HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/10/2006 Blue Sheet draft Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan
TOWN COUNCIL
MEETING
INFORMATION
TOWN OF MARANA
MEETING DATE: October 10,2006
AGENDA ITEM: D.4
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MAYOR AND COUNCIL
Steve Johnson, Marana Police Department
Discussion and direction concerning the draft Pima County Multi-
Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan
DISCUSSION
Staff will review with Council the draft Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation
Plan, specifically focusing on those components related to Marana and its responsibilities under
the Plan.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends authorization to bring to Council for adoption the Pima County Multi-
Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan.
ATTACHMENTS
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan and Executive Summary.
SUGGESTED MOTION
I move to direct staff to bring to Council for adoption the proposed Pima County Multi-
Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan.
{00002691.DOC /}
SJ/JCB/I0/3/2006
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan
(PCMJHMP)
Executive Summary:
In December 2004 the Pima County Hazard Mitigation Steering Committee was formed
to update the Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (PCMJHMP) to
stay in compliance with the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. The purpose ofthe Plan is
to establish a comprehensive disaster hazard mitigation program to reduce the loss of life
and property, human suffering, economic disruption, and disaster assistance costs
resulting from natural and human-caused disasters in Pima County.
The Plan accomplishes this by enhancing public awareness and understanding; create a
decision tool for management; promote compliance with State and Federal program
requirements; enhance local policies for hazard mitigation capability; and establish inter-
jurisdictional coordination of mitigation-related programming and regulatory compliance.
The Committee consists of members from the jurisdictions located within Pima County.
Each jurisdiction formed its own hazard mitigation planning group to ensure the
information in the Plan reflected their communities.
The Plan allows us to be eligible for the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) Hazard Mitigation Grant Programs (HMGP) and Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM)
grant funds thru FEMA and administered by the State. The Plan has to be adopted by the
Town of Marana for us to receive funding under the FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant
Programs.
The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requires the Plan be reviewed and submitted to
FEMA within five years from date of implementation for the Town of Marana to remain
eligible for HMGP and PDM grant funding.
The Plan consists of several components of which the following are of particular interest:
1) Community Description (pages 20-21);
2) Risk Assessment (pages 64-83)(103-107);
3) Asset Inventory (pages 112-115);
4) Vulnerability Assessment (pagesI16-140);
5) Capability Assessment (pagesI41-142, NOT REQUIRED);
6) Hazard Mitigation Goals, Objectives and Actions (pages 150-157);
7) Action Plan Priorities (pages 202-204)
Note:
The information used for this plan was collected from several sources some of which may
have been outdated at the time this Plan was written.
""-,~,"-~~"""""""""""",."~""""-,-,~~",,,,,,,",,,,,~,,,,,,,,,,,-----",,,,,",'~'''~''>''''-
PIMA COUNTY MUL TI.JURISDICTIONAL
HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Draft
..<~,J
PillA GOUNTY OFFlca OF
ItMEItGE:Mey IIAN,A.."EftT
AND HOMELAND SECURITY
Pima County Office of Emergency Management and Homeland Security
October 31,2005
Adopted
Approved by FEMA
FINAL DRAFT
~
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Pima County Board of Supervisors
Ann Day, District 1
Ramon Valadez, District 2
Sharon Bronson, Chair, District 3
Ray Carroll, District 4
Richard Elias, District 5
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Planning Group
Chief Larry Anderson, South Tucson Fire Department
Joe Bridges, Davis Monthan Air Force Base
Janet Brown, Pima County Risk Management
Gloria Browne, Pima County Department of Transportation
Paul Caserta no, Pima Association of Governments
Jackie Cutrell, Pima County Wastewater Management
Dennis Dolan, Marana Department of Transportation
Lauren Eib, Tucson Unified School District Risk Mgt
Chief Craig Encinas, Tohono O'odham Indian Nation
Lee Gagnion, Tucson Department of Transportation
Albert Garcia, Pima County Waste Water
Carol Green, Pima County Facilities Management
Tom Helfrich, Pima Flood Control District
Sgt. Steve Johnson, Town of Marana Police Department
Dan Johnson, Veterans Medical Center
William Jones, Pima County Development Services
Yves Khawam, Pima County Development Services
Steve Kreienkamp, Raytheon
Lt. Jason Larter, Oro Valley Police Department
David Lenox, Pima County Emergency Management
Lt. Sanford Levy, Tucson Police Department
Bob Lutgendorf, Pima County Facilities Management
Chief Basilio Martinez, Pascua Yaqui Fire Department
Carlos Carranza, Pascua Yaqui Facilities Management Director
Ray Silvas, Pascua Yaqui Lead Community Groundskeeper
Roman Arrellin, Pascua Yaqui Fleet Management
Jerry Rhody, Pascua Yaqui Project I Energy Manager
Larry Seligman, Pascua Yaqui Chief of Police I Public Safety Director
Miguel Escamilla, Pascua Yaqui Casino Security Manager
Marcelino Flores, Pascua Yaqui Community Development Coordinator
Richard M. Valenzuela, Pascua Yaqui Division Director of Housing
Juan Romero, Pascua Yaqui Maintenance Rehabilitation Manager
Reuben Howard, Pascua Yaqui Executive Director of Health
Lydia Goudeau, Pascua Yaqui CHR Supervisor
Feliciano Cruz, Pascua Yaqui Injury Prevention Coordinator
Tula McCarthy, Pascua Yaqui Nursing Director
John E. Jensen, Pascua Yaqui Procurement Manager
Kelly K. Gomez, Pascua Yaqui Land Office Department Director
Janet McLay, Tucson Risk Management
Richard Nassi, Tucson Department of Transportation
Asst. Chief Brad Olsen, Tucson Fire Department
Jim Porta, Tucson Department of Transportation
Kerry Reeve, Pima County Emergency Management
J
Karla Reeve-Wise, Pima County Department of Transportation
Martin Roush, Town of Sahuarita
Andy Wigg, Pima Regional Flood Control District
Tom Wilson, Tucson Department of Transportation
Consultant Team (URS Corporation)
Bob Lagomarsino, AICP
Margaret Ayala
Molly Bosley, AICP
""~,-;::-:'- ,~'*
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...............................................................................................................................................i
TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................. ............................................ .............. ............... ...... .................... i
LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................... ......... .......... ......... ................ .......... .......... ....... ....... i ii
LIST OF TABLES......................................................................................... ..................... ............... .................... ........iv
EXECUTIVE SU MMARY .................................................................. ................................ ........ ....................... .....1
OFFICIAL RECORD OF ADOPTION BY LOCAL JURISDICTION......................................................................2
2.1 DMA 2000 Requirements and Approach ....................................................................................................................... 2
2.2 Official Record of Adoption ............................................................................................................................................2
INTRODUCTION ......................... ........... ................ ........ .................. .................. ........ ................................ ...........3
3.1 Background...... ................... ............. ............ ........... ............. ................... .......................... ............ .......... ....... ......... ...... 3
3.1.1 Arizona's Growing Smarter Initiative.........................................................................................................................3
3.2 Plan Purpose and Authority .................................................. ......................................................................................... 4
3.3 Plan Description ...... ................. ............. ......................... ................ ............... ...................... .............. ........ .......... ....... ... 5
3.3.1 Community Description............ .......... ............................ .............. ....................... ............. .............. ....... .......... .......... 5
3.3.2 Risk Assessment.......... ........................ ........... .............. .................... ................. ................... ......... ......... ................. 5
3.3.3 Capability Assessment and Goals, Objectives and Actions ..................................................................................... 6
3.4 Multi-Jurisdictional Participation Information .................................................................................................................6
3.4.1 List of Participating Jurisdictions............................................................................................................................... 6
3.4.2 Description of Each Jurisdiction's Participation in the Planning Process ................................................................. 6
3.5 Planning Process Documentation .................................................................................................................................7
3.5.1 Description of Steering ColTVTlittee Formation ..........................................................................................................7
3.5.2 Hazard Mitigation Plan Steering Committee............................................................................................................. 9
3.5.3 Hazard Mitigation Steering Committee Activities...................................................................................................... 9
3.5.4 Planning Process Milestones........ ........... ....... .......... ... ....... ............,. ..... .................. ........... ...... ......... ......... ....... ..... 10
3.5.5 Public Involvement............ ................ .......... ............... ................. ................ ................... ............ .......... ........ ........... 10
3.5.6 Existing Plans or Studies Reviewed ....................................................................................................................... 11
3.5.7 Action Strategies.. .............. ............... ............ ................ .............. ........................ ..... ........ ............ ........... ......... ....... 11
3.5.8 Arizona's Growing Smarter Initiative....................................................................................................................... 13
COMMUNITY PROFILES ....................... ................ ............... ............................... ...................... ..................... ...15
4.1 Pima County ........................................................................................... ........................... .......................................... 15
4.1.1 History.......... ...................... ............ ........... .............. .................. ....................... ..... ........... .......... ......... ......... ........... 15
4.1.2 Geography......... ................ ............ ............. ............... .................. ................... ................ ....... ..... .......... .................. 15
4.1.3 Climate.. .................. ............................ ............ ............... .................... ................ ................ ....... ............. ................. 15
4.1.4 Geology .... .............. ................. ......................... .............. ........ ........... ...................... ..... ........ .......... ........... ............. 16
4.1.5 Govemment............ ................. ............... ................ ........... ...................... ............... ......... ................. ........ .............. 16
4.1.6 Transportation................. ............. ............. ........... ............... .......................... ................ .............. .......... ...... ............ 17
4.1.7 Land Ownership............... .............. ........... .............. ............... ......................... ............... .............. ................... ........ 19
4.1.8 Demographics.... ..................... ............ ........... .............. ..... ................. ................ ................ ............. ........ ........ ........ 19
4.2 Town of Marana...... .................. .............. ............. .............. ..................... ................... ........ ......... ......... ........................ 20
4.3 Town of Ora Valley ......................................................................................................................................................23
4.4 Pascua Yaqui Tribe .....................................................................................................................................................25
4.5 Town of Sahuarita ............... .............. .......................... ................ ....................... ................... ............................. ......... 27
4.6 City of South Tucson ...................................................................................................................................................29
4.7 T ohono O'odham Nation ......................... .......... ................ ..... ................ ..................................... ................... ............. 31
4.8 City of Tucson.............. ......................................... ........... ............................ .................... ............................................ 33
RISK ASSESSMENT.. .......... ................................ ......... ............... ......................................................................36
5.1 DMA 2000 Requirements and Approach ..................................................................................................................... 36
5.2 Hazard Identification and Screening................... ......... .................. ............................ .................. ................. .......... ..... 36
5.3 Data Limitations...... ..................... ............. ......... ............. ......................... ........................ .............. ......................... ..... 38
5.4 Hazard Profiles........ ..... ................ ............... .......... .............. ............................................... ...................... ......... .......... 39
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Pima County Multi-Jurlsdictional HaZEI'd Mitigation Plan (Drat/: October 31, 2005)
URS
f
5.4.1 Dam Failure ........................ ........ ...... .... ...... .............. .... ..... ........ ............ ......... .............. .......................... .......... ...... 39
5.4.2 Disease. .............. ........... ...... ........ ... ..... ............. ......... ....... ..... .............. ........ ... .... ..... ......... ......... .... ............ ......... .... 45
5.4.3 Drought ..................................................... ......... ......... ........ ......... ......... ............. .................... ..... ........................ .... 49
5.4.4 Earthquake ........................................... .............. ..................................... ............. .................. ........... .......... ........... 55
5.4.5 Extreme Heat.... ............................................. ........ ......... ............... ......... ....... ................... ............... ........... ..... ....... 61
5.4.6 Flood....................................... ................. ..................... ..................... ...... .... ............... ............... ......... .......... .......... 64
5.4.7 Hail...... ....... .... ....... ...... ...... ... ...... ..... '" ..... ...... ..... ...... ........ ..... .... ..... .............. ..... ..................... ........... ....... ........ ....... 75
5.4.8 Hazardous Material (HAZMA T) Event .................................................................................................................... 79
5.4.9 Lightning ............ ................................. ............................. ...... ...:..................... ............. ............ ................. .......... .... 85
5.4.10 Severe Winds............ ...... ........... ........... ........... ........... ............ .............. ....... ...................... .............. ........... ....... 88
5.4.11 Subsidence ........................................................................................................................................................89
5.4.12 Thunderstorm... ......... ...... ........ ........ ............. .... ......... ..... ..... ... ............... ........ ...................... ............................... 93
5.4.13 T omado.......... .... ..... ...... ...... ........ ... ............... ....... .... ... ..... ............... ............. ........ ........ ... .......... .......... ...... ... ...... 99
5.4.14 Tropical Cyclone .............................................................................................................................................. 101
5.4.15 Wildfire ..... ......................................... ............... ...................... ...... ..................... ...................... ............... .......... 103
5.5 Asset Inventory............... ............... ...... ........... ...... ...... ........................ ............. ....... ................ ...... ........ ........ ............. 112
5.5.1 Population. ............................. ....... .......... ........... ........ ............... ...... ............. ............ ..... .............. ................ .......... 112
5.5.2 Buildings........................... ......................... ........... ........... ............ ...................... .......... ...................... ................... 114
5.5.3 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure.......................................................................................................................114
5.6 Vulnerability Assessment.............. ............................................ .................... ...... ......... ................ ....... ......... ........ ..... 116
5.6.1 Methodology.. ............... ...... ................. ............................... ................. ....... ................. ...................... ............ ....... 116
5.6.2 Development Trend Analysis.................... ................. ...... .............. ........ ......... ...... ....... ................. ........... ............. 139
6. M ITIGA TION STRA TEG Y ....... ..................... ..................... ......... ....................... ............................... .................141
6.1 Capability Assessment....... ................................................. ............................... ................ .......... ............... ......... ..... 141
6.1.1 Oro Valley ............................................................................................................................................................. 143
6.1.2 Pascua Yaqui.. .................. ............................ .......... ...... ........ ......... .......................... ..... ........... ......... ............... ..... 144
6.1.3 Sahuarita ........................ ...... ............... ..................... ....... ..................... ...... .............. .............. ...... .................. ...... 145
6.1.4 South Tucson..... ......... ................ ................ ..... ..................... ......... ............. .......... .................................. .............. 146
6.1.5 Tohono O'odham Nation....................................................................................................................................... 147
6.1.6 Tucson.. ........... ..................................................... ..... ........................................... ........ ..... ................................... 148
6.1.7 Unincorporated Pima County................................................................................................................................ 149
6.2 Hazard Mitigation Goals, Objectives, and Actions..................................................................................................... 150
6.2.1 Definitions ................ ...... ...... ......... ..... .......... ............................... .............. ..... ................. ......... .... ..... ........... ......... 150
6.2.2 Goals, Objectives and Potential Actions...............................................................................................................150
6.2.3 Marana..... ..... ................. ... ........ ...... ..... ... ..... ....... .......... ...... ... ....... .... ...... ............ ................. ............. ...... .............. 151
6.2.4 Oro Valley......................................... ................................ ..................... ....... ........... ....... ........... ............... ............ 158
6.2.5 Pascua yaqui.............. ................................................... ............. ............ ..... ........ ............................. .......... ..... ..... 164
6.2.6 Sahuarita ................. ......................................... ......... ................................. ....................... ..... ............... ............... 172
6.2.7 South Tucson....... .......... .... ..... ............... .... .... .... ................................. .................... .................. .... ... ........ ........ ..... 176
6.2.8 Tucson.. ....... ...... ......................... ..... ........... ....,.... ....... ....................... ............ ......... ..... .......................... ............... 185
6.2.9 Unincorporated Pima County........ ........ ........... ..... .......... ....... ........ ..... ....... ................. .... ............ ......... ..:.. ....... ..... 192
6.3 Potential Actions and Evaluation Process ................................................................................................................. 200
6.4 Action Plans..................... .............................. ........................... ............. ........... ......................................................... 202
7. PLAN MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES... .................. .............. .......................... ....................... ....................... 219
7.1 Monitoring, Evaluating and Updating the Plan .......................................................................................................... 219
7.1.1 Plan Monitoring ..........................:..........................................................................................................................220
7.1.2 Plan Evaluation ..................................................................................................................................................... 220
7.1.3 Plan Updates ........................................................................................................................................................220
7.1.4 Implementation Through Existing Programs... .................................................................... ................ ..................221
7.1.5 Continued Public Involvement ..............................................................................................................:...............221
Pima County AluIi-JlIisdictiona/ Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Orall: October 31, 2(05)
URS
H
~_."""""''''"''''~0....-<''_''m".' ,...,......'..."i,,~_"'........."',,""-,._
'::>'
r-'"
5J
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4-1 Pima County General Features ..................................................................................................................18
Figure 4-2: Marana General Features............................................... .......... ................... ..................... .............. ....... ....22
Figure 4-3: Oro Valley General Features .....................................................................................................................24
Figure 4-4: Pascua Yaqui General Features...................................,............................................................................26
Figure 4-5: Sahuarita General Features ......................................................................................................................28
Figure 4-6: South Tucson General Features................................................................................................................30
Figure 4-7: Tohono O'odham General Features ..........................................................................................................32
Figure 4-8: Tucson General Features ..........................................................................................................................35
Figure 5-1: Potentially Hazardous Dams, 2002............................................................................................................44
Figure 5-2: Arizona Precipitation, Normal and Departure, Jan 1998-Nov 2004...........................................................51
Figure 5-3: Hydrologic Drought ........................ .... ... .... .............. ...... .......... ..... .... ........ ...... .......... .... ....................... .......54
