1 City of Susanville
66 N. Lassen Street • Susanville CA
Mendy Schuster, Mayor
Russ Brown, Mayor pro tem
Curtis Bortle • Patrick Parrish • Dawn Miller
Susanville City Council
Regular Council Meeting • City Council Chambers
Wednesday, February 18, 2026 – 4:30 PM
Call to Order
Roll Call
1. Approval of Agenda: (Additions and/or Deletions)
2. Public Comment Regarding Closed Session Items (if any): Any person may address the City Council at this time upon any subject for discussion during Closed Session.
A. Public Employment - pursuant to Government Code §54957
1. Public Safety Chief
2. Pubic Works Director
4. Return to Open Session: (recess if necessary)
• Reconvene in open session at 5:00 PM
• Pledge of Allegiance
• Invocation
• Report any changes to agenda
• Report any action out of Closed Session
• Awards or Presentations by the City Council
5. Business from the Floor: Any person may address the City Council at this time upon any subject on the agenda or not on the agenda within the jurisdiction of the City Council. However, comments on items on the agenda may be reserved until the item is discussed and any matter not on the agenda that requires action will be referred to staff for a report and action at a subsequent meeting.
Presentations are subject to a three-minute limit.
6. Consent Calendar: All matters listed under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine by the City Council. There will be no separate discussion on these items. Any member of the public or the City Council may request removal of an item from the Consent Calendar to be considered separately.
6.A. Minutes of the City Council February 4, 2026 regular meeting
6.B. Vendor and Payroll Warrants
7. Public Hearings - No business.:
8. Council Discussion/Announcements:
9. New Business:
2 9.A. Consider co-sponsorship of the 36th Annual Junior Fishing Derby to be held on Saturday, May 16, 2026
9.B. Consider Resolution No. 26-6509, adopting an updated Multi-Jurisdictional Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
9.C. Consider Resolution No. 26-6510, authorizing the Acting Public Works Director to issue a Notice of Completion for Project No. 22-5116-3492, Susanville Southeast Gateway Project
9.D. Consider Resolution No. 26-6511, approving the Permanent Local Housing Allocation 2021 and 2022/2023 Statement of Work and Budget.
9.E. Consider Resolution No. 26-6512, authorizing the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with C & S Companies, Inc. for Professional Design/Engineering and Construction Administration Services for airfield-related projects at the Susanville Municipal Airport.
10. Planning Commission - No business:
11. Susanville Community Redevelopment Agency - No business:
12. Susanville Municipal Energy Corporation - No business:
13. Continuing Business:
13.A. Discussion regarding Memorial Ball Park Grandstand Fire Emergency Operations
14. City Manager's Reports:
15. Future Council Items:
15.A. Future Council Items
16. Adjournment:
• The next regular meeting of the Susanville City Council will be held on March 4, 2026, at 4:30 PM.
Reports and documents relating to each agenda item are on file in the Office of the City Clerk and are available for public inspection during normal business hours and at the meeting. These reports and documents are also available at the City’s website www.cityofsusanville.gov, unless there were systems problems posting to the website.
Accessibility: An interpreter for the hearing-impaired may be made available upon request to the City Clerk seventy-two hours prior to a meeting. A reader for the vision-impaired for purposes of reviewing the agenda may be made available upon request to the City Clerk. The location of this meeting is wheelchairaccessible.
I, Heidi Whitlock, certify that I caused to be posted notice of the regular meeting scheduled for February 18, 2026 in the areas designated on February 13, 2026.
Agenda Item No. 6.A.
Agenda Item
City Council Agenda Item
Submitted By: Heidi Whitlock, City Clerk
Action Date: February 18, 2026
Subject: Minutes of the City Council February 4, 2026 regular meeting Presented By: Heidi Whitlock, City Clerk
Summary: Attached for the Council's review and approval are the minutes of the February 4, 2026 meeting.
Fiscal Impact: None.
Action Requested: Motion to approve and file the minutes of the February 4, 2026 meeting.
Attachments:
1. 2026.02.04.cc.min
Susanville City Council
Regular Council Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, February 4, 2026 – 4:30 PM
Mayor Schuster called the meeting to order at 4:30pm.
1. Approval of Agenda:
MOVER: Mayor Pro Tem Russ Brown
SECONDER: Council Member Dawn Miller
AYES: Mayor Mendy Schuster, Mayor Pro Tem Russ Brown, Council Member Patrick Parrish, Council Member Curtis Bortle, Council Member Dawn Miller
NAYS: None
RESULT: Passed
2. Public Comment Regarding Closed Session Items (if any): No comment.
A. Public Employment - pursuant to Government Code §54957
1. City Manager – Evaluation
The Council convened in closed session at 4:31pm to discuss the above-mentioned item.
4. Return to Open Session:
• Reconvene in open session at 5:09pm
• Pledge of Allegiance
• Invocation
• Report any changes to agenda – no changes made
• Report any action out of Closed Session
Dan Newton, City Manager, stated that the City Council met in Closed session where direction was provided to staff, but no reportable action was taken. • Awards or Presentations by the City Council
Chandra Jabbs, Finance Director, introduced Jordyn Barney and Karli Wheeler, both new Account Technicians with the Finance Department.
5. Business from the Floor:
Megan Wright, public, stated her concern regarding the recent decisions made by the Honey Lake Valley Recreation Authority to reduce the hours of operation.
Marcus Wright, public, requested an itemized audit of the pool financials as they believe there has been a mismanagement of funding. In addition, he requested more conversation between the pool board and the public.
6. Consent Calendar:
MOVER: Mayor Pro Tem Russ Brown
SECONDER: Council Member Patrick Parrish
AYES: Mayor Mendy Schuster, Mayor Pro Tem Russ Brown, Council Member Patrick Parrish, Council Member Curtis Bortle, Council Member Dawn Miller
NAYS: None
RESULT: Passed
6.A. Minutes of the City Council January 7, 2026 regular meeting
6.B. Vendor and Payroll Warrants
7. Public Hearings: No business.
8. Council Discussion/Announcements:
Council Member Bortle offered a Land Acknowledgment Statement and shared that he attended Doug LaMalfa's funeral services.
9. New Business:
9.A. Discussion regarding the promoting of the upcoming election to take place on June 2, 2026.
Heidi Whitlock, City Clerk, provided an explanation of why the item was being presented and provided information on where and when the upcoming election had been noticed.
9.B. Consider Resolution No. 26-6506, authorizing the City Manager to execute an Airport Hangar Lease for Hangar 9 with Air Methods
Erik Edholm, Acting Public Works Director, provided an explanation of the item and requested approval of Resolution No. 26-6506.
MOVER: Council Member Patrick Parrish
SECONDER: Council Member Curtis Bortle
AYES: Mayor Mendy Schuster, Mayor Pro Tem Russ Brown, Council Member Patrick Parrish, Council Member Curtis Bortle, Council Member Dawn Miller
NAYS: None
RESULT: Passed
Council took a short recess from 5:27pm to 5:30pm prior to meeting as the Planning Commission.
The Planning Commission meeting begins at 5:30pm.
10. Planning Commission:
10.A. PUBLIC HEARING - Consider PC Resolution No. 26-1197, approving use permit application #25-003 to allow an approximately 180 foot-long 4 foot solid wood fence with 1.50 ft. lattice addition in the front and side yards of the residential property on APN 103-411-008-000 (705 Court St.)
Council Member Parrish recused himself as he someone speaking on behalf of the property owner was his employer.
Chair Schuster opened the public hearing at 5:30pm.
Mike Prettyman, Code Enforcement Officer, provided an explanation of the item and requested approval of PC Resolution No. 26-1197.
Stefano Richichi, property owner, provided additional information related to the fence.
Chair Schuster closed the public hearing at 5:38pm.
MOVER: Commissioner Curtis Bortle
SECONDER: Commissioner Miller
AYES: Chair Schuster, Vice Chair Brown, Commissioner Bortle, Commissioner Miller
NAYS: None
RESULT: Passed
10.B. PUBLIC HEARING - Consider PC Resolution No. 26-1198, approving use permit application #25-004 to allow a 208 foot-long 2 ft. lattice addition to the top of the existing 6 ft. perimeter fence in the rear and side yards of the residential property on APN 107-073-019 (457 Prospect Ave.)
Council Member Parrish again recused himself as he someone speaking on behalf of the property owner was his employer.
Chair Schuster opened the public hearing at 5:39pm.
Mike Prettyman, Code Enforcement Officer, provided an explanation of the item and requested approval of PC Resolution No. 26-1198.
Travis Krause, property owner, provided additional information related to his fence request.
Chair Schuster closed the public hearing at 5:42pm.
MOVER: Commissioner Curtis Bortle
SECONDER: Commissioner Dawn Miller
AYES: Chair Schuster, Vice Chair Brown, Commissioner Bortle, Commissioner Miller
NAYS: None
RESULT: Passed
10.C. PUBLIC HEARING - Consider PC Resolution No. 26-1199, approving use permit application #25-005 to allow a 151 foot-long 6 ft. tall black ornamental iron fence in the front yard of 1065 Campbell Rd. (APN 103-113-012-000) and a 116 foot long 6 ft. tall black ornamental iron fence in the front yard of 1070 Campbell Rd. (APN 103-112-009-000)
Chair Schuster opened the public hearing at 5:43pm.
Mike Prettyman, Code Enforcement Officer, provided an explanation of the item and requested approval of PC Resolution No. 26-1199.
Todd Wedlake, property owner, provided additional information related to his fence request.
Commissioner Bortle inquired whether the fence height was a building code or City code requirement, to which it was stated that it was the City Municipal Code.
Chair Schuster closed the public hearing at 5:46pm.
MOVER: Vice Chair Russ Brown
SECONDER: Commissioner Curtis Bortle
AYES: Chairwoman Schuster, Vice Chair Brown, Commissioner Parrish, Commissioner Bortle, Commissioner Miller
NAYS: None
RESULT: Passed
The Planning Commission adjourned at 5:47pm.
The Council reconvened in open session at 5:48pm.
9.C. Consider Resolution No. 26-6507, Amending the Fiscal Year 2025-2026 City of Susanville Budget
Ms. Jabbs presented the proposed amendment to the fiscal year 2025.2026 budget and requested Council approval of Resolution No. 26-6507.
MOVER: Mayor Pro Tem Russ Brown
SECONDER: Council Member Patrick Parrish
AYES: Mayor Mendy Schuster, Mayor Pro Tem Russ Brown, Council Member Patrick Parrish, Council Member Curtis Bortle, Council Member Dawn Miller NAYS: None
RESULT: Passed
9.D. Discussion regarding St. Francis property
Mr. Newton introduced Dan Collins, receiver of the St. Francis property, to provide an update on said property, including the struggles of the property being small at around 10,000 square feet as well as it being a corner lot.
Council Member Bortle asked if a low-income housing development was the only viable option for redevelopment on the site.
Council Member Parrish inquired whether anyone was interested in the property.
Mr. Collins stated that he wanted to verify that the Council was supportive of this type of housing project prior to reaching out to potential developers.
Public Member inquired about where the tenants would be parking, while another voiced his concern with the project in general as he didn't want to see the project fail like previous attempts at that location.
Mayor Schuster voiced her concerns about the project.
Council Member Parrish shared that he thinks the project may be a good idea as the uptown needs all the help it can get.
Council Member Miller shared that she is not in favor of the number of projected units. She stated that the density would fit better in the area of the bowling alley property.
Mr. Collins stated that all the points provided were valid.
Council Member Bortle agreed that parking could be an issue but also agreed with Parrish that, as a business owner, he would like an apartment building across from his business as it could increase sales.
Mayor pro tem Brown stated that it is an option to consider and believed the Council should be open to it.
11. Susanville Community Redevelopment Agency - No business
12. Susanville Municipal Energy Corporation - No business
Council recessed for 10 minutes at 6:44pm.
Council reconvened in open session at 6:54pm.
13. Continuing Business:
13.A. Consider Resolution No. 26-6508, authorizing the Finance Director to increase the Memorial Park Fire Restoration budget by $60,000 for engineering services for Frank Ernaga Ballfield Grandstand engineering, design, and project administration services
Jolene Arredondo, Deputy City Manager, provided an explanation of the item and requested approval of Resolution No. 26-6508.
James Snell, public, inquired whether NST has any experience with ball parks and if they have drawings to review to which Mr. Newton stated that they have a structural division in Washington which will be drafting it and they would be hired to prepare the drawings. It was also asked if it would be a wood or steel structure. Mr. Newton stated that the insurance did state that it could be a-like structure and that he would also like to see a wooden structure.
MOVER: Mayor Pro Tem Russ Brown
SECONDER: Council Member Curtis Bortle
AYES: Mayor Mendy Schuster, Mayor Pro Tem Russ Brown, Council Member Patrick Parrish, Council Member Curtis Bortle, Council Member Dawn Miller NAYS: None
RESULT: Passed
13.B. Discussion regarding Memorial Ball Park Grandstand Fire Emergency Operations Mr. Newton provided an explanation of the item and requested Council direction on the continuance of the emergency.
MOVER: Council Member Curtis Bortle
SECONDER: Mayor Pro Tem Russ Brown
AYES: Mayor Mendy Schuster, Mayor Pro Tem Russ Brown, Council Member Patrick Parrish, Council Member Curtis Bortle, Council Member Dawn Miller NAYS: None
RESULT: Passed
14. City Manager's Reports:
14.A. Department Reports - Police Department
Allen Sobol, Acting Public Safety Chief, provided an update on the Police Department.
15. Future Council Items:
15.A. Future Council Items
No future items were requested.
16. Adjournment: Council Member Bortle requested Council adjourn in memory of Richard Schuster. Adjourn at 7:07pm
• The next regular meeting of the Susanville City Council will be held on February 18, 2026 at 4:30 PM.
Heidi Whitlock, City Clerk Mendy Schuster, Mayor
Approved on: ___________________
Agenda Item No. 6.B.
Agenda Item
City Council Agenda Item
Submitted By: Jenny Galindo, Account Technician II
Action Date: February 18, 2026
Subject: Vendor and Payroll Warrants
Presented By: Chandra Jabbs, Finance Director
Summary: Warrants dated January 23, 2026 through February 4, 2026 numbered 225784-225837.
Fiscal Impact: Accounts Payable warrants totaling $313,738.37, plus $272,390.66 in Payroll warrants, for a total of $586,129.03.
Action Requested: Motion to file and receive.
Attachments:
1. 01-29-2026
2. 01-30-2026
Agenda Item No. 9.A.
Standard Review
City Council Agenda Item
Submitted By: Jolene Arredondo, Deputy City Manager
Action Date: February 18, 2026
Subject: Consider co-sponsorship of the 36th Annual Junior Fishing Derby to be held on Saturday, May 16, 2026
Presented By: Jolene Arredondo, Deputy City Manager
Summary: The Lassen Sportsmen’s Club is hosting the 37th Annual Junior Fishing Derby at Memorial Park and on the Susan River on Saturday, May 16, 2026. The event draws around 500
children/youth ages 2 to 15 each year. The Lassen Sportsmen’s Club is requesting the City of Susanville co-sponsorship for the Junior Fishing Derby. As part of that sponsorship, Lassen Sportsmen's Club is requesting:
• Use of civic contribution in the amount of $1,000 for the purchase of fish (already approved in 25/26 FY budget)
• Insurance coverage for the event
• Use of Memorial Park and Bandstand for event - fee
waived
• Usage of Power Panel - fee waived
• Printing of the Derby entry forms
Fiscal Impact:
• $1,000 Civic Contribution
• $380 Event Insurance
• $212 unearned revenue (Memorial Park electric panel & park rental fees)
Action Requested: Motion to approve co-sponsorship of the 36th Annual Junior Fishing Derby to be held on May 16, 2026, at Memorial Park; waive electric panel and park rental fee; provide insurance for the event; and expend $1,000 civic contribution funds to Lassen Sportsmen's Club for the purchase of fish.
Attachments:
1. 2026 Fishing Derby Request
/.'---- .
/' J~~t· Lassen Sportsmens Club
AL M25?/nt; Ac
0 , bli, 259 Maple Street • Susanville, CA 96130
assen portsmen s 1ub 'c1-,,,
t7
January 19, 2026
Susanville City Council
Attn: Dan Newton, City Administrator
66 N Lassen Street
Susanville, CA 96130
Dear Mr. Newton:
The Lassen Sportsmens Club will be holding its 37th Annual Junior Fishing Derby on Saturday, May 16, 2026 at Memorial Park and on the Susan River. The derby is the only one sanctioned by the California Fish & Wildlife Department to operate outside the normal fishing season.
We would like to again invite you and the County of Lassen to officially co-sponsor this event, along with the S.I.R. Tribal Business Council. As part of that sponsorship, we would request the following items be provided from the City:
• Donation of $1,000 for the purchase offish
• Insurance coverage for the event
• Use of Memorial Park and Bandstand for event-fee waived • Usage of Power panel - fee waived
• Printing of the Derby entry forms
Our event budget is $9,000, with the purchase of approximately one thousand pounds of fish accounting for $8,000 of that amount.
The past few years we have averaged around 500 youngsters, ages 2 to 15, which participate in this event. Over the past 30+ years we have had more than 16,000 young people locally and from Northern California develop the love of fishing. We are starting to see the grand children of some of our earliest participants now taking part in the Junior Fishing Derby.
For tax purposes, the Taxpayer ID Number (TIN) for the club is 81-1970187. The Lassen Sportsmens Club is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization.
If you have any further questions, please contact our club president, Wade Workman at (530) 310- 0151 or the club treasurer, Carla Dieter at (530) 251-6240.
Thank you for the long term support the city has given this event over the past 37 years and for your consideration.
)l;;J/~
WADE WORKMAN, President
Lassen Sportsmens Club
Agenda Item No. 9.B.
Standard Review
City Council Agenda Item
Submitted By: Erik Edholm, Acting Public Works Director Action Date: February 18, 2026
Subject: Consider Resolution No. 26-6509, adopting an updated MultiJurisdictional Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Presented By: Erik Edholm, Acting Public Works Director Summary:
The City of Susanville participated with Lassen County and the Susanville Indian Rancheria in the preparation of an updated MultiJurisdictional Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan, which recognizes the threat that natural hazards pose to people, property, and critical infrastructure and identifies mitigation actions intended to reduce the impacts of future hazard events. The Plan was prepared through the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)- prescribed mitigation planning process and complies with the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 and Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 201.
Adoption of the updated Hazard Mitigation Plan by the City Council is required to maintain eligibility for FEMA pre- and post-disaster hazard mitigation funding and must be reviewed and updated every five years. FEMA Region IX has approved the Plan
contingent upon adoption by Lassen County, the City of Susanville, and the Susanville Indian Rancheria. Adoption of the Plan is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15262 and 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA
Guidelines and does not commit the City to specific projects or expenditures.
Fiscal Impact: None.
Action Requested: Motion to Approve Resolution No. 26-6509, adopting an updated Multi-Jurisdictional Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Attachments:
1. Final Lassen County Operational Area LHMP
2. 26-6509
LASSEN COUNTY OPERATIONAL AREA
LOCAL HAZARD MITIGTION PLAN
LASSEN COUNTY, CITY OF SUSANVILLE, AND THE
SUSANVILLE INDIAN RANCHERIA
December 2025
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Table of Contents
Preface................................................................................................................... v
1. Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1-1
1.1. Purpose of the Plan...................................................................................... 1-1
1.2. Scope of the Plan ......................................................................................... 1-1
1.3. Hazard Mitigation Planning Directive.......................................................... 1-2
1.4. Promulgation Authority................................................................................ 1-2
1.5. Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Adoption ...................................................... 1-3
2. Planning Process ............................................................................................... 2-1
2.1. Methodology and Timeline .......................................................................... 2-1
2.2. Planning Team.............................................................................................. 2-3
2.2.1. Members ........................................................................................... 2-3
2.2.2. Meetings............................................................................................ 2-6
2.3. Stakeholder Coordination............................................................................ 2-7
2.3.1. Recurring Meetings ........................................................................... 2-8
2.3.2. Mitigation Related Planning Resources ............................................. 2-8
2.4. Public Outreach............................................................................................ 2-8
2.4.1. LHMP Awareness Campaign............................................................. 2-9
2.4.2. Mitigation Awareness Campaign ..................................................... 2-11
3. Community Profile ............................................................................................. 3-1
3.1. Location and History.................................................................................... 3-1
3.2. Physical Features......................................................................................... 3-3
3.3. Historic/Cultural Resources ........................................................................ 3-3
3.4. Climate .......................................................................................................... 3-4
3.5. Population..................................................................................................... 3-4
3.6. Demographics .............................................................................................. 3-5
3.7. Housing......................................................................................................... 3-6
3.8. Economy ....................................................................................................... 3-7
3.9. Employment.................................................................................................. 3-8
3.10. Lifeline Infrastructure................................................................................... 3-8
3.10.1. Energy ............................................................................................ 3-8
3.10.2. Natural Gas ....................................................................................... 3-9
3.10.3. Water ............................................................................................ 3-9
3.10.4. Liquid Waste (Sewer) ........................................................................ 3-9
3.10.5. Solid Waste (Trash) and Recycling.................................................. 3-10
3.10.6. Telecommunications........................................................................ 3-10
3.11. Transportation............................................................................................ 3-11
3.11.1. Highway/Road Systems................................................................... 3-11
3.11.2. Railroad .......................................................................................... 3-11
3.11.3. Aviation .......................................................................................... 3-11
3.11.4. Public Transportation....................................................................... 3-12
3.12. Land Use and Development....................................................................... 3-12
3.12.1. Lassen County ................................................................................ 3-12
3.12.2. City of Susanville............................................................................. 3-13
3.12.3. Susanville Indian Rancheria ............................................................ 3-15
3.13. Future Development................................................................................... 3-15
3.13.1. Lassen County ................................................................................ 3-16
3.13.2. City of Susanville............................................................................. 3-16
3.13.3. Susanville Indian Rancheria ............................................................ 3-17
4. Capability Assessment ...................................................................................... 4-1
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan i
4.1. Personnel Resources................................................................................... 4-1
4.1.1. Lassen County .................................................................................. 4-1
4.1.2. City of Susanville............................................................................... 4-3
4.1.3. Susanville Indian Rancheria .............................................................. 4-4
4.1.4. Other Area Organizations .................................................................. 4-4
4.2. Mitigation Governance................................................................................. 4-5
4.2.1. Plans ............................................................................................ 4-5
4.2.2. Programs........................................................................................... 4-7
4.2.3. Regulations, Codes, Laws, Policies, & Ordinances............................ 4-9
4.3. Technical Resources.................................................................................. 4-11
4.3.1. Proficiencies and Expertise ............................................................. 4-11
4.3.2. Communications.............................................................................. 4-12
4.3.3. Technology...................................................................................... 4-13
4.4. Fiscal Resources........................................................................................ 4-13
4.4.1. Lassen County ................................................................................ 4-13
4.4.2. City of Susanville............................................................................. 4-14
4.4.3. Susanville Indian Rancheria ............................................................ 4-15
4.5. Ability to Expand On and Improve Capabilities and Resources ............. 4-17
4.5.1. Personnel Resources ...................................................................... 4-17
4.5.2. Mitigation Governance..................................................................... 4-17
4.5.3. Technical Resources ....................................................................... 4-18
4.5.4. Fiscal Resources............................................................................. 4-18
5. Hazard/Threat Assessment ............................................................................... 5-1
5.1. Overview ....................................................................................................... 5-1
5.2. Hazard/Threat Identification ........................................................................ 5-1
5.3. Hazard/Threat Screening and Prioritization................................................ 5-2
5.3.1. Ranking Tool Design ......................................................................... 5-2
5.3.2. Hazard/Threat Prioritization ............................................................... 5-3
5.4. Hazard/Threat Profiles ................................................................................. 5-4
5.4.1. Agricultural Pests/Disease................................................................. 5-4
5.4.2. Aircraft Accident ................................................................................ 5-7
5.4.3. Avalanche ......................................................................................... 5-8
5.4.4. Civil Disturbance ............................................................................. 5-10
5.4.5. Dam/Reservoir Failure..................................................................... 5-11
5.4.6. Drought and Water Shortage........................................................... 5-15
5.4.7. Earthquake...................................................................................... 5-20
5.4.8. Energy Disruption............................................................................ 5-29
5.4.9. Extreme Temperature...................................................................... 5-31
5.4.10. Flood and Levee Failure.................................................................. 5-39
5.4.11. Hazardous Materials Release.......................................................... 5-49
5.4.12. Infectious Disease ........................................................................... 5-53
5.4.13. Landslide/Other Earth Movement .................................................... 5-56
5.4.14. Natural Gas Pipeline/Storage Accident............................................ 5-59
5.4.15. Other Lifeline Infrastructure Accident............................................... 5-62
5.4.16. Severe Weather and Storms ........................................................... 5-63
5.4.17. Technology Disruption..................................................................... 5-67
5.4.18. Terrorism......................................................................................... 5-68
5.4.19. Volcano .......................................................................................... 5-70
5.4.20. Wildfire .......................................................................................... 5-73
6. Risk Assessment................................................................................................ 6-1
6.1. Overview ....................................................................................................... 6-1
6.1.1. Vulnerable Assets.............................................................................. 6-1
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan ii
6.1.2. Scientific Loss Estimation Models...................................................... 6-1
6.1.3. Quantitative Exposure Analysis ......................................................... 6-5
6.1.4. Qualitative Exposure Analysis ........................................................... 6-6
6.2. Scientific Loss Estimation Analysis Results.............................................. 6-7
6.2.1. Earthquake........................................................................................ 6-7
6.2.2. Flood and Levee Failure.................................................................. 6-11
6.3. Quantitative Exposure Analysis Results .................................................. 6-17
6.3.1. Wildfire .......................................................................................... 6-17
6.4. Qualitative Exposure Analysis Results..................................................... 6-20
6.4.1. Agriculture Pests/Disease................................................................ 6-20
6.4.2. Aircraft Accident .............................................................................. 6-21
6.4.3. Avalanche ....................................................................................... 6-21
6.4.4. Civil Disturbance ............................................................................. 6-21
6.4.5. Dam/Reservoir Failure..................................................................... 6-22
6.4.6. Drought and Water Shortage........................................................... 6-23
6.4.7. Energy Disruption............................................................................ 6-25
6.4.8. Extreme Temperature...................................................................... 6-25
6.4.9. Hazardous Materials Release.......................................................... 6-27
6.4.10. Infectious Disease ........................................................................... 6-28
6.4.11. Landslide/Other Earth Movements .................................................. 6-28
6.4.12. Natural Gas Pipeline/Storage Accident............................................ 6-29
6.4.13. Other Lifeline Infrastructure Accident............................................... 6-30
6.4.14. Severe Weather and Storms ........................................................... 6-30
6.4.15. Technology Disruption..................................................................... 6-31
6.4.16. Terrorism......................................................................................... 6-31
6.4.17. Volcano .......................................................................................... 6-32
7. Mitigation Strategy............................................................................................. 7-1
7.1. Overview ....................................................................................................... 7-1
7.2. Mitigation Goals and Objectives ................................................................. 7-1
7.3. Mitigation Progress...................................................................................... 7-4
7.4. Mitigation Prioritization................................................................................ 7-7
7.5. Mitigation Actions ........................................................................................ 7-9
7.6. Implementation Plan .................................................................................. 7-12
8. Plan Maintenance............................................................................................... 8-1
8.1. Monitoring, Evaluating and Updating the Plan........................................... 8-1
8.2. Integration with Other Planning Efforts ...................................................... 8-2
8.3. Continued Stakeholder and Public Involvement........................................ 8-2
8.4. Point of Contact............................................................................................ 8-3 APPENDIX A- Adoption Resolutions ................................................................................... 8-1 APPENDIX B- Planning Team Member Attendance Matrix................................................. 8-1 APPENDIX C- Public Outreach Meeting Announcements.................................................. 8-1 APPENDIX D- Survey Results .............................................................................................. 8-1 APPENDIX E- List of Assets................................................................................................. 8-1 APPENDIX F- FEMA National Risk Index-Lassen County .................................................. 8-1
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan iii
Figures
