin Township, Mechanicsburg Borough, Middlesex Township, Monroe Township, Mount Holly Springs Borough, New Cumberland Borough, Newburg Borough, Newville Borough, North Middleton Township, North Newton ACTION: Increase participation in FEMA’s Township, Penn Township, Shippensburg Community Rating System (CRS) Program. Township, Shippensburg Borough, Shiremanstown Borough, Silver Spring Township, South Middleton Township, South Newton Township, Southampton Township, Upper Allen Township, Upper Frankford Township, Upper Mifflin Township, West Pennsboro Township, and Wormleysburg Borough ACTION NO: 5

Category: Prevention – National Flood Insurance Program Flood, Flash Flood, & Ice Jam; Hurricane, Tropical Hazard(s) Addressed: Storm, & Nor’easter Each municipality within the County will review opportunities within FEMA’s Community Rating Description: System (CRS) Program to determine the program’s applicability and potential effectiveness within their jurisdiction. Pennsylvania Department of Community and Lead Agency/Department: Economic Development; Cumberland County Municipalities Begin review of CRS requirements in 2010. Adopt Implementation Schedule: measures when appropriate to attain CRS credit through 2015.

149

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Newburg Borough COMMUNITY: ACTION: Obtain participating status in the National Flood Insurance Program. ACTION NO: 6

Category: Prevention – National Flood Insurance Program Flood, Flash Flood, & Ice Jam; Hurricane, Tropical Hazard(s) Addressed: Storm, & Nor’easter The Borough of Newburg was suspended from the program on March 25, 2009. Flood hazards exist within this community. In order to reduce the community’s vulnerability to flood hazards and assist property owners located in the 1%-annual-chance- Description: floodplain (at least eight structures have been identified in this flood hazard area) in obtaining flood insurance through the NFIP, the Borough should fulfill requirements to achieve reinstatement in the program. Cumberland County Planning Department; Lead Agency/Department: Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development Implementation Schedule: Complete by 2010. COMMUNITY: Cumberland County, Camp Hill Borough, Carlisle Borough, Cooke Township, Dickinson Township, East Pennsboro Township, Hampden Township, Hopewell Township, Lemoyne Borough, Lower Allen Township, Lower Frankford Township, Lower Mifflin Township, Mechanicsburg Borough, Middlesex Township, Monroe Township, Mount Holly Springs Borough, New Cumberland Borough, Newburg Borough, Newville Borough, North Middleton Township, ACTION: Acquire more detailed structure North Newton Township, Penn Township, information. Shippensburg Township, Shippensburg Borough, Shiremanstown Borough, Silver Spring Township, South Middleton Township, South Newton Township, Southampton Township, Upper Allen Township, Upper Frankford Township, Upper Mifflin Township, West Pennsboro Township, and Wormleysburg Borough ACTION NO: 7

Category: Public Education and Awareness Flood, Flash Flood, & Ice Jam; Hurricane, Tropical Hazard(s) Addressed: Storm, & Nor’easter Collect information on first floor elevations (obtained from elevation certificates), foundation type, Description: construction type, basement presence, building height (# of stories). Some of this information is already held by the County Tax Assessment Office,

150

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 6.4-1: List of 2010 mitigation actions with information including community or communities affected, action category, hazard addressed, action description, lead agency/department and general implementation schedule. but needs to be transferred into a more usable format in a GIS database. Acquiring this data will greatly improve future flood loss estimates. Cumberland County Planning Department; Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County GIS Department Begin coordination with Tax Assessment Office in Implementation Schedule: 2010. Collect and organize information through 2015. COMMUNITY: Cumberland County, Camp Hill Borough, Carlisle Borough, Cooke Township, Dickinson Township, East Pennsboro Township, Hampden Township, Hopewell Township, Lemoyne Borough, Lower Allen Township, Lower Frankford Township, Lower Mifflin Township, Mechanicsburg Borough, Middlesex Township, Monroe Township, Mount Holly Springs Borough, New Cumberland Borough, Newburg Borough, Newville Borough, North Middleton Township, ACTION: Develop Flood Intensity Indicators North Newton Township, Penn Township, document. Shippensburg Township, Shippensburg Borough, Shiremanstown Borough, Silver Spring Township, South Middleton Township, South Newton Township, Southampton Township, Upper Allen Township, Upper Frankford Township, Upper Mifflin Township, West Pennsboro Township, and Wormleysburg Borough ACTION NO: 8

Category: Public Education and Awareness Flood, Flash Flood, & Ice Jam; Hurricane, Tropical Hazard(s) Addressed: Storm, & Nor’easter Develop a Flood Intensity Indicators document that includes quantitative and qualitative information from local emergency management staff on the relationship between flood “signs” (e.g. water surfacing at a specific man hole cover) for given intensity levels and the impact such an event will have on local public and private properties. Coordinate with Civil Air Control to collect aerial Description: photography of real time flooding. This information will be documented and shared so that it is accessible to other local and County planning personnel. Mount Holly Springs, East Pennsboro, New Cumberland and Wormleysburg are municipalities where this information is believed to be common knowledge. Publicize this information to increase awareness of flood hazards and promote public involvement in hazard mitigation. Cumberland County Department of Public Safety; Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County Municipalities; Cumberland

151

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 6.4-1: List of 2010 mitigation actions with information including community or communities affected, action category, hazard addressed, action description, lead agency/department and general implementation schedule. County Planning Department; Cumberland County GIS Department Hold a meeting between the County and local municipalities in 2010 to discuss the intent and Implementation Schedule: structure of this document. Collect information over 2011-2013. Publish draft of document in 2014 and make available for future updates. Cumberland County COMMUNITY: ACTION: Review the County Act 167 Plan for critical flood hazard information. ACTION NO: 9

Category: Public Education and Awareness Flood, Flash Flood, & Ice Jam; Hurricane, Tropical Hazard(s) Addressed: Storm, & Nor’easter Review completed County Act 167 plan to evaluate Description: public infrastructure impacted by flood events and identify which structures are “critical.” Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County Planning Department Perform action when Act 167 Plan is completed and Implementation Schedule: approved. Phase I was completed as of November, 2009. Phase II will be completed in 2010. COMMUNITY: Cumberland County, Camp Hill Borough, Carlisle Borough, Cooke Township, Dickinson Township, East Pennsboro Township, Hampden Township, Hopewell Township, Lemoyne Borough, Lower Allen Township, Lower Frankford Township, Lower Mifflin Township, Mechanicsburg Borough, Middlesex Township, Monroe Township, Mount Holly Springs Borough, New Cumberland Borough, Newburg Borough, Newville Borough, North Middleton Township, ACTION: Apply for funding to perform detailed flood North Newton Township, Penn Township, studies. Shippensburg Township, Shippensburg Borough, Shiremanstown Borough, Silver Spring Township, South Middleton Township, South Newton Township, Southampton Township, Upper Allen Township, Upper Frankford Township, Upper Mifflin Township, West Pennsboro Township, and Wormleysburg Borough ACTION NO: 10

Category: Public Education and Awareness Flood, Flash Flood, & Ice Jam; Hurricane, Tropical Hazard(s) Addressed: Storm, & Nor’easter Apply to PEMA for funding to undertake detailed flood studies for the County's high-hazard areas to Description: determine BFE and a full range of flood-recurrence intervals (2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50- and 100-year events) for use in future refinements of the mitigation plan.

152

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 6.4-1: List of 2010 mitigation actions with information including community or communities affected, action category, hazard addressed, action description, lead agency/department and general implementation schedule. Cumberland County Planning Department; Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County Municipalities Implement as funding opportunities become Implementation Schedule: available. COMMUNITY: Cumberland County, Camp Hill Borough, Carlisle Borough, Cooke Township, Dickinson Township, East Pennsboro Township, Hampden Township, Hopewell Township, Lemoyne Borough, Lower Allen Township, Lower Frankford Township, Lower Mifflin Township, Mechanicsburg Borough, Middlesex Township, Monroe Township, Mount Holly Springs Borough, New Cumberland Borough, Newburg Borough, ACTION: Develop flood mitigation project proposals Newville Borough, North Middleton Township, which are eligible for state and federal mitigation North Newton Township, Penn Township, grant funding programs. Shippensburg Township, Shippensburg Borough, Shiremanstown Borough, Silver Spring Township, South Middleton Township, South Newton Township, Southampton Township, Upper Allen Township, Upper Frankford Township, Upper Mifflin Township, West Pennsboro Township, and Wormleysburg Borough ACTION NO: 11 Natural Resource Protection; Structural Project Category: Implementation Flood, Flash Flood, & Ice Jam; Hurricane, Tropical Hazard(s) Addressed: Storm, & Nor’easter Develop flood mitigation project proposals which are eligible for funding through various state and federal mitigation grant programs. These projects should specifically address structural mitigation efforts for Description: existing buildings or infrastructure, but may be designed to provide natural resource benefits (e.g. stream or wetland restoration projects which reduce flooding in the surrounding area). Currently proposed projects are included in Appendix H. Cumberland County Planning Department; Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County Department of Public Safety; Cumberland County Municipalities In progress. Implement projects as funding Implementation Schedule: opportunities become available. COMMUNITY: Cumberland County and local municipalities including New Cumberland ACTION: Perform public outreach activities that Borough, East Pennsboro Township, Camp Hill promote reduction in the number of repetitive loss Borough structures. ACTION NO: 12 Public Education and Awareness – National Flood Category: Insurance Program

153

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 6.4-1: List of 2010 mitigation actions with information including community or communities affected, action category, hazard addressed, action description, lead agency/department and general implementation schedule. Flood, Flash Flood, & Ice Jam; Hurricane, Tropical Hazard(s) Addressed: Storm, & Nor’easter Perform public outreach activities to address repetitive loss structures, focusing specifically on communities in the County which have a high number of repetitive loss structures; the Borough of New Cumberland (54), Borough of Camp Hill (14), Description: and Township of East Pennsboro (16). At a minimum, activities will include notification to property owners of the flood hazards present and encourage flood insurance purchases for un-insured structures in the area. Cumberland County Planning Department; Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County Municipalities Begin developing outreach materials in 2010. Implementation Schedule: Coordinate with municipal representatives and distribute by 2011. COMMUNITY: Cumberland County, Camp Hill Borough, Carlisle Borough, Cooke Township, Dickinson Township, East Pennsboro Township, Hampden Township, Hopewell Township, Lemoyne Borough, Lower Allen Township, Lower Frankford Township, Lower Mifflin Township, Mechanicsburg Borough, Middlesex Township, Monroe Township, Mount Holly Springs Borough, New Cumberland Borough, Newburg Borough, ACTION: Identify properties in the community at Newville Borough, North Middleton Township, high risk of flooding for purposes of property North Newton Township, Penn Township, protection. Shippensburg Township, Shippensburg Borough, Shiremanstown Borough, Silver Spring Township, South Middleton Township, South Newton Township, Southampton Township, Upper Allen Township, Upper Frankford Township, Upper Mifflin Township, West Pennsboro Township, and Wormleysburg Borough ACTION NO: 13 Property Protection – National Flood Insurance Category: Program Flood, Flash Flood, & Ice Jam; Hurricane, Tropical Hazard(s) Addressed: Storm, & Nor’easter Evaluate properties in the community considered at high risk of flooding to identify structures (including Repetitive Loss and Severe Repetitive Loss structures) which federal mitigation funds can be applied most effectively for purposes of buyout, Description: relocation, elevation, or flood-proofing. Use information on vacant lots located in the 1%-annual- chance floodplain (see Table 4.4.4-2) to address vulnerability of future development and collect information such as lowest adjacent grade, lowest

154

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 6.4-1: List of 2010 mitigation actions with information including community or communities affected, action category, hazard addressed, action description, lead agency/department and general implementation schedule. floor, etc… for properties currently located and structures proposed for construction in the 1%- annual-chance floodplain. In addition, identify sources of funding for local-match contributions. Cumberland County Planning Department; Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County Municipalities Implementation Schedule: Complete evaluation by 2011. COMMUNITY: East Pennsboro Township, Lemoyne Borough, New Cumberland Borough, ACTION: Participate in the NOAA National Weather Wormleysburg Borough Service Ice Observer Program. ACTION NO: 14 Public Education and Awareness; Emergency Category: Services Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Flash Flood, & Ice Jam Train and certify ice observers who will monitor potential ice jam conditions along the Susquehanna Description: River and provide warning for imminent ice jam events. Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County Department of Public Safety

Implementation Schedule: December 2011

COMMUNITY: Cumberland County ACTION: Update Annex E regularly and coordinate with state and federal counterparts on radiological ACTION NO: 15 emergency response. Category: Emergency Services

Hazard(s) Addressed: Nuclear Incidents Update Cumberland County Radiological Emergency Response Procedures to Nuclear Power Plant Incidents (Annex E) regularly. Hold annual review meetings between the utility, Cumberland County Description: and other counties affected by the 10-mile Emergency Planning Zone. Perform bi-annual federally evaluated exercises. Include an action plan for reducing potential injury/death and damage at identified critical facilities. Cumberland County Department of Public Safety; Lead Agency/Department: Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency; Exelon Implementation Schedule: Update annually. Cumberland County COMMUNITY: ACTION: Provide assistance as requested in the development of Annex A. ACTION NO: 16

Category: Emergency Services

155

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Hazard(s) Addressed: Nuclear Incidents Coordinate with the state as requested in the development of Annex A which is intended to cover multiple types of radiological hazards including those Description: related to transportation, fixed facility, medical and construction uses. There is some uncertainty regarding when this document will be completed, but it will eventually be merged with Annex E. Cumberland County Department of Public Safety; Lead Agency/Department: Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency Schedule is dependent on incoming requests for Implementation Schedule: comments and coordination with the state. COMMUNITY: Cumberland County ACTION: Identify point of dispensing sites. ACTION NO: 17

Category: Emergency Services

Hazard(s) Addressed: Pandemic Identify large capacity point of dispensing sites which would be used during serious emergencies when the Description: county population would need to be quickly vaccinated or provided medical support. Cumberland County Department of Public Safety; Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County GIS Department Implementation Schedule: Complete by 2011.

