DOCSLIB.ORG

2018 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2018 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 2018 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan SUBMITTED BY Sacramento Municipal Utility District 6301 S Street Sacramento, CA 95817 Executive Summary Natural and human-caused hazards affect the lives of people and its communities, financially, economically, and psychologically. They have the potential to disrupt entire communities. Nationwide, taxpayers pay billions of dollars annually to help communities, organizations, businesses, and individuals recover from disasters. This Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) represents the Sacramento Municipal Utility District’s (SMUD’s) commitment to reduce and eliminate where possible, the potential risks and impacts of natural and human-caused hazards. The LHMP serves to help protect SMUD’s assets, customers, and communities by improving disaster preparedness and increasing resiliency. It also serves as a guide for SMUD decision- makers as they commit resources to reducing the effects of potential hazards on SMUD’s energy infrastructure. SMUD’s LHMP is a single-jurisdiction plan that geographically covers all areas where SMUD owns assets and operates critical infrastructure (hereinafter referred to as the plan area). The 2018 LHMP is organized as follow: Section 1 – Introduction Section 2 – Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Overview Section 3 – SMUD Goals and Objectives Section 4 – SMUD Facilities Section 5 – Hazard Identification and Analysis Section 6 – Capability Assessment Section 7 – Mitigation Strategies Section 8 – Plan Review and Implementation Section 9 – Plan Adoption and Maintenance A draft of this plan was posted on smud.org for public comments in advance of the October 2, 2018 SMUD Finance and Audit Committee meeting and will be considered for approval by the SMUD Board of Directors within eight weeks of receipt of approval from California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Table of Contents Section 1 Introduction ............................................................................... 1 Purpose ................................................................................................................. 1 Background ........................................................................................................... 1 Section 2 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Overview .................................. 2 Plan Development Process Overview .................................................................... 2 Organize Resources .............................................................................................. 3 2.2.1 Build the Planning Team .................................................................................... 3 2.2.2 Organizational Involvement ................................................................................ 6 2.2.3 Public Involvement ............................................................................................. 8 2.2.4 Regional Participation ........................................................................................ 9 2.2.5 Review and Incorporate Existing SMUD Information/Documents .................... 11 Assess Risks ....................................................................................................... 13 Develop Mitigation Plan ....................................................................................... 14 Plan Maintenance ................................................................................................ 14 Section 3 SMUD Goals and Objectives .................................................. 15 SMUD Profile ....................................................................................................... 15 The Service Area ................................................................................................. 16 The Electric System ............................................................................................. 19 Purpose and Vision .............................................................................................. 19 Goal and Objectives ............................................................................................ 19 SMUD Capital Projects ........................................................................................ 20 SMUD Priorities ................................................................................................... 20 Section 4 SMUD Facilities ....................................................................... 21 General Facilities ................................................................................................. 21 Power Generation ................................................................................................ 21 4.2.1 Hydroelectric .................................................................................................... 21 4.2.2 Rancho Seco Dam ........................................................................................... 27 i | Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 2018 4.2.3 Wind Energy ..................................................................................................... 28 4.2.4 Solar Photovoltaic ............................................................................................ 29 4.2.5 Local Gas-Fired Plants ..................................................................................... 29 Transmission ....................................................................................................... 30 Distribution ........................................................................................................... 31 Gas Pipeline ........................................................................................................ 31 Other Interest ....................................................................................................... 32 Section 5 Hazard Identification and Analysis ........................................ 33 Hazard Risk Assessment ..................................................................................... 33 Results and Methodology .................................................................................... 33 Hazards Assessment ........................................................................................... 34 Fire Hazards ........................................................................................................ 37 5.4.1 Wildfire Hazards ............................................................................................... 37 5.4.2 Urban Structural Fire Hazards .......................................................................... 