Figure 2-1. Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Planning Process .................................................... 2-2 Figure 3-1. Map of Lassen County ............................................................................................. 3-1 Figure 3-2. Map of Susanville Indian Rancheria......................................................................... 3-2 Figure 3-3. General Plan Land Use- Lassen County ................................................................ 3-13 Figure 3-4. General Plan Land Use- City of Susanville............................................................. 3-14 Figure 4-1. Lassen County Budget- 2023-24............................................................................ 4-14 Figure 4-2. City of Susanville Draft Budget- 2024-25 ............................................................... 4-15 Figure 5-1. Land Conservation Act Maps- Lassen County, north segment................................. 5-6 Figure 5-2. Land Conservation Act Maps- Lassen County, south segment ................................ 5-6 Figure 5-3. Dams within Lassen County with Inundation Maps ................................................ 5-14 Figure 5-4. US Drought Monitor, California .............................................................................. 5-17 Figure 5-5. Maximum Length of Dry Spells (Days)................................................................... 5-19 Figure 5-6. Quaternary Earthquake Faults in Lassen County................................................... 5-23 Figure 5-7. Quadrangle Maps Containing Earthquake Fault Zones in the Susanville Area....... 5-24 Figure 5-8. Recorded Earthquakes in the Vicinity of Lassen County ........................................ 5-27 Figure 5-9. Rates for Earthquake of Magnitude 6.7 or Larger in the Next 30 years .................. 5-28 Figure 5-10. NOAA’s National Weather Service Heat Index..................................................... 5-33 Figure 5-11. Wind Chill Chart................................................................................................... 5-34 Figure 5-12. Annual Average Maximum Temperature.............................................................. 5-36 Figure 5-13. Annual Average Minimum Temperature............................................................... 5-37 Figure 5-14. Extreme Heat Days.............................................................................................. 5-38 Figure 5-15. Comparison between Historic and Projected Temperature .................................. 5-39 Figure 5-16. Special Flood Hazard Areas................................................................................. 5-42 Figure 5-19. Hazardous Materials Features- Lassen County.................................................... 5-50 Figure 5-20. High Pressure Natural Gas Transmission Pipelines- Lassen County ................... 5-61 Figure 5-21. Potentially Hazardous Volcanoes of California..................................................... 5-70 Figure 5-22. Volcano Hazard Assessment- Lassen Region (USGS) ........................................ 5-71 Figure 5-23. Fire Hazard Severity Zones- State Responsibility Areas ...................................... 5-77 Figure 5-24. Fire Hazard Severity Zones- Local Responsibility Areas ...................................... 5-78 Figure 5-25. Lassen County Recent Major Wildfire Perimeters ................................................ 5-80 Figure 5-26. Annual Average Area Burned............................................................................... 5-82 Figure 6-1. M7.0 Earthquake on the Honey Lake Fault .............................................................. 6-7 Figure 6-2. M7.0 Earthquake on the Honey Lake Fault: Ground Motions for Lassen County...... 6-8 Figure 6-3. Flood Depths 1% Annual Chance (100-year) Flood- Lassen County...................... 6-12 Figure 6-4. Flood Depths 1% Annual Chance (100-year) Flood- City of Susanville .................. 6-13 Figure 6-5. Flood Depths 1% Annual Chance (100-year) Flood- Susanville Indian Rancheria . 6-14 Tables
Table 1-1. County, City, and Rancheria Promulgation Authorities .............................................. 1-2 Table 2-1. Members of the Mitigation Steering Committee......................................................... 2-4 Table 2-2. Planning Team Meetings Summary........................................................................... 2-6 Table 3-1. Lassen County Population, 1970-2021 (U.S. Census Bureau) .................................. 3-4 Table 3-2. Projected Growth for Lassen County (U.S. Census Bureau) ..................................... 3-4 Table 3-3. Population by Age and Gender in Lassen County (U.S. Census Bureau).................. 3-5 Table 3-4. Population by Race/Ethnicity (U.S. Census Bureau) ................................................. 3-5 Table 3-5. Housing Units by Type (U.S. Census Bureau)........................................................... 3-6 Table 3-6. Household by Tenure (U.S. Census Bureau) ............................................................ 3-7 Table 3-7. Vacancy by Type (U.S. Census Bureau)................................................................... 3-7
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan iv
Table 3-8. Employment by Industry (U.S. Census Bureau) ........................................................ 3-8 Table 3-9. Lassen County Land Use Designations and Building Density.................................. 3-12 Table 3-10. City of Susanville Land Use Designations and Building Density ............................ 3-14 Table 3-11. Available Parcels in Lassen County ...................................................................... 3-16 Table 3-12. Available Parcels in City of Susanville................................................................... 3-17 Table 5-1. Relevant Hazards and Threats.................................................................................. 5-1 Table 5-2. Hazard Prioritization Template .................................................................................. 5-3 Table 5-3. Hazard/Threat Prioritization Results.......................................................................... 5-3 Table 5-4. Avalanche Classification System............................................................................... 5-9 Table 5-5. Avalanche Danger Warning System.......................................................................... 5-9 Table 5-6. Dams and Reservoirs in Lassen County ................................................................. 5-12 Table 5-7. Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) Scale ................................................................... 5-25 Table 5-8. Earthquake Effects Associated with various Richter Magnitudes............................. 5-25 Table 5-9. Historic Earthquakes in the Vicinity of Lassen County............................................. 5-26 Table 5-10. Recent Earthquakes of M5+ in the Vicinity of Lassen County Since 1973 ............. 5-28 Table 5-11. Northern California Region Earthquake Likelihoods .............................................. 5-29 Table 5-12. FEMA Flood Zone Designations............................................................................ 5-43 Table 5-13. Susan River Flood Categories............................................................................... 5-43 Table 5-14. Susan River Flood Levels ..................................................................................... 5-44 Table 5-15. Significant Flooding Events and Associated Flood Levels- Susan River................ 5-46 Table 5-16. Historical Records of Large Floods in Lassen County ........................................... 5-46 Table 5-17. Maximum 1-day Precipitation ................................................................................ 5-47 Table 5-18. Annual Precipitation .............................................................................................. 5-48 Table 5-19. Historic Severe Storms in Lassen County ............................................................. 5-66 Table 5-20. Ground‐Based Volcanic Hazard Alert Levels (USGS) ........................................... 5-72 Table 5-21. Airborne Volcanic Hazards Alert Levels (USGS) ................................................... 5-72 Table 5-22. Major Wildfires in Lassen County .......................................................................... 5-79 Table 6-1. Hazus Default Building Inventory Data- General Occupancy..................................... 6-2 Table 6-2. Hazus Default Building Inventory Data- General Building Type................................. 6-3 Table 6-3. Essential Facilities Data for Lassen County Included in the Hazus Risk Assessment 6-4 Table 6-4. Hazus Lifeline Inventory Default Data - Transportation System................................. 6-5 Table 6-5. Hazus Lifeline Inventory Default Data- Utility System................................................ 6-5 Table 6-6. Critical Assets within Lassen County......................................................................... 6-6 Table 6-7. Estimated Impacts- M7.0 Honey Lake Earthquake Scenario..................................... 6-9 Table 6-8. Estimated Building Damage- M7.0 Honey Lake Earthquake Scenario .................... 6-10 Table 6-9. Predicted Essential Facility Functionality- M7.0 Honey Lake Earthquake Scenario. 6-10 Table 6-10. Impacts for 1% Annual Chance (100-Year) Flood Scenario................................... 6-15 Table 6-11. Estimated Building Damage for 1% Annual Chance (100-year) Flood Scenario.... 6-15 Table 6-12. Predicted Essential Facility Functionality for 1% Annual Chance (100-year) Flood Scenario................................................................................................................ 6-16 Table 6-13. Critical Asset Wildfire Exposure- Lassen County................................................... 6-18 Table 7-1. Status of Previous Mitigation Actions ........................................................................ 7-4 Table 7-2. Proposed Mitigation Actions...................................................................................... 7-9 Table 7-3. Proposed Mitigation Actions Implementation Plan................................................... 7-13
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan v
Preface
Impacts from disasters (threats and hazards) can be a challenge for a jurisdiction’s residents/visitors, its budget, its elected officials, and its staff. In addition to significant property damage, injuries, and fatalities, it can experience disruptions to the community and the economy (i.e., power outages, loss of telecommunications and water service, limited access to fuel, loss of revenue, and road closures). Depending on the magnitude, response and recovery from these disaster events can take weeks, months, and in some instances, years. The goal of many communities is to mitigate the potential impacts from disasters thus shortening the response and recovery time.
Mitigation is one of the Mission Areas identified under the Federal government’s National Preparedness System. Under the National Preparedness System, each Mission Area is supported by a “framework” document that identifies essential functions and core capabilities. The National Preparedness System Mission Areas are:
▪ Prevention- to avoid, prevent, or stop an act of terrorism ▪ Protection- to safeguard against acts of terrorism and other hazards and threats ▪ Mitigation- to reduce the loss of life and property from hazards and threats ▪ Response- to stabilize a situation after hazards and threats ▪ Recovery- to restore, strengthen and revitalize after hazards and threats Mitigation is seen as the primary Mission Area dedicated to breaking the disaster cycle, as its goal is to build resiliency within the community, enabling a more efficient and effective response to and recovery from threats and hazards.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) defines mitigation as “any action taken to reduce and/or eliminate the long-term risk to human life and property from natural hazards and threats.” Mitigation is considered local, with the primary responsibility for development and implementation of mitigation strategies lying with local jurisdictions (cities, counties, tribes, and special districts). Local jurisdictions, however, are not alone. Partners and resources exist within and surrounding jurisdictions, in addition to support from other levels of government (i.e., county, region, state, and federal). To assist jurisdictions Respond
Recover
Prevent
Protect
Mitigate
Incident
Preface
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan vi
implement mitigation and become more resilient to threats and hazards, FEMA developed a program and guidance around the creation of Local Hazard Mitigation Plans (LHMPs). LHMPs promote a comprehensive planning process, requiring an assessment of local capabilities against impacts from threats and hazards to identify potential mitigation strategies (actions/projects) that will reduce and/or eliminate impacts.
The main goal of the LHMP is to establish a list of actions/projects derived from a comprehensive understanding of the community, existing capabilities, and prevailing threats and hazards. While many of these actions/projects are centered around reducing and/or eliminating the impact, some are focused on increasing current capabilities, fostering the development of partnerships, and providing public education outreach programs.
With an approved and adopted LHMP, local jurisdictions are eligible for federal Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) Grants offered through FEMA: Hazard Mitigation Grant Program-HMGP, Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities- BRIC (formerly Pre-Disaster Mitigation-PDM), and Flood Management Assistance-FMA. The HMA Grants are a great source of funding to help implement actions/projects identified in the LHMPs.
The residents of Lassen County Operational Area have dealt with a variety of threats and hazards affecting the area. Photos, journal entries, and newspaper articles dating well back in to the 1800's show that the residents of the area have experienced earthquakes, flooding, wildfire, severe weather, and windstorms. Historically, these threats and hazards adversely affected the lives and the economy of the area. When factoring in new development and growth (population, the built environment), exposure to these threats and hazards creates an even greater risk than previously experienced. In addition to personal property losses, it is equally important to recognize the increased cost and timeframe for government to recover from these threats and hazards.
While it is not always possible to predict exactly when these threats and hazards will occur or the exact extent to which they will impact the area, with careful planning and collaboration among public agencies, private sector organizations, and citizens within the community, it is possible to minimize the expected losses (injuries, fatalities, economic) that can result from these threats and hazards. Because of this, Lassen County, the City of Susanville, and the Susanville Indian Rancheria realize the importance of identifying effective ways to mitigate (reduce and/or eliminate) the impacts from threats and hazards.
The update to the Lassen County Operational Area LHMP builds upon previous mitigation efforts done by the County, the City, and the Rancheria and incorporates new, relevant information and priorities into the plan. This includes reassessing and reevaluating: the community demographics, mitigation capabilities (resources); community threats and hazards (identification, prioritization, and risk); and mitigation goals, objectives, and strategies (actions/projects). Significant consideration was given to new challenges and issues facing the County, the City, and the Rancheria (i.e., pandemic, energy disruption, wind-driven wildfire events). This plus factoring in best practices, led to a reorganization of the LHMP and in some instances adding, renaming, and expanding threats and hazards and consolidating or renaming mitigation strategies (actions/projects).
Preface
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan vii
Because the LHMP must include information to meet federal requirements and guidance it can include information not traditionally found in other planning documents. This can lead to a large, cumbersome document, making it difficult to easily access specific information. In an effort to ensure the plan contains all required information and is user-friendly; the LHMP has been organized in following sections:
1: Introduction- provides information on the purpose of the plan, outlines the scope of the work, and presents the adoption process and authority.
2: Planning Process- provides information on the methodology used to prepare the LHMP, including a list of the Planning Team members, overview of stakeholder coordination, and the public outreach efforts.
3: Community Profile- provides background information on the County, City, and Rancheria, ensuring all Planning Team members have a common understanding of the dynamics within the community.
4: Capability Assessment- provides information on current resources available to the County, City, and Rancheria to support mitigation efforts, including department roles and responsibilities, and existing mitigation plans/programs/codes. 5: Hazard/Threat Assessment- provides information on and prioritizes threats and hazards within the County, City, and Rancheria.
6: Risk Assessment- provides information on the potential impacts, through exposure and loss (damage) estimates for threats and hazards within the County, City, and Rancheria. 7: Mitigation Strategy- provides information on the actions/projects the County, City, and Rancheria are proposing to address the risk from threats and hazards. 8: Plan Maintenance- provides information on how the County, City, and Rancheria intend to keep the LHMP current, incorporate it into other efforts, and share it with the public.
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-1
1. Introduction
This section presents general information about mitigation and the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP). Hazard mitigation is defined as any action taken to reduce and/or eliminate long term risk to human life and property. Mitigation can reduce the enormous cost of disasters to residents, businesses, and government. In addition, it can protect critical community facilities, reduce exposure to liability, and minimize community disruption.
The LHMP is a “living document” that should be reviewed, monitored, maintained, and revised to reflect changing conditions, shifting priorities, and new information. As required, an approved and adopted LHMP must be in place to receive federal Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) Grants offered through the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
Lassen County, the City of Susanville, and the Susanville Indian Rancheria (County, City, Rancheria) collaborated to prepare the update of the LHMP which was previously adopted in 2018 and approved by FEMA in 2019. The updated LHMP represents the current understanding of the community, potential impacts from natural, manmade, and technological hazards and threats, captures current mitigation capabilities, validates mitigation goals and objectives, and presents mitigation actions/projects that may be taken to reduce risk of impacts (fatalities, injuries, property damage, community disruption, and economic consequences) from hazard/threats within Lassen County. Updating of this LHMP demonstrates the community’s commitment to mitigation, fulfills regulatory requirements as established by FEMA, establishes eligibility for seeking HMA Grants, and serves as a guide to local decisions makers to implement mitigation programs.
1.1. Purpose of the Plan
While the plan may have many purposes (i.e., collaboration, coordination, relationship building), the ultimate purpose of the LHMP is to identify mitigation strategies (i.e., policies, measures, projects, actions, and tools) that will result in the reduction and/or the elimination of risk of impacts from future disaster (hazard/threat) events within County, City, and Rancheria.
1.2. Scope of the Plan
The scope of the LHMP is to 1) assess relevant existing conditions and capabilities; 2) identify potential threats and hazards and their impacts; and 3) propose mitigation strategies to address the impacts to the threats and hazards within the County, City, and Rancheria.
This is accomplished by using a systematic process of validating existing capabilities, learning about the hazards/threats that can affect each of the participating jurisdictions, establishing (validating) clear goals and objectives, identifying and implementing appropriate mitigation strategies, and keeping the plan current.
The LHMP is an integral part of a multi-pronged approach to minimizing personal injury and property damage from natural, manmade, and technological hazards/threats, and it complements other planning documents and regulatory authorities governing pre-disaster land use planning and post-disaster response and recovery. It is intended to set the tone for the implementation of mitigation practices that will build a disaster resistant and sustainable community.
Introduction
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-2
1.3. Hazard Mitigation Planning Directive
The impetus and authority to create LHMPs is derived from the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Public Law 93-288), as amended by the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000). In response to escalating disaster costs, the federal government adopted DMA 2000 which places emphasis on hazard mitigation planning. Under DMA 2000, local governments are required to have a FEMA-approved and locally adopted LHMP to be eligible for HMA Grants (Hazard Mitigation Grant Program- HMGP, Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities BRIC, and Flood Mitigation Assistance- FMA). LHMPs must be consistent with the State HMP and must demonstrate that proposed mitigation strategies are based on a sound planning process that accounts for the risk to and the capabilities of the individual communities.
The requirements and procedures for LHMPs are found in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at Title 44, Chapter 1, Part 201 and in supporting FEMA Mitigation Guidance and Handbooks.
1.4. Promulgation Authority
The promulgation authority is vested in the members of the Lassen County Board of Supervisors, the City of Susanville City Council, and the Susanville Indian Rancheria Tribal Business Council.
These Councils and Boards are the legislative body of the jurisdiction and decide policy, enact laws, and administer all activities. A list of the members of the Councils/Boards is in Table 1.1.
Table 1-1. County, City, and Rancheria Promulgation Authorities Position Elected Official
County
County Supervisor Mike Scanlan
County Supervisor Gary Bridges
County Supervisor Tom Neely
County Supervisor Aaron Albaugh
County Supervisor Jason Ingram
City
Mayor Mendy Schuster
Mayor Pro Tem Russ Brown
Council Member Curtis Bortle
Council Member Patrick Parrish
Council Member Dawn Miller
Rancheria
Chairman Arian Hart
Vice-chairman Robert Joseph
Councilman Aaron Brazzanovich Jr
Councilman Alton Brazzanovich
Member-at-Large Kurt Merino
Member-at-Large Mary Joseph
Secretary/Treasurer Christie Choo
Introduction
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-3
1.5. Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Adoption
Following a review by the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) and formal approval by FEMA, the updated LHMP was adopted by the governing body of each participating jurisdiction (Lassen County, the City of Susanville, and the Susanville Indian Rancheria) through a signed resolution. The Adoption Resolution by the participating jurisdictions are located in Appendix A.
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-1
2. Planning Process
This section demonstrates the methodology (planning process) used by the County, City, and Rancheria to update the LHMP. FEMA’s Local Mitigation Planning Handbook (2023) and FEMA’s Local Mitigation Planning Policy Guide (2023) outlines guidance and offers examples to help local jurisdictions meet CFR44 requirements when developing and/or updating LHMPs. A significant part of the guidance emphasizes the involvement of the “whole community” in the planning process. The whole community concept promotes the inclusion of not only emergency managers but other department representatives (e.g., community development, public works, finance, administration), as well as, outside stakeholders and partners (e.g., surrounding counties/cities, special districts, lifelines companies, businesses leaders) to participate in the LHMP effort. The whole community concept also includes outreach to the general public to bring awareness to the LHMP planning effort and content (community threats/hazards, mitigation strategies). As part of this effort, the County, City, and Rancheria also ensured representation and/or the needs of the underserved, socially vulnerable populations were included in the planning process. Soliciting and considering input from these diverse interests is essential to building a comprehensive plan and gaining community-wide support for the LHMP. Throughout this process, opportunities for public involvement were offered and comments were encouraged. More details about public engagement are provided under the Public Outreach section.
2.1. Methodology and Timeline
To update the LHMP, the County, City and Rancheria implemented a three (3) phase planning approach: 1) Prepare; 2) Develop; and, 3) Finalize (Figure 2.1), with the Develop phase being broken down into three (3) sub-phases. It is worth noting that while the figure includes a 4th phase (Implement & Maintain), it is not part of the LHMP update process. This phase is part of the overall planning approach followed by the County, City, and Rancheria to apply mitigation strategies (implement) and keep the plan current (maintain). In addition to the phases, Figure 2.1 also depicts the estimated timeline to complete each phase.
Planning Process
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-2
Figure 2-1. Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Planning Process While this methodology is in alignment with FEMA guidance, sequence and naming of phases were adjusted to better suit the County, City and Rancheria needs. Additional information about each phase is present below.
Under the Prepare phase general project tasks were completed. This included conducting an Administrative Kickoff meeting with the consultant, validation of the Planning Team, an identification of the Public Outreach effort, and a Kickoff meeting with the Planning Team. This phase also included the initial identification and collection of both internal and external documents and materials that may be beneficial to the LHMP update process.
Led by the consultant, the Planning Team worked through the Develop sub-phases. During the Existing Conditions sub-phase (2a), relevant characteristics and demographics (Community Profile), current mitigation abilities (Capabilities Assessment), and existing community threats and hazards (Hazard Assessment) within the County, City, and Rancheria were reviewed and discussed. The Capabilities Assessment included the identification of departments supporting mitigation, current governance guiding mitigation efforts, identification of financial resource availability to possibly support mitigation, and discussion of assets; while the Hazard Assessment included the identification, description, and prioritization of local threats and hazards within the County, City, and Rancheria. Under the Risk Assessment sub-phase (2b), the Planning Team reviewed potential impacts (exposure and vulnerabilities) of threats and hazards within the County, City, and Rancheria and validated the prioritization of the threats and hazards. The final sub-phase, Mitigation Strategies (2c), had the Planning Team discuss previous mitigation actions/projects, assess current capabilities, identify and prioritize new mitigation actions/projects, and develop an implementation plan for each mitigation action/project.
Planning Process
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-3
Throughout the Develop Phase, plans and other documents, both internal and external, were analyzed and leveraged by the Planning Team to ensure decisions were based on the best available information and that proposed mitigation actions were compatible with other efforts. And conversely, efforts were made to encourage results from the LHMP planning process to be considered and incorporated into other planning efforts. Additionally, during this phase outreach was done with the public to solicit input.
The last phase of the planning process methodology was Finalize. During this phase, the Planning Team reviewed and provided comments on the administrative draft of the LHMP. The administrative draft of the LHMP was then presented to the public for review and comment. After Planning Team and Public review, the draft LHMP was forwarded to the Cal OES and FEMA. This phase also included addressing both Cal OES and FEMA comments and working with the County Board, City Council, and the Tribal Business Council to adopt the LHMP.
During the planning process, draft LHMP sections were disseminated for review and comment as the Planning Team moved through each phase and sub-phase. This helped the Planning Team focus their review on the subject matter at hand and enforced the relationship between the phases. At the end of the planning process, another review cycle was provided, this time with all draft sections under one cover.
2.2. Planning Team
Building on the whole community concept, a Planning Team was established to assist with the updating of the LHMP. The primary goal of the Planning Team is to help define and identify mitigation strategies. Other roles for the Planning Team include:
▪ Validate the planning approach
▪ Provide information and material
▪ Update and review information and material
▪ Collaborate with other Planning Team members
▪ Be the primary liaison with the community and stakeholders ▪ Promote public participation
▪ Address FEMA and the Cal OES comments
The Planning Team was led by the Lassen County Planning and Building Services Department.
The Lassen County Department representative took on the responsibilities of Project Manager; and coordinated Planning Team activates. Additionally, the County, City, and Rancheria hired a consultant (APetrow Consulting) to provide technical support through the planning process and preparation of the LHMP. The consultant was responsible for facilitating Planning Team meetings and updating the LHMP.
2.2.1. Members
To ensure this update to the LHMP was comprehensive, special considerations were given to the selection of Planning Team members. The intent was to identify members who could represent key segments of the community. The Planning Team was comprised of subject matter experts from a range of areas covered in the LHMP who could provide great benefit/insight to the team, as well as other community stakeholders and partners (i.e., surrounding jurisdictions, special
Planning Process
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-4
districts, chamber of commerce, lifeline companies, higher education institutions, special interest groups, private organizations). Keeping the Planning Team to a manageable number of members while ensuring that all perspectives are captured and/or included in the process is always challenging. To balance this, the Planning Team members were urged to act as liaisons to other community groups with whom they regularly interact with to exchange thoughts on the LHMP.
Planning Team members were encouraged to communicate the direction and status of the planning effort to outside members and in return they were expected to bring that outside perspective back to the Planning Team. This was especially true for underserved and socially vulnerable populations and businesses. The Planning Team had representatives from County, City, and Rancheria departments (i.e., Housing, Community Development) that worked with and understood the challenges, needs, and special interests of the underserved and socially vulnerable populations. Similar to how the Chamber of Commerce was able to provide great insight into many small business issues and concerns.
The Lassen County Planning and Building Services Department made great efforts to engage/include as many Planning Team members as possible. A phased approach was used to contact potential Planning Team members. This included conducting initial one-on-one phone calls to introduce the project and confirm the best point person (representative) for their organization. Next email invites were sent out to the representatives to become part of the Planning Team. This was then followed up with invites to attend each of the Planning Team meetings. The County also reached back out to any Planning Team member who failed to respond and/or failed to attend Planning Team meetings. It is worth noting that while the County made extra efforts, because of varying reasons, some invited Planning Team members did not attend some meetings. Below is a list of the Planning Team members (Table 2-1).
Table 2-1. Members of the Mitigation Steering Committee Names Organization Department Title
Bob Godman City of Susanville Public Works Director
Dan Newton City of Susanville City Manager’s
Office
City Manager
Dow Davis City of Susanville Building Official
Erik Edholm City of Susanville Public Works Asst. Director Jolene Arredondo City of Susanville City Manager’s
Office
Assistant to the City Manager
Kelly Mumper City of Susanville City Planner/Code Enforcement Supervisor
Marcie Rojas City of Susanville Public Works Program Coordinator Mike Bollinger City of Susanville Director of Public Safety Nick Dacosta City of Susanville Public Works Assistant Director Tamra Spade City of Susanville Economic
Development
Director
Tom Hernandez City of Susanville Fire Assistant Chief
Cynthia Raschein Lassen County Public Works Assistant Director Elizabeth Krier Lassen County Public Health Emergency Services Coordinator Gaylon Norwood Lassen County Planning and
Building Services
Deputy Director
Grace Poor Lassen County Health and Social
Services
Housing Program Manager
Planning Process
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-5
Jason Housel Lassen County Information
Services
Information Services Supervisor
Jayson Vial Lassen County Community and
Social Services
Director
Jim Uruburu Lassen County Public Health Emergency Preparedness Coordinator
John McGarva Lassen County Sheriff’s
Department
Sheriff
Matt Oden Lassen County Planning and
Building Services
Assoc. Planner
Maurice
Anderson
Lassen County Planning and
Building Services
Director
Michael Hoenig Lassen County Planning and
Building Services
Environmental Health Specialist
Mike Johnson Lassen County Planning and
Building Services
Building Official
Mike Prettyman Lassen County Planning and
Building Services
Code Enforcement Officer
Mindie Hilton Lassen County Planning and
Building Services
Assoc. Planner
Robert Steen Lassen County Planning and
Building Services
Senior Building Inspector
Roberto
MaravillaPlancarte
Lassen County Planning and
Building Services
Environmental Health Specialist
Sara Chandler Lassen County Planning and
Building Services
Manager, Environmental Health
Silas Rojas Lassen County OES OES Chief
Audie Noneo Susanville Indian Rancheria Emergency Management Officer Brandie Cooper Susanville Indian Rancheria Natural Resources Director Maureen Curley Susanville Indian Rancheria Tribal Administrator Scott Dixon Susanville Indian Rancheria Emergency Management Coordinator
Kory Bowser Bureau of Land Management Fire Management Officer Division Chief Casey Urrutia California Department of
Forestry and Fire Protection
(CAL FIRE)
Chief
Cade Mohlr Fire Safe Council Registered Professional Forrester Jamie Huber Janesville School District Janesville School Superintendent/Principal
Tom Browning Lassen Community College Program Director
Cort Cortez Lassen Municipal Utility
District (LMUD)
Electric Operations Manager
Casey Williams Susanville Sanitary District District Operations Superintendent
Steve Stump Susanville Sanitary District General Manager Michael Gibbons Mintier Harnish City of Susanville Consultant Brian Greer Dynamic Planning and
Science
City of Susanville Consultant -
General Plan update
Ethan Mobley Dynamic Planning and
Science
City of Susanville Consultant -
General Plan update
Planning Process
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-6
2.2.2. Meetings
There were a series of meetings held with the Planning Team. Each meeting had a primary focus and provided an opportunity to discuss/review information and exchange ideas. The Planning Team meetings were arranged and scheduled to follow the planning process phases outlined in the Methodology and Timeline section; with each meeting designed to walk members through sections of the LHMP. Discussions and agreements from the meetings were captured and made available for the Planning Team to review. This allowed the Planning Team to review and comment while the information was still fresh in their minds.
