2021 Hurricane Preparedness Guide
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Atlantic Hurricane Season Outlook for June 2020
Atlantic Hurricane Season Outlook for June 2020 ELEVATED U.S. RISKS FROM HURRICANE SEASON 2020 AS VERY BUSY YEAR BEGINS… Outlook Overview ➢ WeatherTiger’s WeatherTiger's June outlook for the 2020 hurricane season is for a 75-80% chance of an above average year, with a 15-20% chance of near-normal and just a 5% chance of below-normal cumulative activity. The median of our forecast is about 180% of average hurricane season activity, or around 19 named storms, nine hurricanes and five major hurricanes. ➢ This is slightly above the consensus of some other recently issued forecasts, likely due to our model's bullishness towards a La Niña developing by late summer or early fall. However, almost all forecast groups project above normal activity. ➢ Overall, while model skill remains limited at this range, convergent lines of evidence from our objective modeling and seasonal analogs support an active season, with the potential for a risky steering current regime in the peak months. Updated Seasonal Outlook for Tropical Cyclone Activity On a lighter note: hurricane season. The devil you know is back. Unlike a pandemic, at least taking down the shutters after a storm won’t make it return. This doesn’t imply that hurricane season 2020 will be reasonable. WeatherTiger’s updated seasonal forecast and a consensus of other guidance favors an abnormally active year. We expect net activity of about three-quarters more than the average season, with 95% odds of more storms than Dr. Birx has scarves. I’ll get into the forecast rationale and what it may mean for Florida, but first, a quick orientation for new readers: I’m Dr. -
Tropical Cyclone Report for Hurricane Ivan
Tropical Cyclone Report Hurricane Ivan 2-24 September 2004 Stacy R. Stewart National Hurricane Center 16 December 2004 Updated 27 May 2005 to revise damage estimate Updated 11 August 2011 to revise damage estimate Ivan was a classical, long-lived Cape Verde hurricane that reached Category 5 strength three times on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale (SSHS). It was also the strongest hurricane on record that far south east of the Lesser Antilles. Ivan caused considerable damage and loss of life as it passed through the Caribbean Sea. a. Synoptic History Ivan developed from a large tropical wave that moved off the west coast of Africa on 31 August. Although the wave was accompanied by a surface pressure system and an impressive upper-level outflow pattern, associated convection was limited and not well organized. However, by early on 1 September, convective banding began to develop around the low-level center and Dvorak satellite classifications were initiated later that day. Favorable upper-level outflow and low shear environment was conducive for the formation of vigorous deep convection to develop and persist near the center, and it is estimated that a tropical depression formed around 1800 UTC 2 September. Figure 1 depicts the “best track” of the tropical cyclone’s path. The wind and pressure histories are shown in Figs. 2a and 3a, respectively. Table 1 is a listing of the best track positions and intensities. Despite a relatively low latitude (9.7o N), development continued and it is estimated that the cyclone became Tropical Storm Ivan just 12 h later at 0600 UTC 3 September. -
A Rapid Forecasting and Mapping System of Storm Surge and Coastal Flooding
AUGUST 2020 Y A N G E T A L . 1663 A Rapid Forecasting and Mapping System of Storm Surge and Coastal Flooding KUN YANG,VLADIMIR A. PARAMYGIN, AND Y. PETER SHENG Department of Civil and Coastal Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida (Manuscript received 16 July 2019, in final form 2 March 2020) ABSTRACT A prototype of an efficient and accurate rapid forecasting and mapping system (RFMS) of storm surge is presented. Given a storm advisory from the National Hurricane Center, the RFMS can generate a coastal inundation map on a high-resolution grid in 1 min (reference system Intel Core i7–3770K). The foundation of the RFMS is a storm surge database consisting of high-resolution simulations of 490 optimal storms generated by a robust storm surge modeling system, Curvilinear-Grid Hydrodynamics in 3D (CH3D-SSMS). The RFMS uses an efficient quick kriging interpolation scheme to interpolate the surge response from the storm surge database, which considers tens of thousands of combinations of five landfall parameters of storms: central pressure deficit, radius to maximum wind, forward speed, heading direction, and landfall location. The RFMS is applied to southwest Florida using data from Hurricane Charley in 2004 and Hurricane Irma in 2017, and to the Florida Panhandle using data from Hurricane Michael in 2018 and validated with observed high water mark data. The RFMS results agree well with observation and direct simulation of the high-resolution CH3D- SSMS. The RFMS can be used for real-time forecasting during a hurricane or ‘‘what-if’’ scenarios for miti- gation planning and preparedness training, or to produce a probabilistic flood map. -
Hurricane and Tropical Storm