COMMUNITY: Cumberland County ACTION: Identify mass clinic sites. ACTION NO: 18

Category: Emergency Services

Hazard(s) Addressed: Pandemic Identify mass clinic sites where medical supplies Description: (e.g. vaccinations) can be distributed methodically without interrupting school days. Cumberland County Department of Public Safety; Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County GIS Department Implementation Schedule: In progress. Complete by 2011. Cumberland County COMMUNITY: ACTION: Pursue advanced emergency response planning efforts. ACTION NO: 19 Emergency Services; Public Education and Category: Awareness Hazard(s) Addressed: Pandemic

Description: Pursue advanced planning efforts such as mapping

156

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 6.4-1: List of 2010 mitigation actions with information including community or communities affected, action category, hazard addressed, action description, lead agency/department and general implementation schedule. point of dispensing sites and identifying personnel needed for response to a pandemic event. Cumberland County Department of Public Safety; Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County GIS Department Implementation Schedule: Complete by 2011. COMMUNITY: Cumberland County, Camp Hill Borough, Carlisle Borough, Cooke Township, Dickinson Township, East Pennsboro Township, Hampden Township, Hopewell Township, Lemoyne Borough, Lower Allen Township, Lower Frankford Township, Lower Mifflin Township, Mechanicsburg Borough, Middlesex Township, Monroe Township, Mount Holly Springs Borough, New Cumberland Borough, Newburg Borough, Newville Borough, North Middleton Township, ACTION: Implement full disclosure of sinkhole North Newton Township, Penn Township, hazards. Shippensburg Township, Shippensburg Borough, Shiremanstown Borough, Silver Spring Township, South Middleton Township, South Newton Township, Southampton Township, Upper Allen Township, Upper Frankford Township, Upper Mifflin Township, West Pennsboro Township, and Wormleysburg Borough ACTION NO: 20

Category: Public Education and Awareness

Hazard(s) Addressed: Subsidence & Sinkholes Implement full disclosure of sinkhole information based on Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources maps and local knowledge to those building on land where documented sinkholes Description: are located. This disclosure can take place through the permit process. When such disclosures are necessary, clarify to recipients that they are building at their own risk. Cumberland County Planning Department; Lead Agency/Department: Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Implementation Schedule: Develop procedures for disclosure over 2010-2011. COMMUNITY: Cumberland County, Camp Hill Borough, Carlisle Borough, Cooke Township, Dickinson Township, East Pennsboro Township, Hampden Township, Hopewell Township, ACTION: Begin inventorying future “significant” Lemoyne Borough, Lower Allen Township, Lower sinkhole events. Frankford Township, Lower Mifflin Township, Mechanicsburg Borough, Middlesex Township, Monroe Township, Mount Holly Springs Borough, New Cumberland Borough, Newburg Borough,

157

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 6.4-1: List of 2010 mitigation actions with information including community or communities affected, action category, hazard addressed, action description, lead agency/department and general implementation schedule. Newville Borough, North Middleton Township, North Newton Township, Penn Township, Shippensburg Township, Shippensburg Borough, Shiremanstown Borough, Silver Spring Township, South Middleton Township, South Newton Township, Southampton Township, Upper Allen Township, Upper Frankford Township, Upper Mifflin Township, West Pennsboro Township, and Wormleysburg Borough ACTION NO: 21

Category: Public Education and Awareness

Hazard(s) Addressed: Subsidence & Sinkholes Begin compiling a central inventory list of “significant” sinkhole events which includes basic information such as location, damage and the party responsible for repair. All information should be Description: reported to and maintained by the County Hazard Mitigation Officer at the Cumberland County Planning Department. Minor events will not be reported. Cumberland County Planning Department; Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County Department of Public Safety Notify local emergency management coordinators Implementation Schedule: that this initiative has started and provide contact for reporting “significant” events in 2010. COMMUNITY: Cumberland County, Camp Hill Borough, Carlisle Borough, Cooke Township, Dickinson Township, East Pennsboro Township, Hampden Township, Hopewell Township, Lemoyne Borough, Lower Allen Township, Lower Frankford Township, Lower Mifflin Township, Mechanicsburg Borough, Middlesex Township, Monroe Township, Mount Holly Springs Borough, New Cumberland Borough, Newburg Borough, Newville Borough, North Middleton Township, ACTION: Participate in the South-Central Task North Newton Township, Penn Township, Force. Shippensburg Township, Shippensburg Borough, Shiremanstown Borough, Silver Spring Township, South Middleton Township, South Newton Township, Southampton Township, Upper Allen Township, Upper Frankford Township, Upper Mifflin Township, West Pennsboro Township, and Wormleysburg Borough ACTION NO: 22

Category: Emergency Services

Hazard(s) Addressed: Terrorism; Regional all-hazard response

158

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 6.4-1: List of 2010 mitigation actions with information including community or communities affected, action category, hazard addressed, action description, lead agency/department and general implementation schedule. Enhance County and municipality preparedness to respond to a terrorism event through participation in Description: training, exercise and planning activities of the South-Central Task Force. Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County Department of Public Safety Participate regularly in training exercises, planning Implementation Schedule: activities and emergency response through 2015. COMMUNITY: Cumberland County ACTION: Coordinate with state and federal agencies on potential mitigation actions for terrorist ACTION NO: 23 activities. Category: Public Education and Awareness

Hazard(s) Addressed: Terrorism; Regional all-hazard response Work with PEMA, FEMA and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to stay abreast of procedures for Description: identifying and determining benefits/costs for potential mitigation actions for terrorist activities. Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County Department of Public Safety Coordinate as information becomes available Implementation Schedule: through 2015. COMMUNITY: Cumberland County, Camp Hill Borough, Carlisle Borough, Cooke Township, Dickinson Township, East Pennsboro Township, Hampden Township, Hopewell Township, Lemoyne Borough, Lower Allen Township, Lower Frankford Township, Lower Mifflin Township, Mechanicsburg Borough, Middlesex Township, Monroe Township, Mount Holly Springs Borough, New Cumberland Borough, Newburg Borough, Newville Borough, North Middleton Township, ACTION: Expand participation in the StormReady North Newton Township, Penn Township, Program. Shippensburg Township, Shippensburg Borough, Shiremanstown Borough, Silver Spring Township, South Middleton Township, South Newton Township, Southampton Township, Upper Allen Township, Upper Frankford Township, Upper Mifflin Township, West Pennsboro Township, and Wormleysburg Borough ACTION NO: 24

Category: Public Education and Awareness Tornado & Windstorm; Hurricane, Tropical Storm, & Hazard(s) Addressed: Nor’easter Expand participation in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s StormReady program. Description: Cumberland County and Carlisle Barracks participate in the StormReady program; however, there are no participating local municipalities.

159

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County Department of Public Safety Learn how the components of StormReady can be Implementation Schedule: applied to each municipality in 2010. Begin taking action to participate in the program in 2011. Cumberland County, COMMUNITY: ACTION: Perform public outreach activities which Shippensburg Township, Middlesex Township, inform manufactured home or commercial trailer and Lower Mifflin Township owners of the increased vulnerability of these ACTION NO: 25 structures to natural hazards.

Category: Public Education and Awareness Tornado & Windstorm; Flood, Flash Flood, & Ice Hazard(s) Addressed: Jam; Hurricane, Tropical Storm, & Nor’easter Perform public outreach activities which inform manufactured home or commercial trailer owners of the increased vulnerability of trailer structures to natural hazards, focusing specifically on communities in the County with greater than 15% of total structures identified as trailers; the Township of Description: Shippensburg (29%), Township of Middlesex (19%), and Township of Lower Mifflin (16%). At a minimum, activities will include notification to property owners of the increased vulnerability to flood and wind hazards, encouraging the use of mitigation measures such as elevation and anchoring. Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County Planning Department Begin developing outreach materials in 2010. Implementation Schedule: Coordinate with municipal representatives and distribute by 2011. Cumberland County COMMUNITY: ACTION: Develop a countywide Traffic Management Plan. ACTION NO: 26

Category: Emergency Services

Hazard(s) Addressed: Transportation Accidents Prepare a countywide Traffic Management Plan. This plan will improve countywide and regional emergency response through the implementation of Description: several measures including common identification of intersections for all emergency responders and all types of emergency response plans. Cumberland County Department of Public Safety; Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County GIS Department; Cumberland County Special Fire Police Implementation Schedule: In progress. Complete by 2012. COMMUNITY: Cumberland County, Camp Hill ACTION: Develop a countywide Railway Borough, Carlisle Borough, Cooke Township, Management Plan. Dickinson Township, East Pennsboro Township,

160

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 6.4-1: List of 2010 mitigation actions with information including community or communities affected, action category, hazard addressed, action description, lead agency/department and general implementation schedule. Hampden Township, Hopewell Township, Lemoyne Borough, Lower Allen Township, Lower Frankford Township, Lower Mifflin Township, Mechanicsburg Borough, Middlesex Township, Monroe Township, Mount Holly Springs Borough, New Cumberland Borough, Newburg Borough, Newville Borough, North Middleton Township, North Newton Township, Penn Township, Shippensburg Township, Shippensburg Borough, Shiremanstown Borough, Silver Spring Township, South Middleton Township, South Newton Township, Southampton Township, Upper Allen Township, Upper Frankford Township, Upper Mifflin Township, West Pennsboro Township, and Wormleysburg Borough ACTION NO: 27

Category: Emergency Services

Hazard(s) Addressed: Transportation Accidents Develop a Railway Management Plan similar to the Traffic Management Plan that identifies railways Description: (including mile markers), railway crossings, high traffic areas and other information. Use lessons learned from the Traffic Management Plan. Pennsylvania Department of Transportation; Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County Department of Public Safety Implementation Schedule: Complete by 2012. COMMUNITY: Cumberland County, Camp Hill Borough, Carlisle Borough, Cooke Township, Dickinson Township, East Pennsboro Township, Hampden Township, Hopewell Township, Lemoyne Borough, Lower Allen Township, Lower Frankford Township, Lower Mifflin Township, Mechanicsburg Borough, Middlesex Township, Monroe Township, Mount Holly Springs Borough, New Cumberland Borough, Newburg Borough, Newville Borough, North Middleton Township, ACTION: Identify tax-exempt properties and update North Newton Township, Penn Township, missing structural information. Shippensburg Township, Shippensburg Borough, Shiremanstown Borough, Silver Spring Township, South Middleton Township, South Newton Township, Southampton Township, Upper Allen Township, Upper Frankford Township, Upper Mifflin Township, West Pennsboro Township, and Wormleysburg Borough ACTION NO: 28

Category: Public Education and Awareness

161

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Hazard(s) Addressed: Urban Fire Structural information is not up-to-date or accurate for tax-exempt properties. Identify structures that are tax-exempt and therefore lack detailed structural information. Obtain structure information for tax- Description: exempt properties to more accurately represent County structure inventory data which can be used to conduct future urban fire hazard vulnerability analyses. Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County GIS Department

Implementation Schedule: Complete by 2013

COMMUNITY: Cumberland County ACTION: Assist with coordination between County residents and utility companies on critical outage ACTION NO: 29 events. Category: Emergency Services

Hazard(s) Addressed: Utility Interruption Coordinate with the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, PEMA and local utilities (PPL, Penelec, Description: Adams Electric, & Met-Ed) to resolve power failures expeditiously, especially for incidents that pose imminent danger to people and property. Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County Department of Public Safety Provide assistance as outage events occur or Implementation Schedule: facilitate meetings for re-occurring or significant events. COMMUNITY: Cumberland County and local municipalities considered at high risk from wildfire hazards including Southampton Township, South Newton Township, Cooke Township, Dickinson ACTION: Expand participation in the Firewise Township, South Middleton Township, Monroe Program. Township, Penn Township, Upper Mifflin Township, and Dickinson Township. ACTION NO: 30

Category: Prevention

Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire The County will facilitate or coordinate expanded participation in the Firewise program and invite a PA DCNR – Bureau of Forestry representative (Rick Deppen, Wildfire Prevention Specialist) to introduce Description: the program to vulnerable municipalities. By learning more about the program and assisting local municipalities in developing Community Wildfire Protection Plans (CWPP), the County hopes to promote participation in Firewise. The CWPPs

162

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 6.4-1: List of 2010 mitigation actions with information including community or communities affected, action category, hazard addressed, action description, lead agency/department and general implementation schedule. should address fuel treatments conducted in critical areas. The White Rock Acres CWPP may serve as a framework for other communities. Cumberland County Department of Public Safety; Lead Agency/Department: Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources – Bureau of Forestry Begin coordination with the Bureau of Forestry in Implementation Schedule: 2010. Increase participation through 2015. COMMUNITY: Cumberland County ACTION: Participate in winter storm exercises. ACTION NO: 31

Category: Emergency Services

Hazard(s) Addressed: Winter Storm; Nor’easter PEMA holds annual winter storm exercises. The Description: County will participate in these exercises as opportunities arise. Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County Department of Public Safety

Implementation Schedule: Participate annually COMMUNITY: Cumberland County, Camp Hill Borough, Carlisle Borough, Cooke Township, Dickinson Township, East Pennsboro Township, Hampden Township, Hopewell Township, Lemoyne Borough, Lower Allen Township, Lower Frankford Township, Lower Mifflin Township, Mechanicsburg Borough, Middlesex Township, Monroe Township, Mount Holly Springs Borough, New Cumberland Borough, Newburg Borough, ACTION: Coordinate with the Pennsylvania Newville Borough, North Middleton Township, Department of Transportation on winter storm North Newton Township, Penn Township, response. Shippensburg Township, Shippensburg Borough, Shiremanstown Borough, Silver Spring Township, South Middleton Township, South Newton Township, Southampton Township, Upper Allen Township, Upper Frankford Township, Upper Mifflin Township, West Pennsboro Township, and Wormleysburg Borough ACTION NO: 32

Category: Emergency Services

Hazard(s) Addressed: Winter Storm; Nor’easter Hold meetings between county maintenance Description: managers and PennDOT to coordinate response activities prior to winter storm season. Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County Department of Public Safety

163

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Implementation Schedule: Coordinate annually COMMUNITY: Cumberland County, Camp Hill Borough, Carlisle Borough, Cooke Township, Dickinson Township, East Pennsboro Township, Hampden Township, Hopewell Township, Lemoyne Borough, Lower Allen Township, Lower Frankford Township, Lower Mifflin Township, Mechanicsburg Borough, Middlesex Township, Monroe Township, Mount Holly Springs Borough, New Cumberland Borough, Newburg Borough, ACTION: Review and update existing ordinances Newville Borough, North Middleton Township, and other regulatory or planning mechanisms with North Newton Township, Penn Township, respect to findings included in the 2010 HMP. Shippensburg Township, Shippensburg Borough, Shiremanstown Borough, Silver Spring Township, South Middleton Township, South Newton Township, Southampton Township, Upper Allen Township, Upper Frankford Township, Upper Mifflin Township, West Pennsboro Township, and Wormleysburg Borough ACTION NO: 33

Category: Prevention – National Flood Insurance Program

Hazard(s) Addressed: All hazards – future development Individual municipalities will review existing zoning ordinances, floodplain ordinances, land-use ordinances, building codes, Comprehensive Plans, and Emergency Operations Plans to incorporate findings of the 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Description: and evaluate whether local planning tools adequately address risk assessment results. This includes an evaluation of snow-removal and emergency access logistics with new development planning and an evaluation of ordinances to standardize hydrant connections. Cumberland County Planning Department; Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County Municipalities Begin in 2010 and complete by 2011; or implement Implementation Schedule: action at time of future update to ordinance, Comprehensive Plan, etc... COMMUNITY: Cumberland County, Camp Hill Borough, Carlisle Borough, Cooke Township, Dickinson Township, East Pennsboro Township, Hampden Township, Hopewell Township, ACTION: Update Geographic Information Systems Lemoyne Borough, Lower Allen Township, Lower data for all critical or vulnerable facilities and Frankford Township, Lower Mifflin Township, distribute maps of facility locations. Mechanicsburg Borough, Middlesex Township, Monroe Township, Mount Holly Springs Borough, New Cumberland Borough, Newburg Borough, Newville Borough, North Middleton Township,

164

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Table 6.4-1: List of 2010 mitigation actions with information including community or communities affected, action category, hazard addressed, action description, lead agency/department and general implementation schedule. North Newton Township, Penn Township, Shippensburg Township, Shippensburg Borough, Shiremanstown Borough, Silver Spring Township, South Middleton Township, South Newton Township, Southampton Township, Upper Allen Township, Upper Frankford Township, Upper Mifflin Township, West Pennsboro Township, and Wormleysburg Borough ACTION NO: 34

Category: Public Education and Awareness

Hazard(s) Addressed: All hazards – critical facilities / vulnerable facilities A significant amount of information on critical facilities information is available at the Cumberland County Department of Public Safety. However, this data does not match files obtained from the Cumberland County GIS Department. Update the County’s inventory of critical facilities with input from local municipalities and centralize the collection of Description: critical facility GIS data into a single dataset. This dataset will be particularly useful for future vulnerability analyses related to hazardous material releases and other hazard assessments. Included in this action should be an evaluation of critical facilities with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of power outage (i.e. hospitals, nursing homes, etc…). Cumberland County Department of Public Safety; Lead Agency/Department: Cumberland County GIS Department Develop a structure for the critical facility geodatabase in 2010. Populate the geodatabase Implementation Schedule: and develop a systematic process for keeping the geodatabase up-to-date in 2011.

Table 6.4-1 lists thirty-four mitigation actions, many of which will require substantial time commitments from staff at the County and local municipalities. Those that participated in the development of the 2010 HMP believe that each of these actions is attainable and can pragmatically be implemented over the next five-year cycle. While all of these activities will be pursued over the next five years, the reality of limited time and resources requires the identification of high priority mitigation actions. Prioritization allows the individuals and organizations involved to focus their energies and ensure progress on mitigation activities.

All mitigation actions were evaluated using the seven criteria which frame the PASTEEL method. These feasibility criteria include: • Political: Does the action have public and political support? • Administrative: Is there adequate staffing and funding available to implement the action in a timely manner?

