301
March 1, 2023
Trevor Benson
Emergency Services Coordinator
General Services, City of Yucaipa
34272 Yucaipa Blvd.
Yucaipa, CA 92399
Dear Trevor Benson:
U.S. Department of Homeland security
FEMA Rcgion 9
1111 Broadway, Suite 1200
"r Oakland, CA 94607-4052
�4 FEMA
dNn 5£4
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has completed its review of the City of Yucaipa Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 2022 and has determined that this plan is eligible for final approval pending its adoption by the City of Yucaipa.
FEMA recently updated the Local Mitigation Planning Policy Guide which will take effect on April 19, 2023. In order for your plan to be approved under the 2011 Local Mitigation Plata Review Guide in which it was reviewed with, formal adoption documentation must be submitted to FEMA Region 9 prior to April 19, 2023. If formal adoption documentation is received between April 19, 2023, and March 1, 2024, the plan must be re -reviewed for adherence to the new 2023 policy guidance and sections of the plan may need to be revised.
If you have any questions regarding the planning or review processes, please contact the FEMA Region 9 Hazard Mitigation Planning Team at fema-r9-miti atg ion-planninggfema.dhs.gov.
Sincerely,
Digitally signed by
ALISON KEARNS
4�_IW4 Date: 2023.03.06
11.53.24-08'00'
Alison Kearns
Planning and Implementation Branch Chief
Mitigation Division
FEMA Region 9
Enclosure (1)
City of Yucaipa Plan Review Tool, dated March I, 2023
cc: Ron Miller, Mitigation Quality Assurance Division Chief, California Governor's Office of Emergency Services
Blythe Denton, Hazard Mitigation Grants Division Chief, California Governor's Office of Emergency Services
Victoria LaMar -Haas, Hazard Mitigation Planning Chief, California Governor's Office of Emergency Services
www.fema.gov
302
REGION IX LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW TOOL
Updated 12/4/2019
The Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Review Tool demonstrates how the local Hazard Mitigation Plan meets the regulation in 44 CFR §201,6 and offers State and FEMA Mitigation Planners an opportunity to provide feedback to the community.
• The Regulation checklist provides a summary of FEMA's evaluation of whether the plan has addressed all requirements.
• The Plan Assessment identifies the plan's strengths as well as documents areas for future improvement. This section also includes a list of resources for implementation of the plan. • The Multi -Jurisdiction Summary Sheet is a mandatory worksheet for multi -jurisdictional plans that is used to document which jurisdictions are eligible to adapt the plan. • The Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment Matrix is a tool far plan reviewers to identify if all components of Element B are met.
Jurisdiction: Title of Plan: Date of Plan:
City of Yucaipa Local Hazard Mitigation Plan September 2022 Local Point of Contact:
Trevor Benson
Title:
Emergency Services Coordinator
Agency:
General Services
Phone Number:
(909) 797-2489 Ext: 260
Address:
34272 Yucaipa Boulevard
Yucaipa, CA 92399
E-Mail:
tbenson
State Reviewer:
Osita Kamalu
Title: Program Specialist
Date: 09/30/2022
Date Received at State Agency
09/01/2022
Date Sent to FEMA
10/05/2022
FEMA Reviewer:
Ellie Schwartz
Emma Reed
Title:
CERC Planner
Community Planner
Date:
10/24/2022
2/17/2023
Date Received in FEMA Region IX
10/5/2022
Date Not Approved
11/17/2022
Date Approvable Pending Adoption
3/1/2023
Date Approved
FEMA Region IX Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Review Tool 1 303
SECTION 1:
REGULATION CHECKLIST
ELEMENT A. PLANNING PROCESS
Al. Does the plan document the planning
process, including how it was prepared
and who was Involved in the process for
each jurisdiction? (Requirement
§201.6(c)(1))
A2. Does the plan document an
opportunity for neighboring
communities, local and regional agencies
involved in hazard mitigation activities,
agencies that have the authority to
regulate development as well as other
interests to be involved in the planning
process? (Requirement §201.6(b)(2))
A3. Does the plan document how the
public was Involved in the planning
process during the drafting stage?