In addition to reviewing and validating material, the intent was to also educate members on the planning process and purpose of each section. By taking this step, it helped ensure that each member would bring knowledge back to their organizations and other stakeholders. Table 2-2 provides a list and the main purpose of each of the meetings. Planning Team member attendance for each Planning Team meeting can be found in Appendix B.
Table 2-2. Planning Team Meetings Summary
Date Purpose
06/29/2023
An initial Planning Team meeting, led by the Lassen County staff, was held to review the 2019 LHMP, discuss needed actions, and start to revise the LHMP. During the meeting a date was also scheduled for an initial Public Outreach meeting to orient the public about the LHMP. 04/01/2024
Prepare and Existing Conditions Community Profile)- Project kickoff with Planning Team. Discussed: Definition of mitigation, purpose of the LHMP, and the proposed project to update the LHMP. Focus was on the role of and who should be on the team, the type of Information needed, the proposed planning process and timeline, public outreach effort needs.
Discussion also included benefits and challenges of the current LHMP (size, information, format), how the LHMP will be used in the future, the FEMA Review Tool, and what changes the community has seen over the past 5 years. Team was prepared for next meeting.
04/15/2024
Existing Conditions (Community Profile, Capabilities Assessment, and Hazard Assessment)- Recapped last meeting and laid out new discussion items. Since there were some new members, discussed definition of mitigation, purpose of the LHMP, the proposed project to update the LHMP, the role of and who should be on the team, the type of information needed, the proposed planning process and timeline, public outreach effort needs discussed relationship between other plans, changes in the community (Community Profile), changes to staff and resources (Capabilities Assessment), project website, and conducted an exercise to identify and prioritize hazards and threats (Hazard Assessment). The Team was prepped for next meeting.
04/29/2024
Existing Conditions (Community Profile, Capabilities Assessment, and Hazard Assessment)- Recapped last meeting and laid out new discussion items. Discussed Community Profile (any changes over the past 5 years), Capabilities Assessment (staffing and governance), threats and hazards (identification and priority), and community assets. Team was prepared for next meeting.
05/13/2024
Existing Conditions (Community Profile, Capabilities Assessment, and Hazard Assessment)- Recapped last meeting and laid out new discussion items. Focused on changes to staffing, governance, and fiscal resources (Capabilities Assessment), highlighted the need to reach “underserved
Planning Process
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-7
Date Purpose
and socially vulnerable populations, scheduled and planned a public outreach event. Team was prepared for next meeting.
06/10/2024
Existing Conditions (Community Profile, Capabilities Assessment, and Hazard Assessment)- Recapped status of project and reviewed the draft LHMP (chapters 1-5) of the updated LHMP. Team was prepared for next meeting.
06/24/2024
Risk Assessment- Recapped last meeting and laid out new discussion items. Focused on changes to LHMP organization and format changes.
This included separating some sections and creating new sections.
Discussions also included initial discussions of risk, focusing on Hazus model results for earthquake and flood.
07/08/2024
Risk Assessment- Recapped last meeting and laid out new discussion items. Recap included summary of the scientific loss estimation risk assessment model. New topics included discussions of quantitative and qualitative risk assessment exposure.
7/22/2024
Mitigation Strategies- Recapped last meeting and laid out new discussion items. Recap included summary risk assessment. New topics included discussions of mitigation strategy, summarizing the approach used to review and identify mitigation actions, measures, and/or projects. Focus of discussion included goals and objectives, status of previous mitigation actions, measures, and/or projects, and a method to prioritize previous mitigation actions, measures, and/or projects.
8/5/2024
Mitigation Strategies and Plan Maintenance- Recapped last meeting and laid out new discussion items. Recap included summary of the discussion of the initial steps of the development of the mitigation strategy (goals and objectives, status of previous mitigation actions, and the method to prioritize mitigation actions). New topics included the identification of new mitigation actions, the mitigation action implementation plan, and the plan to maintain the LHMP over the next 5 years.
8/19/2024
Administrative Draft LHMP Review- Recapped last meeting and laid out new discussion items. Recap included further discussion of the overall Mitigation Strategy process with focus on mitigation actions. The Planning Team walked through each hazard/threat to validate the problem statement and discuss possible actions to reduce and/or eliminate impacts. New topics included the LHMP Plan Maintenance requirements and proposed actions.
9/16/2024
Administrative Draft LHMP Review- Recapped last meeting and laid out new discussion items. Recapped the entire Planning Process to ensure the Planning Team understood the purpose of each step. New topics included the review of areas needing Planning Team attention and reevaluation of proposed mitigation actions.
9/17/2024
– Present
Various ad-hoc meetings with Planning Team members to discuss and address comments and concerns
2.3. Stakeholder Coordination
The County, City, and Rancheria coordinate with Emergency Management stakeholders on a regular basis. While some coordination is planned (or scheduled), some is ad hoc. The purpose of these stakeholder meetings is to provide a platform for greater coordination and communication. It also provided an opportunity to discuss proposed and current actions, ensuring actions are understood, compatible, and synchronized. Below is an overview of some of the
Planning Process
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-8
Emergency Management stakeholder meetings and stakeholder resources materials leveraged for this effort:
2.3.1. Recurring Meetings
• Mutual Aid Regional Advisory Committee (MARAC)- Lassen County attends the Cal OES run MARAC meetings. The MARACs were established to provide a broad base for local government participation in the California Standardize Emergency Management System (SEMS) Maintenance System and are a principal source of input and information into the system. The MARAC meetings are also used to inform and encourage regional coordination among local jurisdictions and key stakeholders. • Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC)- Lassen County attends the LEPC meetings. The quarterly meetings are used to discuss hazardous material related topics. • Lassen County Disaster Council- The Lassen County runs and attends the Disaster Council meeting annually.
• Shasta-Cascade Hazardous Materials Response Team (SCHMRT)- Administration group that meets quarterly or on an as-needed basis. The Operations group meets monthly for a 6-hour drill. They typically welcome invitations to conduct their drills in member jurisdictions
2.3.2. Mitigation Related Planning Resources
Because the County, City, and Rancheria wanted a comprehensive LHMP, it emphasized the review, consideration, and incorporation of information from other plans; not only plans within its jurisdiction. These stakeholder plans contained an array of information on various topics that helped augment information within and provided additional insight into all sections within the LHMP (i.e., Community Profile, Hazard Profile, Capabilities Assessment, Risk Assessment, Mitigation Strategy, and Plan Maintenance). These plans include:
• State Hazardous Materials Incident Contingency Plan (HMICP)- describes the State’s hazardous material emergency response organization; the roles and responsibilities of state agencies; the relationship of the State with the local, federal, volunteer, and private organizations and is a useful reference document
• Shasta County LHMP
• Plumas County LHMP
• Modoc County LHMP
• Airport Land Use Plan- The primary goal of airport land use planning is to protect the public and the people who live near the airport. This is done by examining land uses within specific airport safety zones.
o Herlong, Spaulding, Bieber, and Ravendale Airports
o Susanville Municipal Airport
o Amedee Army Airfield
2.4. Public Outreach
For the purposes of the LHMP, the County, City, and Rancheria define the public as any person within the County or adjacent areas, not part of the Planning Team, not acting in an official capacity of a recognized form or level of government. There were two (2) different Public Outreach
Planning Process
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-9
campaigns used during the LHMP update process: the first informing the community of LHMP Update and the second educating the community of hazards. Community education of hazards is an ongoing campaign conducted by the County, City, and Rancheria that was leveraged during the LHMP update process. Below is a summary of the campaigns:
2.4.1. LHMP Awareness Campaign
This campaign is focused on engaging with the public during the LHMP update process. A significant piece of the FEMA’s LHMP guidance is to ensure the “whole community” is involved, and a key element of the whole community concept is engaging with the general public. In support of this a series of public meetings, events, and dissemination of information were used to engage the public.
The public outreach strategy under this campaign worked in conjunction with LHMP planning process and timeline. As the Planning Team completed critical milestones, meetings and key information were disseminated to the public for feedback and comments. This outreach strategy shared information about the project kickoff, potential impacts of the threats and hazards within the community, current mitigation capabilities, and proposed mitigation actions.
There were public meetings held at the very start of the project (06/29/2023); a meeting was held after the Hazard Assessment was completed (06/06/2024), and a meeting was held at the end of the project after the Mitigation Strategies and draft LHMP was completed (10/7/2024).
Announcements for the public meetings can be found in Appendix C. The meetings were advertised through the Planning Team members official social media platforms (Facebook, Xformerly Twitter, Instagram, Nextdoor), through official websites, media outlets (Modoc Record, Susanvillestuff.com, Lassen County Times, Sierra Daily News/JDX/KSUE) and posted at several locations (Lassen County Administrative Office, Lassen County Planning and Building Services Office, Veterans’ Memorial Hall). The meeting announcements were also shared with the Susanville Blue Star Moms group.
On June 29, 2023, an initial public outreach meeting was held. The meeting was led by Lassen County staff. A presentation was developed to introduce the community to mitigation and summarize the information in the LHMP. A flyer was prepared and distributed throughout the county and postings were made on the County website of the meeting time and date. While the meeting was well publicized, no one from the public attended.
On June 6, 2024, a second meeting (virtual) was held to inform the public of the contents and the process to update LHMP. The Planning Team believed a virtual meeting may be better attended because of the size of the County, family logistical issues, and other competing family issues.
Planning Team members felt that families could find the time to log into a virtual call as opposed to having to make arrangements and travel to a meeting. Because of the lack of attendance during the initial public meeting, the Planning Team took additional steps to ensure the announcement of the meeting was widely disseminated. Information regarding the second Public meeting was disseminated within the community via the County and partner websites and multiple Planning Team member’s social media platforms, as well as individual Planning Team member outreach efforts. A presentation was prepared with information about the LHMP (i.e., purpose, scope, update process) in addition to the type of hazards and threats identified by the Planning Team.
Planning Process
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-10
While better publicized, no one from the public attended the second Public meeting. To counter this, the presentation was made available on the County and partner websites.
On October 7, 2024, a final public meeting was held to present the findings of the Planning Team’s efforts to update the LHMP. As with the past meetings, this public meeting was held virtually to encourage more participation. Announcements for public meetings were disseminated within the community via the County and partner websites and multiple Planning Team member’s social media platforms, as well as individual Planning Team member outreach efforts. A presentation was prepared with information about the purpose of mitigation and LHMPs, an introduction of the Lassen County Operational Area LHMP (i.e., purpose, scope, update process), what hazards and threats were included in the LHMP, what mitigation projects/actions were identified by the Planning Team, and how the public could review and comment on the LHMP. While well publicized, public attendance was limited. Comments from the public were geared more on clarification and were addressed in the meeting. As with the past meetings, the presentation was posted on the County website under the Hazard Mitigation page. In conjunction with the final public outreach efforts, as updates were provided to the Councils/Boards, the public was made aware of the public comment period and how they could access the final draft LHMP. After the public review period was closed (3 weeks), a meeting was held with the Planning Team to provide an update of the public comment period.
In support of the Public Outreach efforts, the County created a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan page on its website and provided a link to Planning Team members to share or connect to their organization’s website (Susanville Indian Rancheria, City of Susanville, City of Susanville Fire Department). The Local Hazard Mitigation Plan page provided basic information and encouraged the public to sign up to receive information on the LHMP update process, as well as, to sign up for local alerts, warnings, and notifications. In between the meetings, there was a series of status updates provided through the website.
A flyer (handout) about Mitigation/LHMP and a public survey were also developed to help disseminate and collect information to inform the Planning Team’s decisions. The handout provided some basic information about mitigation and the LHMP. It also included a link (Quick Response-QR code) to the survey. The handout was made available to all Planning Team members. The public survey was housed on the Lassen County LHMP webpage but was advertised through team members that linked their websites to the County website. The Planning Team reviewed and incorporated the results from the survey as they went through the planning process. Survey results can be found in Appendix D.
The County, City, and Rancheria also leveraged existing public outreach efforts to engage the public. Planning Team members handed out flyers at the Children’s Fair- 05/04/2024, and Veteran Stand Down- 05/18/2024. The Planning Team determined that these events were a good opportunity to reach the general public. The Children’s Fair was a public event that provided residents with informational resources about general public health issues and challenges. The events were all publicized via the local jurisdiction’s websites and official social media platforms.
Mitigation information was also disseminated with utility bills and other regular mailer circulars.
Other than the survey results, limited public input was received through the public meetings/events, website, or social media platforms. Results from the survey were shared with
Planning Process
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 2-11
the Planning Team and incorporated/considered where appropriate. In all, the public comments confirmed the Planning Team decisions and supported the proposed mitigation strategies. As such, all public comments were incorporated into the LHMP where appropriate.
2.4.2. Mitigation Awareness Campaign
The County, City, and Rancheria utilize several platforms to educate the public about hazards in the community, relevant programs to safeguard and protect the community during/from the effects of the hazards, and actions they can take to prepare themselves for events on a regular basis.
Below is a list of the different platforms used:
▪ County, City and Rancheria Emergency Preparedness Websites ▪ Social Media (Facebook, Twitter)
▪ Meetings/Workshops
▪ Public Service Announcements- radio and television
▪ Community Emergency Response Team Training (CERT)
▪ FireSafe Councils
▪ Evacuation training for Schools and Communities
▪ Weed Abatement campaigns
▪ Flood emergency awareness campaigns
Additional information about the County, City, and Rancheria programs can be found in the Capability Assessment (Section 4) of the LHMP.
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-1
3. Community Profile
The purpose of this section is to present an overview of the County, City, and Rancheria, providing the Planning Team with a common understanding of the existing conditions and perspective on aspects within the community. Gaining a common understanding of these existing conditions provides the basis on which the Planning Team can assess the impacts of threats and hazards, as well as identify needed mitigation strategies. Because Lassen County is more rural than most, and that there is significant coordination between the County, City, and Rancheria, the Planning Team felt that presenting some of the Community Profile information at the County-level was more appropriate and beneficial to the LHMP planning efforts.
3.1. Location and History
Lassen County is located in northeastern California. It is bordered on the north by Modoc County, on the south by Plumas and Sierra Counties, on the west by Shasta County, and on the east by Washoe County in the State of Nevada (Figure 3-1) named after Peter Lassen and Lassen Peak, the County was formed in 1864.
Figure 3-1. Map of Lassen County
Lassen County has a total area of 3,001,780 acres (4,690.3 square miles). Over 63 percent of the land area in Lassen County is administered by Federal, state or local agencies. Portions of
Community Profile
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-2
the Lassen National Forest, Lassen Volcanic National Park, Modoc National Forest, Plumas National Forest and Toiyabe National Forest are located in Lassen County. The region of presentday Lassen Conty is located within the original lands of several indigenous societies: Washoe, Northern Paiute, Mountain Maidu, Achomawi, Atsugewi, and Pit River people.
The City of Susanville is the only incorporated city in the county and serves as the County seat.
Incorporated in 1900 as a General Law city, Susanville is about 85 miles north-northwest of Reno, Nevada, on the eastern slopes of where the Sierra Nevada and the Cascade mountain ranges meet. Unincorporated communities include Bieber, Clear Creek, Doyle, Herlong, Janesville, Johnstonville, Litchfield, Madeline, Milford, Nubieber, Patton Village, Ravendale, Spalding, Standish, Termo, Wendel and Westwood. State Highway 36 leads west from Susanville to the Central Valley and the city of Red Bluff. State Highway 36 also leads eastward to Highway 395, then south to Reno, about a 1½ hour drive.
The Susanville Indian Rancheria is a federally recognized Indian Tribe in Northeastern California with aboriginal ties to the Mountain Maidu, Northern Paiute, Hammawi and Atsugewi Bands of the Pit River, and the Washoe Tribe. The Susanville Indian Rancheria currently consists of five (5) non-contiguous land bases (Lower Rancheria, Upper Rancheria, Herlong parcel, Ravendale parcel, and Cradle Valley parcel (Lassen/Plumas County); and totals 1,340 acres (1,100 trust; 240 fee) in Lassen County (Figure 3-2).
Figure 3-2. Map of Susanville Indian Rancheria
Community Profile
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-3
3.2. Physical Features
Lassen County is characterized by forest-covered mountains and plateaus roughly covering the western one-third of the County and sagebrush and juniper rangeland with a number of interspersed valleys covering the eastern two-thirds. Part of the Warner Range extends into northeastern Lassen County. Most of the large valleys are comprised of the remnants of ancient lake beds. The largest valley is the Honey Lake Valley in the south-central part of the County, which extends into Nevada and joins Long Valley to the southeast. The Honey Lake Valley is generally considered to be part of the Great Basin. Another large valley consists of the Madeline Plains, which includes Grasshopper Valley. Big Valley is located in the northwestern part of the County. A portion of Fall River Valley extends into the northwestern part of the County from the west. Elevations range from 3,300 feet in the Fall River Valley to about 8,700 feet at Hat Mountain in the northeast comer of the County. Eagle Lake, located 16 miles north of Susanville, is the second largest natural lake located wholly within California. At an elevation of 5,100 feet, the lake covers 42 square miles and offers a variety of recreational resources and attractions.
Located in the south- central part of the county at an elevation of 4,240 feet above sea level, the City of Susanville straddles the Susan River which flows out of the mountains and drains southeastward into the Honey Lake Valley. West of Susanville, on both sides of the southeastdraining Susan River, foothills rise nearly 1,000 feet above the river valley to elevations of 5,000 to 5,200 feet. Susanville Peak, 3½ miles due north of the city, is 6,576 feet high; Diamond Mountain, 8 miles south of Susanville, is 7,738 feet above sea level; and, Thompson Peak, 13 miles southeast of Susanville and 3 miles southwest of Janesville, reaches elevations of 7,795 feet. Both Diamond Mountain and Thompson Peak straddle the Lassen County-Plumas County boundary. Mt. Lassen, a 10,437-foot volcano that last erupted in 1914 is located in Shasta County, 6 miles from the Lassen County line and approximately 50 air-miles from Susanville.
Amongst Susanville Indian Rancheria’s expanse, precious surface water resources include 1 perennial stream (Clarks Creek), 2 intermittent streams (East and West Berry Creek), 5 documented springs, 1 wetland, 2 wet meadows, and several ephemeral drainages. These water resources are important not only economically and ecologically, but also culturally for SIR. The West Barry Creek (Berry Creek) is an ephemeral stream drainage that runs approximately north to south through the Upper and Lower Rancheria properties. It is the western most of two main drainages originating in the Upper SIR property, transecting through the residential areas and entering the Lower SIR property at the Diamond Mountain Casino/Mini-Mart (Casino). The Upper Rancheria topography contributes to runoff, erosion, and transport debris into Barry Creek during flood events that have the potential to block established storm drainages and cause overflowing water and damage to the surrounding infrastructure and established roads. The most recent flooding of Barry Creek occurred in 2019 that contributed to erosion of stream banks and minor habitat deterioration. No landslides have been recorded to have occurred on tribal lands.
3.3. Historic/Cultural Resources
Because of the proximity of the Susan River, Honey Lake, and various other creeks, as well as the flat land near these water sources, the Susanville area is considered extremely sensitive for both historic and pre-historic resources.
Community Profile
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-4
The City of Susanville General Plan Land Use Element indicates there are 7 archaeological sites within the city limits and another 10 within one mile of the city limits, as recorded by the California Archaeological Inventory (CAI). There are also historical and culturally sensitive sites located within the Susanville Indian Rancheria. The Susanville Indian Rancheria is dedicated to the preservation of these sites and as a policy does not disclose information regarding the location of specific sites or general areas where they are present.
3.4. Climate
The climate of Lassen County is variable, but in general it is characterized by warm dry summers and cold moist winters. Most of the precipitation falls between October and May. The average annual rainfall ranges from 4 inches along the Nevada border in the eastern Honey Lake Valley and increases going west to 48 inches near Juniper Lake in Lassen Volcanic National Park.
Average daily temperatures range from 69.6 degrees Fahrenheit in July (although it is not uncommon to reach temperatures exceeding 90 degrees) to 20.4 Fahrenheit in January. The frost-free growing season ranges from 142 days at Susanville to 65 days in the Madeline Plains.
3.5. Population
According to the Lassen County Housing Element Technical Background Report, the County has experienced fluctuating population growth over the past five (5) decades (Table 3-1). Between 1970 and 1980, Lassen County experienced a population increase of approximately 29% (16,796 to 21,661). However, between 1980 and 2000, the population has declined to 16,393. Conversely, there was a significant population increase in the following decade (35,081 in 2010), more than doubling the population in 2000. Currently, Lassen County has been experiencing a slight population decline.
Table 3-1. Lassen County Population, 1970-2021 (U.S. Census Bureau) Year 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2021
Population 16,796 21,661 20,319 16,363 35,081 32,949
The current estimated population breakdowns for the County, City, and Rancheria are as follows:
▪ Unincorporated 32,730 (US Census Bureau)
▪ City of Susanville 16,728 (US Census Bureau)
▪ Susanville Indian Rancheria 570 (US Census Bureau)
Table 3-2 represents the projected population projections for Lassen County. It should be noted that the total population figures given include an incarcerated population in the two (2) state prisons and the one (1) federal prison located within the county. A more accurate view of the population that could potentially be affected by hazards is indicated by the household population.
Table 3-2. Projected Growth for Lassen County (U.S. Census Bureau) 2030 2040 2050
Total Population 37,490 39,073 39,891
Household Population 27,994 — —
Community Profile
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-5
3.6. Demographics
According to the Lassen County Housing Element Technical Background Report, approximately
42.5% of the population falls within the 20-44 age range, 24.5% falls within the 45-64 age range,
14.8% falls within the 65 and above age range, and 18.1% falls within the 0-19 age range.
Additionally, approximately 65% of the population is male and 35% female. The following table (Table 3-3) provides a further breakdown of the age range of the population, and the male/female population.
Table 3-3. Population by Age and Gender in Lassen County (U.S. Census Bureau) Table 3-4 depicts the racial or ethnic group breakdown within the County between 2010 to 2021.
Approximately 64% of the population in Lassen County identifies as White (non-Hispanic). The second largest ethnic group is Hispanic or Latino accounting for approximately 20% of the population. Between 2010 and 2021, the White (non-Hispanic) population decreased by 10.5%.
Within that same timeframe, the Hispanic or Latino, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and Two or More Races populations slightly increased. This trend is consistent with the statewide trend in California.
Table 3-4. Population by Race/Ethnicity (U.S. Census Bureau) Racial/Ethnic Group 2010 2021
Hispanic or Latino 5,974 6,494
White (non-Hispanic) 23,606 21,139
Black or African American 2,849 2,748
Native American 1,129 750
Asian 642 513
Native Hawaiian 201 250
Other 171 137
Two or More Races 509 918
Community Profile
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-6
As required by FEMA, the LHMP should identify and emphasis “Underserved and Socially Vulnerable Populations”. While there are no specific classifications, the understood intent is to identify populations in the community who may have unique challenges and/or needs with regards to response and recovery from threats and hazards. Below is an overview of the “Underserved and Socially Vulnerable Populations” in Lassen County. This list and the corresponding data were taken from the revised draft of the Lassen County General Plan Housing Element. ▪ Extremely Low-income Households- (1,055 households in Co- 11.5%) ▪ Seniors- (7.3% of the population is 65 or older)
▪ Persons with Disabilities- (16.9% have disabilities. 59.6% are 75 years or older) ▪ Large Households- (5 or more persons; may be multi-generational.8.4% in Co) ▪ Farmworker Households- (77 farms, 152 farmworkers, 97 seasonal in Co) ▪ Female-headed Households- (1,097 families in Co)
▪ Individuals Experiencing Homelessness- (102 in Co, 31 unsheltered.)
3.7. Housing
According to the Lassen County Housing Element Technical Background Report, approximately
76.4% of the housing stock in Lassen County is single-family homes (Table 3-5). Of the remaining
23.6% of the housing stock, 12.3% are mobile homes, boats, recreational vehicles, and vans.
Duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and housing developments with five or more units make up the remaining housing stock.
Table 3-5. Housing Units by Type (U.S. Census Bureau)
There are 8,910 households in Lassen County (Table 3-6). Of that, approximately 70% of the households are owner-occupied, 30% are renter occupied. As depicted in the table, there has been some fluctuation between owner-occupied and renter-occupied in County over the last 21 years.
Community Profile
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-7
Table 3-6. Household by Tenure (U.S. Census Bureau)
2000 2010 2021
Tenure Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Owner 6,552 68% 6,545 64% 6,236 70%
Renter 3,073 32% 3,731 36% 2,674 30%
TOTAL 9,625 10,276 8,910
Over 56.9% of the housing units in Lassen County are “occupied” and 10.7% are for seasonal, recreational, or occasional use (Table 3-7). An estimated 29% of the housing units in Lassen County are “vacant” or “other vacant”. Other vacant is a category that includes units that are vacant due to foreclosure, personal/family reasons, legal proceedings, repairs/renovation, abandonment, preparation for being rented or sold, or vacant for an extended absence for reason such as work assignment, military duty, or incarceration.
Table 3-7. Vacancy by Type (U.S. Census Bureau)
Type Number Percent
Occupied 8,910 56.9%
Vacant 3,363 21.5%
For Rent 143 0.9%
Rented, not occupied 18 0.11%
For sale only 222 1.4%
Sold, not occupied 114 0.7%
For seasonal, recreational, or occasional use 1,681 10.7% For migrant workers 0 0%
Other vacant 1,185 7.5%
3.8. Economy
According to the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Economic Forecast for Lassen County (2021-2026), total employment in Lassen County will decline throughout most of the forecast period. Some of the forecast summary includes:
▪ The California Correction Center, a prison in Susanville, will be deactivated during 2021 and 2022.
▪ Because the California Correction Center accounts for more than 10 percent (10%) of all jobs in Lassen County, closing it will have a major impact on the economy and job market. ▪ Total employment across Lassen County will decline by 2.1 percent (2.1%) in 2021 and
6.7 percent (6.7%) in 2022.
▪ The job market will not recover before the end of the forecast period and may never completely recover.
▪ The unemployment rate is expected to decline to 5.5 percent (5.5%) in 2021 as people drop out of the labor force but increase to 6.2 percent (6.2%) in 2022 as local residents lose their jobs.
▪ Lassen County population is expected to shrink during the forecast period and could continue to decline over the long term (through at least 2030).