48 Flood Hazards ..................................................................................................... 53 5.5.1 Riverine, Stream and Alluvial Flood Hazards ................................................... 56 5.5.2 Sea Level Rise, Coastal Flooding, and Erosion Hazards ................................. 56 5.5.3 Tsunami ........................................................................................................... 56 5.5.4 Levee Failure ................................................................................................... 57 5.5.5 Dam Failure ...................................................................................................... 59 Earthquakes and Geological Hazards ................................................................. 64 5.6.1 Fault Rupture ................................................................................................... 64 5.6.2 Subsidence ...................................................................................................... 65 5.6.3 Liquefaction ...................................................................................................... 66 5.6.4 Landslides ........................................................................................................ 66 5.6.5 Volcanoes ........................................................................................................ 75 Threat and Disturbance Hazards ......................................................................... 79 5.7.1 Terrorism .......................................................................................................... 79 5.7.2 Cyber Threats................................................................................................... 81 Climate Change and Meteorological Hazards ..................................................... 83 ii | Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 2018 5.8.1 Air Pollution ...................................................................................................... 86 5.8.2 Avalanches ....................................................................................................... 86 5.8.3 Droughts and Water Shortages ........................................................................ 87 Energy Shortage .................................................................................................. 92 Severe Weather and Storms.............................................................................. 93 5.10.1 Extreme Heat ................................................................................................. 95 5.10.2 Freeze .......................................................................................................... 100 5.10.3 Fog ............................................................................................................... 101 5.10.4 Severe Thunderstorms, Hail, and Lighting ..................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Staff Summary for April 15-16, 2020
    Item No. 30 STAFF SUMMARY FOR APRIL 15-16, 2020 30. SHASTA SNOW-WREATH CESA PETITION Today’s Item Information ☐ Action ☒ Consider and potentially act on the petition, DFW’s evaluation report, and comments received to determine whether listing Shasta snow-wreath (Neviusia cliftonii) as a threatened or endangered species under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) may be warranted. Summary of Previous/Future Actions • Received petition Sep 30, 2019 • FGC transmitted petition to DFW Oct 10, 2019 • Published notice of receipt of petition Nov 22, 2020 • Public receipt of petition Dec 11-12, 2019; Sacramento • Received DFW 90-day evaluation report Feb 21, 2020; Sacramento • Today, determine if petitioned action Apr 15-16, 2020; Teleconference may be warranted Background A petition to list Shasta snow-wreath as endangered under CESA was submitted by Kathleen Roche and the California Native Plant Society on Sep 30, 2019 (Exhibit 1). On Oct 10, 2019, FGC staff transmitted the petition to DFW for review. A notice of receipt of petition was published in the California Regulatory Notice Register on Nov 22, 2019. California Fish and Game Code Section 2073.5 requires that DFW evaluate the petition and submit to FGC a written evaluation with a recommendation, which was received at FGC’s Feb 21, 2020 meeting. The evaluation report (Exhibit 2) delineates each of the categories of information required for a petition, evaluates the sufficiency of the available scientific information for each of the required components, and incorporates additional relevant information that DFW possessed or received during the review period. Today’s agenda item follows the public release and review period of the evaluation report prior to FGC action, as required in Fish and Game Code Section 2074.
    [Show full text]
  • Ccthe-California-Fire-Chronicles-First
    No Copyright © 2019 by James W. Lee The California Fire Chronicles First Edition Please copy, repost, download, print, share and distribute far and wide at will. ISBN: 9781797668697 Author’s Social Media Sites: You Tube: Aplanetruth3 & (4) WellHealed2 Websites: Aplanetruth.info; Tabublog.com; Wellhealed.life; Avvi.info; Wellnessandwisdom.store; Face Book: JME LEE Author’s Books: Fall of 2019 Dedications This book is dedicated to all who have been displaced and disrupted by the California fires through no fault of their own. They deserve better than how they have been treated by their insurers, their local politicians, their state ‘representatives’, their local & state fire and police agencies, FEMA, and Red Cross. To courageous retired Fire Captains John Lord and Matt Dakin, who boldy went on social media to discuss the many anomalies, inconsistencies and impossibilities, that are occurring with the California fires when no other government or community service officials had the temerity to do. To date, they are STILL the only two experts to speak out, though many professionals are in agreement, in private conversation and do not want to risk their jobs and pensions. And to you, the readers of this books most difficult subjects to comprehend and disseminate. It takes courage, to look at very difficult conclusions to the possibilities that California’s fires were not random or happenstance. It takes will, to want to know the truth, wherever it may lead you. And it takes Love, to heal the wounds from the physical, mental and Spiritual battles we are all facing today. The first steps to any occulted truths are a willingness to want to know rather than beLIEve, trust and blindly accept the official narratives provided by those in Secret Societies with hidden agendas who care not about your safety, or your well-being.