(Requirement §201.6(b)(1))
a, Does the plan provide
documentation of how the plan was
prepared? This documentation must
include the schedule or timeframe and
activities that made up the plan's
development as well as who was
Involved.
b. Does the plan list the jurisdictions)
participating in the plan that are
seeking approval?
c. Does the plan identify who
represented each jurisdiction?
(At a minimum, it must identify the
jurisdiction represented and the
person's position or title and agency
within the jurisdiction.)
a. Does the plan document an
opportunity for neighboring
communities, local, and regional
agencies Involved in hazard mitigation
activities, agencies that have the
authority to regulate development, as
well as other Interested parties to be
involved in the planning process?
b. Does the plan identify how the
stakeholders were Invited to
participate In the process?
a. Does the plan document how the
public was given the opportunity to be
involved in the planning process?
b. Does the plan document how the
public's feedback was incorporated
into the plan?
2.1-2.$
Pages 3-8 X
1.1-1.6;
only
Yucaipa
Pages 1-2
2.3 Table 2.1
Pages 4-5
X
X
2.3-2.4
X
Pages 4-7
2.3.2
2.5 Pages 7-8 X
2.5 Pages 7-8 X
A4. Does the plan describe the review and incorporation of existing plans, studies,
2.2; 2.4;
reports, and technical information? (Requirement 9201.6(b)(3))
4.3; 7.4
X
Pages 3-4, 5
-7; 27; 84
A5, Is there discussion of how the community(ies) will continue public participation
2.5; 8.4
in the plan maintenance process? (Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(Iii)) Pages 7-8;
X
93 2 FEMA 30egion IX Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool
Ab. Is there a description of the method
and schedule for keeping the plan
current (monitoring, evaluating and
updating the mitigation plan within a 5-
year cycle)? (Requirement
§201.6(c)(4)(i))
ELEMENT A., REQUIRED REVISIONS
a. Does the plan identify how, when,
and by whom the plan will be
monitored (how will implementation
be tracked) over time?
b. Does the plan identify how, when,
and by whom the plan will be
evaluated (assessing the effectiveness
of the plan at achieving stated purpose
and goals) over time?
c. Does the plan identify how, when,
and by whom the plan will be updated
durine the 5-vear cvcle?
ELEMENT B. HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT
(Reviewer: See Section 4 for assistance with Element B) B1. Does the plan include a description of
a. Does the plan include a general
the type, location, and extent of all
description of all natural hazards that
natural hazards that can affect each
can affect each jurisdiction?
jurisdictlon(s)? (Requirement
b. Does the plan provide rationale for
§201.6(c)(2)(i))
the omission of any natural hazards
that are commonly recognized to
affect the jurisdictions) in the planning
area?
c. Does the plan include a description
of the type of all natural hazards that
can affect each jurisdiction?
d. Does the plan include a description
of the location for all natural hazards
that can affect each jurisdiction?
82
8.2
x
8.2
5.2, 5.4
Pages 37;
39-71
5.2
commonly
recognized
hazards
were
removed
but some
hazards
were
merged)
5.2; 5.4
each profile
has a
description
section
Pages 37;
39-71
5.4; each
profile has
a location
section
Pap -es 39-71
X
x
X
X
FEMA Region 1X Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Review Tool 305
3 1. REGULATION CHECKLIST
Location
• LocalPlan
•
e. Does the plan include a description
page number)
5A; each
of the extent for all natural hazards
profile has
that can affect each jurisdiction?
an extent
X
section
Pages 39-71
B2. Does the plan include information on
a. Does the plan include information
5.4; each
previous occurrences of hazard events
on previous occurrences of hazard
profile has
and on the probability of future hazard
events for each jurisdiction?
a history
X
events for each jurisdiction?
section
(Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
Pages 39-71
b. Does the plan include information
5.4; each
on the probability of future hazard
profile has
events for each jurisdiction?
a
X
probability
section
Pages 39-71
B3. Is there a description of each
a. Is there a description of each
6.2 - 6.4
identified hazard's impact on the
hazard's impacts on each jurisdiction
community as well as an overall
(what happens to structures,
Pages 73-80
x
summary of the community's
infrastructure, people, environment,
vulnerability for each jurisdiction?
etc.)?
(Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(il))
b. Is there a description of each
6.2 - 6.4
identified hazard's overall vulnerability
(structures, systems, populations, or
Pages 73-80
other community assets defined by the
Appendix D
X
community that are identified as being
susceptible to damage and loss from
hazard events) for each jurisdiction?