Community Profile
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-8
3.9. Employment
According to the Lassen County Housing Element Technical Background Report, there are 8,639 jobs in Lassen County (Table 3-8); and approximately 3,851 individuals who reside in Lassen County are employed in the area. Employment trends indicate that the top industry type Lassen County residents work in is public administration (31.1%). Public Administration is defined as managing, supervising, and working through a partnering with organizations that regulate and control public policy in all levels of government (local, regional, state, federal), as well as nonprofit organizations. Secondly, top industry types include education, health, and social services (20.7%), followed by retail trade (9.8%).
Table 3-8. Employment by Industry (U.S. Census Bureau)
3.10. Lifeline Infrastructure
3.10.1. Energy
Four (4) utilities provide electrical service in Lassen County: Lassen Municipal Utility District (LMUD), Plumas-Sierra Rural Electric Cooperative (PSREC), Surprise Valley Electrification Cooperative (SVEC), and Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E).
LMUD, a publicly owned utility created by voters in 1986, provides service to the most customers in the County. LMUD has nine (9) substations, and its service territory is over 1,933 areas, mostly in the central portion of the County. LMUD is connected to the California’s electrical grid in Westwood, CA (Lassen County). LMUD is supplied its electrical power from Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E). PG&E is connected to LMUD with two (2) PG&E owned transmission lines: 1) the Caribou line and the 2) Hat Creek line. The Hat Creek line is only used as a back-up line and does not have the capacity to support all of LMUD’s customers.
PSREC, based in Portola provides service to the southeast portion of the County. SVEC, based in Modoc provides service to the northeast portion of the County, and PG&E provides service along the western boundary of the County.
Community Profile
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-9
3.10.2. Natural Gas
TC Energy (formerly TransCanada Energy) owns and operates 85.1 miles of 20-inch mainline, including one compressor station and one each pig launcher and receiver in Lassen County called the Tuscarora line. Typical mainline operating pressures are between 800 PSI and the maximum allowable operating pressure of 1,000 PSI. Flow is from north to south. The system also includes
11.0 miles of 6-inch Susanville lateral, and 5.3 miles of 4-inch Herlong lateral for distribution by local systems. The City of Susanville operates 10 miles of high-pressure steel gas main pipeline operating at 400 PSI and 60 miles of low pressure polyethene gas mains operating at 40 PSI.
3.10.3. Water
The City of Susanville is the water provider to the residents within the City of Susanville and to some areas of the Susanville Indian Rancheria (lower Rancheria on Joaquin Street and upper Rancheria north of Spring Ridge Road). The City of Susanville is a retail water supplier and does not provide water to other supply agencies. Customer’s water needs are met utilizing water from Bagwell Springs, Cady Springs, and four (4) wells located southeast in the City. Water from the wells is primarily utilized during hot summer months to supplement increased demands. The City wells draw water from the Honey Lake Valley Groundwater Basin, which is part of the North Lahontan Hydrologic Region.
The City of Susanville maintains approximately 60 miles of water lines that service six (6) different pressure zones, five (5) water storage tanks (3.88 MMG) located throughout the City, a 29-acre freshwater reservoir (Berry Reservoir) that holds up to 36.8 million gallons.
The majority of the unincorporated County is served by individual wells. The Big Valley Groundwater Basin (BVGB) spans across 144 square miles, 72% of which is located in Lassen County. BVGB’s sixteen (16) wells are part of the California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring Program. The Big Valley Groundwater Sustainability Plan established a path to sustainability by 2042.
3.10.4. Liquid Waste (Sewer)
The Susanville Sanitary District, formed in 1948, is an independent special district. Its service boundaries encompass about 6.2 square miles. According to the District’s website, with a few exceptions, the District boundaries are contiguous to the City of Susanville City limits. The District has approximately 3,595 connections (3,199 residential connections, 387 commercial connections, and 9 industrial connections). The District provides wastewater collection and tertiary wastewater treatment. The District recently went to UV disinfection in lieu of chemical treatment in order to better serve the community and protect the environment. The District owns and maintains 61 miles of collection pipelines, a wastewater treatment plant, 2 polishing ponds, and a wetland.
Wastewater is collected through 60 miles of gravity-fed pipelines and one mile of pressure sewer mains. The Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) treats approximately 1.0 million gallons of wastewater per day during dry weather and approximately 1.2 million gallons per day (mgd) in wet weather. The WWTP has the capacity to treat and discharge 2.0 mgd average monthly flow
Community Profile
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-10
and 3.1 mgd peak wet weather flow, with a maximum hydraulic capacity of 4.0 mgd. For planning purposes, the District estimates that each residence uses approximately 250 gallons per day.
The majority of the unincorporated County is not served by a community septic system. Therefore, housing is dependent on individual septic systems. The Lassen County Liquid Waste Program is responsible for protecting public health and the environment from the potential adverse health and environmental impacts associated with new and repair on-site individual sewage disposal systems. They investigate complaints, review test data, design proposals and inspect the construction and installation of all septic systems to ensure conformance with applicable codes and ordinances.
3.10.5. Solid Waste (Trash) and Recycling
The Lassen Regional Solid Waste Management Authority (LRSWMA) is a joint powers agency (JPA) formed in 1998 by and between the City of Susanville and the County of Lassen. The Authority is responsible for all aspects of municipal solid waste management, including recycling, within Lassen County and is empowered to grant a franchise for municipal solid waste and recycling collection services. LRSWMA operates two (2) municipal solid waste landfills and nine (9) transfer stations within Lassen County. Private contractors, such as C&S Waste Solutions of Lassen County, perform waste collection services within some areas of Lassen County. C&S Waste Solutions of Lassen County currently holds the franchise agreement and operates exclusively in the franchised area which includes the areas of Susanville, Doyle, Herlong, Janesville, Milford, Wendel and Westwood.
3.10.6. Telecommunications
Historically, telecommunications consisted of land lines, cellular service, and broadband (internet) service. However, with recent innovations and advancements in telecommunications, many of the traditional land line services have been transitioning to voice over internet protocol (VoIP) services. VoIP is a technology that allows people to make phone calls using a broadband internet connection instead of a traditional phone line. VoIP can be cheaper than traditional phone networks, especially for long distance calls, but it can also be subject to bandwidth limitations.
A Broadband Planning and Feasibility Study for Lassen County has just been completed (2023).
According to the study, the purpose was to research the telecommunications industry landscape in Lassen County. This included identifying the location of fiber optics assets, the service areas and service offering of retail Internet Service Providers (ISP), the location of premises lacking access to adequate broadband, and available funding for broadband infrastructure.
The study determined that there are only two (2) wireline ISPs providing services to significant portions of Lassen County. Zito Media’s cable services are essentially the only form of high-speed cable available in the County, reaching more than half of households. Frontier’s DSL systems cover more rural areas, but often do not offer speeds of 25/3 Mbps, suggesting that they are using legacy telephone wiring that has not been upgraded in many areas. Fixed wireless services are more readily available across the County, often the only form of internet service available beyond the service footprints of each of these two main ISPs. In some areas, the fixed wireless option can offer better performance than the DSL option.
Community Profile
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-11
Plumas-Sierra Telecommunications (PST) provides broadband services to Lassen, Plumas, Sierra and Nevada counties in California, and Washoe County, Nevada. PST is a wholly owned subsidiary of Plumas-Sierra Rural Electric Cooperative, which is member-owned and provides electric and internet services north of Truckee.
3.11. Transportation
3.11.1. Highway/Road Systems
The public road system within Lassen County consists of:
• 303 miles of state highway
• 881 miles of county road
• 50 miles within the City of Susanville, and
• 536 miles controlled by federal agencies
Truck traffic on the state highway system has reached 24%. For trucks travelling between Reno and the Interstate 5 corridor, Routes 395 and 44 are the shortest travel routes.
3.11.2. Railroad
Two (2) Class 1 freight railroads operate in the county:
▪ Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF)- BNSF operates 83 track miles in Lassen County, including 36 at-grade crossings, and 1 each under- and above-grade crossing. At-grade crossings are at greatest risk of conflicts with road traffic. BNSF operates a maintenance facility in Westwood, a railyard at Bieber, and freight stations at Westwood, Lodgepole, Willow Springs, Little Valley, and Bieber.
▪ Union Pacific (UP)- UP operates 131 track miles with 36 at-grade, and 2 each under- and above-grade crossings. UP operates freight stations at Wendel, Susanville, CalNeva, and Herlong.
3.11.3. Aviation
Aviation serves are provided by a variety of public and private organizations. ▪ Susanville Municipal Airport (SVE)- SVE serves general aviation and emergency services use, with an asphalt runway of 2,180 feet and two helipads ▪ Southard Field (Bieber)- with a runway of 2,980 feet
▪ Herlong Airport- with a runway of 3,269 feet
▪ Ravendale Airport- with a runway of 2,920 feet
▪ Spaulding Airport- with a runway of 4,600 feet
▪ Amedee Airport- Amedee Airport is near Herlong and has a 10,000-foot runway operated by the U.S. Army and requires prior permission before use ▪ Banner Lassen Medical Center- Banner Lassen Medical Center operates a private 86 by 50-foot concrete helipad in Susanville
Community Profile
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-12
3.11.4. Public Transportation
Lassen Rural Bus, the primary public transportation provided in Lassen County, offers a range of services. These services include Commuter Route, Fixed Route, Deviated Fixed Route, Demand Response Route, and Dial-a-Ride services. Additional Lassen Rural Bus offers services to select regional locations and/or services to connect to other regional transportation services (Reno Bus Service, Plumas County Transit Connection, Lassen Senior Services, Big Valley 50 Plus, and Eagle Lake Demand Response Route).
3.12. Land Use and Development
3.12.1. Lassen County
Table 3-9 provides a list of the Land Use designations for Lassen County as defined in the Lassen County General Plan. These designations are derived in an attempt to designate the proposed general distribution and intensity of uses within the county. Figure 3-3 presents the Land Use Map for Lassen County. Greater detailed information can be found in the Lassen County General Plan.
Table 3-9. Lassen County Land Use Designations and Building Density Land Use Designation Description Building Density
Residential
Residential Centers 1 - 7.25
Urban Residential Low 1 - 7.25; High +8
Estate Residential .2 - 1
Planned Development Residential Average: 4
Planned Development Option Average: 4
Rural Residential .05 – .33
Agricultural Residential .025 – .05
Commercial
Commercial 1 - 7.25
Business Park 1 - 7.25
Neighborhood Commercial 1 - 7.25
Highway Commercial 1 - 7.25
Industrial (General) 1 - 7.25
Industrial Park 1 - 7.25
Natural Resource
Intensive Agriculture Not to Exceed: 0.025
Extensive Agriculture Not to Exceed: 0.025
Open Space N/A
Scenic Corridor N/A
Conservation/Conservation Corridor N/A
Trail Corridor N/A
Institutional Governmental & non-governmental Wide Range
Community Profile
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-13
Figure 3-3. General Plan Land Use- Lassen County
3.12.2. City of Susanville
All land within the Susanville planning area is grouped into categories (designations). Error! R eference source not found.10 presents the Land Use designation and Error! Reference source not found.4 presents the distribution of Land Use designations within the city limits (Source: City of Susanville General Plan, Land Use Element). Both ensure a proper planning mechanism is in use for considerations of future planning and development, which allow for determining adjacent developments and acceptability of zone districts.
Community Profile
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-14
Table 3-10. City of Susanville Land Use Designations and Building Density Land Use Designations Description Building Density
Residential
Single Family 0 - 7
Duplex and Triplex 0 - 15
Multiple Family 5 - 20
Mobile Home Park 0 - 14
Commercial
Local/Neighborhood 5 - 20
Commercial Office 5 - 20
General Commercial/Shopping Center 5 - 20
Mixed Use 5 - 20
Commercial/Light Industrial N/A
Industrial Light Industry/Business Park N/A
Heavy/General N/A
Agricultural Agricultural Residential 0 - 2
Open Space Resource Conservation N/A
Parks and Recreation N/A
Public & Governmental Critical Facilities N/A
Figure 3-4. General Plan Land Use- City of Susanville
Because of regular flooding along the river, Susanville’s earliest residential area was built on the high ground now known as Uptown. Originally, the center of the town was at Main and Lassen,
Community Profile
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-15
but the development trend has been such that the commercial area has now extended eastward along Main Street about 2 miles. All new development, as well as redevelopment, or substantial improvement projects located in mapped flood zones are subject to the City of Susanville Floodplain Ordinance.
3.12.3. Susanville Indian Rancheria
The Susanville Indian Rancheria has a total acre is 1880.54. 1397.53 acres in trust land and 483.01 in fee acres that are either developed or partially developed. The land is held in seven different parcels as follows:
▪ Lower Rancheria: The Lower Rancheria is the original 30-acre land base purchased in 1923 with funds from a congressional appropriation for the procurement of land for landless and homeless California Indians and today is utilized for housing, a health care facility, education facilities, gymnasium, administrative offices, a gaming facility, and a mini-mart. In 2001 the Susanville Indian Rancheria purchased 3.21 acres adjacent to the Lower Rancheria that was put into trust in 2003 and has since been developed for 12 additional tribal housing units. SIR also purchased land off of Paul Bunyon and Chestnut with 38.01 acres. Brings a total of acres to 71.31 acres. ▪ Upper Rancheria: The Upper Rancheria is a 120-acre parcel which was appropriated to the tribe by an act of congress in 1978 with help from Congressman Bizz Johnson and is located just north of Susanville city limits. The land is used for tribal housing, a public water system, and open space. SIR also purchased 875 acres in March 2002 and acquired an additional 300 acres from BLM in 2016 to the Upper Rancheria for a total of 1295 acres to the Upper Rancheria.
▪ Ravendale: 80 acres was given to the Susanville Rancheria in 1994 through a donation.
The property is located near Buckhorn Reservoir and is undeveloped with Limited access. ▪ Eagle Lake Biological Field Station: 102.35 acres located on the southern shores of Eagle Lake. Chico State transferred the property to be maintained by the SIR. We would like to revitalize the property for the community to use. ▪ Termo: 20.1 acres were donated to SIR, and the deed is anticipated in 2025. ▪ Cradle Valley: SIR purchased the property in September 2003. 160 acres near Antelope Lake. Plans to create an outdoor culture recreation area for Native groups on the property.
This property was in the footprint of the Dixie Fire in 2022. ▪ Herlong Parcel: The Susanville Indian Rancheria acquired 72 acres from the Sierra Army Depot (SIAD) through the Base Realignment and Closure Act (BRAC) which was put into trust in 2000. The property consists of 120 housing units, many of which were in disrepair when acquired; a commercial building; and open space adjacent to a railroad track. The Susanville Indian Rancheria currently operates a housing rental program and is investigating other economic development opportunities for the property.
3.13. Future Development
Lassen County has experienced reduced population growth over the past 5 years, and it is anticipated this trend may continue over the next 5 years. All development occurring since the adopted 2019 LHMP was constructed in accordance with all local, state and federal land use,
Community Profile
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-16
building codes, zoning, and environmental requirements. Because of no growth and rigorous project review, there have been no changes to the community’s vulnerability over the last 5 years.
All future development proposed for the County, City, and the Rancheria will continue to be reviewed to ensure compliance with all relevant land use, zoning, building codes and environmental standards. Additionally, prior to incorporation of information from the updated LHMP into the relevant General Plans, each jurisdiction will leverage the LHMP during the review of future proposed development projects. In doing so, new projects, whether on vacant land or infill projects will limit and/or reduce expose of structures or population to potential hazards.
Development on Susanville Indian Rancheria parcels which are in trust, is governed by federal statute. Parcels which are located within Lassen County or City of Susanville jurisdictional boundaries are governed by the jurisdiction in which they are located.
3.13.1. Lassen County
The Lassen County population in the unincorporated area has declined; however, based on recent population trends the population is expected to remain steady or slightly decline in the next 5-year time frame. Error! Reference source not found.11 provides an overview of the available p arcels within Lassen County.
Table 3-11. Available Parcels in Lassen County
Zoning Vacant Acreage
with Infrastructure
R-1 (Single Family Residential) 912.19
R-2 (Duplex Residential) 0.58
R-3 (Duplex/Triplex Residential) 17.83
PUD (Planned Unit Development) 382.43
C-T (Town Center) 126.73
MU (Mixed Use) 87.26
Total 1,527.02
Source: 2014–2019 Lassen County Housing Element
3.13.2. City of Susanville
The City of Susanville population has increased at approximately 1-percent (1%) annually since 1990. This includes irregular growth patterns attributed to the construction of state prison facilities but does not include inmate population. Much of the City’s growth has been associated with an increased employment base in government, education, and health care. While many parcels within the city could hold additional residential capacity, there is a limited supply of residential property that is ready for construction. Growth has been limited in recent years and has decreased some over the past 5 years despite improvements in the state and national economies. Error! R eference source not found.12 provides an overview of the vacant acreage within the City and the associated planning zones. In addition to the land listed in the table there are 136 vacant infill parcels which can be developed with one dwelling per parcel.
Community Profile
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 3-17
Table 3-12. Available Parcels in City of Susanville
Zone District Vacant Acreage without Environmental/
Infrastructure Constraints
R-1 (Single Family Residential) 98.00
R-1 B-1 (Single Family Residential) 1.80
R-2 (Duplex Residential) 7.08
R-3 (Duplex/Triplex Residential) 48.40
R-3A (Duplex/Triplex Residential) 3.58
R-4 (Multifamily Residential) 45.91
MHP (Mobile Home Park) 32.77
PD (Planned Development) 172.20
Total 407.94
3.13.3. Susanville Indian Rancheria
As previously mentioned, limited growth has occurred within the Susanville Indian Rancheria over the past 5 years, and it is anticipated this trend will continue over the next 5 years. All development occurring since the adopted 2018/2019 LHMP was constructed in accordance with all relevant tribal land use, building codes, zoning, and environmental requirements. Because of the limited growth and rigorous project review over the past 5 years, there have been no changes to the community’s vulnerability.
Below are the development projects in discussion at the Susanville Indian Rancheria. As included in the project description, these project parcels may or may not be developed. If they are developed, the Susanville Indian Rancheria will review the proposed developed to ensure that any new development does not occur in hazard area and will not increase vulnerability. ▪ Upper Rancheria: In 2001, the Susanville Indian Rancheria purchased an additional 875 acres adjacent to the Upper Rancheria. The tribe plans to utilize the property for additional housing, economic development, renewable energy, and protection of cultural sites on the property. A Class-III Archaeological survey performed in conjunction with an Environmental Assessment required to put the land into trust (completed in 2004), revealed 72 sites potentially eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, many of which were petroglyph panels. Currently, there are plans to construct a new health clinic off of Spring Ridge Road.
▪ Ravendale Parcel: Susanville Indian Rancheria was donated 80 acres east of Ravendale, CA (T35N, R16E, S1/2 of the SE1/4 of Sec. 36) in 1994. Buckhorn creek bisects the NW corner of the property which has steep slopes, sagebrush and western juniper habitats, and no road access. The Susanville Indian Rancheria has been discussing a possible land transfer to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), which manages land adjacent to the property, in exchange for BLM managed lands adjacent to the Upper Rancheria and Highway 139.
▪ Cradle Valley Parcel: Susanville Indian Rancheria acquired 160 acres of forested property in Plumas County, completely surrounded by the Plumas National Forest, in 2003. The Susanville Indian Rancheria is currently developing a proposal to put this land into trust. The long-term goal for this property, executed through the Cradle Valley Indigenous Landscape Enhancement Project (CVILEP), is to return the property to presettlement conditions and develop a Cultural Retreat.
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-1
4. Capability Assessment
The purpose of this section is to capture the resources (or capabilities) available to the County, City, and Rancheria in support of mitigation. To demonstrate these resources, this section has been organized by: Personnel Resource; Mitigation Governance Resources; Technical Resources, and Financial Resources.
4.1. Personnel Resources
The following is an overview of the Personnel Resources (administrative capacities) for the County, City, and Rancheria which support emergency management, and can assist with the implementation of current and future mitigation strategies. The focus is on the County, City, and Rancheria capabilities. However, due to the extensive amount of public lands located in Lassen County, a number of federal and state agencies are included as potential planning partners in hazard mitigation activities. The following subsection includes a listing of local departments, agencies, and special districts that may have a role in developing and/or implementing mitigation strategies, programs, and/or projects.
4.1.1. Lassen County
▪ Administration Department: The Administration Department is responsible for compilation, preparation, recommendation and presentation to the Board of Supervisors of the County Preliminary and Final Budgets on a yearly basis. In addition, the Department oversees the County's Information Services Department.
▪ Agricultural Commission: The Agricultural Commission promotes Lassen County agricultural production by protecting it from injurious pests and diseases, to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of food and other products for the consumer, and to build consumer and business confidence in the marketplace through the maintenance of equity. ▪ Airports: The Airports Department is responsible for the administration, operation and maintenance of Lassen County's four airports located throughout the County. ▪ Buildings and Grounds: The Roads Department provides funding for the maintenance of County road and bridge systems to safeguard the traveling public and preserves the County's capital investment in the system.
▪ HMA Grants and Loans: The HMA Grants and Loans Division is committed to community reinvestment through the use of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) funds. The funds assist in improving the quality of life for all residents and business owners in Lassen County by providing businesses with technical assistance, homeowners the financing to complete the necessary repairs to bring a housing unit in compliance with all pertinent codes, affordable housing options, and to upgrade the infrastructure of disadvantaged rural communities. ▪ Public Health: The Public Health Emergency Preparedness Program plans response efforts to large-scale public health incidents. These emergencies could include a pandemic, anthrax attack, smallpox outbreak, earthquake, severe winter storm, and more. ▪ Office of Emergency Services: Provides for services in any extraordinary emergency situation associated with natural disasters, technological (man-made) emergencies, and war emergency operations in the Lassen Operational Area. Responsible for the policies, responsibilities and procedures required to protect the health and safety of the populace,
Capability Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-2
public and private property and the environment from the effects of natural and human caused technological emergencies and disasters. Responsible for field response, Emergency Operations Center activities, and the recovery process. ▪ Planning and Building Services: Responsible for developing the County General Plan, including the Safety Element. Develops Area Plans and Zoning Maps. Provides planning and technical assistance to residents to ensure development projects are consistent with all applicable building codes and standards. The County Building Official serves as the County Floodplain Manager.
o Planning Division- Responsible for land use planning and policy, zoning, setback requirements, and design reviews. This division presents applications to multiple bodies including the Planning Commission, Board of Supervisors, Architectural Review Committee, and others.
o Building Division- Responsible for enforcing building codes and design criteria within Lassen County, issuing related permits, identifying snow load roof requirements, and performing inspections.
o Surveyor Division- Provides services to the public and to other governmental agencies as requested. The Surveyor’s Office ensures that the review of Final Maps, Parcel Maps, Records of Survey, Lot Line Adjustments, Mergers, Certificates of Compliance, Notices of Violation, Corner Records and legal descriptions are in conformance with State and Local Ordinances and that the information provided on these documents is technically correct. The Surveyor’s Office is also responsible for maintaining Lassen County’s six digit addressing system.
o Code Enforcement Division- The primary function of the Division is to receive and respond to citizen complaints and referrals from other agencies and/or departments regarding alleged violations of applicable ordinances, codes, and regulations relating to fire, life, health, safety, blight, building, electrical, mechanical, plumbing, public nuisance, welfare, zoning, land use, and other matters of public concern. The County Code Enforcement program is complaint driven. This means that, typically, the Department does not initiate code enforcement cases. However, cases are potentially opened (without a complaint) when a “dangerous” violation is identified necessitating action without a complaint. o Environmental Health Division- The mission of Environmental Health is to protect and promote public health and environmental quality through the application of scientific principles, education and the enforcement of applicable laws and regulations. Environmental Health carries out necessary programs designed to control or prevent disease, improve the overall environment, and enhance the general welfare and health of the community. o Surface Mining and Reclamation, Williamson Act (Land Conservation Act)- Responsible for managing mining projects, including the mining reclamation process which restores the land to a stable and safe environment. Additionally, The Williamson Act provides property tax relief to private landowners of openspace or farmland in exchange for a ten-year agreement with local governments.
During this ten-year period, specific parcels of land would be restricted to open space or agricultural uses.
Capability Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-3
o Natural Resources- Responsible for Lassen County’s resource management and conservation policies. This includes resource management agencies, geologic and soil resources, water resources, vegetation, forest resources, rangeland, mineral resources, energy resources, recreation resources, air quality, and scenic resources
▪ Public Works/Roads: The Roads Department provides funding for the maintenance of County road and bridge systems to safeguard the traveling public and preserves the County's capital investment in the system.
▪ Sheriff: The Sheriff is responsible for a wide range of public safety services including managing a 911 dispatch center for both the city and county, providing search and rescue services, providing boating safety services on navigable waters, and responding to and managing emergencies within the County. The sheriff is also responsible for the County Jail.
4.1.2. City of Susanville
▪ Administration: All public buildings, parks and all other public property, including the Susanville Municipal Airport and its operation, under the jurisdiction of the City Council are under the general supervision of the City Administrator. This department also oversees the finance division.
▪ Code Enforcement: The city has established and hired staff to conduct local code enforcing of municipal and other codes.
▪ Economic Development Department: The City, in partnership with the Rancheria, has established and hired staff to for an Economic Development Department. The department will guide the City’s Economic Development strategies and programs working closely with all City staff, local governments, and community stakeholders. ▪ Fire: Provides fire, rescue and emergency services to the Susanville community on a day to basis. Conducts emergency response activities in advance of hazard events to minimize life loss and property damage. Also provides fire prevention public education information, including vegetation management. Enforces fire safety codes and regulations. ▪ Police: Provides law enforcement services for the City of Susanville. Responds to emergencies caused by natural and manmade events.
▪ Public Works: Maintains and improves the condition of the City street and alley system, keeps drainage ways open and free of debris, maintains and operates all City controlled traffic signs, and pavement markings in a safe and effective manner, provides a safe and reliable public water and natural gas system, provides a local municipal airport and implements capital improvement projects. The Public Works Department also serves as the air pollution control district.
o Planning and Building: Planning administers the General Plan, including Safety Element Updates. Reviews development plans within the City of Susanville.
Develops and enforces zoning regulations and ensures all projects meet applicable public safety codes and standards. Building reviews all local construction projects to ensure they are consistent with all applicable building codes and standards. The Building Official serves as the City’s Floodplain Manager. Parks & facilities operates, maintains and improves City owned parks and recreation facilities.
Capability Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-4
4.1.3. Susanville Indian Rancheria
▪ Tribal Business Council: The governing body of the Tribe, the Tribal Business Council, is made up of elected officials. It sets tribal policy, including land use and development strategies for all tribal lands, and approves all plans, including emergency procedures, evacuation, and hazard mitigation plans.
▪ Tribal Administrator: Responsible for implementing Council policies and programs on a day-to-day basis.
▪ Housing Authority: Develops and administers housing programs to benefit the members of the Susanville Indian Rancheria.
▪ Indian Health Care Center: Provides public health services and health care to the Susanville Indian Rancheria.
▪ Natural Resources: To assess, protect, and enhance the Tribal and environmental resources (culture, language, land, air, water) on the ancestral homelands of the tribes and bands of SIR in order maintain a healthy community and to manage for multiple land uses.
▪ Public Works: Develops, implements, and maintains infrastructure and facilities located within the Rancheria lands. The Emergency Services Specialist (ESS) resides within the Public Works Department. The ESS develops emergency plans and procedures, participates in operational area and multi-jurisdictional hazard mitigation planning efforts. ▪ Emergency Services Specialist: Provides perspective on hazards and vulnerabilities facing the Susanville Indian Rancheria. Helps identify and develop projects that will eliminate and/or reduce the risk of hazards. Ensures plans incorporate/consider hazardrelated information, and reviews projects to increase awareness of risk to hazards.