    [Show full text]
  • Situation Reports
    Report ID #: 2018-0910-0152 Weekly Wildfire Brief Provide Feedback on this Report Notice: The information in this report is subject to change and may have evolved since the compiling of this report. BLUE Text = Newly added information and information that has changed since the last wildfire brief. GRAY Text = Infomration where nothing new has been posted since the last wildfire brief, unable to reverify the information as still being current. Inside this Brief: Summary Pg 1 - 2 Wildfire Snapshot Pages Pg 6-28 Weather Information Pg 3 Downloadable Map Files Pg 29 Red Flag Watches & Warnings Pg 4 USGS Debris Flow Hazard Maps Pg 30 Air Quality Maps Pg 4 Recovery Resources Pg 31-32 Significant Fire Potential Maps Pg 5 Reference Links Pg 33 (Previous Brief Published 9/6/18) Wildfire Summary - September 9, 2018 For reference: 1 sq mile = 640 acres ; 1 football field = approx 1.32 acres Acres % Structures Structures Fire Burned Contained Evacuations Page Threatened Destroyed [Change] [Change] Del Norte & Siskiyou Counties 32,398 77% Natchez Fire Warnings None listed None listed 6-7 [+1,125] [+7%] El Dorado County 150 95% Sliger Fire None None listed None listed 8 [+0] [+35%] Lake, Mendocino, Colusa, & Glenn Counties Mendocino 459,123 98% Area None 280 9-11 Complex [+0] [+0%] Closures Madera County Lions Fire 12,990 100% None None None 12 (FINAL) [-357] [+15%] Mono County 6,898 39% Boot Fire Lifted 45 None 13-14 [+1,768] [+39%] Napa County Snell Fire * 2,400 20% YES 180 None 15-16 Placer County 1,120 77% Area North Fire 10 None 17-18 [-154] [+34%]
    [Show full text]
  • Fountain Wind Project Draft
    3. Environmental Analysis 3.16 Wildfire 3.16 Wildfire The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) has assigned a “Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone” rating throughout Shasta County (Shasta County, 2016). Round Mountain, Montgomery Creek, and Burney all are listed as communities at risk by CAL FIRE’s Office of the State Fire Marshal (CAL FIRE, 2019a). This section identifies and evaluates issues related to wildfire in the context of the Project and alternatives. It includes information about the physical and regulatory setting and identifies the criteria used to evaluate the significance of potential impacts, the methods used in evaluating these impacts, and the results of the impact assessment. The Shasta County Fire Department provided initial input and recommendations related to fire prevention for the County’s environmental review process shortly after the CUP application was filed for the Project (Shasta County Fire Department, 2018). Later, in response to the issuance of notice of intention to prepare this Draft EIR, the County received scoping input noting that existing conditions are windy and the terrain is steep (up to 25 percent grade), and that there is a history of lightning strikes and fires, both natural and human-caused, in the area. Options for ingress and egress are limited. Furthermore, the existing forest, which was planted after the Fountain Fire, is mostly pine. Trees are approximately 20 to 30 feet tall and grow 3 to 4 feet apart, deer brush and manzanita grow in the understory, and years’ worth of pine needles cover the forest floor. Input as to potential impacts and mitigation measures also was received.