Figure 5-4: Western United States Peak Ground Acceleration Map............................................................................57
Figure 5-5: Maximum Intensity Ground Shaking and Earthquake Damage, 1887-1999..............................................58
Figure 5-6: Peak Acceleration Map. ............. ...... .... .... ... .... .......... .... .... .... ......... .... .......... .... .... ......................... ......... ....60
Figure 5-7: Summer Heat Severity .... .... ........ ............. ..... .... ................. ........................................ .... ............ ........ ........63
Figure 5-8: Floodplain Definition Sketch ......................................................................................................................64
Figure 5-9: SignifICant Floods ............ .......... .... ... ...... ......... ......... ....... ...... ......... ........ ......................... ...........................67
Figure 5-10: Repetitive Loss Properties...... .... ........... ........... ........... ..... ........ ........... ........ .... ................. .;.......... ...... ..... 70
Figure 5-11: 1oo-Year 24-Hour Probable Maximum Precipitation ...............................................................................72
Figure 5-12: 100-Year Flood Hazard Zones ................................................................................................................73
Figure 5-13: How Hail Is Formed .................................................................................................................................75
Figure 5-14: Annual Frequency of Hailstorms.............................................................................................................. 78
Figure 5-15: Extremely Hazardous Substances (EHS) Releases, 1990-2002.............................................................82
Figure 5-16: Extremely Hazardous Substance Facilities, 2002....................................................................................84
Figure 5-17: Lightning Flash Density, 1996-2000 ........................................................................................................87
Figure 5-18: Areas Historically Affected by Subsidence ................................................................................:.............92
Figure 5-19: Thunderstorm Life Cycle........................ .... ..... ....... ............ ...... .... ................... .... ...... ......... ............. .........93
Figure 5-20: Thunderstorm Hazard Severity Based on Average Duration, 1949-1977 ................................................96
Figure 5-21: Thunderstorm Hazard Severity Based on Average Number of Thunder Events, 1949-1977 ..................97
Figure 5-22: Thunderstorm Hazard Severity Based on Lightning Strike Density, 1949-1977 ......................................98
Figure 5-23: How 00 Tornadoes Form? ......................................................................................................................99
Figure 5-24: Significant Wildfires, 1968-2002 ............................................................................................................106
Figure 5-25: Slope Model......... ............ ........... ................. .......... ............ ....... .... .... ....... .... ...... ....... ............... ...... .... ....1 08
Figure 5-26: Modifted National Fire Danger Rating System Fuel Model....................................................................110
Figure 5-27: Wildfire Hazard Areas............................................................................................................................111
Figure 5-28: Potentially Vulnerability Populations (Percentage of Jurisdictional Total).............................................113
Pima County Mull/-Jurisdictional HazErd Mitigation Plan (Dralt: OcIober 31, 2(05)
URS
i;;
~~~'
J:J
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1: DMA 2000 Requirements - Prerequisites......................................................................................................2
Table 4-1: Average Annual Temperature and Precipnation .........................................................................................16
Table 4-2: Population for Pima County and Incorporated Entities, 2000-2030............................................................19
Table 4-3: Employment for Pima County and Incorporated Entities ............................................................................19
Table 4-4: Population and Employment, Marana, 1990-2030......................................................................................20
Table 4-5: Population and Employment, Oro Valley, 1990-2030 .................................................................................23
Table 4-6: Population, Pascua Yaqui, 1990-2030........................................................................................................25
Table 4-7: Population and Employment, Sahuama, 1990-2030...................................................................................27
Table 4-8: Population and Employment, South Tucson, 1990-2030............................................................................29
Table 4-9: Population, Tohono O'odham Nation, 1990-2030.......................................................................................31
Table 4-10: Population and Employment, Tucson, 1990-2030 ....................................................................................33
Table 5-1: DMA 2000 Requirements - Risk Assessment ............................................................................................36
Table 5-2: Pima County Historical Hazard Event Database Fields ..............................................................................37
Table 5-3: Historical Record of Hazards in Pima County by Type ...............................................................................38
Table 5-4: Identified Dams in Pima County, 2002........................................................................................................41
Table 5-5: NID Downstream Hazard Potential Classes ...............................................................................................42
Table 5-6: Potentially Hazardous Dams in Pima County, 2002 ...................................................................................42
Table 5-7: Earthquake PGA, Magnitude and Intensity Comparison.............................................................................56
Table 5-8: National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Loss Statistics, 1978-2003.......................................................68
Table 5-9: National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Policy Holders, 2003................................................................68
Table 5-10: Flood Probability Terms ............................................................................................................................69
Table 5-11: 100-Year Floodplains In Pima County by Jurisdiction...............................................................................71
Table 5-12: Tucson WFO Weather Advisories.............................................................................................................74
Table 5-13: Estimating Hail Size .................................................................................................................................. 76
Table 5-14: Average Number of Days with Thunderstorms and Hail In Pima County By Month (1961-1990).............76
Table 5-15: National Response Center Extremely Hazardous Substances Incidents in Pima County, 1990-2003.....81
Table 5-16: Extremely Hazardous Substance (EHS) Facilities in Pima County, 2003.................................................83
Table 5-17: Estimated Cumulative Damage From Subsidence by Type in Arizona, 1991..........................................90
Table 5-18: Fujita Tornado Scale.................................................................................................................................99
Table 5-19: Classification Criteria for Tropical, Subtropical, and Extratropical Cyclones ...........................................101
Table 5-20: SaffirlSimpson Hurricane Scale Ranges.................................................................................................101
Table 5-21: Significant Wildfires in Pima County by Jurisdiction, 1968.2002.............................................................105
Table 5-22: FEMAlIFCI Wildfire Susceptibility Matrix.................................................................................................105
Table 5-23: Pima County Populations Potentially Vulnerable to Hazards, 2000........................................................112
Table 5-24: Buildings in Pima County, 2000 ..............................................................................................................114
Table 5-25: Abbreviations for Jurisdiction Critical Facilities .......................................................................................114
Table 5-26: Inventory of Potential Exposure to Critical Facilities from Hazards by Jurisdiction .................................115
Table 5-27: Potential Exposure and Losses from Drought Hazard ............................................................................119
Table 5-28: Potential Exposure and Loss from Earthquake Hazard ..........................................................................120
Table 5-29: Potential Exposure and Loss from Flood Hazard....................................................................................121
Table 5-30: Potential Exposure and Losses from Hail Hazard...................................................................................121
Table 5-31: Potential Exposure from HAZMAT Hazard (1-Mile Radius) ....................................................................122
Table 5-32: Potential Exposure from HAZMAT Hazard (2-Mile Radius) ....................................................................122
Table 5-33: Potential Exposure and Loss from Severe Wind Hazard ........................................................................123
Table 5-34: Exposure from Subsidence Hazard (Historical) ......................................................................................123
Table 5-35: Exposure from Subsidence Hazard (Water Level Decline) .....................................................................124
Table 5-36: Potential Exposure and Losses from Thunderstorm Hazard................................................................... 125
Table 5-37: Potential Exposure and Loss from Tornado Hazard ...............................................................................125
Pima County Mulli-JlIisclictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Dral!: October 31, 2(05)
URS
iv
-~>~.,:'
r'"
1':"
,-",- j
Table 5-38: Potential Exposure from Wilclfjre Hazard (Extreme Risk)........................................................................126
Table 5-39: Potential Exposure from Wilclfjre Hazard (High Risk) .............................................................................126
Table 5-40: Potential Exposure from Wildfire Hazard (Medium Risk) ........................................................................127
Table 5-41: Potential Exposure from Wilclfjre Hazard (Combined Extreme, High and Medium Risks) ......................127
Table 5-42: Summary of Exposure and Loss from Hazards in Pima County .............................................................128
Table 5-43: Summary of Exposure and Loss from Hazards in Marana......................................................................129
Table 5-44: Summary of Exposure and Loss from Hazards in Oro Valley.................................................................130 '
Table 5-45: Summary of Exposure and Loss from Hazards in Pascua Yaqui............................................................131
Table 5-46: Summary of Exposure and Loss from Hazards in Sahuarita ..................................................................132
Table 5-47: Summary of Exposure and Loss from Hazards in South Tucson............................................................133
Table 5-48: Summary of Exposure and Loss from Hazards in Tohono O'odham......................................................134
Table 5-49: Summary of Exposure and Loss from Hazards in Tucson ..................................................................;...135
Table 5-50: Summary of Exposure and Loss from Hazards in Unincorporated Pima County.................................... 136
Table 5-51: Summary of Special Needs Population Exposure to All Hazards in Pima County ..................................138
Table 6-1: Marana Legal and Regulatory Capability .........................................................................................................142
Table 6-2: Marana Administrative and Technical Capacity ................................................................................................142
Table 6-3: Marana Fiscal Capability ................................................................................................................................142
Table 6-4: Ora Valley Legal and Regulatory Capability .....................................................................................................143
Table 6-5: Ora Valley Administrative and Technical Capacity ............................................................................................143
Table 6-6: Fiscal Capability............ ........ ...... ...... .... ........ ..... .... ... ............... ....................... .......... ........... ......... ....... ........ .143
Table 6-7: Pascua Yaqui Legal and Regulatory Capability ................................................................................................144
Table 6-8: Pascua Yaqui Administrative and Technical Capacity ..............................................................................144
Table 6-9: Pascua Yaqui Fiscal Capability .........................................................................................00'............................144
Table 6-10: Sahuarita Legal and Regulatory Capability.....................................................................................................145
Table 6-11: Sahuarita Administrative and Technical Capacity............................................................................................145
Table 6-12: Sahuarita Fiscal Capability ...........................................................................................................................145
Table 6-13: South Tucson Legal and Regulatory Capability ..............................................................................................146
Table 6-14: South Tucson Administrative and Technical Capacity .....................................................................................146
Table 6-15: South Tucson Fiscal Capability .....................................................................................................................146
Table 6-16: ToOOoo O'odham Nation Legal and Regulatory Capability ...............................................................................147
Table 6-17: Tohono O'odham Administrative and Technical Capacity ................................................................................147
Table 6-18: Tohooo O'odham Fiscal Capability ................................................................................................................147
Table 6-19: Tucson Legal and Regulatory Capability ........................................................................................................148
Table 6-20: Tucson Administrative and Technical Capacity ...............................................................................................148
Table 6-21: Tucson Fiscal Capability ..................................................:...........................................................................148
Table 6-22: Legal and Regulatory CapabUity ...................................................................................................................149
Table 6-23: Pima County Administrative and Technical Capacity .......................................................................................149
Table 6-24: Pima County Fiscal Capability ......................................................................................................................149
Table 6-25: DMA 2000 Requirements - Mitigation Strategy ......................................................................................150
Table 6-26: DMA 2000 Requirements -Implementation of Mitigation Measures ......................................................202
Table 6-27: Marana Mitigation Action Plan ................................................................................................................203
Table 6-28: Oro Valley Mitigation Action Plan............................................................................................................205
Table 6-29: Pascua Yaqui Mitigation Action Plan ......................................................................................................207
Table 6-30: Sahuarita Mitigation Action Plan .............................................................................................................210
Table 6-31: South Tucson Mitigation Action Plan ......................................................................................................212
Table 6-32: Tucson Mitigation Action Plan.......... ............. .............. ........... ........... ......... .... ................. ......... ..... ...... ... .214
Table 6-33: Unincorporated Pima County Mitigation Action Plan ..............................................................................217
Table 7-1: DMA 2000 Requirements - Monitoring, Evaluating, and Updating the Plan.............................................219
Table 7-2: DMA 2000 Requirements -Implementation Through Existing Programs.................................................221
Table 7-3: DMA 2000 Requirements - Continued Public Involvement ......................................................................222
Pima County Mul/i.Jurisdictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
v
;;i~~1
$J
1, EXECUTiVE SUMMARY
Across the United States, natural and human-caused disasters have led to increasing levels of death, injury, property
damage, and interruption of business and govemment services. The toll on families and individuals can be immense
and damaged businesses cannot contribute to the economy. The time, money and effort to respond to and recover
from these emergencies or disasters divert public resources and attention from other important programs and
problems. With 66 federal or state declarations, 261 other events, and a combined total of 327 disaster events
recorded, the seven jurisdictions con1ained within Pima County, Arizona recognize the consequences of disasters
and the need to reduce the impacts of natural and human-caused hazards.
The elected and appointed officials of Pima County also know that with careful selection, mitigation actions in the
form of projects and programs can become long-term, cost effective means for reducing the impact of natural and
human-caused hazards. Applying this know/edge, the Pima County Hazard Mitigation Steering Committee consisting
of represen1atives from Pima County Unincorporated Area, City of Marana, City of Om Valley, Pascua Yaqui Tribe,
C~y of Sahuatita, City of South Tucson, and City of Tucson coHaborated to prepare this multi-jurisdictional hazard
mitigation plan. With the support of various city offICials, county officials, native nations, URS Corporation
consultants, the State of Arizona, Pima County Office of Emergency Management and Homeland Security, and the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), this plan is the result of nearly a year's worth of work to develop a
multi-hazard mitigation plan that will guide the County toward greater disaster resistance in full harmony with the
character and needs of the community and region.
Both people and property within Pima County are at risk from a variety of hazards that have the potential for causing
widespread loss of life and damage to property, infrastructure, and the environment. The purpose of hazard
mitigation is to implement actions that eliminate the risk from hazards, or reduce the severity of the effects of hazards
on people and property. Mitigation is any sus1ained action taken to reduce or eliminate long-term risks to life and
property from hazard events. The goal of mitigation is to save lives and reduce property damage through the
encouragement of long-term reductions in hazard vulnerability. Mitigation can reduce the enormous cost of disasters
to property owners and all levels of govemment. In addition, mitigation can protect critical community facil~ies,
reduce exposure to liability and minimize community disruption. Preparedness, response, and recovery measures
support the concept of mitigation and may directly support identified mitigation actions.
The Pima County Multi-Jurisdictionaf Hazard Mitigation Plan has been prepared in compliance with Section 322 of
the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (St,fford Act or the Act), 42 U.S. C. 5165,
enacted under Sec. 104 of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, (DMA 2000) Public Law 106-390 of October 30,2000.
This plan identifies hazard mitigation measures intended to eliminate or reduce the effects of future disasters
throughout the County, and was developed in a joint and cooperative venture by members of the Pima County
Hazard Mitigation Steering Committee and each individual jurisdiction's hazard mitigation planning group. The Pima
County HMP was developed utilizing a regional approach to include all Pima County Cities and Towns as well as the
Pascua Yaqui Tribe. To sustain the multi-jurisdictional flow of the planning process and the final format of the plan,
the tribal portions of the plan were fully integrated into the overall plan. Even though the development of tribal HMPs
must meet state-level criteria, the Pima County Steering Committee decided not to separate the Pasqua Yaqui Tribe
plan from the multi-jurisdictional plan, as the Nation is a jurisdiction within Pima County and interfaces equally with
the other Pima County jurisdictions.
Following each major disaster declaration, the County is required to review and update the Plan's goals, objectives,
and actions. Additionally, county and local jurisdictional plans must be reviewed, revised if appropriate, and
resubmitted to FEMA for approval within five years and state and tribal plans within three years in order to continue to
be eligible for Hazard M~igation Grant Program (HMGP) and Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) grant funding. It is,
however, recommended that the plan be reviewed annually to ensure it remains current. Updates, amendments, or
plan revisions should be submitted to FEMA for review. If updates are not necessary, the County should notify FEMA
in writing that the plan was reviewed and it is determined that a plan update is not required. Updates may include
new policy guidance or changes in program administration. Annual updates are an eligible activity under the Hazard
M~igation Grant Program (HMGP).
Pima County Mulli-Jllisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Dralt: October 31, 2(05)
URS
-'-"'-'~""~'-'-~""~."-~'''"''------"--",",,,,~.,.,~,
,-::~"'; ,
~..!.f: ..)
2. OFFICIAL RECORD OF ADOPTION BY LOCAL JURISDICTION
The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 addresses a range of topics, focused primarily on the importance of pre-disaster
infrastructure mitigation planning to reduce disaster losses nationwide and to control and streamline the
administration of both federal disaster relief and programs to promote mitigation activ~ies. According to the Act, the
purpose of Title 1- Pre-disaster Hazard Mitigation is:
. .. to establish a national disaster hazard mitigation program -
(1) to reduce the loss of lite and property, human suffering, economic disruption, and
disaster assistance costs resulting from natural disasters; and
(2) to provide a source of pre-disaster hazard mitigation funding that will assist States
and local governments (including Indian tribes) in implementing effective hazard
mitigation measures that are designed to ensure the continued functionality of critical
services and facilities after a natural disaster.
Major provisions of the Act include the following: funding for pre-disaster mitigation activities; developing muni-hazard
maps to better understand risk; establishing state and local government infrastructure mitigation planning
requirements; defining how states can assume more responsibility in managing the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
(HMGP); and adjusting methods in which management costs for projects are funded.
It is important to note that this document is designed as an instrument of ~igation primarily for natural disasters and
other environmentally related events. Atthough some human involvement is impliedw~h many of the hazards profiled
herein, this document is not intended to address the prevention or mitigation of the possible impacts of terrorist
activity. The term terrorism encompasses intentional, criminal or malicious acts involving Weapons of Mass
Destruction (WMDs), including biological, chemical, nuclear, and radiological weapons; arson, incendiary, explosive,
and armed attacks; industrial sabotage and intentional hazardous material releases; and cyber-terrorism (attacks via
computer means). Therefore, while such a terrorist event could possibly trigger a response that is addressed through
this document (e.g., chemical release), it is not the intent of the Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation
Plan, or the State of Arizona Hazard Mitigation Plan, to preemptively address these specifIC events. Included in this
plan is a description of parallel processes that are now underway to address terrorism.