B4. ❑oes the plan address NFIP insured structures within the jurisdiction that have 6.2.4 X been repetitively damaged by floods? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)) PaSe 77 ELEMENT B. REQUIRED REVISIONS
ELEMENT C. MITIGATION STRATEGY
C1 Does the plan document each
a. Does the plan document each
4.2- 4.5
jurisdiction's existing authorities,
jurisdiction's existing authorities,
Pages 21-36
X
policies, programs and resources and its
policies, programs and resources?
b. Does the plan document each
4.3; 7.4
ability to expand on and improve these
existing policies and programs?
jurisdiction's ability to expand on and
Pages 27,
X
(Requirement §201.6(c)(3))
improve these existing policies and
84 programs?
C2. Does the plan address each jurisdiction's participation in the NFIP and
4.3.3 continued compliance with NFIP requirements, as appropriate? (Requirement Pages 31-32
X
§201.6(c)(3)(ii))
FEMA Region IX Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool
306
C3. Does the plan include goals to reduce/avoid long-term vulnerabilities to the identified hazards? (Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(i))
C4. Does the plan identify and analyze a
comprehensive range of specific
mitigation actions and projects for each
jurisdiction being considered to reduce
the effects of hazards, with emphasis on
new and existing buildings and
infrastructure? (Requirement
§201.6(c)(3)(ii))
C5. Does the plan contain an action plan
that describes how the actions identified
will be prioritized (including cost benefit
review), implemented, and administered
by each jurisdiction? (Requirement
§201.6(c)(3)(iv)); (Requirement
§201.6(c)(3)(lii))
C6. DDes the plan describe a process by
which local governments will integrate
the requirements of the mitigation plan
into other planning mechanisms, such as
comprehensive or capital improvement
plans, when appropriate? (Requirement
§201.6(c)(4)(ii))
-
ELEMENT C, REQUIRED REVISIONS
a. Does the plan identify and analyze a
comprehensive range of specific
mitigation actions and projects to
reduce the impacts from hazards?
b. Does the plan identify mitigation
actions for every hazard posing a
threat to each participating
jurisdiction?
c. Do the identified mitigation actions
and projects have an emphasis on new
and existing buildings and
infrastructure?
a. Does the plan explain how the
mitigation actions will be prioritized
Jincluding cost benefit review)?
b. Does the plan identify the position,
office, department, or agency
responsible for implementing and
administering the action, potential
funding sources and expected
timeframes for completion?
a. Does the plan identify the local
planning mechanisms where hazard
mitigation information and/or actions
may be incorporated?
b. Does the plan describe each
community's process to integrate the
data, information, and hazard
mitigation goals and actions into other
planning mechanisms?
c, The updated plan must explain how
the jurisdiction(s) Incorporated the
mitigation plan, when appropriate,
into other planning mechanisms as a
demonstration of progress in local
hazard mitigation efforts,
7.2 Pages 81-82 1 X
7,3-7A
Pages 82-86 X
7.4 Pages 84-88 X
7.4 Pages84-86 X
7.5 Pages86-87 X
7.6 Pages 87-91 X
8.3 Pages 92-93 X
8.3 Pages 92-93
x
8.3 Pages 97-93 a X
ELEMENT 0. PLAN REVIEW, EVALUATION, AND IMPLEMENTATION
(Applicable to plan updates only)
D1. Was the plan revised to reflect changes in development? (Requirement 9.7.3 X §201.6 d 3 } I Pages 18-19
FEMA Region IX Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Review Tool S 307
1. REGULATION CHECKLIST Location
• lan Not
Regulation
(section Met Met
and/or
pag_ number)
D2. Was the plan revised to reflect progress in local mitigation efforts? 7.3 X
(Requirement §201.6d 3 Pages 82-84
D3. Was the plan revised to reflect changes in priorities? (Requirement
7.2; 7.4
§201.6(d)(3))
Pages 81- X
82; 84-86
ELEMENT D; REQUIRED REVISIONS
ELEMENT E. PLAN ADOPTION
E1. Does the plan include documentation that the plan has been formally adopted
1.5-U
by the governing body of the jurisdiction requesting approval? (Requirement
X
§201.6(c)(5))
NA
N/A
E2. For multi -jurisdictional plans, has each Jurisdiction requesting approval of the plan documented formal plan adoption? (Requirement §201.6(c)(5)) ELEMENT E: REQUIRED REVISIONS
E1. — Once a resolution has been signed adopting the Hazard Mitigation Plan by the City of Yucaipa, please email the signed resolution to [email protected] and we will send an Approval notice.
