Hanford City Council
June 18, 2024

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-98

ROW LABELS SUM OF DETERMINED ACRES SUM OF INDEMNITY AMOUNT 2019 104.2 $73,516.60
2020 1,091.3 $169,330.49
2021 6,412.0 $5,439,305.60
Frost/Freeze/Cold Winter 2,931.7 $4,837,850.97
2017 300.8 $315,462.00
2018 2,165.0 $3,536,578.31
2019 111.2 $210,005.56
2020 26.4 $497,612.10
2021 328.3 $278,193.00
Grand Total 12,972.9 $13,712,629.11
Source: USDA RMA Crop Indemnity Reports, 2017 -2021
Cultural, Historic and Natural Resources
Extreme cold can have significant effects on environmental resources, including water, soil, plant, and wildlife resources. In water bodies such as lakes, rivers, and ponds, extreme cold can cause ice cover to form, which can limit the amount of oxygen that is available for aquatic organisms and negatively impact aquatic ecosystems and wildlife. Soil can also freeze during extreme cold temperatures, affecting its health and nutrient availability, which can impact agricultural production. Furthermore, cold temperatures can damage or kill plants, particularly sensitive crops, leading to decreased growth rates and affecting agricultural production. Frost and freeze damage can also impact trees and other vegetation, potentially causing dieback. Wildlife can also be impacted by extreme cold events, with food availability limited, migration patterns altered, and physiological stress caused. In some cases, extreme cold events could lead to mass die-offs of wildlife populations.

Extreme heat can cause an increase in water temperatures in streams, rivers, and lakes. During storm events, increased and warmer runoff from impervious surfaces into streams can lead to a degradation of habitat. This impairs water quality and compromises aquatic species’ metabolism and reproduction.

Elevated water temperatures can inhibit aquatic life, especially if a species can only survive in a small range of water temperatures. The effects of thermal pollution are highly dependent upon air temperature conditions before the storm, suggesting that as temperatures rise, the impacts from heat pollution will also rise (Herb et al, 2008). Increasing temperatures may also cause species to shift habitats in elevation and latitude, and extended periods of extreme heat can stress both flora and fauna species. Extreme heat may cause temporary drought-like conditions. Several weeks of extreme heat will increase evapotranspiration and reduce moisture content in vegetation, leading to higher wildfire vulnerability for that time period even if the rest of the season is relatively moist.

Development Trends
Since structures are not usually directly impacted by extreme temperature fluctuations, continued development is less impacted by this hazard than others in the plan. However, all structures in the planning area will be exposed to extreme weather events. Facilities with back-up generators are better equipped to handle a severe weather situation should the power go out. Additionally, pre-emptive measures such as construction of green buildings that require less energy to heat and cool, use of good insulation on pipes and electric wirings, and smart construction of walkways, parking structures, and pedestrian zones that minimize exposure to severe temperatures may help increase the overall durability of the buildings and the community to temperature variations. Continued development also implies continued population growth, which raises the number of individuals potentially exposed to variations in temperature. Public education efforts should continue to help the population understand the risks and vulnerabilities of outdoor activities, property maintenance, and regular exposures during periods of extreme temperature events.

4.5.6.8 Risk Summary
• Extreme temperatures can have considerable impacts on human health, the natural environment, and the economy.
• On average there are 105.1 days per year above 90°F. The highest recorded temperature for the County was 116°F, while the lowest recorded temperature was 14°F.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-99 • Overall temperatures are expected to rise substantially throughout this century. The daily maximum average temperature is expected to rise by as much as 8.8°F by 2100. • Climate change is expected to result in higher average temperatures and more extreme heat events in the Central Valley. Climate change is also expected to result in more extreme cold events in the US. • The County’s agriculture economy is at risk of extreme temperatures from outdoor laborers being vulnerable to heat illnesses as well as crop losses due to heat, freeze, and frost. • From 2017 to 2021, there were 12,973 acres of crop lost to extreme temperatures and a combined $13 million indemnity payments made for insured crop loss due to freeze/frost and heat events. • The very young, the very old, people with poor physical health and those experiencing homelessness are more susceptible to the impacts of extreme temperatures. • Medicare beneficiaries that rely on electricity-dependent medical equipment and devices to live independently in their homes are also at risk, as any extreme heat or extreme cold event that results in a prolonged power outages can be life-threatening.
• The significance of extreme temperatures in the County is High. • Related hazards – Agricultural Pest and Disease, Drought, Severe Weather, Wildfire

JURISDICTION GEOGRAPHIC
AREA

PROBABILITY

OF FUTURE

OCCURRENCE

MAGNITUDE/

SEVERITY

OVERALL

SIGNIFICANCE

PRIORITY
HAZARD?
Kings County Extensive Highly Likely Limited High Yes
City of Avenal Extensive Highly Likely Limited High Yes City of Corcoran Extensive Highly Likely Limited High Yes City of Hanford Extensive Highly Likely Limited High Yes City of Lemoore Extensive Highly Likely Limited High Yes

4.5.7 FLOOD

4.5.7.1 Hazard Description
A flood is the temporary inundation of water or mud on normally dry land. Heavy or prolonged rain or dam collapse can cause inundation, as can flash floods. Urban flooding occurs in developed areas where the amount of water generated from rainfall and runoff exceeds the stormwater systems’ capacity. As land is converted from agricultural to urban uses, it often loses its ability to absorb rainfall. Rain flows over impervious surfaces such as concrete and asphalt and into nearby storm sewers and streams. This runoff can result in the rapid rise of floodwaters. During urban floods, streets can become inundated, and storm drains often back up because of the volume of water and become blocked by vegetative debris, like yard waste, which can cause additional flooding. Flooding is one of the primary hazards in California, in addition to earthquakes and wildfire.

Floodplains are defined as the areas immediately adjacent to a channel from a river, stream, or other waterway. The area between the floodway and 1% annual chance floodplain boundaries is termed the floodway fringe. The floodway fringe encompasses the portion of the floodplain that could be completely obstructed without increasing the water-surface elevation of the base flood elevation by more than 1 foot at any point. The areas between a waterway and the floodplain are most apparent during and after a flood event. Typical relationships between the floodway, the floodway fringe, and their significance to floodplain development are illustrated in Figure 4-28 below.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-100 Figure 4-28 Floodway Schematic

Source: Guidance for Flood Risk Analysis and Mapping – FEMA, 2019 Floodplains are illustrated on inundation maps, which show areas of potential flooding and water depths.

In its common usage and based on FEMA guidelines, the floodplain most often refers to the area that is inundated by the 1% annual-chance flood. The 1% floodplain is also referred to as the “100-year floodplain,” meaning that it is an area that has a 1% chance of experiencing a flood of a certain magnitude or greater in any given year. Similarly, the 0.2% floodplain is also known as the “500-year floodplain,” meaning that it is an area that has a 0.2% chance of experiencing a flood of a certain magnitude or greater in any given year. The 1%-annual-chance flood is the national minimum standard by which communities regulate their floodplains through the FEMA National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The floodway is the channel of the tributary and the land adjacent to it, whereas the flood fringe (shown above) is the remaining portion of the 100-year floodplain, excluding the floodway.

There are three types of flood events in the County planning area: riverine flooding (which includes flash flooding that can occur along intermittent creeks and channels called arroyos), localized flooding (urban stormwater flooding), and dam and levee incident flooding. These three types of flooding area summarized below.

Riverine flooding – Riverine flooding is a type of flooding that occurs when water levels in a river, stream, or other watercourse rise and overflow their banks, causing water to spread out and flood adjacent areas.

This type of flooding is typically caused by heavy rainfall, snowmelt, or a combination of the two, and can be exacerbated by factors such as deforestation, urbanization, and poor land use practices that increase the amount of runoff entering waterways. Riverine flooding can be particularly dangerous and destructive, as it can cause rapid and unpredictable increases in water levels and currents, and can result in extensive property damage, loss of life, and economic disruption. Riverine flooding in the County can occur in Tulare Lake Basin and also occurs along intermittent creeks and drainages called arroyos, such as the Arroyo Esquinado and Arroyo del Camino near the City of Avenal, that periodically convey water and during storm events runoff from these waterways can also cause flooding.

Localized flooding – Localized flooding is a type of flooding that occurs in a specific area, such as a neighborhood or street, rather than over a large geographic region. This type of flooding is typically caused by heavy rainfall that overwhelms drainage systems or by other local factors that impede the flow of water, such as blocked culverts or poorly designed stormwater infrastructure. Localized flooding can be sudden and intense, and can cause damage to homes, businesses, and infrastructure in the affected area. In some cases, localized flooding can also lead to flash flooding, a particularly dangerous and rapid form of flooding that occurs when water rises rapidly in a short period of time, often with little warning.

Levee Failure – Levees are raised areas along rivers or canals that prevent flooding by confining the water flow. They can be natural or manmade, and are usually made of dirt or concrete. While they provide strong flood protection, they are not failsafe and can be overtopped during severe flood events. Flooding from the failure of levees throughout the County or upstream is also of concern, as there are levees that

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-101 have breached along the Kings River (Serna 2017). The HMPC notes that the Cross Creek and Tule River channels were breached in early 2023. Dam failures or breaches also can result in flooding.

4.5.7.2 Geographic Area
Significant – The County, and in particular the Tulare Lake Basin, once served as the natural drainage of the Kings River, Cross Creek, Kern River, and Tule River as a part of the hydrologic watershed of the Sierra Nevada Mountains along the east side of the San Joaquin Valley. Canal and flood control development in the late 1800s and early 1900s redirected water flow and managed waterways through a series of canals, water storage and agricultural levies (Kings County 2010). This led to the conversion of thousands of acres of lake basin into farmable land.

These waterways and the lake basin remain the predominant flood prone areas as defined by FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs). Historically, floods have been a major cause of disaster in the County, and past flooding events have shown that the lake basin has been turned to as a default emergency overflow for extreme incidences of floodwater (Cassidy, 2023). The primary cause of local flooding is due to the drainage patterns that flow towards the Tulare Lake Basin, in southern Kings County. This area has no outlet to the ocean unless the water is pumped by artificial means out of the Tulare Lake Basin.

FEMA and the Federal Insurance Administration have assessed flood hazards for major streams in Kings County. Projected geographic areas and the extent of flooding are shown in the map on the following page. Figure 4-29 shows the extent of flooding from both a 100‐year (1% annual chance) and 500‐year (0.2% annual chance) flood event. As noted in the County’s 2012 MJHMP, the average flooding season in Kings County occurs from November through June with the rainy season occurring between November and April and snowmelt in the nearby mountainous area occurring from April to June.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-102 Figure 4-29 Kings County FEMA 1% & 0.2 Annual Chance Floodplain

Moreover, Figure 4-30 below shows the extent of a 100-year event based on data compiled by DWR’s Awareness Floodplain Mapping project, which comes from DWR’s Best Available Maps (BAM). These floodplains complement the FEMA 1% & 0.2% annual chance floodplains shown in Figure 4-30 above.

According to DWR’s BAM, no 200-year floodplains based on USACE’s Comprehensive Study are located within the County.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-103 Figure 4-30 Kings County DWR Awareness 100-Year Floodplains

4.5.7.3 Past Occurrences
California has a chronic and destructive flood history. Half of the 72 federally declared disasters in California between 1950 and 2000 were flood-related events. Between 1992 and 2002, every county in California was declared a federal disaster area at least once for a flooding event. Historically, floods have been the most frequent cause of disaster in the County. The primary cause of local flooding is the drainage pattern in the Tulare Lake Basin (Kings County MJHMP, 2012).

Significant flooding occurs in Kings County approximately every five years. Kings County was declared a disaster area by the federal government eight times between 1955 and 2012. FEMA’s Flood Insurance Study (FIS) listed flooding events in 1950, 1952, 1955, 1958, 1962, 1963, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1973, 1978, 1980, 1982, 1985, 1986, 1995, 1997 and 2010. Heavy snow runoff caused flooding in the County in January of 1969.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-104 Kings was the only county designated in
this federal disaster declaration. Damage
included $1.56 million in public costs and
$1.25 million in private costs for a total of
$2.81 million (Kings County MJHMP, 2012)
There have been 11 NCEI recorded flooding
events in Kings County since 2012, detailed
in Table 4-57 below. Significant flooding
also occurred at the beginning of 2023,
during the development of this plan. The
extent of the damage from this recent
flooding event is currently being assessed,
but it necessitated the activation of the
County’s Emergency Operation Center
(EOC) and is likely to have caused
significant damage to agricultural lands,
County roads, bridges, other critical
infrastructure, and substantial disruption
to the local community. The flooding may
have also caused damage to homes and
businesses, which may require extensive
repairs and reconstruction efforts.

Table 4-57 NCEI Recorded Flood Events in Kings County since 2012

DATABASE DECLARATION NUMBER DECLARED DATE DESCRIPTION
NCEI 442261 3/8/2013 Flood
586928 6/5/2015 Flash Flood
677961 1/8/2017 Flood
675398 1/18/2017 Flood
708242 6/22/2017 Flood
779399 10/3/2018 Flash Flood
815477 5/26/2019 Flood
815480 5/26/2019 Flood
816572 6/1/2019 Flash Flood
930572 1/27/2021 Flood
FEMA 4308 4/1/2017 Flood
Source: National Centers for Environmental Information; FEMA

4.5.7.4 Likelihood of Future Occurrence
Highly Likely – Due to the history of past flooding events and the natural drainage pattern of the planning area, flooding in the County is likely to continue to occur in the future. The potential for failure of one of the many levees throughout the County could create more risk for flooding. The 1% annual chance flood is the flood that has a one percent chance in any given year of being equaled or exceeded. Based on past events, flooding events less severe than a 1% annual chance flood and those outside of the 1% annual chance floodplain occur frequently during periods of heavy rain or snowmelt. According to the NCEI Storm Events Database, there have been 10 flood events recorded for Kings County between 2012 and 2022. This means it is highly likely a flood event will occur in a given year.

Many tomato, cotton, and hay farms and orchards within the historically dry Tulare Lake outside of the City of Corcoran flooded in March 2023. Following a series of historically powerful and severe storms and increased runoff from the Sierra Nevada into the San Joaquin Valley through waterways and canals, thousands of acres of cropland in the County became inundated with flood waters for the first time in decades. Tulare Lake was once one of the largest freshwater lakes west of the Mississippi and was largely drained in the late 19 th and early 20th centuries, as rivers that fed it were dammed and diverted for agriculture.

Source: San Francisco Chronicle, March 25, 2023

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-105

4.5.7.5 Climate Change Considerations
California’s Fourth Climate Assessment indicated shifts in California’s precipitation regime to more dry days, more dry years, and a longer dry season, with increases in sporadic, heavy precipitation events and floods that are expected to exceed the State’s flood control system capacity (CNRA 2018). With wildfires already being a problem in California, an increase in dry periods is expected to prime conditions for fires to occur, which will in turn worsen the potential for runoff and flooding associated with burned areas.

Greater storm intensity is also projected with climate change, resulting in more direct runoff and flooding (CNRA 2018). The San Joaquin Valley Regional Summary Report from the Fourth Climate Assessment indicates that the frequency of catastrophic floods will increase in the coming years. This in turn will lead to increased stress on agriculture, natural ecosystems, water resources, land use and community development, transportation, energy, public health, and climate justice.

4.5.7.6 Magnitude and Severity
Critical – A portion of the County continues to be subject to inundation during flood events, as approximately 353,391 acres have been determined to be in the 1% & 0.2% annual chance floodplains, which combined cover 39.6% of the County. Therefore, a potential flood hazard would threaten a significant geographic area (10% – 50%) of the County. On the other hand, WSP analysis shows that if a flood event would occur, the damage associated with flooding could impact around 9% of the County’s total improved parcels.

The occurrence of a flood can lead to life and property loss, damage to agricultural land, road and bridge closures and disruption of communication systems, resulting in significant disturbances to regular processes. Individuals living in low-lying trailer parks along the rivers and those experiencing homelessness are particularly vulnerable to such disasters. However, sufficient time is generally available to alert and warn those who might be affected. In the event of a catastrophic flood control structural failure, local response capabilities may be overwhelmed, necessitating mass evacuations to save lives. The impact on life safety will be determined by the warning time and the resources available to notify and evacuate the public. Loss of life is a possibility, and there may be associated health concerns, as well as negative effects on local buildings and infrastructure.

4.5.7.7 Vulnerability Assessment
Development in or near the floodplain puts lives and property at risk. Flood damage can include structure inundation, erosion of stream banks, road embankments, foundations footings for bridges, impact damage from debris, blockage of infrastructure, cropland destruction, sewage releases from damaged tanks, and economic loss to agriculture.

Certain health hazards are common in flood events. Standing water and wet materials in structures can become breeding grounds for microorganisms such as bacteria, mold, and viruses. This can cause disease, trigger allergic reactions, and damage materials long after the flood. When floodwaters contain sewage or decaying animal carcasses, infectious disease becomes a concern. Direct impacts, such as drowning, can be limited with adequate warning and public education about what to do during floods.

Where flooding occurs in populated areas, warning and evacuation will be of critical importance to reduce life and safety impacts.

While there are some benefits associated with flooding, such as the replenishment of sediments and nutrients to agricultural lands, it is considered a hazard to develop in floodplains. Floods can cause many cascading effects. Flooding can damage infrastructure, and fire can break out as a result of dysfunctional electrical equipment. Hazardous materials can also get into floodways, causing health concerns and polluting water supplies. In many instances during a flood, the drinking water supply will become contaminated.

People
The total people at risk to flooding in the County was estimated by multiplying the average number of persons per household in Kings County (3.17) and each applicable incorporated jurisdiction (Avenal – 3.59, Corcoran – 3.31, Hanford – 3.09, and Lemoore – 2.95) times the number of residential parcels in each floodplain to estimate the population residing in flood hazard areas. The average number of persons per household data was acquired from the 2021 ACS 5-Year Estimates.

Based on this analysis, which accounts for residents only and not workers, there are 1,126 residents living in the 1% annual chance flood zone throughout the County. Of all study areas, the unincorporated County has the most residents living in the 1% annual chance flood area (941), followed by the City of Corcoran (132). Of the unincorporated population, the majority living in the central portion of the County that floods consist of at-risk socially vulnerable and DACs. Many of these particular households consist of farm

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-106 workers or people that live on farms or work within the agricultural industry in the region. These particular at-risk communities are at even greater risk to flooding based on direct impacts flooding poses to their properties but also the indirect impacts flooding affects their livelihood and local economy. Table 4-58 below details population estimates by jurisdiction, followed a table for the 0.2% annual chance floodplain.

Table 4-58 Population Living in the 1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard Zone

JURISDICTION POPULATION
Avenal 22
Corcoran 132
Hanford 31
Lemoore -
Unincorporated County 941
Total 1,126
Source: WSP Analysis 2023
The same analysis was conducted for the 0.2% annual chance floodplain, indicating that there are 7,181 residents living in the 0.2% annual chance flood zone throughout Kings County. The majority of people living in this floodplain are residents of the City of Avenal, with 5,529 people in the 0.2% annual chance floodplain. This population distribution is shown in Table 4-59.

Table 4-59 Population Living in the 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard Zone

JURISDICTION POPULATION
Avenal 5,529
Lemoore 1,437
Unincorporated County 216
Total 7,183
Source: WSP 2023
Property
Historically, Kings County has been at risk of flooding primarily during the winter and spring months when river systems swell with heavier rainfall and runoff from winter snowmelt. Normally, storm floodwaters are kept within defined limits by a variety of storm drainage and flood control measures. But occasionally, extended heavy rains result in floodwaters that exceed normal high-water boundaries and cause damage. Flooding has occurred in the past within the 100-year floodplain and in other localized areas in the County.

A flood vulnerability assessment was performed for the County using GIS overlay methodology. The County’s parcel layer and associated assessor’s building improvement valuation data were provided by the County and were used as the basis for the inventory. Kings County’s effective FEMA Digital FIRM (DFIRM) dated June 17, 2019, was used as the hazard layer. A DFIRM is FEMA’s flood risk data that depicts the 1% annual chance (100-year) and the 0.2% annual chance (500-year) flood events; this data is incorporated into the National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL). Figure 4-29 summarizes the flood zones included on these maps.

Kings County Assessor Parcel data was used to estimate flood hazard impacts to parcels with improvement values greater than zero. An address point data layer provided by the County’s GIS department was also used in combination to assess not only parcels’ but also structures’ exposure to flood hazard. FEMA’s NFHL flood zones, with an effective date of June 17, 2019, were overlaid in GIS on the address points to identify structures/parcels that would likely be inundated during a 1% annual chance and 0.2% annual chance flood event.

Building improvement values and counts for those parcels and structures were then extracted from the assessor’s parcel data and address point data, and subsequently summed for the unincorporated county and jurisdictions. Results of the overlay analysis are shown in Table 4-60 for the 1% annual chance flood and Table 4-61 for 0.2% annual chance flood. The jurisdictional annexes provide more detailed information based on assessor property types. Property type refers to the land use of the parcel and includes Agricultural, Commercial, Exempt, Industrial, Multi-Family Residential, Multi-Use and

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-107 Residential. Content values were estimated as a percentage of improved values based on their occupancy type, using FEMA/Hazus estimated content replacement values. This includes 100% of the improved value for agricultural, commercial, exempt, and multi-use parcels; 50% for multi-family residential and residential parcels; and 150% for industrial parcels. Improved and content values were then totaled to obtain total exposure. The locations of these parcels are displayed in Figure 4-31 below.

A loss estimate analysis was also performed based on depth damage functions developed by the Army Corp of Engineers and FEMA. The loss curves depict the expected flood losses associated with the depth of flooding at a structure. There are different depth damage curves for structure and content losses. For this analysis, an average flood depth of two feet is assumed. A depth damage ratio of 25% was used for structural loss by multiplying it by the total values, based on the FEMA damage curves, assuming a 2-foot- deep flood. This means that the estimated loss of a parcel is 25% of its total value. The results are shown in the loss estimate columns in Table 4-60 for the 1% annual chance flood and Table 4-61 for the 0.2% annual loss properties.

The result is an inventory of the number and types of improved parcels and structures subject to flooding.

Results are organized by unincorporated County and incorporated jurisdictions. Detailed tables show counts of parcels by jurisdictions and land use type (Agricultural, Commercial, Exempt, Industrial, Multi- Family Residential, Multi-Use and Residential) within each flood zone. It is important to note that there could be more than one structure or building on an improved parcel (i.e., a condo complex occupies one parcel but might have several structures). The flood loss analysis does not account for business disruption, emergency services, environmental damages, or displacement costs, thus actual losses could exceed the estimate shown. Conversely, this analysis does not differentiate parcels that may have been developed since the County and cities adopted floodplain regulations, which would be mitigated to the 1% annual chance flood if developed in accordance with local floodplain regulations. Table 4-60 and Table 4-61 also do not include publicly owned parcels that contain critical facilities and infrastructure; these vulnerable community lifelines are listed in Table 4-65.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-108 Figure 4-31 Kings County FEMA Flood Hazards

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-109 Table 4-60 1% Annual Chance Floodplain Exposure and Loss by Jurisdiction

JURISDICTION PROPERTY TYPE IMPROVED
PARCEL
COUNT

BUILDING
COUNT

IMPROVED
VALUE

ESTIMATED

CONTENT
VALUE
TOTAL
VALUE

ESTIMATED
LOSS

POPULATION
Avenal Agricultural 2 2 $103,539 $103,539 $207,078 $51,770 Commercial 1 1 $11,386 $11,386 $22,772 $5,693 Exempt 2 2 $342,024 $342,024 $684,048 $171,012 Residential 5 6 $170,357 $85,179 $255,536 $63,884 22 Total 10 11 $627,306 $542,128 $1,169,434 $292,358 22 Corcoran Exempt 3 3 $225,007 $225,007 $450,014 $112,504 Residential 40 40 $5,726,687 $2,863,344 $8,590,031 $2,147,508 132 Total 43 43 $5,951,694 $3,088,351 $9,040,045 $2,260,011 132 Hanford Agricultural 1 1 $4,325 $4,325 $8,650 $2,163 Commercial 1 1 $6,900 $6,900 $13,800 $3,450
Exempt 1 1 $751,205 $751,205 $1,502,410 $375,603 Multi-Family
Residential 1 9 $2,986,560 $1,493,280 $4,479,840 $1,119,960 28 Residential 1 1 $269,146 $134,573 $403,719 $100,930 3 Total 5 13 $4,018,136 $2,390,283 $6,408,419 $1,602,105 31 Lemoore Agricultural 1 1 $11,954 $11,954 $23,908 $5,977 Exempt 1 1 $- $- $- $-
Total 2 2 $11,954 $11,954 $23,908 $5,977 – Unincorporated Agricultural 147 151 $16,079,220 $16,079,220 $32,158,440 $8,039,610 Commercial 14 14 $9,450,042 $9,450,042 $18,900,084 $4,725,021 Exempt 1,243 1,338 $261,919,205 $261,919,205 $523,838,410 130,959,603 Industrial 2 2 $78,858 $118,287 $197,145 $49,286 Multi-Use 50 60 $14,465,996 $7,232,998 $21,698,994 $5,424,749 190 Residential 221 237 $25,257,607 $12,628,804 $37,886,411 $9,471,603 751 Total 1,677 1,802 $327,250,928 $307,428,556 $634,679,484 $158,669,871 941 Grand Total 1,737 1,871 337,860,018 $313,461,271 $651,321,289 $162,830,322 1,126 Sources: Kings County Assessor’s Office; NFHL Effective date 6/17/2019, FEMA; GIS analysis

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-110 Table 4-61 0.2% Annual Chance Floodplain Exposure and Loss by Jurisdiction

JURISDICTION PROPERTY TYPE IMPROVED
PARCEL
COUNT

BUILDING
COUNT

IMPROVED
VALUE

ESTIMATED

CONTENT
VALUE
TOTAL
VALUE

ESTIMATED
LOSS

POPULATI
ON
Avenal Agricultural 1 1 $163,000 $163,000 $326,000 $81,500 Commercial 97 119 $17,116,938 $17,116,938 $34,233,876 $8,558,469 Exempt 7 9 $109,198 $109,198 $218,396 $54,599 Industrial 9 10 $849,591 $1,274,387 $2,123,978 $530,994 Multi-Family
Residential 29 112 $22,639,837 $11,319,919 $33,959,756 $8,489,939 402 Multi-Use 6 9 $749,775 $749,775 $1,499,550 $374,888 32 Residential 1,363 1,419 $114,303,823 $57,151,912 $171,455,735 $42,863,934 5,094 Total 1,512 1,679 $155,932,162 $87,885,128 $243,817,290 $60,954,322 5,529 Lemoore Commercial 3 4 $1,542,712 $1,542,712 $3,085,424 $771,356 Industrial 1 1 $399,406 $599,109 $998,515 $249,629 Multi-Family
Residential 2 274 $34,356,891 $17,178,446 $51,535,337 $12,883,834 808 Multi-Use 1 1 $3,821,051 $3,821,051 $7,642,102 $1,910,526 3 Residential 212 212 $41,915,687 $20,957,844 $62,873,531 $15,718,383 625 Total 219 492 $82,035,747 $44,099,161 $126,134,908 $31,533,727 1,437 Unincorporated Agricultural 21 22 $1,511,667 $1,511,667 $3,023,334 $755,834 Exempt 66 71 $12,319,035 $12,319,035 $24,638,070 $6,159,518 Multi-Use 10 12 $3,312,255 $3,312,255 $6,624,510 $1,656,128 38 Residential 52 56 $7,408,259 $3,704,130 $11,112,389 $2,778,097 178 Total 149 161 $24,551,216 $20,847,087 $45,398,303 $11,349,576 216 Grand Total 1,880 2,332 $262,519,125 $152,831,375 $415,350,500 $103,837,625 7,181 Sources: Kings County Assessor’s Office; NFHL Effective date 6/17/2019, FEMA; GIS analysis

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment

2023 Update Page 4-111
Significant areas of Kings County are at risk of being inundated by a 1% annual chance flood event. The unincorporated areas of the County are predominantly inundated by the 1% annual chance floodplain and have the greatest percentages of total loss from a 1% annual chance flood. The sites of Avenal, Corcoran and Lemoore are all somewhat exposed to both 1% and 0.2% annual chance flood events. The City of Hanford is the least vulnerable to flood events.

Based on this analysis, the County Planning Area has 1,737 parcels with 1,871 structures on them valued at over $651 million in the 1% annual chance floodplain. An additional 1,880 parcels with 2,332 structures on them valued at more than $415 million within the 0.2% annual chance floodplain. As a result, the total value of these exposed parcels and structures is approximately $1.07 billion. When factoring in FEMA’s estimated loss ratio, the estimated total losses from both 1% and 0.2% annual chance flood events is over $266 million. However, development in the 500-year floodplain is typically not regulated, thus a large flood event could be extremely damaging in the County.

Kings County joined the NFIP in 1980; each jurisdiction also participates in the NFIP. Table 4-62 below shows the NFIP entry dates of Kings County and its jurisdictions.