State of New Jersey 2014 Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5. Risk Assessment 5.8 Hurricane and Tropical Storm 2014 Plan Update Changes The 2014 Plan Update includes tropical storms, hurricanes and storm surge in this hazard profile. In the 2011 HMP, storm surge was included in the flood hazard. The hazard profile has been significantly enhanced to include a detailed hazard description, location, extent, previous occurrences, probability of future occurrence, severity, warning time and secondary impacts. New and updated data and figures from ONJSC are incorporated. New and updated figures from other federal and state agencies are incorporated. Potential change in climate and its impacts on the flood hazard are discussed. The vulnerability assessment now directly follows the hazard profile. An exposure analysis of the population, general building stock, State-owned and leased buildings, critical facilities and infrastructure was conducted using best available SLOSH and storm surge data. Environmental impacts is a new subsection. 5.8.1 Profile Hazard Description A tropical cyclone is a rotating, organized system of clouds and thunderstorms that originates over tropical or sub-tropical waters and has a closed low-level circulation. Tropical depressions, tropical storms, and hurricanes are all considered tropical cyclones. These storms rotate counterclockwise in the northern hemisphere around the center and are accompanied by heavy rain and strong winds (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA] 2013a). Almost all tropical storms and hurricanes in the Atlantic basin (which includes the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Sea) form between June 1 and November 30 (hurricane season). August and September are peak months for hurricane development. -
Disaster Management of India
DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN INDIA DISASTER MANAGEMENT 2011 This book has been prepared under the GoI-UNDP Disaster Risk Reduction Programme (2009-2012) DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN INDIA Ministry of Home Affairs Government of India c Disaster Management in India e ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The perception about disaster and its management has undergone a change following the enactment of the Disaster Management Act, 2005. The definition of disaster is now all encompassing, which includes not only the events emanating from natural and man-made causes, but even those events which are caused by accident or negligence. There was a long felt need to capture information about all such events occurring across the sectors and efforts made to mitigate them in the country and to collate them at one place in a global perspective. This book has been an effort towards realising this thought. This book in the present format is the outcome of the in-house compilation and analysis of information relating to disasters and their management gathered from different sources (domestic as well as the UN and other such agencies). All the three Directors in the Disaster Management Division, namely Shri J.P. Misra, Shri Dev Kumar and Shri Sanjay Agarwal have contributed inputs to this Book relating to their sectors. Support extended by Prof. Santosh Kumar, Shri R.K. Mall, former faculty and Shri Arun Sahdeo from NIDM have been very valuable in preparing an overview of the book. This book would have been impossible without the active support, suggestions and inputs of Dr. J. Radhakrishnan, Assistant Country Director (DM Unit), UNDP, New Delhi and the members of the UNDP Disaster Management Team including Shri Arvind Sinha, Consultant, UNDP. -
City of Kenner Emergency Operations Plan (COKEOP), Augmenting the Basic Plan (BP)
CITY OF KENNER EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Annex “A” HURRICANE AND STORM PLAN (H&SP) Issued: June 1, 2007 Revised: November 1, 2011 City of Kenner, Louisiana Hurricane and Storm Plan June 1, 2007 I. PURPOSE The purpose of the City of Kenner Hurricane & Storm Plan (hereafter referred to as “Plan” or “H&SP”) is to describe the emergency response of City agencies in the event of a hurricane or severe storm. This document is intended to serve as a guide for the delivery and coordination of governmental services prior to, during, and following a storm incident. The guidelines set forth will facilitate the City’s Emergency Planning Advisory Group (EPAG) and executive’s decision-making regarding preparation, response and management of storm incidents. II. SCOPE This Plan is an administrative directive governing the operations of the City of Kenner, its subordinate agencies and departments. This document in no way purports to cover all aspects of storm related disaster/emergency or recovery management. Rather, it is intended to provide City personnel with an outline of those essential functions and duties to be performed in the event of a hurricane or storm event. - 1 - Revised: November 1, 2011 City of Kenner, Louisiana Hurricane and Storm Plan June 1, 2007 TITLE I. PLAN IMPLEMENTATION III. HURRICANE AND STORM PLAN IMPLEMENTATION The City of Kenner Hurricane and Storm Plan (H&SP) is a component of the City of Kenner Emergency Operations Plan (COKEOP), augmenting the Basic Plan (BP). Upon learning or receiving information from any source of a developing, pending, or actual hurricane or storm event, the Mayor or his/her designee may implement all or any portion of the COKEOP-BP or H&SP. -