165

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

• Social: Will the action be acceptable by the community or will it cause any one segment of the population to be treated unfairly? • Technical: How effective will the action be in avoiding or reducing future losses? • Economic: What are the costs and benefits of the action and does it contribute to community economic goals? • Environmental: Will the action provide environmental benefits and will it comply with local, state and federal environmental regulations? • Legal: Does the community have the authority to implement the proposed measure?

The PASTEEL method was presented to meeting attendees at the October 28, 2009 Mitigation Workshop. Attendees were instructed to use political, administrative, social, technical, economic, environmental and legal considerations as a basis for proposing sound mitigation actions and a means of evaluating which of the identified actions should be considered most critical.

FEMA mitigation planning requirements indicate that any prioritization system used shall include a special emphasis on the extent to which benefits are maximized according to a cost-benefit review of the proposed projects. To do this in an efficient manner that is consistent with FEMA’s guidance on using cost-benefit review in mitigation planning, the PASTEEL method was adapted to include a higher weighting for two elements of the economic feasibility factor – Benefits of Action and Costs of Action. This method incorporates concepts similar to those described in Method C of FEMA 386-5: Using Benefit Cost Review in Mitigation Planning (FEMA, 2007).

Those participating in the 2010 HMP provided comments which allowed for the prioritization of the mitigation actions listed in Table 6.4-1 using the seven PASTEEL criteria. In order to evaluate and prioritize the mitigation actions, participants identified favorable and less favorable factors for each action. Table 6.4-2 summarizes the evaluation methodology and provides the results of this evaluation for all thirty-four mitigation actions in two columns. The first results column includes a summary of the feasibility factors, placing equal weight on all factors. The second results column reflects feasibility scores with benefits and costs weighted more heavily; and therefore, given greater priority. A weighting factor of three was used for each benefit and cost element. Therefore, a “+” benefit factor rating equals three pluses and a “-“ benefit factor rating equals three minuses in the total prioritization score.

166

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Figure 6.4-2: Summary of cost-benefit review and prioritization of mitigation actions using PASTEEL methodology. PA STEEL CRITERIA CONSIDERATIONS (+) Favorable (-) Less favorable (N) Not Applicable MITIGATION ACTIONS P A S T E E L Political Administrative Social Technical Economic Environmental Legal

(EQUAL (x3 )

(x3)

NO. NAME gal Challenge

WEIGHTING)

al Support

SUMMARY

COSTSPRIORITIZED)

SUMMARY(BENEFITS & Politic Local Champion Public Support Staffing Funding Allocation Maintenance / Operations Community Acceptance Effect on Segment of Population Technically Feasible Long - Term Solution Impacts Secondary of Action Benefit of Action Cost Contrib utes to Economic Goals Outside Funding Required Effect on Land / Water Effect on Endangered Species Waste HAZMAT /Effect on Site Consistent w/ Community Environmental Goals Consistent w/ Federal Laws State Authority Existing Local Authority Potential Le Participate in the 16 (+) 20 (+) development and continued 1 + + + + - - + + + + N + + + - N N + + + + + - 4 (-) 4 (-) update of Emergency Action 3 (N) 3 (N) Plans. Form a drought emergency 10 (+) 14 (+) working group to resolve 2 - + - + + - - - + + - + + N N + N N + + - - - 9 (-) 9 (-) water conservations 4 (N) 4 (N) enforcement issues. 11 (+) 15 (+) Issue countywide “advisory” 3 - + - + + - - - + N - + + N N + N N + + - + + 7 (-) 7 (-) burn bans. 5 (N) 5 (N) Update and provide more 18 (+) 22 (+) 4 detail to the countywide + + + + + + + + + + + + + N N + N + + + N N + 0 (-) 0 (-) downstream users inventory. 5 (N) 5 (N) Increase participation in 18 (+) 22 (+) 5 FEMA’s Community Rating + - + + + + + + + + + + + + N + N N + + N + + 1 (-) 1 (-) System (CRS) Program. 4 (N) 4 (N) Obtain participating status in 18 (+) 22 (+) 6 the National Flood Insurance + - + + + + + + + + + + + + N N N + + + N + + 1 (-) 1 (-) Program. 4 (N) 4 (N) 11 (+) 15 (+) Acquire more detailed 7 N + N + - - + + + + N + + + N N N N N + N N + 2 (-) 2 (-) structure information. 10 (N) 10 (N) 14 (+) 18 (+) Develop Flood Intensity 8 N + + + + + + + + + N + + N N N N N + + N N + 0 (-) 0 (-) Indicators document. 9 (N) 9 (N)

167

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

(EQUAL (x3 )

(x3)

NO. NAME gal Challenge

WEIGHTING)

al Support

SUMMARY

COSTSPRIORITIZED)

SUMMARY(BENEFITS & Politic Local Champion Public Support Staffing Funding Allocation Maintenance / Operations Community Acceptance Effect on Segment of Population Technically Feasible Long - Term Solution Impacts Secondary of Action Benefit of Action Cost Contrib utes to Economic Goals Outside Funding Required Effect on Land / Water Effect on Endangered Species Waste HAZMAT /Effect on Site Consistent w/ Community Environmental Goals Consistent w/ Federal Laws State Authority Existing Local Authority Potential Le Review the County Act 167 19 (+) 23 (+) 9 Plan for critical flood hazard N + + + + N + + + + N + + + + + N + + + + + + 0 (-) 0 (-) information. 4 (N) 4 (N) 12 (+) 14 (+) Apply for funding to perform 10 + + + + - - + - N - + + - + - N N + + + N N + 6 (-) 8 (-) detailed flood studies. 5 (N) 5 (N) Develop flood mitigation project proposals which are 19 (+) 23 (+) 11 eligible for state and federal + + + + - N + + + + N + + + - + + + + + + + + 2 (-) 2 (-) mitigation grant funding 2 (N) 2 (N) programs. Perform public outreach 13 (+) 17 (+) activities that promote 12 + - + - + N + + + - N + + + N + N N + + - + N 4 (-) 4 (-) reduction in the number of 6 (N) 6 (N) repetitive loss structures. Identify properties in the 17 (+) 20 (+) community at high risk of 13 + + + + + + + - + + + + - + - + + + + + N + - 5 (-) 6 (-) flooding for purposes of 1 (N) 1 (N) property protection. Participate in the NOAA 17 (+) 21 (+) 14 National Weather Service Ice + + + + + + + N + - N + + - + N N + + + + + + 2 (-) 2 (-) Observer Program. 4 (N) 4 (N) Update Annex E regularly and coordinate with state and 17 (+) 21 (+) 15 federal counterparts on + + N + + + + + + + N + + N N N N + + + + + + 0 (-) 0 (-) radiological emergency 6 (N) 6 (N) response.

168

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

(EQUAL (x3 )

(x3)

NO. NAME gal Challenge

WEIGHTING)

al Support

SUMMARY

COSTSPRIORITIZED)

Provide assistance as 14 (+) 18 (+) 16 requested in the development + - N + + - + + + + N + + N - N N + + + + - + 4 (-) 4 (-) of Annex A. 5 (N) 5 (N) 13 (+) 17 (+) Identify point of dispensing 17 + + N + + + + - + + N + + N N N N N N + + + - 2 (-) 2 (-) sites. 8 (N) 8 (N) 13 (+) 17 (+) 18 Identify mass clinic sites. + + N + + + + - + + N + + N N N N N N + + + - 2 (-) 2 (-) 8 (N) 8 (N) 15 (+) 17 (+) Pursue advanced emergency 19 + + + + - + + + + + N + - + - N N N N + + + + 3 (-) 5 (-) response planning efforts. 5 (N) 5 (N) 16 (+) 20 (+) Implement full disclosure of 20 + + + + + + + - + + N + + + N N N + + + N + - 2 (-) 2 (-) sinkhole hazards. 5 (N) 5 (N) 10 (+) 14 (+) Begin inventorying future 21 N - - - + - + + - + + + + + N N N N N + N N + 5 (-) 5 (-) “significant” sinkhole events. 8 (N) 8 (N) 16 (+) 20 (+) Participate in the South- 22 + + + + + N + + + + N + + + N N N + N + N + + 0 (-) 0 (-) Central Task Force. 7 (N) 7 (N) Coordinate with state and 18 (+) 22 (+) federal agencies on potential 23 + + + + + N + + + + N + + + + N N + N + + + + 0 (-) 0 (-) mitigation actions for terrorist 5 (N) 5 (N) activities.

169

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

(EQUAL (x3 )

(x3)

NO. NAME gal Challenge

WEIGHTING)

al Support

SUMMARY

COSTSPRIORITIZED)

SUMMARY(BENEFITS & Politic Local Champion Public Support Staffing Funding Allocation Maintenance / Operations Community Acceptance Effect on Segment of Population Technically Feasible Long - Term Solution Impacts Secondary of Action Benefit of Action Cost Contrib utes to Economic Goals Outside Funding Required Effect on Land / Water Effect on Endangered Species Waste HAZMAT /Effect on Site Consistent w/ Community Environmental Goals Consistent w/ Federal Laws State Authority Existing Local Authority Potential Le 12 (+) 16 (+) Expand participation in the 24 N + - + - + + + + + N + + N N N N N N + N + + 2 (-) 2 (-) StormReady Program. 9 (N) 9 (N) Perform public outreach activities which inform manufactured home or 13 (+) 17 (+) 25 commercial trailer owners of + - + - + N + + + - N + + + N + N N + + - + N 4 (-) 4 (-) the increased vulnerability of 6 (N) 6 (N) these structures to natural hazards. 17 (+) 19 (+) Develop a countywide Traffic 26 + + + + + + + + + + + + - + N N N N + + N + + 1 (-) 3 (-) Management Plan. 5 (N) 5 (N) 17 (+) 19 (+) Develop a countywide 27 + + + + - + + + + + + + - + N N N + + + N + + 2 (-) 4 (-) Railway Management Plan. 4 (N) 4 (N) Identify tax-exempt properties 10 (+) 14 (+) 28 and update missing structural N + N + + + + + - + N + + N N N N N N N N N + 1 (-) 1 (-) information. 12 (N) 12 (N) Assist with coordination 10 (+) 14 (+) between County residents 29 N + + + + N + + + - N + + N N N N N N N N N + 1 (-) 1 (-) and utility companies on 12 (N) 12 (N) critical outage events. 16 (+) 20 (+) Expand participation in the 30 N + - + - + + - + + N + + + + + + N + + + + - 4 (-) 4 (-) Firewise Program. 3 (N) 3 (N)

170

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

(EQUAL (x3 )

(x3)

NO. NAME gal Challenge

WEIGHTING)

al Support

SUMMARY

COSTSPRIORITIZED)

SUMMARY(BENEFITS & Politic Local Champion Public Support Staffing Funding Allocation Maintenance / Operations Community Acceptance Effect on Segment of Population Technically Feasible Long - Term Solution Impacts Secondary of Action Benefit of Action Cost Contrib utes to Economic Goals Outside Funding Required Effect on Land / Water Effect on Endangered Species Waste HAZMAT /Effect on Site Consistent w/ Community Environmental Goals Consistent w/ Federal Laws State Authority Existing Local Authority Potential Le 11 (+) 15 (+) Participate in winter storm 31 N + N + + + + + + - N + + N N N N N N + N N + 2 (-) 2 (-) exercises. 11 (N) 11 (N) Coordinate with the 10 (+) 12 (+) Pennsylvania Department of 32 N + N + + + + + + - N + - N + N N N N N N N + 2 (-) 4 (-) Transportation on winter 11 (N) 11 (N) storm response. Review and update existing ordinances and other 18 (+) 22 (+) regulatory or planning 33 + + N + + + + + + + + + + + N + N + + + N + - 1 (-) 1 (-) mechanisms with respect to 4 (N) 4 (N) findings included in the 2010 HMP. Update Geographic Information Systems data for 13 (+) 15 (+) 34 all critical or vulnerable + + N + + + + + + + + + - N N N N N N N N + + 1 (-) 3 (-) facilities and distribute maps 9 (N) 9 (N) of facility locations.

171

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Using cost-benefit weighted prioritization, mitigation actions which received twenty-one or more favorable ratings were considered high priority actions. Actions 4, 5, 6, 9, 11, 14, 15, 23, and 33 are considered high priority mitigation actions. A majority of the political, administrative, social, technical, economic, environmental and legal aspects of these activities are conducive to straightforward and less-complicated implementation. In addition, all of these actions are considered extremely beneficial to mitigation efforts and can be achieved at minimal cost to the County and local municipalities.

Using cost-benefit weighted prioritization, mitigation actions which received seven or more unfavorable ratings are expected to be more difficult to accomplish compared to other mitigation actions. These actions are not considered low priority, particularly since they will likely need more attention than other actions. However, barriers to implementation increase their costs (i.e. political, financial, time, etc…) and therefore reduce overall benefits. There are three actions which fall into this category.

Action 2, “Form a drought emergency working group to resolve water conservation enforcement issues,” seeks to resolve significant problems facing the County and local municipalities in enforcing water conservation measures authorized by the Commonwealth. Local municipalities and local law enforcement do not have the authority or resources to enforce state mandates. While the working group will seek to resolve these issues as they arise, it is unclear whether a resolution can be reached.

Action 3, “Issue countywide ‘advisory’ burn bans,” is designed to resolve some of the difficulties encountered with the issuance of countywide burn bans during drought emergencies. In order for a countywide burn ban to be initiated, approximately ten fire chiefs must send a letter to their district forester requesting a ban. At that point, the district forester will approach the County to issue a countywide ban. The countywide ban must then be in place for thirty days. This is a very bureaucratic process which is very difficult and time-consuming to implement. While it is more efficient to issue burn bans locally, it is unclear whether Action 3 will alleviate the situation of patchwork bans across the County since the decision to authorize them ultimately rests with local municipalities.

Lastly, Action 10, “Apply for funding to perform detailed flood studies,” is included as a call for the County and local municipalities to seek outside funding for detailed flood studies. While countywide Flood Insurance Rate Maps were recently issued to the County, there are still many flood sources in Cumberland County which have not been studied or have only been studied for approximate flooding. In some cases, detailed flood studies have been performed, but are now significantly outdated. Due to the expense of detailed analyses, the County will need to identify and apply for additional funding from state and/or federal sources. The completion of detailed studies will often depend on the availability of these funds, which will likely be limited.

172

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

7. Plan Maintenance 7.1. Update Process Summary Monitoring, evaluating and updating this plan are critical to maintaining its value and success in Cumberland County’s hazard mitigation efforts. Ensuring effective implementation of mitigation activities paves the way for continued momentum in the planning process and gives direction for the future. This section explains who will be responsible for maintenance activities and what those responsibilities entail. It also provides a methodology and schedule of maintenance activities including a description of how the public will be involved on a continued basis. While the methodology and schedule are similar to what is outlined in the 2004 HMP, slight revisions were made based on the County’s experience with maintenance updates between 2004 and 2010. The 2004 maintenance process involved quarterly meetings with the HMSC, citizens, municipal officials and other stakeholders to address mitigation responsibilities. The primary change made to the 2010 HMP reduces the frequency of these meetings so that they are held annually rather than quarterly.

7.2. Monitoring, Evaluating and Updating the Plan Chaired by Kirk Stoner, Director of Planning for the Cumberland County Planning Department, the HMSC established for the 2010 HMP is designated to lead monitoring, evaluation and future update efforts with support and representation from all participating municipalities. The HMSC will coordinate maintenance efforts, but the input needed for effective periodic evaluations will come from community representatives, local emergency management coordinators and planners, the general public and other important stakeholders. The HMSC will oversee the progress made on the implementation of action items identified in the 2010 HMP and modify actions, as needed, to reflect changing conditions. The HMSC will meet annually during the spring months to discuss specific coordination efforts that may be needed with other stakeholders. In addition, it will also serve in an advisory capacity to the Cumberland County Board of Commissioners and the Cumberland County Planning Commission.