4.1.4. Other Area Organizations
▪ Local/Regional
Fire Protection Districts (i.e., Janesville Fire, Susan River, others) Firenet Lassen Joint Powers Authority
Big Valley Pest Abatement District
Community Service Districts
County Service Area #1
Herlong Public Utility District
Lassen Municipal Utility District
School Districts (i.e., Susanville, Lassen High, others) Resource Conservation Districts
▪ State
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
Division of Safety of Dams
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
California Environmental Protection Agency
Department of Fish & Wildlife
Office of Emergency Services
Highway Patrol
Capability Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-5
▪ Federal
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Environmental Protection Agency
Bureau of Land Management
Correctional Institution, Herlong
USDOT-FRA-Office of Railroad Safety
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
US Forest Service
Sierra Army Depot Fire and Emergency Services
Sierra Army Depot Police Department
4.2. Mitigation Governance
The County, City, and Rancheria have many plans, programs, and regulations/codes/ordinances that address disaster management in their respective jurisdictions. Some of them (or elements of them) directly relate to mitigation, such as the Lassen County Safety Element of the General Plan, while others focus on different aspects of disaster management such as emergency response.
Still others do not focus directly on disaster issues but have implications that are relevant to mitigation, such as plans related to spending on public facilities. As part of the LHMP planning process, each of these plans, programs, and regulations were reviewed to identify relevant information to be incorporated into the LHMP update, and to identify deficiencies which would impact proposed mitigation actions or lead to the development of new mitigation actions. The jurisdictions have the ability to expand and improve their plans, programs, and regulations but may have little control over other’s plans, programs, and regulations (i.e., NFIP). Whether they have the ability or not to expand and improve, relevant plan, program, or regulation, each was assessed for deficiencies. Recommended changes, if any, are reflected in the mitigation actions section (Section 7).
4.2.1. Plans
▪ General Plan: California State law requires local governments to prepare a Comprehensive General Plan to address community policies, objectives, and mitigation actions that will guide the growth and physical development of the jurisdiction and the distribution of future land uses, both public and private. The policies of the General Plan are intended to underline most land use decisions, zoning and specific Plans, subdivisions, and capital improvements. General Plans are made up of a series of mandatory elements (Land Use, Circulation, Housing, Conservation, Open Space, Noise, Safety, Environmental Justice, and OpenSpace) and optional elements (i.e., Health, Equity, Community Development, Water, Climate Change, and Resiliency). According to California General Plan guidelines, the goal of the Safety Element of General Plans is to reduce the potential short and long-term risk of death, injuries, property damage, and economic and social dislocation resulting from fires, floods, droughts, earthquakes, landslides, climate change, and other hazards. Other locally relevant safety issues, such as airport land use, emergency response, hazardous materials spills, and crime reduction, may also be included. Some local jurisdictions have chosen to incorporate their hazardous waste management plans into their safety elements. California law requires each county and city in the state to develop and adopt a general plan. By law, the legislative body of the county or city can amend any part of the general plan only four (4) times a year. The
Capability Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-6
Susanville Indian Rancheria prepares a Master Land Use Plan to guide development within the Rancheria.
▪ City of Susanville Community Fire Safe Plan 2006: The City of Susanville Community Fire Safe Plan was utilized as the basis for the wildfire risk and vulnerability assessment.
No changes have been made to this document since the adoption of the 2018/2019 Hazard Mitigation Plan, however, the City has adopted the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone delineated within the city local response area by Division of Forestry/CAL FIRE. ▪ Lassen County Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2017 Work Plan: This plan was developed by the Lassen County Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) Working Group to identify priority private, private-public and public agency fire mitigation projects within Lassen County. Three of the priority projects identified in the plan (Diamond Mountain, Little Valley, and Day Lassen Bench) have been funded through efforts by the Lassen County Firesafe Council and are currently in progress. ▪ CAL FIRE Lassen Modoc Unit Fire Plan: The Lassen Modoc Plumas Unit includes Lassen, Modoc and Plumas Counties and portions of Shasta and Siskiyou Counties. The Unit’s Fire Management Plan is intended to provide information to CAL FIRE personnel, various County Boards of Supervisors, Firesafe Councils and other stakeholders focused on identifying specific problem areas and solving the mutually agreed upon fire issues. ▪ Emergency Operations Plans: Lassen County, the City of Susanville, and the Susanville Indian Rancheria maintain Emergency Operations Plans which include specific response procedures for earthquake, flooding, reservoir failure, fire, and other hazards. These plans are periodically updated to be consistent with all state requirements. The County Office of Emergency Services is currently leading the update of the Lassen Operational Area Emergency Operations Plan.
▪ Evacuation Plan: Lassen County is currently developing an Evacuation Plan to systematically evacuate citizens from hazard areas.
▪ Urban Water Management Plan 2017: The City of Susanville Urban Water Management Plan is updated every five years to monitor water supply issues and mitigate drought situations.
▪ Groundwater Sustainability Plan: Lassen County serves as the Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) for Big Valley which has been designated as a medium priority groundwater basin under the Groundwater Sustainability Act. Under the Act, local GSA’s have to prepare a Groundwater Sustainability Plan for the basin. ▪ Storm Water Resource Plan: As a result of the regional flooding which occurred in January and February 2017, the Honey Lake Valley Resource Conservation District obtained funding from the State Water Board to develop the region’s first Storm Water Resource Plan.
▪ Floodplain Management Plan: Lassen County and the City of Susanville have adopted a floodplain management plan in accordance with the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) guidance. Recommendations and policies within the plan have been adopted as part of the local building codes.
▪ Capital Improvements Plan: Lassen County, the City of Susanville, and the Susanville Indian Rancheria each maintain a Capital Improvements Plans (CIP) with projects that are budgeted for at least a five-year period. Engineering mitigation projects are included within the Capital Improvements Plan. Additionally, the projects already included within the
Capability Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-7
Capital Improvements Plan are reviewed for mitigation improvements (e.g., areas prone to flooding are configured with mitigation elements, new reservoirs are reviewed to ensure they are configured with seismic flexible joints, current seismic design criteria is applied to pipeline construction, facility locations are reviewed for special hazards, etc.). ▪ Lassen County Drought Plan: The County and local stakeholders are in the process of creating and adopting a local Drought Plan for the County of Lassen in compliance with Senate Bill 552.
▪ Lassen County Hazardous Materials Area Plan (HMAP)- describes the County’s preincident planning and preparedness for hazardous materials releases. It describes the roles and responsibilities of federal, state, local, and nongovernmental agencies during a hazardous materials incident. It also describes the County’s hazardous materials incident response program, training, communications and post-incident recovery procedures. ▪ State Hazardous Materials Incident Contingency Plan (HMICP)- describes the State’s hazardous material emergency response organization; the roles and responsibilities of state agencies; the relationship of the State with the local, federal, volunteer, and private organizations and is a useful reference document
▪ Hazardous Materials Response Plan- address mutual aid, hazardous materials transportation issues, hazard analysis and coordination of incidents that crossjurisdictional boundaries within Region III. The thirteen-county Region III LEPC includes Butte, Colusa, Glen, Lassen, Modoc, Plumas, Lassen, Sierra, Siskiyou, Sutter, Tehama, Trinity and Yuba counties.
▪ Airport Compatibility Plans- The primary goal of airport land use planning is to protect the public and the people who live near the airport. This is done by examining land uses within specific airport safety zones. There are plans for all public airports in Lassen and surrounding counties.
4.2.2. Programs
▪ Lassen County Firesafe Council: The Lassen County Fire Safe Council was formed in 2001 as a 501(c)(3) corporation. Its purpose is to make communities, neighborhoods and homes within Lassen County safe from wildfires. The Council works closely with public agencies, private landowners and the communities within Lassen County to identify, review, prioritize and implement fire mitigation projects. There are currently seven communities that have been organized and recognized by the Firewise Communities USA program.
▪ Vegetation Management: Lassen County, the City of Susanville, and the Susanville Indian Rancheria conduct vegetation management (e.g., vegetation removal, burning) to mitigate potential wildfire hazards. Also, CAL FIRE Lassen Modoc Unit is conducting or assisting in multiple vegetation management treatments. ▪ Weed Abatement: In order to minimize potential wildfires, Lassen County, the City of Susanville, the Big Valley Weed Abatement and the Susanville Indian Rancheria implement weed abatement programs.
▪ National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP):
Lassen County- Lassen County participates in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). Lassen County has adopted floodplain management requirements and county staff will continue to enforce the requirements in the foreseeable future. The Building
Capability Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-8
Official is the designated floodplain manager for Lassen County. Section 12.26 of the Lassen County Code provides details on the actions the County takes for flood prevention.
Section 12.26.040 references the adoption of the NFIP minimum flood plain management criteria and the adoption of the latest Flood Insurance Map. Section 12.26.054(2)A/B provides a description of the implementation of Substantial Improvement and Substantial Damage provision. The section covers many details from general provisions to duties and responsibilities of flood plain administration that the County takes to keep in compliance.
Lassen County Planning and Building Department currently tracks all new permitting in the county to ascertain if an applicant is in a flood zone, this enables them to properly apply the Substantial Damage and Substantial Improvement regulations set forth by the NFIP. Lassen County also prohibits building in Flood Ways, highly limits building in the Flood Fringe and requires Elevation Certificates showing compliance with NFIP regulations in all SFHA's (Special Flood Hazard Areas).
City of Susanville- The City of Susanville participates in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and has adopted the NFIP minimum floodplain management criteria through Susanville Municipal Code (SMC) Chapter 15.40 – Floodplain Management Regulations, most recently updated and adopted by Ordinance No. 13-988 to maintain compliance with FEMA requirements. These regulations implement 44 CFR § 60.3 and establish the City’s standards for floodplain development, permitting, construction, elevation, floodway restrictions, subdivision requirements, and enforcement within Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs).
The City has adopted the governing Flood Insurance Study (FIS) and Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) through SMC § 15.40.070, which incorporate by reference the Flood Insurance Study dated June 6, 1985 and the associated FIRM and Flood Boundary and Floodway Maps with an effective date of September 3, 2010, as adopted by Ordinance No. 13-988.
Administration and enforcement of these regulations is assigned to the City Building Official, designated as the Floodplain Administrator under SMC § 15.40.140, who is responsible for reviewing floodplain development applications, issuing or denying permits, conducting field inspections, and ensuring compliance with NFIP requirements. Following a flood or damaging event, the Floodplain Administrator conducts onsite assessments to determine whether structures within the SFHA have incurred Substantial Damage, applying FEMA’s definition of damage equal to or exceeding 50 percent of the structure’s pre-damage market value. When a structure meets the definition of Substantial Damage— or when proposed work qualifies as Substantial Improvement—the City requires the structure to be elevated, repaired, or reconstructed to meet all applicable provisions of SMC Chapter 15.40 and NFIP standards prior to issuance of a permit, ensuring continued community compliance with NFIP floodplain management regulations.
Susanville Indian Rancheria- Susanville Indian Rancheria is not in an NFIP designated floodplain and therefore does not participate in the NFIP or have a designated floodplain manager.
Capability Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-9
▪ Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) Regulatory Program. A State law that requires locals to develop and maintain an Area Plan which describes the agency’s plan for preparing for and responding to a hazardous materials emergency. ▪ Public Information and Outreach Program: Lassen County, the City of Susanville and the Susanville Indian Rancheria maintain Public Outreach through various platforms (i.e., social media) and activities to continue to improve and enhance the program. Additionally, while used for more focused, major type of events, the jurisdictions can also access the Caltrans message boards.
▪ Neighborhood Watch: Lassen County, the City of Susanville, and the Susanville Indian Rancheria are implementing “Neighborhood Watch” programs for residents.
Neighborhood Watch is set up for the safety of the residents. The Neighborhood Watch Program is a group of people living in the same area, who want to make the neighborhood safer by working together and in conjunction with the local law enforcement to reduce crime and improve their quality of life.
▪ Dangerous Building Program/Ordinance Codified and adopted in 2017. The program is broken down into two Chapters within Title 15. Chapter 15.09 (Neglected Vacant Buildings) and Chapter 15.10 (Abatement of Dangerous Buildings and Structures) which references the California Building Code and 1997 Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings, or within the definition of "substandard building" under the provisions of the California Building Code. The purpose of this program is to require that vacant dwellings and buildings within the incorporated limits of the city of Susanville are maintained to certain minimum standards and suitable for use or habitation while allowing them to be properly secured and boarded up for a limited period time, and that dwellings and buildings which remain vacant and unoccupied for appreciable periods of time do not become public nuisances. The program (or ordinance) addresses vacant buildings and vacant boarded-up buildings that are considered to be a major cause and source of blight and safety concerns in both residential and nonresidential neighborhoods, especially when the owner of the building fails to actively maintain and manage the building to ensure that it does not become a liability to the neighborhood.
4.2.3. Regulations, Codes, Laws, Policies, & Ordinances ▪ Lassen County
Lassen County Code, Title 7: Health and Sanitation, Chapter 7.04 – Contagious Diseases
Lassen County Code, Title 9: Public Peace, Safety, and Morals, Chapter 9.16 – Fire Hazards
Lassen County Code, Title 12: Buildings and Construction, Article I – Building Code, Chapter 12.19 – Snow Load Design Standards
Lassen County Code, Title 12: Buildings and Construction, Article I – Building Code, Chapter 12.26 – Flood Damage Prevention
Lassen County Code, Title 12: Buildings and Construction, Article III – Storage of Hazardous Materials
▪ City of Susanville
Susanville Municipal Code, Title 8: Health and Safety, Chapter 8.12 – Open Burning
Capability Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-10
Susanville Municipal Code, Title 8: Health and Safety, Chapter 8.20 – Standards for Fire Protection Facilities And Water Flow
Susanville Municipal Code, Title 8: Health and Safety, Chapter 8.50 – Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone
Susanville Municipal Code, Title 8: Health and Safety, Chapter 8.28 – Weed and Rubbish Abatement
Susanville Municipal Code, Title 15: Buildings and Construction, Chapter 15.24 – International Fire Code Adopted
Susanville Municipal Code, Title 15: Buildings and Construction, Chapter 15.40 – Floodplain Management
▪ Susanville Indian Rancheria
Tribal Environmental Policy Ordinance No. 2000-003
Housing Ordinance No. 2000-002
Discharge of Pollutants into the Waters of the Susanville Indian Rancheria Ordinance No. 2003 – 001
▪ Other
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)- The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) is the codification of the general and permanent regulations published in the Federal Register by the executive departments and agencies of the federal government of the United States. CFR provides the rules and regulations for the Stafford Act which includes the FEMA Response, Recovery, and Mitigation programs. California Emergency Services Act- The California Emergency Services Act is the guiding policy document of the State of California to ensure the state is prepared to deal with threats and hazards. The document establishes authorities and presents the organizational structure (and system) to ensure the state is coordinated between its political subdivisions (Standardized Emergency Management System- SEMS).
This act also establishes the California Disaster Assistance Act- CDAA. California Building Standards Code- California Building Standards Code 2022 Edition, California Residential Code 2022 Edition, Energy Code- California Energy Code 2022 Edition and California Green Building Standards Code 2022 Edition, California Historical Building Code 2022 Edition, California existing Building Code 2022 Edition, adopted and amended by on November 5, 2022 California Plumbing Code- CPC 2022 Edition, adopted and amended by Ordinance No. 19-007 on November 5, 2022
California Mechanical Code- California Mechanical Code 2022 Edition, adopted and amended by Ordinance No. 19-008 on November 5, 2022
California Electrical Code- California Electrical Code 2022 Edition, adopted and amended by Ordinance No. 19-009 on November 5, 2022
California Fire Code- California Fire Code 2022 Edition, adopted and amended by Ordinance No. 19-010 on November 5, 2022
Senate Bill (SB) 379- In 2017, the California State Senate approved Senate Bill (SB) 379 which requires the General Plan’s Safety Element to address climate adaptation and resilience strategies. This must be done after the next revision to the Local
Capability Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-11
Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) or by January 2022 in the city/county does not have a LHMP. If the jurisdiction has an approved and adopted LHMP it shall be summarized and incorporated by reference into the Safety Element. Assembly Bill (AB) 477- In 2019, the California State Assembly approved Assembly Bill (AB) 477. AB 477 requires local jurisdictions (cities/counties) to include representatives from the access and functional needs population in the next update of the Emergency Plan. The primary focus areas include, but are not limited to, emergency communications, emergency evacuations, and emergency sheltering. Assembly Bill (AB) 2140- In 2006, the California State Assembly approved Assembly Bill (AB) 2140. AB 2140 enables the state of California to provide greater than 75% of the eligible state share if a local jurisdiction (city/county) has an approved and adopted LHMP as part of the General Plan’s Safety Element. Senate Bill (SB) 552- Passed and signed in September 2021, State and local governments will share the responsibility in preparing and acting in the case of a water shortage event (Drought Planning). The new requirements are expected to improve California’s ability to manage future droughts and help prevent catastrophic impacts on drinking water for communities vulnerable to impacts of climate change.
The bill outlines the new requirements for small water suppliers, county governments, DWR, and the State Water Board to implement more proactive drought planning and be better prepared for future water shortage events or dry years. California Health and Safety Code (H&SC), Article 1- allows peace officers to enforce local health officer orders to prevent the spread of contagious diseases within their jurisdiction. This section does not limit the authority of peace officers or public officers to enforce these orders.
California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 19, Division 2, Chapter 4, Article 3- regulations relating to fire and life safety involving the various occupancy classifications under the authority of the California State Fire Marshal.
4.3. Technical Resources
The County, City, and Rancheria have a variety of technical resources that can be used to assist with emergency management, including resources to help implement and maintain mitigation strategies. Some Technical Resources are connected to and/or can be expanded by the County’s, City’s, and Rancheria’s ability to augment personnel and fiscal resources. This allows the County, City, and Rancheria to expand existing services and/or bring in needed proficiencies/expertise or technology/equipment to assist with mitigation efforts. Below is an outline of the Technical Resources.
4.3.1. Proficiencies and Expertise
▪ Hazardous Materials Response Team- The County is a participating member of the Region III Hazardous Material Response Team (HMRT) which operates a Type II hazmat response team. This HMTRT is a multi-jurisdictional team that serves Lassen, Modoc, Lassen, Siskiyou, Tehama, and Trinity Counties. The City Susanville Fire Department also operates a Type II hazmat response team. Due to concerns created by the transport of hazardous materials through Lassen County, the California Office of Emergency Services
Capability Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-12
has provided a Hazardous Materials Response Vehicle, and a 17-member response team designed to respond to events occurring in Lassen, Plumas, and Modoc counties. Lassen County also maintains membership with the Shasta Cascade Hazardous Materials Response Team (SCHMRT); and the Sierra Army Depot maintains an agreement with City of Susanville for Hazmat response.
▪ Back-up Power Generation: Lassen County, the City of Susanville and the Susanville Indian Rancheria maintain appropriate back-up power generation at many, but not all critical facilities. Emergency power is available at the County and City Emergency Operations Centers and the Susanville Indian Rancheria Casino. ▪ Emergency Preparedness Training: Lassen County, the City of Susanville and the Susanville Indian Rancheria routinely conduct HazMat, NIMS, and SEMS training for employees, in addition to conducting exercises to simulate the response to a hazard event. ▪ Emergency Equipment Inventory: Lassen County, the City of Susanville and the Susanville Indian Rancheria maintain emergency equipment and resources to enable a timely response and repair of assets to mitigate the overall impact of hazards on operations.
4.3.2. Communications
Several alert-warning systems are available in Lassen County. To activate one or more of these systems, LCSO’s Public Safety Dispatch Center or SIFC can be contacted to activate and support these alert systems:
▪ Genasys (zonehaven)- mass notification system is a reverse call emergency notification system utilized to inform residents and business owners of local emergencies.
Notifications can be made to both landlines and wireless services. ▪ Emergency Alert System (EAS) is used when a life-threatening hazard requires immediate protective action, with participating broadcast stations and cable operators transmitting the emergency alert over their networks. EAS messages may not exceed two minutes and are designed to provide a brief, initial warning to be followed by more detailed information.
▪ National Warning System is a government-to-government warning system that connects the National Warning Center at Colorado Springs to each state and, in turn, to the designated warning points in each county.
▪ Integrated Public Alert Warning System (IPAWS) can also be sent through the Community Notification System. IPWAS works off cell towers. If the circumstances of the emergency meet criteria, an alert can be sent out for a specific area with a duration of time so if anyone drives in the specified area of the incident they will get the alert. ▪ California Health Alert Network (CAHAN) is a web-based system that can distribute public health emergency information via cell phone, email or landline. Lassen County HSSA Public Health is the designated Lassen County CAHAN Administrator. ▪ AT&T Language Line is available as a mobile application to assist the Incident Commander in communicating with affected individuals in their native language should there be no other emergency responder on-scene who can do so in person. ▪ Amateur Radio Emergency Service (ARES) operators who can provide backup two-way voice and data communications on independent systems. They may be used to
Capability Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-13
communicate between facilities and locations when conventional communications systems are inoperable or overwhelmed. Local operators are equipped to communicate on UHF (60 CM), VHF high (2 meter), and HF bands. A unique capability of HF is long distance communications without intervening repeaters or other technologies. The auxiliary communications system is activated through SIFC.
In addition to the specialty platforms, the County, City, and Rancheria also have access to social media, print media, and broadcast media (radio).
4.3.3. Technology
▪ Geographic Information Systems (GIS)- the County, City, and the Rancheria are in the process of developing GIS databases to map and evaluate natural hazards (e.g., earthquake, flooding, etc.).
4.4. Fiscal Resources
This sub section demonstrates the County’s, City’s, and Rancheria’s fiscal resources that may be leveraged to support mitigation efforts. As with most jurisdictions, County, City, and Rancheria generate annual operating budgets. The operating budgets incorporate all revenue streams and planned expenditures, providing insight into how the jurisdiction’s financial resources will be used and/or reallocated.
4.4.1. Lassen County
The County of Lassen operating budget is prepared by the Administration Department and approved by the County Board of Supervisors annually. The County of Lassen annual operating budget consists of Governmental Funds and Other Funds. The Governmental Funds include General, Special Revenue, Capital Projects, Debt Service, while the Other Funds include Enterprise, Internal Service, and Special Districts and Other Agencies. Figure 4-1 presents a summary of all funds for Fiscal Year 2023-24.
Capability Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-14
Figure 4-1. Lassen County Budget- 2023-24
Over the last five (5) years the County has not received Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) or any other funds to implement projects from the LHMP; it has used general funds to implement needed projects within the jurisdiction. The administration of the implemented projects (project management, project closeout, audits) was carried out in accordance with Lassen County policies and requirements, as well as any special fund requirements, A list of the completed projects is included in Section 7 of the LHMP.
4.4.2. City of Susanville
The City of Susanville operating budget is prepared by the Finance Department and approved by the City Council annually. The City of Susanville annual operating budget consists of a variety of funds. Figure 4-2 presents a draft summary of all funds for Fiscal Year 2024-25.
Capability Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-15
Figure 4-2. City of Susanville Draft Budget- 2024-25
Over the last five (5) years the City has not received Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) or any other funds to implement projects from the LHMP; it has used general funds to implement needed projects within the jurisdiction. The administration of the implemented projects (project management, project closeout, audits) was carried out in accordance with the City of Susanville policies and requirements, as well as any special fund requirements, A list of the completed projects is included in Section 7 of the LHMP.
4.4.3. Susanville Indian Rancheria
The Susanville Indian Rancheria operating budget is prepared by the Fiscal Department, in close coordination with all Susanville Indian Rancheria Departments; and is approved by the Tribal
Capability Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-16
Business Council annually. While operating budget records are maintained, they were not available for incorporation in the LHMP update.
With regards to Hazard Mitigation efforts, the Susanville Indian Rancheria has not received funding through FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) program. However, hazard mitigation type of work has been funded through other agencies such as the United States (US) Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The EPA funds the Natural Resources Department through its Performance Partnership Grant (PPG) General Assistance Program (GAP). In this grant, programs such as the annual Spring drive are funded to collect, dispose or recycle hazardous household waste to prevent it from entering the ground, streams and wetlands where it can pose a risk to the health and safety of living organisms and the abandoned vehicle program to collect and dispose of abandoned vehicles which eventually break down into some harmful chemicals and can leach fluids into the ground (see SIR’s Abandoned Vehicle Ordinance.
Additionally, other grants in the PPG combined award are the CWA 106 and 319 and these grants pay for programs to protect waterways and wetlands from contaminants as well as build infrastructure to reduce runoff from parking lot at the Casino to keep it out of Barry Creek.
Non-federal funding was also received from the Tribal Nations Grant Fund (TNGF) – funds projects to Tribal Governments to mitigate the hazard of power outages to the community.
Through several Equal Distribution Grants funded by the California Gaming Commission’s Tribal Nations Grant Fund, the Susanville Indian Rancheria has: installed a generator at the tribal building; purchased remote CRDs to utilize in various locations on tribal lands and remote places to have back up power and wireless cell phone service during emergency events where power and cell phone service is disrupted so that they can take care of themselves, families and nearby neighbors.
Through the I.H.S. Small Ambulatory Program (SAP) grant, the SIR is moving forward in the process of constructing a new clinic to serve Native and non-natives in the region whose health has been affected by hazardous environmental conditions. In the absence of other grants, the SIR has funded emergency management supplies and equipment.
Within the last decade, the Susanville Indian Rancheria has received several CalOES Emergency HSGP grants. They have been utilized for backup power purposes, to hire an Emergency Coordinator, to develop response plans, and offer CERT training. With access to these funds, the Susanville Indian Rancheria plans to grow the SIR’s Emergency Management program to be able to explore some of these other programs.
Future potential sources of funding are aligned with the Natural Resources Department’s three (3) plans all addressing climate change: Climate Change Vulnerability and Assessment Plan, Climate Change Adaption Plan, Climate Change Implementation Plan and Forest Woodland Management Plan. Many opportunities exist within EPA, FEMA, USDA. DOE, BIA, BLM, and CalFIRE. the Susanville Indian Rancheria is currently investigating grants within these agencies to address the top priority threat of wildfires through fuel reduction activities that prevent the fires we have experienced recently.
The Susanville Indian Rancheria Continuity of Operations Plan (COOP) has policies and procedures in support of closing out all grants. Also, the Susanville Indian Rancheria financial
Capability Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-17
policies and procedures have all of the necessary internal controls in place with fiscal policy in compliance with all applicable Federal statutes and regulations and will amend its plan whenever necessary to reflect changes in Tribal or Federal laws and statutes.
The closeout procedures required by Uniform Guidance, 2 C.F.R. § 200 are followed with the completion of projects funded with federal, state, local and tribal grants. Under this closeout requirement for 2 C.F.R. § 200. 344, recipients must submit no later than 120 calendar days after the end of the period of performance, all financial, performance and other reports as required by the terms and conditions of the award. This ensures that grant expenditures are in sync with the stated deliverables for the granting agency to determine that the project was completed as stated.
Below is a list of the current federal, tribal, and private funding to implement mitigation activities:
• BIA Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) grants ( 2024) for the Upper Rancheria area. The first round of WUI work has been completed for fuel reduction, fire breaks that would impact the cultural areas, homes and future development areas on 995 acres of Tribal trust property where pile burning, thinning, mowing and hand piling was used to mitigate risks posed by fires and drought. A new grant proposal is pending to complete work in 2025 • EPA CWA 106- (annual grant as part of the EPA Performance Partnership Project). This grant award includes improvements and follow-up on the bioretention structure that keeps pollution from runoff at casino parking lot and prevents them from entering Barry Creek and mitigates the risk of Barry Creek flooding on Paul Bunyan Road and at the Chesnut St. intersection
• EPA CWA 312- (2023/2024) as part of the EPA Performance Partnership Project) This grant award included post-Dixie fire mitigation as well as non-source pollution nutrient overload in Clark Creek from soil erosion.