Table 4-62 NFIP Entry Date – Kings County & Jurisdictions

JURISDICTION NFIP ENTRY DATE
Kings County August 4, 1988
City of Avenal April 5, 1989
City of Corcoran November 28, 1997
City of Hanford March 18, 1987
City of Lemoore April 3, 1987
Source: Community Information System (CIS) 2023
As of April 18, 2023, in the unincorporated County, there are 173 flood insurance policies in force, of which there are 125 single family units and 48 non-residential. The number of policies in force by jurisdiction and flood zone are shown in Table 4-63. In the unincorporated County, there are 173 flood insurance policies in force, of which there are 241 single-family units, 3 2-4 family units, zero in all other residential, and 59 non-residential.

Table 4-63 Community Information System Policies in Force by Flood Zone and Jurisdiction

FLOOD ZONE KINGS
COUNTY

CITY OF
AVENAL

CITY OF

CORCORAN

CITY OF

HANFORD

CITY OF

LEMOORE
A01-30 & AE Zones 33 1 0 0 0
A Zones 51 0 0 2 0
AO Zones 0 0 0 0 0
AH Zones 0 0 0 0 0
atmospheric river
(AR) Zones
0 0 0 0 0
A99 Zones 0 0 0 0 0
V01-30 & VE Zones 0 0 0 0 0
V Zones 0 0 0 0 0
D Zones 0 0 0 0 0
B, C & X Zone
- Standard 89 0 4 13 9
- Preferred 0 1 0 0 0
Total 173 1 4 15 9
Source: Community Information System (CIS) 2023
NFIP data indicates that there are 202 insurance policies in the County representing $49,959,000 of insurance coverage in force. Since 1978 there have been 9 paid losses, totaling $18,946. This results in approximately $412 in annualized losses. Most of the losses have been in the unincorporated County.

Table 4-64 provides details on flood insurance policies for each individual jurisdiction.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-112 Table 4-64 Kings County Flood Insurance Policy Information

JURISDICTION POLICIES INSURANCE IN
FORCE
NO. OF
PAID
LOSSES

TOTAL LOSSES PAID
Avenal 1 $277,000 1 $0
Corcoran 4 $1,202,000 0 $0
Hanford 15 $4,667,000 2 $2,246
Lemoore 9 $3,034,000 0 0
Unincorporated Kings County 173 $40,779,000 173 $16,700 Total 202 $49,959,000 9 $18,946
Source: FEMA NFIP Community Information System
FEMA insures properties against flooding losses through the NFIP. As part of the process to reduce or eliminate repetitive flooding to structures across the United States, FEMA has developed an official Repetitive Loss Strategy. The purpose behind the national strategy is to identify, catalog, and propose mitigation measure to reduce flood losses to the relatively few numbers of structures that absorb the majority of the premium dollars from the national flood insurance fund.

A repetitive loss property is defined by FEMA as “a property for which two or more NFIP losses of at least $1,000 each have been paid within any 10-year period since 1978”. A repetitive loss property may or may not be currently insured by the NFIP. There are no repetitive loss properties or severe repetitive loss properties located within the County, based on NFIP data retrieved on April 18, 2023.

Critical Facilities and Lifelines
Key support facilities and structures most necessary to withstand the impacts of, and respond to, natural disasters are referred to as critical facilities. Examples of these critical facility types include utilities, transportation infrastructure, and emergency response and services facilities, given failures of components along major lifelines or even closures or inaccessibility to key emergency facilities could limit if not completely cut off transmission of commodities, essential services, and other potentially catastrophic repercussions. Floods and levee failure can disrupt, damage, or destroy these critical facilities, which in turn can impede the ability of Kings County to respond to and recover from a major flood event.

A GIS analysis of exposed critical facilities was conducted, similar to the parcel analysis, using HIFLD. The results of critical facilities throughout the County which are exposed to the various flood hazards are shown in Table 4-65 below and organized by the jurisdiction they are located in and the FEMA Lifeline category into which they are classified. The locations of these facilities are displayed in Figure 4-32 below.

Table 4-65 Critical Facilities Within the 1% and 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard by FEMA Lifeline and Jurisdiction
FLOOD

HAZARD ZONE

JURISDICTION

COMMUNICATIONS
ENERGY

FOOD, WATER,

SHELTER

HAZARDOUS

MATERIAL

HEALTH AND

MEDICAL

SAFETY AND

SECURITY

TRANSPORTATION
TOTAL
1% Annual
Chance
Avenal - 1 - - - - 1 2
Corcoran - 3 - - - 1 - 4
Hanford - - - - - 1 - 1
Unincorporated 20 12 - 5 - - 71 108
Total 20 16 - 5 - 2 72 115

0.2% Annual
Chance
Avenal 2 - - 1 - 8 - 11
Corcoran - - - - - - - -

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-113 FLOOD

HAZARD ZONE

JURISDICTION

COMMUNICATIONS
ENERGY

FOOD, WATER,

SHELTER

HAZARDOUS

MATERIAL

HEALTH AND

MEDICAL

SAFETY AND

SECURITY

TRANSPORTATION
TOTAL
Hanford - - - - - - - -
Unincorporated - - - - - - - -
Total 2 - - 1 - 8 - 11
Source: HIFLD, Kings County, WSP GIS Analysis

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-114 Figure 4-32 Kings County Critical Facilities & FEMA Flood Hazards

Economy
Flooding can have a major economic impact on the economy. Based on the flood loss analysis, there are 16 commercial structures worth an estimated $18.9 million in total value directly at risk of flooding in the 1% annual chance zone. Based on the loss analysis this could result in approximately $4.7 million in direct losses. In addition, there are 123 commercial structures worth an estimated $37.3 million in total value directly at risk of flooding in the 0.2% annual chance zone. Based on the loss analysis this could result in approximately $9.3 million in direct losses. This does not account for other indirect losses such as business interruption, lost wages, and other downtime costs.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-115 Effects on the agricultural economy can be devastating, and a large amount of area at risk to flooding in the County is agricultural and lies within the Tulare Lake basin. Flooding can damage crops and livestock.

In addition to the obvious impacts on crops and animals, flooding can have deleterious effects on soil and the ability to reinvigorate the agricultural activities impacted once the flood waters recede. Damage to water resources such as underground irrigation systems, water storage reservoirs, springs and other natural water bodies could have a serious effect on agriculture operations.

Cultural, Historic and Natural Resources
Natural areas within the floodplain often benefit from periodic flooding as a naturally recurring phenomenon. These natural areas often reduce flood impacts by allowing absorption and infiltration of floodwaters. Natural resources are generally resistant to flooding except where natural landscapes and soil compositions have been altered for human development or after periods of previous disasters such as drought and fire. Wetlands, for example, exist because of natural flooding incidents. These areas provide natural and beneficial functions to hold and absorb floodwaters. Areas recently suffering from wildfire damage may erode because of flooding, which can temporarily alter an ecological system.

Development Trends
The potential or likelihood of a flood event in the County increases with the annual onset of heavy rains in winter and spring months. Much of the historical growth in the problem areas connected with flooding and stormwater runoff include erosion, sedimentation, degradation of water quality, losses of environmental resources, and certain health hazards. For NFIP participating communities, floodplain management practices implemented through local floodplain management ordinances should mitigate the flood risk to new development in the 1% annual chance floodplains. As noted previously, a large amount of development has occurred in the 0.2% annual chance floodplain and these areas are not regulated or require flood mitigation, thus flood risk is increasing to a degree, although to the less frequent flood events.

The development trend in the County planning area consists of steady growth. Much of this growth is occurring in the urban and SOI areas; such growth can result in more impervious surfaces due to buildings and infrastructure and increase stormwater runoff. The California DOF projects that Kings County’s population will increase by 3.0% by the year 2025 when compared to the year of 2021. The County’s population is also projected to continue to grow through the year 2060. Such growth may consume previously undeveloped acres, and the increase in impervious surfaces could affect existing drainage and flood control facilities.

Changes in municipal boundaries such as annexations into the SOI may change the flood risk profile for certain communities. A GIS analysis of 1% and 0.2% annual chance flood exposure within SOI boundaries is summarized in the tables below. These parcels are included in Table 4-66 and Table 4-67, and they fall under “Unincorporated” in terms of their jurisdiction. Parcels shown below in these tables are also those that fall within each jurisdiction’s SOI and are exposed to potential flood hazard events. As shown, only parcels located in the SOI of the Cities of Corcoran and Lemoore are exposed to 1% annual chance flood hazards. In addition, only two parcels located in the SOI of the City of Lemoore are exposed to 0.2% annual chance flood hazards.

Table 4-66 Sphere of Influence Risk to FEMA 1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard

CORCORAN LEMOORE GRAND TOTAL
Improved Parcel Count 40 2 42
Building Count 44 2 46
Improved Value $38,205,152 $25,742 $38,230,894
Estimated Content Value $37,338,575 $25,742 $37,364,317 Total Value $75,543,727 $51,484 $75,595,211
Population 96 - 96
Source: Kings County; WSP Analysis 2023

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-116 Table 4-67 Sphere of Influence Risk to FEMA 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard

LEMOORE GRAND TOTAL
Improved Parcel Count 2 2
Building Count 2 2
Improved Value $63,970 $63,970
Estimated Content Value $47,370 $47,370
Total Value $111,340 $111,340
Population 3 3
Source: Kings County; WSP Analysis 2023

4.5.7.8 Risk Summary
The overall significance of the flood hazard in the County is High • Eleven flood events were recorded for Kings County between 2012 and 2022, which makes it is highly likely that a flood event occurs in a given year. Significant flooding also occurred during plan development in early 2023.
• Significant flooding occurs in the County through snowmelt, arroyos, and significant rainfall events.

Flooding risks are present among the Tulare Lake Basin and several creeks and rivers, including the Kings River, the Arroyo Esquinado, and the Arroyo del Camino. • The Tulare Lake Basin once served as the natural drainage of the Kings River, Cross Creek, Kern River, and Tule River as a part of the hydrologic watershed of the Sierra Nevada Mountains along the east side of the San Joaquin Valley. Canal and flood control development turned the area into farmable land, although the Basin is still subject to flooding during significant precipitation events. • Key findings from the 2022 CVFPP indicate shifts in California’s precipitation regime, which show more dry days, more dry years, a longer dry season, and increases in occasional heavy precipitation events and floods. These same studies project greater storm intensity with climate change, resulting in more direct runoff and flooding and as a result, high frequency flood events in conjunction with heavy precipitation and extreme storm events.
• Countywide there are 4,203 structures at risk within the limits of the 100-year and 500-year floodplain zones worth over $1.06 billion, with a loss estimate of over $578 million. • Countywide approximately 8,307 persons live in the 100-year floodplain and 500-year floodplains. Of this population, 941 residents live within the 100-year floodplain in the unincorporated County and 132 residents live in 500-year floodplain in the City of Corcoran. Of this population, the majority living in the central portion of the County’s floodplain consists of socially vulnerable populations living on farms or working within the agricultural industry, many of which are designated DACs. These at-risk communities are at greater risk to flooding based on direct impacts flooding poses to their properties but also how the indirect impacts flooding affects their livelihood and local economy. • Levees and flood control dam infrastructure provide some protection, but also pose potential levee and dam failure risks.
• In March 2023, a series of AR events caused extensive flooding that rendered almost all emergency access routes in and out of the City of Corcoran unusable. As a consequence, State Route (SR) 43 to the north of Corcoran became the sole accessible route connecting Kings County to the City. Another alternative, SR 137, was available but located in Tulare County. The significance of these emergency access routes during flooding cannot be overstated, as they play a vital role in facilitating resource mobilization, emergency response efforts, and ensuring the overall safety of the public. • Related hazards – Severe weather: Heavy Rain, Wildfire, Landslide and Debris Flow.

JURISDICTION GEOGRAPHIC
AREA

PROBABILITY

OF FUTURE

OCCURRENCE

MAGNITUDE/

SEVERITY

OVERALL

SIGNIFICANCE

PRIORITY
HAZARD?
Kings County Extensive Highly Likely Critical High Yes
City of Avenal Extensive Highly Likely Critical High Yes City of Corcoran Extensive Highly Likely Critical High Yes City of Hanford Extensive Highly Likely Critical High Yes

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-117 City of Lemoore Extensive Highly Likely Critical High Yes

4.5.8 LAND SUBSIDENCE

4.5.8.1 Hazard Description
Land subsidence is defined as the vertical sinking of the land over natural or manmade underground voids. Subsidence is common in several areas of California, usually as a result of groundwater pumping, peat loss, or oil and gas extraction. Fluctuations in the level of underground water caused by pumping or by injecting fluids into the earth can initiate sinking to fill the empty space previously occupied by water or soluble minerals. Weight, including surface developments such as roads, reservoirs, and buildings, and manmade vibrations from such activities as blasting and heavy truck or train traffic can accelerate the natural processes of subsidence, or induce subsidence over manmade voids.

The 2018 California SHMP profiles subsidence as a secondary impact of drought associated with the reduced availability of surface water and increased groundwater pumping in order to meet water needs.

According to Smith, et al. (2018), approximately 1 million people in the San Joaquin Valley rely on groundwater pumping for drinking water, and thousands of farmers rely on groundwater to irrigate crops. While groundwater pumping occurs in both drought and non-drought years to support urban, rural, and agricultural water needs, the SHMP notes that it is greatly increased during dry years.

The primary source of water for the County is groundwater (Kings County, n.d.). As groundwater is extracted faster than the aquifers can recharge, significant subsidence of soil layers may occur. Often, once an aquifer has been compressed by subsidence, the deformation of shape is permanent, resulting in a decreased capacity to store water. In addition to the direct damage subsidence may cause to infrastructure, as foundations are warped subsidence also increases the risk of flooding as ground elevation changes.

4.5.8.2 Geographic Area
Extensive – Figure 4-33 below shows the vertical ground surface displacement measured in feet for Kings County and the surrounding areas. This DWR dataset represents measurements of vertical ground surface displacement in more than 200 of the high-use and populated groundwater basins across the State of California between January 2015 and January 2023. Vertical displacement estimates are derived from Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR) data that are collected by the European Space Agency (ESA) Sentinel-1A satellite and processed by TRE ALTAMIRA Inc. (TRE), under contract with the California DWR as part of DWR’s SGMA technical assistance to provide important SGMA-relevant data to GSAs for Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) development and implementation. As shown in Figure 4-33, the red/orange areas experienced the most (negative) vertical ground surface displacement between June 2015 to January 2023, meaning that these areas have experienced the most land subsidence during this period of time. These areas include the northern and eastern portions of the County, including the cities of Corcoran, Hanford, and Lemoore. Due to gaps in spatial coverage, the map below shows the approximate subsidence using the average of all reported values within each square grid area. Reported values are not evenly distributed within each square, and each square may have a different number of measurements.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-118 Figure 4-33 Kings County Vertical Ground Surface Displacement (Jun 2015 – Jan 2023)

Source: DWR 2023

4.5.8.3 Past Occurrences
Land subsidence from groundwater extraction in the San Joaquin Valley has been called the greatest human alteration of the Earth’s surface (Galloway et al, 1999). This phenomenon is closely tied to the growth of agriculture and the accessibility of water in the region. Due to the semi-arid nature of the valley and the variation in streamflow on the east and west sides of the San Joaquin Valley, agriculture has become heavily dependent on the aquifer system. A brief history of land subsidence in the San Joaquin Valley from Land Subsidence from Groundwater Use in California by Borchers and Carpenter (2014) is summarized below.

The sinking of land caused by the removal of groundwater started in the 1920s, but accelerated during the post-World War II period when the demand for irrigation water increased, leading to the drilling of numerous wells. In 1955, the San Joaquin Valley supplied a

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-119 quarter of all irrigation groundwater in the United States. By 1970, more than half of the valley, an area covering 5,200 square miles, had experienced subsidence of over one foot.

Although the connection between the decline of groundwater levels and subsidence in the Delano City area was identified early on, a comprehensive study of the regional impact of groundwater overdraft on subsidence was not conducted until the early 1950s. At that time, government agencies expressed worry about how subsidence could affect the Delta-Mendota Canal (which was under construction at the time) and the California Aqueduct (which was still in the planning stages).

The year 1954 saw the start of research into land subsidence through the collaboration of a Federal-State interagency committee and the USGS "Mechanics of Aquifers Project." Through field monitoring and research, the studies were able to determine the extent and magnitude of subsidence and its correlation to groundwater overdraft. The findings provided valuable information that enabled the strategic placement of the California Aqueduct, which, together with the Delta-Mendota Canal and the Friant-Kern Canal, brought surface water into the valley to reduce the dependence on groundwater.

By 1974, the importation of surface water had resulted in groundwater levels recovering by over 200 feet in certain regions on the west side of the valley. While this helped to decelerate the rate of subsidence, subsidence still persisted due to the slow drainage of water from the compacting clayey aquitards, especially in the Los Banos-Kettleman City area of the mid-valley and the Wasco-Tulare area of the southern valley.

The droughts that occurred after 1975 led to a rapid decline in groundwater levels despite lower pumping volumes than those in the 1960s. This was due to a reduction in storage space within the aquifer system and decreased hydraulic conductivity of the compacted aquitards, which restrict the drainage of water to the more permeable parts of the system. Despite water levels being notably higher than those in the 1960s, the observations indicated renewed land subsidence during drought periods.

The present drought, combined with a shift in cropping patterns from row crops and range land to permanent crops such as trees, has again led to increased dependence on aquifer systems for agricultural irrigation in the San Joaquin Valley. Currently, an area spanning about 2,700 square miles west of Tulare and east of Kettleman City is continuing to experience subsidence. The Lemoore Naval Air Station, located at the northwest edge of this area, has seen a total subsidence of over 10 feet between 1925 and 2010. The conversion to permanent crops and orchards that require year-round irrigation has been linked to increased groundwater extraction and changes in land use, which have contributed to the subsiding area. The sagging of canals, rivers, and flood bypass channels in these regions has led to a loss of freeboard and flow capacity.

4.5.8.4 Likelihood of Future Occurrence
Likely – Land subsidence has been a recurring issue in Kings County for decades and can be expected to continue in the future. The frequency of future land subsidence incidents in the County will largely be dependent on the mitigation actions and pumping regulations initiated by the State, the County, and local regulations. Based on past trends of gradual subsidence throughout the entire San Joaquin Valley and the continued dependence on groundwater pumping, it can be assumed that subsidence will continue in the future, with increased rates of subsidence during drought years.

The HMPC notes that at times agricultural operations are subjected to 0% - 5% allocations of surface water deliveries, which forces agriculture to rely upon groundwater to remain viable. This has resulted in some years of over drafting amounts of approximately 820,000 acre-feet per year (Bittle, 2023). The SGMA also helped establish local GSAs to manage groundwater sustainably within the four groundwater subbasins in the region: Tulare Lake, Kaweah, Kings, and Westside Subbasins. Further, the development and implementation of each GSA’s GSP should further mitigate the amount of over drafting in the future and help reduce subsidence rates. See Section 4.5.4, Drought for additional information on the Tulare Lake, Kawah, Kings, and Westside Subbasin GSPs.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-120

4.5.8.5 Climate Change Considerations
Climate change is expected to result in increased temperatures and changes in precipitation patterns, which can lead to both extreme precipitation variability and prolonged periods of drought. Drought conditions can cause a reduction in soil moisture content while increasing the demand for water resources. In response, people may increase their use of groundwater, which can lead to increased land subsidence risk through the compaction of soil layers and the depletion of underground water resources.

Extreme precipitation variability present both challenges and opportunities. Extreme flooding occurred in the County following the series of AR events that hit the State in early 2023. The HMPC noted that these events could be beneficial if excess flood water were captured and used to enhance groundwater recharge. However, such strategic recharge projects require extensive knowledge of the soil, geology, and aquifer properties, as well as planning, permits, and infrastructure. These projects are eligible for funding through the DWR’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Grant Program.

However, during periods of extended drought, water levels in aquifers may be drawn down to levels that are too low, which can cause the soil and rock layers to compress and settle. Once this occurs, the water cannot recharge the layers, leading to permanent subsidence and the permanent loss of groundwater storage capacity. This can have significant economic and environmental impacts, including damage to infrastructure, decreased agricultural productivity, and reduced access to water resources.

4.5.8.6 Magnitude and Severity
Limited – The rate of subsidence is difficult to predict, and it is also uncertain where exactly it will occur.

This unpredictability makes it hard to assess the potential magnitude and severity of the subsidence's impact. As the County's different areas continue to sink at varying rates that range from approximately

0.5 feet to 2.5 feet of vertical ground surface displacement in the area south of Kettleman City in the County to 4.5 to 5.5 feet of vertical ground surface displacement in the area between the cities of Hanford and Corcoran, the impacts on infrastructure could become more evident (see Figure 4-31). It is likely that continued subsidence in the County could lead to further harm to infrastructure such as buildings, roads, and water storage and management systems, such as canals and aqueducts.

4.5.8.7 Vulnerability Assessment
Land subsidence due to groundwater pumping can permanently damage or collapse underground aquifers, increase flood risk in low-lying areas, and pose hazards to buildings, infrastructure, and water storage facilities. Subsidence can result in serious, localized structural damage to buildings, roads, irrigation ditches, canals, streams, underground utilities, and pipelines. It can disrupt and alter the flow of surface or underground water. The consequences of improper use of land subject to ground subsidence can be excessive economic losses, including the high costs of repair and maintenance for buildings, irrigation works, highways, utilities, and other structures. This results in direct economic losses to citizens as well as indirect economic losses through decreased property values.

Property
The lack of detailed data on property damage due to land subsidence in Kings County makes it difficult to quantify past or potential future losses. Most subsidence instances result in relatively minor damage and settling of buildings. But in some cases, subsidence can result in serious structural damage to buildings, roads, irrigation ditches, underground utilities, and pipelines, potentially resulting in the complete loss of the structure.

People
This hazard typically results in property damage, not risk to human life. In the event of modest subsidence over time, property that people rely on like buildings, roads, rail lines, and underground infrastructure, such as sewer, electrical power, and water lines could be impacted. These impacts may also be due to related erosion or flooding hazards. Land subsidence is also not expected to have a disproportionate impact on socially vulnerable populations.

Critical Facilities and Lifelines
Land subsidence is a threat to critical infrastructures, including groundwater wells, levees, and aqueducts.

As land sinks, it can cause the casings of wells to collapse and require repair. Water that had previously been advanced by gravity may require lift stations or pumps to be moved over distorted landscapes.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-121 Economy
Damage resulting from land subsidence can cause direct economic losses in the form of needed structural repairs to affected buildings and facilities, as noted above. It can also result in indirect losses, such as from increased taxes and decreased property values. The HMPC notes that as a result of media coverage of subsidence in the area, lending institutions have applied higher interest rates due to perceived higher risk, placing greater financial burdens on lower-income communities. Subsidence may also impact agricultural industries and livelihoods dependent on those industries if transportation routes are affected.

Cultural, Historic and Natural Resources
Historic and cultural facilities are just as susceptible to subsidence related damage as other structures.

However, there is not sufficient data to identify specific historical or cultural facilities at increased risk from this hazard.

Development Trends
While vulnerability to this hazard is not anticipated to increase with new development, increased water pumping resulting from the demand of new development has the potential to increase the frequency and severity of subsidence. Increased efforts to monitor and manage groundwater pumping, increased accuracy of mapping, and emphasis on appropriate grading and ground compaction during development will help alleviate vulnerability for future development in unknown areas of risk.

4.5.8.8 Risk Summary
• A significant portion of Kings County is at risk from ongoing land subsidence, and despite the gradual nature of this hazard, the observed and potential impacts to critical infrastructure makes the overall significance of this hazard Medium.
• The entire Kings County is vulnerable to land subsidence due to its dependence on agriculture and groundwater pumping; however, increased efforts on sustainable groundwater management and the implementation of the Tulare Lake, Kaweah, Kings, and Westside Subbasins GSPs should alleviate this hazard risk in the future.
• Increased drought conditions resulting from climate change will likely result in more groundwater pumping, which could lead to more human-induced subsidence; groundwater sustainability planning and management could help offset future subsidence. • Land subsidence can alter the flow of surface or underground water, an impact that may not be noticed until long after the fact.
• Related Hazards – Drought, Flood

JURISDICTION GEOGRAPHIC
AREA

PROBABILITY

OF FUTURE

OCCURRENCE

MAGNITUDE/

SEVERITY

OVERALL

SIGNIFICANCE

PRIORITY
HAZARD?
Kings County Extensive Likely Limited Medium Yes
City of Avenal Extensive Likely Limited Medium Yes
City of Corcoran Extensive Likely Limited Medium Yes
City of Hanford Extensive Likely Limited Medium Yes
City of Lemoore Extensive Likely Limited Medium Yes

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-122

4.5.9 LANDSLIDE

4.5.9.1 Hazard Description
Landslides can refer to a wide variety of processes that result in the perceptible downward and outward movement of soil, rock, and vegetation under the gravitational influence. Common names for landslide types include slump, rockslide, debris slide, lateral spreading, debris avalanche, earth flow, and soil creep.

Although landslides are primarily associated with steep slopes (i.e., greater than 15 percent), they may also occur in areas of generally low relief and occur as cut‐and‐fill failures, river bluff failures, lateral spreading landslides, collapse of mine‐waste piles, and failures associated with quarries and open‐pit mines.

The force of gravity acting upon a steep or moderately steep slope is the primary cause of a landslide.

Slope failure occurs when the force of gravity pulling the slope downward exceeds the strength of the earth materials that comprise the slope to hold it in place. In addition to the force of gravity, other contributing factors to landslides can include rainfall, earthquakes, changes in groundwater, and human- induced modifications to existing slopes.

The potential for a landslide to occur exists anywhere weak or fractured materials rest upon a moderate to steep slope. The severity of a landslide depends in large part on the degree of development in the area in which it occurs and the geographic area of the slide itself. Generally speaking, landslides result in devastating consequences, but in very localized areas. A landslide occurring in an undeveloped area would be less severe because lives and property would not be affected; the only impacts would be to land, vegetation, and wildlife. However, a landslide occurring in a developed area could have devastating effects, ranging from structure and infrastructure damage to injury and loss of life.

Mudslides are a mass of water and fine-grained earth that flows down a stream, ravine, canyon, arroyo, or gulch. If more than half of the solids in the mass are larger than sand grains (rocks, stones, boulders), the event is called a debris flow. A debris fan is a conical landform produced by successive mud and debris flow deposits, and the likely spot for a future event. Mud and debris flow problems can be exacerbated by wildfires that remove vegetation that serves to stabilize soil from erosion. Heavy rains on the denuded landscape can lead to the rapid development of destructive mudflows.

A rockfall is the falling of a detached mass of rock from a very steep to horizontal slope. Rockfalls are caused by the loss of support from underneath through erosion, or triggered by ice wedging, root growth, or ground shaking. Rockfalls and landslides are influenced by seasonal patterns, precipitation, and temperature patterns. Weathering and decomposition of geologic materials produce conditions favorable to rockfalls. Changes to an area or slope, such as cutting and filling activities, can also increase the risk of a rockfall. Rockfalls can threaten human life, impact transportation corridors, and communication systems and cause other property damage.

There are predictable relationships between local geology and landslide events. The downslope movement of earth material, either as a landslide, debris flow, mudslide, or rockslide, is part of the continuous, natural process of erosion. This process, however, can be influenced by a variety of causes that change the stability of the slope. Slope instability may result from natural processes, such as the erosion of the toe of a slope by a stream, or by ground shaking caused by an earthquake. Slopes can also be modified artificially by grading, or by the addition of water or structures to a slope. Development that occurs on a slope can substantially increase the frequency and extent of potential slope stability hazards.

Knowledge of these relationships can improve planning and reduce vulnerability.

4.5.9.2 Geographic Area
Significant – As mentioned in the County’s 2012 MJHMP, landslide hazards are uncommon throughout much of the county due to the flat topography. The southwestern County intersects with the Kettleman Hills and the Southern California Coastal Range. These areas of the County that are the most susceptible to landslides, and there are few past occurrences. Areas near rivers and streams are also subject to natural erosion, which may be increased during flood events.

Deep-seated landslide susceptibility in the County is depicted in Figure 4-34; areas in darker red colors have a higher susceptibility to landslide and most of these areas are concentrated west of SR 33. This map shows the relative likelihood of deep-seated land sliding based on regional estimates of rock strength and steepness of slopes. On the most basic level, weak rocks and steep slopes are most likely to generate landslides. The map uses detailed information on the location of past landslides, the location and relative strength of rock unites, and steepness of slope to estimate susceptibility to deep-seated land sliding (0 to X, low to high, as shown in the Figure’s legend). On very low slopes, landslide susceptibility is low even if there are weak rock and geologic materials, and that susceptibility increases with slope and

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-123 weaker rocks. High landslide susceptibility classes (VIII, IX, and X) include very steep slopes with hard rocks and moderate to very steep slopes with weak rocks (Wills et al. 2011).

Figure 4-34 Kings County Deep – Seated Landslide Susceptibility

4.5.9.3 Past Occurrences
There have not been any disaster declarations associated with landslides or California Geological Survey (CGS) records of landslides in Kings County. However, the County’s 2012 LHMP noted that landslides have occurred in the western part of the county, particularly in burn areas and after heavy rains. Heavy rain events caused a slope failure around a water line for Avenal in 1995, 1998, 2008 and 2010.