Each municipality will designate a community representative to monitor mitigation activities and hazard events within their respective communities. The local emergency management coordinator would be suitable for this role. This individual will be asked to work with the HMSC to provide updates on applicable mitigation actions and feedback on changing hazard vulnerabilities within their community.

Periodic evaluations of the 2010 HMP will take place as deemed necessary by the HMSC during its annual meeting, but no fewer than once every two years. Evaluations of the 2010 HMP will not only include an investigation of whether mitigation actions were completed, but also an assessment of how effective those actions were in mitigating losses. A review of the qualitative and quantitative benefits (or avoided losses) of mitigation activities will support this assessment. Results of the evaluation will then be compared to the goals and objectives established in the plan and decisions will be made regarding whether actions should be discontinued, or modified in any way in light of new developments in the community. Progress will be documented by the HMSC for use in the next HMP update and submitted to the Board of Commissioners.

173

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Upon each HMP evaluation, the HMSC will consider whether applications should be submitted for existing mitigation grant programs. A decision to apply for funding will be based on appropriate eligibility and financial need requirements. The HMSC will also support local and county officials in applying for post-disaster mitigation funds when they are available. All state and federal mitigation funding provided to the County or local municipalities will be reported in subsequent plan updates.

The Cumberland County HMP will be updated every five years, as required by the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, or following a disaster event. Future plan updates will account for any new hazard vulnerabilities, special circumstances, or new information that becomes available. During the five-year review process, the following questions will be considered as criteria for assessing the effectiveness the Cumberland Hazard Mitigation Plan: • Has the nature or magnitude of hazards affecting the County changed? • Are there new hazards that have the potential to impact the County? • Do the identified goals and actions address current and expected conditions? • Have mitigation actions been implemented or completed? • Has the implementation of identified mitigation actions resulted in expected outcomes? • Are current resources adequate to implement the Plan? • Should additional local resources be committed to address identified hazards?

Issues that arise during monitoring and evaluation which require changes to the risk assessment, mitigation strategy and other components of the plan will be incorporated during future updates.

7.3. Incorporation Into Other Planning Mechanisms Upon review of the 2004 HMP, municipalities agreed that minimal action was taken in incorporating the HMP findings into other planning mechanisms. However, with the 2010 HMP, all municipalities are required through plan adoption to review existing zoning ordinances, floodplain ordinances, land-use ordinances and building codes to incorporate findings of the HMP and evaluate whether local planning tools adequately address risk assessment results (see Action 31 in Section 6.4). Based on the results of these evaluations, communities are expected to revise existing local planning and regulatory tools to address local vulnerability to the high and moderate risk hazards identified in this plan. Results of the 2010 HMP will also be incorporated into future updates to the County and municipal Comprehensive Plans and Emergency Operations Plans.

7.4. Continued Public Involvement As was done during development of the 2010 HMP, the HMSC will involve the public during annual meetings or periodic evaluations of the HMP by providing an opportunity to submit comments. The public will have access to the current HMP through their local municipal office or the Cumberland County Planning Department. Information on upcoming events related to the HMP or solicitation for comments will be announced via newsletters, newspapers, mailings and the County website (http://www.ccpa.net/). The public is encouraged to submit comments

174

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan on the HMP at any time. The HMSC will incorporate all relevant comments during the next update of the hazard mitigation plan.

175

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

8. Plan Adoption The Plan was submitted to the Pennsylvania State Hazard Mitigation Officer on December 7, 2009. It was forwarded to FEMA for final review and approval-pending-adoption on June 14, 2010. FEMA granted approval-pending-adoption on . Full approval from FEMA was received on .

This section of the plan includes copies of the local adoption resolutions passed by Cumberland County and its municipal governments as well as a completed Local Mitigation Plan Review Crosswalk. Adoption resolution templates are provided to assist the County and municipal governments with recommended language for future adoption of the HMP.

176

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan County Adoption Resolution

Resolution No. ______Cumberland County, Pennsylvania

WHEREAS, the municipalities of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania are most vulnerable to natural and human-made hazards which may result in loss of life and property, economic hardship, and threats to public health and safety, and

WHEREAS, Section 322 of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) requires state and local governments to develop and submit for approval to the President a mitigation plan that outlines processes for identifying their respective natural hazards, risks, and vulnerabilities, and

WHEREAS, Cumberland County acknowledges the requirements of Section 322 of DMA 2000 to have an approved Hazard Mitigation Plan as a prerequisite to receiving post-disaster Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funds, and

WHEREAS, the Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan has been developed by the Cumberland County Department of Planning and the Cumberland County Department of Public Safety in cooperation with other county departments, local municipal officials, and the citizens of Cumberland County, and

WHEREAS, a public involvement process consistent with the requirements of DMA 2000 was conducted to develop the Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan, and

WHEREAS, the Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan recommends mitigation activities that will reduce losses to life and property affected by both natural and human-made hazards that face the County and its municipal governments,

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the governing body for the County of Cumberland that: • The Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan is hereby adopted as the official Hazard Mitigation Plan of the County, and • The respective officials and agencies identified in the implementation strategy of the Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan are hereby directed to implement the recommended activities assigned to them.

ADOPTED, this ______day of ______, 2010

ATTEST: CUMBERLAND COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

______By ______

By ______

177

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan Municipal Adoption Resolution

Resolution No. ______, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania

WHEREAS, the , Cumberland County, Pennsylvania is most vulnerable to natural and human-made hazards which may result in loss of life and property, economic hardship, and threats to public health and safety, and

WHEREAS, the acknowledges the requirements of Section 322 of DMA 2000 to have an approved Hazard Mitigation Plan as a prerequisite to receiving post-disaster Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funds, and

WHEREAS, a public involvement process consistent with the requirements of DMA 2000 was conducted to develop the Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan, and

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the governing body for the : • The Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan is hereby adopted as the official Hazard Mitigation Plan of the , and • The respective officials and agencies identified in the implementation strategy of the Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan are hereby directed to implement the recommended activities assigned to them.

ADOPTED, this ______day of ______, 2010

ATTEST:

______By ______

By ______

178

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

The date each jurisdiction adopted both the 2004 and 2010 plan is listed in Table 8-1.

Table 8-1: Adoption date of the Hazard Mitigation Plan by Cumberland County and local municipalities. JURISDICTION 2004 HMP ADOPTION DATE 2010 HMP ADOPTION DATE Cumberland County July 12, 2004 Borough of Camp Hill July 14, 2004 Borough of Carlisle August 12, 2004 Township of Cooke July 6, 2004 Township of Dickinson July 19, 2004 Township of East Pennsboro July 7, 2004 Township of Hampden July 29, 2004 Township of Hopewell August 23, 2004 Borough of Lemoyne July 1, 2004 Township of Lower Allen August 23, 2004 Township of Lower Frankford August 3, 2004 Township of Lower Mifflin June 24, 2004 Borough of Mechanicsburg August 3, 2004 Township of Middlesex June 25, 2004 Township of Monroe July 8, 2004 Borough of Mount Holly Springs July 1, 2004 Borough of New Cumberland July 7, 2004 Borough of Newburg July 19, 2004 Borough of Newville July 20, 2004 Township of North Middleton July 1, 2004 Township of North Newton August 3, 2004 Township of Penn July 8, 2004 Township of Shippensburg July 3, 2004 Borough of Shippensburg July 20, 2004 Borough of Shiremanstown August 16, 2004 Township of Silver Spring August 11, 2004 Township of South Middleton August 12, 2004 Township of South Newton July 20, 2004 Township of Southampton July 26, 2004 Township of Upper Allen not provided Township of Upper Frankford July 26, 2004 Township of Upper Mifflin not provided Township of West Pennsboro August 17, 2004 Borough of Wormleysburg August 10, 2004

179

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

9. Apppendices Appendix A – Bibliography

1) American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). 1998. Wind Zones in the United States. Retrieved at: http://www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/saferoom/tsfs02_wind_zones.shtm.

2) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). November, 2009. 2009 H1N1 Flu, Situation Update. Retrieved at: http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/.

3) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). November, 2009. 2009 H1N1 Flu (“Swine Flu”) and You. Retrieved at: http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/qa.htm.

4) Consumer Product Safety Commission. 2003. 2003 Annual Report. Washington, D.C.

5) Cumberland County Office of Emergency Preparedness (Cumberland EOP). August, 1984. Hazards/Vulnerability Analysis – Cumberland County.

6) The Economist Newspaper Limited. 2009. “Glossary of Economic Terms.” Retrieved at: http://www.economist.com/research/economics/alphabetic.cfm?letter=D.

7) Environmental Protection Agency. 2009. “Natural Disaster PSAs.” Retrieved at: http://www.epa.gov/naturalevents/psa.html.

8) Environmental Protection Agency. 2009. “National Priorities List (NPL).” Retrieved at: http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/.

9) Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water Standards and Applied Sciences Division. 1998. Environmental Impacts of Animal Feeding Operations. Washington, D.C.

10) Evans, Barry M., Joy R. Drohan, & Scott B. Dane. 2000. Multi-hazard identification and risk assessment. Pennsylvania State University; Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency.

11) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). July, 2000. Benefit-Cost Analysis of Hazard Mitigation Projects: Tornado and Hurricane Shelter Model.

12) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 1997. Multi-Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment: A Cornerstone of the National Mitigation Strategy. Washington, D.C.

13) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). September, 2002. FEMA 386-1: Getting Started.

14) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). August, 2001. FEMA 386-2: Understanding Your Risks – Identifying Hazards and Estimating Losses.

15) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). April, 2003. FEMA 386-3: Developing the Mitigation Plan.

16) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). August, 2003. FEMA 386-4: Bringing the Plan to Life.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

17) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). May, 2007. FEMA 386-5: Using Benefit-Cost Review in Mitigation Planning.

18) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). May, 2005. FEMA 386-6: Integrating Historic Property and Cultural Resource Considerations into Hazard Mitigation Planning.

19) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). September, 2003. FEMA 386-7: Integrating Manmade Hazards into Mitigation Planning.

20) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). August, 2006. FEMA 386-8: Multijurisdictional Mitigation Planning.

21) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). August, 2008. FEMA 386-9: Using the Hazard Mitigation Plan to Prepare Successful Mitigation Projects.

22) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). July 1, 2008. Local Multi-Hazard Mitigation Planning Guidance.

23) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). January, 2008. National Fire Incident Reporting System 5.0: Complete Reference Guide.

24) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). September 2008. Glossary: Frequently Used Terms for Levee Systems.

25) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). June 4, 2009. Tornado Activity in the United States. Retrieved at: http://www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/saferoom/tsfs02_torn_activity.shtm.

26) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2009. Wind Zones in the United States. Retrieved at: http://www.fema.gov/graphics/library/wmap.gif.

27) Federal Emergency Management Agency Community Information System (FEMA CIS). October 14, 2009. Community Rating System Overview Report.

28) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2009. Community Rating System. Retrieved at: http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip/crs.shtm.

29) Federal Emergency Management Agency – Region III (FEMA – Region III). 2009. Mid-Term Levee Inventory. Philadelphia, PA.

30) Global Security. May, 2009. Flu Pandemics in History. Retrieved at: http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/ops/hsc-scen-3_pandemic-history.htm.

31) Hirst, Eric and Brendan Kirby. 1996. Ancillary Services. Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National Laboratory.

32) Juniata County, PA Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Juniata, PA MJHMP). July, 2008. Appendix C – Hazard Profiles: Civil Disorder.

33) Kochanov, W. E. 1999. Sinkholes in Pennsylvania. Harrisburg, PA: Pennsylvania Geological Survey, 4th ser., Educational Series 11.

34) Makkai, Adam. 1970. “Statistical Aspects of Phrasal Idioms in Modern English.” Proceedings of the 10th International Congress of Linguists, Bucharest, 1967.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

35) McKee, T.B.; N.J. Doesken; and J. Kleist. 1993. The relationship of drought frequency and duration to time scales. Preprints, 8th Conference on Applied Climatology, pp. 179–184. January 17–22, Anaheim, California.

36) Mercer County. 2005. All Hazard Mitigation Plan. Mercer County, PA.

37) Millersville University, Department of Earth Sciences. 2009. Retrieved at: http://www.millersville.edu/esci/geology/.

38) National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), Environmental and Societal Impacts Group, and the American Meteorological Society. 2001. Extreme Weather Sourcebook 2001: Economic and Other Societal Impacts Related to Hurricanes, Floods, Tornadoes, Lightning, and Other U.S. Weather Phenomena. National Center for Atmospheric Research: Boulder, CO.

39) National Climatic Data Center (NCDC). 2009. Retrieved at: http://www4.ncdc.noaa.gov/cgi- win/wwcgi.dll?wwevent~storms.

40) National Climatic Data Center (NCDC). 2007. United State Snow Climatology. Retrieved at: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ussc/index.jsp.

41) National Drought Mitigation Center, University of Nebraska - Lincoln. 2009. Retrieved at: http://drought.unl.edu/.

42) National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). 2007. NFPA 1600: Standard on Disaster/Emergency Management and Business Continuity Programs.

43) National Hurricane Center (NHC). 2009. The Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale (Experimental). Retrieved at: http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/aboutsshs.shtml.

44) National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. July, 2009. “Air Pollution.” Retrieved at: http://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/topics/exposure/air-pollution/.

45) National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association – Hurricane Research Division (NOAA – HRD). 2009. Retreived at: http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/G11.html.

46) National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA). 1995. Tornadoes… Nature’s Most Violent Storms – A Preparedness Guide Including Safety Information for Schools.

47) National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association – National Weather Service (NOAA – NWS). 1998. Northeast Floods of 1996 Disaster Survey Report. Retrieved at: http://www.nws.noaa.gov/oh/hrl/surveys/flood96/index.htm on June 9, 2010.

48) National Research Council. 1986. The Earth’s Electrical Environment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

49) Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources – Bureau of Forestry (DCNR – BOF). September 23, 2009. Personal Communication with Richard Deppen, Wildfire Prevention Specialist.

50) Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources – Bureau of Forestry (DCNR – BOF). May, 2010. Personal Communication with Richard Deppen, Wildfire Prevention Specialist.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

51) Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources – Bureau of Forestry (DCNR – BOF). 2009. Pennsylvania Firewise Community Program. Retrieved at: http://www.dcnr.state.pa.us/FORESTRY/ffp/firewise.aspx.

52) Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR). 2003. Map 68: Density of Mapped Karst Features in South-Central and Southeastern Pennsylvania. Retrieved at: http://www.dcnr.state.pa.us/topogeo/map68/index.aspx.

53) Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR). 2009. Landslides in Pennsylvania. Retreived at: http://www.dcnr.state.pa.us/topogeo/hazards/landslides.aspx.

54) Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR). 2009. Sinkholes in Pennsylvania. Retreived at: http://www.dcnr.state.pa.us/topogeo/hazards/sinkholes.aspx.

55) Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR). October 9, 2009. Counties with Burn Bans. Retrieved at: http://www.dcnr.state.pa.us/forestry/ffp/burnbans.aspx.

56) Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP). May, 2008. 3140-FS-DEP4174: Pennsylvania’s Dam Safety Program Fact Sheet.

57) Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP). Watershed Management Drought Information Center. 2009. Retrieved at: http://www.depweb.state.pa.us/watershedmgmt/cwp/view.asp?a=1435&q=527747.

58) Pennsylvania Department of Health. October 8, 2009. Novel 2009 Influenza A/H1N1 Confirmed and Probable Case Counts in Pennsylvania. Retrieved at: http://www.health.state.pa.us/H1N1Map/.

59) Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency (PEMA). Hazard Mitigation Planning Made Easy!

60) Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency (PEMA). March 6, 2009. Mitigation Ideas: Potential Mitigation Measures by Hazard Type – A Mitigation Planning Tool for Communities.

61) Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency (PEMA). 2007. Pennsylvania’s Hazardous Material Emergency Planning and Response Act 1990-165 - 2007 Annual Report.

62) Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency (PEMA). 2008. Pennsylvania’s Hazardous Material Emergency Planning and Response Act 1990-165 - 2008 Annual Report.

63) Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency (PEMA). November 10, 2009. Savings to the Fund – 2009. Personal communication with Steve Boyer, PLS.