• Gaming Commission’s Tribal Nations Grant Fund (TNGF) awarded in 2024 to mitigate outages caused by fire and climate events such as a generator for the Tribal offices so that critical command and control can continue during Wildfires that have caused power outages and Compactible Rapid Deployment Units for backup power and Internet for crews working in remote field locations in critical fuel reduction work.
4.5. Ability to Expand On and Improve Capabilities and Resources
4.5.1. Personnel Resources
There are four (4) primary ways the County, City, and Rancheria can expand and/or improve personnel resources: deployment or reassignment of the County, City, and Rancheria workforce, through Contractor Employees, through Volunteer Workers; Mutual Aid Support; and Partnerships. Depending on the needs of the project and/or action, the County, City, and Rancheria can bring in additional staff to support mitigation efforts. This could include bringing in a project manager or support staff to implement a project or program or to help with public outreach. The County, City, and Rancheria could also establish MOUs for mutual aid and/or partnership to provide a unique service or support staff. The County, City, and Rancheria also has very active volunteer groups that can be utilized for selected roles and responsibilities.
4.5.2. Mitigation Governance
While the County, City, and Rancheria do have some influence with other Mitigation Governance Resources (i.e., federal, state, adjacent counties), it only has the ability to create, revise, and remove governance under its authority. Departments within the County, City, and Rancheria
Capability Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-18
regularly review governance and make recommendations for any necessary changes (i.e., expansion, revision, creation, elimination) based on needs or lessons learned after disasters in its or surrounding/similar communities. Additionally, during the development of new mitigation actions, each mitigation governance was reviewed and evaluated. Any recommended (or needed) changes, including the creation of and/or the removal of mitigation governance was captured under section 7.
4.5.3. Technical Resources
The County, City, and Rancheria have the ability (and regularly assesses) its Technical Resources to identify needs, determine necessary resources, and recommend necessary actions in support of efforts. The Technical Resources are usually connected to the County, City, and Rancheria ability to augment or resign personnel outlined under Section 4.1 or to allocate or raise funding outlined under Section 4.4 but can also include the expanding and/or revising the use of proficiencies/expertise, technology, and communication technologies Section 4.3; including outreach programs and social media platforms to assist with mitigation efforts. Actions could include increasing educational programs to bring hazard awareness to students and vulnerable populations, developing and offering traveling hazard awareness campaigns at street fairs and farmers markets, or utilizing its social media platforms to disseminate or expand on the amount of hazard and mitigation information shared with the public.
4.5.4. Fiscal Resources
The County, City, and Rancheria have several options they can explore if they decide not to utilize funds used as part of their operating budget to implement additional emergency management efforts and/or mitigation strategies. The options to augment operating budget funds include Grants, Bonds, Loans, Fees, and Assessments. The method most likely utilized will be applying for Grants. Because the County, City, and Rancheria are committed to mitigation, they intend to seek grant funding opportunities to assist with implementation of mitigation efforts. The County, City, and Rancheria will use their standard procedures for applying for HMA Grants, which includes seeking Board/ Council approval. The HMA Grants could be used for the implementation of projects and/or to pay staff to assist with the mitigation effort. The other funding options, while available, will only be used after careful consideration and deliberation. In some instances, this may also include seeking public approval. The County, City, and Rancheria are considering the following funding sources to help implement mitigation projects.
4.5.4.1 Federal Funding Sources
▪ Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) Grant Program: Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) is a FEMA program administered by Cal OES and was created when the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 amended the Stafford Act to provide a funding mechanism that is not dependent on a presidential disaster declaration.
▪ Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP): Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) is authorized under Section 404 of the Stafford Act. The program provides HMA Grants to states and local governments to implement long-term hazard mitigation measures after a major disaster declaration. These funds are only available in states following a presidential disaster declaration. Eligible applicants include state and local governments, Native
Capability Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-19
American tribes or other tribal organizations, and certain private non-profit organizations.
Eligible projects must be proven to be cost-effective through a benefit /cost analysis. ▪ Fire Protection & Safety (FP&S) Grant Program: The Fire Protection & Safety (FP&S) Grant Program is administered by FEMA and supports projects that enhance the safety of the public and firefighters from fire and related hazards. The primary goal is to target highrisk populations, firefighter safety and mitigate high incidences of death and injury.
Examples of the types of projects supported by FP&S include fire prevention and public safety education campaigns, juvenile fire setter interventions, media campaigns, and arson prevention and awareness programs.
▪ Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) Grant Program: FEMA provides funding to assist States and communities implement measures that reduce or eliminate the long-term risk of flood damage to buildings, manufactured homes, and other structures insurable under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
▪ Post-Fire Hazard Mitigation Grant: Under the Fire Mitigation Assistance Grant (FMAG) program, FEMA offers mitigation grants to help reduce and/or eliminate potential impacts after a fire. These funds are generally used to address secondary hazards that leave areas prone to floods, erosion, and mudflows.
▪ Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) Grant Program: The Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) Grant Program is designed to set a strategic direction for the enhancement of regional response capability and capacity. Through Federal grant funding, UASI is tasked to reduce area vulnerability by strengthening the cycle of response and by ensuring that potential targets are identified, assessed and protected. ▪ Hazardous Materials Emergency Planning (HMEP) Grant Program: The Hazardous Materials Emergency Planning (HMEP) Grant Program is administered by the US Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration and provides financial and technical assistance as well as national direction and guidance to enhance State, Territorial, Tribal, and local hazardous materials emergency planning and training.
▪ Emergency Operations Center (EOC) Grant Program: Administered by FEMA and is intended to improve emergency management and preparedness capabilities by supporting flexible, sustainable, secure, and interoperable Emergency Operations Center (EOC) with a focus on addressing identified deficiencies and needs. ▪ Emergency Management Performance Grant (EMPG) Program: States have the opportunity to use Emergency Management Performance Grant (EMPG) funds to further strengthen their ability to support emergency management mission areas while simultaneously addressing issues of national concern as identified in the National Priorities of the National Preparedness Guidelines.
▪ Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA): Programs administered through the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) include social services, natural resources management on trust lands, economic development programs, housing improvements, fire management, trail maintenance, disaster relief, replacement and repair of schools, repair and maintenance of roads and bridges, and the repair of structural deficiencies on high hazard dams. ▪ Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) can assist Tribal Agencies with environmental concerns, environmental review of proposed actions, and Clean Water Act HMA Grants.
Capability Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 4-20
▪ United States Forest Service (USFS): United States Forest Service (USFS) by the Lassen County Resource Advisory Committee (RAC). Projects recommended by the RAC typically include trails reconstruction and maintenance, fish passage and waterway restoration, community wildfire fuels reduction efforts, conservation education programs, and noxious weed reduction efforts. Though projects may occur on both National Forest System and private lands in Lassen County, All RAC projects must show a clear benefit to the public lands.
4.5.4.2 State Funding Sources
▪ Fire Safe California Grants Clearinghouse: Various grant opportunities lay within this grant program to improve California’s community wildfire preparedness. The California Fire Safe Council (FSC) in cooperation with its fellow member of the California Fire Alliance accomplishes its mission, to preserve and enhance California’s manmade and natural resources, through public education programs and by funding community fire safety projects.
▪ Infrastructure State Revolving Fund: Provides low-cost financing for some infrastructure projects.
▪ Proposition 50 Funds: A variety of water projects can be financed through this program which is administered by the Water Resources Control Board. ▪ Clean Water State Revolving Fund: Provides low-interest loans related to water treatment projects.
4.5.4.3 Local Funding Sources
▪ Capital Improvement Funds: These funds may be used to support hazard mitigation projects and are provided through the annual budgeting process to support projects included in the community’s 5-Year Capital Improvement Plan. ▪ Special Assessments: Local governments can also raise funds for mitigation projects through special assessments which can be adopted through the local voting process. ▪ Community Development Block Grants: These funds may be used for mitigation projects related to housing, economic development, public works, community facilities and public service activities serving lower income residents. Although the funds are administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, they are considered local funds once they are received and thereby are eligible to provide the 25 percent local match required for the receipt of federal grant programs.
5. Hazard/Threat Assessment
5.1. Overview
The purpose of this section is to review, validate, and/or update the identified and profiled hazards and threats in the current LHMP. The intent is to confirm and update the list and determine if the information is current and accurate. The importance of this is to ensure that all hazards and threats are being considered and decisions are based on the most up-to-date information. Another purpose of this section is to screen the hazards and threats. The screening of the hazards/threats (ranking and prioritizing) will provide the jurisdictions with a better understanding of the significance of each hazard/threat within its community. During the review and update, the Planning Team addressed and discussed the following questions:
▪ Is this hazard/threat still present and significant within the jurisdiction? ▪ Has the potential for the hazard/threat changed including the severity and/or frequency? As part of process, the Planning Team leveraged other planning efforts and documents, including the State of California Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan, the Lassen County General Plan, the City of Susanville General Plan, and other documents containing updated information and best practices for hazards (i.e. FEMA, USGS, NOAA, USC). Additionally, as previously mentioned, because Lassen County is more rural than most and there is significant coordination between the County, City, and Rancheria, it was determined to be beneficial to discuss the Hazards and Threats County-wide.
5.2. Hazard/Threat Identification
Based on the review of the current LHMP, incorporating information from other documents (i.e., the California State Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan, local General Plans), and utilizing local experience and knowledge, the Planning Team identified the following hazards and threats as being relevant to the County, City, and Rancheria (Table 5-1). Over the past 5 years, the County, City, and Rancheria has determined that because of the dynamics (challenges and opportunities) and exceptional cooperation within the county that it is best to assess and address all hazards and threats at a county-level; not by individual jurisdiction.
No new hazards or threats were identified and/or removed from the previous LHMP. However, a few of the hazards and threats were renamed to better reflect the hazards and/or threat in the County, City and Rancheria.
Table 5-1. Relevant Hazards and Threats
▪ Agricultural Pests/Disease ▪ Hazardous Materials Release ▪ Aircraft Accident ▪ Infectious Disease
▪ Avalanche ▪ Landslide/Other Earth Movement
▪ Civil Disturbance ▪ Natural Gas Pipeline/Storage Accident ▪ Dam/Reservoir Failure ▪ Other Lifeline Infrastructure Accident ▪ Drought and Water Shortage ▪ Severe Weather and Storms ▪ Earthquake ▪ Technology Disruption
▪ Energy Disruption ▪ Terrorism
▪ Extreme Temperature ▪ Volcano
▪ Flooding and Levee Failure ▪ Wildfire
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-2
5.3. Hazard/Threat Screening and Prioritization
The intent of screening hazards/threats is to help prioritize which hazards/threats create the greatest concern in the community. The County, City, and Rancheria applied the same approach used in the 2019 LHMP to update the LHMP. A summary of the process and the results of the hazard/threat ranking are below:
5.3.1. Ranking Tool Design
The ranking tool prioritizes hazards/threats based on two (2) separate factors:
▪ Probability of the hazard affecting the community
▪ Impacts of the hazard on the community
The Planning Team utilized a non-numerical ranking system that was implemented within other LHMPs. This process consists of generating a qualitative ranking, High, Medium, or Low rating for: 1) Probability; and, 2) Impact from each hazard/threat. As part of this process, the following criteria (definitions) were applied:
▪ Probability
High: (Highly Likely/Likely) An event will most likely happen within five (5) years (greater than 75% chance). There may or may not have been historic occurrences of the hazard in the community or region, but experts feel that it is likely that the hazard will occur in the community. Citizens feel that there is a likelihood of an occurrence.
Medium: (Possible) An event may happen within five (5) years (between 30% and 75% chance). There may or may not have been a historic occurrence of the hazard in the community or region, but experts feel that it is possible that the hazard could occur in the community. Citizens may feel that there is a likelihood of an occurrence.
Low: (Unlikely) An event will most likely not happen within five (5) years (less than 30% chance). There have been no historical occurrences of the hazard in the community or region and both experts and citizens agree that it is highly unlikely that the hazard will occur in the community.
▪ Impact
High: (Catastrophic/Critical) Both experts and citizens feel that the consequences will be significant in terms of building damage, loss of life, and disruption to the economy; widespread geographic extent and/or higher than average magnitude.
Medium: (Limited, but not insignificant) Consequences are thought to be considerable in terms of building damage, loss of life, and disruption to the economy; extended geographic extent and/or average magnitude.
Low: (Negligible) Consequences are thought to be minimal in terms of building damage, loss of life, and disruption to the economy; may be limited in geographic extent and/or lower than average magnitude.
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-3
For consistency, the County, City, and Rancheria agreed to the following prioritization scheme for hazards/threats (Table 5-2). The shading of the matrix boxes indicates the priority level: Red = Tier 1; Yellow = Tier 2; and Green = Tier 3.
Table 5-2. Hazard Prioritization Template
High
Impact
Medium
Impact
Low
Impact
High
Probability
Medium
Probability
Low
Probability
5.3.2. Hazard/Threat Prioritization
Based on the revised list of hazards and threats utilizing the ranking approach indicated above, the County, City, and Rancheria screened the relevant hazards/threats. The following table (Table 5-3) presents the results of the screening and ranking of each relevant hazard/threat.
Table 5-3. Hazard/Threat Prioritization Results
Agricultural Pests/Disease
Aircraft Accident
Avalanche
Civil Disturbance
Dam/Reservoir Failure
Drought and Water Shortage
Earthquake
Energy Disruption
Extreme Temperature
Flooding and Levee Failure
Hazardous Materials Release
Infectious Disease
Landslide/Other Earth Movement
Natural Gas Pipeline/Storage Accident
Other Lifeline Infrastructure Accident
Severe Weather and Storms
Technology Disruption
Terrorism
Volcano
Wildfire
Based on this approach, there are eight (8) priority hazards/threats- hazards categorized as “Tier 1” or Red. The eight (8) priority hazards/threats include: Cybersecurity Threat, Drought and Water Shortage, Extreme Temperature, Flood and Levee Failure, Hazardous Materials Release, Other Pipeline/Storage Accident, Severe Weather and Storms, and Wildfire.
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-4
5.4. Hazard/Threat Profiles
The information provided is intended to be an overview of each of the relevant hazards/threats, which includes a summary of the prioritization, brief description of the hazard/threat, the location and extent of potential risk, previous occurrences (history), the probability of future events, and climate considerations. More detailed information may be found in the State of California MultiHazard Mitigation Plan, the Lassen County General Plan, the City of Susanville General Plan, and other documents (i.e., local, state, federal and academic publications discussing specific hazards).
5.4.1. Agricultural Pests/Disease
5.4.1.1 Prioritization
▪ Probability- MEDIUM
▪ Impact- MEDIUM
5.4.1.2 Description
Agricultural pests and disease occur when an undesirable organism inhabits an area in a manner that causes serious harm to agriculture crops, livestock or poultry, and wild land vegetation or animals. Countless insects and diseases live on, in, and around plants and animals in all environments. Most are harmless, while some can cause significant damage and loss. Under some conditions, insects and diseases that have been relatively harmless can become hazardous. For example, severe drought conditions can weaken trees and make them more susceptible to destruction from insect attacks than under normal conditions. Another element under this threat/hazard in the county is predators. While not a pest or disease, there are several animals that can cause serious harm livestock. Wolves have been known to attack and kill livestock in the county.
5.4.1.3 History
Agricultural pests in Lassen County include both insect pests and noxious weeds. Given the arid environment of the agricultural lands in Lassen County, the predominant commodity is field crops which include hay, wheat, straw, and pasture land, and account for over half the agriculture production value in the county. Scotch thistle, yellow starthistle and puncturevine are the most common noxious weeds that can impact these crops. Insect pests which are known to prey on field crops include the mormon cricket and locusts.
The Mormon cricket is a short-winged katydid which is closely related to grasshoppers. The name originated in 1848 when crickets invaded crops of Mormon settlers in the Salt Lake area. Mormon crickets can create havoc and cause economic losses, as well as creating a greater amount of destruction when accompanied by a drought. Unfortunately, there are no known predators that feed specifically on Mormon crickets.
Seed, fruit, vegetable and nursery crops account for approximately fifteen percent (15%) of the county’s agricultural production value. They may be susceptible to mediterranean fruit fly, oriental fruit fly, gypsy moth, glassy-winged sharpshooter, asian citrus psyllid, and light-brown apple moth.
According to the most recent map published by the United States Department of Agriculture in
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-5
2011, the Africanized honey bee had not spread into California counties farther north than the central valley.
To date, there have been no known state or federal declarations for this type of event in the County.
5.4.1.4 Location and Extent
The California Land Conservation Act of 1965, commonly referred to as the Williamson Act, enables local governments to enter into contracts with private landowners for the purpose of restricting specific parcels of land to agricultural or related open space use. In return, landowners receive property tax assessments which are much lower than normal because they are based upon farming and open space uses as opposed to full market value.
State funding was provided in 1971 by the Open Space Subvention Act, which created a formula for allocating annual payments to local governments based on acreage enrolled in the Williamson Act Program. Subvention payments were made through FY 2009 but have been suspended in more recent years due to revenue shortfalls.
Error! Reference source not found. and Figure 5-2 shows land that, under the Williamson Act, has been zoned as agricultural, open space, or recreational in Lassen County. These lands are susceptible to agricultural pests and diseases.
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-6
Figure 5-1. Land Conservation Act Maps- Lassen County, north segment Source: California Department of Conservation
Figure 5-2. Land Conservation Act Maps- Lassen County, south segment Source: California Department of Conservation
5.4.1.5 Probability of Occurrence
Due to its interaction with the global economy, its mild Mediterranean climate, and its diversified agricultural and native landscape, Lassen County currently experiences and will continue to
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-7
experience periodic losses due to agricultural pests and diseases. According to the Planning Team’s assessment of this hazard/threat, there is a Medium probability of occurrence; see subsection 1 under this hazard/event (Prioritization). A Medium hazard/threat event was determined to equate to between 30% and 75% chance of occurring within five (5) years.
5.4.1.6 Climate Consideration
California farmers contend with a wide range of crop‐damaging pests and pathogens. Continued climate change is likely to alter the abundance and types of many pests, lengthen pests’ breeding season, and increase pathogen growth rates. For example, the pink bollworm, a common pest of cotton crops, is currently a problem only in southern desert valleys because it cannot survive winter frosts elsewhere in the state. However, if winter temperatures rise 3 to 4.5°F, the pink bollworm’s range would likely expand northward, which could lead to substantial economic and ecological consequences for the state.
Temperature is not the only climatic influence on pests. For example, some insects are unable to cope in extreme drought, while others cannot survive in extremely wet conditions. Furthermore, while warming speeds up the lifecycles of many insects, suggesting that pest problems could increase, some insects may grow more slowly as elevated carbon dioxide levels decrease the protein content of the leaves on which they feed (California Climate Change Center 2006).
5.4.2. Aircraft Accident
5.4.2.1 Prioritization
▪ Probability- LOW
▪ Impact- HIGH
5.4.2.2 Description
The industry standard for defining Aircraft Accidents include both accidents that occur “in-flight” and those that occur “on ground”; and definitions delineate those that cause death and injuries and those that cause substantial damage to the aircraft. For this LHMP, the Planning Team is defining Aircraft Accident as an occurrence associated with in- flight accidents only.
5.4.2.3 Location and Extent
As described under Section 3- Transportation, the County has seven (7) aviation facilities:
▪ Susanville Municipal Airport (SVE)- SVE serves general aviation and emergency services use, with an asphalt runway of 2,180 feet and two helipads ▪ Southard Field (Bieber)- with a runway of 2,980 feet
▪ Herlong Airport- with a runway of 3,269 feet
▪ Ravendale Airport- with a runway of 2,920 feet
▪ Spaulding Airport- with a runway of 4,600 feet
▪ Amedee Airport- Amedee Airport is near Herlong and has a 10,000-foot runway operated by the U.S. Army and requires prior permission before use. ▪ Banner Lassen Medical Center- Banner Lassen Medical Center operates a private 86 by 50-foot concrete helipad in Susanville.
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-8
5.4.2.4 History
There is not an extensive history of aircraft accidents in Lassen County, but they have occurred.
The most recent incident occurred in August of 2020, when a small private aircraft (Piper PA-14 Family Cruiser) crashed shortly after taking off from the Susanville Municipal Airport (SVE) at about 1:40 pm. Both passengers aboard the aircraft were fatally injured. To date, there have been no known state or federal declarations for this type of event in the County.
5.4.2.5 Probability of Occurrence
The probability of an aircraft incident occurring in the County exists due to several airports in the County and aircraft flight patterns over the County. While many airports have Airport Environs Land Use Compatibility Plans, these plans usually only identify safety zones that require land use restrictions to minimize potential impacts. While these efforts can assist in reducing impacts on the ground, they usually do not address impacts associated with aircraft flying overhead under normal flight conditions. The risk to the County associated with these types of incidents is similar to other parts of rural California. According to the Planning Team’s assessment of this hazard/threat, there is a Low probability of occurrence; see subsection 1 under this hazard/event (Prioritization). A Low hazard/threat event was determined to equate to (less than 30% chance of occurring within five (5) years.
5.4.2.6 Climate Consideration
While there are many devices that monitor and/or track weather conditions, it is expected that changing conditions are going to impact air travel. From the simplest of impacts from temperatures altering takeoffs and landing, to increase in rains and winds altering flight patterns, change in our environment could increase the likelihood of an aircraft incident.
5.4.3. Avalanche
5.4.3.1 Prioritization
▪ Probability- LOW
▪ Impact- Medium
5.4.3.2 Description
An avalanche is a rapid flow of snow down a slope, from either natural triggers or human activity.
Typically occurring in mountainous terrain, an avalanche can mix air and water with the descending snow. Powerful avalanches have the capability to entrain ice, rocks, trees, and other material on the slope; however, avalanches are always initiated in snow and are primarily composed of flowing snow. In mountainous terrain avalanches are among the most serious objective hazards to life and property, with their destructive capability resulting from their potential to carry an enormous mass of snow rapidly over large distances.
5.4.3.3 Location and Extent
Avalanches are classified by their morphological characteristics and are rated by either their destructive potential (force), or the mass (size) of the downward flowing snow. Some of the morphological characteristics used to classify avalanches include the type of snow involved, the nature of the failure, the sliding surface, the propagation mechanism of the failure, the trigger of
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-9
the avalanche, and the slope angle, direction, and elevation. Avalanche size, mass, and destructive potential are rated according to the following table (Table 5-4):
Table 5-4. Avalanche Classification System
Size Relative to Path Destructive Force
R1 Very Small D1 Sluff or snow that slides less than 50m (150') of slope distance R2 Small D2 Small, relative to path
R3 Medium D3 Medium, relative to path
R4 Large D4 Large, relative to path
R5 Maximum D5 Major or maximum, relative to path
Source: University Corporation for Atmospheric Research To help reduce the probability of avalanches, an Avalanche Warning System has been developed.
The purpose of the warning system is to both educate the public of the potential risk but to also ensure the public is taking appropriate actions to reduce the chance of triggering an avalanche and that they are prepared in the event of an occurrence (Table 5-5).
Table 5-5. Avalanche Danger Warning System
Probability and
Trigger
Degree and Distribution
of Danger
Recommended Action
in Back Country
Low
Natural avalanches very unlikely.
Human triggered avalanches unlikely.
Generally stable snow. Isolated areas of
instability
Travel is generally safe. Normal
caution advised
Moderate
Natural avalanches unlikely. Human
triggered avalanches possible. Unstable
slabs possible on steep terrain
Use caution in steeper terrain
Considerable
Natural avalanches possible. Human
triggered avalanches probable.
Unstable slabs probable on steep
terrain
Be increasingly cautious in steeper
terrain
High
Natural and human triggered
avalanches likely. Unstable slabs likely
on a variety of aspects and slope angles
Travel in avalanche terrain is not
recommended. Safest travel on
windward ridges of lower angle slopes
without steeper terrain above
Extreme
Widespread natural or human
triggered avalanches certain.
Extremely unstable slabs certain on
most aspects and slope angles. Large
destructive avalanches possible
Travel in avalanche terrain should be
avoided and travel confined to low
angle terrain well away from
avalanche path run-outs
Source: Lassen County
The City of Susanville and the Susanville Indian Rancheria are located in relatively flat areas within Lassen County and are therefore not at risk for avalanche hazards; however, other areas within Lassen County that are in mountainous terrain with snow pack are susceptible to periodic avalanches. This includes the higher elevations of the western mountainous regions of the County including the Diamond Mountains and areas within Lassen National Park. These areas are
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-10
generally owned by State or Federal agencies and are remote with no development and access typically limited to dirt roads. Private lands under County jurisdiction are very sparsely developed if developed at all.
5.4.3.4 History
Documented past occurrences of avalanches as they relate to impacts on the County, City, and the Rancheria are not available. To date, there have been no known state or federal declarations for this type of event in the County.
5.4.3.5 Probability of Occurrence
While no specific property damage or loss of life have been recorded within the County, the potential exists that an avalanche will impact the County in the higher elevations of the western mountainous regions of the County including the Diamond Mountains and areas within Lassen National Park. Because avalanches are caused by natural and human triggers, there is always a probability of occurrence if the snow pack is at significant levels. However, because of modern technology and advanced communication systems, the Planning Team’s assessment of this hazard/threat there a low probability (less than 30%) of experiencing an event with loss of life over the next five (5) years.
5.4.3.6 Climate Consideration
Avalanches are caused by an external stress on the snow pack; they are not random or spontaneous events. Natural triggers of avalanches include additional precipitation, radiative and convective heating, rock fall, ice fall, and other sudden impacts; however, even a snow pack held at a constant temperature, pressure, and humidity will evolve over time and develop stresses, often from the downslope creep of the snow pack. These are all factors that may be impacted by climate change. The effect could include more frequent and larger events.
5.4.4. Civil Disturbance
5.4.4.1 Prioritization
▪ Probability- LOW
▪ Impact- LOW
5.4.4.2 Description
Civil Disturbance is a term generally used to describe disorderly conduct or a breakdown of orderly society by a group of people. Civil Disturbance can range from a protest against major sociopolitical problems to riots.
5.4.4.3 Location and Extent
Civil Disturbance can occur in any part of the County. However, it is generally located within larger, more concentrated, commercial areas. Civil Disturbance events can occur any time of the year and can last a few hours or in some cases a few days/weeks.
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-11
Some Civil Disturbance events can occur without warning, while other times there is limited advance warning. There is no universal or common scale to measure levels of Civil Disturbance.
Most Civil Disturbance is generally defined by types of disturbance.
5.4.4.4 History
No significant historical or known state or federal declarations for this type of event in the County. have been reported to date.
5.4.4.5 Probability of Occurrence
There are no studies that predict the probability of civil disturbance occurrences. However, based on its rural environments, the Planning Team’s assessment of this hazard/threat determined there is a low probability (less than 30%) chance of experiencing an event over the next five (5) years.
5.4.4.6 Climate Consideration
While there is no direct linkage between climate change and civil disturbances, there could be indirect linkages. As climate change impacts are either felt or perceived to be felt it could ignite passions within people to demonstrate against possible causes or enablers.