Table 2.1: DMA 2000 Reaulrements . PrereQuisites
Section TItle Requirement Language
Prerequisites Adoption by S201.6(cX5): [The local hazard mitigation plan shall include] documentation that the
the Local plan has been formally adopted by the governing body of the
Governing jurisdiction requesting approval of the plan (e.g., City Council, County
Body Commissioner [Board of Supervisors], Tribal Council)...
Source: FEMA. July 11, 2002.
To be completed.
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft October 31, 2005)
URS
2
..)
3. INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this section is to provide an overview of the Pima County Multi-Jurisdictiona/ Hazard Mitigation Plan.
This includes a review of the background, authority and purpose of the plan, and a description of the plan document.
The Pima County Mufti-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan has been prepared in compliance with Section 322 of
the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act or the Act), 42 U.S. C. 5165,
enacted under Sec. 104 of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, (DMA 2(00) Public Law 106-390 of October 30,2000.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has further clarified the hazard mitigation planning
requirements of the Act in a number of Interim Final Rules. In addition, FEMA clarified its methodology for evaluation
of the hazard mitigation plans under DMA 2000 in an Interim Criteria document and provided significant
methodological assistance with its related How-To Guides.
On February 26, 2002, FEMA published an Interim Final Rule in the Federal Register that established the hazard
mitigation planning requirements enacted in the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. This rule addresses state mitigation
planning, identifieS new local mitigation planning requirements, authorizes Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP)
funds for planning activities, and increases the amount of HMGP funds available to States that develop a
comprehensive, enhanced mitigation plan. This rule also requires that repairs or construction funded by a disaster
loan or grant must be carried out in accordance with applicable standards and states that FEMA may require safe
land use and construction practices as a condition of grantees receiving disaster assistance under the Stafford Act.
FEMA published a new Interim Final Rule in the October 1, 2002 Federal Register, whose primary purpose was to
extend the date that state and local mitigation plans must be completed to be eligible for post-disaster assistance
from November 1, 2003 to November 1, 2004.
FEMA prepared further guidance to assist states, local, and tribal govemments to meet the new DMA 2000 planning
requirements through a document titled State and Local Plan Interim Criteria Under the Disaster Mitigation Act of
2000. The document has two major objectives:
· To help federal and state reviewers evaluate mitigation plans from different jurisdictions in a fair and consistent
manner; and
· To help state and local jurisdictions to develop new mitigation plans or modify existing ones in accordance with
the criteria of Section 322.
The requirements for a hazard mitigation plan according to the Interim Criteria are defined in tables with the
corresponding Pima County Mufti-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan sections.
3.1.1 Arizona's Growing Smarter Initiative
The Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan has been created to identify a process through which
local communities in Pima County can effectively plan for and mitigate the most severe natural hazards that affect the
region. Since the nature of the built environrrlent of Pima County is so closely tied to the ability of its communities to
create effective mechanisms to address both natural and human caused disasters, it is essential that the mitigation
planning process be well integrated with the local government comprehensive land use planning process. Given this
linkage, it is beneficial to understand the nature of growth in Pima County, as well as the State of Arizona's statutory
frarrlework for local governrrlent planning and growth managerrlent.
Since 1973, most cities, towns, and counties in Arizona have been required to develop plans for communities looking
at issues such as land use, circulation, housing, public services and facilities, and conservation, rehabilitation, and
redevelopment. As growth rates signifICantly increased in the 1990s, a critical mass of political support errlerged to
provide more tools to assist in responding to the consequences of rapid growth. In 1998, the Arizona Legislature
passed the Growing Smarter Act, which clarified and strengthened planning elements in the required plans of
municipalities and counties and added four new elerrlents, namely: Open Space, Growth Areas, Environrrlental
Planning, and Cost of Development. In 2000, the Legislature passed Growing Smarter/Plus to further enhance land
use planning statutes in Arizona (Arizona Department of Commerce, 2004).
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hal~d Mitigation Plan (Dralt: October 31, 2(05)
URS
3
-;~.-
r'~
-:'7 ,)
Among the highlights of Growing Smarter/Plus are the following:
. Requires larger and fast-growing cities to obtain voter approval of their general plans at least once every ten
years;
. Requires mandatory rezoning conformance with General and Comprehensive Plans;
. Requires more effective public participation in the planning process;
. Requires cities and counties to exchange plans, coordinate with regional planning agencies, and encourages
comments between entities prior to adoption to encourage regional coordination; and
. Requires landowner permission for plan designation and rezoning of private property to open space.
Perhaps the most relevant requirement of Growing Smarter/Plus conceming hazard mitigation is the mandate that
new general plans in Arizona include an Environmental Planning/Safety Element, which contains analysis, policies,
and strategies to address any anticipated effects of the plan's elements and new development called for by the plan
on air and water quality and natural resources. These requirements, while instituted prior to DMA 2000, set the stage
for effective coordination between land use planning and mitigation planning.
As noted above, the Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan has been prepared in compliance with
the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000), the Interim Final Rules, and related documents. In addition to
complying with the legislation, the overall purpose of the plan is to establish a comprehensive disaster hazard
mitigation program to reduce the loss of life and property, human suffering, economic disruption, and disaster
assistance costs resulting from natural and human-caused disasters in the community. A more detailed description of
the goals of the Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan may be found in Section 8 of this document.
This plan has been prepared with the assistance of the Pima County Hazard Mitigation Steering Committee and URS
Corporation.
The Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan is intended to serve many purposes. These include the
following:
. Enhance Public Awareness and Understanding - to help residents within the County better understand the
natural and human-caused hazards that threaten public health, safety, and welfare; economic vitality; and the
operational capability of important instnutions;
. Create a Decision Tool for Management - to provide information that managers and leaders of local
govemment. business and industry, community associations, and other key instnutions and organizations
need to take action to address vulnerabilities to future disasters;
. Promote Compliance with State and Federal Program Requirements - to insure that Pima County and its
jurisdictions can take full advantage of state and federal grant programs, policies, and regulations that
encourage or mandate that local governments develop comprehensive hazard mitigation plans;
. Enhance Local Policies for Hazard Mitigation Capability - to provide the policy basis for mitigation actions that
should be promulgated by participating jurisdictions to create a more disaster-resistant future;
. Inter-Jurisdictional Coordination of Mitigation-Related Programming - to ensure that proposals for mitigation
inniatives are reviewed and coordinated between Pima County and the other jurisdictions contained within the
County; and
. Regulatory Compliance - To qualify for certain forms of federal aid for pre- and post-disaster funding, local
jurisdictions must comply wnh the federal DMA 2000 and its implementing regulations (44 CFR Section 201.6,
published February 26, 2002). DMA 2000 intends for hazard mitigation plans to remain relevant and current.
Therefore, ~ requires that State hazard mitigation plans are updated every three years and local plans every
five years. This means that the Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan uses a "five-year
planning horizon". It is designed to carry the County through the next five years, after which its assumptions,
goals, and objectives will be revisited and the plan resubmitted for approval.
In the past, federal legislation has provided funding for disaster relief, recovery, and some hazard mitigation planning.
DMA 2000 is the latest legislation to improve this planning process and was put into motion on October 10, 2000,
Pima County Mul/i-Jurisdictional HazlJ'd Mitigation Plan (Ofafl: October 31. 2005)
URS
4
J
when the President signed the Act (Public law 106-390). The new legislation reinforces the importance of mitigation
planning and emphasizes planning for disasters before they occur. As such, this Act establishes a pre-disaster
hazard mitigation program and new requirements for the national post-disaster Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
(HMGP).
Section 322 of the Act specifically addresses mitigation planning at the state and local levels. It identifies new
requirements that allow HMGP funds to be used for planning activities, and increases the amount of HMGP funds
available to states that have developed a comprehensive, enhanced mitigation plan prior to a disaster. States and
communities must have an approved mitigation plan in place prior to receiving post-disaster HMGP funds. local and
tribal mitigation plans must demonstrate that their proposed mitigation measures are based on a sound planning
process that accounts for the risk to and the capabilities of the individual communities.
DMA 2000 is intended to facilitate cooperation between state and local authorities, prompting them to work together.
It encourages and rewards local and state pre-disaster planning and promotes sustainability as a strategy for disaster
resistance. This enhanced planning network will better enable local and state governments to articulate accurate
needs for mitigation, resulting in faster allocation of funding and more effective risk reduction projects.
To implement the new DMA 2000 requirements, FEMA prepared an Interim Final Rule, published in the Federal
Register on February 26, 2002, at 44 CFR Parts 201 and 206, which establishes planning and funding criteria for
states and local communities. The Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan has been prepared to
meet FEMA requirements thus making Pima County and its incorporated jurisdictions eligible applicant agents for
funding and technical assistance from state and federal hazard mitigation programs.
The Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan consists of the following primary components. Note,
where possible, individual communities and the unincorporated area of the County were separately defined.
3.3.1 Community Description
In order to provide an adequat~ background for the hazard profiles and risk assessment presented in subsequent
chapters, jurisdictions within Pima County were described in detail. These descriptions include a general history and
background for each jurisdiction, information on the historic and future trends for demographic, population, and
economic conditions that have shaped these areas, and a brief identifICation of growth trends and general plan
themes currently being experienced in the jurisdiction.
3.3.2 Risk Assessment
The risk assessment seeks to identify hazards potentially affecting the County, provide detailed descriptions of the
hazards, assess the risks associated with such hazards, describe the County's and each jurisdiction's vulnerability to
such hazards, and estimate potential losses to persons and property from each hazard. To meet the requirements for
the risk assessment according to DMA 2000, Pima County used a step-wise approach detailed in Understanding
Your Risks: Identifying Hazards and Estimating Losses (FEMA 2001).
Through this process the planning team identified and compiled relevant data on all potential natural hazards that
threaten the County. Information collected includes historical data on natural hazard events that occurred in and
around participating jurisdictions and how these events impacted its population and property. Based upon historical
occurrences and the best available data from agencies such as FEMA and the National Weather Service, the
planning team identified and described all natural hazards that threaten Pima County. Detailed hazard profiles
include information on the frequency, magnitude, location and impact for each hazard in addition to estimating the
probabilities for future hazard events. Maps are included to delineate identified hazard areas and previous hazard
occurrences.
In addition to assessing potential hazards, an inventory of assets was prepared that may be affected by natural
hazards such as people, housing units, critical facilities, special facilities, infrastructure and lifelines, hazardous
materials faci6ties and commercial facilities. loss estimates were compiled by assessing the potential impacts from
each hazard using F~MA's Hazards U.S. (HAZUS-MH) multi-hazard loss estimation model and other risk modeling
Pima County IIuIti-JfliS<fdional Hazlrd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
5
"....~,.
,$' ,)
techniques. This information provides Pima County leadership with information outlining the full range of hazards and
the potential social impacts, damages and economic losses confronting each community.
3.3.3 Capability Assessment and Goals, Objectives and Actions
While not required by DMA 2000, an important component of the mitigation strategy is a thorough review of the
jurisdiction's resources in order to identify, evaluate, and enhance the capability of local resources to mitigate the
effects of hazards. The capability assessment examines the community's legal and regulatory capability, describes
the administrative and technical ability of personnel resources, and considers financial resources necessary to
implement the mitigation strategy.
Utilizing the findings of the capability and risk assessments, the consu~ant team worked with the Pima County
Hazard Mitigation Steering Committee to draft an overall mitigation strategy for the County, including specific
strategies for individual jurisdictions. This group collaborated to engage in an interactive planning process by
facilitating discussion on possible mitigation activities and gaining consensus on the identifICation of the general
planning goals and target objectives for the hazard mitigation plan. In addition, each community participating in the
plan worked with its own hazard mitigation planning group at the jurisdiction level. Based upon these goals and
objectives, the Pima County Hazard Mitigation Steering Committee reviewed and adopted a comprehensive range of
appropriate mitigation measures to address the many risks facing the County. Such measures include preventive
actions, property protection techniques, natural resource protection strategies, structural projects, emergency
services and public information and awareness activities.
3.4.1 List of Participating Jurisdictions
The jurisdictions that participated in the planning process are listed below. Representatives from all participating
jurisdictions, local businesses, educational facilitators, various public, private and non-profit agencies, media
representatives and the general public provided input into the preparation of this plan. Local jurisdictional
representatives included but were not limited to fire chiefs/officials, police chiefs/officials, planners and other
jurisdictional officials/staff. See full list of participants on the first page of the HMP under "Acknowledgements".
. Pima County - Unincorporated Area
. Town of Marana
. Town of Oro Valley
. Pascua Yaqui Tribe
. Town of Sahuarita
. City of South Tucson
. City ofTucson
3.4.2 Description of Each Jurisdiction's Participation in the Planning Process
A representative from each jurisdiction in Pima County was selected as a lead contact for the Pima County Hazard
Mitigation Steering Committee. Each lead identified a jurisdiction-level Local Mitigation Planning Group that included
decision-makers from police, fire, emergency services, community development/planning, transportation, economic
development, public works and emergency response/services personnel within their jurisdiction. The jurisdiction-level
Local Mitigation Planning Group assisted the leads in identifying the specific hazards/risks that are of concern to
each jurisdiction and to prior~ize hazard mitigation measures. The leads brought this information to Steering
Committee meetings held regularly to provide Jurisdiction-specific input to the multi-jurisdictional planning effort and
to assure that all aspects of each Jurisdiction's concerns were addressed.s
All Pima County Hazard Mitigation Steering Committee members were given homework assignments at each of the
meetings, and the homework was completed by the Local Mitigation Planning Group and returned to URS where it
was compiled into the Plan. The homework assignments were designed after the FEMA State and Local Mitigation
Pima County MultJ-Jurlsdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
6
J
Planning How-to Guide worksheets, which led the group members through the process of defining the jurisdiction's
assets, vulnerabilities, capabilities, goals and objectives, and action items, following the ST APLEE Criteria set forth
by FEMA for the Hazard Mitigation Planning Program. The Steering Committee members were also given additional
action items at each meeting to be completed and returned to URS. Steering Committee members were contacted
when press releases were sent to area publications, the Arizona Daily Star and the Tucson Cnizen as well as all area
radio and television stations, should members of the public contact them for additional information concerning the
development and status of the HMP. In addition, several Steering Committee members communicated with URS staff
specifically to discuss hazard-related goals, objectives and actions.
Throughout the planning process, the Steering Commmee members were given maps of the profiled hazards as well
as detailed jurisdiction-level maps that illustrated the profiled hazards and critical facilities at an enhanced scale. The
Steering Committee members Were asked to review these maps with their local group members and provide URS
with updates or changes to the critical facility or hazard layers to better represent their jurisdictions. Data received
from Steering Commmee members was added to the hazard database and used in the modeling process described
in the Risk Assessment portion of the Plan.
3.5.1 Description of Steering Committee Formation
The Pima County OffICe of Emergency Management and Homeland Security (OEM&lHS) hired URS Corporation to
assist with the re-structuring and updating of the current HMP originally developed in 2000. David Lenox, the
representative for OEM&HS, contacted the members of the original Steering Committee to advise the HMP would
begin the update and re-structuring process and their participation was being requested. The response to this
announcement was overwhelming. Most all agencies and organizations from the original Steering Committee,
accepted the invitation to participate in this planning process. The Steering Committee was reactivated, with new,
additional members from Davis Monthan Air Force Base, Pima County Association of Governments, Tucson Unified
School District, Veteran's Administration Medical Center and Raytheon Missile Systems Company. Because of the
overwhelming response to the reactivation of the HMP Steering Committee, representing most FEMA-suggested
disciplines, additional invitations were not attempted. The intention of formulating a steering committee was for this
group to serve as an advisory body to undertake the planning process; meeting dates were set for all members of the
Steering Committee and interested parties to attend. In turn, the Steering Commmee members were requested to
develop their own Local Mitigation Planning Group from their city/town and tribal departments to minimally include:
Flood Control (Public Works), Planning and Development, Fire and Law Enforcement. Fortunately,- existing
partnerships and resources at the local, county, state, and federal levels were in place, which supported the efforts of
the Steering Committee and the Local Mitigation Planning Groups. Representatives from all participating jurisdictions
and tribal nations provided input on an on-going basis into the formation of this Hazard Mitigation Plan. Each city,
county, and tribal jurisdiction identified prospective members by taking into consideration the plan objectives as
defined by the guidelines published in the Federal Register Vol. 67, dated February 26,2002 and those community
members/agencies who would be an asset to this planning process. A complete list of participants, to include
Steering Committee members and Local Mitigation Planning Group members, is on table 3-2: Pima County Multi-
Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Planning Group.
Table 3-2: Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Planning Group
Chief Larry Anderson South Tucson Fire Department
Joe Bridges Davis Monthan Air Force Base
Janet Brown Pima County Risk Management
Gloria Browne Pima County Department of Transportation
Paul Casertano Pima Association of Governments
Jackie Cutrell Pima County Wastewater Management
Pima County Mufj.Jlliscfclional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
~:~....