64) Rainer Jr., Kelly Rex et al. June, 1991. “Risk Analysis for Information Technology.” Journal of Management Information Systems. Vol. 8, Issue 1.

65) Robson, John R.K. 1981. Famine: Its Causes, Effects, and Management. New York: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, Inc.

66) Root, S.L. 1978. Atlas 138ab - Geologic Map of the Carlisle and Mechanicsburg Quadrangles, Cumberland County. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection.

67) Spatial Hazard Events and Losses Database for the United States (SHELDUS). 2009. Retrieved at: http://webra.cas.sc.edu/hvri/products/sheldus.aspx.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

68) Tri-County Regional Planning Commission (TCRPC). 2007. 2030 Regional Transportation Plan – 2007 Update: Existing Conditions & Alternatives.

69) Tri-County Regional Planning Commission (TCRPC). July, 2003. Regional Growth Management Plan 2020.

70) United States Army Corps of Engineers Engineer Research and Development Center, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory. 2007. Ice Jams and Ice Jam Flooding. Retrieved at: http://www.crrel.usace.army.mil/icejams/.

71) United States Census Bureau (U.S. Census). 2009. Cumberland County, Pennsylvania Population and Housing Narrative Profile: 2006-2008. Retrieved at: http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/NPTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=05000US42041&- qr_name=ACS_2008_3YR_G00_NP01&-ds_name=&-redoLog=false.

72) United States Census Bureau (U.S. Census). August 26, 2008. Household Income Rises, Poverty Rate Unchanged, Number of Uninsured Down. Washington D.C.: U.S. Census Bureau News. Retrieved at: http://www.census.gov/Press- Release/www/releases/archives/income_wealth/012528.html.

73) United States Census Bureau – Population Division (U.S. Census). June 30, 2009. Population Estimates – Minor Civil Divisions: 2000 to 2008. Retrieved at: http://www.census.gov/popest/cities/SUB-EST2008-5.html.

74) United States Department of Energy. 2005. Liquefied Natural Gas: Understanding the Basic Facts. Washington, D.C.

75) United States Department of Energy. 2000. Report of the US Department of Energy’s Power Outage Study Team Findings and Recommendations to Enhance Reliability from the Summer of 1999. Washington, D.C.

76) United States Department of Health and Human Services (U.S. HHS). 2009. HHS Pandemic Influenza Plan. Retrieved at: http://www.hhs.gov/pandemicflu/plan/appendixb.html.

77) United States Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA). 2009. Retrieved at: http://www.phmsa.dot.gov/hazmat/library/data-stats/incidents.

78) United States Geological Survey, Earthquake Hazards Program. 2009. Retrieved at: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/regional/states/?region=Pennsylvania.

79) United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2009. Toxic Release Inventory. Retrieved at: http://www.epa.gov/TRI/.

80) United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). December 19, 2008. Retrieved at: http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/emerg-preparedness/emerg-classification.html.

81) World Health Organization. November, 2009. Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 – Update 73. Retrieved at: http://www.who.int/csr/don/2009_11_06/en/index.html.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Appendix B – Meeting and Other Participation Documentation

Appendix B-1: Kick-off Meeting Materials

Appendix B-2: Risk Assessment – LEMC Meeting Materials

Appendix B-3: Mitigation Solutions Workshop Materials

Appendix B-4: Public – LEMC Meeting Materials

Appendix B-5: Completed Risk Assessment Worksheets

Appendix B-6: Completed Capability Assessment Surveys

Appendix B-7: Completed HMP Review Worksheets

Appendix B-8: Notification of HMP update from Cumberland County Planning Department to Surrounding Counties

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Appendix B: Summary of participation from local municipalities during the 2010 HMP update. MEETING WORKSHEETS/SURVEYS/FORMS RISK MITIGATION 5-YEAR KICK-OFF RISK CAPABILITY PROJECT MUNICIPALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHOP PUBLIC MEETING PLAN August 26, ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT OPPORTUNITY September 21, October 28, November 16, 2009 REVIEW 2009 SURVEY SURVEY FORMS 2009 2009 WORKSHEET  Camp Hill Borough  Carlisle Borough       Cooke Township    Dickinson Township        East Pennsboro Township        Hampden Township     Hopewell Township       Lemoyne Borough  Lower Allen Township      Lower Frankford Township   Lower Mifflin Township   Mechanicsburg Borough      Middlesex Township  Monroe Township  Mount Holly Springs Borough  New Cumberland Borough   Newburg Borough      Newville Borough     North Middleton Township   North Newton Township       Penn Township       Shippensburg Borough       Shippensburg Township  Shiremanstown Borough       Silver Spring Township South Middleton Township           South Newton Township     Southampton Township       Upper Allen Township   Upper Frankford Township    Upper Mifflin Township   West Pennsboro Township      Wormleysburg Borough

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Appendix C – Hazard Survey Results (Evans et al., 2000)

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Appendix D – Critical Facilities

WITHIN 1½ MILES OF WITHIN 1%- SARA TITLE ANNUAL- WITHIN III OR ¼ FACILITY NAME STREET ADDRESS CITY/STATE/ZIP CHANCE 10 MILES MILES OF FLOOD OF TMI RAIL OR ZONE MAJOR ROAD AIRPORTS Carlisle Business Airport 228 Petersburg Road Carlisle, PA 17013  Newville Regional Airfield 797 Newville Road Shippensburg, PA 17257  Shippensburg Regional Airport 20 Airport Lane Shippensburg, PA 17257  EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE FACILITIES – AMBULANCE Camp Hill Ambulance Association 2198 Walnut Street Camp Hill, PA 17011  Cumberland County American Red Cross 79 East Pomfret Street Carlisle, PA 17013  Cumberland Goodwill EMS 519 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013  Cumberland Valley EMS 235 East King Street Shippensburg, PA 17257  East Pennsboro Ambulance Service, Inc. 750 South Humer Street Enola, PA 17025  Hampden Township Ambulance 295 South Sporting Hill Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17050  Hampden Township Ambulance 1200 Good Hope Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17050  Life Lion Critical Care – Hangar 15 228 Petersburg Road Carlisle, PA 17013  Lower Allen Ambulance Association 2238 Gettysburg Road Camp Hill, PA 17011  New Cumberland Ambulance Association 319 Fourth Street New Cumberland, PA 17070   Newville Community Ambulance - Friendship 15 East Big Spring Avenue Newville, PA 17241  Hose Company #1 Silver Spring Ambulance & Rescue 12 Eleanor Drive New Kingstown, PA 17072  Association West Shore Advanced Life Support Inc. 503 North 21st Street Camp Hill, PA 17011  West Shore EMS Medic 81 2233 Gettysburg Road Camp Hill, PA 17011  West Shore EMS Medic 82 – Mechanicsburg 46 North Market Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  Station

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

WITHIN 1½ MILES OF WITHIN 1%- SARA TITLE ANNUAL- WITHIN III OR ¼ FACILITY NAME STREET ADDRESS CITY/STATE/ZIP CHANCE 10 MILES MILES OF FLOOD OF TMI RAIL OR ZONE MAJOR ROAD West Shore EMS Medic 82 – Upper Allen 104 Gettysburg Pike Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  Station West Shore EMS Medic 83 102 West Ridge Street Carlisle, PA 17013  West Shore EMS Medic 84 (Chambersburg 81 Walnut Bottom Road Shippensburg, PA 17257   Area Advanced Life Support ) West Shore EMS Medic 85 440 Oak Street Lemoyne, PA 17043  West Shore EMS Medic 86 1200 Good Hope Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17050  Yellow Breeches Ambulance 100 Chestnut Street Mount Holly Springs, PA 17065   EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE FACILITIES – DIALYSIS CENTERS 158 South 32nd Street – DCA of Camp Hill Camp Hill, PA 17011  Camp Hill Shopping Center DCA of Carlisle 101 Noble Blvd. Carlisle, PA 17013  DCA of Mechanicsburg (Former Seidle 120 South Filbert Street – Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  Hospital) Fox Building FMC Cooperation 254 East High Street Carlisle, PA 17013   Plaza 21 Dialysis Center 421 North 21st Street Camp Hill, PA  EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE FACILITIES – HOSPITALS Carlisle Regional Medical Center (~200 Beds) 361 Alexander Spring Road Carlisle, PA 17015  Holy Spirit Hospital (~312 Beds) – Healthcare 503 North 21st Street Camp Hill, PA 17011  Management Medical Facilities EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE FACILITIES – REHABILITATION CENTERS Healthsouth Rehab Hospital of 175 Lancaster Blvd. Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  Mechanicsburg Healthsouth Rehab Hospital for Special 4950 Wilson Lane Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  Services HCR Manor Care #583 1700 Market Street Camp Hill, PA 17011  West Shore Health and Rehabilitation 770 Poplar Church Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

WITHIN 1½ MILES OF WITHIN 1%- SARA TITLE ANNUAL- WITHIN III OR ¼ FACILITY NAME STREET ADDRESS CITY/STATE/ZIP CHANCE 10 MILES MILES OF FLOOD OF TMI RAIL OR ZONE MAJOR ROAD EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE FACILITIES – RETIREMENT HOMES OR SENIOR CENTERS Bethany Village Retirement Center 325 Wesley Drive Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  Big Spring Senior Center 91 Doubling Gap Road Newville, PA 17241  Bridges at Bent Creek 2100 Bent Creek Blvd. Mechanicsburg, PA 17050  Camp Hill Care Center 46 Erford Road Camp Hill, PA 17011  Carlisle Senior Action Center 20 E. Pomfret Street Carlisle, PA 17013  Chapel Pointe at Carlisle 770 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA  Church of God Nursing Home 801 North Harrisburg Pike Carlisle, PA 17013  375 Claremont Drive (1000 Claremont Nursing & Rehabilitation Center Carlisle, PA 17013  Claremont Road) Country Meadows – West Shore I 4905 E. Trindle Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  Country Meadows – West Shore II 355 S. Sporting Hill Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  Cumberland Crossings 1 Longsdorf Way Carlisle, PA 17013  Forest Park Health Center 700 Walnut Bottom Road Carlisle, PA  Greenridge Village Complex Big Spring Road Newville, PA 17241  3401 Hartzdale Drive – Suite Lifetime Adult Day Care Camp Hill, PA  132 Manor Care Center 940 Walnut Bottom Road Carlisle, PA  Mary Schaner Senior Center 98 S. Enola Drive Enola, PA 17025  Mechanicsburg Area Senior Adult Center 97 W. Portland Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17050  Messiah Village 100 Mount Allen Drive Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  New Cumberland Senior Center 122 Geary Avenue New Cumberland, PA 17070   Nightingale Nursing Home 1700 Market Street Camp Hill, PA 17011  Sarah A. Todd Home 1000 West South Street Carlisle, PA 

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

WITHIN 1½ MILES OF WITHIN 1%- SARA TITLE ANNUAL- WITHIN III OR ¼ FACILITY NAME STREET ADDRESS CITY/STATE/ZIP CHANCE 10 MILES MILES OF FLOOD OF TMI RAIL OR ZONE MAJOR ROAD Shippensburg Senior Center 56 Cleversburg Road Shippensburg, PA 17257  Thornwald Nursing Home 442 Walnut Bottom Road Carlisle, PA 17013  West Shore Health and Rehab 770 Poplar Church Road Camp Hill, PA 17011  The Woods at Cedar Run 824 Lisburn Road Camp Hill, PA 17011  FIRE DEPARTMENTS – CAMP HILL Camp Hill Fire Department PO Box 633, 2198 Walnut St. Camp Hill, PA 17011  FIRE DEPARTMENTS – CARLISLE Carlisle Barracks Fire Company Carlisle Barracks, Bldg. 400 Carlisle, PA 17013  Cumberland-Goodwill Fire & Rescue 102 West Ridge Street Carlisle, PA 17013  Empire Friendship Firefighters Association 177 Spring Rd. Carlisle, PA 17013  Union Fire Company 35 W. Louther St. Carlisle, PA 17013  FIRE DEPARTMENTS – EAST PENNSBORO Citizens Fire Company #1 230 N. Enola Dr. Enola, PA 17025  Creekside Fire Company 13 E. Dulles Dr. Camp Hill, PA 17011  Goodwill Fire Company #1 400 Third St. West Fairview, PA 17025  Midway Fire Company of Enola 17 E. Manor Ave. Enola, PA 17025  Summerdale Fire Company 202 Third St., Box 89 Summerdale, PA 17093  West Enola Fire Company 118 Chester Rd. Enola, PA 17025  FIRE DEPARTMENTS – TOWNSHIP OF HAMPDEN Hampden Twp. Fire Station 1200 Good Hope Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17050  Hampden Twp. Volunteer Fire Company 295 S. Sporting Hill Rd. Mechanicsburg, 17055  Naval Inventory Control Point Fire Division Code 8914, Box 2020 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  FIRE DEPARTMENTS – LOWER ALLEN

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

WITHIN 1½ MILES OF WITHIN 1%- SARA TITLE ANNUAL- WITHIN III OR ¼ FACILITY NAME STREET ADDRESS CITY/STATE/ZIP CHANCE 10 MILES MILES OF FLOOD OF TMI RAIL OR ZONE MAJOR ROAD Lisburn Community Fire Company 1800 Main St.-R. #3 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050  Lower Allen Fire Company – Station #2 800 Rupp Avenue Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  Lower Allen Fire Company – Station #1 2233 Gettysburg Road Camp Hill, PA 17011  FIRE DEPARTMENTS – MOUNT HOLLY SPRINGS Citizens Fire Company #1 100 Chestnut St. Mt. Holly Springs, PA 17065  FIRE DEPARTMENTS – MECHANICSBURG Citizens Fire Company #2 208 South York St. Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  Washington Fire Company 53 E. Main St. Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  FIRE DEPARTMENTS – MONROE Monroe Fire Company PO Box 1058-1225 Peffer Rd. Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 FIRE DEPARTMENTS – NEW CUMBERLAND New Cumberland Fire Department 319 Fourth Street New Cumberland, PA 17070   New Cumberland River Rescue 1125 Market Street New Cumberland, PA 17070   FIRE DEPARTMENTS – NEWBURG/HOPEWELL Newburg-Hopewell Volunteer Fire Company PO Box 5, 106 N. High St. Newburg, PA 17240 FIRE DEPARTMENTS – NEWVILLE Friendship Hose Company #1 15 East Big Spring Ave. Newville, PA 17241  FIRE DEPARTMENTS – TOWNSHIP OF NORTH MIDDLETON North Middleton Twp. Volunteer Fire 310 North Middleton Rd. Carlisle, PA 17013 Company (Station #1) North Middleton Twp. Volunteer Fire 2061 Spring Road Carlisle, PA 17013  Company (Station #2) FIRE DEPARTMENTS – TOWNSHIP OF PENN Penn Twp. Volunteer Fire Department 1750 Pine Rd. Newville, PA 17241 

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

WITHIN 1½ MILES OF WITHIN 1%- SARA TITLE ANNUAL- WITHIN III OR ¼ FACILITY NAME STREET ADDRESS CITY/STATE/ZIP CHANCE 10 MILES MILES OF FLOOD OF TMI RAIL OR ZONE MAJOR ROAD FIRE DEPARTMENTS – SHIPPENSBURG Cumberland Valley Hose Company 56 West King St. Shippensburg, PA 17257   Vigilant Hose Company 129 East King Street Shippensburg, PA 17257  West End Fire & Rescue 49 Lurgan Ave. Shippensburg, PA 17257  FIRE DEPARTMENTS – SHIREMANSTOWN Shiremanstown Fire Company 3 West Main St. Shiremanstown, PA 17011  FIRE DEPARTMENTS – SILVER SPRING New Kingstown Fire Company 277 Locust Point Rd. New Kingstown, PA 17072  Silver Spring Fire Company 6471 Carlisle Pike Mechanicsburg, PA 17050  FIRE DEPARTMENTS – SOUTH MIDDLETON South Middleton Twp. Fire Company PO Box 93, 405 Forge Rd. Boiling Springs, PA 17007  FIRE DEPARTMENTS – SOUTH NEWTON South Newton Twp. Volunteer Fire Company PO Box 49, 16 Firehouse Rd. Walnut Bottom, PA 17266  FIRE DEPARTMENTS – UPPER ALLEN Upper Allen Twp. Fire Company 104 Gettysburg Pike Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  FIRE DEPARTMENTS – UPPER FRANKFORD Upper Frankford Twp. Fire Company 4080 Enola Rd. Newville, PA 17241 FIRE DEPARTMENTS – WEST PENNSBORO West Pennsboro Volunteer Fire Company 200 Park Rd. Plainfield, PA  FIRE DEPARTMENTS – WEST SHORE BUREAU OF FIRE West Shore Bureau Fire Station #1 18 Market St. Wormleysburg, PA 17043  West Shore Bureau Fire Station #2 326 Herman Ave. Lemoyne, PA 17043  POLICE STATIONS