5.4.5. Dam/Reservoir Failure
5.4.5.1 Prioritization
▪ Probability- MEDIUM
▪ Impact- MEDIUM
5.4.5.2 Description
Because of California’s seasonal and climatic conditions, water storage is critical. Dams and reservoirs help store water necessary for agriculture, hydroelectric power, recreational activities, environmental protection, and a stable drinking water supply. They are also critical tools in flood and debris control. Based on the function, dams can be classified as: storage dams, diversion dams, detention dams, debris dams, or coffer dams. In addition to these functional classifications there are several types of dam constructions:
▪ Gravity Dams—concrete, rubber masonry
▪ Embankment Dams—earth or rock
▪ Arch/Multiple Arch Dams—concrete
▪ Buttress Dams—concrete, timber, steel
Along with their many benefits, dams and reservoirs present formidable consequences if not properly designed, built, and maintained. Failures to dams and reservoir are generally due to old age, poor design/construction, lack of maintenance, structural damage, improper siting, landslides flowing into a reservoir, or terrorist actions. Structural damage is often a result of a flood, erosion, or earthquake. A catastrophic dam/reservoir failure could inundate the area downstream. The degree of flood impact is dependent upon topography, vegetation, duration and intensity of rainfall with consequent storm water runoff. The force of the water is large enough to carry boulders, trees, automobiles, and even houses along a destructive path downstream.
Another factor in dam/reservoir failures is heavy or increased precipitation, especially in very short
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-12
periods of time. This increase in rainfall can crest dams, weaken structures, and erode supports.
The potential for casualties, environmental damage, and economic loss is great. Damage to electric generating facilities and transmission lines could impact life support systems in communities outside the immediate hazard area.
5.4.5.3 History
Lassen County has numerous reservoirs and dams; however, historically there have only been minor impacts associated with washout or overflow impacting Lassen County and City of Susanville. Furthermore, the Susanville Indian Rancheria is geographically located such that impacts from reservoirs or dams are not expected to affect the region. The State of California and the federal government have a rigorous Dam Safety Program. This is a proactive program that ensures proper planning in the event of failure but also sets standards for dam design and maintenance. Because of this, many potential issues have been addressed and/or resolved. To date, there have been no known state or federal declarations for this type of event in the County.
5.4.5.4 Location and Extent
There are forty-five (45) dams in Lassen County, with a total storage capacity of 162,000-acre feet (Table 5-6). Only four (4) of these dams have a storage capacity of 10,000-acre feet or greater. These dams range in purpose from water storage to flood control. Most dams in this sparsely populated county are removed from the population clusters of the county. Many of the dams are privately owned and support agriculture and ranching activities. The State of California has created Dam Inundation Zone maps for some dams within the state. The maps depict areas that would be inundated should a dam fail catastrophically. Dam Inundation Zone maps have been prepared for seven (7) dams in or adjacent to the county (Figure 5-3). These included Rains Creek (high), Sworinger (high), Collet Addition (significant), Coyote Flat (significant), Red Rock #1 (high), Caribou Lake (significant), and Indian Ole (high). Other dams of concern which have not been mapped include Hog Flat, and McCoy Flat.
Table 5-6. Dams and Reservoirs in Lassen County
Name Date Type Capacity
(acre ft.)
1 Albaugh No 1 1953 Earth 335
2 Albaugh No 2 1966 Earth 270
3 Antelope 1918 Earth 1,500
4 Beaver Creek 1978 Earth 214
5 Branham Flat 1880 Earth 1,200
6 Buckhorn 1904 Earth 2,000
7 California Corrections Center 1980 Earth 280
8 California Corrections Center II 1995 Earth 368
9 Caribou Lake 1928 Earth 460
10 Chace Valley 1955 Earth 92
11 Collett Addition 1991 Earth and Rock 7,800
12 Collett Afterbay 1991 Earth 300
13 Coon Camp 1900 Earth 548
14 Coyote Flat 1928 Earth 5,250
15 Cramer Wood Ranch 1910 Earth 3,000
16 Elkins And Lane 1953 Earth 412
17 Emerson Earth 418
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-13
Name Date Type Capacity
(acre ft.)
18 Fredonia 1914 Earth 300
19 Gerig 1939 Flashboard and Buttress 110
20 Heath Reservoir 1965 Earth 6,850
21 Hog Flat 1891 Earth 8,000
22 Holbrook 1952 Earth 719
23 Horse Lake 1912 Earth 75
24 Indian Ole 1924 Flashboard and Buttress 24,800
25 Iverson 1968 Earth 1,800
26 Leavitt, Lake 1891 Earth 7,482
27 Leonard No 2 1968 Earth 187
28 Madeline 1900 Earth 400
29 Mardis 1941 Earth 11
30 Mccoy Flat 1891 Earth 17,290
31 Mendiboure 1949 Earth 1,130
32 Myers 1957 Earth 279
33 Nine Springs 1954 Earth 125
34 Peconom 1920 Earth 173
35 Petes Valley 1954 Earth 240
36 Rains Creek 1960 Earth 126
37 Red Rock No 1 1893 Earth 10,000
38 Round Valley 1892 Earth and Rock 5,500
39 Shugru Earth 195
40 Silva Flat 1926 Earth 3,900
41 Smoke Creek 1949 Earth 960
42 Spaulding 1954 Earth 147
43 Spooner 1906 Earth 3,123
44 Sworinger 1961 Earth 4,050
45 Tule Lake 1904 Earth 39,500
Source: California Department of Water Resources
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-14
Figure 5-3. Dams within Lassen County with Inundation Maps Source: California Division of Dam Safety (2024)
5.4.5.5 Probability
Dam failure events are infrequent and usually coincide with the events that cause them, such as earthquakes, landslides, excessive rainfall and snowmelt. These impacts can also be exacerbated by aging or poor maintenance of the structures. There is a “residual risk” associated with dams; residual risk is the risk that remains after safeguards have been implemented. For dams, the residual risk is associated with events beyond those that the facility was designed to withstand. According to the Planning Team’s assessment of this hazard/event, there is a Medium probability of occurrence; see subsection 1 under this hazard/threat (Prioritization). A Medium hazard/threat event was determined to equate to between 30% and 75% chance of occurring within five (5) years.
5.4.5.6 Climate Consideration
Increased rainfall from changing climate conditions could present a risk to dams and reservoirs in Lassen County if volume of runoff is greater than the dam’s capacity. This could cause the County to release stored water into the downstream water courses in order to ensure the integrity of the dam.
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-15
5.4.6. Drought and Water Shortage
5.4.6.1 Prioritization
▪ Probability- HIGH
▪ Impact- HIGH
5.4.6.2 Description
Drought can best be thought of as a condition of water shortage for a particular user in a particular location. Drought is a gradual phenomenon and generally is not signified by one or two dry years.
There are many considerations that are factored into the determining the drought status; these include consideration of status on the Palmer Drought Severity Index, CPC Soil Moisture Model, USGS Weekly Streamflow, Standardized Precipitation Index, and Objective Drought Indicator Blends.
California’s extensive system of water supply infrastructure (reservoirs, groundwater basins, and interregional conveyance facilities) generally mitigates the effects of short‐term dry periods for most water users. However, drought conditions are present when a region receives belowaverage precipitation, resulting in prolonged shortages in its water supply, whether its water supply is provided by atmospheric, surface, or ground water means.
Drought is not a purely physical phenomenon, but rather an interplay between natural water availability and human demands for water supply. The precise definition of drought is made complex owing to political considerations, but there are generally four (4) types of conditions that are referred to as drought:
▪ Meteorological drought is brought about when there is a prolonged period with less than average precipitation.
▪ Agricultural drought is brought about when there is insufficient moisture for average crop or range production. This condition can arise, even in times of average precipitation, owing to soil conditions or agricultural techniques.
▪ Hydrologic drought is brought about when the water reserves available in sources such as aquifers, lakes, and reservoirs fall below the statistical average. This condition can arise, even in times of average (or above average) precipitation, when increased usage of water diminishes the reserves.
▪ Socioeconomic drought associates the supply and demand of water services with elements of meteorological, hydrologic, and agricultural drought. Socioeconomic drought occurs when the demand for water exceeds the supply as a result of weather-related supply shortfall.
5.4.6.3 Location and Extent
The entire County is subject to drought and/or water storage conditions. There are many considerations that are factored into the determining the drought status; these include consideration of status on the Palmer Drought Severity Index, CPC Soil Moisture Model, USGS Weekly Streamflow, Standardized Precipitation Index, and Objective Drought Indicator Blends.
The U.S. Drought Monitor, established in 1999, is a weekly map of drought conditions produced jointly by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the U.S. Department of
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-16
Agriculture, and the National Drought Mitigation Center at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. The map is based on measurements of climatic, hydrologic and soil conditions as well as reported impacts and observations from more than 350 contributors around the country. Droughts are generally categorized into five (5) categories:
▪ D1- Abnormally Dry
▪ D2- Moderate Drought
▪ D3- Severe Drought
▪ D4- Extreme Drought
▪ D5- Exceptional Drought
Drought events can happen any time of the year and can last for months or in worst case scenarios, even years or may be declared after as few as 15 days. Drought events usually have advance notices as it is generally a worsening of condition over time.
Around the Susanville Indian Rancheria, the West Barry Creek has suffered altercation to its original stream course from historic land use as a ranch, impoundment and springhead excavation, and more recently by the construction of Paul Bunyan Road through the drainage.
This later road construction event effectively de-watered the natural stream channel, interrupted the hydrologic function of several ephemeral/seasonal wet lands and associated native plant communities, impacted absorption of precipitation into the natural lithographic structure of the drainage, with the resultant drying of seeps and shallow springs due to the loss of surface area of absorbing soils exposure and disruption of the water table strata in the drainage bottom, and is exacerbated during drought events.
The SIR Lower and Upper Rancheria, and SIR Herlong are located in the Honey Lake Valley Groundwater Basin. Groundwater recharge in Honey Lake Valley occurs through direct precipitation, infiltration through basalts north of the valley which percolates laterally to beneath the valley floor (DWR 1963), and absorption from flows in stream courses. Groundwater in the northwest portion of the valley also is affected by drought periods, showing changes in spring groundwater levels of 20 feet over the period from 1987 to 1991 as compared to preceding and subsequent years. Hydrographs in the area near Herlong do not appear to be affected by drought periods but instead show a continued decline in groundwater levels of 20 feet during the period from 1984 through 2005.
5.4.6.4 History
Lassen County and the Susanville Indian Rancheria along with all of California has been experiencing a severe-to-very severe multi-year drought which began in 2012 and continued into 2024 even with a normal rainfall season (Figure 5-4). California’s Governor declared a drought state of emergency in January 2014 and directed state agencies to take all necessary actions to respond to drought conditions.
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-17
Figure 5-4. US Drought Monitor, California
Source: US Drought Monitor
In April of 2015 the Governor announced the first-ever 25 percent statewide mandatory water reductions and a series of actions to help save water, increase enforcement to prevent wasteful water use, streamline the state's drought response and invest in new technologies that will make California more drought resilient. As secondary effect from the drought has been an unprecedented die-off of trees and a state of emergency was issued to enable federal action to mobilize resources for the safe removal of dead and dying trees which represent a significant increased wildland fire hazard. To date, guided by the California Water Action Plan, the state has committed hundreds of millions of dollars – including Water Bond funds - to emergency drought relief, disaster assistance, water conservation and infrastructure projects across the state. Efforts are also underway to establish a framework for sustainable, local groundwater management for the first time in California's history based on legislation passed in 2014. The 2017 water year brought record rainfall to California and an unprecedented snowpack to the Sierra Nevada Mountains, The drought was declared officially over for most of the state by the Governor on April 7, 2017. However, five counties in the Central Valley remain under a state drought declaration.
The majority of Lassen County is included in the North Lahontan Hydrologic Region. Hydrologic regions are defined as "major drainage basins" by the California Water Plan. This means that much of the County's surface water, including the Susan River, drains to the series of alkaline lakes, such as Honey Lake, which make up the region, and do not feed to the ocean. This fact creates different conditions in Lassen County than other parts of the state as its water sources are more localized and independent from regional water systems.
Historically, water levels in Honey Lake were the indicator of dry or drought years in Lassen County. Honey Lake went dry in 1859, 1865, 1887, and 1889. Following a wet cycle, the Lake
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-18
once again went dry in 1919 and remained dry until 1938. Other periods of extended drought occurred in California in 1975-77, 1987-1992, 2000-2004, 2007-2009, and 2012-2016.
To date, there have been no known state or federal declarations for this type of event in the County.
5.4.6.5 Probability of Occurrence
In any given year, California and Lassen County can be subject to drought and/or water shortage conditions. This is especially true since much of the water supply is provided by outside resources, resources that are shared with others. It is also important to note that droughts do not happen overnight, they are a slow buildup of conditions. On average, seventy-five percent (75%) of the state’s annual precipitation occurs in the “wet season”- November through March. December, January, and February generally see the most precipitation but there have been many early and late season storms that bring in a substantial amount of precipitation. One of the best ways to predict drought conditions is to study the status of the El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) patterns. In California. ENSO is a periodic shifting of ocean atmosphere conditions in the tropical Pacific that ranges from El Niño (warm phase) to neutral to La Niña (cold phase). La Niña conditions tend to favor a drier outlook for Southern California; while the El Niño conditions favor stronger, and wetter storms.
The State of California has also developed tools under the Cal-Adapt project. The Cal-Adapt project provides the public, researchers, government agencies and industry stakeholders with essential data & tools for climate adaptation planning, building resiliency, and fostering community engagement. The following figure (Figure 5-5) was generated by Cal-Adapt work for Lassen County.
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-19
Figure 5-5. Maximum Length of Dry Spells (Days)
According to the Planning Team’s assessment of this hazard/event, there is a High probability of occurrence; see subsection 1 under this hazard/threat (Prioritization). A High hazard/threat event was determined to equate to greater than 75% chance of occurring within five (5) years.
5.4.6.6 Climate Consideration
Climate change has the potential to make drought events more common in the West, including California. Extreme heat creates conditions more conducive for evaporation of moisture from the ground, thereby increasing the possibility of drought. A warming planet could lead to earlier
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-20
melting of winter snow packs, leaving lower stream flows and drier conditions in the late spring and summer. Snow packs are important in terms of providing water storage and ensuring adequate supply in the summer, when water is most needed. Changing precipitation distribution and intensity has the potential to cause more of the precipitation to run-off rather than be stored.
The result of these processes is an increased potential for more frequent and more severe periods of drought.
5.4.7. Earthquake
5.4.7.1 Prioritization
▪ Probability- LOW
▪ Impact- HIGH
5.4.7.2 Description
An earthquake is caused by a release of strain within or along the edge of the Earth's tectonic plates, producing surface fault rupture, ground motion, and secondary
hazards such as ground failure. For millions of years, the forces of plate tectonics have shaped the Earth as the
huge plates that form the Earth's surface move slowly
over, under, and past each other. Sometimes the
movement is gradual. At other times, the plates are locked together, unable to release the accumulating energy.
When the accumulated energy grows strong enough, the plates break free causing the ground to shake. Most earthquakes occur at the boundaries where the plates meet; however, some earthquakes occur in the middle of plates. The severity of the shaking increases with the amount of energy released, decreases with distance from the causative fault or epicenter, and is amplified by soft soils. After just a few seconds, earthquakes can cause massive damage and extensive casualties.
A fault is a fracture between blocks of the earth’s crust where one side moves relative to the other along a parallel plane to the fracture. There are three (3) different types of earthquake faults: 1) Normal, 2) Thrust, and 3) Strike-slip. Normal and Thrust faults are examples of dip-slip faults. Dipslip faults are slanted fractures where the blocks mostly shift vertically. If the earth above an inclined fault moves down, the fault is called a normal fault, but when the rock above the fault moves up, the fault is called a reverse (or thrust) fault. Thrust faults have a reverse fault with a dip of 45° or less.
Normal Fault Thrust Fault
Strike-slip faults are vertical or almost vertical rifts where the earth’s plates move mostly horizontally. From the observer’s perspective, if the opposite block looking across the fault moves
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-21
to the right, the slip style is called a right lateral fault; if the block moves left, the shift is called a left lateral fault.
Strike-slip Fault
Ground shaking and ground deformation are the specific hazards associated with earthquakes.
The severity of these hazards depends on several factors, including soil and slope conditions, proximity to the fault, magnitude, and the type of earthquake. Below is an overview of the hazards associated with earthquakes:
Ground Shaking - Ground shaking is the motion felt on the earth’s surface caused by seismic waves generated by the earthquake. It is the primary cause of earthquake damage. The strength of ground shaking depends on the magnitude of the earthquake, the type of fault, distance from the epicenter (where the earthquake originates), and local soil conditions. Soils and soft sedimentary rocks near the earth’s surface can amplify earthquake ground shaking. Amplification increases the magnitude of the seismic waves generated by the earthquake. The amount of amplification is influenced by the thickness of geologic materials and their physical properties. Buildings and structures built on soft and unconsolidated soils can face greater risk. Amplification can also occur in areas with deep sediment filled basins and on ridge tops. Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) is a measure of the strength of ground shaking across the impacted area. Larger PGAs result in greater damage to structures. PGA is often used to depict the risk of damage from future earthquakes by showing earthquake ground motions that have a specified probability (10%, 5% or 2%) of being exceeded in 50 years return period. These values are often used for reference in construction design, and in assessing relative hazards when making economic and safety decisions.
Ground Deformation - consists of three (3) main classifications or types: 1) surface fault rupture, 2) landslides, and 3) liquefaction.
Surface Fault Rupture - As previously mentioned, the sudden sliding of part of the earth’s crust releases the vast store of elastic energy in the rocks as an earthquake. The resulting fracture is known as a fault, while the sliding movement of earth on either side of a fault is called fault rupture. Fault rupture generally begins below the ground surface at the earthquake hypocenter, typically between three and ten miles below the ground surface in California. If an earthquake is large enough, the fault rupture will reach the ground surface (referred to as “surface fault rupture”), wreaking havoc on structures built across its path.
Structures built across a fault are at risk of significant damage from surface fault rupture. Recent large earthquakes in Turkey and Taiwan have shown that few structures built across the surface traces of rupturing faults can withstand the displacements that may occur during a large earthquake.
Landslides - Earthquake-induced landslides are secondary earthquake hazards that occur from ground shaking. They can destroy the roads, buildings, utilities, and other critical facilities necessary to respond and recover from an earthquake.
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-22
Many communities in Southern California have a high likelihood of encountering such risks, especially in areas with steep slopes. (NOTE: while mentioned here, landslides are addressed separately in a later section) Liquefaction - Liquefaction is the phenomenon that occurs when ground shaking causes loose, saturated, sandy soils to lose strength and act like viscous fluid.
Liquefaction results in two types of ground failure: lateral spread and loss of bearing strength. Lateral spreads develop on gentle slopes and entail the sidelong movement of large masses of soil as an underlying layer liquefies. Loss of bearing strength occurs when the soil supporting structures liquefy, causing the structures to settle, resulting in damage and, in some cases, collapse.
5.4.7.3 Location and Extent
As noted by the California Geological Survey,
California is divided into eleven (11) geomorphic
provinces. California’s geomorphic provinces are
naturally defined geologic regions that display a
distinct landscape or landform. Each region
displays unique, defining features based on
geology, faults, topographic relief and climate.
These geomorphic provinces are remarkably
diverse. They provide spectacular vistas and
unique opportunities to learn about the earth’s
geologic processes and history. These
geomorphic provinces each have the potential to
create significant earthquakes and associated
hazards. Lassen County is located in a relatively
high seismic activity zone in the Modoc Plateau
geologic province, between the Cascade Range
and Basin and Range geologic provinces. The
Modoc Plateau area lies in the northeast corner
of California as well as parts of Oregon and Nevada. Nearly 1,000,000 acres of the Modoc National Forest are on the plateau between the Medicine Lake Highlands in the west and the Warner Mountains in the east. Its landform is volcanic table land ranging from 4,000 to 6,000 feet above sea level, cut by many north–south faults. "Occasioned lakes, marshes, and sluggishly flowing streams meander across the plateau. It is a thick accumulation of lava flows and tuff beds, along with many small volcanic cones. It has cinder cones, juniper flats, pine forests, and seasonal lakes. The plateau is thought to have been formed approximately 25 million years ago as a southern extension of the Columbia Plateau flood basalts.
In California, the 1972 Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act prohibits the siting of most structures for human occupancy across traces of active faults that constitute a potential hazard to structures from surface faulting. Figure 5-6 depicts the quaternary faults in Lassen County.
Quaternary Faults are less than 1.8 million years old and are classified as “potentially active.” A fault is considered “active” if displacement has occurred in the past 11,000 years; “historic” displacement is seismic activity which occurred within the past 200 years. Pre-quaternary faults
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-23
are more than 1.8 million years old and are generally classified as “inactive” unless a detailed study concludes there is potential for activity.
Figure 5-6. Quaternary Earthquake Faults in Lassen County Source: California Geological Survey, Fault Activity Map of California The City of Susanville and the Susanville Indian Rancheria are located within the Honey Lake Fault Zone. As mapped by the California Geological Survey, there are eight (8) quadrangle maps delineating Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones in the Susanville area, as shown in the figure below (Error! Reference source not found.7). From top to bottom, left to right, these quadrangle m aps are Standish, Stony Ridge, Milford, Herlong, Calneva Lake, McKesick Peak, Doyle and
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-24
Constantia. Properties in the earthquake fault zones are required to have a geological evaluation prior to construction to avoid mapped fault traces of active faults. After earthquakes, some regions may be prone to fault ruptures, liquefaction, and landslides.
Figure 5-7. Quadrangle Maps Containing Earthquake Fault Zones in the Susanville Area Earthquakes can occur any time of the year and their duration is usually measured in minutes.
While there are some advanced warning with earthquake associated aftershocks (or foreshocks), the majority of earthquakes occur without warning. The effect of an earthquake on various locations throughout the felt area is often measured in terms of shaking intensity. The intensity scale consists of a series of certain key responses such as people awakening, movement of furniture, damage to chimneys, and total destruction of property. The intensity scale currently used in the United States is the Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) Scale (Table 5-7). It was developed in 1931 by the American seismologists Harry Wood and Frank Neumann. This scale is composed of increasing levels of intensity, designated by Roman numerals that range from imperceptible shaking (MMI I) to catastrophic destruction (MMI X). It does not have a mathematical basis; instead, it is an empirical scale based on observed effects.
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-25
Table 5-7. Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) Scale
Intensity Shaking Description
I Not Felt Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable conditions.
II Weak Felt only by a few persons at rest, especially on upper floors of buildings.
III Weak Felt quite noticeably by persons indoors, especially on upper floors of buildings. Many people do not recognize it as an earthquake. Standing motor cars may rock slightly. Vibrations similar to the passing of a truck.
IV Light Felt indoors by many, outdoors by few during the day. At night, some awakened. Dishes, windows, doors disturbed; walls make cracking sound.
Sensation like heavy truck striking building. Standing cars rocked noticeably.
V Moderate Felt by nearly everyone; many awakened. Some dishes, windows broken. Unstable objects overturned. Pendulum clocks may stop.
VI Strong Felt by all, many frightened. Some heavy furniture moved; a few instances of fallen plaster. Damage slight.
VII Very
Strong
Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction; slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures; considerable damage in poorly built or badly designed structures; some chimneys broken.
VIII Severe Damage slight in specially designed structures; considerable damage in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse. Damage great in poorly built structures. Fall of chimneys, factory stacks, columns, monuments, walls.
Heavy furniture overturned.
IX Violent Damage considerable in specially designed structures; well-designed frame structures thrown out of plumb. Damage great in substantial buildings, with partial collapse. Buildings shifted off foundations.
X Extreme Some well-built wooden structures destroyed; most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations. Rails bent.
In addition, most people are familiar with the Richter scale, a method of rating earthquakes based on the amplitude of seismic waves at their source, an indirect measure of energy released (Table 5-8). The Richter scale is logarithmic; each one-point increase corresponds to a 10-fold increase in the amplitude of the seismic waves and a 32-fold increase in the amount of energy released.
For example, an earthquake registering magnitude 7.0 on the Richter scale releases over 1,000 times more energy than an earthquake registering magnitude 5.0. It should be noted that while an earthquake may have many intensity values across the impacted area, there is just one Richter magnitude associated with each event.
Table 5-8. Earthquake Effects Associated with various Richter Magnitudes Magnitude Earthquake Effects
0-1.9 Micro- Not felt by people
2.0-2.9 Minor- Felt by few people
3.0-3.9 Minor- Felt by some people, inside objects can be seen shaking
4.0-4.9 Light- Felt by most people, inside objects shake and fall
5.0-5.9 Moderate- Felt by everyone, damage and possible collapse of unreinforced buildings
6.0-6.9 Strong- Felt by everyone, widespread shaking/damage, some buildings collapse
7.0-7.9 Major- Felt by everyone, widespread shaking/damage, many buildings collapse
8.0 or greater Great- Felt by everyone, widespread shaking/damage, most buildings collapse
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-26
5.4.7.4 History
Historical records provide some limited information on earthquakes that impacted Lassen County prior to the widespread development of regional seismic networks. Five events are included in the USGS’ “Seismicity of the United States, 1568-1989 (Revised)” (1993), as given in Error! R eference source not found.9.
Table 5-9. Historic Earthquakes in the Vicinity of Lassen County Magnitude Date(s) Location/Description
5.8 (est.) 1885-Jan 31
Near Susanville.
Chimneys were damaged in the Honey Lake Valley towns of Buntingville and Susanville. Shocks were most severe near Janesville. Felt north to Alturas (Modoc County), south to Sacramento, and at a few towns in Nevada. More than 100 aftershocks were felt in the area to Feb. 8, 1885.
6.0 (est.) 1889-June 20
North of Susanville.
The earthquake was most severe in the Susanville-Willow Creek area, where chimneys were thrown down, and the
water in Eagle Lake was muddied. As many as 75
aftershocks occurred, 28 of which were felt within 2 hours of the main event. Felt north to Alturas (Modoc County), south to Sacramento, and east to Virginia City, Nev.
N/A 1908-Jan 27
Honey Lake region.
Chimneys were toppled at Amedee and Milford in the Honey Lake region. Aftershocks were reported.
5.6 1950-Dec 14
Near Herlong.
This main shock of a series caused considerable structural damage at Herlong. Many structures sustained cracks from about 0.3 to 0.6 cm in width to as much as 24 m in length.
Many chimneys were broken, trusses and roof rafters were split, and several buildings were displaced on their
foundations. Damage to water mains, steam pipes, and
sewers also was reported. Felt from Alturas (Modoc
County) south to Sacramento and east to Lovelock, Nev.
Several foreshocks and aftershocks were felt in the area.
5.3 1979-Feb 22
Honey Lake Valley.
This earthquake interrupted telephone service in the
epicentral area but caused only minor property damage.
Drywall was cracked at Doyle, near the Nevada border, and desks were displaced. The earthquake was felt over a large area of northeast California and western Nevada. It was preceded by a small foreshock and was followed by
aftershocks through Feb. 23.
Source: USGS, 1993
Error! Reference source not found.8 depicts the USGS earthquake catalog of earthquakes o ccurring in the vicinity of Lassen County since 1973. The USGS earthquake catalog for the region includes more than 1,000 earthquakes within 50 miles of Lassen County, including five (5) events of Magnitude 5.0 or above, listed in Table 5-10, two (2) of which had its epicenter within Lassen County.
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-27
Figure 5-8. Recorded Earthquakes in the Vicinity of Lassen County Source: USGS
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-28
Table 5-10. Recent Earthquakes of M5+ in the Vicinity of Lassen County Since 1973 Magnitude Date Location/Description (when available)
5.7 2013-May 24 Plumas County/10 km WNW of Greenville CA (Canyon Dam earthquake)
5.3 1979-Feb 22 Lassen County/(see Error! Reference source not found. for description)
5.2 2001-Aug 10 Adjacent to Lassen County
5.1 2008-Apr 26 Adjacent to Lassen County/1 km NW of Mogul, NV
5.0 1976-Nov 27 Lassen County
Source: USGS, 2015
To date, there have been no known state or federal declarations for this type of event in the County.
5.4.7.5 Probability of Occurrence
The United States Geological Survey (USGS) and their partners, as part of the latest Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast Version 3 (UCERF3; 2015), have estimated the chances of having large earthquakes throughout California over the next 30 years (Figure 5-9).