A FAILURE of INITIATIVE Final Report of the Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane Katrina
A FAILURE OF INITIATIVE Final Report of the Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane Katrina U.S. House of Representatives 4 A FAILURE OF INITIATIVE A FAILURE OF INITIATIVE Final Report of the Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane Katrina Union Calendar No. 00 109th Congress Report 2nd Session 000-000 A FAILURE OF INITIATIVE Final Report of the Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane Katrina Report by the Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane Katrina Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpoacess.gov/congress/index.html February 15, 2006. — Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed U. S. GOVERNMEN T PRINTING OFFICE Keeping America Informed I www.gpo.gov WASHINGTON 2 0 0 6 23950 PDF For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001 COVER PHOTO: FEMA, BACKGROUND PHOTO: NASA SELECT BIPARTISAN COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE THE PREPARATION FOR AND RESPONSE TO HURRICANE KATRINA TOM DAVIS, (VA) Chairman HAROLD ROGERS (KY) CHRISTOPHER SHAYS (CT) HENRY BONILLA (TX) STEVE BUYER (IN) SUE MYRICK (NC) MAC THORNBERRY (TX) KAY GRANGER (TX) CHARLES W. “CHIP” PICKERING (MS) BILL SHUSTER (PA) JEFF MILLER (FL) Members who participated at the invitation of the Select Committee CHARLIE MELANCON (LA) GENE TAYLOR (MS) WILLIAM J. -
Fishing Pier Design Guidance Part 1
Fishing Pier Design Guidance Part 1: Historical Pier Damage in Florida Ralph R. Clark Florida Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems May 2010 Table of Contents Foreword............................................................................................................................. i Table of Contents ............................................................................................................... ii Chapter 1 – Introduction................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2 – Ocean and Gulf Pier Damages in Florida................................................... 4 Chapter 3 – Three Major Hurricanes of the Late 1970’s............................................... 6 September 23, 1975 – Hurricane Eloise ...................................................................... 6 September 3, 1979 – Hurricane David ........................................................................ 6 September 13, 1979 – Hurricane Frederic.................................................................. 7 Chapter 4 – Two Hurricanes and Four Storms of the 1980’s........................................ 8 June 18, 1982 – No Name Storm.................................................................................. 8 November 21-24, 1984 – Thanksgiving Storm............................................................ 8 August 30-September 1, 1985 – Hurricane Elena ...................................................... 9 October 31, -
Chapter 2.1.3, Has Both Unique and Common Features That Relate to TC Internal Structure, Motion, Forecast Difficulty, Frequency, Intensity, Energy, Intensity, Etc
Chapter Two Charles J. Neumann USNR (Retired) U, S. National Hurricane Center Science Applications International Corporation 2. A Global Tropical Cyclone Climatology 2.1 Introduction and purpose Globally, seven tropical cyclone (TC) basins, four in the Northern Hemisphere (NH) and three in the Southern Hemisphere (SH) can be identified (see Table 1.1). Collectively, these basins annually observe approximately eighty to ninety TCs with maximum winds 63 km h-1 (34 kts). On the average, over half of these TCs (56%) reach or surpass the hurricane/ typhoon/ cyclone surface wind threshold of 118 km h-1 (64 kts). Basin TC activity shows wide variation, the most active being the western North Pacific, with about 30% of the global total, while the North Indian is the least active with about 6%. (These data are based on 1-minute wind averaging. For comparable figures based on 10-minute averaging, see Table 2.6.) Table 2.1. Recommended intensity terminology for WMO groups. Some Panel Countries use somewhat different terminology (WMO 2008b). Western N. Pacific terminology used by the Joint Typhoon Warning Center (JTWC) is also shown. Over the years, many countries subject to these TC events have nurtured the development of government, military, religious and other private groups to study TC structure, to predict future motion/intensity and to mitigate TC effects. As would be expected, these mostly independent efforts have evolved into many different TC related global practices. These would include different observational and forecast procedures, TC terminology, documentation, wind measurement, formats, units of measurement, dissemination, wind/ pressure relationships, etc. Coupled with data uncertainties, these differences confound the task of preparing a global climatology. -
Richmond, VA Hurricanes