.5'.;
Dennis Dolan Marana Department of Transportation
Lauren Eib Tucson Unified School District Risk Management
Chief Craig Encinas Tohono O'odham Indian Nation
Lee Gagnion Tucson Department of Transportation
Albert Garcia Pima County Waste Water
Carol Green Pima County Facilities Management
Tom Helfrich Pima Flood Control District
Sgt. Steve Johnson Town of Marana Police Department
Dan Johnson Veterans Medical Center
.
William Jones Pima County Development Services
Yves Khawam Pima County Development Services
Steve Kreienkamp Raytheon Missile Systems Company
Lt. Jason Larter Oro Valley Police Department
David Lenox Pima County Emergency Management
Lt. Sanford Levy Tucson Police Department
Bob Lutgendorf Pima County Facilities Management
Chief Basilio Martinez Pascua Yaqui Fire Dept
Carlos Carranza Pascua Yaqui Facilities Management Director
Ray Silvas Pascua Yaqui Lead Community Groundskeeper
Roman Arrellin Pascua Yaqui Fleet Management
Jerry Rhody Pascua Yaqui Project I Energy Manager
Larry Seligman Pascua Yaqui Chief of Police I Public Safety Director
Miguel Escamilla Pascua Yaqui Casino Security Manager
Marcelino Flores Pascua Yaqui Community Development Coordinator
Richard M. Valenzuela Pascua Yaqui Division Director of Housing
Juan Romero Pascua Yaqui Maintenance Rehabilitation Manager
Reuben Howard Pascua Yaqui Executive Director of Health
Lydia Goudeau Pascua Yaqui CHR Supervisor
Feliciano Cruz Pascua Yaqui Injury Prevention Coordinator
Tula McCarthy Pascua Yaqui Nursing Director
John E. Jensen Pascua Yaqui Procurement Manager
Kelly K. Gomez Pascua Yaqui Land Office Department Director
Janet McLay Tucson Risk Management
Richard Nassi Tucson Department of Transportation
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft October 31, 2005)
URS
8
J
Asst. Chief Brad Olsen Tucson Fire Department
Jim Porta , Tucson Department of Transportation
Kerry Reeve Pima County Emergency Management
Karia Reeve-Wise Pima County Department of Transportation
Martin Roush Town of Sahuarita, Town Engineer
Andy W199 Pima Regional Flood Control District
Tom Wilson Tucson Department of Transportation
3.5.2 Hazard Mitigation Plan Steering Committee
The Steering Committee is composed of representatives from Pima County jurisdictions, including each of the five
incorporated communities in the County, one of t'Ml Native American communities, and representation from the
unincorporated areas of Pima County. The Steering Committee met regularly, serving as a forum for the
representatives to voice their opinions and concerns about the mitigation plan. Anhough several jurisdictions had
multiple representatives on the Steering Committee, each jurisdiction selected a lead representative who acted as
the liaison between their jurisdictional local Mitigation Planning Group and the Steering Committee. Each local team,
made up of jurisdictional staff/officials met separately and provided additional local-level input to the leads for
inclusion into the Plan. The leads acted as liaisons between the Steering Committee and their local Mitigation
Planning Group throughout the development of the Plan.
3.5.3 Hazard Mitigation Steering Committee Activities
As shown through 3-1, members of the Pima County HMP Steering Committee met several times to consider,
discuss, and debate the over-all planning process as well as potential goals, objectives, and actions. At these
meetings, specific consideration was given to the County's hazard identification/profiles and the vulnerability
assessment resuns.
Table 3.1: Plannina Group Activities
Date Topic Who Attended
November 4, 2004 Meeting between URS, OEM&HS and select Pima Kim Janes, Kerry Reeve, David Lenox, Stan
County representatives to discuss over-all strategy for Levine, Bob Lagomarsino, Margaret Ayala
the multi-jurisdictional plan development and re-
of the current HMP.
Deoennber10,2004 Kick-off meeling to present an overview of the planning All members of the Steering Committee
process, methodoloavand suaaested Iimeframe.
January 11, 2005 Presented the Hazard Identificalion & Hazard Profiling, All members of the Steering Committee
to include Asset Maps. Discusses the CapabiUty
Assessment and requested worksheets to be
COfJ1lIeted by the next meeting. Previewed the Goals,
and Actions.
Febfuary, 17,2005 Presented detailed instructions of how to completed All members of the Steering Committee
the Goals, Objectives and Actions. Requested the
GOAs to be completed by the next meeling.
March 31,2005 As a group, discussed each Goal, Objective and All members of the Steering Committee
Actions. The Steering Committee along vmh the
locaI1eams requested additional time to complete their
GOAs.
Informal communications via email, telephone, and face-to-face interaction between members of the Steering
Committee and URS and between the Steering Committee and the local planning groups constituted a vast majority
of the necessary communication to complete and ensure cohesion and consistency throughout the planning process.
Pima Coullly Jlufi-JIrislfdiooaI HazlM'd Uiligation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
9
:::.,s~
/,~",!,
r"
"J. ,)
3.5.4 Planning Process Milestones
The approach taken by Pima County relied on sound planning concepts and a methodical process to identify County
vulnerabilities and to propose the mitigation actions necessary to avoid or reduce those vulnerabilities. Each step in
the planning process was built upon the previous, providing a high level of assurance that the mitigation actions
proposed by the participants and the priorities of implementation are valid. Specific milestones in the process
included:
. Risk Assessment (November, 2004 - January 2005) . The Steering Committee used the FEMA list of hazards
from the State and Local Mitigation Planning How-to Guide (How-to Guide) to identify natural hazards that
potentially threaten all or portions of the County. In addition to natural hazards, the Steering Committee also
identified human-caused hazards that may threaten all or portions of the County and individual jurisdictions.
Specific geographic areas subject to the impacts of the identified hazards were mapped using a Geographic
Information System (GIS). The Steering Committee had access to information and resources regarding hazard
identifICation and risk estimation. The consultant provided hazard specific maps, such as floodplain delineation
maps, earthquake shake potential maps, and wildfire threat maps and performed GIS-based analyses of
hazard areas and the locations of infrastructure, critical faciltties, and other properties located within their
jurisdictions.
The Steering Committee also conducted a methodical, qualitative examination of the vulnerability of important
faciltties, systems, and neighborhoods to the impacts of future disasters. GIS data and modeling results were
used to identify specific vulnerabilities that could be addressed by specifIC mitigation actions. The Steering
Committee also reviewed the history of disasters in the County and assessed the need for specific mitigation
actions based on the type and location of damage caused by past events.
Finally, the assessment of community vulnerabilities included a review of existing codes, plans, policies,
programs, and regulations used by local jurisdictions to determine whether existing provisions and
requirements adequately address the hazards that pose the greatest risk to the community.
. Goals, Objectives and Alternative Mitigation Actions (January 2005 - May 2005) - Based on this
understanding of the problems faced by the County, a series of goals and objectives were identified by the
Steering Committee to guide subsequent planning activities. In addttion, a series of alternative mitigation
actions were identified to address these goals and objectives on a community-by-community basis. This was
done in the Steering Committee meeting series described above, starting in January, and continuing through
May.
. Mitigation Plan and Implementation Strategy (May 2005 - July 2005) - The Steering Committee determined
the priorities for action from among the alternatives and developed a specific implementation strategy
including details about the organizations responsible for carrying out the actions, their estimated cost, possible
funding sources, and timelines for implementation.
3.5.5 Public Involvement
To address the requirements of DMA 2000, the Pima County OffICe of Emergency Management OEM/HS convened
a countywide Hazard Mitigation Plan Steering Committee that consisted of representatives of all seven communities
participating in the hazard mttigation planning process (i.e., Pima County, all of the cities within the county, and the
Pascua Yaqui Tribe). This group met and communicated regularly between November 2004 and July 2005 to help
craft and review important common elements of the plan. In addition, to support the activities of the Steering
Committee and focus on unique community issues, the County worked with each jurisdiction to convene a Local
Mitigation Planning Group. These teams contributed essential understanding of and information about the status of
hazard mttigation planning in the communities and developed mitigation goals, objectives, and actions for their
communities.
In November 2005, the County issued a press release regarding the preparation of the H M P. The press release was
sent to two local newspapers, the Arizona Daily Star and Tucson Cttizen as well as all area radio and television
stations. Both newspapers published the press release the week of November 14, 2005. The County provided an e-
Pima County Multi-Juriscliclional Haztld Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
10
.)
mail address, telephone number, and a physical mailing address requesting interested citizens to participate in the
planning and adoption processes.
3.5.6 Existing Plans or Studies Reviewed
Steering Committee team members and their corresponding local Mitigation Planning Groups prior to and during the
planning process reviewed several plans, studies, and guides. These included the following:
· Pima County General Plan
· Various local Community General Plans
· Various local Codes and Ordinances
· State and local Mitigation Planning How-to guide, FEMA 386-2, August 2001
· FEMA CRS-DMA2K Mitigation Planning Requirements
· Crosswalk Reference Document for Review and Submission of local Mitigation Plans to the State Hazard
Mitigation Officer and FEMA Regional Office
· Pima County Emergency Operations Plan and Recovery
3.5.7 Action Strategies
The Pima County Steering Committee identified potential hazard mitigation actions that will assist in mitigating the
impact of natural and human-caused hazards in the county. In order to evaluate these potential actions, the Steering
Committee used the STAPlEE evaluation process, which provides a systematic approach weighing the pros and
cons of potential mitigation actions. STAPlEE stands for Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, legal,
Economic, and Environmental. For each of these characteristics, a series of questions was posed that assisted in
evaluating the appropriateness of each potential action to the community, as described below:
Social. The public must support the overall implementation strategy and specifIC mitigation actions. Therefore,
the projects will have to be evaluated in terms of community acceptance by asking questions such as:
· Will the proposed action adversely affect one segment of the population?
· Will the action disrupt established neighborhoods, break up voting districts, or cause the relocation of lower
income people?
· Is the action compatible with present and future community values?
· If the community is a tribal entity, will the actions adversely affect cultural values or resources?
Technical. It is important to determine if the proposed action is technicallv feasible, will help to reduce losses in
the lona term, and has minimal secondary impacts. Here, you will determine whether the a~emative action is a
whole or partial solution, or not a solution at all, by considering the following types of issues:
· How effective is the action in avoiding or reducing future losses? If the proposed action involves upgrading
culverts and storm drains to handle a 10-year storm event, and the objective is to reduce the potential impacts
of a catastrophic flood, the proposed mitigation cannot be considered effective. Conversely, if the objective
were to reduce the adverse impacts of frequent flooding events, the same action would certainly meet the
technical feasibility criterion.
· Will it create more problems than it solves?
· Does it solve the problem or only a symptom?
Administrative. Under this part of the evaluation criteria, you will examine the anticipated staffina. fundino, and
maintenance requirements for the mitigation action to determine if the jurisdiction has the personnel and
administrative capabilities necessary to implement the action or whether outside help will be necessary.
· Does the jurisdiction have the capability (staff, technical experts, and/or funding) to implement the action, or
can it be readily obtained?
· Can the community provide the necessary maintenance?
· Can it be accomplished in a timely manner?
Pima County Mutri-JlXisddiona/ Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
11
;',;.:.,";~)
r~'~
..5' ""
Political. Understanding how your current community and state political leadership feels about issues related to
the environment, economic development, safety, and emergency management will provide valuable insight into
the level of political support you will have for mitigation activities and programs. Proposed mitigation objectives
sometimes fail because of a lack of political acceptability. This can be avoided by determining:
. Is there oolitical supPort to implement and maintain this action?
. Have pomicalleaders participated in the planning process so far?
. Is there a local/departmental champion willing to help see the action to completion? .
. Who are the stakeholders in this proposed action?
. Is there enough public supoort to ensure the success of the action?
. Have all of the stakeholders been offered an opportunity to participate in the planning process?
. How can the mitigation objectives be accomplished at the lowest .cost" to the public?
Legal. Without the appropriate legal authority, the action cannot lawfully be undertaken. When considering this
criterion, you will determine whether your jurisdiction has the legal authority at the state. tribal, or local level to
implement the action, or whether the jurisdiction must pass new laws or regulations. Each level of government
operates under a specific source of delegated authority. As a general rule, most local governments operate
under enabling legislation that gives them the power to engage in different activities. legal authority is likely to
have a signifICant role later in the process when your state. tribe, or community will have to determine how
mitigation activities can best be carried out, and to what extent mitigation policies and programs can be
enforced.
. Does the state. tribe, or community have the authority to implement the proposed action?
. Is there a technical, scientifIC. or legal basis for the mitigation action (i.e., does the mitigation action "fit" the
hazard setting)?
. Are the proper laws, ordinances. and resolutions in place to implement the action?
. Are there any potential legal consequences?
. Will the community be liable for the actions or support of actions. or lack of action?
. Is the action likely to be challenged by stakeholders who may be negatively affected?
Economic. Every local, state, and tribal government experiences budget constraints at one time or another.
Cost-effective mitigation actions that can be funded in current or upcoming budget cycles are much more likely
to be implemented than mitigation actions requiring general obligation bonds or other instruments that would
incur long-term debt to a community. States and local communities with tight budgets or budget shortfalls may
be more willing to undertake a mitigation initiative if it can be funded, at least in part, by outside sources. "Big
ticker mitigation actions, such as large-scale acquisition and relocation, are often considered for implementation
in a post-disaster scenario when additional federal and state funding for mitigation is available.
Economic considerations must include the present economic base and projected growth and should be based on
answers to questions such as:
. Are there currently sources of funds that can be used to implement the action?
. What benefits will the action provide?
. Does the cost seem reasonable for the size of the problem and likely benefits?
. What burden will be placed on the tax base or local economy to implement this action?
. Does the action contribute to other community economic coals, such as capital improvements or economic
development? .
. What proposed actions should be considered but be "tabled" for implementation until outside sources of
fundina are available?
Environmental. Impact on the environment is an important consideration because of public desire for
sustainable and environmentally hea~hy communities and the many statutory considerations, such as the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), to keep in mind when using federal funds. You will need to evaluate
Pima County Mulli-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Dralt: October 31, 2005)
URS
12
..)
whether, when implementing mitigation actions, there would be negative consequences to environmental assets
such as threatened and endangered species, wetlands, and other protected natural resources.
· How will this action affect the environment (land, water, endangered species)?
· Will this action comply with local, state, and federal environmental laws or regulations?
· Is the action consistent with community environmental goals?
Numerous mitigation actions may well have beneficial impacts on the environment. For instance, acquisition and
relocation of structures out of the floodplain, sediment and erosion control actions, and stream corridor al'!d
wetland restoration projects all help restore the natural function of the floodplain. Also, vegetation management
in areas susceptible to wildfires can greatly reduce the potential for large wildfires that would be damaging to the
community and the environment. Such mitigation actions benefit the environment while creating sustainable
communities that are more resilient to disasters.
Members of the Steering Committee used the ST APLEE characteristics and respective questions to evaluate the
potential local mitigation actions, including the probable costs and benefits of the actions. This formed the basis of
the subsequent hazard mitigation Action Plans.
3.5.8 Arizona's Growing Smarter Initiative
This Hazard Mitigation Plan has been created to identify a process through which local communities in Pima County
can effectively plan for and mitigate the most severe natural hazards that affect the region. Since the nature of the
built environment of Pima County is so closely tied to the ability of its communities to create effective mechanisms to
address both natural and human caused disasters, it is essential that the mitigation planning process be well
integrated with the local govemment comprehensive land use planning process. Given this linkage, it is benefICial to
understand the nature of growth in Pima County, as well as the State of Arizona's statutory framework for local
government planning and growth management.
Since 1973, most cities, towns, and counties in Arizona have been required to develop plans for communities looking
at issues such as land use, circulation, housing, public services and facilities, and conservation, rehabilitation, and
redevelopment. As growth rates significantly increased in the 1990s, a critical mass of political support emerged to
provide more tools to assist in responding to the consequences of rapid growth. In 1998, the Arizona Legislature
passed the Growing Smarter Act, which clarified and strengthened planning elements in the required plans of
municipalities and counties and added four new elements, namely: Open Space, Growth Areas, Environmental
Planning, and Cost of Development. In 2000, the Legislature passed Growing Smarter/Plus to further enhance land
use planning statutes in Arizona. (Arizona Department of Commerce, 2004)
Among the highlights of Growing Smarter/Plus are the following:
· Requires larger and fast-growing cities to obtain voter approval of their general plans at least once every ten
years;
· Requires mandatory rezoning conformance with General and Comprehensive Plans;
· Requires more effective public participation in the planning process;
· Requires cities and counties to exchange plans, coordinate with regional planning agencies, and
encourages comments between entities prior to adoption to encourage regional coordination; and
· Requires landowner permission for plan designation and rezoning of private property to open space.
Perhaps the most relevant requirements of Growing SmarterlPlus concerning hazard mitigation are the mandate that
new general plans in Arizona include two elements. The first is an Environmental Planning Element, which contains
analysis, policies, and strategies to address any anticipated effects of the plan's elements and new development
called for by the plan on air and water quality and natural resources. The second, and more directly relevant, is a
Safety Element "for the protection of the community from natural and man-made hazards including features
necessary for such protection as evacuation routes, peak load water supply requirements, minimum road widths
according to function, clearances around structures and geologic hazard mapping in' areas of known geologic
hazards." The safety element is mandatory for cities of 50,000 residents or more and optional for smaller
Pima county Multi-Juriscfc1iona/ Haz<ld Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS.