Figure 5-9. Rates for Earthquake of Magnitude 6.7 or Larger in the Next 30 years Source: USGS, 2015
Statewide, the rate of earthquakes around Magnitude 6.7 (the size of the 1994 Northridge earthquake) has been estimated to be one per 6.3 years (more than 99% likelihood in the next 30
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-29
years); in northern California, the rate is one per 12 years (95% likelihood in the next 30 years).
Northern California’s rates are given in Table 5-11.
Table 5-11. Northern California Region Earthquake Likelihoods Magnitude (greater than
or equal to)
Average Repeat Time
(years)
30-year likelihood of one
or more events
5 0.24 100%
6 2.4 100%
6.7 12 95%
7 25 76%
7.5 92 28%
8 645 5%
Source: UCERF3, 2015
According to the Planning Team’s assessment of this hazard/event, there is a Low probability of occurrence; see subsection 1 under this hazard/threat (Prioritization). A Low hazard/threat event was determined to equate to (less than 30% chance of occurring within five (5) years.
5.4.7.6 Climate Considerations
To date, no credible evidence has been provided that links climate to earthquakes; however, climate impacts are a significant consideration in the response and recovery efforts. Effects from climate change could create cascading complications and impacts. For example, if a significant earthquake causing damage to infrastructure such as water supply lines and storage tanks occurred during extensive drought conditions, efforts to fight post-earthquake fires or urban interface fires could be compromised. Conversely, if the earthquake were to occur during extended heightened rainfall or snowfall, landslides could occur hindering access and prolong the need for long-term sheltering of persons displaced from their housing. Damage to the power supply could be exacerbated by an increasing number of severe winter storms.
5.4.8. Energy Disruption
5.4.8.1 Prioritization
▪ Probability- MEDIUM
▪ Impact- MEDIUM
5.4.8.2 Description
Energy Disruption is considered a form of lifeline system failure. For the purposes of this LHMP, energy disruption includes energy shortage/power outage and energy shortage/power outage is confined to rolling blackouts or brownouts and Public Safety Power Shutdown (PSPS) events. A brownout is a partial, temporary reduction in total system capacity, while a blackout is a complete interruption in power. A brownout is caused by high electricity demand that is near or above a utility’s production capacity. When this occurs, the utility may reduce the flow of electricity to certain areas to prevent a blackout. A blackout is a large-scale service interruption that can happen as a result of severe weather or equipment failure at power plants.
PSPS events are initiated by power utility companies and are implemented in response to severe weather events. The purpose is to mitigate the increased fire risk during “red flag” weather
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-30
conditions. Red flag weather conditions include high winds, low humidity, and high temperatures.
By shutting off power, the utility companies are ensuring that electrical equipment, which can arc and spark, during severe events, will not exacerbate or start a fire.
Energy Disruptions can also be the consequence of another hazard, or can be a primary hazard, absent of an outside trigger. Energy outages may also be due to natural hazards such as wildfires, earthquakes, floods, severe winter weather, high winds, and landslides. These outages can last anywhere from a few minutes to, in rare instances, a week or more. Energy Disruptions could impact one, or a combination of other systems (i.e., potable water system, power system, natural gas system, wastewater system, communication system, or transportation system).
5.4.8.3 Location and Extent
Energy Disruption events can occur throughout the County, they can occur anytime of the year, and generally last for a few hours or in some cases a few days. Depending on the cause of energy disruption there may or may not be advanced warning (i.e., PSPS). There is no universal or common scale to measure levels of Energy Disruption. Most Energy Disruptions are generally defined by the type (cause) of disruption and duration.
5.4.8.4 History
The 2000-2001 California electricity crises brought to light many critical issues surrounding the state’s power generation and distribution system, including its dependency on out-of-state resources. Although California has implemented effective energy conservation programs, the state continues to experience both population growth and weather cycles that contribute to a heavy demand for power. The 2000 and 2001 blackouts occurred due to losses in transmission or generation and/or extremely severe temperatures that lead to heavy electric power consumption. Additionally, the July 2006 heat wave brought about rolling blackouts which indicates the demand for power during extreme heat events will exceed availability and appropriate planning for alternate power sources is extremely important to protect the community.
The Caribou line is the main transmission supply line. The Caribou line traverses rugged country throughout the Feather River Canyon and is susceptible to damage. Winter storms with high winds, ice storms, rain induced slides, drought kill trees, along with possibility of forest fires can all play a part in damage to the Caribou line and power failures are an annual occurrence. The Caribou line has averaged over three outages per year over the last five years. The outage duration varies depending upon the event but can last from hours to several weeks. As mentioned above, the Hat Creek line is a back-up line and cannot meet the capacity to support all of LMUD’s customers.
For certain events, LMUD has the ability to obtain power from the Honey Lake Power (HLP) biomass generation plant in a power outage emergency. During the August 2012, “Chips Fire”, LMUD) received power from HLP for 24 consecutive days due to damage sustained to the Caribou line. However, during the January 2017 storm related Caribou line outage, the Honey Lake Power (HLP) plant was closed down for maintenance which led to an area wide 30-hour power outage for LMUD’s customers.
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-31
To date, there have been no known state or federal declarations for this type of event in the County.
5.4.8.5 Probability of Occurrence
There are no studies that predict the probability of Energy Disruption occurrences. However, the California Independent System Operator (Cal ISO) does monitor energy supply and demand and provides some near-time predictions when there may be energy shortages and recommend “Flex Alerts” orders. Similarly, PSPS events are implemented and managed by private utility companies. While historically, they have not consistently provided advanced notice of when and where the power would be shut off, or when the power will be restored, there are noticeable improvements to notifications over recent events. According to the Planning Team’s assessment of this hazard/event, there is a Medium probability of occurrence; see subsection 1 under this hazard/threat (Prioritization). A Medium hazard/threat event was determined to equate to between 30% and 75% chance of occurring within five (5) years.
5.4.8.6 Climate Consideration
With increased changes in climate, the demands on energy will shift too. This shift in demand could have significant impacts on energy supply and equipment. Additionally, climate could have a direct impact on the energy system and equipment. Heavier than normal rain or snowfall could cause flooding and damage infrastructure, as could extreme winds.
5.4.9. Extreme Temperature
5.4.9.1 Prioritization
▪ Probability- HIGH
▪ Impact- MEDIUM
5.4.9.2 Description
For the purposes of the LHMP, Extreme Temperature includes both 1) extreme heat and 2) extreme cold weather conditions.
Extreme Heat conditions, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), are defined as weather that is much hotter and more humid than average for a particular time and place. The Cal-Adapt website defines Extreme Heat as any day in the 7-month period between April through October where the high temperature exceeds the 98th historical percentile of the maximum daily temperature.
Similarly, a heat wave is defined as five (5) days of temperatures which exceed the extreme threshold. The baseline used is calculated from data for the years 1961 through 1990.
Extreme Heat is a function of heat and relative humidity. As relative humidity increases, the air seems warmer than it actually is because the body is less able to cool itself via evaporation of perspiration. As the Heat Index rises, so do health risks such as heat exhaustion, sunstroke, and heatstroke. Some Heat Index Program Alert procedures are implemented when the high temperature is expected to exceed 105° to 110° (depending on local climate) for at least two consecutive days.
Extreme heat kills hundreds of Americans every year and causes many to become seriously ill. Extreme heat can result in significant economic impacts, affect agriculture and livestock,
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-32
and may cause damage to homes and businesses. Measures to prevent illness are generally common sense, including staying cool indoors, keeping hydrated, limiting physical activity, and monitoring those at highest risk. Prolonged high temperatures can pose a risk to vulnerable populations, particularly if combined with power outages. Measures to prevent illness are generally common sense, including staying cool indoors, keeping hydrated, limiting physical activity, and monitoring those at highest risk.
There are also other characteristics of extreme heat which do not factor in humidity. This includes when there is a series of days at high temperatures and when temperatures do not cool down/off at night. In both of these instances there could be risks to humans and equipment.
Extreme Cold conditions are noted when there are sustained temperatures below freezing (32F). The NOAA provides three different categories of actions for freeze events: advisory, watch, and warning.
▪ Frost Advisory is issued when the minimum temperature is forecast to be 33 to 36 degrees on clear and calm nights during the growing season.
▪ Freeze Watch is issued when there is a potential for significant, widespread freezing temperatures within the next 24-36 hours.
▪ Freeze Warning is issued when significant, widespread freezing temperatures are expected.
When combined with extreme cold temperatures, winds can compound the events creating a phenomenon known as “wind chill” factor. Wind Chill is the term used to describe the rate of heat loss on the human body resulting from the combined effect of low temperature and wind.
As winds increase, heat is carried away from the body at a faster rate, driving down both the skin temperature and eventually the internal body temperature. Animals are also affected by wind chill; however, cars, plants, and other objects are not.
5.4.9.3 Location and Extent
Because of modern weather technologies, Extreme Temperature events usually have advance notice. An Extreme Temperature event can occur throughout the entire County and events can last a few days and, in some instances, they can last for a few weeks. Typically, extreme heat events happen in the summer months while extreme cold events happen in the winter months.
The heat index is a measure of how hot it feels when relative humidity is factored in with the actual air temperature (Figure 5.10). Relative humidity is the percentage of moisture in the air compared with the maximum amount of moisture the air can hold. Humidity is an important factor in how hot it feels because when humidity is high, water does not evaporate as easily, so it is harder for your body to cool off by sweating.
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-33
Figure 5-10. NOAA’s National Weather Service Heat Index As the Heat Index rises, so do health risks. Specifically:
▪ When the Heat Index is 90°F, heat exhaustion is possible with prolonged exposure and/or physical activity.
▪ When it is 90° to 105°F, heat exhaustion is probable with the possibility of sunstroke or heat cramps with prolonged exposure and/or physical activity. ▪ When it is 105° to 129°F, sunstroke, heat cramps or heat exhaustion is likely, and heatstroke is possible with prolonged exposure and/or physical activity. ▪ When it is 130°F and higher, heatstroke and sunstroke is extremely likely with continued exposure. Physical activity and prolonged exposure to the heat increase the risks.
Heat Syncope refers to sudden loss of consciousness and is typically associated with people exercising who are not acclimated to warm temperatures When conditions exist, the National Weather Services (NWS) issues the following excessive heat products:
▪ Heat Advisory is a period when excessive heat is expected. The combination of hot temperatures and high humidity will create a situation in which heat related illnesses are possible.
▪ Excessive Heat Watch is a prolonged period of dangerous excessive heat within about 48 hours.
▪ Excessive Heat Warning is a prolonged period of dangerous excessive heat within about 24 hours.
In addition to affecting people, severe heat places significant stress on plants and animals. The effects of severe heat on agricultural products may include reduced yields and even loss of crops.
In events with long durations, especially when temperatures do not cool down in the evenings, it will tax and stress equipment both from the utility, as well as, personal equipment (i.e., air conditions). The loss of equipment could create large scale issues and increase the reliance on government support.
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-34
Prolonged freezing temperatures can pose a risk to vulnerable populations, particularly if combined with power outages. Exposure to cold can cause significant health problems, such as frostbite or hypothermia and become life threatening. When combined with precipitation, ice can form on roadways, trees, and power lines creating secondary hazard conditions. Extreme cold can also result in significant damage to homes and businesses (e.g., from burst pipes). Agriculture and livestock are subject to damage and life loss and may cause economic impacts as well.
Figure 5.11 shows the NWS Wind Chill Chart that uses science and other information to provide an accurate, understandable, and useful formula for calculating the dangers from winter winds and freezing temperatures.
Figure 5-11. Wind Chill Chart
When conditions exist, NOAA provides three (3) different categories of actions for freeze events:
advisory, watch, and warning.
▪ Frost Advisory is issued when the minimum temperature is forecast to be 33 to 36 degrees on clear and calm nights during the growing season.
▪ Freeze Watch is issued when there is a potential for significant, widespread freezing temperatures within the next 24–36 hours.
▪ Freeze Warning is issued when significant, widespread freezing temperatures are expected.
5.4.9.4 History
Lassen County has experienced several extreme heat events in the past; however, they are not well documented. The temperature baseline varies throughout Lassen County with it ranging from 84 degrees, in the higher elevation area of western Lassen County near Juniper Lake, to 96 degrees in the Honey Lake area. In the Susanville, Janesville, Standish, and Leavitt Lake area where the majority of the County’s population lives the extreme heat threshold is 94-95 degrees.
The County, City, and the Rancheria have, in the baseline period, reached the extreme heat threshold an average of 4 days a year and have historically averaged a heat wave once every 6 years for the 1961 to 1990 time period. However, there have generally been no adverse or limited human impact from these routine heat waves. There have been no activations of cooling centers in response to heat waves experienced in the Lassen County, the City of Susanville, or the Susanville Indian Rancheria.
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-35
Temperatures below freezing have been recorded in Lassen County every month of the year. The lowest recorded temperature on record is -23F, which occurred on February 1, 1956.
Temperatures falling below 0F generally occur no more than a few days a year on average, though most of the County experiences single digit low temperatures each year. To date Lassen County has been declared under a state or federal freeze declaration only once.
To date, there have been no known state or federal declarations for this type of event in the County.
5.4.9.5 Probability of Occurrence
While the County is not subjected to high humidity, other conditions of extreme heat (series of days and no cooling off during the evenings) can occur. Because of this, the entire county could be subject to extreme heat conditions, particularly in the lower elevation valley areas. Additionally, the entire County is subject to freeze conditions. The variations in elevation within the county, ranging from around 3,300 feet in the valleys to over 8,000 at some mountain peaks, give an indication of the general areas subjected to extended freezing conditions. The higher elevations will experience greater levels of freezing for longer periods of time. For example, the frost-free growing season in Lassen County ranges from 142 days at Susanville to only 65 days in the Madeline Plains.
The State of California has also developed tools under the Cal-Adapt project which provide the public, researchers, government agencies and industry stakeholders with essential data & tools for climate adaptation planning, building resiliency, and fostering community engagement. Some areas that Cal-Adapt looked at which are useful for Extreme Temperature events include Annual Average Maximum Temperature, Annual Average Minimum Temperature, and Extreme Heat Days. The following figures (Figure 5-12, Figure 5-13, and Figure 5-14) were generated by CalAdapt work for Lassen County.
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-36
Figure 5-12. Annual Average Maximum Temperature
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-37
Figure 5-13. Annual Average Minimum Temperature
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-38
Figure 5-14. Extreme Heat Days
According to the Planning Team’s assessment of this hazard/event, there is a High probability of occurrence; see subsection 1 under this hazard/threat (Prioritization). A High hazard/threat event was determined to equate to greater than 75% chance of occurring within five (5) years.
5.4.9.6 Climate Consideration
As temperatures rise due to climate change, Californians will face greater risk of death from dehydration, heat stroke/exhaustion, heart attack, stroke, and respiratory distress caused by extreme heat. By mid‐century, extreme heat events in urban centers could cause two to three
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-39
times more heat‐related deaths than occur today. By 2100, hotter temperatures are expected throughout the state, with an increase of 3 to 5.5°F under the lower emissions scenario and 8 to
10.5°F under the higher emissions scenario (Figure 5-15).
Figure 5-15. Comparison between Historic and Projected Temperature Source: California Energy Commission
Depending on the model and the study referenced, freezing spells are likely to increase and/or decrease in frequency as climate conditions change. However, if emissions follow higher projections, freezing events could occur only once per decade in a sizable portion of the state by the second half of the 21st century.
5.4.10. Flood and Levee Failure
5.4.10.1 Prioritization
▪ Probability- HIGH
▪ Impact- MEDIUM
5.4.10.2 Description
A flood is a temporary condition (short-duration or long-duration) of partial or complete inundation on land that is normally dry. Although temporary, floods can take several hours to days to develop.
This condition is generally caused by precipitation (i.e., rainfall). Several factors determine the severity of floods, including rainfall intensity and duration, antecedent moisture conditions, surface permeability, and geographic characteristics of the watershed such as shape and slope. Other causes of flooding can include a ruptured dam or levee, rapid ice or snow melting in the mountains, under-engineered infrastructure, or even a poorly placed beaver dam can overwhelm a river or channel and send water spreading over adjacent land or floodplains. According to FEMA, there are several different types of floods and under some there are subtypes. The flooding types and subtypes include:
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-40
▪ Riverine Flooding- river/stream overbank flooding, flash floods, dam and levee failure, alluvia fans, ice jam flooding, moveable bed streams)
▪ Urban Drainage- flooding caused by older, undersized, or ill placed infrastructure. ▪ Ground Failures- mud flood and mud flows, subsidence, liquefaction (NOTE: while mentioned here, mud flows are discussed under landslide hazards and Subsidence and Liquefaction hazards are discussed under earthquake hazards). ▪ Fluctuating Lake Levels- water level in lakes fluctuates with changes in moisture balance (precipitation minus evaporation) within the lake basin. ▪ Coastal Flooding and Erosion- flooding that occurs when storms produce large ocean waves that sweep across coastlines making landfall (storm surge).
In California, the more common types of flooding are Riverine Flooding (including flash flooding), Urban Flooding, and Coastal Flooding (i.e., storm surge).
A flash flood is a flood occurring in a watershed where the time of travel of the peak of flow from one end of the watershed to the other is less than six hours. A flash flood is a rapid flooding of low-lying areas, rivers and streams that is caused by the intense rainfall associated with a thunderstorm, or multiple thunderstorms. Flash floods also occur when a man-made structure, such as a dam, collapses. Flash flooding occurs when the ground under a storm becomes saturated with water so quickly that it cannot be absorbed. The runoff collects in low-lying areas and flows rapidly downhill. As a result, anything in its path is suddenly in rising water. A typical flash flood begins with a slow-moving thunderstorm. This usually takes longer to move out of the affected areas and causes the area to endure a greater amount of rainfall for a longer period of time. In addition, a thunderstorm may pass over an affected area repeatedly, dumping even more rainfall. A large amount of rainfall in a short time can result in flash flood conditions, as can a dam failure or other sudden spill. The National Weather Service’s definition of a flash flood is a flood occurring in a watershed where the time of travel of the peak of flow from one end of the watershed to the other is less than six hours.
The heavy rainfall associated with these storm systems contributes to urban flooding in a number of ways. Primarily, heavy rainfall will often overwhelm the capacity of the conventional drainage system made up of storm drains, catch basins, sewers, and additional natural mechanisms for storm-water management. These systems typically cannot handle more than one or two inches of rainfall per hour before they begin to back up and overflow. This amount is further diminished if the storm drains, and other components of the storm-water management system, have not been adequately maintained, are clogged with debris such as trash or natural waste, or are old and in a state of disrepair. Heavy rainfall, combined with storm-water runoff, can cause local waterways to rise and overflow their banks.
Another flood condition is alluvial fan flooding which occurs in the steep arid or semiarid mountains found throughout California. Alluvial fans are fan-shaped deposits of eroded rock and soil carried out of mountains and into valley floors by landslides, mudslides, mudflows, and surface runoff. At the beginning of the valley, alluvial fans are steep and narrow with boulders and other coarse material. The deposited material becomes increasingly fine as the gradient decreases and the material, mainly gravels, sand and mud, spreads. When rain falls, runoff from the canyon walls flows as a high-velocity sheet that channels into rivulets, and then to natural drainage courses.
The rapidly moving water often carries large boulders and other material from the watershed
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-41
depositing them into runoff channels, blocking the flow of water. Floodwater then spills out onto the fan, with each event finding a new channel that soon fills up with deposits and overflows.
Flooding in alluvial fans often can cause greater damage than clear-water flooding.
The following flood characterization designates the amount of time for response:
▪ Flood Watch—a flood is possible in the area. Advanced warning. ▪ Flood Warning—flooding is already occurring or will occur soon in the area. Advanced warning.
▪ Flash Flood Watch—a flash flood is possible in the area. Little-to-no advanced warning. ▪ Flash Flood Warning—flooding is already occurring or will occur soon in the area. Littleto-no advanced warning.
5.4.10.3 Location and Extent
The geographical location, climate, and topography of Lassen County makes some portions of the county more prone to flooding. Floods in Lassen County are classified into three (3) types.
The first consists of those that occur during late fall and winter, primarily as a result of prolonged rainstorms. The second type occurs during spring and early summer, mainly as a result of snowmelt from the Sierra Nevada Mountains. The third type occurs during summer as a result of intense convective rainstorms. The most significant flood-producing rainstorms are those that occur during fall and winter.
The standard measure for flooding is the "100-year flood", a benchmark used by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to establish a standard of flood control in communities throughout the country. The 100-year flood is also referred to as the "regulatory" or "base" flood.
The term 100-year flood is often incorrectly used and can be misleading. The correct designation is “the 1% annual chance flood”, meaning that the 100-year flood has a one percent chance of being equaled or exceeded during any given year, not that the flood will occur once every hundred years.
The County and City are participating members of the NIFP and they utilize FEMA National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM). The FIRM maps identify potential flood risk in geographic areas. The FIRMs are the official map of a community on which FEMA has delineated both the special flood hazard areas and the risk premium zones applicable to the community. Historically, FIRMs were produced on paper; however, over recent years FEMA has begun the process of creating digital versions - DFIRM. Because of the volume of area, not all FIRMs have been digitized. Due to the limited detail and large scale of the base maps used for most FIRMs, much interpolation between contour lines is done in mapping the floodplain boundaries. This is why you may find discrepancies when actual ground elevations are surveyed:
the maps are just the best available graphic representations of the Base Flood Elevations (BFEs).
The flood hazard areas identified on the FIRMs (i.e., the Special Flood Hazard Areas or SFHAs) for the County are depicted in Figure 5.16. The flood hazard zones depicted on the map are derived from FEMA’s DFIRM and indicate the probability of flooding happening over a given period of time. As defined by FEMA, Zone A, AE, AE Floodway, AH, and AO (lighter shades of blue) indicate a 1% annual chance of flooding; while Zone Shaded X (dark blue) indicates a 0.2%
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-42
annual chance of flooding (500-year flooding). Complete definitions of flood zone designations are provided in Table 5.12.
Figure 5-16. Special Flood Hazard Areas
Source: FEMA
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-43
Table 5-12. FEMA Flood Zone Designations
Risk Level Flood Zone Description
High
A
Areas with a 1% annual chance of flooding and a 26% chance of flooding over the life of a 30‐year mortgage. Because detailed analyses are not performed for such areas; no depths or base flood elevations are shown within these zones.
AE The floodplain where base flood elevations are provided.
AH
Areas with a 1% annual chance of shallow flooding, usually in the form of a pond, with an average depth ranging from 1 to 3 feet. These areas have a 26% chance of flooding over the life of a 30‐year mortgage. Base flood elevations derived from detailed analyses are shown at selected intervals within these zones.
AO
River or stream flood hazard areas, and areas with a 1% or greater chance of shallow flooding each year, usually in the form of sheet flow, with an average depth ranging from 1 to 3 feet.
These areas have a 26% chance of flooding over the life of a 30‐ year mortgage. Average flood depths derived from detailed analyses are shown within these zones.
Moderate to
Low
X
(Shaded)
Area of moderate flood hazard, usually the area between the limits of the 100-year and 500-year floods.
X (Unshaded)
Area of minimal flood hazard, usually depicted on FIRMs as above the 500-year flood level. Zone X is the area determined to be outside the 500-year flood and protected by levee from 100- year flood.
Undetermined D
Areas with possible but undetermined flood hazards. No flood hazard analysis has been conducted. Flood insurance rates are commensurate with the uncertainty of the flood risk.
The County does not have a well-developed flood protection system. As a result, flooding often occurs along many streams, damaging agricultural and urban properties and causing channel and bank erosion. Although many valleys and rivers in the County could be subject to flooding, flooding and erosion are particularly serious along the Susan River. This is supported by the fact that historical records indicate that the Susan River is the primary source of flooding within the County. The Susan River (approximately 40 miles long) crosses the southern portion of the County and drains into Honey Lake. Because of the Susanville River flood risk, steps have been taken to develop categories of flooding (Error! Reference source not found.13) and estimate e xpected damage for selected flood levels on the Susan River (Error! Reference source not found.14).
Table 5-13. Susan River Flood Categories
Stage Flood Level (feet)
Major Flood 14
Moderate Flood 13
Flood 12
Action 10.5
Source: Lassen County
Hazard/Threat Assessment
Lassen County Operational Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5-44
Table 5-14. Susan River Flood Levels
River Level
(feet) Description
10.5 Those along rivers should begin careful monitoring of river and keep informed of forecast updates. Localized minor lowland flooding below Susanville in Johnstonville, Leavitt Lake, Standish, and Litchfield rural areas.
11.0 Local minor lowland flooding below Susanville in Johnstonville, Leavitt Lake, Standish, and Litchfield rural areas.
11.5 Localized minor to moderate lowland flooding below Susanville in the Johnstonville, Leavitt Lake, Standish, and Litchfield rural areas.
12.0 Flood Stage. Several homes on Carroll Street in Susanville begin to flood.
Local flooding in Susanville from Lassen Street downstream along Riverside Drive, especially below Piute Creek which enters river near Alexander Drive. Moderate lowland flooding below Susanville in Johnstonville, Leavitt Lake, Standish, and Litchfield areas. Some rural roads affected by flooding.
12.5 Minor to moderate flooding in Susanville from Lassen Street downstream along Riverside Drive. Several homes along the river were affected, especially on Carroll Street. Moderate lowland flooding below Susanville in Johnstonville, Leavitt Lake, Standish, and Litchfield areas. Rural roads and bridges begin to flood in these areas.
13.0 Moderate flooding in Susanville from Lassen Street downstream along Riverside Drive. Some homes along the river have moderate flood effects, especially on Carroll Street. Significant lowland flooding below Susanville in Johnstonville, Leavitt Lake, Standish, and Litchfield areas. Rural roads and bridges in these areas flood. Similar to flood of 3/13/1983.
13.5 Moderate to major flooding in Susanville, Johnstonville, Leavitt Lake, Standish, and Litchfield. Susanville flooded from Lassen Street downstream along Riverside Drive and from Cornell/River Street on north to Hood Street/Sunkist Drive on south. River up to bottom of Lassen Street bridge.
Many homes along river have minor to moderate flooding. Many roads and bridges in the Honey Lake Valley area flood, with moderate transportation impacts. Similar to 3/30/1974 and 1/21/1969 floods.
14.0 Major flooding in Susanville, Johnstonville, Leavitt Lake, Standish, and Litchfield. Susanville flooded from Lassen Street downstream along Riverside Drive and from Main St (Highway 36) on north to railroad tracks on south. Many homes, businesses, schools, roads, and bridges in the Honey Lake Valley area flooded. Serious transportation impacts. Impacts to power, phone, and rural water systems begin. Similar to 2/24/1958 flood.
14.5 Major flooding in Susanville, Johnstonville, Leavitt Lake, Standish, and Litchfield areas in Honey Lake Valley. Susanville flooded from Lassen Street downstream along Riverside Drive and from Main Street (Highway 36) north to railroad tracks on south. Serious flood impacts homes, businesses, schools, roads, and bridges throughout Honey Lake Valley. US Highway 395 flooded. Serious transportation impacts, moderate impacts to power, phone, and rural water systems. Similar to 12/23/1955 flood.
15.0 Major flooding in Susanville, Johnstonville, Leavitt Lake, Standish, and Litchfield areas. Major flooding in Susanville from Lassen Street downstream along Riverside Drive, and from Main Street (Highway 36) on north to railroad tracks on south. Serious flood impacts homes, businesses, schools, roads, and bridges throughout Honey Lake Valley. US Highway 395 flooded. Serious transportation, power, phone, and rural water system impacts. Similar to 1/31/1963 and 1/13/1980 floods.