4.5.9.4 Likelihood of Future Occurrence
There is limited data on past events, but occasional landslides and debris flows are likely to occur in the western part of the county in the future. As mentioned in the County’s 2012 MJHMP, winter and spring are typically the landslide/rock‐fall seasons in California as rain falls and snow melts and saturates soils and temperatures enter into freeze/thaw cycles. Debris and mud flows generally occur during summer cloudbursts. Debris and mudslides and rock‐fall can occur rapidly with little warning during torrential

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-124 rains. Landslides typically have a slower onset and can be predicted to some extent by monitoring soil moisture levels and ground cracking or slumping in areas of previous landslide activity.

On the other hand, projected climate change-associated variance in rainfall events may result in more high-intensity rain events, which may increase landslide frequency. In addition, the increased potential of wildfire occurrence also escalates the risk of landslide and debris flows in the period following a fire. Refer to the Climate Change Considerations subsection below for more details on climate change’s impact on landslide events.

4.5.9.5 Climate Change Considerations
Landslides can result from intense rainfall and runoff events. Projected climate change-associated variance in rainfall events may result in more high-intensity events, which may increase landslide frequency. In addition, the increased potential of wildfire occurrence also escalates the risk of landslide and debris flows in the period following a fire, when slopes lack vegetation to stabilize soils and burned soil surfaces allow more rainfall runoff. As climate change affects the length of the wildfire season, it is possible that a higher frequency of large fires may occur into late fall, when conditions remain dry. The wildfires can be followed by intense rains early in the winter, as occurred with the Thomas Fire in December 2017 and subsequent Montecito and Carpinteria debris flows in January 2018 that occurred in Santa Barbara County (CA SHMP 2018). Moreover, tree mortality resulting from drought, pests or any other threat could also pose an increase in landslides as the loss of trees would reduce the protection of steep slopes and thereby increase the probability of landslide occurrences.

4.5.9.6 Magnitude and Severity
Negligible – Figure 4-29 shows the relative extent of deep land sliding based on regional estimates of rock strength and steepness of slopes. The data used for the map utilizes detailed information on the location of past landslides, the location and relative strength of rock units, and the steepness of the slope in a methodology developed by Wilson and Keefer (1985) as implemented by Ponti et al (2008) to create classes of landslide susceptibility. These classes express the generalization that on very low slopes, landslide susceptibility is low even in weak materials, and that landslide susceptibility increases with slope and in weaker rocks. The convergence of factors suggests limited landslide potential in most of Kings County due to the very low slopes. However, there are areas on the west side where the potential increases due to an increase in slope and topography along the Southern California Coastal Range, mainly to the west of I-5. These areas are shown in darker orange and red in Figure 4-34.

Landslides are often triggered by other natural hazards such as earthquakes, heavy rain, flood, or wildfires.

Landslide frequency is often related to the frequency of these other hazards. In Kings County, landslides typically occur during and after major storms so the potential for landslides largely coincides with the potential for sequential severe storms that saturate steep, vulnerable soils.

4.5.9.7 Vulnerability Assessment
Property
Landslides directly damage engineered structures in two general ways: 1) disruption of structural foundations caused by differential movement and deformation of the ground upon which the structure sits, and 2) physical impact of debris moving downslope against structures located in the travel path.

During the 2023 update of this plan, a GIS analysis of exposure to landslide hazard areas was performed.

GIS analysis indicates approximately $126.4 million of property improvements are exposed, which takes into account improved values of properties. Table 4-68 summarizes landslide exposure by jurisdiction. GIS was used to intersect the parcel boundaries with a master address point layer to obtain the number of buildings per parcel. Only parcels with improvement values greater than zero were used in the analysis, this method assumes that improved parcels have a structure of some type.

Based on this analysis there is a total of 144 improved parcels together with 304 structures located within landslide hazard areas in the County. The majority of this exposure is to the west of I-5 and in the southwestern unincorporated County. None of the parcels from the cities of Corcoran and Lemoore are exposed to landslide hazard. There is a high level of uncertainty as to the actual risk to these exposed parcels, thus a more specific loss estimation is not provided. A more detailed, site-specific analysis would be needed to assess actual risk within the identified parcels. The analysis results are shown below in Table 4-68.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-125 Table 4-68 Kings County Improved Parcels & Structures Potentially at Risk to Landslide

JURISDICTION IMPROVED
PARCEL
COUNT

BUILDING
COUNT

IMPROVED
VALUE

ESTIMATED

CONTENT
VALUE

TOTAL VALUE POPULATION
Avenal 22 22 $1,820,347 $1,197,668 $3,018,015 61
Hanford 37 188 $38,644,308 $25,007,092 $63,651,400 501 Unincorporated
County
85 94 $29,768,911 $29,971,966 $59,740,877 73
Total 144 304 $70,233,566 $56,176,725 $126,410,291 635 Source: Department of Conservation, CGS, Kings County Assessor, Wood GIS Analysis Figure 4-35 below further breaks down the numbers of exposed parcels by landslide class, as shown previously in Table 4-68; the higher the class the greater the susceptibility. As shown by Figure 4-35, most of the exposed parcels and structures are located within Class 7 landslide areas.

Figure 4-35 Total Parcel & Structure Counts by Landslide Class

Source: Department of Conservation, CGS, Kings County Assessor, Wood GIS Analysis People
People could be susceptible if they are caught in a landslide or debris flow, potentially leading to injury or death. There is a danger to drivers operating vehicles, as rocks and debris can strike vehicles passing through the hazard area or cause dangerous shifts in roadways. Similar to the methodology used in the flood section, the total people at risk were estimated by multiplying the average number of persons per household in the County and each applicable incorporated jurisdiction with the number of residential parcels in landslide-prone areas to estimate the population residing in landslide hazard areas. As shown in Table 4-68 above, there are approximately 635 people potentially residing in landslide susceptible areas. These areas include the western portion of the City of Avenal and a small portion of the City of Hanford, as well as the unincorporated County to the west of I-5, SR 33 & SR 41. However, it is not likely that landslides will occur without warning and direct impacts to people are suspected to be minimal.

Critical Facilities and Lifelines
In addition to buildings, utilities and transportation structures are vulnerable to the impact and ground deformation caused by slope failures. They present a particular vulnerability because of their geographic extent and susceptibility to physical distress. Lifelines are generally linear structures that, because of their geographic extent, have a greater chance of being affected by ground failure due to greater hazard exposure.

Extension, bending, and compression caused by ground deformation can break lifelines. Failure of any component along the lifeline can result in the failure to deliver service over a large region. Once broken, 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Class 3
Class 5
Class 6
Class 7
Class 8
Class 9
Class 10
Total
Structure Count Parcel Count

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-126 transmission of the commodity through the lifeline ceases, which can have catastrophic repercussions including loss of power to critical facilities such as hospitals, impaired disposal of sewage, contamination of water supplies, disruption of all forms of transportation, and release of flammable fuels. Therefore, the overall impact of lifeline failures, including secondary failure of systems that depend on lifelines, can be much greater than the impact of individual building failures.

Table 4-69 below summarizes the results of the critical facilities analysis, highlighting the exposure of critical facilities throughout the County to landslide hazards. The critical facilities that are exposed to landslide hazards are located within the City of Avenal and unincorporated County. Many exposed critical facilities are located in the southwestern part of the County to the west of Interstate 5.

Table 4-69 Critical Facilities Within the Class 9 Landslide Hazard by FEMA Lifeline

JURISDICTION

LANDSLIDE
CLASS

COMMUNICATIONS
ENERGY

FOOD, WATER, SHELTER

HAZARDOUS MATERIAL

HEALTH AND MEDICAL

SAFETY AND SECURITY

TRANSPORTATION
TOTAL
Avenal 5 1 - - - - - - 1
7 4 1 - - - - - 5
9 - 1 - - - - - 1
10 1 - - - - - - 1
Unincorporated 5 10 2 - 1 - - 2 12
7 2 2 - 1 - - 4 9
8 2 - - - - - - 2
9 - - - - - - 2 2
10 6 - - - - - - 6
Grand Total - 26 4 - 1 - - 8 39
Source: HIFLD, Kings County, WSP GIS Analysis
Economy
Economic impacts typically center around transportation routes temporarily closed by debris flow or landslide activity. These roads may be used to transport goods across the County or provide access by visitors and tourists. Depending on the amount of damage, the road may simply need to be cleaned off or may require some level of reconstruction.

Cultural, Historic and Natural Resources
As primarily a natural process, landslides and debris flows can have varying impacts on the natural environment. Debris flows have the potential to permanently alter the natural landscape. The impacts of landslides and debris flows on historical and cultural structures would be similar to the impacts on the general property.

Development Tends
The severity of landslide problems is directly related to the extent of human activity in hazard areas.

Human activities such as property development and road construction can exacerbate the occurrence of landslides. Development Trends should take place carefully to prevent landslide damage to property or people. Adverse effects can be mitigated by early recognition, avoiding incompatible land uses in these areas, or by corrective engineering. Improving mapping and information on landslide hazards and incorporating this information into the development review process could prevent siting of structures and infrastructure in identified hazard areas.

A GIS analysis of exposure to landslide hazard within SOI boundaries is summarized in Table 4-70 below.

These parcels are also included in Table 4-69, and they fall under “Unincorporated” in terms of their jurisdiction. Parcels shown below in Table 4-70 are those that fall within each jurisdiction’s SOI and are

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-127 exposed to potential landslide hazard events. As shown in Table 4-70, only two parcels with two structures located in the SOI of the City of Hanford are exposed to landslide hazard.

Table 4-70 Sphere of Influence Risk to Landslide Hazard

JURISDICTION IMPROVED
PARCEL
COUNT

BUILDING
COUNT

IMPROVED
VALUE

ESTIMATED

CONTENT
VALUE
TOTAL
VALUE

POPULATION
Hanford 2 2 $350,069 $525,104 $875,173 -
Total 2 2 $350,069 $525,104 $875,173 -
Source: HIFLD, Kings County, WSP GIS Analysis
Furthermore, as shown in Figure 4-34, areas west of I-5 are the most susceptible to landslide hazard in the County. However, the Community District areas, which are outlined in the County’s 2035 General Plan Land Use Element and represent the County’s future urban growth, are not located to the west of I-5.

They are mostly SOIs that surround the County’s current municipal boundaries, while most areas within current SOIs are not significantly exposed to landslide hazard. Therefore, landslide hazards currently pose a limited threat to these Development Trends areas.

4.5.9.8 Risk Summary
• The overall significance of landslides in Kings is Low. • The geologic formations commonly associated with slope stability problems in Kings County are largely concentrated to the west of I-5 and in the southwestern portion of the County. • Heavy rain events caused a slope failure around a water line for Avenal in 1995, 1998, 2008 and 2010; however, there have not been any disaster declarations associated with landslides or CGS records of landslides in Kings County.
• People are most commonly at risk if they are caught in a landslide or debris flow, including when driving through a hazard area.
• Property loss is rare, but GIS analysis shows some properties could be exposed to landslides. • Landslides in adjacent counties can disrupt major transportation corridors, possibly affecting the local tourist economy and shipment of goods.
• Landslides and debris flows can destroy infrastructure such as water and sewer lines, electrical and telecommunications utilities and drainage. Disrupted transportation routes occur occasionally, usually during heavy rainstorms, and cause considerable inconvenience. • Related Hazards: Flood, Severe Weather

JURISDICTION GEOGRAPHIC
AREA

PROBABILITY

OF FUTURE

OCCURRENCE

MAGNITUDE/

SEVERITY

OVERALL

SIGNIFICANCE

PRIORITY
HAZARD?
Kings County Significant Occasional Negligible Low No
City of Avenal Significant Occasional Negligible Low No City of Corcoran Significant Occasional Negligible Low No City of Hanford Significant Occasional Negligible Low No City of Lemoore Significant Occasional Negligible Low No

4.5.10 PUBLIC HEALTH HAZARDS: PANDEMICS/EPIDEMICS

4.5.10.1 Hazard Description
A public health hazard spreads from one person to another through a variety of ways that include contact with blood and bodily fluids, breathing in an airborne virus, or being bitten by an insect.

The scale of a public health hazard outbreak or biological incident is described by the extent of the spread of disease in the community. An outbreak can be classified as an endemic, an epidemic, or a pandemic depending on the prevalence of the disease locally and around the world. • An endemic is defined as something natural to or characteristic of a particular place, population, or climate. For example, threadworm infections are endemic in the tropics. • An epidemic is defined as a disease that spreads rapidly through a demographic segment of the human population, such as everyone in a given geographic area, a similar population unit, or everyone of a certain age or sex, such as the children or women of a region. • A pandemic is defined as an extensive epidemic with effects felt worldwide.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-128 While many potentially devastating diseases are spread through ingestion or insects, airborne diseases and those spread through physical contact pose higher risks to the community as they are difficult to control. Diseases such as influenza, pertussis, tuberculosis, and meningitis are all spread through these methods and pose a threat to communities. Health agencies closely monitor for diseases with the potential to cause an epidemic and seek to develop and promote immunizations.

A pandemic is a global disease outbreak. A pandemic occurs when a new virus emerges for which people have little or no immunity, and for which there is no vaccine. This disease could easily spread person-to- person, causing serious illness, and can sweep across the country and around the world in a very short time. The CDC is working closely with other countries and the World Health Organization (WHO) to strengthen systems to detect outbreaks that might cause a pandemic and to assist with pandemic planning and preparation.

An especially severe influenza pandemic could lead to high levels of illness, death, social disruption, and economic loss. Impacts could range from school and business closings to the interruption of basic services such as public transportation, health care, and the delivery of food and essential medicines.

Pandemics are generally thought to be the result of novel strains of viruses. Because of the process utilized to prepare vaccines, it is impossible to have vaccines pre-prepared to combat future pandemics.

Additionally, for novel viruses, identification of symptoms, mode of transmission, and testing/identification may require development, causing significant delays in response actions. A portion of the human and financial cost of a pandemic is related to the lag time to prepare a vaccine to prevent the future spread of the novel virus. In some cases, current vaccines may have limited efficacy against novel strains.

Even when there is a strong healthcare system in place, disease outbreaks can strain and overwhelm community resources. The County’s vulnerable populations, young children, the elderly, under-resourced households, and those with underlying health conditions, will be the hardest hit during any disease outbreak. An especially severe outbreak could lead to high levels of illness, death, social disruption, and economic loss. Impacts could range from school and business closings to the interruption of basic services such as public transportation, health care, and the delivery of food and essential medicines.

Ongoing COVID-19 Pandemic
Since March 2020 and during the update of this plan, the County, the nation, and the world were dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic, confirming that the pandemic is a key public health hazard in the State.

The COVID-19 virus has a much higher rate of transmission than the seasonal flu, primarily by airborne transmission of droplets/bodily fluids. Common symptoms include fever, cough, fatigue, shortness of breath or breathing difficulties, and loss of smell and taste.

Figure 4-36 below shows the case fatality rate of COVID-19 from March 14, 2020, to March 21, 2023. The case fatality rate (CFR) is the ratio between confirmed deaths and confirmed cases. As shown in the figure, the CFR was relatively much higher in 2020 and started dropping towards the end of 2020 and early 2021. The highest CFR that the US experienced was a bit higher than 6%. On the other hand, since early 2022, the US’ CFR has been lower than 2%. However, as also mentioned by the figure’s source – Our World In Data, CFR does not reflect the risk of dying from COVID-19 because the CFR relies on the number of confirmed cases, and many cases are not confirmed.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-129 Figure 4-36 Case Fatality Rate of COVID-19 Up-to-Date

Source: Our World In Data – Global Change Data Lab
Moreover, as mentioned in CDC’s most up-to-date summary on January 27, 2023, there is a rapid reduction in the overall US COVID-19-related mortality rate in March 2022. From April through September 2022, COVID-19–related mortality rates remained relatively stable. On the other hand, although overall COVID-19-related mortality rates declined, adults aged ≥65 years continued to have the highest mortality rates. During April–September 2022, the proportion of COVID-19-related deaths accounted for by adults aged ≥85 years increased to ~40% despite accounting for <2% of the U.S. population. COVID-19–related deaths among children remained rare (CDC 2023).
2022 US Mpox Outbreak
As discussed by CDC in February 2023, Mpox is a rare disease caused by infection with the mpox virus.

Mpox virus is part of the same family of viruses as the variola virus, the virus that causes smallpox. Mpox symptoms are similar to smallpox symptoms, but milder, and mpox is rarely fatal. Mpox is not related to chickenpox.

Mpox was discovered in 1958 when two outbreaks of a pox-like disease occurred in colonies of monkeys kept for research. Despite being named “monkeypox,” the source of the disease remains unknown.

However, African rodents and non-human primates (like monkeys) might harbor the virus and infect people.

The first human case of mpox was recorded in 1970. Prior to the 2022 outbreak, mpox had been reported in people in several central and western African countries. Previously, almost all mpox cases in people outside of Africa were linked to international travel to countries where the disease commonly occurs or through imported animals. These cases occurred on multiple continents.

People with mpox often get a rash that may be located on hands, feet, chest, face, or mouth or near the genitals. The incubation period is 3-17 days. During this time, a person does not have symptoms and may feel fine. The rash will go through several stages, including scabs, before healing. The rash can initially look like pimples or blisters and may be painful or itchy. Other symptoms of mpox can include fever, chills, swollen lymph nodes, exhaustion, muscle aches and backache, headache, and respiratory symptoms (e.g., sore throat, nasal congestion, or cough). Mpox can spread to anyone through close, personal, often skin-to-skin contact. The risk is considered low for getting mpox by touching objects, fabrics, and surfaces that have been used by someone with mpox and not disinfected.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-130 As of March 15, 2023, there are 86,500 global cases, while 30,262 of them are in the US. The WHO declared Monkeypox Spread a Global Health Emergency on July 23, 2022. Since the number of new cases remained low, the Biden Administration ended the mpox public health emergency declaration on January 31, 2023.

Valley Fever
Another example of a human health hazard that is endemic to the County is Valley Fever, or “cocci” which is a known but poorly understood secondary effect of drought conditions, and possibly a combination of wind and drought events followed by a rainy season. Valley Fever is an infection caused by a fungus (Coccidioides immitis) that lives in soil and dirt and areas with low rainfall, high summer temperatures, and moderate winter temperatures. Valley Fever is primarily a disease of the lungs and the infection can occur year-round. In California, it has been reported from most counties, but especially from the San Joaquin Valley and Central Coast. Anyone who lives in, works in, or visits a place with Valley Fever can be infected. According to the Epidemiologic Summary of Valley Fever (Coccidioidomycosis) in California, 2019 Report, published by the California Department of Public Health, Kings County was one of the counties that have the highest rates of Valley Fever in 2019.

People can get sick by breathing in a form of the Valley Fever fungus called spores. Spores are too small to be seen and they can get into the air with dust when it is windy or when dirt is distributed. Fortunately, Valley Fever cannot be spread from one person to another. About 60% of infected people will not get sick. People who do get sick can have symptoms such as fever, tiredness, and weight loss that last a month or more. Valley Fever can also infect the brain, joints, bone, skin, or other organs. This type of infection is rare; however, it can be serious and sometimes fatal. Most people who get Valley Fever fully recover and are usually protected from getting Valley Fever again.

4.5.10.2 Geographic Area
Extensive – Pandemics occur not only on a county or state level but on a national and global scale. Most communities in Kings County would likely be affected, either directly or by secondary impacts. Some indirect consequences may be the diversion of resources that may be otherwise available. Diseases usually spread throughout vulnerable populations and in areas where people live and work in close quarters. Depending on the specifics of the illness, these areas can include shelters, senior homes, schools, and places of business. In general, it is likely that the more populated areas may be affected sooner and may experience higher infection rates.

Kings County has reported 65,122 cases and 464 deaths from COVID-19 as of December 13, 2022. The current COVID-19 pandemic has affected all the jurisdictions in Kings County. Table 4-71 shows the total number of cases as well as the number of cases per total population specific to the jurisdictions within Kings County. Data specific to tribes are included in the nearest counties. Kings County comprises less than 1% of the statewide total cases and deaths. In general, it is likely that the more-populated areas municipal areas may be affected sooner and may experience higher infection rates.

Table 4-71 COVID-19 Cases by Jurisdiction (as of December 8, 2022)

JURISDICTION CASES CASES PER
TOTAL POP*.

City of Avenal 7,712 55.6%
City of Corcoran 11,584 51.2%
City of Hanford 25,589 44.6%
City of Lemoore 11,914 44.7%
Unincorporated
County
4,166 13.3%
Total 60,974 40.1%
Source: Kings County Department of Public Health COVID -19 Dashboard *Total population is based on U.S. Census Bureau ACS 2017 -2021 5-Year Estimates Moreover, according to the New York Times “Tracking coronavirus in Kings County” dashboard shown in Figure 4-37, Kings County has relatively high reported cases per 100,000 people.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-131 Figure 4-37 Reported Coronavirus cases per 100,000 people Data source: The New York Times, December 14, 2022
With regards to Valley Fever, Figure 4-38 below shows Valley Fever Annual Incidence among California Counties in the year 2013 – 2018 and 2019.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-132 Figure 4-38 Annual Incidence among California Counties in the year 2013 – 2018 and 2019

Source: Epidemiologic Summary of Valley Fever (Coccidioidomycosis) in California, 2019 Report, published by California Department of Public Health

4.5.10.3 Past Occurrences
Since the early 1900s, five lethal pandemics have swept the globe:
• 1918-1919 Spanish Flu: The Spanish Flu was the most severe pandemic in recent history. The number of deaths was estimated to be 50-100 million worldwide and 675,000 in the United States. Its primary victims were mostly young, healthy adults. At one point, more than 10% of the American workforce was bedridden.
• 1957-1958 Asian Flu: The 1957 Asian Flu pandemic killed 1.1 million people worldwide, including about 70,000 people in the United States, mostly the elderly and chronically ill. Fortunately, the virus was quickly identified, and vaccine production began in May 1957. • 1968-1969 H3N2 Hong Kong Flu: The 1968 Hong Kong Flu pandemic killed one million people worldwide and approximately 100,000 people in the United States. Again, the elderly were more severely affected. This pandemic peaked during school holidays in December, limiting student- related infections, which may have kept the number of infections down. Also, people infected by the Asian Flu ten years earlier may have gained some resistance to the new virus. • 2009-2010 H1N1 Swine Flu: This influenza pandemic emerged from Mexico in early 2009 and was declared a public health emergency in the US on April 26. By June, approximately 18,000 cases had been reported in the US and the virus had spread to 74 countries. Most cases were fairly mild, with

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-133 symptoms similar to the seasonal flu, but there were cases of severe disease requiring hospitalization and some deaths.
• 2020-Ongoing COVID-19: The COVID-19 or novel coronavirus was detected in December 2019 and was declared a pandemic in March 2020. As of December 14, 2022, 650 million cases and 6.66 million deaths have been reported globally, including approximately 99.2 million cases and 1.09 million deaths in the US. Worldwide there have been 13.05 billion vaccine doses administered. The response to the COVID-19 Pandemic included numerous public health orders, including stay-home orders, massive testing infrastructure, the establishment of alternate care sites to support the hospital system, and an unprecedented community-wide vaccination push.

4.5.10.4 Likelihood of Future Occurrence
Occasional – Although it is impossible to predict the next disease outbreak, recent history shows these outbreaks are not uncommon and are likely to reoccur. Based on the five pandemics that have affected the United States in roughly the last 100 years, a pandemic occurs on average roughly every 20 years. In other words, there is a 5% probability that a pandemic that affects the entire United States will occur in any given year.

For the current COVID-19 pandemic, due to the virus's ability to mutate and rapidly infect those who are not vaccinated, the pandemic may extend for several years, and booster vaccines may be necessary to prevent future outbreaks. In just the last couple of decades, the world has drastically increased points of transmissions through global travel and trade to levels unseen in human history – this may have a drastic impact on the frequency of pandemics and the speed with which they spread in coming years.

4.5.10.5 Climate Change Considerations
As the Earth’s climate continues to warm, researchers predict wild animals will be forced to relocate their habitats — likely to regions with large human populations — dramatically increasing the risk of a viral jump to humans that could lead to the next pandemic. This link between climate change and viral transmission is described by an international research team led by scientists at Georgetown University, published on April 28, 2022, in Nature. The scholars noted that the geographic range shifts due to climate change could cause species that carry viruses to encounter other mammals, sharing associated viruses thousands of times, which may then further be spread to humans. In addition, rising temperatures caused by climate change will impact bats, which account for the majority of novel viral sharing. Bats’ ability to fly will allow them to travel long distances and share viruses in geographically dispersed places.

Altogether, the study suggests that climate change will become the biggest upstream risk factor for disease emergence — exceeding higher-profile issues like deforestation, wildlife trade and industrial agriculture. The authors highlight a need to pair wildlife disease surveillance with real-time studies of environmental change (GUMC 2022).

Another research article that was published on August 23, 2021, also reached a similar conclusion. The likelihood of an extremely infectious disease epidemic – similar to the COVID-19 pandemic – could triple in the coming decades. William Pan, Ph.D. – one of the study authors and an associate professor of global environmental health at Duke University, together with his colleagues looked at data from the past 400 years to estimate the chance of extreme epidemics each year. The rate of occurrence of epidemics varies widely across time, the researchers said, but the chance of an extreme epidemic can be calculated.

Recent estimates show that infectious diseases that are passed from animals to humans – also called zoonotic diseases, such as COVID-19 – are becoming more common due to climate change (Crist, 2022).

4.5.10.6 Magnitude and Severity
Critical – The magnitude of a disease outbreak or public health emergency will range significantly depending on the aggressiveness of the virus in question, the ease of transmission, and the efficacy of public health and medical responses. Pandemic influenza is easily transmitted from person to person, but advances in medical technologies have greatly reduced the number of deaths caused by influenza over time.

Today, a large percentage of the world’s population is clustered in cities, making them ideal breeding grounds for epidemics. Additionally, the explosive growth in air travel means a virus could spread around the globe within hours, quickly creating a pandemic. Under such conditions, there may be very little warning time. It is estimated that one to six months will have lapsed between the time that a dangerous new influenza strain is identified and the time that outbreaks begin to occur in the United States.

Outbreaks are expected to occur simultaneously throughout much of the nation, preventing shifts in human and material resources that normally occur with other natural disasters. These aspects make

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-134 influenza pandemic unlike most other public health emergencies or community disasters. Pandemics typically last for several months to years.

As seen with the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, the rapid spread of a virus combined with the need for increased hospital and coroner resources, testing centers, first responders, and vaccination administration sites causes significant strain on the medical system and public health departments. Additionally, other public health-related triggers or commingled public health hazards (such as an outbreak of another pathogen) or even more contagious strains of COVID such as the recent Omicron, BA.5 and Delta B.1.617.2 variant, can quickly lead to even more outbreaks.

The Pandemic Intervals Framework (PIF) developed by WHO is a six-phased approach to defining the progression of an influenza pandemic. This framework is used to guide influenza pandemic planning and provides recommendations for risk assessment, decision-making, and action. These intervals provide a common method to describe pandemic activities that can inform public health actions. The duration of each pandemic interval might vary depending on the characteristics of the virus and the public health response.

The six-phase approach was designed for the easy incorporation of recommendations into existing national and local preparedness and response plans. Phases 1 through 3 correlate with preparedness in the pre-pandemic interval, including capacity development and response planning activities, while Phases 4 through 6 signal the need for response and mitigation efforts during the pandemic interval.

Pre-Pandemic Interval
Phase 1 is the natural state in which influenza viruses circulate continuously among animals (primarily birds) but do not affect humans.

Phase 2 occurs when an animal influenza virus circulating among domesticated or wild animals is known to have caused infection in humans and is thus considered a potential pandemic threat. Phase 2 involves cases of animal influenza that have circulated among domesticated or wild animals and have caused specific cases of infection among humans.

Phase 3 represents the mutation of the animal influenza virus in humans so that it can be transmitted to other humans under certain circumstances (usually very close contact between individuals). At this point, small clusters of infection have occurred.

Phase 4 is characterized by verified human-to-human transmission of the virus able to cause “community-level outbreaks.” The ability to cause sustained disease outbreaks in a community marks a significant upward shift in the risk for a pandemic. Phase 4 involves community-wide outbreaks as the virus continues to mutate and becomes more easily transmitted between people (for example, transmission through the air)
Phase 5 is characterized by verified human-to-human spread of the virus in at least two countries in one WHO region. While most countries will not be affected at this stage, the declaration of Phase 5 is a strong signal that a pandemic is imminent and that the time to finalize the organization, communication, and implementation of the planned mitigation measures is short.

Phase 6, the pandemic phase, is characterized by community-level outbreaks in at least one other country in a different WHO region in addition to the criteria defined in Phase 5. The designation of this phase will indicate that a global pandemic is underway.