    [Show full text]
  • Report on Exempt Timber Harvesting for the Reduction of Fire Hazard Within 150 Feet of Structures and Non-Discretionary Timber Harvest Notice Use and Rule Compliance
    DRAFT Report on Exempt Timber Harvesting for the Reduction of Fire Hazard Within 150 Feet of Structures And Non-Discretionary Timber Harvest Notice Use and Rule Compliance July 14, 2021 Thomas W. Porter, Director California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection J. Keith Gilless, Chair State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection Wade Crowfoot, Secretary for Natural Resources California Natural Resources Agency Gavin Newsom, Governor State of California DRAFT A note for reading this report: The nature of monitoring complex regulatory frameworks and ecological variables involves detailed, sometimes complicated quantitative analysis. To help all readers, this report includes: • A detailed Executive Summary of the full report and key findings • Gray text boxes and bolded text within the main body of the report to highlight and summarize each section or important findings, followed by detailed analysis results for readers that wish to know more about the outcomes of the monitoring and findings Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................ iii Monitoring Report on 1038(c) 0-150 Foot Fire Hazard Reduction Exemptions ............... 8 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 8 Background .............................................................................................................. 8 Monitoring Overview ...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • California Fish and Wildlife Journal, Special Fire Issue, 2020
    California Fish and Wildlife SPECIAL ISSUE of Fire on California’s Natural Reso Effects urces Journal for the Conservation and Management of California’s Species and Ecosystems STATE OF CALIFORNIA Gavin Newsom, Governor CALIFORNIA NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCY Wade Crowfoot, Secretary for Natural Resources FISH AND GAME COMMISSION Eric Sklar, President Jacque Hostler-Carmesin, Vice President Russell Burns, Member Peter S. Silva, Member Samantha Murray, Member Melissa Miller-Henson, Executive Director DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Charlton “Chuck” Bonham, Director CALIFORNIA FISH AND WILDLIFE EDITORIAL STAFF Ange Darnell Baker .....................................................................................Editor-in-Chief Lorna Bernard .....................................Office of Communication, Education and Outreach Neil Clipperton, Scott Osborn, Laura Patterson, Dan Skalos, Karen Converse, Kristin Denryter, and Katherine Miller ...........................Wildlife Branch Felipe La Luz and Ken Kundargi ................................................................... Water Branch Jeff Rodzen and Jeff Weaver ..................................................................... Fisheries Branch Cherilyn Burton ..................................................... Habitat Conservation Planning Branch Kevin Fleming .........................................................Watershed Restoration Grants Branch Jeff Villepique and Steve Parmenter .................................................Inland Deserts Region Paul Reilly and James Ray
    [Show full text]
  • The CRA Weekly Wildfire Brief for September 6, 2018
    Report ID #: 2018-0907-0327 Weekly Wildfire Brief Provide Feedback on this Report Notice: The information in this report is subject to change and may have evolved since the compiling of this report. BLUE Text = Newly added information and information that has changed since the last wildfire brief. GRAY Text = Infomration where nothing new has been posted since the last wildfire brief, unable to reverify the information as still being current. Inside this Brief: Summary Pg 1 - 2 Wildfire Snapshot Pages Pg 7-29 State Wildfire Map Pg 3 Downloadable Map Files Pg 30 Weather Information Pg 4 Recovery Resources Pg 31-32 Red Flag Watches & Warnings Pg 5 Reference Links Pg 33 Air Quality Maps Pg 5 Significant Fire Potential Maps Pg 6 (Previous Brief Published 8/31/18) Wildfire Summary - September 