OPTIONAL: HIGH HAZARD POTENTIAL DAM RISKS (Applicable to jurisdictions interested in becoming sub applicants to FEMA's Rehabilitation of High Hazard Potential Dams (HHPD) Grant Program only) HHPD1. Did Element A4 (planning process) describe the incorporation of existing plans, studies, reports, and technical information for high hazard potential dams? HHPD2. Did Element B3 (risk assessment) address HHPDs?
HHPD3. Did Element C3 (mitigation goals) include mitigation goals to reduce long- term vulnerabilities from high hazard potential dams that pose an unacceptable risk to thepublic?
HHPD4. Did Element C4-05 (mitigation actions) address HHPDs prioritize mitigation actions to reduce vulnerabilities from high hazard potential dams that pose an unacceptable risk to the public?
REQUIRED REVISIONS
1 ELEMENT F. ADDITIONAL STATE REQUIREMENTS
(Optional for State Reviewers only; not to be completed by FEMA) F1.
F2.
ELEMENT F:_REQUIRED REVISIONS
FEMA Region IX Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool
308
SECTION 2:
PLAN ASSESSMENT
A. plan Strengths and Opportunities for Improvement
This section provides a discussion of the strengths of the plan document and identifies areas where these could be improved beyond minimum requirements.
CIUMUM H: rlanning rrucess
Plan Strengths:
• Al —Figure 2.1 (page 3) shows the planning methodology; it gives a timeframe for planning activities, Table 2.2 (page 5) does a great job of summarizing the agendas for all of the planning team's meetings.
• A2 —The planning process involved a broad range of stakeholders. They include a Joint Issues Group; community partners; county CIES, local and regional agencies; national agencies; local school districts; churches; nonprofit organizations; private utilities; medical services; and academic institutions.
• A3 —The city created two awareness campaigns for hazard mitigation. The LFEMP Awareness Campaign used virtual public meetings, website and social media updates, and joint work with community partner outreach. The city also held two public meetings to raise awareness and get feedback. The team talked about this feedback and used it to create the plan. Adding hazard awareness to existing stakeholder outreach programs is a great way to use connections to the public. It can also get better input and support. • A3 - The second campaign, the Hazard Education Campaign, targeted community -based stakeholder and public meetings. The city attended community events, held meetings about mobile homes, and conducted surveys to determine how much the public knows about disasters. Meeting the public where they are is a great way to make sure they can learn about their hazard risks and the city's mitigation activities. • A4 —The planning team reviewed a wide number of existing resources. These included the state HMP, county HMPs, city LHMPs, and water district HMPs. The team also reviewed hazard -specific resources, like a wildfire mitigation plan, an emergency operations plan and drought plans. The more resources the team can pull from, the more in-depth the LHMP can be.
• A5 —The planning team will continue to involve the public through feedback and comments on the LHMP. They will also continue to update their website, social media and local media. The public will be able to comment again before the plan is adopted.
Opportunities for Improvement:
• A4 — The plan could provide more detail about what the team included from the plans they reviewed. Giving this information can make future updates easier. It may also help the integration and maintenance processes.
• A6 - The plan does a great job of discussing the maintenance process as whole.
However, it could be more specific in keeping monitoring and evaluation activities distinct.
PEMA Region IX Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Review Tool 7 309
Element B. Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
Plan Strengths:
• B3 -- Each hazard in the risk assessment discusses the impacts on populations, buildings, economy, environment and lifelines. The section for earthquake impacts has a very detailed Hazus study of impacts on structures. The flooding assessment also has an analysis of impacts to the economy, buildings and households.
Opportunities for Improvement:
• B2 --The history section of the windstorm profile states that wind events regularly affect the area. This section should list these wind events
• 82b —The probability for landslides is unclear. The scoring gives it a "high" probability, but the hazard profile states that the probability is low to moderate. Please more clearly define the probability of this and other hazards.