4.5.10.7 Vulnerability Assessment
People
Pandemics can affect large segments of the population for long periods. The number of hospitalizations and deaths will depend on the virulence of the virus. Risk groups cannot be predicted with certainty; the elderly, people with underlying medical conditions, and young children are usually at higher risk, but as discussed above, this is not always the case. People without health coverage or access to good medical care are also likely to be more adversely affected. According to the 2021 ACS 5-Year Estimates of the County, 10.3% of the County’s population is 65 years of age or older, 7.5% of the population is 5 years of age or younger, and 16.4% experienced poverty in the prior 12 months.

However, impacts, mortality rates, speed and types of spread are disease-specific. As seen with the current COVID-19 pandemic statewide, according to the County Department of Public Health, the most positive cases occurred in the 18-49 age group. This age group makes up more than 50% of the County’s total cases. Hospitalizations and deaths, however, happened more within the 50+ age group. (KCDPH, 2023)

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-135 Property
Public health hazards would not have direct impacts on infrastructure or the built environment. Should infrastructure require human intervention to fulfill vital functions, these functions could be impaired by absenteeism, sick days and isolation, quarantine, and disease prophylaxis measures. As concerns about contamination increase, property may be quarantined or destroyed as a precaution against spreading illness. Additionally, traditional sheltering facilities, including shelters for persons experiencing homelessness or facilities to support displaced persons during an evacuation, cannot be done in a congregate setting. This requires additional planning considerations or the use of facilities that allow for non-congregate shelter settings which may require approval from FEMA and may have an increased cost.

Critical Facilities and Lifelines
The impacts of a public health hazard on critical infrastructure and lifelines would center on service disruption due to staff missing work and shortages in essential resources and supplies to perform services, as seen with personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic within the health and medical sector. Schools may also be forced to close due to faculty and staffing shortages.

While automated systems and services that allow for the physical distancing of staff from other persons may fare better through a public health hazard incident, all critical infrastructure sectors and lifelines would likely be affected due to the globalization of supply chains, services, and interdependency of most communities.

Economy
A widespread public health hazard outbreak could have devastating impacts on Kings County’s economy. The economic impacts fall under two categories – economic losses as a result of the disease, and economic losses to fight the disease. Economic impacts as a result of diseases include those costs associated with lost work and business interruption. Depending on the disease and the type and rate of spread, businesses could see a loss of consumer base as people self-isolate or avoid travel. This could last for a protracted amount of time, compounding economic loss. Economic costs are also associated with incident response. Two of the biggest areas of cost are public information efforts and mass prophylaxis.

In a normal year, lost productivity due to illness costs US employers an estimated $530 billion. During a pandemic, that figure would likely be considerably high and could trigger a recession or even a depression. According to an October 2020 report by The Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) Network, the estimated cumulative financial costs of the COVID-19 pandemic related to the COVID-19 economic recession and compromised health (premature death, mental health, long-term health impairment) in the US population was almost $16 trillion (Cultler and Summers 2020). Since March 2022, the California Small Business COVID-19 Relief Grant Program has been rolling out and supporting small businesses with grants ranging from $5,000 to $25,000. The entire financial support offered through the program exceeds $2 billion.

Cultural, Historic and Natural Resources
As mentioned previously, public health hazards would not have specific impacts on the built or natural environment, including historic and cultural resources. However, historic and cultural resources are often intertwined with the tourism industry, therefore reduced tourism could lead to impacts such as a loss of revenue needed for resource maintenance.

Impacts on natural resources can vary. Some ecosystems showed signs of improvement during the peak covid-19 lockdown. However, some zoonotic diseases can spread from animals to humans, wreaking havoc on both populations. Examples of zoonotic diseases include avian flu, swine flu, tuberculosis, plague, and rabies.

Development Trends
Population growth and development contribute to pandemic exposure. Development Trends in the County has the potential to change how infectious diseases spread through the community and impact human health in both the short and long term. New development may increase the number of people and facilities exposed to public health hazards and greater population concentrations (often found in special needs facilities and businesses) put more people at risk. During a disease outbreak, those in the immediate isolation area would have little to no warning, whereas the population further away in the dispersion path may have some time to prepare and mitigate against disease depending on the hazard, its transmission, and public notification.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-136

4.5.10.8 Risk Summary
• In summary, the public health hazard is considered to be of overall Medium significance for Kings County. Variations in risk by jurisdiction are summarized in the table below, along with key issues from the vulnerability assessment.
• Pandemics affecting the U.S. occur roughly once every 20 years, meaning there is a roughly 5% chance a pandemic will happen each year, but they cannot be reliably predicted. • Effects on people will vary, while the elderly, people with underlying medical conditions, and young children are usually at higher risk.
• Effects on property are typically minimal, although quarantines could result in short-term closures. • Effects on economy: lost productivity due to illness and potential business closures could potentially have severe economic impacts. Social distancing requirements and fear of public gatherings could significantly reduce in-person commerce.
• Effects on critical facilities and infrastructure: community lifelines, such as healthcare facilities, like hospitals will be impacted and may be overwhelmed and have difficulty maintaining operations due to bed availability, medical staffing shortages, and lack of PPE and other supplies. • Ongoing mitigation activities should focus on disease prevention, especially during flu season. This includes, but is not limited to, pre-season community outreach campaigns to educate the public about risks and available support; establishing convenient vaccination centers; reaching out to vulnerable populations and caregivers; and issuing advisories and warnings. • Related Hazards – Human Conflict

JURISDICTION GEOGRAPHIC
AREA

PROBABILITY OF
FUTURE

OCCURRENCE

MAGNITUDE/

SEVERITY

OVERALL

SIGNIFICANCE

PRIORITY
HAZARD?
Kings County Extensive Highly Likely Critical Medium Yes City of Avenal Extensive Highly Likely Critical Medium Yes City of Corcoran Extensive Highly Likely Critical Medium Yes City of Hanford Extensive Highly Likely Critical Medium Yes City of Lemoore Extensive Highly Likely Critical Medium Yes

4.5.11 SEVERE WEATHER: GENERAL
The climate in the Central Valley is defined generally by hot, dry summers and foggy, rainy winters. Severe weather is generally any destructive weather event but usually occurs in Kings County as localized thunderstorms that bring heavy rain and strong winds that occur most often during the winter and spring months. The agricultural industry is among the most vulnerable asset to severe weather.

Agricultural losses resulting from natural hazards can have dramatic impacts on the economic health of Kings County.

For this plan, severe weather is broken down as follows:
• Dense Fog
• Heavy Rain, Thunderstorm, Hail, Lightning
• High Wind/Tornado
NOAA’s NCEI has been tracking adverse weather since 1950. Their Storm Events Database contains data on the following: all weather events from 1996 to September 2022, and additional data for tornados (1950 – 1995), thunderstorm winds (1955-1995), and hail (1955-1995). This database contains 992 storm events that occurred in the County between January 1, 1950, and September 2022. Table 4-72 summarizes these events.

Table 4-72 NCEI Hazard Event Reports for Kings County, 1950-2022 HAZARD # OF
EVENTS

PROPERTY
LOSS ($)

CROP LOSS
($)

DEATHS INJURIES USDA RMA
LOSSES**
Cold/wind Chill* 4 $0 $0 0 0 $0
Dense Fog* 333 $3,911,000 $0 0 8 $0
Dense Smoke 0 $0 $0 0 0 $0
Drought* 64 $0 $0 0 0 $5,185,606
Excessive Heat* 24 $2,000,000 $0 0 0 $0

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-137 HAZARD # OF
EVENTS

PROPERTY
LOSS ($)

CROP LOSS
($)

DEATHS INJURIES USDA RMA
LOSSES**
Extreme
Cold/Wind Chill*
4 $0 $0 0 0 $0
Flash Flood 6 $0 $0 0 0 $0
Flood 19 $818,190 $1,000,000 0 0 $0
Frost/Freeze* 198 $0 $216,720,000 0 0 $10,965,935
Funnel Cloud 15 $0 $0 0 0 $0
Hail 25 $2,000 $4,360,000 0 5 $4,803,398
Heat* 93 $0 $106,600,000 0 0 $37,013,009
Heavy Rain 61 $131,000 $10,450,000 0 0 $17,638,076
High Wind* 41 $5,553,000 $300,000 1 6 $1,220,101
Lightning 10 $51,000 $400,000 0 0 $0
Strong Wind* 49 $453,400 $119,500 0 0 $0
Thunderstorm
Wind*
32 $399,500 $4,000,000 1 0 $0
Tornado 8 $540,250 $0 0 1 $0
Wildfire* 3 $0 $0 1 0 $55,611
Winter Storm* 0 $0 $0 0 0 $0
Winter Weather* 0 $0 $0 0 0 $61,977,533
Total 992 $13,859,340 $343,949,500 3 20 $138,859,270
Source: National Center for Environmental Information Storm Events Database, www.ncdc.noaa.gov/stormevents/ * Hazards with wide extents reflect larger zones that extend beyond Kings County. ** USDA RMA data is for the year 2007 – 2020
Hazards recorded in the USDA RMA database may not share the exact names used in the NCEI database: (NCEI Hazard Name – USDA RMA Name)
Heavy Rain – Excess Moisture/Precipitation/Rain
High Wind – Wind/Excess Wind
Winter Weather – Cold Winter/Cold Wet Weather
The NCEI table above summarizes adverse weather events that occurred in the County from 1950 to 2022. Only a few of the events actually resulted in state and federal disaster declarations. It is interesting to note that different data sources capture different events during the same time period, and often different information specific to the same events. While the HMPC recognizes these inconsistencies, this data provides value in depicting the County’s overall hazard environment as it relates to severe weather.

Due to the size of the County and changes in elevation and climate, weather conditions can vary greatly across the County. The profiles that follow provide information from two weather stations in different parts of the County, the Hanford weather station in the northeastern county and the Avenal weather station in the southwestern County. The temperature data from these two weather stations are displayed in Table 4-73.

Table 4-73 Hanford 1S and Avenal 9 Weather Station Summaries METRIC HANFORD 1S
(043747)
AVENAL 9 SSE
(040398)
Period of record 1899-2016 1955-1961
Winter Average Minimum Temperature* 36.2°F 37.0°F
Winter Mean Temperature * 46.7°F 49.5°F
Summer Average Maximum Temperature** 95.1°F 100.4°F
Summer Mean Temperature** 77.7°F 81.2°F
Average Annual Number of Days >90°F 105 124

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-138 METRIC HANFORD 1S
(043747)
AVENAL 9 SSE
(040398)
Average Annual Number of Days <32°F 0.0 0.0
Mean Total Precipitation (in.) 8.38 in. 6.55 in.

Mean Snow Depth (in.) 0.0 0.3 in.

Source: WRCC
* Winter = Dec., Jan., and Feb.
** Summer = Jun., Jul., and Aug.

4.5.12 SEVERE WEATHER: DENSE FOG

4.5.12.1 Hazard Description
Fog results from air being cooled to the point where it can no longer hold all of the water vapor it contains. For example, rain can cool and moisten the air near the surface until fog forms. A cloud-free, humid air mass at night can lead to fog formation, where land and water surfaces that have warmed up during the summer are still evaporating water into the atmosphere. This is called radiation fog. A warm moist air mass blowing over a cold surface also can cause fog to form, which is called advection fog.

The interior California valleys have a unique fog problem called the tule fog. The tule fog is a radiation fog, which condenses when there is high relative humidity, typically after heavy rain, calm winds, and rapid cooling during the night. The longer nights during the winter months create this rapid ground cooling, which results in a pronounced temperature inversion at a low altitude, creating a thick ground fog. Above the cold, foggy layer, the air is typically warm and dry. Once the fog has formed, turbulent air is necessary to break through the inversion. Daytime heating can also work to evaporate the fog in some areas. The tule fogs get their name from the tule reeds, which grew around the swamps and deltas of the great Tulare Lake that once covered the southern end of the San Joaquin Valley.

As noted in the County’s 2012 MJHMP, the tule fog season in the County is typically December through February. Fog typically forms rapidly in the early morning hours. Tule fogs can last for days, sometimes weeks. Fog can have devastating effects on transportation corridors in the County. Nighttime driving in the fog is dangerous and multi-car pileups have resulted from drivers using excessive speed for the conditions and visibility. Tule fog has also been found to be connected to air pollution and exacerbates the naturally occurring fog. A study published in the Journal of Geophysical Research in 2019 found that air pollution is a key contributor to this seasonal fog, and due to the passage of the Clean Air Act in 1970, it has declined about 75 percent since 1980 (Gray et al., 2019). Figure 4-39 illustrates the extent of tule fog over the Central Valley.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-139 Figure 4-39 Tule Fog over Central Valley

Source: NASA, Jeff Schmaltz, January 5, 2005

4.5.12.2 Geographic Area
Extensive – The San Joaquin Valley is hemmed in on three sides by mountain ranges, with resulting inversion layers trapping cooler air on the valley floor. This predisposes the County’s planning area to severe episodes of fog in winter months, when barometric pressures are high, humidity is increased, and ambient temperatures are low. All areas of the County are vulnerable to dense fog events.

4.5.12.3 Past Occurrences
As shown in Table 4-72 above, the NCEI records 333 dense fog events that occurred in various zones that encompass Kings County, such as Southwestern San Joaquin Valley and Western San Joaquin Valley zones. Since dense fog events are recorded on a zonal basis, not all 333 dense fog events happened within Kings County. The followings are the descriptions of a few dense fog events that impacted Kings County, based on the NCEI database.
• November 14 – 22, 2002: Following the very substantial rain for the 3 days from the 7th through the 9th of the month, high pressure aloft built and resided over Interior Central California. Numerous vehicle accidents occurred due to the extremely poor visibilities on Central and Southern San Joaquin Valley roadways. There were 4 indirect traffic fatalities due to the dense fog with at least 32 injuries. On the morning of the 22nd, there were several separate accidents due to locally dense fog in North Kings and West Tulare Counties that resulted in indirect injuries. According to NCEI database, this dense fog event resulted in a total of $150,000 property losses. • January 11 – 17, 2003: Widespread and dense morning fog continued throughout the Central and Southern San Joaquin Valley from the morning of the 11th through the morning of the 17th of January. Accidents were reported on the 7th, and 14th in Kings County due to very poor visibilities in dense fog. According to NCEI database, this dense fog event resulted in a total of $150,000 property losses.
• January 31, 2018: Areas of dense fog formed once again overnight in the San Joaquin Valley. The fog became dense in several locations during the early morning hours and resulted in several auto accidents along State Route 198 near Hanford. Visibility of less than a quarter mile was reported in Hanford. California Highway Patrol was pacing traffic along State Highway 198 between the

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-140 Kings/Tulare County line and Armona as several fog-related minor auto accidents were reported.

Several school districts had delayed openings due to dense fog. According to NCEI database, this dense fog event resulted in a total of $100,000 property losses. • January 6, 2021: High pressure built over central California on January 5. With mainly clear skies and light winds, areas of dense fog formed in the San Joaquin Valley during the early morning hours of January 6. Hanford reported visibility of below a quarter mile. A four-vehicle accident took place on State Route 198 at 08:09 am PST involving a big rig, a pickup truck and two cars. There was a minor injury from the collision. Visibility at both Hanford and Visalia (Tulare County) was at an eighth of a mile at the time of the accident. According to NCEI database, this dense fog event resulted in a total of $150,000 property losses.

4.5.12.4 Likelihood of Future Occurrence
Highly Likely – According to Table 4-72, 333 dense fogs impacted Kings County during a 27-year period, which equates to 12.3 events per year. Therefore, based on NCEI data and the fact that the tule fog prevails in the San Joaquin Valley, it is highly likely that fog events will continue to occur regularly in Kings County.

On the other hand, California’s winter tule fog has declined due to climate change and the reduction in air pollution. Refer to the Climate Change Considerations subsection below for more details on climate change’s impact on the Likelihood of Future Occurrence of fog events.

4.5.12.5 Climate Change Considerations
As mentioned in the previous section, California’s winter tule fog has declined dramatically over the past three decades, which raised a red flag for the state’s multibillion-dollar agricultural industry, according to researchers at UC Berkeley. Crops such as almonds, pistachios, cherries, apricots, and peaches go through a necessary winter dormant period brought on and maintained by colder temperatures. Tule fog that descends upon the State’s Central Valley between late fall and early spring, helps contribute to this winter chill.

When there is an insufficient rest period (or lack of dormant time for crops) it impairs the ability of farmers to achieve high-quality fruit yields. The UC Berkeley findings have implications for the entire country since many of these California crops account for 95 percent of U.S. production. The researchers also paired NASA and NOAA satellite records with data from a network of University of California weather stations, covering 32 consecutive winters. Based on the data, there was a great deal of variability from year to year, but on average, the researchers found a 46 percent drop in the number of fog days between the first of November and the end of February. Climate forecasts suggest that the accumulation of winter chill will continue to decrease in the Central Valley. Tule fog was also less prevalent in recent years in part due to the multi-year drought (Yang, 2015).

While the short‐term fog variability is dominantly driven by climate fluctuations, the longer‐term temporal and spatial changes in fog have been driven by changes in air pollution. In addition to the decrease in the accumulation of winter chill, the Clean Air Act has also greatly reduced the air pollution that would form fogs (Gray et al., 2019).

4.5.12.6 Magnitude and Severity
Critical – Tule fog forms on clear nights when the ground is moist, and the wind is near calm and can be widespread throughout the San Joaquin Valley. On nights like this, the ground cools rapidly. In turn, the moist air above it cools and causes water vapor to condense. Once it has formed, the air must be heated enough to either evaporate the fog or lift it above the surface so that visibilities improve. Common areas for tule fog to form include foothills and valleys. Visibility in tule fog is usually less than an eighth of a mile (about 600 ft or 200 m) but can be much lower. Visibility can vary rapidly; in only a few feet, visibility can go from 10 feet (3.0 m) to near zero.

Fog contributes to transportation accidents and is a significant life safety hazard. These accidents can cause multiple injuries and deaths and could have serious implications for human health and the environment if a hazardous or nuclear waste shipment were involved. Other disruptions from fog include delayed emergency response vehicles and school closures.

In 2018, the NWS in Hanford, California developed the Experimental Fog Severity Index in conjunction with the NWS issues fog advisories to help give motorists warning of fog events. A dense fog advisory is issued when widespread dense fog develops, and visibilities drop to one-quarter of a mile or less. The Experimental Fog Severity Index has five levels with level 5 being the most severe. Figure 4-40 describes each level of the Index.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-141 Figure 4-40 National Weather Service Experimental Fog Severity Index

Source: NWS

4.5.12.7 Vulnerability Assessment
Property
Based on historic information, the primary effect of fog has not resulted in significant damages to property, and the losses are typically covered by insurance. Dense fog does result in substantial vehicle damage during transportation-related accidents.

People
Reduced visibility is the greatest risk to people when heavy fog is prevalent. Particularly when fog is dense, it can be hazardous to drivers, mariners and aviators and contributes to numerous accidents each year. To reduce injury and harm, people should avoid driving when dense fog is prevalent, if possible. If driving is pertinent, emergency services advise driving with lights on low beam, watching for California Highway Patrol (CHP) pace vehicles to guide through the fog, avoiding stopping on highways, and avoiding crossing traffic lanes. Feedback from the public as part of the public survey also emphasized the impacts of dense fog on the population related to travel on County roads that lack appropriate signage on fog hazards (see Appendix G).

Critical Facilities and Lifelines
Fog can have devastating effects on transportation corridors in the County. Multi-car pileups have resulted from drivers using excessive speed for the conditions and visibility. These accidents can cause multiple injuries and deaths and could have serious implications for human health and the environment if a hazardous or nuclear waste shipment were involved. Other disruptions from tule or dense fog include delayed emergency response vehicles and school closures.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-142 Economy
Economic impacts due to dense fog are generally related to road closures leading to a decrease in travel to businesses. Other economic impacts related to property damages are vehicles from accidents. As shown in Table 4-72 above there is a recorded $3,911,000 of property damages as a result of dense fog all of which are from traffic accidents in the Central Valley and San Joaquin Valley. Based on that amount, this region including Kings County has an estimated average annual loss expectancy of $144,852 due to dense fog events.

Cultural, Historic and Natural Resources
As referred to in the Climate Change Considerations section, California’s winter tule fog has declined dramatically over the past three decades, raising a red flag for the State’s multibillion-dollar agricultural industry. Crops such as almonds, pistachios, cherries, apricots, and peaches go through a necessary winter dormant period brought on and maintained by colder temperatures and tule fog that descends upon the State’s Central Valley between late fall and early spring.

Development Trends
Population and commercial growth both within and outside the County will increase the potential for complications with traffic accidents and commerce interruptions associated with dense fog.

4.5.12.8 Risk Summary
• Tule fog season begins in late fall and lasts from winter (November – March). • Between 1950 and 2022, 333 dense fog events impacted areas including Kings County during a 27- year period, which equates to 12.3 events per year.
• Dense fog events in the Central Valley and San Joaquin Valley have resulted in $3,911,000 in property damages, largely due to traffic accidents.
• California’s winter tule fog has declined dramatically and is predicted to be less prevalent due to prolonged drought events and the reduction in air pollution. • Reduced visibility is the greatest risk to people when heavy fog is prevalent, it can be hazardous to drivers, mariners and aviators and contributes to numerous accidents each year. It does not typically have a disproportionate impact on socially vulnerable populations. • Fog can have devastating effects on transportation corridors and result in casualties; fog can prevent responders to arrive on the scene timely.
• Related Hazards – Hazardous Materials Incidents, Transportation Accidents

JURISDICTION GEOGRAPHIC
AREA

PROBABILITY OF
FUTURE

OCCURRENCE

MAGNITUDE/

SEVERITY

OVERALL

SIGNIFICANCE

PRIORITY
HAZARD?
Kings County Extensive Highly Likely Critical Medium Yes City of Avenal Extensive Highly Likely Moderate Low No
City of Corcoran Extensive Highly Likely Moderate Low No City of Hanford Extensive Highly Likely Critical Medium Yes City of Lemoore Extensive Highly Likely Moderate Low No

4.5.13 SEVERE WEATHER: HEAVY RAIN, THUNDERSTORMS, HAIL, AND

LIGHTNING

4.5.13.1 Hazard Description
Heavy Rain
A majority of adverse weather experienced in the County takes place in the winter months as heavy rain and thunderstorm events that are sometimes accompanied by high winds or dense fog. The County’s weather is influenced by the Pacific Ocean and routine climate patterns such as El Niño, the warm phase of the El Niño-Southern Oscillation, a pattern found in the tropical Pacific when there are fluctuations in temperatures between the ocean and atmosphere. During El Niño, the surface winds across the entire tropical Pacific are weaker than normal and the ocean surface is at above-average temperatures in the central and eastern tropical Pacific Ocean (NOAA 2016). El Niño typically develops over North America during the winter season, causing the severe winter storms the County often experiences. This climate pattern occurs every few years and brings with it above-average rain and snow across the southern region of the United States, especially in California.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-143 Atmospheric rivers (ARs), another climate pattern that leads to adverse weather in the County, are responsible for up to 50 percent of California’s precipitation annually and 65 percent seasonally (Arcuni 2019). An AR is a long, narrow region of the atmosphere, like a river in the sky, that transports most of the water vapor outside of the tropics. ARs can be 300 miles wide, a mile deep and more than 1,000 miles long, and carry an amount of water vapor roughly the same as the average flow of water at the mouth of the Mississippi River (NOAA 2015). Warm water storms over the Pacific Ocean lead to evaporation and create a high concentration of moisture in the air while prevailing winds create the distinctive river shape, which is often compared “to a fire hose pointed at California” (Arcuni 2019). When an AR reaches land, it releases water vapor in the form of rain or snow. ARs play an important role in the global water cycle and are closely tied to both water supply and flooding risk.

Research suggests that ARs contributed to the collapse of both Oroville Dam spillways in February 2017 (NASA Global Hydrology Resource Center), as well as the winter flooding in 1861-1862, which completely inundated Sacramento and is considered the worst flood event in California’s history (Ingram 2013). When an AR forms in the tropical regions of the Pacific near Hawaii it is known as a Pineapple Express. This type of AR can produce as much as five inches in one day (NOAA 2018). In 2018 two Pineapple Express ARs hit California, causing significant heavy precipitation events throughout the State.

California was facing a severe drought when it was hit by 31 AR storms between October 2022 and March 2023. Although the number of storms was not unprecedented, their location, intensity, and duration had a significant impact on California's climate. As a result of these AR storms, the state experienced record- breaking snowfall and deadly flooding. (Toohey, 2023).

Thunderstorms
Thunderstorms are formed from a combination of moisture, rapidly rising warm air, and a force capable of lifting air, such as warm and cold fronts or a mountain. Thunderstorms may occur alone, in clusters, or in lines. As a result, several thunderstorms can affect one location in the course of a few hours. A thunderstorm can produce lightning, thunder, and rainfall and may also lead to the formation of tornadoes, hail, downbursts, and microbursts of wind. Electricity can be interrupted by lightning strikes.

During the summer, climatic factors combine to promote the development of thunderstorms.

Hail
Hail forms on condensation nuclei such as dust or ice crystals, when supercooled water freezes on contact. In clouds containing large numbers of supercooled water droplets, these ice nuclei grow quickly at the expense of the liquid droplets. The hail grows increasingly larger. Once a hailstone becomes too heavy to be supported by the storm’s updraft it falls out of the cloud. Hailstones are usually from the size of a pea to the size of a golf ball, and larger hailstones can cause property damage.

Lightning
Lightning is an electrical discharge between positive and negative regions of a thunderstorm. A lightning flash is composed of a series of strokes with an average of about four strokes per flash. The length and duration of each lightning stroke vary but typically average about 30 microseconds.

4.5.13.2 Geographic Area
Extensive – Heavy rain is generally expansive in size. The entire County is susceptible to any of the effects of heavy rain and thunderstorms. Hail and lightning events are also common in the County, which can impact any area of the County during any month of the year.

4.5.13.3 Past Occurrences
Hail
Hail events are common in the County. Figure 4-41 shows that different areas within the planning area, SOI, and other areas in the vicinity have historically experienced hail events. Several hail events during which quarter and even golf ball-sized hailstones fell happened in recent years. Database for hail.

Additionally, there have been three USDA disaster declarations that included hail since 2012 (S4657, S4170, and S3320).

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-144 Figure 4-41 Hail Events in Kings County, 1950 – 2021
As shown in Table 4-74, since 1950, there have been 25 reports of hail events that caused around $2,000 property loss and $4,060,000 crop loss. Table 4-74 shows the records collected from the NCEI Strom Events
Table 4-74 Hail Events in Kings County, 1950 – 2021

LOCATION DATE PROPERTY DAMAGE CROP DAMAGE
KINGS CO. 1/22/1964 - -
KINGS CO. 3/23/1964 - -
KINGS CO. 3/6/1980 - -
KINGS CO. 4/28/1980 - -
KINGS CO. 3/12/1996 - -
HANFORD 11/22/1996 $2,000 -
LEMOORE NAS 3/22/1997 - $20,000
STRATFORD 4/8/1999 - $3,390,000

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-145

LOCATION DATE PROPERTY DAMAGE CROP DAMAGE
HANFORD 10/10/2000 - $500,000
AVENAL 5/31/2002 - -
(NLC)NAS LEMOORE 2/22/2005 - -
KETTLEMAN CITY 4/28/2005 - -
HANFORD 4/28/2005 - -
LEMOORE 4/28/2005 - -
HANFORD 4/28/2005 - -
HANFORD 9/20/2005 - -
AVENAL 3/10/2006 - -
(NLC)NAS LEMOORE 2/22/2007 - -
CORCORAN 9/22/2007 - -
HANFORD MUNI ARPT 10/29/2007 - -
CIMARRON 10/29/2007 - -
CIMARRON 4/11/2012 - $150,000
HANFORD 4/24/2016 - -
STRATFORD 9/11/2017 - -
Source: NCEI
Heavy Rain
Heavy rains and adverse storms occur in the County primarily during the late fall and winter but have a chance of occurring in every month of the year. According to information obtained from the WRCC, the majority of precipitation is produced by storms during January and other winter months. Precipitation during the summer months is in the form of rain showers and is rare.

The NCEI records show heavy rainstorms can cause widespread flooding, which can lead to extensive localized drainage issues. In addition to the flooding that often occurs during these storms, strong winds, when combined with saturated ground conditions, can knock down very mature trees. Refer to the Flood section for more information related to flooding events in the County. There have been eight federal and state disaster declarations (1983, 1995 [two], 1997, 2005, 2017 [two], and 2023) for heavy rain, severe storm, and flooding in Kings County. In addition, there have been three USDA disaster designations (2012 [two], and 2016) for excessive rainfall.

The NCEI Storm Events Database records 56 rain events in Kings County between 1950 and 2021, as shown in Table 4-75. No casualties are recorded for any of the events. As noted above there is a connection between heavy rain events and flooding and it is assumed that the property damages listed in the NCEI database are the results of flooding caused by heavy rain events. The heavy atmospheric rain conditions which hit California in late 2022 to early 2023 are not reflected in this dataset.