13
~.-'~-..'-N'~~_..,_.,...___,~Go'''''''''''~'''''''_
,1"""""'-
r-'
~<....E,' J
communities. These requirements, while instituted prior to DMA 2000, set the stage for effective coordination
between land use planning and mitigation planning within Arizona.
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
14
.}
4, COMMUNITY PROFILES
The purpose of this section is to provide basic background information on Pima County and its communities,
Information provided includes histmy, geography, climate, government, transportation, land ovvnership,
demographics, economy, development patterns, and planning information,
4.1.1 History
Pima County is located in southern Arizona and encompasses 9,184 square miles. The second largest of the four
original counties, Pima County was created by the first territorial legislature for Arizona on November 8, 1864. As
originally constituted, Pima County included almost the entire portion of the United States originally acquired from
Mexico in the Gadsen Purchase. Over time, portions of Pima County were carved off to create Maricopa, Pinal,
Cochise, and Graham Counties.
Originally named for the Native American tribe inhabiting the area, evidence of the human settlement of Pima County
dates back over 9,000 years. The Hohokam inhabited the area until the 15008 when they mysteriously disappeared.
The Tohono O'odham were the next to settle the region and concentrated along the Santa Cruz and Gila Rivers. The
arrival of the Spanish in the 16908 marked the first European peoples to establish settlements in the area. Missionary
and explorer Father Eusebio Francisco Kino established the San Xavier del Bac mission, which still stands today as
one of the preeminent examples of 18th century missionary architecture in the world. Throughout the 1700s the
Spanish continued to settle throughout southern Arizona. In 1775, the Tucson presidio .was buiR to protect settlers
from raiding tribes of Apaches. Residents of the fort began to refer to it as the .Old Pueblo', which still remains today
as a nickname for Tucson.
Rapid growth in the region occurred in the mid-18oos with the discovery of silver and gold and the arrival of
prospectors from Mexico. With the expansion of mining ~nd ranching in the late 18oos, Pima County continued to
witness increasing populations as new residents migrated to the Tucson region settling in proximity to major
transportation corridors. Slowly, development moved eastward from Tucson until abutting with federally owned land
resulting in a trend reversal with new growth occurring to the northwest.
4.1.2 Geography
Pima County lies within the Basin and Range Physiographic Province, characterized by northwest-trending mountain
ranges separated by alluvial basins. Separated by the Tucson and Sierrita Mountains, a large portion of Pima County
lies in two alluvial basins: Avra Valley to the west and the Tucson basin in the east. The regional drainage network,
primarily formed by the Santa Cruz River and its tributaries, is dry for a majority of the year except during the spring
runoff or from heavy storms.
Varying in elevation from desert valleys at roughly 1,200 feet to the 9,185-foot peak of Mount lemmon, the county is
home to diverse plant and animal communities. Numerous mountain ranges ring the Tucson basin, including the
Santa Catalina, Rincon, Empire, Santa Rita, Sierrita, and Tucson mountains. Two cactus forests traverse the county
- Saguaro National Park to the northeast and Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument in the southwestern portion. In
addition, the County is home to the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge nestled along the western boundary of
the county and the Coronado National Forest in the eastern portion of the county within the Santa Catalina
Mountains. Other major natural features include Torto/ita Mountain Park, Tucson Mountain Park, Colossal Cave
Mountain Park, Cienega Creek Natural Preserve, and Agua Caliente Park.
4.1.3 Climate
Characterized by abundant sunshine, a long summer, mild winter, low average annual precipitation, relatively low
humidity, and generally light winds, Pima County's climate is typical of the Sonoran desert within which it is located.
As shovvn in Table 4-1, average temperatures range from the low 30's in the winter and into the 100's during the
summer. However, the average temperatures presented fail to portray the extreme heat experienced in the summer
with temperatures often exceeding 110 degrees. These same locations can also reach well below freezing (32
Pima Coonty IIulli-JlIis6dional Hazard lliliga/ion Plan (Draft: October 31. 2005)
URS
15
1""'....,.,
,,-::...
degrees) in the winter. For example, Tucson set a record high of 114 degrees on both July 4, 1989, and July
28,1995, and a record low of 6 degrees on January 7,1913. These temperature extremes are partly due to Arizona's
arid climate resulting from its separation from large bodies of water (i.e., Pacific Ocean, GuWof California, and GuW of
Mexico), intervening mountain regions (i.e., Sierra Nevada Mountains), low humidity, and relatively low elevations
across the state.
Table 4.1: Average Annual Temperature and Precipitation
Averaae Temoerature (F Precipitation (i nches)
Location January July Wettest Month Driest Month Tota'AnnuaIAve~
Min Max Min Max
Ajo 41.5 64 77.7 103 1.94 AUGust 0.10 M~ 8.41
Casbel 30.3 64.9 65.4 99.2 2.66 AUQust 0.33 M~ 13.81
Kitt Peak 33.1 49.5 60.9 80.4 4.71 AUllust 0.38 Mill 23.61
Sabino Canyon 37.2 66.6 72.3 101.7 2.37 Auaust 0.20 Mil 13.04
Sahuarita 31.0 67.0 68.4 101.3 2.57 AUllust 0.06 rMII 10.62
Sells 36.8 65.7 72.1 100.9 2.67 (July) 0.08 M~ 11.86
Tucson Maanetic Observatory 34.2 64.9 71.5 100.6 2.24 (AUQusil 0.23 M8'f 21.79
Tucson.UnNe~wofArizona 37.5 65.4 73.8 100.1 2.15 fAuausO 0.17 M~ 11.17
Note: The period II record varies for each data set and location. The eaI1iesl data utilized is from 1928 and the most recent is 2002.
Source: western Regional Climate Center, 2004.
Pima County receives much of ns annual precipitation during the monsoon season from July to mid~September, with
the remainder of the precipitation occurring during the winter months. Most of this precipitation occurs in the form of
intense, localized thunderstorms during the summer and gentle rains during the winter. Flash floods are otten
associated with the torrential rains of the monsoon season.
Average wind speeds are similar across Arizona, averaging approximately 6 to 9 miles per hour annually. Pima
County generally experiences average wind speeds at approximately 8 miles per hour. However, sign~icant
variations can exist throughout the year, as evidenced by Tucson's statewide record of 71 miles per hour maximum~
recorded wind gust. The surrounding mountains and topography of the region influence wind velocities and directions
in the Tucson basin.
4.1.4 Geology
Pima County is comprised of a complex geology reflective of a history of faulting and folding of the earth's crust. The
mountains include sedimentary, metamorphic volcanic, or intrusive igneous rock, or a combination of the three. The
alluvial basins consist of well~nsolidated sediments eroded from the surrounding mountain ranges with caliche, or
hardpan, underneath. Caliche is formed as calcium carbonate and deposited within the soil through water seepage.
4.1.5 Government
The govemmental and administrative affairs of Pima County are directed by a five~member Board of Supervisors with
each member elected from a designated district to serve a four~year term. The chairperson is selected by the Board
from among its members. Other elected offICials, otten referred to as constitutional OffICers, are the Assessor, Clerk
of the Superior Court, the Constables, County Attomey, Recorder, School Superintendent, Sheriff, and Treasurer.
Presiding judges are appointed from elected members of the judicial bench.
Because of Arizona's constitutional provisions and the requirements promulgated by Arizona Revised Statutes, the
government of Pima County is organized to have a direct and indirect relationship with the Board of Supervisors. The
Board of Supervisors has direct control over the County's general government functions; community services;
indigent defense; medical, health, and welfare services; and public works functions. These broad functions include
the County's intemal governmental administrativel management activities; maintenance and construction of the
County's sewerage and sanitation infrastructures; County streets, roads, and bridges which comprise the County's
transportation infrastructure; natural resources, parks, community centers, recreational facilities and libraries (in
cooperation with the ctty of Tucson); and numerous clinics. Indirect relationships are maintained with the elected
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional HszErd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
16
.J
officials. The Board of Supervisors appoints a County Administrator to be responsible for the general direction,
supervision, administration, and coordination of all affairs of the county.
Each of the five municipalities in the county (Marana, Oro Valley, Sahuarita, South Tucson, and Tucson) is governed
by council-manager tonn of government, with an elected Council consisting of seven members, including a mayor
and vice mayor and an appointed town or city manager. The two tribal communities covered by this plan (the
Pascua-Yaqui Tribe and the Tohono O'odham Nation) are governed by elected tribal councils. Each of the
municipalities and the tribal communities is described in more detail below.
4.1.6 Transportation
As shown in Figure 4-1, several major roadways support both local and transportation needs. Interstate 10 provides
connectivity with the Phoenix metropolitan area to the north and Interstate 19 with Mexico to the south. Several other
State and US highways, most notably Arizona State Highways 85 and 86, coupled with key Indian Routes provide
local and regional access throughout southern Arizona. Pima County is host to four municipal airports providing
commercial and general aviation service to the region. In addition, the county is home to the Davis-Monthan Air
Force Base in Tucson. Davis-Monthan Air Force Base currently has approximately 6,000 military personnel stationed
on base and employs 1,700 civilian persons.
Pima County UOO-JtxiSIictional Hazard IIiIigaIion Plan (Dratf: October 31, 2005)
1JRS
17
~"~-- J
Figure 4.1 Pima County General Features
Pima County MunJ-Jurlsdictional Haza-d Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
18
,)
4.1.7 Land Ownership
Approximately 70 percent of Pima County consists of Federal, State, and Native American owned lands. The San
Xavier, Pascua Yaqui, and Tohono O'odham reservations account for ownership of 42 percent of the land, 15
percent of the land is owned by the state of Arizona, and 12 percent by federal agencies (U.S. Forest Service and
Bureau of Land Management).
4.1.8 Demographics
According to 2004 estimates, Pima County is home to approximately 931,000 residents as presented in Table 4-2.
Containing a relatively large portion of Arizona's overall population (16.5 percent) and growing by 26.5 percent from
1990 to 2000, the county experienced a slower rate of growth than witnessed statewide at 40 percent. A majority of
the population resides in the eastern portion of the county, including all five incorporated jurisdictions. Two of Pima
County's incorporated entities were the fastest growing jurisdictions within the state of Arizona from 1990 to 2000 _
Marana grew by 520% and the Town of Sahuarita by 345%.
Table 4-2: Po ~Iation for Pima Coun 'I and Incor: JOI'ated Entities, 2000-2030
lJurisdiction 2000 2004 2010 2020 2025 2030
Marana 13,566 23,520 43,105 73,622 87,440 96,541
Oro Vallev 29,700 38,280 45,n9 58,601 65.498 70,559
Pascua Yaqui 3,315 - - . - -
Sahuarita 3,242 9,715 24,388 43,657 50,610 55,8n
South Tucson 5,490 5,580 5,780 6,030 6,155 6,255
Tohono O'odham Nation 2,799 - - - - -
Tucson 486,699 521,605 591,251 736,789 825,508 915,904
Unincorporated County 305,049 332,510 350,015 373,188 370,284 361,537
TOTAL 843,746 931,210 1,060,318 1,291,887 1,405,495 1,506,673
Source: Pina Association of Governments, InIerim Projections, 2004; us Census Bureau, 2000
The City of Tucson, located in the eastern portion of Pima County, is the center of economic activity for the County.
Table 4-3 depicts population within the County for 2000 and projections for 2030. According to these projections,
employment within the County is expected to grow by 98% from approximately 384,000 to 762,000 in 2030. A
majority of workers in Pima County are employed in the service sector of the economy, followed by government.
construction and manufacturing, and trade and transportation. The labor force is reflective of the influence of tourism,
academia, and the retirement population in the Tucson metropolitan area. In September of 2004, the average
unemployment rate in Pima County was 3.9 percent, compared with the statewide average of 5.0 percent.
fable 4-3: Employment for Pima County and Incorporated Entitles
~urisdiction 2000 2030
Marana 9,100 27,000
Ora Valley 6,000 25,000
Sahuarita 1,500 10,000
South Tucson 3,700 4,000
Tucson 281,200 464,000
Unincoroorated County 83,200 232,000
TOTAL 384,700 762,000
. .
Source: Pma Association of Governments, 2004.
In response to the State's Growing Smarter statutes (see page 3), the County updated and adopted the Pima County
Comprehensive Plan in December of 2001. The Comprehensive Plan focuses on the establishment of growth
management principles designed to balance urban development with the natural environment. This plan
complements local development strategies employed by the communities within the county, most notably those in the
greater Tucson metropolitan area. The plans for these communities are described in their respective community
profiles.
Pima County Mul/i-Jtxisdicfional HazllTd Mitigation Plan (Draft: Octobef 31, 2005)
URS
19
'::~;",
r"'"
3"J
Nestled along Interstate 10 approximately 1 mile northwest of Tucson (see Figure 4-2), the
Town of Marana experienced dramatic growth in the past decade as a result of aggressive
annexation policies and the development of master-planned communities. The Town of
Marana held the distinction as being the fastest growing incorporated entity within the
state of Arizona during the decade between 1990 and 2000 with an explosive 520
percent growth rate. Although not as prominent as its population growth, in 2002 the
Town of Marana's incorporated limits encompassed nearly 115 square miles, which
contrasts with the 59 square miles it contained in 1990. Bordering Tucson to the
southwest, Marana straddles Interstate 10 and is predominantly surrounded by unincorporated
Pima County.
Founded in 1881, in conjunction with the development of rail transportation, Marana solidified itself as a destination
with its appearance on Southern Pacific Railroad maps in 1890. Although ranching and the railroad dominated the
community prior to World War I, the post-way war years brought significant change to the region with the
implementation of extensive agricultural irrigation systems and the development of cotton farming. Other substantial
factors in Marana's development were the location of Marana Army Air Field (now Pinal Airpar1< and Evergreen Air
Center) and the removal of the downtown business district due to the widening of Interstate 10 in the early 1960's. In
March of 1977, the Town of Marana incorporated with an area roughly 10 square miles. Governed by a seven
member Town Council consisting of a Mayor and six council members elected for four-year terms, the Town utilizes a
Council-Manager form of government. The Town Council appoints a Town Manager responsible for the daily
operation of town services and the orderly administration of affairs.
Although a majority of Marana's topography is flat, much of the area is designated as floodplain. In addition, the
existing Town boundaries include portions of the Tortolita and Tucson Mountain foothills that are dominated by
slopes exceeding 15%. The development constraints posed by these environmentally sensitive lands provide the
potential for natural open space and habitat conservation areas to balance with the urban development occurring.
Several riparian features, including major wash crossing in the Tortolita Fan and the Santa Cruz River provide natural
wildlife habitat for diverse species native to the Sonoran desert.
As illustrated in Table 4-4, in 1990 the population of Marana was 2,187, which blossomed to 13,556 in 2000.
Projected to continue its population explosion as a result of aggressive annexation policies, ample amounts of
undeveloped land, and the Town's proximity to Interstate access, Marana is expected to be home to 96,541 persons
(or 6.41%) of the total Pima County population by 2030. In 2000, Marana had 9,100 jobs, while 2030 projections
anticipate 27,000 jobs within the community. Although Marana's population and employment roles within the county
are projected to increase, Marana's ratio of jobs-per capita is also forecasted to substantially decrease from 0.67 in
2000 to 0.28 in 2030.
Table 4.4: Population and Employment, Marana,1990.2030
1990 2000 2004 2010 2020 2030
Population
Pima County 666,880 843,746 931,210 1.060,318 1,291,887 1,506,673
Marana 2,187 13,556 23,520 43,105 73,622 96,541
As a % of County 0.33% 1.61% 2.53% 4.07% 5.70% 6.41%
Employment
Pima County - 384,700 - - - 762,000
Marana - 9,100 - - - 27,000
As a % of County . 2.4% - - - 3.5%
Source: Pima Association of Governments (Interim Projections), July 2004; US Census Bureau.
Although witnessing substantial urban growth during the past decade, Marana continues to hold onto its agricultural
and ranching roots and serves as the main trade and transportation center for the surrounding rural periphery for the
eastern portion of Pima County. This location serves as a node for transportation, coupled with the Town's reputation
for a business-friendly environment with no city property taxes, lead to substantial recent investment in economic
Pima County Multi-Jwisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
20
..)
development activities. Marana's major private employers include Arizona Portland Cement, Costco, Home Depot,
Wal-Mart, Lowe's, Sargent Controls & Aerospace, and Tucson Ready Mix. Major public employers include the
Marana Unified School District and the Town of Marana.
Marana's General Plan, adopted in November of 2002, reflects a community preparing for unprecedented future
growth. Marana's Land Use Map defines a pattern of growth sensitive to the natural environment and reflective of the
Town's goal to preserve and protect natural habitats. As of 2002, 21.9 percent of the land in Marana was agricultural
and 55.9 percent was vacant. Although, growth plans for the community indicate that a majority of northeast Marana
is designated as environmentally sensitive, best suited for less intense uses such as low-density residential
development or open space, the future development plans indicate substantial investment in both residential and
economic opportunities. Low and medium density residential in proximity to environmentally sensnive areas provides
a transition to more intensive commercial and industrial uses located in proximity to major transportation corridors
including Interstate 10 and the Marana Northwest Regional Airport.
Pima County IIuIli-Jlljsdctional Hazard IIitigaIion Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
21
"!.-._,,,,-
rihc
~../
Pima County Mulli-Juriscictiona/ HazlJ'd Mitigation Plan (Dra1f: October 31, 2005)
URS
22
J
Nestled between the Santa Catalina Mountains to the east and the T ortolita Mountains
to the northwest, Oro Valley is located six miles northwest of the Tucson city limns.