• 132b --The plan only states whether the probability for that hazard has increased or decreased. It would be useful for the description of hazard vulnerability to also indicate statistical probability of the hazard occurring in the future. • B3 - The impact summaries for some of the hazards are not very detailed. The plan could give more detail on the impacts of drought, landslides, wildfires, extreme temperatures and windstorms. These impacts should be specific to the city of Yucaipa; they should reflect the assets that are vulnerable to each identified hazard.
Element C: Mitigation Strat
Plan Strengths;
• C1—The capabilities assessment is very thorough. It covers administrative, regulatory, technical and financial capabilities. It goes into detail for each resource. Many of the resources describe how the city will improve and integrate them with the plan. • C2 — The plan describes the city's involvement with the National Flood Insurance program (NFIP). It describes the city codes and floodplain safety overlay district that supports their involvement. The plan also shares the city's CAVs and other ways in which they comply with the NFIP.
• C3 —The plan has six general goals with several objectives under each. The goals are related to the hazards; they focus on the protection of community assets. Goals must center around what matters to the community, like people, structures, the environment and systems.
■ C4 — The plan has a range of actions, spanning from structural retrofits and irrigation improvements to communications plans. The actions that address factoring wildfire mitigation into existing and future development show the city is dedicated to protecting future assets.
• C5 —The plan uses the STAPLBL method to assess the actions, It gives a cost estimate for each new mitigation action. The plan also lists the lead department, estimated timeframe, and potential funding source for each action.
S FEMA Region IX Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool
310
Opportunities for Improvement:
• C4 — Mitigation actions 19 through 27 all seem to be response -based, it is okay to include these types of actions in the mitigation plan. However, mitigation programs cannot fund them. They should receive the same level of detail as other actions. Right now, these only include a few words that do not describe how they will be carried out. • C4a - When creating mitigation actions, it is helpful to be as specific as possible. If applicable, give a description of what the action will do and/or a short synopsis of how the mitigation project relates back to an identified risk. • C6 - The plan could list more plans that will or could be integrated with information from the LHMP. Many of the plans and resources listed in the capabilities assessment could be integrated. Consider listing more examples of integration.
Element a: Plan Update, Evaluation, and Implementation (Plan Updates Only) Plan Strengths:
• a2 —The plan lists all previous mitigation actions and describes the status of each one. It is important to acknowledge when actions need to be continued or are no longer relevant is vital. That way, the updated plan can reflect the community's priorities. • d3 —The plan states that new actions were based on the feedback from the 2016 LHMP and the creation of the latest Capital Improvement Plan. It also states that the actions were chosen from the in-depth review of the risk assessment and capabilities assessment. Many of the actions reflect the priority to increase and improve capabilities.
B. Resources for Implementing and Updating Your Approved Plan This resource section is organized into three categories:
1) Guidance and Resources
2) Training Topics and Courses
3) Funding Sources
Guidance and Resources
Local Mitigation Planning Handbook
https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documentsl3t598 Beyond the Basics
htt : mitigationguide.orgi
Mitigation Ideas
https:(l www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documentsl30627 Plan Integration: Linking Local Planning Efforts
FEMA Region IX Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Review Tool 311
0 htk s: J www.fema.xovJmedia-IibraryJassets/documents/1Q8S93 Integrating Disaster Data into Hazard Mitigation Planning https://www.fema,p,ov/media-library/as5et5/documents/103486 Integrating Historic Property and Cultural Resource Considerations into Hazard Mitigation Planning
https://www.fema.gov/ar/media-library_/assets/documents/4317 Community Rating System User Manual
https://www.tema.pov/media-library/assets/docurnents/9768 U.S. Climate Resilient Toolkit