Table 4-75 Heavy Rain Events in Kings County, 1950 – 2021

EVENT TYPE LOCATION DATE PROPERTY DAMAGE CROP DAMAGE
Flash Flood

AVENAL 3/5/2001 - -
KETTLEMAN CITY 2/21/2005 - -
HANFORD MUNI ARPT 9/22/2007 - -
AVENAL 6/5/2015 - -
AVENAL 10/3/2018 - -
KETTLEMAN CITY 6/1/2019 - -
Flood HANFORD 3/12/1996 - -
LEMOORE 3/24/1998 - -
LEMOORE 3/28/1998 - -
LEMOORE 5/5/1998 - -

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-146

EVENT TYPE LOCATION DATE PROPERTY DAMAGE CROP DAMAGE
HANFORD 11/12/2001 - -
COUNTYWIDE 1/2/2006 $71,000 $1,000,000
HANFORD MUNI ARPT 1/23/2008 $5,000 -
HANFORD 10/13/2009 $2,000 -
(NLC)NAS LEMOORE 1/19/2010 $25,000 -
LEMOORE 12/29/2010 $75,000 -
KETTLEMAN CITY 4/7/2011 $2,000 -
HANFORD 6/5/2011 $1,000 -
HANFORD MUNI ARPT 3/8/2013 - -
ROSSI 1/8/2017 $637,190 -
AVENAL 1/18/2017 - -
HARDWICK 6/22/2017 - -
HANFORD 5/26/2019 - -
ARMONA 5/26/2019 - -
AVENAL 1/27/2021 - -
Heavy Rain

HANFORD 2/1/1998 $20,000 $1,000,000
HANFORD 5/1/1998 - $73,600,000
HANFORD 6/8/2000 - $100,000
HANFORD MUNI ARPT 5/31/2002 - $ - AVENAL 3/15/2003 - $ -
HANFORD 4/1/2003 - $8,900,000
HANFORD 4/21/2003 $1,000 -
COUNTYWIDE 5/1/2003 - $5,500,000
LEMOORE 12/14/2003 - -
COUNTYWIDE 12/28/2004 - -
COUNTYWIDE 1/1/2005 - -
COUNTYWIDE 1/7/2005 - -
COUNTYWIDE 1/24/2005 - -
AVENAL 2/18/2005 - -
LEMOORE 4/28/2005 - -
COUNTYWIDE 5/5/2005 - -
COUNTYWIDE 5/8/2005 - $671,000
KETTLEMAN CITY 9/20/2005 $10,000 -
HANFORD MUNI ARPT 1/1/2006 - -
COUNTYWIDE 3/2/2006 - -
LEMOORE 3/28/2006 - -
COUNTYWIDE 4/2/2006 - $2,200,000
AVENAL 5/21/2006 - -
HANFORD 10/5/2011 $100,000 -
CIMARRON 1/30/2014 - -
SHIRLEY 3/26/2014 - -
LEMOORE 11/1/2014 - -
HANFORD 12/11/2014 - -
CIMARRON 5/5/2016 - -

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-147

EVENT TYPE LOCATION DATE PROPERTY DAMAGE CROP DAMAGE
CIMARRON 5/5/2016 - -
CIMARRON 1/21/2017 - -
Source: NCEI
Thunderstorms
County-level thunderstorm data is not available, however, as noted above, thunderstorm events are not uncommon in the County, especially during summer months.

Lightning
As noted above, lightning events are not uncommon in the County. As shown in Table 4-76, there have been 10 NCEI recorded lightning events in Kings County since 1950, which caused $451,000 in damage.

Table 4-76 Lightning Events in Kings County, 1950 – 2021

LOCATION DATE CROP DAMAGE PROPERTY DAMAGE
AVENAL 5/31/2002 $5,000 -
HANFORD MUNI ARPT 5/31/2002 $5,000 -
HANFORD 5/31/2002 - -
HANFORD 5/31/2002 $5,000 -
CORCORAN 7/30/2003 - -
LEMOORE 4/28/2005 - -
HANFORD MUNICIPAL AIRPORT 4/28/2005 $25,000 $400,000 COUNTYWIDE 10/24/2005 - -
AVENAL 8/31/2007 $1,000 -
SHORT ACRES SUBDIVISION 9/11/2017 $10,000 -
Source: NCEI

4.5.13.4 Likelihood of Future Occurrence
Highly Likely – Based on the NCEI data, there have been a combined 90 heavy rain, thunderstorms, hail, and lightning events in Kings County since 1950. Statistically, there is a 100% percent chance that a major hail, heavy rain, or lightning event will happen in any given year. The actual risk to the County is dependent on the nature and location of any given hazard event.

4.5.13.5 Climate Change Considerations
As average temperatures increase over time, warming in the atmosphere can trigger more frequent extreme weather events. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory researchers have found that ARs will reach the West Coast more frequently (Hagos et al., 2016). Currently, the West receives rain or snow from these ARs between 25 and 40 days each year. By the end of this century, days on which the ARs reach the coast could increase by a third, or between 35 and 55 days a year (Hagos et al., 2016).

Figure 4-42 shows the estimated intensity (return level) of extreme precipitation events which are exceeded on average once every 20 years and how it changes in a warming climate over historical, mid- century, and late-century time periods, based on the Cal-Adapt tool. Under both the RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5 scenarios, precipitation levels will increase throughout the century. Using the RCP 8.5 scenario and the CanESM2 model, referred to by Cal-Adapt as an “average” simulation, precipitation will increase from 1.32 inches to 1.85 inches by 2099 (as shown by the green squares in Figure 4-42). Using the same scenario and the CNRM-CM5 “cooler/wetter” model, precipitation will increase to 2.3 inches by 2099 (as shown by the blue squares in Figure 4-42).

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-148 Figure 4-42 Predicted Future Changes in Intensity of Extreme Precipitation Events Under Low- emissions and High-emissions Scenarios for Kings County

For this graph from Cal-Adapt, an extreme precipitation event is defined as a day during a water year (Oct–Sep) with 1-day rainfall totals above the locally-defined extreme threshold of 0.33 inches.

Figure 4-43 shows the historic (1961-1991) annual 30-year average maximum precipitation for the County.

Figure 4-44 shows the projected mid-century (2035-2064) annual 20-year average maximum precipitation for the County under the RCP 8.5 scenario.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-149 Figure 4-43 Kings County 30-Year Historical Maximum Annual Average Precipitation

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-150 Figure 4-44 Kings County 30-Year Maximum Annual Average Precipitation

4.5.13.6 Magnitude and Severity
Critical – The extent of heavy rain, thunderstorms, hail, and lightning weather events can affect up to 50 percent of property in the County. These weather events can also shutdown of facilities and result in severe injuries.

Hail
The NWS classifies hail by diameter size, and corresponding everyday objects to help relay scope and severity to the population. Table 4-77 indicates the hailstone measurements utilized by the NWS.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-151 Table 4-77 Hail Measurements

AVERAGE

DIAMETER

CORRESPONDING

HOUSEHOLD OBJECT
.25 inch Pea
.5 inch Marble/Mothball
.75 inch Dime/Penny
.875 inch Nickel

1.0 inch Quarter

1.5 inch Ping-pong ball

1.75 inch Golf Ball

2.0 inch Hen Egg

2.5 inch Tennis Ball

2.75 inch Baseball

3.00 inch Teacup

4.00 inch Grapefruit

4.5 inch Softball
Source: NWS
There is no clear distinction between storms that do and do not produce hailstones. According to NOAA’s National Severe Storms Laboratory, nearly all severe thunderstorms probably produce hail, though it may melt before reaching the ground. Multi-cell thunderstorms produce many hailstones, but not usually the largest hailstones. In the life cycle of the multicell thunderstorm, the mature stage is relatively short so there is not much time for the growth of the hailstone. Supercell thunderstorms have sustained updrafts that support large hail formation by repeatedly lifting the hailstones into the very cold air at the top of the thunderstorm cloud. In general, hailstones two inches (5 cm) or larger in diameter are associated with supercells (a little larger than golf ball size which the NWS considers to be 1.75 inches.). Non-supercell storms are capable of producing golf ball-size hail.

In all cases, the hail falls when the thunderstorm’s updraft can no longer support the weight of the ice.

The stronger the updraft the larger the hailstone can grow. When viewed from the air, it is evident that hail falls in paths known as hail swaths. Hail swaths can range in size from a few acres to areas 10 miles wide and 100 miles long. In some instances, piles of hail have been so deep that snowplows were required to remove them, and occasional hail drifts (several feet of dime to nickel-sized hail) have been reported. Severe hailstorms can be destructive to property. Vehicles, roofs of buildings, and landscaping are the most commonly damaged by hail. Hail has also been known to cause injury to humans and occasionally has been fatal.

Heavy Rain
The heavy precipitation events that County and all of California experience are often the results of an AR.

ARs are categorized by a unit of measurement known as the Integrated Water Vapor Transport (IVT), which takes into account the amount of water vapor in the system and the wind that moves it around.

For a storm to be classified as an AR it has to reach an IVT threshold of 250 units; 1,000 IVT or more is considered to be “extreme” (Arcuni 2019). In 2019 a system for categorizing the strength and impacts of ARs was developed by the Center for Western Weather and Water Extremes (CW3E), out of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at UC San Diego.

The newly developed scale ranks ARs into five categories from weak to exceptional and characterizes the extent of heavy rain events related to AR. Unlike the Fujita Scale for tornadoes which focuses on potential damages, the AR scale accounts for both storms that may be hazardous and storms that can provide benefits to the local water supply. A category one AR is primarily beneficial, generally lasting only 24 hours and producing modest rainfall, while a category five AR is considered “exceptional” and primarily hazardous, lasting for several days, and associated with heavy rainfall and runoff that may cause significant damages. Table 4-78 below describes the scale. The CW3E developed the scale as a tool for officials with an operational need to assess flooding potential in their jurisdictions before the storms make landfall. The scale is also a useful tool to outline the extent of heavy rain events.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-152 Table 4-78 Atmospheric River Categories

CATEGORY DESCRIPTION EXAMPLE
AR Cat. 1 Weak – Primarily
beneficial
Feb. 2, 2017, AR hit California, lasted 24 hours at the coast, and produced modest rainfall.

AR Cat. 2 Moderate – Mostly
beneficial, but also
somewhat
hazardous
Nov. 19-20, 2016, AR hit Northern California, lasted 42 hours at the coast, and produced several inches of rain that helped replenish low reservoirs after a drought.

AR Cat. 3 Strong balance of
beneficial and
hazardous
Oct. 14-15, 2016, AR lasted 36 hours at the coast, produced 5-10 inches of rain that helped refill reservoirs after a drought, but also caused some rivers to rise to just below flood stage.

AR Cat. 4 Extreme – Mostly
hazardous, but also
beneficial
Jan. 8-9, 2017, AR that persisted for 36 hours produced up to 14 inches of rain in the Sierra Nevada and caused at least a dozen rivers to reach flood stage.

AR Cat. 5 Exceptional –
Primarily hazardous
Dec. 29, 1996, to Jan 2, 1997, AR lasted over 100 hours at the Central California coast. The associated heavy precipitation and runoff caused more than $1 billion in damages.

Source: Center for Western Weather and Water Extremes, Scripps Institution of Oceanography at UC San Diego. Scale was developed by F. Martin Ralph Director of CW3E in collaboration with Jonathan Rutz of NWS.

In both February 2018 and 2019, the West Coast experienced six ARs. However, as shown in Figure 4-45, California experienced vastly different precipitation totals due to the location of the AR’s landfall, as well as each AR’s IVT. The ARs in February 2019 were all considered to be moderate to extreme, concentrated in California, and resulted in heavy precipitation; whereas the ARs in February 2018 had a negligible effect on California. Between October 2022 and March 2023, California was faced with an onslaught of additional ARs. Of the 31 ARs, one was categorized as extreme and six were strong. Almost half were moderate; 11 were weak (Toohey 2023). The strength of these ARs, as well as their locations, are shown in Figure 4-45.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-153 Figure 4-45 Atmospheric River Strength and Land Distribution, February 2018 vs. February 2019

Source: Center for Western Weather and Water Extremes, Scripps Institution of Oceanography at UC San Diego 2021-2026 Update P

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-154 Figure 4-46 Atmospheric Rivers Strength, October 2022 through March 2023

Source: Center for Western Weather and Water Extremes, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, via the LA Times
Thunderstorms
Although thunderstorm events by themselves may not create significant damage or danger to the County, hail, lightning, and high winds events that happen together with thunderstorm events can all have damaging effects.

Lightning
Lightning is measured by the Lightning Activity Level (LAL) scale, created by the NWS to define lightning activity into a specific categorical scale. The LAL is a common parameter that is part of fire weather forecasts nationwide. The County is at risk to experience lightning in any of these categories. The LAL is reproduced in Table 4-79.

Table 4-79 Lightning Activity Level Scale

CATEGORY DESCRIPTION
LAL 1 No thunderstorms.

LAL 2 Isolated thunderstorms. Light rain will occasionally reach the ground. Lightning is very infrequent, 1 to 5 cloud to ground strikes in a five-minute period.

LAL 3 Widely scattered thunderstorms. Light to moderate rain will reach the ground. Lightning is infrequent, 6 to 10 cloud to ground strikes in a five-minute period.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-155

CATEGORY DESCRIPTION
LAL 4 Scattered thunderstorms. Moderate rain is commonly produced. Lightning is frequent, 11 to 15 cloud to ground strikes in a five-minute period.

LAL 5 Numerous thunderstorms. Rainfall is moderate to heavy. Lightning is frequent and intense, greater than 15 cloud to ground strikes in a five-minute period.

LAL 6 Dry lightning (same as LAL 3 but without rain). This type of lightning has the potential for extreme fire activity and is normally highlighted in fire weather forecasts with a Red Flag warning.

Source: NWS

4.5.13.7 Vulnerability Assessment
People
Exposure is the greatest danger to people from heavy rain events. People can be caught in rising waters and may need to be rescued. Populations at higher elevations with large stands of trees or power lines may be more susceptible to power outages, while populations in low-lying areas are at risk for possible flooding.

Vulnerable populations include the elderly, low-income, linguistically isolated populations, people with life-threatening illnesses, and residents living in areas that are isolated from major roads, which includes portions of central Kings County where DACs are located. Power outages can be life-threatening to those dependent on electricity for life support. Isolation of these populations is a significant concern. These populations face isolation and exposure during hail, heavy rain, lightning, and thunderstorm events, and could suffer from the secondary effects of these hazards, particularly during long-term power outages.

Recreationists in the area west of Avenal near Kettleman Hills may also be more vulnerable to severe weather events.

Property
The County experiences a rainy season in the winter months through early spring. These winter storms can include significant precipitation. The primary effect of these storms has not resulted in significant injury or damages to people and property, or the losses are typically covered by insurance. It is the secondary hazards caused by weather that have had the greatest impact on the County. Damage and disaster declarations related to adverse weather have occurred and will continue to occur in the future.

Heavy rain and thunderstorms are the most frequent type of severe weather occurrences in the County.

Utility outages, downing of trees, debris blocking streets and property damage can be a direct result of these storm events. Properties in poor condition may risk the most damage. Given the nature of these types of storms, the entire County is potentially at risk.

Critical Facilities and Lifelines
Transportation infrastructure can be affected by hail, heavy rain, and lightning events, mostly associated with secondary hazards. Landslides caused by heavy prolonged rains can block roads in the western portion of the County. Of particular concern are roads providing access to isolated areas and the elderly, especially given that limited local roads and highways are available to move people and supplies throughout the region. Prolonged obstruction of major routes due to landslides, debris, or floodwaters can disrupt the shipment of goods and other commerce.

Severe windstorms and downed trees can create serious impacts on power and above-ground communication lines. Loss of electricity and phone connection would leave some populations isolated because residents would be unable to call for assistance. Lightning events can have similarly destructive effects on power and information systems. Failure of these systems would have cascading effects throughout the County and could disrupt critical facility functions. Downed power lines can cause blackouts, leaving large areas isolated.

Economy
The economic impact of heavy rain and hail events is typically short-term. Generally, long-term economic impacts center more around hazards that cascade from a heavy rain event such as flooding or fires. In general, all severe weather poses a risk to the agriculture economy in the County.

Table 4-80 below describes the crop losses related to heavy rain, thunder, hail, and lightning events. Kings County experiences an average of $1.6 million in annualized loss due to crop damages from heavy rain, thunder, hail, and lightning events.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-156 Table 4-80 Crop Loss due to Heavy Rain, Hail, Lightning in Kings County, 2007 – 2021

CAUSE YEAR SUM OF DETERMINED ACRES SUM OF INDEMNITY AMOUNT Excess Moisture/
Precipitation/
Rain
2007 70.4 $24,928
2008 66.0 $10,014
2009 329.0 $224,874
2010 659.4 $283,860
2011 5,629.3 $1,712,635
2012 219.2 $41,044
2013 205.9 $522,194
2014 1,560.1 $3,501,416
2015 523.6 $560,091
2016 3,065.5 $2,085,683
2017 2,354.0 $1,918,062
2018 214.7 $328,600
2019 3,999.7 $4,126,183
2020 1,033.3 $1,686,385
2021 318.6 $612,108
Hail 2007 35.0 $26,581
2009 9.5 $8,404
2010 2,237.3 $2,762,216
2011 170.4 $256,672
2012 27.6 $9,793
2014 46.7 $20,870
2015 11.0 $6,829
2016 274.7 $256,324
2017 114.2 $96,615
2018 1,057.4 $1,001,332
2019 200.4 $123,523
2020 100.4 $270,721
2021 12.0 $11,603
Other (Snow/
Lightning/ Etc.)
2015 109.1 $86,250
2016 150.2 $191,290
2020 437.5 $74,999
Grand Total 25,242.1 $22,842,099
Source: USDA RMA
Cultural, Historic and Natural Resources
As a natural process, the impacts of most heavy rain events by themselves are part of the overall natural cycle and do not cause long-term consequential damage. However, natural habitats such as streams and trees risk major damage. Prolonged rains can saturate soils and lead to slope failure and potentially landslide events. Flooding events can produce river channel migration or damage riparian habitat.

Development Trends
New critical facilities, such as communication towers should be built to withstand heavy rain damage.

Development Trends projects should consider adverse weather hazards at the planning, engineering, and architectural design stages to reduce vulnerability. Stormwater master planning and site review should account for buildings to withstand heavy rain events considered for all new development. Thus,

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-157 development trends in the County are not expected to increase overall vulnerability to the hazard but all development will be affected by adverse weather and storm events.

Continued development implies continued population growth, which raises the number of individuals potentially exposed to severe weather. Individual citizens, families, and businesses of the County need to be prepared to address severe weather events when they occur. It is recommended that citizens, families, and businesses have an emergency preparedness plan, such as storing extra supplies of food and water, as well as other related supplies such as flashlights, batteries, firewood and a battery-operated radio within their home or business. In addition, public education efforts should continue to help the population understand the risks and vulnerabilities of outdoor activities, property maintenance, and regular exposures during periods of severe weather.

4.5.13.8 Risk Summary
• During the 71-year period from 1950 to 2021, 24 hail events, 56 heavy rain events and 10 lightning events occurred in Kings County.
• The County experiences an estimated $1.6 million in annualized crop loss due to hail, heavy rain, and lightning events.
• As average annual precipitation is expected to increase, these events are likely to increase as well. • Climate change is expected to increase atmospheric rivers in California, increasing heavy rain events. • Related Hazards – Flooding, Landslide

JURISDICTION GEOGRAPHIC
AREA

PROBABILITY

OF FUTURE

OCCURRENCE

MAGNITUDE/

SEVERITY

OVERALL

SIGNIFICANCE

PRIORITY
HAZARD?
Kings County Extensive Highly Likely Critical Medium Yes City of Avenal Extensive Highly Likely Critical Medium Yes City of Corcoran Extensive Highly Likely Critical Medium Yes City of Hanford Extensive Highly Likely Critical Medium Yes City of Lemoore Extensive Highly Likely Critical Medium Yes

4.5.14 SEVERE WEATHER: HIGH WIND/TORNADO

4.5.14.1 Hazard Description
High winds, often accompanying severe thunderstorms, can cause significant property and crop damage, threaten public safety, and have adverse economic impacts from business closures and power loss.

Straight-line winds are generally any thunderstorm wind that is not associated with rotation (i.e., is not a tornado). It is these winds, which can exceed 100 mph that represent the most common type of severe weather and are responsible for most wind damage related to thunderstorms. These winds can overturn mobile homes, tear roofs off houses, topple trees, snap power lines, shatter windows, and sandblast paint from cars. Other associated hazards include utility outages, arcing power lines, debris blocking streets, dust storms, and an occasional structure fire.

For this hazard, three different classifications of windstorms were analyzed: high winds, strong winds, and thunderstorm winds. The most significant distinction between high winds and thunderstorm winds in the NCEI dataset is that high winds are most frequently reported in the winter months (December, January, and February) and are recorded on a zonal scale, whereas thunderstorm winds are most reported in the summer months (June, July, and August) and recorded on a local county or city scale.

Strong winds are another type of windstorm, which originates from thunderstorms and are any wind exceeding 58 mph. Despite these differences, the wind speeds and associated impacts from these winds are comparable.

Tornadoes are another severe weather hazard that can affect the Kings County Planning Area. Tornadoes form when cool, dry air sits on top of warm, moist air. Tornadoes are rotating columns of air marked by a funnel-shaped downward extension of a cumulonimbus cloud whirling at destructive speeds of up to 300 mph, usually accompanying a thunderstorm. Tornadoes are the most powerful storms that exist.

They can have the same pressure differential that fuels 300-mile-wide hurricanes across a path only 300- yards wide or less.

4.5.14.2 Geographic Area
Extensive – Wind and tornadoes have the potential to happen anywhere in the County. The resulting damage from wind and tornado events may be most severe in the downtown areas of incorporated communities where there are more large trees, infrastructure, and higher-density development.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-158 The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) collects data on wind resources in the U.S. to help determine the location of new wind energy sites. Figure 4-47 from the NREL Wind Prospector Web viewer shows the average annual wind speed in Kings County at the height of 100 meters. The majority portions of the County have average wind speeds between 3.5 meters/second (7.8 miles/hour) and 5 meters/second (11.2 miles/hour). The southwestern and northwestern portions of the County, however, have relatively high average wind speeds – between 5 meters/second (11.2 miles/hour) and 6 meters/second (13.4 miles/hour).

As noted in the County’s 2012 MJHMP, based on National Climate Data Center (NCC) data, tornado behavior, tornadoes are more likely to hit the flatter, lower elevations of Kings County and are more common in the eastern parts of the County around Hanford, Lemoore, and Corcoran.

Figure 4-47 Kings County Average Annual Wind Speed at 100 meters

Source: NREL Wind Prospector

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-159

4.5.14.3 Past Occurrences
During the rainy season, the Kings Planning Area is prone to relatively strong thunderstorms, sometimes accompanied by high winds and tornadoes. While tornadoes do occur occasionally, most often they are of F0/EF0 intensity. The NCEI Storm Events Database does not record any tornado events that had a magnitude higher than F2 or EF1 in the Planning Area in the past. Table 4-81 shows the details of the most significant historic events recorded in NCEI, followed by additional descriptions of these events. In addition to the events listed in the NCEI database, there were three USDA disaster designations declared for the County that were related to high wind (and rain) in 2016 and 2017 (twice in 2017).

Table 4-81 Past High Wind and Tornado Events in Kings County, 1950-2021 HAZARD
TYPE

DATE LOCATION MAGNITUDE PROPERTY

DAMAGES
($)
CROP

DAMAGES
($)

DEATHS INJURIES
Tornado 4/5/1980 Countywide F2 $250,000 $0 0 1
Tornado 11/12/1996 Lemoore F1 $250,000 $0 0 0
High
Wind 2/3/2000 Countywide - $100,000 $0 1 4
High
Wind ¾/2001 Countywide - $250,000 $0 0 0
High
Wind 10/13/2009 Countywide - $250,000 $0 0 0
Source: NCEI Storm Events Database
April 5, 1980: This F2 tornado event results in $250,000 of property damage and 1 injury.

November 22, 1996: The tornado event caused substantial damage to the Lemoore Naval Air Station administrative section but no injuries occurred. Damage included roof removal of the base recycling center, wind damage to roofs on several administrative structures, powerlines and poles, and fixed structures (static display aircraft). This F1 tornado event results in $250,000 of property damage.

February 3, 2000: Infrequent gusty wind occurred in Central California. Tehachapi and Frazier Park in the Kern County Mountains reported gusts of 45 knots. Bakersfield (Kern County) had gusts to 36 knots (41 miles/hour) and Lemoore had sustained wind at 21 knots (24 miles/hour) on the South San Joaquin Valley floor. Over 4,500 power company customers in the South San Joaquin Valley lost power due to downed, along with several weather-related vehicle accidents. This event resulted in 1 death, 4 injuries and $100,000 of property damage.

March 4, 2001: Strong southeast wind flow ripped through Interior California with various degrees of damage reported on the San Joaquin Valley floor to small structures and agriculture in addition to the damage in the Kern Mountains from strong wind around Frazier Park, Lebec, and Fort Tejon. Local utility companies reported more than 53 power poles downed and a dozen 70,000-volt power lines on the Southern San Joaquin Valley floor and in the Kern Mountains causing a power loss to at least 15,000 customers. Wind speed of 83 miles/hour was reported 5 miles east of Tehachapi (Kern County) with 55 miles/hour wind in Tehachapi Valley itself. This event resulted in $250,000 property damage.

October 13, 2009: This high wind event came with a heavy precipitation event through the Southern San Joaquin Valley. High wind gusts toppled trees, downed utility lines, and created areas of blowing dust with near-zero visibility. Gusts to 60 mph developed at the south end of the San Joaquin Valley near the base of the Grapevine (Kern County). This event resulted in $250,000 property damage.

Figure 4-48 and Figure 4-49 show the locations of the past wind and tornado events in Kings County based on data from NOAA’s NWS Storm Prediction Center.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-160 Figure 4-48 High Wind Events in Kings County, 1955 -2021

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-161 Figure 4-49 Tornado Events in Kings County, 1950 -2019

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-162

4.5.14.4 Likelihood of Future Occurrence
Highly Likely – 139 high wind and tornado events have occurred in Kings County over 73 years of recordkeeping, which equates to almost two high wind or tornado event on an annual basis. Historical wind activity within the Planning Area indicates the County will likely continue to experience high wind during thunderstorm events with the potential of the formation of funnel clouds and low-intensity tornadoes during adverse weather conditions. The actual risk to the County is dependent on the nature and location of any given thunderstorm or tornado event.

Moreover, ongoing research has resulted in different conclusions on the effect of climate change on wind regimes. For other types of extreme weather events, such as tornadoes and severe thunderstorms, more research is also needed to understand how climate change will affect them. Refer to the Climate Change Considerations subsection below for more details on climate change’s impact on fog events.

4.5.14.5 Climate Change Considerations
Studies referenced in California’s Fourth Climate Assessment indicated that extreme fire weather, particularly in the form of hot and dry winds, can strongly influence shrub-land fire regimes. Strong winds have also been now associated with severe forest fires in California meaning climate change impacts on wind patterns may also affect forest health and wildfire susceptibility. However, ongoing research compiled in the recent climate assessment has resulted in different conclusions on the effect of climate change on wind regimes. The August 2021 IPCC report argues that in most places, wind speeds will be drastically reduced because of climate change, whereas in 2019, Scientific American reported that winds across the world were speeding up. The Maine Monitor suggests that a lack of wind can increase wildfire risks and aggravate drought. Unusual wind patterns combined with other climate change issues, such as hotter water temperatures, can also cause problems. At this time, these changing factors are not well understood and are still being incorporated into state and regional research and risk analysis. Hopefully, soon, scientists will be able to find a solution for the rapidly changing wind patterns (Garrison 2022).

For other types of extreme weather events, such as tornadoes and severe thunderstorms, more research is also needed to understand how climate change will affect them. These events occur over much smaller scales, which makes observations and modeling more challenging. Projecting the future influence of climate change on these events can also be complicated by the fact that some of the risk factors for these events may increase with climate change, while others may decrease, like the complexity of predicting future wind patterns, which is mentioned above. Even though some studies predict that climate change could provide the opportunity for more severe thunderstorms to form, this does not necessarily mean that more tornadoes will occur, given that only about 20% of supercell thunderstorms produce tornadoes. The fourth National Climate Assessment summarizes the complicated relationship between tornadoes and climate change: “…extreme weather, such as tornadoes, are also exhibiting changes which may be linked to climate change, but scientific understanding isn’t detailed enough to project direction and magnitude of future change” (NatGeo 2022).

4.5.14.6 Magnitude and Severity
Critical – High winds and tornadoes can cause damage to property and loss of life. While most tornado damage is caused by violent winds, most injuries and deaths result from flying debris. Property damage can include damage to buildings, fallen trees and power lines, broken gas lines, broken sewer and water mains, and the outbreak of fires. Crops and industries may also be damaged or destroyed. Access roads and streets may be blocked by debris, delaying the necessary emergency response.

In 2007, the NWS began rating tornadoes using the Enhanced Fujita Scale (EF-scale). The EF-scale is a set of wind estimates (not measurements) based on damage. It uses three-second gusts estimated at the point of damage based on a judgment of eight levels of damage to the 28 indicators. These estimates vary with height and exposure. Standard measurements are taken by weather stations in open exposures.