6, 2018 For reference: 1 sq mile = 640 acres ; 1 football field = approx 1.32 acres Acres % Structures Structures Burned Contained Evacuations Page Fire Threatened Destroyed [Change] [Change] Del Norte & Siskiyou Counties 31,273 70% Natchez Fire [+4,197] [+0%] Warnings None listed None listed 7-8 El Dorado County Sliger Fire * 150 60% Lifted None listed None listed 9 Lake, Mendocino, Colusa, & Glenn Counties Mendocino 459,123 98% Area None 280 10-12 Complex [+21] [+5%] Closures Madera County 13,347 85% Lions Fire [+357] [+5%] None None None 13 Mono County Boot Fire * 5,130 0% YES 32 None 14-15 Orange & Riverside Counties Holy Fire 23,025 100% (FINAL) [-111] [+7%] None None 24 16 Placer County North Fire * 1,274 43% YES 50 None 17-18 Shasta, Siskiyou,
    [Show full text]
  • Community Wildfire Protection Plan Siskiyou County
    Community Wildfire Protection Plan Siskiyou County Klamathon Fire | July 2018 Happy Complex | August 2014 Boles Fire | September 2014 COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN SISKIYOU COUNTY MUTUAL AGREEMENT PAGE This countywide Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) for Siskiyou County: Was collaboratively developed. Participants included interested residents and citizens, local fire departments, city and county leadership positions, state and federal suppression agencies and other land management entities of Siskiyou County. Is designed to help communities identify and prioritize areas for hazardous fuel reduction treatments and recommends the types and methods of treatment that will protect the communities of Siskiyou County. Identifies current measures to reduce the ignitability of structures throughout the area addressed by the plan. The following entities mutually agree with the contents of this Community Wildfire Protection Plan: Recommended by: ________________________________________________________ Jaime Tarne, President Fire Safe Council of Siskiyou Council Recommended by: ________________________________________________________ Bernie Paul, President Siskiyou County Fire Chiefs Association Recommended by: ________________________________________________________ Brandon A. Criss, Chair Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors Approved by: ____________________________________________________________ Phillip R. Anzo, Unit Chief CAL FIRE Siskiyou ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This CWPP is a community-based resource guide to achieve resilience
    [Show full text]
  • Fire Budget Adjustment Revised
    RESOLUTION NO. 2019-50 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARINA APPROVING BUDGET AMENDMENTS TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT BUDGET IN THE AMOUNT OF $277,000 TO REFLECT STATE OF CALIFORNIA WILDLAND FIRE RESPONSE REIMBURSEMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2018/19 WHEREAS, the City of Marina has responded to a number of wildland fire responses this past year; namely the Airline 2, Ferguson, Cranston, Mendocino Complex, Carr, Stone, Herz, Delta and Camp Fires; and, WHEREAS, the State of California has reimbursed the City of Marina for the cost of this assistance based upon a standardized schedule in the amount of $277,000; and, WHEREAS, the Department has proposed budget adjustments to account for the expenditures incurred with responding to these wildfires; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Marina authorizes the following budget adjustments to the Fire Department’s General Fund FY 2018/19 Budget: All Amounts in Thousands Proposed Budget Adj Expenditures Overtime 168 Materials, Supply, Tools and Eq. 53 100.250.000.00-6400.737 Maintenance and Repairs 19 100.250.000.00-6360.850 Training and Travel 9 100.250.000.00-6500.700 Maintenance and Repair - Other 28 100.250.000.00-6360.566 277 Resolution No. 2019-50 Page Two PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Marina at a regular meeting duly held on the May 7, 2019, by the following vote: AYES, COUNCIL MEMBERS: Berkley, Urrutia, O’Connell, Morton, Delgado NOES, COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT, COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSTAIN, COUNCIL MEMBERS: None Bruce C.