https.JJtoo I ki t. cl i m a to _gov/
2014 National Climate Assessment
http://nra20l4-Alobalchange.gov/
Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation http://ipcc-wg2.gov/SREX/images/uploads/SREX-All FINAL.pdf FY15 Hazard Mitigation Assistance Unified Guidance
https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/ 103279 Climate Resilient Mitigation Activities for Hazard Mitigation Assistance https://www.fem,a.gov/media-library/assets/documents/il0202 Training
More information at https:/Araining.fema.yov/emi.asi3x or through your State Training Officer Mitigation Plannin
15-318 Mitigation Planning for Local and Tribal Communities https:/./training.fema.aov/is/courseoverview.asi3x?code=is-318 15-393 Introduction to Hazard Mitigation
https:/Itraining.fema.gov/is/cour.seoverview.aspx?code=is-39B.a G-318 Preparing and Reviewing Local Plans
G-393 Mitigation for Emergency Managers
Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA)Grant Programs
IS-212.b Introduction to Unified HMA
http://www.trai ni np.fema.gov/is/co urseoverview.aspx?code=lS-212. b IS-277 Benefit Cost Analysis Entry Level
http://www.training.fema.izov/is/co urseove rview.aspx?code=15-277_ E-212 HMA: Developing Quality Application Elements
E-213 HMA: Application Review and Evaluation
E-214 HMA: Project Implementation and Programmatic Closeout E-276 Benefit -Cost Analysis Entry Level
GI5 and Hazus-MH
IS-922 Application of GI5 for Emergency Management
htto: // www.trainine.ferna.Rov/is/cou rseuverview_asox?code=IS-922 E-190 ArcGIS for Emergency Managers
E-296 Application of Hazus-MH for Risk Assessment
E-313 Basic Hazus-MH
Floodplain Management
E-273 Managing Floodplain Development through the NFIP
10 FEMA Region IX Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool
312
E-278 National Flood Insurance Program/ Community Rating System Potential Funding Sources
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
POC: FEMA Region IX and State Hazard Mitigation Officer Website: https://www.fema.izov/hazard-mitigation-grant-program Pre -Disaster Mitigation Grant Program
POC: FEMA Region IX and State Hazard Mitigation Officer Website: https://www.fema.gov/pre-disaster-mitigation-grant-program Flood Mitigation Assistance Grant Program
POC: FEMA Region IX and State Hazard Mitigation Officer Website: http.s:// www.fema.pov/flood-mitigation-assistance-grant-program Emergency Management Performance_ Grant Program
POC: FEMA Region IX
Website: https:l/ www.fema.gov/emerpency-mahiRomor)t-performance- rant -pro f� Lm FEMA Region IX Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Review Tool 313
11 SECTION 3:
MULTI -JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY SHEET
INSTRUCTIONS: For multi -jurisdictional plans, this summary sheet must be completed by listing each participating jurisdiction that is eligible to adopt the plan.
#
Jurisdiction Name
Jurisdiction Type
Eligible to
Adopt the
Plan?
Plan POC
Email
z
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
14 11
12 13
14 15
12 FEMA RIX Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool
314
HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT MATRIX
Requirement Met? (Y/N)
Hazard
Type
Location
Extent
Previous
Probability
Impacts
Vulnerability
Mitigation
Occurrences
Action
Drought
Medium
6.2.1 Page 68
Appendix ❑
Table 7.2
Medium
Table 6.3 &
Appendix D
Table 7.2
Earthquake
Appendix E
6.4 Page 68-
71 Energy Disruption
High
Appendix D
Table 7.2
Flooding
Medium
Appendix D
Table 7.2
Landslide
High
Appendix ❑
Table 7.2
Wildfire
High
Appendix D
Table 7.2
Extreme
Medium
Appendix D
Table 7.2
Temperature
Infectious Disease
Medium
Appendix ❑
Table 7.2
Technology
Medium
Appendix D
Table 7.2
Disruption
WindstormMedium
No Location
No Extent
Appendix D
Table 7.2
Civil disturbance
Low
Appendix D
Table 7.2
13 FEMA RIX Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool
315
HAZARD IDENTIFICLTION! RISK ASSESSMENT MATRIX
Requirement Met? (Y/N)
Hazard
Type
Location
Extent
previous
Probability
Impacts
Vulnerability
Mitigation
Occurrences
Action
Dam failure
Low
Appendix D
Table 7.2
Terrorism
Low
Appendix D
Table 7.2
SECTION 4:
HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT MATRIX (OPTIONAL) INSTRUCTIONS: This matrix can be used by the plan reviewer to help identify if all of the components of Element 6 have been met.
List out natural hazard names that are identified in the plan in the column labeled "Hazards" and put a "Y" or "N" for each component of Element B.
FEMA Region IX Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool
14 316