Table 4-82 describes the EF-scale ratings versus the previous Fujita Scale used prior to 2007 (NOAA n.d.).

Table 4-82 The Fujita Scale and Enhanced Fujita Scale

FUJITA SCALE DERIVED OPERATIONAL EF-SCALE
F NUMBER FASTEST ¼

MILE (MPH)
3-SECOND

GUST (MPH)
EF
NUMBER
3-SECOND

GUST (MPH)
EF NUMBER 3-SECOND

GUSTS (MPH)
0 40-72 45-78 0 65-85 0 65-85
1 73-112 79-117 1 86-109 1 86-110
2 113-157 118-161 2 110-137 2 111-135
3 158-207 162-209 3 138-167 3 136-165

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-163 4 208-260 210-261 4 168-199 4 166-200
5 261-318 262-317 5 200-234 5 Over 200
Source: NWS.

Notes: EF – Enhanced Fujita F – Fujita mph – Miles per Hour Figure 4-50 illustrates the potential impact and damage from a tornado.

Figure 4-50 Potential Impact and Damage from a Tornado

Source: NOAA NWS, Storm Prediction Center
The damaging effects of wind speed are measured using the Beaufort Wind Scale as shown in Table 4-83 below. This scale only reflects land-based effects and does not take into consideration the effects of wind over water.

Table 4-83 Beaufort Wind Scale

WIND SPEED
(MPH)
DESCRIPTION – VISIBLE CONDITION
0 Calm; smoke rises vertically
1-4 Light air; direction of wind shown by smoke but not by wind vanes 4-7 Light breeze; wind felt on face; leaves rustle; ordinary wind vane moved by wind 8-12 Gentle breeze; leaves and small twigs in constant motion; wind extends light flag 13-18 Moderate breeze; raises dust and loose paper; small branches are moved 19-24 Fresh breeze; small trees in leaf begin to sway; crested wavelets form on inland water 25-31 Strong breeze; large branches in motion; telephone wires whistle; umbrellas used with difficulty 32-38 Moderate gale whole trees in motion; inconvenience in walking against wind 39-46 Fresh gale breaks twigs off trees; generally, impedes progress 47-54 Strong gale slight structural damage occurs; chimney pots and slates removed 55-63 Whole gale trees uprooted; considerable structural damage occurs 64-72 Storm very rarely experienced; accompanied by widespread damage 73+ Hurricane devastation occurs
Source: NWS

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-164 Based on NCEI records between 1955 and 2022 there have been a combined 116 strong wind/high wind/thunderstorm winds and 23 tornado/funnel cloud events in Kings County, which have resulted in a total of $6,946,250 in property damage and $4,420,000 in crop damage. The most damaging event took place on January 4, 2008. The first major winter storm of the new year arrived on the 4th and brought heavy rain to the San Joaquin Valley. Very strong winds developed on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley with this storm. The strongest winds occurred in Avenal, where roofs were damaged, trees toppled and two glider planes lifted off the tarmac and flipped over at the local airport. Based on surveys of the sustained property damage, top winds were estimated at 70-75 mph. This high wind event was caused by an increase in local winds due to a combination of strong large-scale winds (synoptic winds due to the Pacific storm pattern) and the interaction of the nearby Coastal Mountain range. Two direct injuries also occurred in Avenal during the wind event. According to the NCEI database, this wind event resulted in $4,500,000 of property damages. Overall, high wind event impacts would likely be limited, with a majority of impacts being related to property damages caused by downed trees as well as power outages.

In the past 73 years, all the tornado events that have taken place in Kings County have been between F0- F1 or EF0 tornadoes. There was only one F2 tornado incident that happened in the year 1980. However, it should be noted that, although unlikely, larger tornadoes could occur. Should the County be hit by an EF- 3 or higher tornado, it can be extrapolated that because of its relative size and the potential size and length of a tornado’s path, a significant portion of the County could be impacted, resulting in property and crop damage and loss of life. The F2 tornado event that happened on April 5, 1980, resulted in $250,000 of property damage and one injury. A worse tornado event could result in more severe damage.

Tornado impacts to the County would likely be negligible, with less than 10 percent of the Planning Area affected by events in the EF0-2 range, though stronger tornadoes are possible. The impact on quality of life or critical facilities and functions in the affected area would depend on where the tornado occurred.

Injuries or deaths are possible due to wind-thrown trees or property damage caused by wind events.

Overall, impacts from high wind and tornado events would likely be negligible, with less than 10 percent of property severely damaged and shutdown of facilities due to loss of power for 24 hours or less.

4.5.14.7 Vulnerability Assessment
Property
General damages are both direct (what the wind event physically destroys) and indirect, which focuses on additional costs, damages and losses attributed to secondary hazards spawned by the event, or due to the damages caused by the wind event. Depending on the magnitude of the wind events as well as the size of the tornado and its path, a tornado is capable of damaging and eventually destroying almost anything. Construction practices and building codes can help maximize the resistance of the structures to damage.

Secondary impacts of damage caused by wind events often result from damage to infrastructure.

Downed power and communications transmission lines, coupled with disruptions to transportation infrastructure, create difficulties in reporting and responding to emergencies. These indirect impacts of a wind event put tremendous strain on a community. In the immediate aftermath, the focus is on emergency services.

Downed trees caused by a wind event are a common occurrence in the County. Falling trees can cause significant damage to property and put people at risk. Due to multiple years of drought in the County, many trees in the area have been impacted, making them more susceptible to blow-down during wind events.

People
Community members are the most vulnerable to high wind and tornado events. The availability of sheltered locations such as basements, buildings constructed using tornado-resistant materials and methods, and public storm shelters, all reduce the exposure of the population. However, there are also segments of the population that are especially exposed to the indirect impacts of high winds and

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-165 tornadoes, particularly the loss of electrical power. According to the data obtained from emPOWER.com, a website
maintained by the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (DHHS), 5.8%, or 1,049 of the 18,207 Medicare
beneficiaries in the County rely on medical equipment that is dependent on electricity to live independently. These at-risk populations include the elderly or disabled, especially those with medical needs and treatments dependent on electricity.

Nursing homes, community-based residential facilities, special needs housing facilities, and isolated communities are also vulnerable. Life support needs can be threatened when
electrical outages are prolonged since backup power generally operates only with minimal functions for a short period of time.

Following the unprecedented 2018 wildfire season in
California, Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) announced it will be conducting PSPS when there are high winds and dry
conditions and generally a heightened fire risk forecasted. The outages could last several days, and PG&E has suggested customers be prepared for outages that could last longer than 48 hours. A majority of Kings County could be affected by the power outages, and many members of the public expressed these concerns in the County’s public survey for the MJHMP (see Appendix G). In addition to PG&E, Southern California Edison (SCE) also provides power to Kings County residents. According to SCE’s official website, their service territories within Kings County are not designated as high fire threat areas or have a very low wildfire risk. Despite the low risk, SCE has been implementing its own Wildfire Response Plan, which outlines a range of activities and actions to help SCE prevent and respond to the increasing risk of wildfires, including a PSPS Protocol. PSPS is mentioned on SCE’s website. SCE also has 24-hour hotlines for customers to call and report power outage events. In addition, SCE keeps an online platform where customers can check out current outage information, including the estimate on when the power will return. In summary, severe wind events that result in PSPS events are likely to have the greatest impact on those communities that are socially vulnerable due to income levels or lack of accessibility and those that rely on electricity-dependent medical equipment.

Critical Facilities and Infrastructure
Both winds and tornadoes may impact exposed critical infrastructure such as power lines; depending on the impact and the function, this could cause a short-term economic disruption. The most common problems associated with tornadoes and high winds are loss of utilities. Downed power lines can cause power outages, leaving large parts of the County isolated, and without electricity, water, and communication. Damage may also limit timely emergency response and the number of evacuation routes. Downed electrical lines following a storm can also increase the potential for lethal electrical shock. Damaging winds can also cause wildfires.

Most structures, including the County’s critical facilities, should be able to withstand and provide adequate protection from severe wind and tornadoes. Those facilities with backup generators should be fully equipped to handle severe wind and tornado events should the power go out. The impact of high wind on responders is similar to that of the general public. In the event of a tornado, there may be localized impacts on response personnel. Impacts on transportation corridors and communications lines affect first responders’ ability to respond effectively. To maintain public confidence, jurisdictions must continue to adhere to building codes and facilitate new development that is built to the highest design standards to account for heavy winds and tornado winds.

On June 26, 2020, California Governor Gavin Newsom and the State Legislature approved the Fiscal Year 2020-2021 State Budget, which included a $50 million one-time General Fund appropriation to support State and local government efforts to mitigate the impacts of the investment-owned utility use of PSPS.

In 2020, the name of the PSPS program was changed to “Community Power Resiliency”. Building on the previous year’s investments, the resiliency program will support critical services vulnerable to power outage events, including schools, county election offices, and food storage reserves.

According to the FY 2020-21 Community Power Resiliency Legislative Report by Cal OES, the City of Avenal received $100,000 in funding to purchase a generator to enhance the resiliency of the Avenal Veteran’s Hall against power outages. This facility also supported the resiliency areas of food storage

High winds can cause trees or debris to
damage electric lines and cause wildfires.

As a result, utility providers may need to
turn off power during severe weather
events – high wind & other events that
could increase wildfire risk. This is called a
Public Safety Power Shutoff. In 2020,
state-funded PSPS grant program was
changed to “Community Power
Resiliency”, which will continue to
support critical services vulnerable to
power outage events, including schools,
county election offices, and food storage
reserves.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-166 reserves and COVID-19 testing. The City of Corcoran received $300,000 in funding to purchase a portable generator and transfer switches to enhance the resiliency of groundwater wells against power outages.

The City of Corcoran’s action was highlighted in the report as in June 2021, the City utilized the generator when power was lost at a well site. The generator quickly restored power to the site, giving fire and paramedic stations access to clean water. In addition, Kings County received $94,826 in funding to purchase generator connections to enhance the resiliency of evacuation points against power outages.

Economy
Winds typically do not have long-term impacts on the economy, although wind does have an impact on the agriculture economy in the County. As shown in Table 4-84, wind events have been a leading cause of crop loss in the past 15 years (2007 – 2021), resulting in over $1.2 million in loss payments from the USDA and almost 2,905 acres lost to high wind events. Kings County experiences an estimated $82,313 annualized loss due to crop damages from excessive wind events.

Table 4-84 Crops Loss Due to High Wind, RMA Crop Indemnity Reports, 2007-2021

YEAR NET DETERMINED ACRES INDEMNITY AMOUNT
2007 273.7 $117,514
2008 1,552 $322,529
2009 326.3 $131,145
2010 18.8 $8,742
2011 - -
2012 147.1 $3,555
2013 321.5 $101,829
2014 - -
2015 42 $61,320
2016 89.6 $187,826
2017 68.9 $166,889
2019 0.75 $588.5
2020 - -
2021 64.3 $82,759
Total 2,904.8 $1,234,698
Source: USDA RMA
Cultural, Historic and Natural Resources
High winds and tornadoes can cause massive damage to the natural environment, uprooting trees and other debris. This is part of a natural process, however, and the environment will return to its original state in time.

Development Trends
As the County continues to increase in population, the number of people and housing developments exposed to the hazard increases. Adherence to current building codes, coupled with proper education on building techniques and the use of sturdy building materials, attached foundations, and other structural techniques may minimize property vulnerabilities. Public shelters at parks and open spaces may help reduce the impacts of tornadoes and high wind events on the recreational populations exposed to storms.

4.5.14.8 Risk Summary
• Between 1950 and 2021 there were a combined 139 high wind (116) and tornado (23) events. • Wind and tornado events have resulted in $6,946,250 in property damages. The most damaging event took place on January 4, 2008, with wind ranging from 70 to 75 mph causing two injuries and $4,500,000 in property damages.
• Excessive wind has caused 2,904.8 acres to be lost and $1,234,698 crop loss payment made by the USDA to farmers in the County.
• PSPS poses a risk to individuals in the County who depend on electricity to live independently. Six percent of Medicare Beneficiaries in the County are electricity dependent. • Related Hazards – Extreme heat, Heavy Rain, Agriculture/Pest and Crop Disease, Wildfire

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-167

JURISDICTION GEOGRAPHIC
AREA

PROBABILITY

OF FUTURE

OCCURRENCE

MAGNITUDE/

SEVERITY

OVERALL

SIGNIFICANCE

PRIORITY
HAZARD?
Kings County Extensive Highly Likely Critical Medium Yes City of Avenal Extensive Highly Likely Critical Medium Yes City of Corcoran Extensive Highly Likely Critical Medium Yes City of Hanford Extensive Highly Likely Critical Medium Yes City of Lemoore Extensive Highly Likely Critical Medium Yes

4.5.15 WILDFIRE

4.5.15.1 Hazard Description
A wildfire is an uncontrolled fire spreading through vegetative fuels, such as grasslands, brush, or woodlands, and posing danger and destruction to property and watersheds. Generally, three major factors sustain wildfires and predict a given area’s potential to burn. These factors are fuel, topography, and weather.
• Fuel – Fuel is the material that feeds fire and is a key factor in wildfire behavior. Fuel is generally classified by type and by volume. Fuel sources are diverse and include everything from dead tree leaves, twigs, and branches to dead standing trees, live trees, brush, and cured grasses. Manmade structures are also considered as a fuel source, such as homes and other associated combustibles.

The type of prevalent fuel directly influences the behavior of wildfire. Fuel is the only factor that can be modified by humans.
• Topography – An area’s terrain and slope affect its susceptibility to wildfire spread. Both fire intensity and rate of spread increase as slope increases due to the tendency of heat from a fire to rise via convection. The arrangement and types of vegetation throughout a hillside can also contribute to increased fire activity on slopes.
• Weather – Weather components such as temperature, relative humidity, wind, and lightning affect the potential for wildfire. High temperatures and low relative humidity dry out fuels that feed wildfires, creating a situation where fuel will more readily ignite and burn more intensely. Thus, during periods of drought, the threat of wildfire increases. Wind is the most influential weather factor of the three and its influence can increase rates of spread regardless of temperature and relative humidity.

Wildfires can occur in areas essentially void of development, or in areas where development intermingles with the natural area known as the wildland-urban interface (WUI), a general term that applies to development adjacent to landscapes that support wildfire. Many wildfires occur in locations that abound in grasslands and brush. While wildfires are often the direct result of lightning strikes, they can be caused by downed powerlines or mechanical equipment or as the result of human activities like landscape debris burns, carelessness, or arson. Wildfires often start in undeveloped areas and public land areas, such as state and federal lands, but can spread to urban areas where structures and other human development are more concentrated. The predominant dangers from wildfires are injury or loss of life to people in the affected area and the destruction of vegetation, property, and wildlife.

Communities throughout California are increasingly concerned about wildfire safety as increased development in the foothills and mountain areas and subsequent fire control practices have affected the natural cycle of the ecosystem. Wildfire risk is predominantly associated with WUI areas. However, significant wildfires can also occur in heavily populated areas, although urbanized and developed areas that are not contiguous with vast areas of wildlands are typically considered safer from wildfires.

The County is exposed to a variety of wildfire hazard conditions that vary based on fuels, topography, weather, and human behavior. CAL FIRE, as required by Government Code Section 51181, has undertaken a statewide program to map areas of potential wildfire severity, and to describe the potential for wildfires to occur in a given area; the resulting Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZs) adopted in November 2007 for the State Responsibility Areas (SRA) and adopted in September 2007 for the Local Responsibility Area (LRA) are shown in Figure 4-51 below.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-168 Figure 4-51 Kings County Federal, State, and Local Responsibility Severity Zones

4.5.15.2 Geographic Area
Significant – CAL FIRE has ranked fuel loading as low in most of the County, where crops and grasses are the primary sources of fuel. However, in the southwest corner, there are moderate fuel hazards from brush, pine, and grass, specifically in the area west of Interstate 5 and north of Highway 41.

The County is mostly flat, with a slight slope towards the topographic low point in the Tulare Lake Basin, which minimizes the fire risk for most of the county. However, elevations in the southwestern part of the County range from 500 feet at the Kettleman Plains to almost 3,500 feet at Table Mountain, creating a more varied terrain with a higher fire hazard in the steeply sloped areas of this region.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-169

4.5.15.3 Past Occurrences
There have been no state or federal disaster declarations in Kings County due to wildfire. The 2012 Kings County MJHMP noted that although there are many fire starts, the fuels are “flashy,” and most fires are quickly put out. Except for the Braley‐Jones Ranch fire in 1951 near Stratford, all mapped fires have occurred west of Interstate 5. The largest was the Garza fire in 2017, which burned over 48,000 acres along the west side of Interstate 5, southwest of Avenal. See Table 4-85 and Figure 4-52 for the history of fires named by CAL FIRE in Kings County.

Table 4-85 Fire History in Kings County, 1950 – 2021

DATE NAME OF FIRE ACRES BURNED
06/04/1951 Braley‐Jones Ranch 468
09/22/1968 Hughs 776
07/30/1969 Avenal Canyon 983
05/22/1979 Pyramid Hills 693
07/01/1979 State of California #32 2,292
05/25/1984 Flat Top 7,218
06/03/1989 Cal Oil 492
06/12/1994 York 1,012
09/04/1995 Tar 126
09/08/1995 Pyramid 397
04/27/1996 Skyline 20,567
05/01/1996 Hwy 41 3,198
08/13/1999 33 243
08/27/2001 Taylor 26
08/10/2007 Tar 5,644
8/19/2008 Avenal 946
07/09/2017 Garza 48,660
05/03/2020 Interstate 5 2,060
10/11/2021 Kettle 447
Source: Cal Fire Redbooks

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-170 Figure 4-52 Fire History in Kings County, 1950 – 2021

4.5.15.4 Likelihood of Occurrence
Occasional – Fire starts are highly likely during each fire season, although they rarely result in large-scale wildfires in Kings County. Based on the recent fire history (2016-2021), there is a 60% chance that a fire will occur during any given year. Figure 4-53 shows the annual probability for wildfire in Kings County from 2023 – 2050, based on Cal FIRE data.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-171 Figure 4-53 Kings County Annual Probability of Fire, 2023 – 2050

4.5.15.5 Climate Change Considerations
According to the 2018 California SHMP, climate change has the potential to impact the frequency, size, and severity of wildfire hazards statewide. Increasing temperatures and decreased precipitation statewide, as shown in Figure 4-54, may intensify wildfire threat and susceptibility to more frequent wildfires in the County.

Exactly how climate change will affect total precipitation is not clear, but models suggest that there is a tendency for wetter conditions in the northern part of the State and drier conditions in the south (CNRA 2018a). What is clear is that California is becoming exceptionally warm and dry, as evidenced by the 2012- 2016 drought, the hottest drought in the State’s recorded history (Mount et al, 2021). Forests in the State were weakened by this drought, which made them more susceptible to pests and pathogens and contributed to widespread tree mortality, creating an abundance of kindling for fire (CNRA 2018).

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-172 Figure 4-54 Average Statewide Precipitation and Temperature Patterns, 1950 – 2020

Source: Mount et al, WRCC, DWR
Current scientific models expect all of California will be affected by increased numbers of forest fires with added intensity due to longer warmer seasons, reduced distribution of biodiversity, lack of moisture, changes in ecosystems, drought impacts (e.g. pest diseases and continued spread of invasive species), and other impacts in coming years (Cal-Adapt, 2023). The extending of the wildfire season into winter months, coinciding with seasonal high wind patterns, has contributed to severe fires in recent years.

Southern California experienced 29 wildfires in December of 2017 alone, and the deadliest and most destructive fire in California’s history, the Camp Fire, happened in November of 2018 and resulted in 153,336 acres burned, 18,804 structures damaged, and 85 deaths (CAL FIRE, 2019; CAL FIRE, n.d.).

Projected wildfire occurrence estimates in annual area burned, based on different potential climate futures and GHG emission scenarios, are summarized from Westerling (2018) and presented in Figure 4-55 and Figure 4-56. These figures show the modeled projections of annual area burned for mid- and end-of-century timelines under both a high emissions scenario (Figure 4-56) and low emissions scenario (Figure 4-55). The projected future climate from these four models can be described as producing:
• CanESM2 – An average future climate simulation
• CNRM-CM5 – A cooler/wetter future climate simulation
• HadGEM2-ES – A warm/dry future climate simulation
• MIROC5 – The model simulation that is most unlike the first three for the best coverage of different possibilities.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-173 Figure 4-55 Kings County Projected Annual Average Area Burned Under RCP 6.5

Figure 4-56 Kings County Projected Annual Average Area Burned Under RCP 8.5

The Keetch-Byram Drought Index (KBDI) is a measure of the amount of precipitation required to return soil to full moisture capacity. A KBDI of zero indicates a total lack of moisture deficiency, while 800 represents drought conditions deep within soil layers. KBDI is cumulative, meaning values will increase on dry and warm days and decrease during rainy periods. It is a simplified proxy for favorability of occurrence and spread of wildfire but is not itself a predictor of fire. Figure 4-57 shows the historic number of days when KBDI is greater than or equal to 600, based on data from 2005, and Figure 4-58 shows the projected number of midcentury (2050) when KBDI will be greater or equal to 600 based on the RCP 8.5 scenario.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-174 Figure 4-57 Kings County Historical Annual Number of Days When KBDI is Greater than or Equal to 600

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-175 Figure 4-58 Kings County Mid-Century Annual Number of Days When KBDI is Greater than or Equal to 600

4.5.15.6 Magnitude and Severity
Negligible – Fire threat provides a measure of fuel conditions and fire potential in the ecosystem, representing the relative likelihood of “damaging” or difficult to control wildfire occurring for a given area.

Fire Threat is not a risk assessment by itself but can be used to assess the potential for impacts on various assets and values susceptible to fire. Impacts are more likely to occur and/or be of increased severity for the higher threat classes. Fire threat is a combination of two factors: 1) fire probability, or the likelihood of a given area burning, and 2) potential fire behavior (hazard). These two factors are combined to create five threat classes ranging from low to extreme. Figure 4-59 below shows the wildfire threat areas throughout the County.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-176 Figure 4-59 Kings County Fire Threat Areas

4.5.15.7 Vulnerability Assessment
Typically, fire season in Kings County runs from early Spring to late Fall, and wildfires can start suddenly due to human activity or lightning strikes. These fires can last anywhere from a few hours to several months, with secondary effects including increased erosion, degraded air and water quality, and economic impacts from burned landscapes. Areas along the southwestern corner of the County face a higher risk than the central and more urbanized portion of the County.

Generally, this hazard is a medium concern given the increasing frequency and severity of wildfires in California. High fuel loads in some regions of the Planning Area along with geographical and topographical features create the potential for both natural and human-caused fires that can result in loss of life and property. These factors, combined with natural weather conditions common to the area, including periods of drought, low relative humidity, and periodic winds, can result in frequent and sometimes catastrophic fires. Even the relatively flat central parts of the County are not immune to fire;

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-177 hot and sometimes windy weather combined with dry vegetation and a denser population can increase the number of ignitions.

Figure 4-60 and Figure 4-61 are the results of Wildfire Risk to Communities, a nationwide risk study from the United States Forest Service that was designed to help communities understand, explore, and reduce wildfire risk. These figures provide a perspective of wildfire risk and vulnerability compared to other California counties. Populated areas in Kings County have, on average, greater wildfire likelihood than 23% of counties in California (USFS 2021). Populated areas in Kings County also have, on average, a greater risk to homes than 19% of counties in California (USFS 2021).

Figure 4-60 Kings County Relative Wildfire Likelihood

Source: USFS 2021

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-178 Figure 4-61 Kings County Relative Wildfire Risk to Homes

People
Wildland fires result in a high risk for personal injury, loss of life to inhabitants of the fire area and firefighters, and losses of structures and personal property. Wildfires in or near the WUI frequently require emergency evacuation and sheltering, often for many days. As is shown in Table 4-86 below, approximately 3,052 people in Kings County reside in moderate, high, and very high fire threat areas. The numbers were derived by taking the total number of residential, multi-family residential, and mixed-use structures identified in the moderate, high and very high fire threat areas and multiplying them by the average household size of the County and cities based on the 2021 ACS 5-Year Estimates. Of this population, only the DACs and socially vulnerable communities identified west of the City of Avenal in the unincorporated County are at greater risk. However, the direct risk from wildfire hazards to socially vulnerable communities in the County is less than the direct risk from other hazards. It does, however, pose human health risk associated with poor air quality, which will have a greater impact on those populations that are disadvantaged and have existing respiratory health conditions.

Table 4-86 Population at Risk to Fire Threat

JURISDICTION POPULATION
Avenal 334
Corcoran 53
Lemoore 242
Unincorporated 2,089
Total 3,052
Source: Kings County, Cal FIRE, FRAP, U.S. Census Bureau, WSP GIS Analysis

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-179 In addition to the direct costs resulting from human injury and property destruction, secondary effects have the potential to continue impacting the community for years. Wildfires release gaseous pollutants, such as carbon monoxide, and hazardous air pollutants, such as particulate matter (i.e. polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons composed of acids, molds, metals, or soot), into the air where they can drift long distances, affecting millions of people (Borgschulte et al, 2022). These small particles easily slip into homes, where they are inhaled, causing negative cardiovascular and respiratory conditions. These effects are felt most acutely by first responders and sensitive populations, such as the young and the old.

Property
The potential impacts of wildfire on property include crop loss, injury and death of livestock and pets, and damage to infrastructure, homes and other buildings located throughout the wildfire risk area.

A wildfire threat assessment was performed for Kings County using the following GIS methodology.

Similar to the methodology used by the flood analysis, address point data together with the assessor’s parcel data were overlaid on a Fire Threat Layer. Improved parcels together with the structures on them were then assigned with wildfire threat area class (very high, high, and moderate). It was assumed that every parcel with an improved value greater than zero was developed in some way, thus only improved parcels and their values were analyzed.

An analysis of the value of those parcels and structures – the improvement value plus the estimated value of building contents – quantifies the potential losses from wildfires by wildfire threat areas, as shown in Table 4-87. The results show that over $145.8 million worth of property and approximately 270 improved parcels together with 747 structures are exposed to wildfire threat countywide. The majority of these buildings are in moderate wildfire threat areas. The unincorporated areas and the City of Lemoore make up the majority of this risk. Exempt residential and agricultural properties constitute the majority of the number of parcels and the projected losses. Exempt properties include but are not limited to wetlands, schools, museums, etc. The total values shown in these tables include both structure value and contents and can be used as an estimate of potential losses since wildfires typically result in a total loss.

Table 4-87 Wildfire Hazard Exposure –Property Summary by Jurisdiction and Fire Threat Zone

JURISDICTION AVENAL CORCORAN LEMOORE UNINCORPORATED TOTAL Parcel Count Very
High
- - - 15 15
Building Count Very
High
- - - 15 15
Parcel County High - - - 53 53
Building County
High
- - - 58 58
Parcel County
Moderate 18 15 82 69 202
Building County
Moderate 100 16 82 376 674
Total Parcel County 18 15 82 137 270
Total Building
Count 100 16 82 449 747
Improved Value $11,097,454 $2,258,421 $18,202,253 $41,643,263 $84,298,845 Estimated Content
Value $5,905,592 $1,129,211 $9,101,127 $39,465,975 $61,507,495 Total Value $17,003,046 $3,387,632 $27,303,380 $81,109,238 $145,806,340 Population 334 53 242 2,089 3,052
Source: Cal FIRE, Kings County Assessor, WSP GIS analysis

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-180 Figure 4-62 shows the composition of structures that are exposed to fire threats within the unincorporated County, categorized by fire threat zone.

Figure 4-62 Unincorporated County Parcels in Fire Threat Area

Critical Facilities and Lifelines
Critical facilities are those community components that are most needed to withstand the impacts of a disaster, as previously described in the Assets section. Wildfire impacts on critical facilities can include structural damage or destruction, risk to persons located within facilities, disruption of transportation, shipping, and evacuation operations, and interruption of facility operations and critical functions.

Critical facilities and infrastructure also create an increased risk for the occurrence of wildfires. Overhead electric transmission lines have been known to spark wildfires. According to data from the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), the State’s three largest utility companies collectively reported 1,744 ignitions statewide between 2019-2021 (CPUC, 2023). Most of these instances were small, less than one acre in size, however these fires can grow rapidly under the right fire conditions. Identifying critical facilities and infrastructure and mitigating their potential risks is important both for maintaining the County’s resilience and for reducing the potential impacts of wildfire.

The locations of critical facilities identified by HIFLD throughout the County are summarized by their exposure to the various wildfire threat levels in Table 4-88.