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

WITHIN 1½ MILES OF WITHIN 1%- SARA TITLE ANNUAL- WITHIN III OR ¼ FACILITY NAME STREET ADDRESS CITY/STATE/ZIP CHANCE 10 MILES MILES OF FLOOD OF TMI RAIL OR ZONE MAJOR ROAD Camp Hill Borough Police (~11 officers) 2145 Walnut St. Camp Hill, PA 17011  Carlisle Borough Police (~33 officers) 240 Lincoln Street Carlisle, PA 17013  Colonel Denning State Park Police 1599 Doubling Gap Road Newville, PA 17241 Cumberland County Sheriff's Department One Courthouse Square Carlisle, PA 17013  (~34 officers) Dickinson College Department of Public 400 West North Street Carlisle, PA 17013  Safety East Pennsboro Township Police (~18 officers 98 S. Enola Dr. Enola, PA 17025  & ~3 community officers) Hampden Township Police (~19 officers) 230 South Sporting Hill Rd. Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  Kings Gap Environmental Police 500 Kings Gap Road Carlisle, PA 17015 Lower Allen Township Police (~19 officers & 2233 Gettysburg Road Camp Hill, PA 17011  ~24 community officers) Lower Allen Township Police – Mall Capital Mall Drive Camp Hill, PA 17011  Substation Mechanicsburg Borough Police (~16 officers) 102 West Allen St. Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  Middlesex Township Police(~16 officers & ~1 350 N. Middlesex Rd., Suite Carlisle, PA 17013 community officer) #3 Mount Holly Springs Borough Police (~5 200 Harman St. Mt. Holly Springs, PA 17065  officers) New Cumberland Borough Police (~7 officers) 1120 Market St. New Cumberland, PA 17070   Newville Borough Police (~6 officers & ~8 23 West Big Spring Avenue Newville, PA 17241  community officers) North Middleton Township Police(~10 officers 2051 Spring Rd. Carlisle, PA 17013 & ~8 community officers) Pine Grove Park Ranger 1100 Pine Grove Road Gardners, PA 17324 Pennsylvania State Police 1538 Commerce Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

WITHIN 1½ MILES OF WITHIN 1%- SARA TITLE ANNUAL- WITHIN III OR ¼ FACILITY NAME STREET ADDRESS CITY/STATE/ZIP CHANCE 10 MILES MILES OF FLOOD OF TMI RAIL OR ZONE MAJOR ROAD Pennsylvania State Police – Newville 248 Center Road Newville, PA 17241  Barracks (PA Turnpike) Shippensburg Borough Police (~16 officers & 60 West Burd Street Shippensburg, PA 17013   ~4 community officers) Shippensburg Campus Police Shippensburg University Shippensburg, PA 17257  Shiremanstown Police Department 1 Park Lane Shiremanstown, PA 17011  Silver Spring Township Police (~11 officers) 6475 Carlisle Pike Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  Upper Allen Township (~14 officers) 100 Gettysburg Pike Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  West Shore Regional Police (~14 officers & 510 Herman Avenue Lemoyne, PA 17043  ~2 community officers) PRISONS Camp Hill State Prison Lisburn Road Camp Hill, PA 17011  Cumberland County Prison 1000 Claremont Road Carlisle, PA 17013  MUNICIPAL & COUNTY FACILTIES Camp Hill Borough Offices 2145 Walnut Street Camp Hill, PA 17011  Carlisle Borough Offices 53 W. South Street Carlisle, PA 17013  Cooke Township Offices 1700 Centerville Road Newville, PA 17241 Cumberland County Courthouse 1 Courthouse Square Carlisle, PA 17013  Cumberland County Public Safety Department 1000 Claremont Road Carlisle, PA 17013  Dickinson Township Offices 219 Mountain View Road Mt. Holly Springs, PA 17065  East Pennsboro Township Offices 98 S. Enola Drive Enola, PA 17025  Hampden Township Offices 230 S. Sporting Hill Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  Hopewell Township Office 415 Three Square Hollow Rd Newburg, PA 17240 Lemoyne Borough Offices 665 Market Street Lemoyne, PA 17043  Lower Allen Township Offices 2213 Gettysburg Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

WITHIN 1½ MILES OF WITHIN 1%- SARA TITLE ANNUAL- WITHIN III OR ¼ FACILITY NAME STREET ADDRESS CITY/STATE/ZIP CHANCE 10 MILES MILES OF FLOOD OF TMI RAIL OR ZONE MAJOR ROAD Lower Frankford Township Offices 1205 Easy Road Carlisle, PA 17013 Lower Mifflin Township Offices 529 Shed Road Newville, PA 17241 Mechanicsburg Borough Offices 36 W. Allen St. Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  350 N. Middlesex Road, Suite Middlesex Township Offices Carlisle, PA 17013 1 Monroe Township Offices 1220 Boiling Springs Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Mount Holly Springs Borough Offices 200 Harman Street Mount Holly Springs, PA 17065  Newburg Borough Offices 4 W. Main Street Newburg, PA 17240 New Cumberland Borough Offices 1120 Market Street New Cumberland, PA 17070   Newville Borough Offices 4 West Street Newville, PA 17241  North Middleton Township Offices 2051 Spring Road Carlisle, PA 17013  North Newton Township Offices 433 Oakville Road Shippensburg, PA 17257 Penn Township Offices 1301 Centerville Road Newville, PA 17241  Shippensburg Borough Offices 111 N. Fayette Street Shippensburg, PA 17257   Shippensburg Township Offices 81 Walnut Bottom Road Shippensburg, PA 17257   Shiremanstown Borough Offices 1 Park Lane Shiremanstown, PA 17011  Silver Spring Township Offices 6475 Carlisle Pike Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  Southampton Township Offices 200 Airport Road Shippensburg, PA 17257  South Middleton Township Offices 520 Park Drive Boiling Springs, PA 17007  South Newton Township Offices 11 High Mountain Road Walnut Bottom, PA 17266  Upper Allen Township Offices 100 Gettysburg Pike Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  Upper Frankford Township Offices 660 Mohawk Road Newville, PA 17241 Upper Mifflin Township Offices 550 Middle Road Newville, PA 17241 West Pennsboro Township Offices 2150 Newville Road Carlisle, PA 17013 

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

WITHIN 1½ MILES OF WITHIN 1%- SARA TITLE ANNUAL- WITHIN III OR ¼ FACILITY NAME STREET ADDRESS CITY/STATE/ZIP CHANCE 10 MILES MILES OF FLOOD OF TMI RAIL OR ZONE MAJOR ROAD Wormleysburg Borough Offices 20 Market Street Wormleysburg, PA 17043  SCHOOLS ABC Bright Beginnings Nursery School 202 W Louther St Carlisle, PA 17013 

Allen Middle School 4226 Gettysburg Rd Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Apple Dumpling Gang 718 Hogestown Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 

Bellaire Elementary 900 Waggoners Gap Rd Carlisle, PA 17013 

Best Friends Daycare Center 206 Bridge Street New Cumberland, PA 17070  

Bethel Christian Academy & Day Care 1413 Holly Pike Carlisle, PA 17015 

Bethel Preeschool & Day Care 1412 Holly Pike Carlisle, PA 17015 

Bible Baptist School 202 W Main St Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Big Spring Administration Office 46 Mt Rock Rd Newville, PA 17241 

Big Spring Middle School 46 Mt Rock Rd Newville, PA 17241 

Big Spring Senior High School 101 Mt Rock Rd Newville, PA 17241 

Boiling Springs High School 4 Forge Rd Boiling Springs, PA 17007 

Brerean Christian Day School 13 Windy Hill Rd Newville, PA 17241

Broad Street Elementary 200 S. Broad Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 

Brookside Montessori School 3709 Rosemont Ave Camp Hill, PA 17011 

CAIU Cedar Run Center 901 Lisburn Rd Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Camp Hill Administration Office 2628 Chestnut St Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Camp Hill High School 101 S 24th St Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Camp Hill Middle School 101 S 24th St Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Camp Hill Presbyterian Day Care 101 N. 23rd Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

WITHIN 1½ MILES OF WITHIN 1%- SARA TITLE ANNUAL- WITHIN III OR ¼ FACILITY NAME STREET ADDRESS CITY/STATE/ZIP CHANCE 10 MILES MILES OF FLOOD OF TMI RAIL OR ZONE MAJOR ROAD Capital Area Children's Center 44 S. 38th Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Capital Area Intermediate Service Center 56 Miller St Enola, PA 17025 

Carlisle Administration Office 624 W Penn St Carlisle, PA 17013 

Carlisle Army War College 123 Forbes Ave Carlisle, PA 17013 

Carlisle Arts Learning Center 20 N Hanover St Carlisle, PA 17013 

Carlisle Community Nursery School 529 Garland Dr Carlisle, PA 17013 

Carlisle Early Education Center 100 E. Pomfret Street Carlisle, PA 17013 

Carlisle Early Education Center 101 E Pomfret St Carlisle, PA 17013 

Carlisle Parks & Recreation Stuart Community 416 Franklin St Carlisle, PA 17013  Center Carlisle YMCA Child Development Center 311 S. West Street Carlisle, PA 17013 

Cedar Cliff High School Carlisle & Warwick Rd Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Central Pennsylvania College College Hill Rd & Valley Rd Enola, PA 17025 

Cherub Montessori Center 323 W. First Street Boiling Springs, PA 17007 

Chesterbrook Academy 1871 Center Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Child Bright Learning Center 5013 Trindle Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 

Child Care Network 1417 Trindle Rd Carlisle, PA 17015 

Children Center of Camp Hill 417 S. 22nd Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Childrens Center @ Hoover Elementary 420 S. 24the Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Childrens Center @ Sheaffer Elementary 2900 Walnut Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Children's Family Care 101 Mt Allen Dr Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 

Children's Family Center 100 Mount Allen Drive Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 

Children’s School of New Cumberland 617 Sixteenth Street New Cumberland, PA 17070  

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

WITHIN 1½ MILES OF WITHIN 1%- SARA TITLE ANNUAL- WITHIN III OR ¼ FACILITY NAME STREET ADDRESS CITY/STATE/ZIP CHANCE 10 MILES MILES OF FLOOD OF TMI RAIL OR ZONE MAJOR ROAD Childtime Inc. 50 Alexander Spring Road Carlisle, PA 17013 

Childtime SACC @ Hamilton Elementary 735 Clay Street Carlisle, PA 17013 

Childtime SACC @ Letrot Elementary 110 E. South Street Carlisle, PA 17013  

Childtime SACC @ Mooreland Elementary 329 Wilson Street Carlisle, PA 17013 

Crestview Elementary 241 Longs Gap Rd Carlisle, PA 17013 

Cumberland - Perry Vocational 111 Conodoguinet Pkwy Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 

Cumberland Valley Administration Office 6747 Carlisle Pike Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 

Cumberland Valley High School 6746 Carlisle Pike Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 

D. Malenich Family Day Care Home 1160 Belvedere Street Carlisle, PA 17013 

Deborah A. Shover Family Day Care 16 N. 25th Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Diane Palovitz Day Care 348 Blacksmith Road Lower Allen, PA 17011  

Dickinson College High St & College St Carlisle, PA 17013 

Dickinson College Childrens Center 28 Garland Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 

Dickinson School of Law 151 S College St Carlisle, PA 17013 

Discovery School 3711 Trindle Rd Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Eagle View Middle School 6746 Carlisle Pike Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 

East Penn CC @ West Creek Hills 400 Erford Road Camp Hill, PA 17011  Elementary East Pennsboro Administration Office 891 Valley Rd Enola, PA 17025 

East Pennsboro Child Care 890 Valley Road Enola, PA 17025 

East Pennsboro Elementary 841 Panther Pkwy Enola, PA 17025 

East Pennsboro High School 426 Shady Ln Enola, PA 17025 

East Pennsboro Middle School 530 N Enola Dr Enola, PA 17025 

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

WITHIN 1½ MILES OF WITHIN 1%- SARA TITLE ANNUAL- WITHIN III OR ¼ FACILITY NAME STREET ADDRESS CITY/STATE/ZIP CHANCE 10 MILES MILES OF FLOOD OF TMI RAIL OR ZONE MAJOR ROAD Eisenhower Elementary 341 N 21st St Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Emmanuel Baptist Christian Academy 4682 E Trindle Rd Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 

Empire Beauty School 5104 Carlisle Pike Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 

Filbert Street Elementary 506 S Filbert St Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 

Frankford Elementary 3968 Enola Rd Newville, PA 17241

Freis Child Care 38 S. Enola Drive Enola, PA 17025 

Good Hope Middle School 451 Skyport Rd Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 

Good Shepard Catholic Church School 3436 Trindle Rd Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Great Hope Baptist School 111 Fern Ave Carlisle, PA 17013 

Green Ridge Elementary 2 Green Ridge Rd Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 

Hamilton Elementary 736 Clay St Carlisle, PA 17013 

Hampden Elementary 441 Skyport Rd Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 

Harrisburg Academy 11 Erford Rd Lemoyne, PA 17043 

Highland Elementary 1326 Carlisle Rd Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Hildebrant Cumberland County Day Care 1000 Claremont Road Carlisle, PA 17013 

Hillside Elementary Seventh St & Sharon Ave New Cumberland, PA 17070  

Hoover Elementary 421 S 24th St Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Iron Forge Educational Center 5 Forge Rd Boiling Springs, PA 17007 

James Burd Elementary 601 Brad St Shippensburg, PA 17257 

Joan E. Miller Group Day Care Home 17 Kevin Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 

Kidz Quarterz - Carlisle Pike 6260 Carlisle Pike Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 

Kidz Quarterz - Lemoyne 650 N. Twelfth Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

WITHIN 1½ MILES OF WITHIN 1%- SARA TITLE ANNUAL- WITHIN III OR ¼ FACILITY NAME STREET ADDRESS CITY/STATE/ZIP CHANCE 10 MILES MILES OF FLOOD OF TMI RAIL OR ZONE MAJOR ROAD Kinder Care Learning Center 335 Cumberland Parkway Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 

KinderCare Learning Center 3716 Kohler Pl Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Kindercare Learning Center 3715 Kohler Place Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Kindercare Learning Center 730 Wertzville Road Enola, PA 17025 

L. Krick TDBA Cuddle Care Day Care 1882 Ester Drive Carlisle, PA 17013 

Lamberton Middle School 778 S Hanover St Carlisle, PA 17013 

Lambs Gate Childrens Center 6450 Carlisle Pike Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 

Learning & Sharing Child Development 335 Front Street New Cumberland, PA 17070    Learning & Play Center 28 E. Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 

Lemoyne Middle School 702 Market St Lemoyne, PA 17043 

LeTort Elementary 111 E South St Carlisle, PA 17013  

Libby Day Care 42 Holly Estates Drive Gardners, PA 17324

Lincoln Center 20th St & Walnut St Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Little Angels Preschool and Child Care Center 64 E. North Street Carlisle, PA 17013 

Little Lambs Day Care 2135 Ritner Highway Carlisle, PA 17015 

Little Steps Child Care Center 700 Market Street Lemoyne, PA 17043 

Lower Allen Elementary School 4101 Gettysburg Rd Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Magic Years - Camp Hill North 457 N. 21st Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Magic Years - Camp Hill South 1007 Rana Villa Avenue Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Magic Years - Carlisle 14 Brookwood Avenue Carlisle, PA 17015 