    [Show full text]
  • Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Proposed Post Carr Fire Hazardous Fuels Reduction Area South 299 Shasta County, California
    Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed Post Carr Fire Hazardous Fuels Reduction Area South 299 Shasta County, California prepared by: VESTRA Resources 5300 Aviation Drive Redding, CA 96002 for The McConnell Foundation Under Grant # 18-FP-SHU-1042 September 17, 2020 Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Proposed Post Carr Fire Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project Contents MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION .................................................................................1 Introduction and Regulatory Context ......................................................................................1 Stage of CEQA Document Development ................................................................................1 Introduction ..............................................................................................................................1 Regulatory Guidance ...............................................................................................................1 Purpose of the Initial Study......................................................................................................2 Project Description and Environmental Setting .....................................................................3 Project Location .......................................................................................................................3 Background and Need for the Project ......................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • Make It Matter
    Wildland Fire Lessons Learned Center Est. 2002 2018 Incident Review Summary Make it Matter 1 “It's not what you look at that matters, it's what you see.” Henry David Thoreau Contents 1. Introduction………………………..……….. 2 2. Drawing the Line of Duty……….….…. 3 3. Chainsaws and Drip Torches………… 3 4. Tree Trauma………………………….…….. 5 5. How We Roll.……………………………….. 6 6. Random?..........……………………………. 7 7. Lesson Session……………………………… 8 8. Entrapments………………………………… 9 Use this document in your Instructors: Look at the exercises before class. annual Fire Refresher. Be Prepared. 1. Introduction The information in this report comes from wildland fire incidents—from various agencies—submitted to and gathered by the Wildland Fire Lessons Learned Center (LLC) in 2018. The primary source of data is accident reports (FLA, RLS, SAI, etc.). Most of these reports have been posted to the LCC’s Incident Reviews Database. SAFENETs and other data sources have been included when no actual report could be located. This year we collected information on 160 incidents. We have combed through these reports and extracted specific lessons and compiled a few numbers. Use this information to inform your future operations. Turn these lessons into learning. Throughout this report, this Action Icon identifies training curriculum related to the topic. If you are an instructor, you will need to look at each exercise ahead of time to pull up videos or to print reading material. 2 2. Drawing the Line of Duty We recorded the work-related death of 19 firefighters in 2018. But not everyone is on the same page about which ones should be considered a “Line of Duty Death.” Everyone agrees that if you are overrun by fire or get hit by a tree on the fireline—that is death in the line of duty.
    [Show full text]
  • EDNC Disaster Timeline
    A Timeline of Disasters in The Episcopal Diocese of Northern California | 2014 - 2020 MEGA FIRE 100,000 + ACRES 100000 110000 120000 130000 140000 150000 160000 170000 180000 190000 200000 210000 220000 230000 240000 250000 260000 270000 280000 290000 300000 310000 320000 330000 340000 350000 360000 370000 380000 390000 400000 410000 420000 430000 440000 450000 460000 470000 480000 490000 500000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 45000 50000 55000 60000 65000 70000 75000 80000 85000 90000 95000 5000 Year Month Event County/Counties Deaths Structures Acres 0 July Lodge Lightning Complex Mendocino – 23 12,536 2014 July Day Fire Modoc – 6 13,153 July Bald Fire Shasta – 20 39,736 July Bully Fire Shasta – – 12,661 July Coffee Fire Shasta – – 6,258 July Eiler Fire Shasta – – 32,416 July Beaver Fire Siskiyou – 21 32,496 July Little Deer Fire Siskiyou 1 – 5,503 July Oregon Gulch Fire Siskiyou – – 35,302 July Monticello Fire Yolo – – 6,488 August July Complex Siskiyou – 3 50,042 August South Napa Earthquake Napa, Sonoma – 156 – September King Fire El Dorado – 80 7,717 July Gasquet Complex Del Norte – – 30,361 July Rocky Fire Lake – 40 69,438 2015 July Wragg Fire Napa – 2 8,051 August Nickowitz Fire Del Norte – – 7,509 August Jerusalem Fire Lake, Napa – 28 25,118 September Butte Fire Amador, El Dorado 2 818 70,686 September Valley Fire Lake, Sonoma, Napa 4 1,958 76,067 August Gap Fire Siskiyou – 14 33,867 2016 August Cold Fire Yolo – 2 5,731 January Flooding, PG&E Power Outages Napa, Sonoma, Sutter, 2 – – 188,000 residents evacuated 2017
    [Show full text]