Table 4-88 Critical Facilities Within Wildfire Threat Zones by Jurisdiction and FEMA Lifeline

WILDFIRE THREAT
ZONE

JURISDICTION

COMMUNICATIONS
ENERGY

FOOD, WATER,

SHELTER

HAZARDOUS

MATERIAL

HEALTH AND MEDICAL

SAFETY AND

SECURITY

TRANSPORTATION
TOTAL
Low Avenal 2 1 - - 1 - - 4
Unincorporated 8 2 - - - - 16 26
Total 10 3 - - 1 - 16 30
3%
13%
84%
Structure Count Very
High
Structure Count High
Structure Count
Moderate

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-181

WILDFIRE THREAT
ZONE

JURISDICTION

COMMUNICATIONS
ENERGY

FOOD, WATER,

SHELTER

HAZARDOUS

MATERIAL

HEALTH AND MEDICAL

SAFETY AND

SECURITY

TRANSPORTATION
TOTAL
Moderate Avenal 3 1 - - - - 1 5
Unincorporated 9 8 - - - - 2 19
Total 12 9 - - - - 3 24
High Avenal 1 1 - - - - - 2
Unincorporated 4 1 - - - - - 5
Total 5 2 - - - - - 7
Very
High
Avenal - - - - - - - -
Unincorporated 4 - - - - - - 4
Total 4 - - - - - - 4
Source: Kings County, HIFLD, Cal FIRE, FRAP, WSP GIS Analysis According to the analysis conducted, there are 35 critical facilities exposed to at least a moderate wildfire threat area. The highest rates of exposure to wildfire threat areas are facilities in the Communication and Energy Lifeline categories, both of which are crucial for response and evacuations in the event of a significant fire.

Economy
The economic impacts of wildfires include loss of property, direct agricultural sector job loss, secondary economic losses to businesses in or near wildland resources like parks and national forests, and loss of public access to recreational resources. Fire suppression may also require increased costs to local and state governments for water acquisition and delivery, especially during periods of drought when water resources are scarce. Effects on agriculture can be significant, which makes up a large portion of Kings County’s economy. In addition to the obvious impacts on crops and animals, wildland fire can have damaging effects on soil and water that will impact agriculture for an extended period.

Cultural, Historic and Natural Resources
The County has three historic sites according to the California Office of Historic Preservation (refer to Subsection 4.2.1). Only one of these sites, No. 206 El Adobe de Los Robles Rancho, involves a structure. A re-built adobe house dating back to 1856, this structure is sensitive in nature and may not meet the latest building codes; it is expected that it might be at risk of wildfires (e.g., because of its potential inability to withstand significant heat). Parks and open spaces, particularly in the foothills, could also be at risk of a wildfire.

Development Trends
A fire threat GIS analysis within SOI boundaries is summarized in the table below. The methodology resembles what was used for the General Property subsection above. These parcels are also included in Table 4-87, and they fall under “Unincorporated” in terms of their jurisdiction. Parcels shown below in Table 4-89 are those that fall within each jurisdiction’s SOI and are located within different wildfire threat areas. As shown in Table 4-89, only parcels located within the SOIs of the Cities of Hanford and Lemoore are exposed to wildfire threat. The majority of these parcels are located in moderate fire threat areas.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-182 Table 4-89 Sphere of Influence Fire Threat Analysis
Jurisdiction Hanford Lemoore Total
Parcel Count High 2 0 2
Building Count High 2 0 2
Parcel Count Moderate 2 5 7
Building Count Moderate 2 6 8
Total Parcel Count 4 5 9
Total Building Count 4 6 10
Improved Value $528,005 $1,862,074 $2,390,079
Estimated Content Value $264,003 $1,126,907 $1,390,909 Total Value $792,008 $2,988,981 $3,780,988
Population 12 18 30
Source: Kings County, HIFLD, Cal FIRE, FRAP, WSP GIS Analysis Any population increases in the Planning Area will continue to make wildfire vulnerability a growing issue, especially as Development Trends expands into higher fire risk areas. These risks can however be managed with strong land use regulations and building code requirements, and with policies established in the Safety Element of the 2035 General Plan. For example, policies requiring fire-resistant vegetation, clustered development, and vegetation clear zones in areas with high and extreme fire hazard, can all decrease the County’s vulnerability to fire.

4.5.15.8 Risk Summary
• The overall significance of wildfire in Kings County is Medium. These events are recurring in nature and can cause significant damage, loss of life, and disruption to critical infrastructure. • The County experiences an average of one wildfire every 3 years and an average of 1,355 acres burned per year. As impacts of climate change such as increased temperatures and prolonged drought conditions continue in coming years, this frequency and intensity may increase. • Powerlines and vehicle or equipment use present a significant source of ignitions. • Wildfires can destroy homes, businesses, and critical infrastructure; almost $146 million worth of property in the County is located in a Fire Threat Zone. • Wildfires can disrupt access to, or even destroy critical facilities and infrastructure; 24 critical facilities are in the Moderate Fire Threat Zone, 7 critical facilities are in the High Fire Threat Zone, and 4 critical facilities are in the Very High Fire Threat Zone.
• Wildfire impacts can include loss of property, direct agricultural sector job loss, secondary economic losses to businesses, and loss of public access to recreational resources. • Wildfires can significantly impact water and air quality, even at great distances from the area burning.

Damages to agriculture, natural resource areas, and habitats are very likely during a wildfire. • Related Hazards – Agricultural Pests and Diseases, Drought, Extreme Temperatures

JURISDICTION GEOGRAPHIC
AREA

PROBABILITY OF
FUTURE

OCCURRENCE

MAGNITUDE/

SEVERITY

OVERALL

SIGNIFICANCE

PRIORITY
HAZARD?
Kings County Significant Likely Negligible Medium Yes
City of Avenal Limited Likely Negligible Medium Yes
City of Corcoran Limited Likely Negligible Low No
City of Hanford Limited Likely Negligible Low No
City of Lemoore Limited Likely Negligible Low No

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
2023 Update Page 4-183
This page is intentionally left blank.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Strategy

2023 Update Page 5-1
5 MITIGATION STRATEGY
Requirement §201.6(c)(3):
[The plan shall include the following:] A mitigation strategy that provides the jurisdiction’s blueprint for reducing the potential losses identified in the risk assessment, based on existing authorities, policies, programs, and resources, and its ability to expand on and improve these existing tools.

This section describes the mitigation strategy process and mitigation action plan for the Kings County MJHMP. It describes how the County and participating jurisdictions met the requirements for the following from the 10-step planning process:
• Planning Step 6: Set Goals
• Planning Step 7: Review Possible Activities
• Planning Step 8: Draft an Action Plan
The mitigation strategy reflects the results of the collaborative work of the HMPC. Subsection 5.3 Mitigation Action Plan is based on the updated planning process, risk assessment, capability assessment, consequence analysis, goal setting, and the identification of mitigation actions. Taking all of these into consideration, the HMPC developed the following overall mitigation strategy, which builds upon the 2012 LHMP strategy:
• Communicate the hazard information collected and analyzed through this planning process as well as HMPC success stories so that the community better understands what can happen where and what they themselves can do to be better prepared.
• Implement the action plan recommendations of this plan to reduce the County’s vulnerability to hazards.
• Use existing rules, regulations, policies, and procedures already in existence. Given the flood hazard in the planning area, an emphasis should be placed on continued compliance with the NFIP. • Lessen the impact of disasters and the speed of the response and recovery process. • Build awareness to help the community become more sustainable and reliant to disasters. • Monitor multi-objective management opportunities so that funding opportunities may be shared and packaged, and broader constituent support may be garnered.

5.1 MITIGATION GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
§201.6(c)(3)(i)
[The hazard mitigation strategy shall include a] description of mitigation goals to reduce or avoid long‐term vulnerabilities to the identified hazards.

Up to this point in the planning process, the HMPC has organized resources, assessed hazards and risks, and documented mitigation capabilities. The resulting goals, objectives, and mitigation actions were developed based on these tasks. The HMPC held a series of meetings and exercises designed to achieve a collaborative, updated mitigation strategy as described further throughout this section.

Over a series of meetings during the 2022 – 2023 update process, the HMPC reviewed the results of the hazard identification, vulnerability assessment, and capability assessment update. This analysis of the risk assessment identified areas where improvements could be made and provided the framework for the HMPC to update planning goals and objectives and the ultimate mitigation strategy for the Kings County planning area.

Mitigation goals are defined as general guidelines that explain what the County wants to achieve in terms of hazard and loss prevention. Goals are typically long-range statements representing community-wide visions. The HMPC reviewed the goals from the 2012 MJHMP which focused on reducing the impacts of natural hazards to life, property, and the environment, as well as agriculture and the economies of communities, and implementing identified mitigation activities. The goals were developed to be compatible with the goals of the community as expressed in the Health and Safety Element of the General Plan, and the 2015 EOP. The County’s Mitigation Strategy is guided by the vision of a safe and resilient County. The mission is to integrate existing laws and programs into a mitigation strategy that will serve the citizens by reducing and preventing injury and damage from natural hazards.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Strategy

2023 Update Page 5-2 Kings County routinely performs activities such as issuing building permits, approving development plans, and repairing roads. The County is conscious that these activities should reflect the vision and goals by using the most current building code, restricting development in hazard-prone areas, or making infrastructure decisions based on the risk assessment findings. As a result, goals were defined for this mitigation plan as broad-based public policy statements that:
• Represent basic desires of the community;
• Encompass all aspects of community, public and private; • Are nonspecific, in that they refer to the quality (not the quantity) of the outcome; • Are future-oriented, in that they are achievable in the future; and • Are time-independent, in that they are not scheduled events.

Goals are stated without regard to implementation. Implementation cost, schedule, and means are not considered. Goals are defined before considering how to accomplish them so that they are not dependent on the means of achievement. Goal statements form the basis for objectives and actions that will be used as means to achieve the goals. Objectives define strategies to attain the goals and are more specific and measurable. Goals are listed below. The County decided not to develop specific objective statements.

5.1.1 Mitigation Goals
• Goal 1: Reduce impacts of natural hazards to life, property, and the environment. • Goal 2: Minimize impacts of natural disasters to agriculture and the economies of communities. • Goal 3: Implement identified mitigation activities.
• Goal 4: Plan for and adapt to the effects of climate change.

5.2 IDENTIFICATION AND ANALYSIS OF MITIGATION ACTIONS
§201.6(c)(3)(ii):
[The hazard mitigation strategy shall include a] section that identifies and analyzes a comprehensive range of specific mitigation actions and projects being considered to reduce the effects of each hazard, with particular emphasis on new and existing buildings and infrastructure. All plans approved by FEMA after October 1, 2008, must also address the jurisdiction’s participation in the NFIP, and continued compliance with NFIP requirements, as appropriate.

In order to identify and select mitigation measures to support the mitigation goals, each hazard identified in Section 4: Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment was evaluated. The HMPC analyzed a comprehensive set of viable mitigation alternatives for both new and existing buildings and infrastructure that would support identified goals and objectives and reduce or eliminate risks to persons or property or lessen the actual or potential effects or consequences of a disaster. Each HMPC member was provided with the following list of categories of mitigation measures, which originate from the NFIP CRS:
• Prevention: Administrative or regulatory actions or processes that influence the way land and buildings are developed and built.
• Property protection: Actions that involve the modification of existing buildings or structures to protect them from a hazard or remove them from the hazard area. • Structural: Actions that involve the construction of structures to reduce the impact of a hazard. • Natural resource protection: Actions that, in addition to minimizing hazard losses, also preserve or restore the functions of natural systems.
• Emergency services: Actions that protect people and property during and immediately after a disaster or hazard event.
• Public information/education and awareness: Actions to inform and educate citizens, elected officials, and property owners about the hazards and potential ways to mitigate them.

At the HMPC Meeting #3, the HMPC was provided with a matrix showing examples of potential mitigation action alternatives for each of the above categories, for each of the identified hazards. The HMPC was also provided a handout that explains the categories and provided further examples. These documents list the common alternatives for mitigation by hazard and actions funded by FEMA. The HMPC was also instructed to consider both future and existing buildings in considering possible mitigation actions. This reference provides four categories of mitigation actions that were discussed at the HMPC meeting in addition to the NFIP/CRS categories. These include:

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Strategy

2023 Update Page 5-3 • Plans and Regulations
• Structure and Infrastructure Projects
• Education and Awareness
• Natural systems protection
Other alternatives discussed in the webinar include the four A’s of mitigation:
• Alter the physical nature of the hazard.
­ Such as wildfire defensible space and fuels treatments, snow fences etc. • Avert the hazard away from people, buildings, and infrastructure. ­ Can include engineered solutions, drainage, and channel improvements, floodproofing, fuel breaks. • Adapt to the hazard.
­ Through land use planning, building codes and design standards, warning systems etc. • Avoid the hazard.
­ Natural systems protection, open space, acquisition, or relocation of properties out of hazardous areas As part of the review of mitigation options, long-term climate change adaptation strategies were also discussed, such as climate adaptation strategies included in the Final Regional Climate Action Plan for the cities of Avenal and Hanford (e.g., Trees, Parks, and Open Space Measures, Community Education and Outreach Measures). HMPC members were encouraged to incorporate climate change adaptation measures into the mitigation strategy of their respective jurisdictions by utilizing resources and guidance available on the Cal-Adapt website and California APG. These adaptation strategies were considered for inclusion in the mitigation strategy and to comply with California Government Code Section 65302.3(g) requirements. Further, the County was provided a list of over 12 suggested ideas for new mitigation actions during HMPC Meeting #3 to consider when developing new mitigation actions (see Appendix D).

To facilitate the brainstorming process, the HMPC was provided a matrix of typical mitigation alternatives organized by CRS category for the hazards identified in the plan, in addition to a handout that explains the categories and provided examples. These materials are included in Appendix B. During a group activity during HMPC Meeting #3 the HMPC members were encouraged to develop mitigation alternatives that would protect future, as well as existing, development from hazards per the DMA 2000 regulations. A facilitated discussion then took place to examine the existing actions in the 2012 MJHMP and analyze the other possible mitigation alternatives from the suggested ideas for new mitigation ideas (previously noted) and by incorporating policies and implementation measures from each jurisdiction’s Safety Element, Emergency Operations Plan, and Capital Improvement Program (e.g. storm water drainage facility policies; emergency preparedness policies; and natural hazard policies for drought, earthquake, extreme heat, dam failure, and other hazards). This facilitated discussion resulted in a full list of mitigation actions from which the HMPC could select mitigation actions. With an understanding of all the alternatives, the group activity was conducted to generate a list of preferred mitigation actions to carry forward into the mitigation strategy. The result was new and updated project ideas with the intent of meeting the identified goals and mitigating identified hazards. These new and updated project mitigation actions were expanded on during numerous follow-up meetings with County OES staff and participating jurisdictions to focus on the refinement and prioritization of new mitigation activities added later in the planning process.

Once new mitigation actions were defined, the HMPC selected and prioritized the mitigation actions by ranking them during another group activity that asked the participants to rank actions as either low, medium, or high-priority projects; additional information on this process is described below. WSP also discussed remaining information or mitigation gaps that needed to be addressed during the final follow- up meetings. These meetings were more focused on stakeholder group sessions intended to wrap up mitigation gaps, discuss opportunities for plan integration, and review the plan implementation and maintenance procedures.

5.2.1 Prioritization Process
Once the mitigation actions were identified, the HMPC was provided with several decision-making tools, including FEMA’s recommended prioritization criteria, STAPLEE, to assist in deciding why one recommended action might be more important, more effective, or more likely to be implemented than another. STAPLEE stands for the following:

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Strategy

2023 Update Page 5-4 • Social: Does the measure treat people fairly? (e.g., different groups, different generations) Does it consider social equity, disadvantaged communities, or vulnerable populations? • Technical: Will it work? (Is the action technically feasible? Does it solve the problem?) • Administrative: Is there capacity to implement and manage the project? (adequate staffing, funding, and other capabilities to implement the project?)
• Political: Who are the stakeholders? Did they get to participate? Will there be adequate political and public support for the project?
• Legal: Does the jurisdiction have the legal authority to implement the action? Is it legal? Are there liability implications?
• Economic: Is the action cost-beneficial? Is there funding available? Will the action contribute to the local economy?
• Environmental: Does the action comply with environmental regulations? Will there be negative environmental consequences from the action?
In accordance with the DMA requirements, an emphasis was placed on the importance of a benefit-cost analysis in determining action priority. Other criteria used to assist in evaluating the benefit-cost of a mitigation action included:
• Does the action address hazards or areas with the highest risk? • Does the action protect lives?
• Does the action protect infrastructure, community assets or critical facilities? • Does the action meet multiple objectives (Multiple Objective Management)? • What will the action cost?
• What is the timing of available funding?
The mitigation categories, multi-hazard actions, and criteria are included in Appendix D.

At the HMPC Meeting #3: mitigation strategy meeting, the HMPC reviewed and discussed the STAPLEE considerations to determine which of the identified actions were most likely to be implemented and effective. Prioritization of previous mitigation actions identified in the 2012 MJHMP were carried forward in the updated plan. New actions identified and selected for further consideration during the 2022-2023 process also were prioritized based on the group activity (sticky dot exercise) and a follow-up discussion.

With the STAPLEE criteria in mind, HMPC participants completed the group activity to select and rank the existing and new mitigation actions, which corresponds to the final list of mitigation actions summarized below in Section 5.4 (e.g., a full list of recommended mitigation actions consisted of recommended actions and actions that would incorporate policies and implementation measures from other planning documents).

The team was asked to prioritize projects with the above criteria in mind, essentially voting on the projects. The projects with the most points or votes using a sticky dot exercise became the higher priority projects, and those with the next highest number of sticky dots became the medium priority projects.

Those projects with less than three or no sticky dots were the low priority projects. The HMPC decided that the high priority projects would be those the County and participating jurisdictions would focus on for implementation during this planning cycle. The HMPC decided that the low priority actions would not be prioritized for implementation during this planning cycle. The HMPC also re-prioritized projects that were added during final review of the plan to ensure mitigation actions were explicitly linked to each known natural hazard assessed and the key vulnerabilities. This process provided both consensus and priority for the recommendations.

The process of identification and analysis of mitigation alternatives allowed the HMPC to come to a consensus and to collectively prioritize recommended mitigation actions. During the voting process, emphasis was placed on the importance of a benefit-cost review in determining project priority; however, this was not a quantitative analysis.

Cost-Benefit Review
A cost-benefit review was applied to prioritize the mitigation recommendations for implementation. The priority for implementing mitigation recommendations depends upon the overall cost-effectiveness of the recommendation when taking into account monetary and non-monetary costs and benefits associated with each action. The cost-benefit table for each hazard provides an analysis of the benefit, cost, and relative priority rank (High, Medium, and Low) for each mitigation activity. The guidelines are listed below.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Strategy

2023 Update Page 5-5 • High – Benefits are perceived to exceed costs without further study or evaluation. • Medium – Benefits are perceived to exceed costs but may require further study or evaluation prior to implementation.
• Low – Benefits and cost evaluations requires additional evaluation prior to implementation.

Funding projects that will help mitigate imminent hazards are cost-effective and assist in efforts to help communities recover from disasters. Most of the projects are already funded through general fund, application fees or state/federal funds. The majority of the projects are ongoing to ensure mitigation measures are implemented within the County. It is not anticipated that all future projects will be identified in the 2023 MJHMP. The County’s MJHMP will also help guide local government to prioritize, be flexible, and identify critical mitigation strategy needs that may arise from a disaster when there is no time to update the local plan.

Benefit-cost was considered in greater detail in the development of the Mitigation Action Plan. For example, parameters were established for assigning the subjective ratings (high, medium, low) to the benefits and costs of each mitigation action. Specifically, each action developed for this plan contains a description of the problem and proposed project, the entity with primary responsibility for implementation, any other alternatives considered, a cost estimate, expected project benefits, potential funding sources, and an implementation schedule. Development of these project details for each action led to the determination of an overall high, medium, or low priority for each action.

Recognizing the limitations in prioritizing actions from multiple departments and the regulatory requirement to prioritize by benefit-cost to ensure cost-effectiveness, the HMPC decided to pursue mitigation action strategy development and implementation according to the nature and extent of damages, the level of protection and benefits each action provides, political support, project cost, available funding, and jurisdiction and department priority. This process guided the development of a prioritized action plan for Kings County and the participating jurisdictions.

Cost-effectiveness will be considered in greater detail through a formal benefit-cost analysis when seeking FEMA mitigation grant eligibility and funding (e.g. HMGP, BRIC grant programs) for eligible actions associated with this plan. It is also important for the County to protect critical facilities and infrastructure. Areas of repetitive loss are high priorities for mitigation funding as they can drain County coffers.

5.2.2 Continued NFIP Participation
The NFIP makes federally-backed flood insurance available to homeowners, renters, and business owners in participating communities. For most participating communities, FEMA has prepared a detailed Flood Insurance Study (FIS). The study presents water surface elevations for floods of various magnitudes, including the 1% annual chance flood (or 100-year flood) and the 0.2% annual chance flood (or 500-year flood). Base flood elevations and the boundaries of the 100- and 500-year floodplains are shown on Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM), which are the principal tools for identifying the extent and location of the riverine flood hazard. FIRMs are the most detailed and consistent data source available, and for many communities, they represent the minimum area of oversight under their floodplain management program.

Participants in the NFIP must, at a minimum, regulate development in floodplain areas in accordance with NFIP criteria. Before issuing a permit to build in a floodplain, participating jurisdictions must ensure that three criteria are met:
• New buildings and those undergoing substantial improvements must, at a minimum, be elevated to protect against damage by the 100-year flood.
• New floodplain development must not aggravate existing flood problems or increase damage to other properties.
• New floodplain development must exercise a reasonable and prudent effort to reduce its adverse impacts on threatened salmonid species.

Kings County and all four jurisdictions participate in the NFIP. Under the NFIP, buildings that were built before the flood hazard was identified on the community’s FIRMs are generally referred to as “pre-FIRM” buildings. When the NFIP was created, the U.S. Congress recognized that insurance for pre-FIRM buildings would be prohibitively expensive if the premiums were not subsidized by the Federal Government. Congress also recognized that most of these flood-prone buildings were built by individuals

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Strategy

2023 Update Page 5-6 who did not have sufficient knowledge of the flood hazard to make informed decisions. The NFIP requires that full actuarial rates reflecting the complete flood risk be charged on all buildings constructed or substantially improved on or after the effective date of the initial FIRM for the community or after December 31, 1974, whichever is later. These buildings are generally referred to as “Post-FIRM” buildings.

Table 5-1 below shows the dates when Kings County and the jurisdictions joined the NFIP.

Table 5-1 Kings County and Its Jurisdictions’ NFIP Entry Date

COUNTY/JURISDICTION NFIP ENTRY DATE
Kings County August 4, 1988
City of Avenal April 5, 1989
City of Corcoran November 28, 1997
City of Hanford March 18, 1987
City of Lemoore April 3, 1987
Source: CIS 2023
Post-FIRM structures built in compliance with the floodplain regulations are mitigated to withstand floods up through the 100-year event. The insurance rate is different for the two types of structures, as pre-FIRM structures are at higher risk of flooding. The effective date for the current countywide FIRM is September 16, 2015.

The County and participating jurisdictions are currently in good standing with the provisions of the NFIP.

Compliance is monitored by FEMA regional staff. Maintaining compliance with the NFIP is an important component of flood mitigation and risk reduction and Kings County and the four participating jurisdictions will continue to make every effort to remain in good standing with the program. This includes continuing to comply with the NFIP’s standards for adopting floodplain maps and maintaining and periodically updating local floodplain regulations. Actions related to continued compliance also include:
• Continued designation of a local floodplain manager whose responsibilities include reviewing floodplain development permits to ensure compliance with the local floodplain management ordinances and rules;
• Suggest changes to improve enforcement of and compliance with regulations and programs; • Participate in FIRM updates by adopting new maps or amendments to maps; • Utilize Digital FIRMs in conjunction with GIS to improve floodplain management, such as improved risk assessment and tracking of floodplain permits;
• Promote and disperse information on the benefits of flood insurance.

5.3 MITIGATION STRATEGY ACTION PLAN
§201.6(c)(3)(iii)
[The hazard mitigation strategy shall include an] action plan, describing how the action identified in paragraph (c)(3)(ii) of this section will be prioritized, implemented, and administered by the local jurisdiction. Prioritization shall include a special emphasis on the extent to which benefits are maximized according to a cost-benefit review of the proposed projects and their associated costs.
§201.6(c)(3)(iv)
For multi‐jurisdictional plans, there must be identifiable action items specific to the jurisdiction requesting FEMA approval or credit of the plan.

This action plan was developed to present the recommendations developed by the HMPC for how the Kings County planning area can reduce the vulnerability of people, property, infrastructure, and natural and cultural resources to future disaster losses. Over time the implementation of these projects will be tracked as a measure of demonstrated progress on meeting the plan’s goals.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Strategy

2023 Update Page 5-7

5.3.1 Progress on Previous Mitigation Actions
A review of 2012 mitigation actions progress reports indicates that Kings County has been successful in implementing actions identified in the 2012 MJHMP Mitigation Strategy, thus, working diligently towards meeting the 2012 plan goals.

The 2012 mitigation strategy contained 20 separate mitigation actions. Three of these actions were multi- jurisdictional, four applied to the City of Avenal, two applied to the City of Corcoran, and the remaining 11 were County-wide actions. As of July 2023, five of these actions have been completed, one has been deleted, and 14 actions are continuing and carried forward into the 2023 MJHMP.

Table 5-2 summarizes progress implementing mitigation actions. The total continuing actions row summarizes the actions from 2012 that are either still in-progress, have annual implementation, or are continuing but not completed. The new actions in 2023 summarizes the number of actions that were identified during the 2022- 2023 plan update process.

Table 5-2 Mitigation Action Progress Summary for County PROGRESS CATEGORY # OF MITIGATION ACTIONS
Completed 5
Deleted 1
Total Removed Actions 6
Continue: In-Progress 9
Continue: Not Started 3
Continue: Revised 2
New Actions in 2023 69
Total Active Actions 78
Source: HMPC 2023
Table 5-3 indicates the details for each of the 2012 mitigation action items. One deleted action was multi- jurisdictional, three actions were completed by the County, one action was completed by the City Corcoran, and one action was completed by the City of Avenal.

Table 5-3 Status of 2012 Mitigation Actions

ID HAZARD(S)

ADDRESSED

MITIGATION ACTION LEAD AGENCY ACTION STATUS
NOTES
1 Earthquake, Land
Subsidence,
Landslide
Housing Rehabilitation Program -
Continue and enhance housing
rehabilitation program.

City of Avenal
Community
Development Director
Ongoing.
2 Drought,
Earthquake,
Extreme
Temperatures:

Freeze and Heat,
Flood, Fog,
Wildfire
Emergency Power System for the
Emergency Operations Center at
the Ken Brown Public Safety
Center - Purchase, Install, test, and
utilize a 200 KW Propane/Natural
Gas-powered emergency
Generator system for the
Emergency Operations Center.

Avenal OES/Police
Department, Kings
County OES
Completed in 2018,
creating the City’s EOC
at the APD
3 Earthquake Vulnerability of Water Distribution
System
City of Avenal Public
Works Department
In progress.
4 Earthquake,
Subsidence,
Landslide
Loss Reduction Program for URM
Buildings
City of Avenal City
Manager’s Office,
California Seismic
Safety Commission,
City of Avenal Public
Works Department
In progress.
5 Drought,
Earthquake,
Extreme
Temperatures:

Freeze and Heat,
Expand the Veterans’ Memorial
Building and designate it as an
emergency shelter.

City of Corcoran Public
Works
Revised Action in 2023.

Use of the Veteran’s
Hall is no longer
needed now that the
RAC gymnasium is

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Strategy

2023 Update Page 5-8

ID HAZARD(S)

ADDRESSED

MITIGATION ACTION LEAD AGENCY ACTION STATUS
NOTES
Flood, Fog,
Wildfire
outfitted and serves a
larger population.
6 Drought,
Earthquake,
Extreme
Temperatures:

Freeze and Heat,
Flood, Fog,
Wildfire
Assess vulnerability of critical
infrastructure and lifeline utilities,
that may be disrupted due to the
construction of high-speed rail
through Kings County.

Kings County, Cities of
Hanford and Corcoran
Deleted. Construction
of high-speed rail has
begun.
7 Drought,
Earthquake,
Extreme Heat,
Flood, Fog,
Freeze, Wildfire
Emergency Power System for
shelter site
City of Corcoran Public
Works, Kings County
Office of Emergency
Services

Revised Action. Use of
the Veteran’s Hall is no
longer needed now
that the RAC
gymnasium is outfitted
and serves a larger
population. The next
critically identified
need area is the
Corcoran Depot
apartment complex as
it houses a
concentrated area of
senior and special
needs individuals.

8 Drought,
Earthquake,
Extreme
Temperatures:

Freeze and Heat,
Flood, Fog,
Wildfire
New Public Safety Building Corcoran Police
Department
Completed, October
2019
9 Drought, EQ,
Extreme Heat,
Flood, Fog,
Freeze, Wildfire
Public Education Program County and City Public
Works, Kings County
Health Dept., Kings
County OES
In progress.
10 Drought,
Earthquake,
Extreme Heat,
Flood, Fog,
Freeze, Wildfire
Emergency Power Switching
System for Primary Care Clinics
County Public Health
Emergency
Preparedness
Completed, December
2018
11 Drought,
Earthquake,
Extreme Heat,
Flood, Fog,
Freeze,
Wildfire
Hospitals HVAC County Public Health
Emergency
Preparedness
Completed, December
2018
12 Drought,
Earthquake,
Extreme Heat,
Flood, Fog,
Freeze, Wildfire
Water Recharge Basin
Partnership Program
State DWR led joint
powers authority
should be developed
to manage this multi-
jurisdictional project.