Mary Loreman Group Day Care Home 1204 Brandt Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17055

Mechanicsburg Area Administrative Office 501 S Broad St Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

WITHIN 1½ MILES OF WITHIN 1%- SARA TITLE ANNUAL- WITHIN III OR ¼ FACILITY NAME STREET ADDRESS CITY/STATE/ZIP CHANCE 10 MILES MILES OF FLOOD OF TMI RAIL OR ZONE MAJOR ROAD Mechanicsburg Art Center 19 Artcraft Dr Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 

Mechanicsburg Learning Center - Downtown 30 W. Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 

Mechanicsburg Learning Center - Upper Allen 626 Williams Grove Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 

Mechanicsburg Learning Center - West End 841 W. Trindle Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 

Mechanicsburg Middle School 1751 S Market St Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 

Mechanicsburg Senior High School 501 S Broad St Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 

Messiah College College Ave Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 

Middlesex Elementary 251 N Middlesex Rd Carlisle, PA 17013 

Mifflin Elementary 400 Roxbury Rd Newville, PA 17241

Monroe Elementary 1241 Boiling Springs Rd Boiling Springs, PA 17007

Mooreland Elementary 330 Wilson St Carlisle, PA 17013 

Mount Holly Springs Elementary 111 Mooreland Ave Mt Holly Springs, PA 17065 

Mulberry Child Care & Preschool 3710 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 

New Cumberland Middle School 332 8th St New Cumberland, PA 17070  

Newville Elementary 101 Steelstown Rd Newville, PA 17241 

North Dickinson Elementary 152 N Dickinson School Rd Carlisle, PA 17015

Northside Elementary 411 N. Walnut Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 

Oak Flat Elementary 335 Centerville Rd Newville, PA 17241 

Oakwood Baptist Day School 4316 Chestnut St Camp Hill, PA 17011 

P. Creek Day Care Home 576 Mud Level Road Shippensburg, PA 17257

Plainfield Elementary 8 Springview Rd Carlisle, PA 17015

Rainbow Preschool 125 E. Main Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

WITHIN 1½ MILES OF WITHIN 1%- SARA TITLE ANNUAL- WITHIN III OR ¼ FACILITY NAME STREET ADDRESS CITY/STATE/ZIP CHANCE 10 MILES MILES OF FLOOD OF TMI RAIL OR ZONE MAJOR ROAD Rossmoyne Elementary 1256 Rossmoyne Rd Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 

Sara Enck Day Care 574 F. Street Carlisle, PA 17013 

Schaeffer Elementary 2901 Walnut St Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Seventh Day Adventist School 16 Oak Park Ave Carlisle, PA 17015 

Shaull Elementary 1921 Good Hope Rd Enola, PA 17025 

Sheperdstown Elementary 1850 S York St Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 

Shippensburg University 1872 Old Main Dr Shippensburg, PA 17257 

Shiremanstown Elementary 42 S Locust St Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Silver Spring Elementary 6747 Carlisle Pike Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 

Silver Spring Presbyterian Church Preschool 444 Silver Spring Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 

Small Frys Family Day Care 6403 Lexington Drive Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 

Small Steps Day Care 125 Wolfs Bridge Road Carlisle, PA 17013 

South Middleton Administrative Office 4 Forge Rd Boiling Springs, PA 17007 

Sporting Hill Elementary 211 S Sporting Hill Rd Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 

St Joseph's School 411 E Simpson Ferry Rd Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 

St Patrick School 88 Marsh Dr Carlisle, PA 17015 

St. Johns Lutheran Church Day Care 44 W. Main Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 

St. Theresa's School 1211 Bridge St New Cumberland, PA 17070  

Stephanie Orsini Day Care 567 F Street Carlisle, PA 17013 

Swartz High School 624 W Penn St Carlisle, PA 17013 

Tender Loving Care Learning Center 220 St. Johns Church Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Tender Years 204 House Ave Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

WITHIN 1½ MILES OF WITHIN 1%- SARA TITLE ANNUAL- WITHIN III OR ¼ FACILITY NAME STREET ADDRESS CITY/STATE/ZIP CHANCE 10 MILES MILES OF FLOOD OF TMI RAIL OR ZONE MAJOR ROAD The Childrens Center 110 Altoona Avenue Enola, PA 17025 

The Goddard School 4955 Woodland Drive Enola, PA 17025 

The Goddard School 5049 Ritter Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 

The Wonder Years 5005 Carlisle Pike Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 

Trinity High School 3602 Simpson Ferry Rd Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Upper Allen Elementary 1791 S Market St Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 

Uriah United Methodist Church Day Care 925 Goodyear Road Gardners, PA 17324 

V. Hockenberry Day Care Home 167 E. North Street Carlisle, PA 17013 

VITEC Center 5007 Lenker St Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 

W.G. Rice Elementary 805 Holly Pike Mt Holly Springs, PA 17065 

Walnut Bottom Center Preschool 51 Alexander Spring Rd Carlisle, PA 17013 

Washington Heights Elementary 532 Walnut St Lemoyne, PA 17043 

Watch 'Em Grow Childcare 240 S. Sixteenth Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Wee Little Lambs Day Care 202 W. Butler Street Mt Holly Springs, PA 17065 

West Creek Hills Elementary 401 Erford Rd Camp Hill, PA 17011 

Wilson Middle School 901 Waggoners Gap Rd Carlisle, PA 17013 

Yellow Breeches Middle School 4 Forge Rd Boiling Springs, PA 17007 

YMCA of Camp Hill 410 Fallowfield Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 

YMCA Satellite Site 1000 Yverdon Drive Camp Hill, PA 17011 

WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES Carlisle Municipal Authority 54 North Middlesex Road Carlisle, PA 17013  East Pennsboro WWTP 21 Dulles Drive Camp Hill, PA 17011  Hampden Township WWTP 4200 Roth Lane Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

WITHIN 1½ MILES OF WITHIN 1%- SARA TITLE ANNUAL- WITHIN III OR ¼ FACILITY NAME STREET ADDRESS CITY/STATE/ZIP CHANCE 10 MILES MILES OF FLOOD OF TMI RAIL OR ZONE MAJOR ROAD Lemoyne Borough Authority WWTP (receives #3 Lowther Street Lemoyne, PA 17043  from Camp Hill) 120 Limekiln Road (Located Lower Allen Township WWTP New Cumberland, PA 17070   in York County) Mechanicsburg Borough WWTP 842 West Church Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055   Mount Holly Springs Authority WWTP 113 Mill Street Mount Holly Springs, PA 17065   Route 696 & Reasoner Lane, Newburg Authority WWTP Newburg, PA 17240  P.O. Box 128 New Cumberland Borough WWTP 12th & Market Street New Cumberland, PA 17070   Newville Water and Sewer Authority – Cool 77 Cove Avenue Newville, PA 17241  Spring Water Treatment Plant Silver Spring WWTP 60 Millfording Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17050  South Middleton Township WWTP 345 Criswell Drive Boiling Springs, PA 17077   Shippensburg Borough WWTP 963 Avon Drive Shippensburg, PA 17065  Upper Allen WWTP 400 Creekside Drive Grantham, PA 17027  West Pennsboro WWTP 20 Bears Road Carlisle, PA 17015  Wormleysburg WWTP 328 South River Street Wormleysburg, PA 17043   WATER SUPPLY FACILITIES NOTE: This list was obtained from the Cumberland County GIS Department “downstream user inventory.” Ashcombe Vegetable Farm 1506 Williams Grove Rd Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  Big Spring Terrace Mobile Home Park #1 42 Big Spring Terrace Newville, PA 17241  Big Spring Terrace Mobile Home Park #2 710 Meadowbrook Rd Carlisle, PA 17013 Bollinger's Mobile Home Park 338 McAllister Church Rd Carlisle, PA 17013  Bonnie Heights Mobile Home Park 7048 Carlisle Pike Carlisle, PA 17013  Bonny Brook Quarries 102 Bonnybrook Carlisle, PA 17013  Carlisle Borough Municipal Authority 53 West South St Carlisle, PA 17013  Carlisle Borough Water Authority 53 West South St Carlisle, PA 17013 

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

WITHIN 1½ MILES OF WITHIN 1%- SARA TITLE ANNUAL- WITHIN III OR ¼ FACILITY NAME STREET ADDRESS CITY/STATE/ZIP CHANCE 10 MILES MILES OF FLOOD OF TMI RAIL OR ZONE MAJOR ROAD Carlisle Suburban Authority 240 Clearwater Dr Carlisle, PA 17013   Country Manor Mobile Home Park 6476 Carlisle Pike Carlisle, PA 17055  Donald Deckman 1100 Park Place Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Hempt Brothers 205 Creek Rd Camp Hill, PA 17011   Hempt Brothers Instream Division 205 Creek Rd Camp Hill, PA 17011  Hempt Brothers Quarry 205 Creek Rd Camp Hill, PA 17011  Hillside Mobile Home Park 338 McAllister Church Road Carlisle, PA 17055  J.T. Derrick Pond Withdraw 1100 Mountain Dr Newburg, PA 17240 Meadows Water Company 6476 Carlisle Pike Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  Mechanicsburg Water Company #1 317 North Market Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  Mechanicsburg Water Company #2 317 North Market St Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  Middlesex Twp. Municipal Authority 259 W. Middlesex Dr Carlisle, PA 17013  Mountain View Mobile Home Park 15 South Hanover St Carlisle, PA 17013  Mt. Holly Dielectric 1 Mountain Street Mt. Holly Springs, PA 17065  Mt. Holly Springs Water Company #1 100 Chestnut Street Mt. Holly Springs, PA 17065  Mt. Holly Springs Water Company #2 100 Chestnut Street Mt. Holly Springs, PA 17065  Mountain Mobile Home Park 122 Woods Dr Mechanicsburg, PA 17055  Nelson Mobile Home Park 16 Betty Nelson Ct Carlisle, PA 17013 Newville Borough Municipal 4 West Street Newville, PA 17241  PA American Water Company #1 Mountain Street Enola, PA 17025  PA American Water Company #2 852 Wesley Dr Camp Hill, PA 17011  Regency Woods Mobile Home Park 831 Market St., P.O. Box 222 Lemoyne, PA 17043  Ritnor Manor Mobile Home Park 322 South Hanover St Carlisle, PA 17013  Shippensburg Water System 60 W. Burd St Shippensburg, PA 17257 

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

WITHIN 1½ MILES OF WITHIN 1%- SARA TITLE ANNUAL- WITHIN III OR ¼ FACILITY NAME STREET ADDRESS CITY/STATE/ZIP CHANCE 10 MILES MILES OF FLOOD OF TMI RAIL OR ZONE MAJOR ROAD Sigman's Mobile Home Park 50 Bonnybrook Road Carlisle, PA 17013  Suncrest Gardens 816 Holly Pike Mt. Holly Springs, PA 17065  U.S. Army War College Carlisle Barracks Carlisle, PA 17013  Union Quarries 102 Bonnybrook Rd Carlisle, PA 17013  White Rock Water Company 1369 Swope Drive Boiling Springs, PA 17007  Williams Grove Mobile Home Park 1300 West Lisburn Rd Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Appendix D: Map showing approximate critical facility locations across Cumberland County.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Appendix E – SARA Title III Facilities

Appendix E: List of SARA Title III facilities. WITHIN POPULATION FLOOD WITHIN 1.5 NAME ADDRESS MUNICIPALITY ZONES MILES OF FACILITY 1% 0.2%

ABF Freight 2001 Harrisburg Pike Township of Middlesex 2,016 N N

Acuity Brands Lighting 7 Logistics Dr Borough of Carlisle 2,973 N N

ADM Alliance Nutrition 2000 Hummel Ave Township of Lower Allen 19,076 N N

ADM Milling 817 Spangler Rd Borough of Camp Hill 17,787 N N

Aero Energy Bulk Storage 811 Newville Rd Township of North Middleton 17,333 N N

Ahistrom Technical Specialities 2 Yates St Borough of Mount Holly Springs 2,297 Y N

Amerigas Propane 1031 Ritner Hwy Township of Shippensburg 8,103 N N

Amerigas Propane LLC 40 Roadway Dr Township of Middlesex 1,710 N N

Ames True Temper Hardware 465 Railroad Ave Township of Hampden 14,561 N N

Amstead Rail 3430 Simpson Ferry Township of Lower Allen 19,201 N N

Andersen Logistic 1400 Distribution Dr Township of North Middleton 2,282 N N

Andersen Logistics 1627 Ritner Hwy Borough of Carlisle 3,343 N N

Applied Industrial Technologies 1103 Claremont Rd Township of Middlesex 6,321 N N

Aqua Specialists 160 Silver Spring Rd Township of Hampden 9,815 N N

Arnold Transportation 451 Freight St Township of Hampden 20,692 N N

Ashcombe Farms 906 W Grantham Rd Township of Monroe 3,395 N N

AT&T 545 Beinheisel Br. Township of Middlesex 3,144 N N

Atlas Roofing Corporation 817 Spangler Rd Borough of Camp Hill 17,592 N N

Bimbo Bakeries 1605 Shearer Dr Borough of Carlisle 3,126 N N

Blue Beacon of Carlisle 40 Clinton Ave Township of Middlesex 1,417 N N

Borders Inc. 1501 Distribution Dr Township of North Middleton 1,649 N N

Carlisle Armory 504 Calvary Rd Township of North Middleton 14,715 N N

Carlisle Borough WWTP 54 N Middlesex Rd Township of Middlesex 924 N N

Carlisle Coatings & Waterproofing 1275 Ritner Hwy Borough of Carlisle 14,317 N N

Carlisle Old Sewer Plant Post Rd Township of North Middleton 12,707 N N

Carlisle Suburban Propane 530 E. North St Borough of Carlisle 17,863 N N

Carlisle Swim Club 1286 S Pitt St Ext Township of South Middleton 11,836 N N

Carlisle Syntec 1295 Ritner Hwy Borough of Carlisle 13,220 N N

Carlisle Water Treatment Plant 165 Longs Gap Rd Township of North Middleton 13,147 N Y

Carlisle WG Pump Station Waggoners Gap Rd Township of North Middleton 15,773 N N

Carolina Logistics Services LLC 100 Louis Parkway Township of Silver Spring 1,905 N N

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Appendix E: List of SARA Title III facilities. WITHIN POPULATION FLOOD WITHIN 1.5 NAME ADDRESS MUNICIPALITY ZONES MILES OF FACILITY 1% 0.2%

Coca-Cola 230 S Tenth St Borough of Lemoyne 17,083 N N

Colt Plumbing 1132 W Trindle Rd Township of Silver Spring 1,404 N N

Comcast of Southeast PA 905 Wertzville Rd Township of East Pennsboro 14,410 N N

Country Manor West Berneisel Bridge Rd Township of Middlesex 2,746 N N

Creekview Mobile Home Park 493 Potato Rd Township of Upper Frankford 1,027 N N

Crown Bolt HD Supply 1400 Distribution Dr Township of North Middleton 1,771 N N

Cumberland Co Landfill 620 Newville Rd Township of North Newton 650 N N

Dairy Farmers of America 4825 Gettysburg Rd Township of Lower Allen 12,785 N N Dept. of the Army/US Army Carlisle Barracks Township of North Middleton 19,606 N N Garrison Dickinson College 28 N College St Borough of Carlisle 20,726 N N

Domestic Casting 222 N Queen St Township of Shippensburg 9,814 N N

East Penn Public Works 645 Tower Rd Township of East Pennsboro 8,747 N N

East Penn WWTP 21 E Dulles Dr Township of East Pennsboro 11,829 N Y

EDS Information Services 225 Grandview Ave Township of East Pennsboro 14,981 N N

EDS Information Services 5450 Carlisle Pike Township of Hampden 12,366 N N

EDS Information Systems 4600 Westport Dr Township of Lower Allen 12,871 N N

Elantic Telcom, Regen Facility 800 Ayers Ave Borough of Lemoyne 17,089 N N

EnerSys 25 Utley Dr Township of Lower Allen 13,321 N N

Exel 36 E Main St Township of Silver Spring 2,462 N N

Exel Logistics 6360 Brackbill Blvd Township of Hampden 13,476 N N 350 Salem Church Exel Logistics Township of Hampden 10,407 N N Rd 300 Salem Church Exel Logistics Township of Hampden 10,614 N N Rd 260 Salem Church Exel Logistics Township of Hampden 9,826 N N Rd 597 Alexander Spg Exel Logistics Township of South Middleton 1,937 N N Rd Exel SJ Johnson 5 True Temper Dr Township of Dickinson 1,194 N N