Other nearby communities include the Town of Marana to the west and the
unincorporated community of Catalina to the north. Oro Valley serves as a gateway to
regional parks, sharing its eastem border with Catalina State Park and the Coronado
National Forest. These areas provide vast recreational and natural open space
opportunities for the community and are integral to the Town's identity as a community
known for its integration of residential uses within the natural Sonoran Desert and as a
resort area. Arizona's second fastest growing community from 1990 to 2000, Oro
Valley covers nearly 32 square miles.
Major access to Oro Valley is provided via Interstate 10, located approximately 12 miles to the west, and State Route
77, or Oracle Road, which runs north-south through the Town, and is the original transportation corrido~ linking
Tucson with the Phoenix metropolitan area to the north. The Town was incorporated in April of 1974 and operates
under a Council-Manager form of govemment, which includes a mayor and four council members elected at-large.
As illustrated in Table 4-5, the 2000 population of Oro Valley was 29,700. With residential development continuing to
rise, this population is forecasted to grow to nearly 70,599 by 2030. Presently, the community relies on residential
growth and development to stimulate economic opportunnies, which results in vulnerability to fluctuations in the real
estate market. Oro Valley's larger employers include the EI Conquistador Resort, Oro Valley Country Club, Town of
Oro Valley, Canyon Del Oro High School, Vanguard Automation, Selecticide, Honeywell, and Securaplane.
Employment is expected to increase from 6,000 jobs in .2000 to 25,000 jobs in 2030. Similar to its projected increase
in the share of population and employment within the county, Oro Valley's jobs-per-capita is also expected to
increase from 0.20 in 2000 to 0.30 in 2030.
Table 4-5: Population and Employment, Oro Valley, 1990-2030
1990 2000 2004 2010 2020 2030
PODUlation
Pima County 66,880 843,746 931,210 1,060,318 1,291,887 1,506,673
Ora Vallev 6,670 29,700 38,280 45,779 58,601 70,559
As a % of County 1.00% 3.52% 4.11% 4.32% 4.54% 4.68%
Employment
Pima County - 384,700 - - - 762,000
Om Valley - 6,000 - - - 25,000
As a % of County - 1.6% - - - 3.3%
Source: Pima Association of Governments (Interim Projections), July 2004; US Census Bureau.
The Town of Oro Valley General Plan, adopted by Town Council on May 29, 2003, supports the themes of
maintaining low-density residential character while permitting a compatible mix of land uses and preservation of the
natural Sonoran desert through the implementation of a well connected system of natural open space. Rural and low-
density residential and open space uses predominate throughout the community, comprising 36.5% and 26.9% of the
planning area, respectively, and tend to follow natural features and provide buffers to environmentally sensnive areas
from high intensity uses. Commercial uses concentrate along Oracle Road, providing easy access to residential
neighborhoods and resulting in a linear pattem of higher intensity uses.
Pima County UuIIi-Jtxisdctional HaztM'd Mitigation Plan (Draft: Odober 31, 2IXJ5j
URS
23
-~',.... .
r" .
.....,;"t'" /
~.....o,;_
Figure 4.3: Oro Valley General Features
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
24
J
The lands of the Pascua Yaqui became part of the United States in the 18708. Calling
themselves the Yaquis, the first modem settlements of these descendents from the
ancient Uto-Azteca people, were near Nogales and South Tucson. Over time, the
Yaquis spread out, settling north of Tucson in an area they named Pascua Village and
in Guadalupe near Tempe.. Retaining their religious and cu~ural ways of life, the
Yaquis began calling themselves the Pascua Yaqui Tribe and accepted political
integration into American society during the 195Os. In 1952, the Pascua Yaqui Tribe
was annexed by the City of Tucson. In 1964, Congress transferred 202 acres of desert
land southwest of Tucson to the Pascua Yaquis who were looking for an area to
preserve their tribal identity. Members of the Pascua Yaqui Tribe relocating to the
reservation struggled to secure federal recognition for the tribe until finally being recognized in 1978. The Tribe
acquired an additional 690 acres in 1988. In 1994, the tribe's status was changed from a created tribe to an historic
tribe.
Today, the Pascua Yaqui Tribe is scattered throughout eastem Pima County and includes several small
communities. These communities include Yoem Pueblo in Marana, Old Pascua in Tucson, Barrio Libre in South
Tucson, and the Pascua Pueblo, a 1.87 -square mile reservation located southwest of the City of Tucson.
As shown in Table 4-6, the population of the Pascua Yaqui Tribe was 3,315 in 2000 and constituted 0.39% of the
total population within Pima County.
Table 4.6: Population, Pascua Yaqui, 1990-2030
1990 2000 2004 2010 2020 2030
P~lation
Pima County 666,880 843,746 931,210 1,060,318 1,291,887 1,506,673
Pascua Yaqui 2,412 3,315 - - - -
As a % of County 0.36% 0.39% - - - -
. . . .
Source: Pima AssOCiation of Govemments (Inlenm Projections). July 2004; US Census Bureau.
The Pascua Yaqui Tribe operates two casinos within Pima County, the 40,000 square foot Casino of the Sun and the
75,000 square foot Casino del Sol. Other businesses include AM Pet Lodge, a landscape nursery, and adobe block
manufacturing.
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Miligation Plan (Oraf/: October 31. 2(05)
URS
25
^. '" .~~"""._-~"""""'"-"<".~-^.
r;C
5~
Pima County Mulli-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31. 2005)
URS
26
J
The Town of Sahuarita is the southern-most incorporated jurisdiction within Pima County.
Situated along Interstate 19 approximately 15 miles from the City of Tucson, Sahuarita
shares portions of its southern border with the retirement community of Green Valley and its
northern border with the Tohono O'odham Nation. Unincorporated Pima County surrounds
the remainder of the Town to the west and east. The Town of Sahuarita is known for its
semi-rural setting with a mixture of recently developed master planned communities in
contrast to the historical agricu~ural production still largely occupying the eastem portion of
the community. Bounded by mountain ranges within the Santa Cruz Valley, Sahuarita's
residents are governed under a Council-Manager form of government, which includes a seven-member Town
Council consisting of a Mayor and six Council Members elected at-large for overlapping terms of four years.
Sahuarita incorporated in 1994 and encompasses a 29 square mile area. The primary transportation corridors
through the Town are Interstate 19 and the Tucson Nogales Highway (SR 19B) providing connections with the
metropolitan environs of Tucson to the north and the Mexican border to the south. Paralleling the Tucson Nogales
Highway, natural development constraints abound in Sahuarita as the Santa Cruz River and its associated floodplain
effectively bisect the Town into eastern and westem segments.
As illustrated in Table 4-7, in 2000 the population of Sahuarita was 3,242. With expanses of available land and
residential growth opportunities, the population is forecasted to increase to 24,388 within 10 years. Mhough a
consistently small share of the region's population, the Town will begin to increase its percentage of the total Pima
County population. By 2030, it is expected the Town of Sahuarita will represent almost 4 percent of Pima County's
population, compared with only 0.24% in 1990.
Although poised for economic growth, a majority of full-time employees travel to Tucson or are employed in service
related facilities in nearby Green Valley. Agricu~ural production, in particular the pecan orchards owned by the
Farmer's Investment Company, still provides most of the basic employment for the town. Other major private and
public employers include Bashas, Wal-mart, the Desert Diamond Casino (an operation of the Tohono O'odham
Nation), the Sahuarita School District and the Town of Sahuarita.
Table 4-7: Population and Employment, Sahuarlta, 1990-2030
1990 2000 2004 2010 2020 2030
Population
Pima County 666,880 843,746 931,210 1,060,318 1,291,887 1,506,673
Sahuarita 1,629 3,242 9,715 24,388 43,657 55,8n
As a % of County 0.24% 0.38% 1.04% 2.30% 3.38% 3.71%
Employment
Pima County - 384,700 - - - 762,000
Sahuarita - 1,500 - - - 10,000
As a % of County - 0.4% - - - 1.3%
. .
Source: Pima ASSOCiation of Govemments (Inlenm PrOJections). July 2004; US Census Bureau.
Ratified by Town residents on May 20,2003, the Sahuarita General Plan reflects a community striving to preserve ns
rural character while realizing the growth pressures expected in the coming years. Over 50 percent of the land within
the planning area is listed as Future Development Area. Although legally developable, demand is not projected to be
high enough to warrant substantial investment in these properties within the innial ten-year planning cycle of the
General Plan. Growth areas will be encouraged in the western portion of the Town and consist of a land use pattern
emphasizing a mixture of uses. Currently, about half of the acreage within the Sahuarita planning area is utilized as
Farm and Ranch land, with only 0.3 percent as commercial. The future development plan stresses the importance of
encouraging employment opportunities by designating 12.8 percent of the planning area's acreage to development of
opportunities focusing on light industrial, office, research, and warehousing activities. These areas are expected to
develop in the northern portion of the Interstate 19 corridor. Transitional to these uses are areas allocated for medium
density residential and mixed-use development providing flexibility in the design of concentrated areas allowing
residents to live close to employment centers.
Pima county Multi-JuriscHctional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
27
'~-"'~~~__""'_""~~'WA' ,
_~2 ,_~
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazwd Mitiga~on Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
28
,)
Engulfed by the City of Tucson, the City of South Tucson is a one square mile community just south of historical
downtown Tucson nestled between the junction of Interstates 10 and 19. Rich in ethnic heritage, this small
community selVices a population of which 83 percent are Mexican-American and 10 percent are Native American.
Developed as a suburban community to Tucson, South Tucson enjoyed a colorful history after being incorporated in
1936, unincorporated in 1938, and reincorporated in 1940.
In 2000, the population of South Tucson was 5,490 as illustrated in Table 4-8. Although relatively small growth
(0.42% through 2030) is projected for the future, South Tucson will continue to provide an increasingly diminished
percent of Pima County's overall resident population. This pattern is reflective of the strong growth throughout
eastern Pima County and the City's inability to gain in available land mass. Similarly, South Tucson's small labor
force is forecasted to parallel the Town's population growth by comprising a smaller share of the region's
employment opportunities. In 2000, there were 3,700 jobs within the community, while 2030 projections estimate
4,000.
Table 4-8: Population and Employment, South Tucson, 1990-2030
1990 2000 2004 2010 2020 2030
Population
Pima County 666,880 843,746 931,210 1,060,318 1,291,887 1,506,673
South Tucson 5,093 5,490 5,780 6,030 6,255
As a % of County 0.76% 0.65% 0.55% 0.47% 0.42%
Employment
Pima County - 384,700 - - - 762,000
South Tucson - 3,700 - - - 4,000
As a % of County - 1.0% - - - 0.5%
. .
Source: Pima Association of Governments (Inlenm PrOJections), July 2004; US Census Bureau.
The City of South Tucson updated their General Plan in 2002. Although not mandated to contain Growing Smarter
elements due to their small size, this information was incorporated into the 2002 revision to provide consistency with
other municipalities in the region.
Pima County Uulti-Jurisdctional Haz/l'd Uitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
29
." -.. ^._..>>-_._-,--"',""'.__._-~-.,..... -,. "'^""'",'~.~"-,,",~~,,~-",,
.::::, ~..
P-":--
...5 J
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31,2005)
URS
30
..J
The ToOOno O'odham, or Desert People, have occupied this region for centuries. The
Tohono O'odham Nation consists of four separated reservation lands located in westem
Pima County, as well as areas of Pinal and Maricopa Counties. Encompassing over two
million acres, the Nation is approximately the size of the state of Connecticut. The largest
reservation contains over 2.7 million acres and extends west 90 miles across central Pima
County, north to the Gila River, and south into Mexico as shown in Figure 5-1. San Xavier
is the second largest land base, and contains over 71 acres located south of the City of
Tucson. The remaining two lands, the Gila Bend Reservation (San Lucy District) and the
Florence Village, are located in Maricopa and Pinal Counties respectively.
Known as the Papago Indians until the 1980s, the Tohono O'odham Nation occupies the second largest reservation
in the United States. Located within the Sonoran Desert, the diverse landscape ranges from desert valleys
interspersed with plains to mountains rising to nearly 8,000 feet. A major tourist attraction, the San Xavier del Bac
Mission, the "White Dove of the Desert,. is located nine miles south of the City of Tucson. Registered as a historic
landmark, the mission has been used continuously by the Tohono O'odham Nation for more than two centuries. In
addition, the Nation is home to Baboquivari Peak, the historical residence of I'itoi, the Papago Creator.
Founded in 1934 and first organized under a written constitution in 1937, the Nation is presently operating under a
constitution adopted in 1986. The Nation is divided into eleven districts: Baboquivari, Chukut, Kuk, Gu Achi, Gu Vo,
Hickiwan, Pisinimo, San Lucy (Gila Bend), San Xavier, Schuk Toak, Sells, and Sif Oidak. Each district is governed by
its own council of elected representatives that supports the Nation's Tribal Council elected by tribal members
pursuant to the Tribe's Constitution. The Tribal Council, as the legislative branch of the Nation's govemment, is
balanced by an executive branch headed by an elected chairman, and a judicial branch. The community of Sells
functions as the Nation's capital.
The population of the ToOOno O'odham nation within Pima County was 2,799 in 2000 as shown in Table 4-9.
Table 4.9: Population, Tohono O'odham Nation, 1990.2030
1990 2000 2004 2010 2020 2030
Population
Pima County 666,880 843,746 931,210 1,060,318 1,291,887 1,506,673
Tohono O'odham 2,750 2,799 - - - -
As a % of County 0.41% 0.33% - - - -
. . . .
Source: Pima ASSOCiation of Governments (Intenm ProJections), July 2004; US Census Bureau.
Traditionally, the nation relied on an agricultural system designed to take advantage of summer flooding. Today, few
O'odham grow traditional crops. Economic activities within the reservation focus on an Industrial Park located near
the City of Tucson, gaming enterprises, and tourism. Major industrial park tenants include Caterpillar, the Desert
Diamond Casino and a 23-acre foreign trade zone. Built in 1993 after authorization for gaming occurred earlier that
year, the Desert Diamond Casino opened with 500 slot machines and employing over 2,400 jobs. In 1995, the casino
expanded to include bingo, live card dealers, and 500 additional slot machines. The nation opened a second casino,
the Golden Hasan, in 1999. The Tohono O'odham Nation is one of Pima County's largest employers, presently
employing over 2,700 persons (Pima Association of Govemments, 2003).
Pima CounIy Uufi-.hlisffctiooal Hazard AIitigaIion Plan (Oral!: October 31, 2(05)
URS
31
- --""-"'~~"-"'~'''''-'-;''''''''''''~-'^''''''-~'''''<'-'~-''^'--'''''-"'+'~-.'"""'__'.';",,~~~"h.... . "
,..:.~>
,J'C"
-" .)
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31,2005)
URS
32
.,)
The City of Tucson, Arizona's second largest and oldest city, serves as the focal point for political,
economic, and cultural activity for Pima County. Prior to the establishment of the first Spanish
mission in 1700, San Xavier del Bac, and the arrival of the Spanish Conquistadors, various Native
American tribes including the Pima, Hohokam and the Tohono O'odham inhabited the area
presently occupied by the City of Tucson. Founded in 1775, Tucson began as a Spanish milnary
garrison to protect settlers from Indian raids from nearby tribes. Receiving independence from
Spanish colonial rule in 1821, governance of the area passed to the Republic of Mexico and
remained part of the State of Sonora until 1854 when it became part of the United States with the Gadsden
Purchase. Formally incorporated in 1877 with an area of 2 square miles, the cny of Tucson presently includes 226
square miles and is the nation's thirtieth most populous City.
Fueled by the availability of cheap and abundant land, Tucson experienced rapid growth in the 1950s following World
War II. Much of this new growth, however, occurred outside the city limits leading to a widespread lineal development
pattern. Surrounded by unincorporated portions of Pima County, Tucson completely surrounds the City of South
Tucson and is in close proximity to the smaller communities of Marana to the northwest, Oro Valley to the north, and
Sahuarita to the south. A mayor and six City Council members representing various wards within the Cny govern
Tucson. Operating under a charter form of government, the Mayor and City Council set policy to be carried out by an
appointed City Manager and other city officials.
Known for its natural beauty, Tucson's natural environment is characteristic of the Sonoran Desert with diverse
habitats and conditions ranging from low land deserts to the highlands of the Santa Catalina and Rincon Mountains.
In addition to the rich biodiversity of the region, the close proximity of the Mexican border and the presence of the
University of Arizona and the Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, which draw residents from throughout the United States
as well as from other countries, influence the City's cultural diversity and tradition for cultural heritage preservation.
As depicted in Figure 4-8, Tucson's primary transportation corridors are Interstates 10 and 19, which provide
accessibility to distant urban locations and a well-developed arterial network providing connectivity within the
metropolitan area. Tucson International Airport, providing commercial air servic~, and Ryan Airfield, serving business
and general aviation traffic, provide additional transportation service to Tucson.
The City of Tucson has experienced tremendous growth since its incorporation over 125 years ago. Illustrated in
Table 4-10, this growth has lead to a current population of just fewer than 490,000 people, which represents 57.68%
of the county. Regardless of its role as the regional focal point, Tucson's relative posnion as the population center will
stagnant in the future as other incorporated jurisdictions and the unincorporated communities in the urban periphery
absorb a larger share of the regional growth. As the regional economic engine, Tucson comprises 73.1% of the
county's employment. However, by 2030 this figure is expected to drop to 60.9%. The diminished role in regional
employment, while increasing by 65% from 2000 to 2030, is indicative of the remarkable development being
experienced within the region.