California Department
of Water Resources
(DWR), Kings County
water and irrigation
districts, Kings County
OES, Community
Development
In progress. Funding
not yet secured but
grant has been applied
for with HMGP

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Strategy

2023 Update Page 5-9

ID HAZARD(S)

ADDRESSED

MITIGATION ACTION LEAD AGENCY ACTION STATUS
NOTES
13 Drought,
Earthquake,
Extreme Heat,
Flood, Fog,
Freeze, Wildfire
Community Alert and Warning Kings County OES,
Sheriff and City Law
Enforcement, Kings
County Operational
Area partners, county
communications and
Cal OES, State
Department of
Corrections, State High
Speed Rail Authority.

Ongoing
14 Drought,
Earthquake,
Extreme Heat,
Flood, Fog,
Freeze, Wildfire
Transportable Shelter Caches for
Displaced Populations
County Public Health
Emergency
Preparedness
Completed, December
2022
15 Drought,
Earthquake,
Extreme Heat,
Flood, Fog,
Freeze, Wildfire
New County EOC Assessment Kings County OES,
County Departments,
Kings County Fire
Department, Kings
County Environmental
Health, Kings County
Information
Technology
Department, and
Kings County Public
Works Department
Not started. Funding
not yet secured.
16 Drought,
Earthquake,
Extreme Heat,
Flood, Fog,
Freeze, Wildfire
Inter-jurisdictional GIS Program Kings County
Community
Development, OES,
City GIS, IT, Cities of
Avenal, Corcoran,
Lemoore, and Hanford;
special districts; water
and irrigation districts;
Local Agency
Formation
Commission of Kings
County; and Kings
County Association of
Governments
In progress.
17 Drought, EQ,
Extreme Heat,
Flood, Fog,
Freeze, Wildfire
Kings County Area Disaster
Council
Kings County OES,
County Admin Office,
Board of Supervisors
In progress.

Organizational work to
establish the Council
was accomplished but
formal meetings have
not yet commenced.
18 Extreme Heat Livestock Disposal Plan Kings County
Agricultural
Commissioner, Kings
County Agricultural
Advisory Committee,
University of California
at Davis Extension,
Environmental Health
Services, Natural
Resources
Conservation Service,
Kings County
Not started. Funding
not yet secured

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Strategy

2023 Update Page 5-10

ID HAZARD(S)

ADDRESSED

MITIGATION ACTION LEAD AGENCY ACTION STATUS
NOTES
Community
Development Agency,
Kings County
Environmental Health,
County OES, PHEP
19 Drought, EQ,
Extreme Heat,
Flood, Fog,
Freeze, Wildfire
Disaster Evacuation Routes Kings County Public
Works Department,
Kings County Sheriff /
City Police, County
OES, Human Services
Agency (HAS), Kings
Rural Area Transit,
Public Health
Emergency
Preparedness, Kings
County Planning
Agency; Cities of
Avenal, Corcoran,
Lemoore, and Hanford;
California Department
of Transportation
In progress. Funding
has not been secured,
may do this internally
20 Fog Traffic Safety Fog Events Kings County Public
Works, Kings OES,
County and City Law
Enforcement, CHP,
Caltrans
Not started, funding
not secured
Source: HMPC 2023

5.3.2 Updated Action Plan
The results of the project identification and prioritization exercise from the third HMPC meeting are summarized in Table 5-4. These projects detail specific actions for reducing future hazard-related losses within Kings County. The projects are organized by jurisdictions and include notes about the department and partners necessary to implement the project.

Table 5-4 provides details on 83 existing and new mitigation actions, including the mitigation action description estimated cost, potential funding sources, timeline, indication of the goal(s) that the projects primarily align with, and are marked with their relative level of priority high, medium, and low. The following table also provides status/implementation notes that describe progress made on the actions so far, using the following categories, and, where applicable, notes if there were changes in the priority level from the previous plan:
• Not Started: Work has not begun
• In Progress: Work has begun but not completed
• Annual Implementation: Ongoing with no specific end date • New in 2023: The action is new to this plan update; little to no work has been completed.

The Cost Estimate column describes the estimated project costs using the following categories:
• Little to no cost
• Low: Less than $10,000
• Moderate: $10,000-$100,000
• High: $100,000-$1,000,000
• Very High: More than $1,000,000
The Timeline column describes the estimated time of completion for each project using the following categories:

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Strategy

2023 Update Page 5-11 • Short Term: 1-2 years
• Medium Term: 3-5 years
• Long Term: 5+ years
• Ongoing: action is implemented every year
Of the 83 mitigation actions in the updated plan, 14 were carried over from the previous plan, two actions were revised, and 69 are new mitigation actions, including 28 Kings County actions and 55 jurisdiction- specific actions. Many of these mitigation actions are intended to reduce impacts to existing development. Those that protect future development from hazards, as required per the DMA 2000 regulations, are indicated by an asterisk in the action identification number. These actions include those that promote wise development and hazard avoidance, such as updating mapping and continued enforcement of floodplain development regulations. Those projects with two asterisks are emergency preparedness actions, most of which were carried forward from the 2017 plan. There is at least one mitigation actions for each natural hazard identified in the plan.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Strategy

2023 Update Page 5-12
Table 5-4 Kings County Mitigation Actions

ID LINKS TO
GOALS

HAZARD(S)

MITIGATED

DESCRIPTION/

BACKGROUND/

BENEFITS

JURISDICTION LEAD AGENCY

AND PARTNERS
COST

ESTIMATE

POTENTIAL

FUNDING

FEMA LIFELINE PRIORITY TIMELINE IMPLEMENTATION
STATUS
KC-1 Goal 1, Goal
2, Goal 3
Drought,
Subsidence
Water Recharge Basin
Partnership Program
Partner with the State
and contiguous
counties to improve
coordination, planning,
and investment in
long‐term water
supplies by developing
a comprehensive water
recharge basin project
to meet demands of
ongoing growth and
development.

Kings County State DWR led
joint powers
authority should
be developed to
manage this
multi-
jurisdictional
project.

California
Department of
Water Resources
(DWR), Kings
County water
and irrigation
districts, Kings
County OES,
Community
Development
High Possible grant
and bond
funds through
recent State
Propositions,
DWR Grants,
HMGP
Food, Hydration,
Shelter
Medium Ongoing In progress. Funding
not secured but has
been applied for
with Hazard
Mitigation Grant
Program
KC-2** Goal 1, Goal
2, Goal 3
Dam Incidents,
Earthquake,
Flood, Dense
Fog, Heavy Rain,
Thunderstorms,
Hail, and
Lightning
Community Alert and
Warning System -
Purchase, install, test,
and utilize a
community wide alert
and early warning
system that alerts
residents by phone,
email, cell phone and
other electronic
communication
devices.

Kings County Kings County
OES, Sheriff and
City Law
Enforcement,
Kings County
Operational Area
partners, county
communications
and Cal OES,
State
Department of
Corrections, State
High Speed Rail
Authority.

High HMGP,
Emergency
Management
Performance
Grant (EMPG),
Homeland
Security Grant
Program
(HSGP) and
potentially the
EOC Grant
Program
Safety and
Security;
Communications
High Ongoing In progress. Funding
has been secured
through EMPG grant
KC-3** Goal 1, Goal
2, Goal 3
Drought,
Earthquake,
Extreme
Temperatures:

Freeze and
Heat, Flood, Fog,
Wildfire
New County EOC
Assessment - Develop a
standing EOC group to
review and discuss
specifications,
supervise the creation
of construction plans,
identify funding
mechanism and
requirements, and
identify the site for the
new Kings County EOC.

Kings County Kings County
OES, County
Departments,
Kings County Fire
Department,
Kings County
Environmental
Health, Kings
County
Information
Technology
Department, and
Kings County
High General Fund,
HMP Grants,
EOC Grant
Program,
Partnership
with State,
County and
Transportation
Agencies,
EMPG,
Homeland
Security Grant
Program
Safety and
Security;
Communications
High Short-
term
In progress. Funding
not secured yet

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Strategy

2023 Update Page 5-13

ID LINKS TO
GOALS

HAZARD(S)

MITIGATED

DESCRIPTION/

BACKGROUND/

BENEFITS

JURISDICTION LEAD AGENCY

AND PARTNERS
COST

ESTIMATE

POTENTIAL

FUNDING

FEMA LIFELINE PRIORITY TIMELINE IMPLEMENTATION
STATUS
Public Works
Department
KC-4* Goal 1, Goal
2, Goal 3
Agricultural
Pests and
Disease, Dam
Incidents,
Earthquake,
Flood, Land
Subsidence,
Landslide,
Wildfire
Inter-jurisdictional GIS
Program -– Establish a
centralized, inter-
jurisdictional GIS
program to improve all
phases of emergency
management.

Kings County Kings County
Community
Development,
OES, City GIS, IT,
Cities of Avenal,
Corcoran,
Lemoore, and
Hanford; special
districts; water
and irrigation
districts; Local
Agency
Formation
Commission of
Kings County;
and Kings County
Association of
Governments.

Moderate Local
government
funds and
possible grant
funds through
recent
Safety and
Security;
Communications;
Transportation
Medium Short-
term
In progress. The
County has been
completely mapped;
Hanford and Avenal
have joined in on the
project contracting
with County GIS to
meet their mapping
needs. The project is
planned to expand
to include all the
incorporated Cities
and continue to
create an integrated
countywide GIS
system and
database.

KC-5 Goal 1, Goal
2, Goal 3
Drought,
Earthquake,
Extreme
Temperatures:

Freeze and
Heat, Flood, Fog,
Wildfire
Kings County Area
Disaster Council -
Review and update
items related to the
Kings County Area
Disaster Council in the
Kings County
Emergency Services
Ordinance to improve
countywide
coordination and the
monitoring and
implementation of the
mitigation plan
Kings County Kings County
OES, County
Admin Office,
Board of
Supervisors
Low Kings County
General Fund,
EMPG
Safety and
Security
High Short-
term
In progress.

Organizational work
to establish the
Council was
accomplished but
formal meetings
have not yet
commenced.

KC-6 Goal 1, Goal
2, Goal 3
Agriculture and
Pest Disease,
Public Health,
Extreme
Temperatures:

Freeze and Heat
Livestock Disposal Plan
- Establish a livestock
disposal plan and
compost team to
address livestock
fatality during extreme
heat events. This action
would reduce impacts
to the agricultural
industry during
extreme temperature
events, reduce the
potential for
Kings County Kings County
Agricultural
Commissioner,
Kings County
Agricultural
Advisory
Committee,
University of
California at
Davis Extension,
Environmental
Health Services,
Natural
Moderate Hospital
Preparedness
Grant, the
actual costs to
bury the
carcasses
would be the
responsibility of
the animal
facility
owner/operator
.

Safety and
Security
High Short-
term
Not started, funding
not yet secured

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Strategy

2023 Update Page 5-14

ID LINKS TO
GOALS

HAZARD(S)

MITIGATED

DESCRIPTION/

BACKGROUND/

BENEFITS

JURISDICTION LEAD AGENCY

AND PARTNERS
COST

ESTIMATE

POTENTIAL

FUNDING

FEMA LIFELINE PRIORITY TIMELINE IMPLEMENTATION
STATUS
agricultural pests and
diseases and public
health concerns, and
avoid overwhelming
critical rendering
infrastructure.

Resources
Conservation
Service, Kings
County
Community
Development
Agency, Kings
County
Environmental
Health, County

OES, PHEP
KC-7 Goal 1, Goal
2, Goal 3
Earthquake,
Extreme
Temperatures:

Freeze and
Heat, Flood, Fog,
Wildfire
Disaster Evacuation
Routes - Ensure the
maintenance and
enhancement of
established disaster
evacuation routes
Kings County Kings County
Public Works
Department,
Kings County
Sheriff / City
Police, County
OES, Human
Services Agency
(HAS), Kings
Rural Area
Transit, Public
Health
Emergency
Preparedness,
Kings County
Planning Agency;
Cities of Avenal,
Corcoran,
Lemoore, and
Hanford;
California
Department of
Transportation
Moderate Gas tax,
federal/state
transportation
funding, Kings
County General
Fund for staff
time,
Community
Power
Resiliency
Allocation
Program,

EMPG, HMGP
Transportation High Short-
term
In progress. Funding
has not been
secured, may do this
internally.

KC-8 Goal 1, Goal
2, Goal 3
Severe Weather
– Dense Fog
Traffic Safety Fog
Events - Improve
lighting, signage, and
traffic controls at
critical intersections
and roadways to
improve safety during
fog events.

Kings County Kings County
Public Works,
Kings OES,
County and City
Law
Enforcement,
CHP, Caltrans
Moderate Cal Trans
Grants, EMPG,
HSGP
Transportation Medium Short-
term
Not started, funding
not secured yet.

KC-9** Goal 1 Dam Incidents,
Earthquake,
Flood, Land
Subsidence,
Landslide,
Automated
Transportation App -
Develop a
transportation routing
app, similar to the
Kings County Kings County
Public Works,
Kings County
Administration,
City GIS, and
Moderate Community
Power
Resiliency
Allocation
Transportation,
Communications
Low Short-
term
New Action in 2023.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Strategy

2023 Update Page 5-15

ID LINKS TO
GOALS

HAZARD(S)

MITIGATED

DESCRIPTION/

BACKGROUND/

BENEFITS

JURISDICTION LEAD AGENCY

AND PARTNERS
COST

ESTIMATE

POTENTIAL

FUNDING

FEMA LIFELINE PRIORITY TIMELINE IMPLEMENTATION
STATUS
Severe Weather:

Dense Fog
Caltrans app, to divert
traffic due to road
conditions during
hazard events
Emergency
Management
Department
Program,

EMPG, HMGP
KC-10* Goal 2, Goal
3, Goal 4
Drought Water Conservation
Campaign - Create a
water conservation
campaign, utilizing
social media, signage,
and grass roots
outreach
Kings County Kings County
Administration,
Water Manager,
Utility Districts
Low DWR, FEMA

HMA HMGP
Funds
Food, Water,
Shelter
High Short-
term
New Action in 2023.

KC-11* Goal 2, Goal
4 Drought Floodwater Recharge
Project - Create a flood
water recharge project
utilizing a feasibility
study, pumps, and land
for recharge.

Kings County Kings County
Administration,
Water Manager,
Utility Districts,
City and County
Engineering
Departments
Very High FEMA HMA
HMGP Funds,
DWR
Food, Water,
Shelter
High Medium-
term
New Action in 2023.

KC-12* Goal 1, Goal
2, Goal 3,
Goal 4
Drought,
Subsidence
Land Subsidence Study
- Conduct updated
land subsidence study
to understand
elevation, shifts, and
vulnerability.

Kings County Kings County
Administration,
Water Manager,
City and County
Engineering
Departments
Moderate DWR, USACE,
Cal OES
Safety and
Security; Food,
Water, Shelter;
Transportation
Medium Short-
term
New Action in 2023.

KC-13* Goal 1, Goal
2 Flooding, Fire Debris Management
Plan - Create a flood
channel debris
management plan to
allow the flow of water,
increase capacity, and
remove fire hazards.

Kings County Kings County
Public Works,
Water and
Irrigation
Districts, City
Public Works
High Proposition 68,
Federal and
State
Resources
Safety and
Security
High Short-
term
New Action in 2023.

KC-14* Goal 1, Goal
2, Goal 3,
Goal 4
Flood, Severe
Weather – Heavy
Rain/Thunderst
orm/Hail/Lightni
ng, Drought,
Subsidence
Develop a series of
flood control basins on
the Kings River that
either recharge or store
water during flood
flows.

Kings County Kings County
Conservation
District (KRCD),
Local GSAs
Very High DWR Grants Safety and
Security, and
Food, Water,
Shelter
High Long-
term
New Action in 2023.

KC-15* Goal 1, Goal
2, Goal 3,
Goal 4
Flood,
Subsidence,
Severe Weather
– Heavy
Rain/Thunderst
orms/Hail/Light
ning
Sediment Removal -
Remove sediment from
the Kings to River to
avoid future capacity
issues.

Kings County KRCD Very High HMPG Funds,
Prop 68
Safety and
Security
High Medium-
term
New Action in 2023.

KC-16** Goal 1, Goal
4 Drought Establish a Drought
Task Force – Kings
County will establish
Kings County Water Districts,
Small Water
Suppliers, Non-
High General Fund Water Systems,
Safety and
Security
High Short-
term
New Action in 2023.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Strategy

2023 Update Page 5-16

ID LINKS TO
GOALS

HAZARD(S)

MITIGATED

DESCRIPTION/

BACKGROUND/

BENEFITS

JURISDICTION LEAD AGENCY

AND PARTNERS
COST

ESTIMATE

POTENTIAL

FUNDING

FEMA LIFELINE PRIORITY TIMELINE IMPLEMENTATION
STATUS
and convene a task
force that develops
water shortage
preparedness planning
efforts for domestic
wells, privately
supplied homes, and
small state water
systems.

Transient Non-
Community
Water Systems;
Kings County
Department of
Public Health
KC-17 Goal 1, Goal
2, Goal 4
Drought Regularly review and
incorporate
information from the
Water Storage
Vulnerability Tool to
update information
about drought and
water shortage
vulnerabilities in the
County’s MJHMP,
WSCPs, and Drought
Resiliency Plan
Kings County Kings County
Office of
Emergency
Services, Water
Districts, Small
Water Suppliers,
Non-Transient
Non-Community
Water Systems,
Kings County
Department of
Public Health
Little to No
Cost
General Fund Water Systems High Short-
term
New Action in 2023.

KC-18 Goal 1, Goal
2, Goal 3,
Goal 4
Drought Water Shortage
Contingency Plans
(WSCPs) - The County
will work with small
water providers to
develop a WSCP and
update the plans every
5 years.

Kings County Kings River
Hardwick School,
Hanford Christian
School, Island
Union School,
Pioneer Union
Elementary
School, Lakeside
Union School,
Kings Ranch
Ministries, Villa
Terrace
Apartments,
Rollerland
Company,
Westlake Farms
Headquarters,
Couture Farms,
State Water
Resources
Control Board
(SWRCB)
Moderate FEMA HMA, CA
DWR
Water Systems Medium Short-
term
New Action in 2023.

KC-19 Goal 1, Goal
2, Goal 3,
Goal 4
Drought County Drought
Resiliency Plan – The
County will develop a
Drought Resiliency
Kings County Water Districts,
Small Water
Suppliers, Non-
Transient Non-
Moderate FEMA HMA

HMGP, DWR
Water Systems Medium Short-
term
New Action in 2023.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Strategy

2023 Update Page 5-17

ID LINKS TO
GOALS

HAZARD(S)

MITIGATED

DESCRIPTION/

BACKGROUND/

BENEFITS

JURISDICTION LEAD AGENCY

AND PARTNERS
COST

ESTIMATE

POTENTIAL

FUNDING

FEMA LIFELINE PRIORITY TIMELINE IMPLEMENTATION
STATUS
Plan that includes
water districts, small
water suppliers, and
Non-Transient Non-
Community Water
Systems
Community
Water Systems
KC-20 Goal 1, Goal
2, Goal 3,
Goal 4
Drought Perform a countywide
service area
assessment to address
the needs of
maintaining an
adequate level of
service for all small
public water systems.

Kings County Water Districts,
Small Water
Suppliers, Non-
Transient Non-
Community
Water Systems,
Kings County
Department of
Public Health
Moderate FEMA HMA
HMGP
Water Systems Medium Short-
term
New Action in 2023.

KC-21 Goal 1, Goal
3 Earthquake Adopt Hazard-
Resistant and Modern
Building Ordinance to
improve Seismic
Resiliency – Residential
properties would be
most vulnerable during
a major earthquake.

This action promotes
the regular local
adoption of applicable
building code updates
to the Building
Ordinance that are
consistent with the
minimum
requirements in the
California Building
Code (CBC) and make
use of the International
Code Council (ICC)
model building codes
to provide a higher
level of protection
against seismic
hazards.

Kings County Kings County
Community
Development
Agency
Moderate FEMA Public
Assistance,
National
Earthquake
Hazards
Reduction
Program’s State
Assistance
Grant Program
Safety and
Security; Health
and Medical,
Energy,
Communications,
Transportation
Low Short-
term
New Action in 2023.

KC-22 Goal 1, Goal
2, Goal 3,
Goal 4
Extreme
Temperatures –
Heat
Collaborate with the
Kings County Farm
Bureau to promote
Climate-Smart
Agricultural Practices
that improve crop
Kings County Kings County
Agricultural
Commissioner’s
Office,
Department of
Public Health,
High California
Climate
Investments
Technical
Assistance
Program
Safety and
Security; Health
and Medical,
Energy,
Transportation
Low Medium-
term
New Action in 2023.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Strategy

2023 Update Page 5-18

ID LINKS TO
GOALS

HAZARD(S)

MITIGATED

DESCRIPTION/

BACKGROUND/

BENEFITS

JURISDICTION LEAD AGENCY

AND PARTNERS
COST

ESTIMATE

POTENTIAL

FUNDING

FEMA LIFELINE PRIORITY TIMELINE IMPLEMENTATION
STATUS
resilience to extreme
heat to ensure Kings
County’s working lands
are productive and
vulnerable and
underserved
communities can
access produce
throughout the year
and refrigeration
infrastructure.

Kings County
Farm Bureau
KC-23 Goal 1, Goal
3, Goal 4
Extreme
Temperatures –
Heat,
Earthquake,
Severe Weather:

Heavy
Rain/Thunderst
orm/Hail/Lightni
ng, Severe
Weather:

Wind/Tornado
Kings County Cool
Zone and Warm Zone
Program – Expand
participating
businesses and
continuums of care in
Kings County in
partnership with major
hospitals and medical
clinics to ensure there
are protections in place
for the unhoused and
other vulnerable
populations during
extreme temperature
events. Also consider
retrofitting designated
facilities included in
the Program that can
also serve as Safe
Rooms during
earthquake and severe
weather events.

Kings County Kings County
Department of
Public Health,
Kings County
Office of
Emergency
Services, Kings
Partnership
Moderate EPA Grants,
Office of
Environmental
Health Hazard
Assessment
(OEHHA),
Health and
Human
Services
Agency
Technical
Support
Safety and
Security; Health
and Medical,
Energy,
Transportation
Low Medium-
Term
New Action in 2023.

KC-24 Goal 1, Goal
3, Goal 4
Extreme
Temperatures –
Heat and
Freeze,
Earthquake,
Severe Weather:

Heavy
Rain/Thunderst
orms/Hail/Light
ning, Severe
Weather:

Wind/Tornado
Conduct a Public
Survey on At-Risk
Community
Demographics and
Disability Needs – A
public survey will be
developed around at-
risk communities to
understand those in
the County with Access
and Functional Needs
(AFNs) and other
disabilities, household
Kings County Kings County
Department of
Public Health,
Kings County
Office of
Emergency
Services, Kings
Partnership
Low FEMA HMA
HMGP
Safety and
Security; Health
and Medical,
Energy,
Transportation
High Short-
Term
New Action in 2023

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Strategy

2023 Update Page 5-19

ID LINKS TO
GOALS

HAZARD(S)

MITIGATED

DESCRIPTION/

BACKGROUND/

BENEFITS

JURISDICTION LEAD AGENCY

AND PARTNERS
COST

ESTIMATE

POTENTIAL

FUNDING

FEMA LIFELINE PRIORITY TIMELINE IMPLEMENTATION
STATUS
emergency
preparedness and
evacuation and
support needs, and
medical devices and
equipment needs at
sheltering facilities.

KC-25 Goal 1, Goal
3, Goal 4
Landslide Development
Regulations in
Landslide Hazard Areas
- Define steep
slope/high-risk areas in
land use, community
plans, and specific
plans in western Kings
County and create
guidelines for
development in these
areas or restrict
development. The
regulations should also
ensure protections are
in place for critical
facilities, like
transportation and
communications
facilities.

Kings County Kings County
Community
Development
Agency
Low FEMA HMA
HMGP
Safety and
Security; Energy,
Transportation
Low Medium-
Term
New Action in 2023.

KC-26 Goal 1, Goal
3, Goal 4
Severe Weather
– All
Protect Existing
Substandard Housing
and New Residential
Construction from
Severe Weather
Hazards – Identify
Housing Rehabilitation
Funding Opportunities
and Review Building
Ordinance and
consider inclusion of
techniques such as
structural bracing
(straps or clips, anchor
bolts), shutters, roof
coverings or
interlocking shingles,
flashing, and bracing
elevated components
in building design to
Kings County Kings County
Community
Development
Agency, City of
Avenal, City of
Corcoran, City of
Hanford, City of
Lemoore
Low FEMA HMA
HMGP
Safety and
Security
Low Medium-
term
New Action in 2023.

Complements
Mitigation Action
KC-21.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Strategy

2023 Update Page 5-20

ID LINKS TO
GOALS

HAZARD(S)

MITIGATED

DESCRIPTION/

BACKGROUND/

BENEFITS

JURISDICTION LEAD AGENCY

AND PARTNERS
COST

ESTIMATE

POTENTIAL

FUNDING

FEMA LIFELINE PRIORITY TIMELINE IMPLEMENTATION
STATUS
minimize severe
weather, hail, and wind
hazards.

KC-27 Goal 1, Goal
3, Goal 4
Severe Weather
– Wind/Tornado
Protect Power Line
Infrastructure and
Coordinate a
Community Back-Up
Power Resiliency Plan
during PSPS Events –
This will involve
coordination with the
CPUC, PG&E and SCE
and the purchase of
permanent generators
in partnership with
hospitals, nursing
homes, and sheltering
facilities.

Kings County CPUC, Electric
Safety and
Reliability
Branch, PG&E,
SCE, City of
Avenal
High FEMA HMA

HMGP, CPUC
Rule 20
Undergroundin
g Programs,
Federal
Transportation
Enhancements
Program (under
TEA-21)
Energy Low Medium-
term
New Action in 2023.

KC-28 Goal 1, Goal
3, Goal 4
Wildfire Regulate Development
in Wildfire Urban
Interface (WUI) in
Western Portion of
County – Update Safety
Element policies to
address current wildfire
risk, discourage
development in the
WUI (very high Fire
Hazard Severity Zones
[VHFHSZs] or State
Responsibility Area
[SRA]), and implement
defensible space
inspection
requirements through
zoning or land use
regulations related to
emergency
accessibility, water
supply and flow for fire
suppression, visible
street addressing and
signage, defensible
space clearances, fuel
modifications, and fire
breaks.

Kings County Kings County Fire
Department
Moderate General Fund Safety and
Security; Food,
Hydration,
Shelter; Health
and Medical;
Energy;
Communications,
Transportation;
Water Systems
Low Short-
term
New Action in 2023.

Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Strategy

2023 Update Page 5-21

ID LINKS TO
GOALS

HAZARD(S)

MITIGATED

DESCRIPTION/

BACKGROUND/

BENEFITS

JURISDICTION LEAD AGENCY

AND PARTNERS
COST

ESTIMATE

POTENTIAL

FUNDING

FEMA LIFELINE PRIORITY TIMELINE IMPLEMENTATION
STATUS
A-1 Goal 1, Goal
3, Goal 4
Earthquake,
Land
Subsidence,
Landslide
Housing Rehabilitation
Program - Continue
and enhance housing
rehabilitation program.

Avenal City of Avenal
Community
Development
Director
High General Fund,
Housing and
Urban
Development
(HUD)
Community
Development
Block Grant
(CDBG) Funds,
HOME, Cal
Home Program
Food, Hydration,
Shelter
Medium Medium-
term
In progress. Homes
continue to be
rehabbed with these
funds-first come first
serve. The City has
received funding
from CDBG, HOME,
and the Cal Home
Program to
rehabilitate homes.

Under this program
most homes are torn
down and
reconstructed to
current codes.

A-2 Goal 1, Goal
2, Goal 3,
Goal 4
Flood, Drought,
Earthquake,
Land
Subsidence
Vulnerability of Water
Distribution System –
Upgrade the two water
transmission lines that
supply water to the city
and Avenal State Prison
(one 18‐inch line and
one 12‐inch line) that
experience water leaks
and movement due to
earthquakes that lead
to slope failure.

Avenal City of Avenal
Public Works
Department
High FEMA HMA

HMPG, BRIC
Food, Hydration,
Shelter
Medium Long-
term
In progress.

Expected to be
completed
December 2023.

A-3 Goal 1, Goal
3, Goal 4
Earthquake,
Subsidence,
Landslide
Loss Reduction
Program for
unreinforced masonry
(URM) Buildings -
Establish a loss
reduction program for
URM buildings in
compliance with the
California URM Law of
1986. In response to the
danger posed by the
great number of
potentially hazardous
buildings in California,
in 1986 the state
legislature enacted the
URM building law
(Chapter 250, Statutes
of 1986: SF547 [Alquist];
Government Code
Avenal City of Avenal
City Manager’s
Office, California
Seismic Safety
Commission, City
of Avenal Public
Works
Department
Very High FEMA HMA

HMGP, BRIC,
General Fund,
Staff Time
Food, Hydration,
Shelter
Medium Long-
term
In progress.