FM Oppel 145 S Enola Dr Township of East Pennsboro 14,592 N N

Fry Communications (B 1&2) 800 W. Church Rd Borough of Mechanicsburg 13,474 N N

Fry Communications, Bldg 4 101 Fry Dr Township of Silver Spring 2,515 N N

FS Growmark 520 E North St Borough of Carlisle 17,900 N N

FS Growmark - Newville 25 McFarland Ave Borough of Newville 3,011 N N

Geodis America Inc. 180 Kost Rd Township of Silver Spring 2,248 N N

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Appendix E: List of SARA Title III facilities. WITHIN POPULATION FLOOD WITHIN 1.5 NAME ADDRESS MUNICIPALITY ZONES MILES OF FACILITY 1% 0.2%

Giant Food Distribution Center 1621 Industrial Dr Borough of Carlisle 3,676 N N

Gulf Oil Company 5125 Simpson Ferry Township of Hampden 15,099 N N

Hampden Township Park and Pool 5001 Park St Ext Township of Hampden 14,551 N N Hampden Township Pinebrook 547 Lamp Post Ln Township of Hampden 14,613 Y N WTP Hampden Township Roth Lane 4200 Roth Ln Township of Hampden 11,123 N N WTP Hampden Twp Pump Station #5 990 Lambs Gap Rd Township of Hampden 8,921 Y N

Hampden Twp. Pump Station #16 99 NW Perimeter Rd Township of Hampden 11,273 N N

Hampden Twp. Recreation Facility 4202 Roth Ln Township of Hampden 10,866 N N

Hempt Brothers 205 Creek Rd Township of Lower Allen 11,750 N N

Hempt Brothers Inc. 55 Locust Point Rd Township of Silver Spring 1,510 N N

Hempt Brothers Quarry 4700 Carlisle Rd Township of Dickinson 516 N N

Huntsdale Fish Culture Station 195 Lebo Rd Township of Penn 881 Y N

JLG Industries 560 Walnut Bottom Township of Southampton 1,600 N N

Kesslers Inc. 1201 Hummel Ave Borough of Lemoyne 18,259 N N Knouse Fruitlands - Peach Glen 62 Peach Glen Rd Township of Dickinson 259 N N Farm Knouse Fruitlands Oakwood Farm 501 Oxford Rd Township of South Middleton 933 N N

Kough's Oil W Main St Borough of Newville 3,158 N N

Kuehne & Nagel Inc. 1501 Distribution Dr Township of North Middleton 1,699 N N

Land O Lakes 405 Park Drive Township of South Middleton 2,692 N N

Lemoyne Co. CTSI 1201 Hummel Ave Borough of Lemoyne 18,816 N N

Level 3 Communications 5095 Ritter Rd Township of Lower Allen 12,264 N N

Lowe's of Carlisle 850 E High St Borough of Carlisle 17,899 N N

Lowe's of Mechanicsburg 5500 Carlisle Pike Township of Hampden 12,420 N N

Mechanicsburg WWTP 842 W Church Rd Borough of Mechanicsburg 13,167 N N

Messiah College 1 College Ave Township of Upper Allen 7,764 N Y

MH Technologies LLC 1 Mountain St Borough of Mount Holly Springs 3,670 N N

Middlesex Twp Reservoir 10 Reservoir Dr Township of Middlesex 786 N N

Mt Holly Spring WWTP 11-13 Mill St. Borough of Mount Holly Springs 3,582 Y N

Mt Holly Springs Boro Well Site 403 McLand Road Township of South Middleton 3,607 N N

Naval Support Activity 5450 Carlisle Pike Township of Hampden 15,621 N N

Nestel Purina Pet Care 6509 Brandy Ln Township of Hampden 15,964 N N

New England Motor Freight 2800 Appleton St Township of Lower Allen 11,054 N N

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Appendix E: List of SARA Title III facilities. WITHIN POPULATION FLOOD WITHIN 1.5 NAME ADDRESS MUNICIPALITY ZONES MILES OF FACILITY 1% 0.2%

New Penn Motor Express 475 Terminal St Township of Hampden 19,701 N N

Newville Water Treatment Plant 77 Cove Ave Borough of Newville 3,133 N N

Newville WWTP 99 Cove Ave Borough of Newville 3,133 N N

Norfolk Southern Rail Corp 218 N Enola Dr Township of East Pennsboro 11,224 N N

North Middleton Authority 240 Clearwater Dr Township of North Middleton 6,912 N Y

PA American Water Company 109 Sample Bidge Rd Township of Silver Spring 4,478 N N

Pennsy Supply 400 Mtn. View Rd Township of Dickinson 1,564 N N

Pennsy Supply Pennsy Dr Township of Penn 824 N N

Pennsy Supply 6470 Carlisle Pike Township of Silver Spring 5,946 N N

Penske Logistics 6 Logistics Dr Borough of Carlisle 2,328 N N

Penske Truck Leasing 7039 Carlisle Pike Township of Silver Spring 2,181 N N

Pepsi Bottling Group 375 Shippensburg Rd Township of North Newton 3,030 N N

Peters Orchard - Wolf Farm 288 Oxford Rd Township of South Middleton 990 N N

Petroleum Products 127 Texaco Rd Township of Silver Spring 4,591 N N

PP&L 100 Commerce Dr Township of Silver Spring 2,902 N N

PPG Industries 400 Park Drive Township of South Middleton 2,903 N N

PPL Martins Creek Arcona Rd. Township of Lower Allen 4,404 N N

Purina Feed, LLC 475 St. Johns Church Township of Hampden 14,649 N N

Reckitt Benckiser 360 Independence Dr Township of Upper Allen 13,660 Y N

Regency South MHP 130 Rex Rd Township of Middlesex 1,920 N N

Relient Energy - MCT Zion Rd Township of South Middleton 3,013 N N

Ryder Transportation 6330 Baseshore Rd Township of Hampden 10,269 N N

Safety Kleen 10 Eleanor Dr Township of Silver Spring 2,551 N N

Schneider National 1 Schneider Dr Township of Middlesex 2,073 N N

Schreiber Foods 208 E Dykeman Rd Borough of Shippensburg 10,871 N N

Schreiber Foods 301 E Dykeman Rd Borough of Shippensburg 10,905 N N

Shipley Energy Carlisle Bulk Plt 125 Garrison Ln Borough of Carlisle 18,765 N N

Shipley Mech Bulk Plant 604 E Locust St Township of Hampden 17,495 N N

Shippensburg Boro Well Site #1 White House Rd Township of Southampton 1,069 Y N

Silver Spring Wastewater 60 Milfording Rd Township of Silver Spring 7,095 N N

SMT Pump Station #1 222 Mill St Township of South Middleton 3,149 Y N

SMT Pump Station #2 188 Fairview St Township of South Middleton 4,312 N N

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Appendix E: List of SARA Title III facilities. WITHIN POPULATION FLOOD WITHIN 1.5 NAME ADDRESS MUNICIPALITY ZONES MILES OF FACILITY 1% 0.2%

SMT Pump Station #3 21 Pine Rd Township of South Middleton 3,587 Y N

SMT Pump Station #5 1507 Commerce Ave Township of South Middleton 2,241 N N

SMT Pump Station #9 5 Well House Ln Township of South Middleton 6,911 N N

Solideal USA 1031 Columbus Ave Borough of Lemoyne 17,066 N N

South Middleton Twp Well Site #1 19 Pump Hose Rd Township of South Middleton 1,854 N N

South Middleton Twp Well Site #2 640 W First St Township of South Middleton 3,761 N N

South Middleton Twp Well Site #3 3 Well House Ln Township of South Middleton 7,146 N N

South Middleton Twp WWTP 345 Criswell Dr Township of Monroe 1,701 Y N

State Correctional Institute 2500 Lisburn Rd Township of Lower Allen 11,739 N N

Sunoco Partners Terminal 5145 Simpson Ferry Township of Hampden 15,026 N N

The Hershey Company 101 Commerce Dr Township of Silver Spring 3,491 N N

The Home Depot 6000 Carlisle Pike Township of Hampden 11,156 N N

The Home Depot 1013 S Hanover St Borough of Carlisle 15,700 N N

Tyco 1311 South Market St Township of Upper Allen 14,612 N N

Union Quarry 102 Bonnybrook Rd Township of South Middleton 8,503 N N

UPS Freight 6060 Carlisle Pike Township of Hampden 10,121 N N

USF Glenmore 1711 Shearer Dr Borough of Carlisle 2,125 N N

UTA of PA dba Embarq 6 N Corporation St Borough of Newville 3,095 N N

UTC of PA dba Embarq 21 N Morris St Township of Shippensburg 8,859 N N

UTC of PA dba Embarq 120 W High St Borough of Carlisle 20,898 N N

UTC of PA dba Embarq 1201 Walnut Bottom Township of South Middleton 4,186 N N

UTC of PA dba Embarq 110 W Pine St Borough of Mount Holly Springs 3,728 N N

Valley Quarries 24 W. Garfield St Borough of Shippensburg 9,755 N N

Valley Quarries 470 Newville Rd Township of Southampton 606 Y N

Verizon CH Dial Tone Office 125 S 30th St Borough of Camp Hill 19,596 N N

Verizon Enola Dial Office 16 E ManorAve Township of East Pennsboro 14,096 N N

Verizon Mechanicsburg Dial Office 14 N High St Borough of Mechanicsburg 14,880 N N

Verizon NC Dial Office 902 Front St Borough of New Cumberland 8,179 N N

Verizon Newville 1022 Newville Rd Township of North Newton 658 N N

Verizon Wireless 2875 Appleton St Township of Lower Allen 11,069 N N

Ward Trucking 1115 Slate Hill Rd Township of Lower Allen 15,583 N N

Warrell Corporation 1250 Slate Hill Rd Township of Lower Allen 11,104 N N

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Appendix E: List of SARA Title III facilities. WITHIN POPULATION FLOOD WITHIN 1.5 NAME ADDRESS MUNICIPALITY ZONES MILES OF FACILITY 1% 0.2%

Waste Management 4300 Industrial Park Township of Hampden 16,907 N N

Wenger Meats and Ice 511 E Louther St Borough of Carlisle 19,791 N N

YRC Inc 100 Roadway Dr Township of Middlesex 1,706 N N

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Appendix E: Map of 161 SARA Title III Facilities, major transportation routes and railways used to identify populations vulnerable to hazardous materials.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Appendix F – Dam Failure Hazard Profile

4.3.12.1 Location and Extent Dam failures most often occur during or after a massive rainfall, flooding, or spring thaws, sometimes with little to no warning. Depending on the size of the water body where the dam is constructed, water contributions may come from distant upstream locations. There are many small farm dams throughout Cumberland County that pose minimal potential threat; however, there are seven dams located within the County which require Emergency Action Plans (see Figure 4.3.12-1). Four of these seven dams are identified as high-hazard (see Section 4.3.12.2 for discussion of high-hazard dams); two of the seven dams do not currently have Emergency Action Plans in place: • Children’s Lake Dam: This non-high-hazard dam owned by the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission is located in South Middleton Township. There is no Emergency Action Plan currently on file. • Carlisle Raw Water Intake Dam: This non-high-hazard dam is located in North Middleton Township. An Emergency Action Plan has been developed for this dam. • Laurel Lake Dam: A high-hazard dam owned by the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources located in Pine Grove Furnace State Park in Cooke Township, a mountainous, seasonally populated area. An Emergency Action Plan and inundation maps have been developed for this dam. • Opossum Lake Dam: A high-hazard dam located on a Commonwealth Fire Commission Lake in the Lower Frankford Township, a sparsely populated community. In a June 23, 2003 article in the Pittsburgh Tribune Review, Opossum Lake Dam was listed an “unsafe” high-hazard dam by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection. An Emergency Action Plan has been developed for this dam. The lake is currently drained and the dam is being replaced with construction scheduled to begin in February 2010. • Oyler Lake Dam: This high-hazard dam is located in Dickinson Township. An Emergency Action Plan and inundation maps have been developed for this dam. • Tolland Quarry Dam: This non-high-hazard dam located in Dickinson Township is owned by Hempt Brothers. At the time of production of the 2010 HMP, an engineering firm submitted documentation on behalf of Hemp Brothers which provided evidence for removal of the high hazard designation for this dam. The Pennsylvania DEP is in the process of evaluating this dam before a decision on revising the category designation is made. There is no Emergency Action Plan currently on file for this dam. • Wolfe Farm Dam: A high-hazard, privately-owned, agricultural dam located in a sparsely populated fruit-production area of South Middleton Township. An Emergency Action Plan has been developed for this dam.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Figure 4.3.12-1: Location of seven high-hazard dams in Cumberland County.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

In addition to the dams listed above, there are two high-hazard dams located outside of Cumberland County which have the potential to affect municipalities within the County. Roxbury Dam is located on the Conodoguinet Creek in Letterkenny Township in Franklin County and has an Emergency Action Plan in place. Raystown Lake Dam is owned by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and is located in Huntington County upstream of the confluence of the Juniata River and the Susquehanna River. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has a federal plan for this dam, but there has been minimal outreach to downstream communities within Cumberland County. Both of these dams would impact riverside communities in Cumberland County in the event of a dam break. While not available for all dams, downstream inundation maps can be obtained from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection.

4.3.12.2 Range of Magnitude Dam failures can pose a serious threat to communities located downstream from major dams. The impact of a dam failure is dependent on the volume of water impounded by the dam and the amount of population or assets located downstream. The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection defines a high hazard dam as “any dam so located as to endanger populated areas downstream by its failure” [Def. added May 16, 1985, P.L.32, No. 15]. While there are approximately 3,200 dams located throughout Pennsylvania, about 780 of them are considered to be high hazard, while the remainder are considered significant or low hazard. High hazard dams receive two inspections each year – once by a professional engineer on behalf of the owner and once by a Department of Environmental Protection inspector (PADEP, 2008).

4.3.12.3 Past Occurrence There have been two significant dam failures in Pennsylvania. The worst dam failure to occur in the U.S. took place in Johnstown, PA in 1889 which claimed 2,209 lives. Another dam failure took place in Austin, PA (Potter County) in 1911 which claimed 78 lives. No significant dam failures have occurred in Cumberland County. According to PEMA, minor dam failures occur annually, but the impact of these events is minimal.

4.3.12.4 Future Occurrence Provided that adequate engineering and maintenance measures are in place, high hazard dam failures are unlikely in Cumberland County. The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection inventories and regulates all dams that meet or exceed the following criteria (PADEP, 2008): • Impound water from a drainage area of greater than 100 acres; • Have a maximum water depth greater than 15 feet; • Have a maximum storage capacity of 50 acre-feet or greater.

The construction, operation, maintenance, modification and abandonment of dams is reviewed and monitored by the Department’s Division of Dam Safety. Dams are evaluated based on categories such as slope stability, undermining seepage and spillway adequacy. The presence of structural integrity and inspection programs significantly reduces the potential for major dam failure events to occur.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

4.3.12.5 Vulnerability Assessment Property and populations located downstream from any dam are vulnerable to dam failure. However, communities downstream of high hazard dams should pay particular attention to inspection and maintenance activities that keep their communities safe. With these activities and oversight from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, vulnerability decreases significantly.

In addition, the County should remain aware of changes that may take place regarding dams outside and upstream of Cumberland County, such as the Roxbury Dam, Raystown Lake Dam and other dams located on the Susquehanna River.

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Appendix G – 2004 HMP Flood Loss Calculation

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Appendix H – Mitigation Projects

Cumberland County 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Appendix I – Local Municipality Flood Vulnerability Maps