Hurricanes Influencing the Richmond Area Why should residents of the Middle Atlantic states be concerned about hurricanes during the coming hurricane season, which officially begins on June 1 and ends November 30? After all, the big ones don't seem to affect the region anymore. Consider the following: The last Category 2 hurricane to make landfall along the U.S. East Coast, north of Florida, was Isabel in 2003. The last Category 3 was Fran in 1996, and the last Category 4 was Hugo in 1989. Meanwhile, ten Category 2 or stronger storms have made landfall along the Gulf Coast between 2004 and 2008. Hurricane history suggests that the Mid-Atlantic's seeming immunity will change as soon as 2009. Hurricane Alley shifts. Past active hurricane cycles, typically lasting 25 to 30 years, have brought many destructive storms to the region, particularly to shore areas. Never before have so many people and so much property been at risk. Extensive coastal development and a rising sea make for increased vulnerability. A storm like the Great Atlantic Hurricane of 1944, a powerful Category 3, would savage shorelines from North Carolina to New England. History suggests that such an event is due. Hurricane Hazel in 1954 came ashore in North Carolina as a Category 4 to directly slam the Mid-Atlantic region. It swirled hurricane-force winds along an interior track of 700 miles, through the Northeast and into Canada. More than 100 people died. Hazel-type wind events occur about every 50 years. Areas north of Florida are particularly susceptible to wind damage. -
Railroad Operational Safety
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH Number E-C085 January 2006 Railroad Operational Safety Status and Research Needs TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2005 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OFFICERS Chair: John R. Njord, Executive Director, Utah Department of Transportation, Salt Lake City Vice Chair: Michael D. Meyer, Professor, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Division Chair for NRC Oversight: C. Michael Walton, Ernest H. Cockrell Centennial Chair in Engineering, University of Texas, Austin Executive Director: Robert E. Skinner, Jr., Transportation Research Board TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2005 TECHNICAL ACTIVITIES COUNCIL Chair: Neil J. Pedersen, State Highway Administrator, Maryland State Highway Administration, Baltimore Technical Activities Director: Mark R. Norman, Transportation Research Board Christopher P. L. Barkan, Associate Professor and Director, Railroad Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign, Rail Group Chair Christina S. Casgar, Office of the Secretary of Transportation, Office of Intermodalism, Washington, D.C., Freight Systems Group Chair Larry L. Daggett, Vice President/Engineer, Waterway Simulation Technology, Inc., Vicksburg, Mississippi, Marine Group Chair Brelend C. Gowan, Deputy Chief Counsel, California Department of Transportation, Sacramento, Legal Resources Group Chair Robert C. Johns, Director, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Policy and Organization Group Chair Patricia V. McLaughlin, Principal, Moore Iacofano Golstman, Inc., Pasadena, California, Public Transportation Group Chair Marcy S. Schwartz, Senior Vice President, CH2M HILL, Portland, Oregon, Planning and Environment Group Chair Agam N. Sinha, Vice President, MITRE Corporation, McLean, Virginia, Aviation Group Chair Leland D. Smithson, AASHTO SICOP Coordinator, Iowa Department of Transportation, Ames, Operations and Maintenance Group Chair L. David Suits, Albany, New York, Design and Construction Group Chair Barry M. -
Emergency Operations Plan
______________________ EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN San Marcos Campus St. Augustine Campus Austin Campus Miami Campus Dallas Campus Rev. September 2019 USAHS EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN 2 Table of Contents I. EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN OVERVIEW ..................................................................... 3 II. CAMPUS OVERVIEW ...................................................................................................................... 3 A. San Marcos, California Campus ....................................................................................................... 3 B. St. Augustine, Florida Campus ......................................................................................................... 3 C. Miami (Coral Gables), Florida Campus ............................................................................................ 3 D. Austin, Texas Campus ...................................................................................................................... 4 E. Dallas, Texas Campus ....................................................................................................................... 4 III. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ................................................................................................. 4 A. Campus Response Team ................................................................................................................... 4 B. Emergency Management Team .......................................................................................................