Table 4.10: Population and Employment, Tucson, 1990.2030
1990 2000 2004 2010 2020 2030
Population
Pima County 666,880 843,746 931,210 1,060,318 1,291,318 1,506,673
Tucson 405,390 486,699 521,605 591,251 736,789 915,904
As a % of County 60.79% 57.68% 56.0% 55.76% 57.03% 60.79%
Employment
Pima County - 384,700 - - - 762,000
Tucson - 281,200 - - - 464,000
As a % of County - 73.1% - - - 60.9%
. . . .
Source: Pima ASSOCIation of Governments (Intenm ProJections), July 2004; US Census Bureau.
Approved in December of 2001, Tucson's General Plan reflects a community that is responding to the diverse nature
of its residents and natural character of the region. The plan anticipates that new growth will be accommodated
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
33
_C ,/
primarily through infill development; higher density, mixed-use activity centers; and corridor planning to reduce the
peripheral sprawl. Tucson is positioning itse~ to take advantage of its distinct natural setting by clearly separating
urban uses from rural and natural resource-based areas. Economic development activity will be encouraged to locate
transportation hubs along existing transportation corridors including Interstate 10, Interstate 19, the Southem Pacific
Railroad, and airports. As an alternative to the lineal pattern of commercial development, small-scale neighborhood
commercial centers will be focused at major street intersections with regional centers positioned in mixed-use activity
centers.
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
34
.)
Figure 4-8: Tucson General Features
Pima County Mul/i-JlIisdictiona/ Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
35
:;:'''.,-;'
r^'
c....~~ -.j
5. RISK ASSESSMENT
A risk assessment providing the factual basis for proposed strategies must be performed in order to adequately
target available resources for hazard mitigation activities. Countywide and local risk assessments supply sufficient
information to enable each jurisdiction to identify and prioritize appropriate mitigation actions to reduce losses from
identified hazards. To complete this risk assessment, potential hazards wtthin the County were identified,the most
probable and destructive hazards were profiled, and their associated consequences were assessed. From this
information, descriptions of the county's vulnerability, including loss estimates, were prepared.
The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) requirements for an acceptable risk assessment are shown in Table
5-1. While technically only natural hazards are addressed, most human-caused hazards are included in this plan in at
least a preliminary manner. In order to meet these requirements, Pima County used the step-wise risk assessment
approach detailed in Understanding Your Risks: Identifying Hazards and Estimating Losses (FEMA 2001). This
approach consists of the following major steps:
1. Identify and screen hazards
2. Profile hazards
3. Inventory assets
4. Estimate losses
5. Identify future risks
Table 5.1: DMA 2000 Requirements - Risk Assessment
Section Title Requirement Languaae
Risk Identifying Hazards ~201.6(c)(2)(i): [The risk assessment shall include al description of the type ... of all
Assessment natural hazards that can affect the iurisdiction...
Risk Profiling Hazard ~201.6(c)(2)(i): [The risk assessment shall include a] description of the ... location and
Assessment Events extent of all natural hazards that can affect the jurisdiction. The plan
shall include information on previous occurrences of hazard events and
on the probabilitv of future hazard events.
Risk Assessing ~201.6(c)(2) [The risk assessment shall include a] description of the jurisdiction's
Assessment Vulnerability: (ii)(A): vulnerability to the hazards described in paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this
Identifying Assets section. This description shall include an overall summary of each
hazard and its impact on the community. The plan should describe
vulnerability in terms of:
The types and numbers of existing and future buildings, infrastructure,
and critical facilities located in the identified hazard areas...
Risk Assessing ~201.6(c)(2) [The plan should describe vulnerability in terms of an] estimate of the
Assessment Vulnerability: (ii)(B): potential dollar losses to vulnerable structures identified in paragraph
Estimating Potential (c)(2)(i)(A) of this section and a description of the methodology used to
Losses prepare the estimate...
Risk Assessing ~201.6(c)(2) [The plan should describe vulnerability in terms oij providing a general
Assessment Vulnerability: (ii)(C): description of land uses and development trends within the community
Analyzing so that mitigation options can be considered in future land use
Development Trends decisions.
Risk Multi-Jurisdictional ~201.6(c)(2) (iii): For multi-jurisdictional plans, the risk assessment section must assess
Assessment Risk Assessment each jurisdiction's risks where they vary from the risks facing the entire
i plannina area.
Source: FEMA, July 11, 2002.
As the first step in the risk assessment process, hazard identification involves the determination of the specific
hazards that threaten an area. Identified hazards include natural and human-caused events potentially affecting
persons and property in Pima County. Natural events become hazards when they pose a threat to people or
Pima Coun/y Mul/i-JlKislfctional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
36
..,J
property. Human-caused events are the direct result of human actions and include technological hazards and
terrorism. Technological hazards are generally accidental and/or are the resu~ of unintended consequences. This
assessment includes hazards that have occurred in the past, as well as those that may occur in the future (even if
there is no historical record of their occurrence).
To aid in the identifICation and screening of hazards, a database of historical hazard events for communities in Pima
County was developed based on information prepared for the State of Arizona Enhanced Hazard Mitigation Plan.
This database was populated in a step-wise manner using a comprehensive information-gathering method employed
on a countywide-basis, as hazard events are likely to affect numerous jurisdictions within a consolidated urban area
at one time. In addition, evaluation of hazard event scenarios is complicated because information is not available at
the jurisdictional level for many hazards and is only available at the county or state level. As a resu~ of this
inconsistency, hazard and community information has been provided at the most localized level possible. The
information listed in Table 5-2 was recorded for each entry where possible.
Table 5-2: Pima Coun Historical Hazard Event Database Fields
Declaration T
State E nditures
Federal Ex nditures
Fatalities
In'uries
Pro Dam e $
ero I Livestock .Da
Total Dam e $
Deseri tion
Information Source
Records from the Arizona Division of Emergency Management (ADEM), Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA), and US Department of Agriculture (USDA), were reviewed first in order to identify and enter events into the
database that were declared a disaster or emergency by one or more of the following: the Governor of Arizona, the
Secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, or the President of the United States. Next, events were identified
and entered that, while not declared a disaster or emergency, caused sufficient one-time or repetitive damage to be
considered a hazard. In order to limit the number of entries and focus on those hazards of most concern to Pima
County and its incorporated jurisdictions, undeclared events had to meet one or more of following criteria:
· 1 or more fatalities
· 1 or more injuries
· $50,000 or more in damages
· Significant event, as expressed in historical records or according to defined criteria (i.e. F1 tornado, etc.)
The first three criteria are useful in order to screen the large number of hazard event records from the last 20-30
years. This includes records from such agencies as the Arizona State land Department (ASlD), National Weather
Service (NWS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), US Geological Survey (USGS), and US
Forest Service (USFS). The last criteria enables the inclusion of historic hazard events that occurred prior to this time
which often have relatively little specifIC information, but were considered significant enough to have gone into one or
more historical records. Such entries were typically from narrative descriptions citied in a wide variety of sources
including newspaper articles, research studies, and other various state and local plans.
As Table 5-3 illustrates, the Pima County database ultimately grew to approximately 327 entries, providing useful
resources for the analysis of historical hazards within the County. It should be noted that reported information
regarding fatalities, injuries, and property damage is available for only a small proportion of the total number of
records and should, at best, be considered representative of the total damage caused by the hazard event. Once a
comprehensive list of all possible hazards is compiled, the list is screened to focus on the most likely or most
damaging hazards.
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: Odober 31. 2005)
URS
37
-~)
At the time of this writing, the hazard profile information for the Pascua Yaqui Tribe could not be developed utilizing
universal research methods, as native culture does not view or capture disaster event statistics in the same manner
as non-native jurisdictions. However, the HAZUS software program was able to model the vulnerability of the
identified hazards for the Community. Current data limitations may be addressed to the degree allowable within
cultural boundaries with future updates of the HMP.
Table 5-3: Historical Record of Hazards In Pima County bv TVDI
Historical Records
Number of Records Recorded Dllnaaes
Other Selected for
Hazard Declarations Events Total Fatalities Injuries Losses (5) Profiling
Aviation Accident 0 2 2 0 0 $0 No
Civil Disturbance 0 1 1 0 0 $0 No
Dam Failure 0 0 0 0 0 $0 Yes
Disease 7 4 11 0 0 $0 Yes
DrouQht 12 57 69 0 0 $300,000,000 Yes
Dust Storm 0 2 2 0 26 $98,000 No
EarthQuake 0 2 2 0 0 $0 No
EXDansive Soil 0 0 0 0 0 $0 No
Extreme Cold 0 0 0 0 0 $0 No
Extreme Heat 0 0 0 0 0 $0 Yes
Fire 0 0 0 0 0 $0 No
Fissure 0 0 0 0 .0 $0 No
Flood 9 24 33 56 119 $920,980,000 Yes
FOQ 0 0 0 0 0 $0 No
Hail 0 5 5 0 0 $50,000 Yes
HAZMA T Event 4 11 15 0 2 $0 Yes
landslide 0 0 0 0 0 $0 No
liahtninQ 0 9 9 1 14 $100,000 Yes
Meteor Strike 0 0 0 0 0 $0 No
Miscellaneous 2 0 2 0 0 $0 No
Mine Accident 0 0 0 0 0 $0 No
Nuclear Incident 0 0 0 0 0 $0 No
Prison Problem 1 0 1 0 0 $0 No
Public Safety 1 0 1 0 0 $0 No
Search and Rescue 1 1 2 0 0 $0 No
Service IntemJDtion 2 0 2 0 0 $0 No
Severe Wind 0 0 0 0 0 $0 No
Subsidence 0 0 0 0 0 $0 Yes
Terrorism 2 0 2 0 . 0 $0 No
Thunderstorm 4 37 41 3 15 $26,086,500 Yes
Tornado 0 8 8 3 51 $3,800,000 Yes
TroDical Cyclone 3 8 11 37 975 $750,800,000 Yes
Volcano 0 0 0 0 0 $0 No
Wildfire 18 89 107 0 0 $66,200,000 Yes
Winter Storm 0 1 1 2 10 $0 Yes
Total 6& 261 327 102 1,212 $2,068,114,500
Pima County Mulli-Jurisdictional Hazcrd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
38
.)
Number of Records
Other Selected for
Hazard Declarations Events Total Fatalities In.urles Losses S Profiling
NoIe: Information on fatalities, inpies, and property damage is available for ooIy a small proportion of the IolaI number of records and should be considered indicative.
DecI;nUons refers to Presidenlial, USDA, or Gubematorial declared disasters or emeIgeIlcies. Events refer to undeclared events with 1 or more fatalities, 1 or
more injuries, $50,000 or more in damages, or historically significant event (as expressed in historical records). The hazard event database covers \he period
1830 to 2002, atIhough approximately 90 percent of lIle records are from 1970 or more recenUy.long-lerm hazard events, such as droughts, were entered for
each reported year of occurrence.
Source: URS, October 2003, and URS, November 2004.
The Pima County Hazard Mitigation Steering Committee decided to select hazards to profile in detail based on a
number of factors, including the following:
· Prior knowledge of the relative risk presented by the hazards
· Information from the hazard event database
· The ability to mitigate the hazard via the DMA2000 process
· The known or expected availability of information on the hazard
Hazards selected for profiling include: dam failure, disease, drought, extreme heat, flood, hail, HAZMA T, lightning,
subsidence, thunderstorm, tornado, tropical cyclone, wildfire, and winter storm. All thirteen hazards selected to
profile affect the entire planning area although at varying degrees and impact. How each of the hazards affect each
jurisdiction is described in the Vulnerability Assessment. Therefore, one Risk Assessment for the planning area in
conjunction with the Vulnerability Assessment will provide the necessary information to assist each jurisdiction to
develop their individual Goals, Objectives and Potential Actions.
The hazards selected for profiling were examined in a methodical manner based on the following four factors, with
each factor considered in detail for the hazards profited:
· ~ature: This section provides basic information about the hazard sufficient enough to enable a user of the
plan to comprehend its nature and distinguish it from other hazards. It also provides a basis for leaders to
understand the subsequent vulnerability assessment and loss estimates. The information for this section is
drawn mainly from FEMA and other national agencies.
· History: Background information about previous occurrences of the hazard is provided. The focus is on
disasters and other events that have occurred in Pima County and, where Pima County information is lacking,
on major occurrences elsewhere in the United States. The information in this section is drawn mainly from the
database of historical hazard events in Arizona.
· Probability and Magnitude: As the title indicates, the focus of this section is the probability or frequency of
the hazard in Pima County as well its magnitude. Information is drawn from a combination of FEMA and other
national sources, Pima County expertise, and the Pima County hazard event database. Where possible, the
focus of this section is on a commonly accepted design event.
· Warning TIme: This topic prOvides information on the amount of time available for preparation prior to the
occurrence of the designated event. The information in this section is drawn from a combination of FEMA and
other national sources, Pima County expertise, and the Pima County hazard event database.
In an effort to provide as much information as possible about each hazard, extensive text analysis as well as
associated tables and graphics have been included for each of the hazard profiles below. These hazard profiles
should be considered introductory, with additional and more detailed analysis available by the many sources cited
below.
5.4.1 Dam Failure
5.4.1.1 Nature
A dam is a barrier constructed across a watercourse in order to store, control, or divert water, which is usually
constructed of earth, rock, concrete, or mine tailings. Water impounded behind a dam is referred to as the reservoir
Pima County U/Jftj-JrxisIlclionaJ Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
39
~'~~,-'""".,.,',....~....,....,."
-
"....,..,..,
.~ '"
and is measured in acre-feet, with one acre-foot being the volume of water that covers one acre of land to a depth of
one foot (i.e. 325,851 gallons). Due to topography, even small dams may have reservoirs containing many acre-feet
of water.
Dam failures involve unintended releases or surges of impounded water often resulting in downstream flooding. The
high velocity, debris-laden wall of water released from dam failures resu~s in the potential for human causalities,
economic loss, lifeline disruption, and environmental damage. Mhough they may involve the total collapse of a dam,
that is not always the case as damaged spillways, overtopping from prolonged rainfall, or other problems, including
the unintended consequences from normal operations, may result in a hazardous situation being created. Due to the
lack of advance warning, failures from natural events, such as earthquakes or landslides, may be particularly severe.
Dam failures may be caused by a variety of natural events, human-caused events, or a combination thereof. Dam
failures usually occur when the spillway capacity is inadequate and water overtops the dam or when internal erosion
through the dam foundation occurs (also know as piping). Structural deficiencies from poor initial design or
construction, lack of maintenance or repair, or the gradual weakening of the dam through the normal aging process
are factors contributing to dam failure events. Other factors include:
. Prolonged periods of rainfall and flooding (the cause of most failures); .
. Overtopping from inadequate spillway design, debris blockage of spillway, and the settlement of the dam's
crest;
. Foundation defects resulting from differential settlement, sliding and slope instability, high uplift pressures, or
uncontrolled foundation seepage;
. Piping and seepage from internal erosion, along hydraulic structures, leakage through animal burrows, or
cracks in the dam;
. Natural events such as earthquakes, volcanic lahars, landslides, or severe winds; and,
. Human caused events from vandalism, terrorism, or negligent operation.
5.4.1.2 History
Throughout the past century, catastrophic dam failures are becoming more frequent. Between 1918 and 1958, 33
major U.S. dam failures caused 1,680 deaths (FEMA, 1997). Some of the largest disasters in the U.S. resulted from
dam failures. In 1889, 2,209 people died when the South Fork Dam failed from overtopping due to excessive rainfall
above Johnstown, Pennsylvania. As another example, the June 5, 1976 failure of the Teton Dam in Idaho, caused by
piping, killed 11 people and caused approximately $1.0 billion in damages (FEMA, 1997).
In Arizona, two dam failure declarations (Presidential/Gubernatorial disaster or emergency declaration) and four
additional undeclared dam failure events were identified, resulting in an estimated 158 fatalities. These events
included the following:
. The Walnut Grove Dam, located on the Hassayampa River 30 miles south of Prescott Arizona, which failed
due to overtopping on February 22, 1890. Approximately 150 people died in the waters released from the
reservoir.
. The Lyman Dam, located south of St. Johns, Arizona, failed due to piping in 1915 leading to eight fatalities.
. The Butler Dam in La Paz County failed in 1982 the result of overtopping.
. Most recently, a mine tailings dam owned by BHP Copper failed on October 22, 1997 as a result of slope
failure. Approximately 300,828 cubic yards of mine rock tailings were released covering an area of 40 acres.
While none of these events occurred in Pima County, there are currently 16 existing dams within Pima County that
may present hazardous situations in the future.
5.4.1.3 Probability and Magnitude
The generally accepted safety standard for the design of dams is the Inflow Design Flood (IDF), which is the flood
magnitude, selected on the basis of size and potential hazard classification of a dam for the emergency spillway
design requirements. The Probable Maximum Flood (PM F), which is the estimated flood flow from the Probable
Maximum Precipitation (PMP), forms the basis for the upper limit of the IDF. The PMP is "... the greatest depth of
Pima County Mulli-JlJisdctional Hazard Miligaffon PIan.(Orat!: October 31, 2(05)
URS
40
~
precipitation for a given duration that is physically possible over a given size storm area at a particular geographical
location at a certain time of the year" (US Department of Commerce and US Army Corps of Engineers, June 1988).
There is historical record of only three storms of a magnitude exceeding 50% of the PMP in Arizona. The largest of
these was the Labor Day storm of 1970, with 59%. However, it must be noted that there are numerous dams in
existence whose discharge capabilities were designed and bum using methods that are now considered potentially
unsafe.
Areas impacted by a dam failure are analyzed on the basis of .sunny day. failures and failures under flood condition.
Typically, the dam-break inundation area or fJoodplain is more extensive than the floodplain used for land use
development purposes and few communities consider upstream dams when permitting development. The potential
severity of a full or partial dam failure is influenced by at least four factors: (1) the amount of water impounded, (2) the
density, type, and value of development and infrastructure downstream, (3) the amount of time available for waming
and evacuation, and (4) the quality of the warning and evacuation.
Currently, comprehensive and directly comparable information on the probability and magnitude of the impact of
specifIC dam failures in Pima County is not available. However, the following two sources of information provide an
indication of the risk posed by specific dams in Pima County and the potential for their failure:
· National Inventory of Dams (HID): FEMA's Hazards US Multi-Hazard (HAZUS-MH) includes data on dams
based on the National Inventory of Dams (NID) information. The HAZUS-MHINID database contains
information on approximately 77,000 dams in the 50 states and Puerto Rico, with approximately 30
characteristics for each dam, including name, owner, river, nearest community, length, height, average
storage, max storage, hazard rating, Emergency Action Plan (EAP), latitude, and longitude. The NID database
includes dams that meet the following criteria: (1) if it is a high or significant hazard potential class dam, (2) if it
is a low hazard potential class dam that exceeds 25 feet in height and 15 acre-feet storage, or (3) if it is a low
hazard potential class dam that exceeds 50 acre-feet storage and 6 feet height. Twelve dams in the NID
database are located in Pima County. Seven of these are in the NID database only and five are in both the
NID and ADWR databases, as shown in Table 5-4.
· Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR) Jurisdictional Dams: ADWR has jurisdiction over 10
dams in Pima County (five in the ADWR database only and five in both the NID and ADWR databases). The
AOWR is responsible for the management of non-federal dams to reduce loss of life and damage to property,
and conducts safety inspections of these dams.
Table 5-4: Identified Dams in Pima County, 2002
Both NID &
Jurisdiction NID Only ADWR Only ADWR Total
Marana 0 0 0 0
Oro Valley 0 0 0 0
Pima County (unincorporated) 6 5 3 14
Sahuarita 1 0 0 1
South Tucson 0 0 0 0
Tucson 0 0 2 2
Total PIma County 7 5 5 17
Note: Dams mBy be contained wiIl1in boIh the NID and ADWR databases.
Soun:e: NlD I HAZUS-Mi, ADWR, URS, December 2003
The NID and AOWR databases provide useful information on the potential hazard posed by dams in Pima County.
Each dam in the NIO is assigned one of the following three hazard potential classes based on the downstream
potential for loss of life and damage to property should the dam fail (listed from best to worst): low, significant, or
high. The hazard classes are determined by the anticipated consequences that may occur in the event of the failure
or faulty operation of the dam or related facilities, as shown in Table 5-5. It is important to note that the hazard
potential classification is an assessment of the consequences of failure, but not an evaluation of the probability of
failure.
Pima County Uufj.Jfxisliaional HaztnJ Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
41
~'> ~. ',.
~.-.,>"
r"~
r::-'
,,"/ J'
Table 5.5: NID Downstream Hazard Potential Classes
Hazard Potential
Classification
Low
Si nificant
Hi h
Note:
Source:
ADWR jurisdiction dams are regularly inspected by ADWR according to NID hazard rating and ADWR safety rating.
High hazard dams are inspected ann~ally, significant hazard dams are inspected every three years, and low hazard
dams are inspected every five years. After inspection, ADWR assigns each dam one of the following four safety
ratings (listed from best to worst): no deficiency, safety defICiency, unsafe non-emergency, or unsafe emergency. At
the time this analysis was prepared, no ADWR jurisdictional dams in Arizona had a rating of 'unsafe emergency'
(the worst safety rating).
While ~ is not possible to predict the probabil~ and magnitude of dam failure in Pima County, the NID hazard and
ADWR safety ratings can be used to identify potentially hazardous dams, as shown in Table 5-6. Of the 17 total
dams identified in Pima County, two have a "High Hazard" rating and no dam had a safety rating of "unsafe non-
emergency" from ADWR. A dam's classifICation as High Hazard is due to the signifICant consequences for both
humans and property of a dam failure in such a highly populated region. Both of the high hazard dams within Pima
County lie in the Tucson metropolitan area.
Table 5-6: PotentiallY Hazardous Dams In Pima Coun-tV. 2002
Both Htslh Hwrcl
Unuf. Non. Ind Unslf. Non.
Jurisdiction HIGh Hwrcl OnlY E OnlY Emeraencv Total
Marana 0 0 0 0
Oro Valey 0 0 0 0
Pima County (uninc) 1 (1) 0 0 1
Sahuarita 0 0 0 0
South Tucson 0 0 0 0
Tucson 1 0 0 1
Totll Pima County 2 0 0 2
(1) This dllll is CUIl1Iltly listed as .Iigh hazard dcIn. however ilformalion from \he Pima County Office of
EmefVtIICY Mlnlgement and HomeIInd SecurIty states this dllll no longer exists.
Note: High Hazard Only dams from the National Inventory of Dams (NID) I HAZUS-MH and is an assessment of the
consequences of failure on populalion (but not an evaluation of the probabiIty of failure). Unsafe Non-Emergency
Only d8ms tom the Arizona Deparlment of Water Resources (ADWR) and is an assessment of the safety of the dam
theI indicates a severe ~ty deficiency that could worsen \0 be come an unsafe condition whiell could result in
failure of the dcIn. BollI High Hauvd and Unsafe Non-Emergency Dams meet both of these conditions and may be
considered lie most hazardous dams.
Source: NID I HAZUS-MH, ADWR, URS, December 2003.
5.4.1.4 Warning Time
The warning time for dam failure may range from a few minutes to usually less than an hour for overtopping and a
few hours for piping failures. Studies indicate that loss of life due to dam failure flooding is significantly reduced when
warning is in excess of 90 minutes. Historically, when warning time is less than 30 minutes, loss of lite has been as
high as 50 percent of the persons within the inundation area. Warning time is dependent upon early detection of the
problem and the travel time from the dam to the population at risk. The factors that can cause dam failure are.
translated into high risks when people or properties are threatened. All high hazard potential dams are required to
prepare Emergency Action Plans (EAPs) that include inundation maps for various types of failures and floods. In
many cases, inundation areas have also been defined for floods due to non-failure spillway flows that exceed the
capacity of the channel below the dam. EAPs and inundation maps are filed with the Pima County Office of
Emergency Management and Homeland Security, the dam owner, and the ADWR. Jurisdictions are generally
responsible for the overall direction and control of emergency response operations within their jurisdictions to include
warning, evacuation, and security of the evacuated areas.
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
42
~i
The National Weather Service (NWS) is responsible for is.suing forecasts and warnings to mitigate the loss of life and
property associated with weather phenomena. The NWS fulfills this mission with. 121 Weather Forecast Offices
(WFOs) nationwide responsible for collecting data, analyzing mathematical computer models of the atmosphere, and
preparing and disseminating weather related information. The Tucson WFO provides a wide range of information,
including current conditions, regional weather forecasts, storm information (e.g., watches, warnings, statements, or
advisories), and public warnings and watches related to eminent or occurring dam failures within Pima County. The
Tucson WFO also provides warnings for extreme flash floods and prolonged periods of flooding, both of which could
lead to dam failure. In general, the warning time for dam failure can vary from minutes to days, depending upon the
nature of the failure. Furthermore, there may be no warning time due to the failure of a dam following a catastrophic
earthquake, landslide, or terrorist attack. In the case of extreme flash flooding, the warning time may also be short,
although it could extend to hours. Periods of prolonged rainfall and associated flooding, the most common cause of
dam failure, may have waming times as short as several hours, but more typically would extend to days.
Hydrological models are used throughout the nation in the preparation of hydrologic watches and warnings. For large
river systems, hydrological models are used by the 13 River Forecast Centers (RFCs) throughout the United States
to produce hydrologic forecasts. For. many-but not all-smaller streams, the NWS has developed an automated
system called ALERT (Automated Local Evaluation in Real Time). The ALERT system provides information on
rainfall amounts, depth of stream flows, and depth of water behind a dam. The Pima County Flood Control District
currently maintains 84 precipitation sensors, 30 stream stage sensors, and four weather stations within eastern Pima
County. However, some communities may still need to use volunteer observers to monitor water levels, the
effectiveness of the levee system, or to confirm automated information with visual observations.
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Haz;,d Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
43
r~c-
"{" -"
Figure 5.1: Potentially Hazardous Dams, 2002
Pima County Multi-Jurisdiclional Hazard MitigaUon Plan (Draft October 31, 2005)
URS
44
-)
5.4.2 Disease
5.4.2.1 Nature
A disease is a pathological (unhealthy or ill) condition of a living organism or part of the organism that is
characterized by an identifiable group of symptoms or signs. Disease can affect any living organism, including
people, animals, and plants. Dis~ase can both directly (through infection) and indirectly (through secondary impacts)
affect people, animals, and plants. Some diseases can directly affect both people and animals by infecting both. The
most hazardous disease threat is the occurrence of an epidemic, which is a disease that affects numerous people,
animals, or plants at one time.
Of great concem for human, animal and plant health are infectious diseases caused by the entry and growth of
microorganisms in another living organism. Some, but not all, infectious diseases are contagious, meaning they are
communicable through direct or even indirect contact with an organism infected with the disease, something it has
touched, or another medium (e.g., water, air). According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC),
during the first half of the twentieth century, optimism grew as steady progress was made against infectious diseases
in humans resulting from improved water quality, sanitation, antibiotics, and inoculations (CDC, October 1998). The
incidences and severity of infectious diseases such as tuberculosis, typhoid fever, smallpox, polio, whooping cough,
and diphtheria were all significantly reduced during this period. This optimism proved premature, however, for a
variety of reasons, including the following: antibiotics began to lose their effectiveness against infectious disease
(e.g., Staphylococcus aureus); new strains of influenza emerged in China and spread rapidly around the globe;
sexually transmitted diseases surged; new diseases were identified in the U.S. and elsewhere (e.g., Legionnaires's
disease, Lyme disease, toxic shock syndrome, and Ebola hemorrhagic fever); acquired immunodeficiency syndrome
(AIDS) appeared; and tuberculosis (including drug-resistant strains) reemerged (CDC, October 1998).
In a 1992 report entitled Emerging Infections: Microbial Threats to Health in the United States, the Institute of
Medicine (10M) identified the growing links between U.S. and intemational health, and concluded that emerging
infections are a major and growing threat to the U.S. An emerging infectious disease is one whose incidence in
humans has increased during the previous decades or threatens to increase in the near future. Emerging infectious
diseases are a product of modem demographic and environmental conditions, such as global travel, globalization
and centralized processing of the food supply, population growth and increased urbanization. In response to the
. threat of emerging infectious diseases, the CDC launched a national effort to protect the US public in a plan entitled
Addressing Emerging Infectious Disease Threats. Based on the CDC's plan, major improvements to the US health
system have been implemented, including Improvements in surveillance, applied research, public heahh
infrastructure, and prevention of emerging infectious diseases (CDC, October 1998).
Despite these improvements, infectious diseases are the leading cause of death in humans worldwide and the third
leading cause of death in humans in the U.S. (American Society for Microbiology, June 21, 1999). A recent follow-up
report from the Institute of Medicine, entitled Microbial Threats to Health: Emergence, Detection, and Response,
notes that the impact of infectious diseases on the U.S. has only grown in the last ten years and that public hea~h
and medical communities remain inadequately prepared. Further improvements are necessary to prevent, detect,
and control emerging, as well as resurging, microbial threats to hea~h. The danger posed by infectious diseases are
compounded by other important trends: the continuing increase in antimicrobial resistance; the US' diminished
capacity to recognize and respond to microbial threats; and the intentional use of biological agents to do harm
(Institute of Medicine, 2003).
The CDC maintains a list of over 50 nationally notifiable diseases. A notifiable disease is one that, when diagnosed,
health providers are required, usually by law, to report to State or local public heahh officials. Notifiable diseases are
those of public interest by reason of their contagiousness, severity, or frequency. The long list includes such diseases
as the following: AIDS; anthrax; botulism; cholera; diphtheria; encephalitis; gonorrhea; Hantavirus pulmonary
syndrome; hepatitis (A, B, C); HIV (pediatric); Legioneltosis; Lyme disease; malaria; measles; mumps; plague; polio
(paralytic); rabies (animal and human); Rocky Mountain spotted fever; rubella (also congenital); Salmonellosis;
SARS; Streptococcal disease (Group A); Streptococcal toxic-shock syndrome; Streptococcus pneumoniae (drug
resistant); syphilis (also congenital); tetanus; Toxic-shock syndrome; Trichinosis, tuberculosis, Typhoid fever; and
Yellow fever (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, May 2, 2003). In addition to diseases found only in
Pima county Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31. 2(05)
URS
45
'f .:.:,~.;:_
,.;-'<'l
_~: J
humans, there is also significant concern about diseases that affect both humans and animals, known as zoonotic
diseases. There are approximately 40 zoonotic diseases, including the following: rabies; tuberculosis and brucellosis;
trichinosis; ringworm; giardiasis; and Lyme disease (Will, April 2002).
In Pima County, the Pima County Health Department seeks to prevent infectious diseases from entering the county
and control those that are endemic or have already entered. Of particular concern to the County Health Department
are new pandemic diseases, such as SARS, new strains of HIV, new influenza strains, botulism, and bio-terrorism
pathogens such as anthrax, smallpox, or chemical attacks of sarin or VX gas. As a component of the Pima County
Health Department, the Disease Control division seeks to reduce the incidence of disease morbidity and mortality in
Pima County through the identification of community health problems, compilation of health statistics, and
development of appropriate intervention programs. Special attention is paid to epidemiology, HIVlAIDS, sexually
transmitted diseases, in addition to preventive programs such as immunizations and well 'M>men services.
Diseases affecting animals and plants, particularly livestock and agricultural products, are also of major concern, as
they can affect the supply and quality of human food supplies, potential economic consequences, and impact foreign
trade. According to the National Animal Health Emergency Management System (NAHEMS), an animal health
emergency is defined as the appearance of disease with the potential for sudden negative impacts through direct
effects on productivity, real or perceived risks to public health, or real or perceived risks to foreign countries importing
from the U.S. (Lautner, April 18, 2002).
A division of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
(APHIS) is responsible for protecting and promoting U.S. agricultural health, administering the Animal Welfare Act,
and carrying out I wildlife damage management activnies. Major programs within APHIS relating to disease are
Veterinary Services (VS) and Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ). Veterinary Services protects and improves the
health, quality, and marketability of animals, animal products and veterinary biologics by (i) preventing, controlling
and/or eliminating animal diseases, and (ii) monitoring and promoting animal health and productivity. Among other
activities, Veterinary Services conducts surveillance on national animal diseases, foreign animal diseases, emerging
animal diseases, and invasive plant species. Most of Veterinary Services efforts are targeted at diseases on the
Organization Internationale des Epizooties (OlE) "A" list or "B" list.
The OlE is the international standard setting body for animal health and international trade. OlE categorizes animal
diseases in two classes: "A" list (most serious) and "B" list (less serious). The "A" list contains transmissible diseases
that have the potential for very serious and rapid spread, irrespective of national borders, are of serious socio-
economic or public health consequence, and are of major importance in the international trade of animals and animal
products. Diseases on the "A" list include the following: Foot and mouth disease; lumpy skin disease; bluetongue;
African horse sickness; classical swine fever; vesicular stomatnis; rinderpest; contagious bovine pleuropneumonia;
Rift Valley fever; sheep pox and goat pox; African swine fever; and highly pathogenic avian influenza. The "B" list
diseases are transmissible diseases considered to be of socio-economic and/or public health importance within
countries and are significant hi the international trade of animals and animal products. This list currently includes over
100 diseases (Organization Intemationale des Epizooties, January 9,2003).
The Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ) program safeguards agriculture and natural resources from the risks
associated with the entry, establishment, or spread of animal and plant pests and noxious weeds. Several thousand
foreign plant and animal species have been established in the Unned States over the past 200 years, with
approximately one in seven becoming invasive. An invasive species is an alien (Le., non-native) species whose
introduction does, or is likely to, cause harm to the economy, environment, or human health. Invasive plants, animals,
and pathogens have often reduced the economic productivity and ecological integrity of agriculture, forestry, and
other natural resources.
Common vertebrate invasive species in the continental US include nutria, house sparrows, European starlings, and
commensal rodents (roof rat, Norway rat, and house mouse). In Hawaii and in some continental U.S. States, feral
pigs, goats, and cats have severely impacted natural and environmental resources. Addnionally, numerous
invertebrate invasive species have become established in the United States, including zebra mussels, imported fire
ants, Africanized honey bees, and Asian longhorned beetles (Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, April
2003).
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Oralt: October 31, 2005) ,
URS
46
j
The Arizona Department of Agriculture (ADA) and Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD) are primarily
concemed with plant, livestock and wild animal diseases and infections. These agencies focus on diseases listed on
the Office Intemational des Epizooties (OlE) disease "A" list. The OlE develops standards and guidelines for use in
protecting against incursions of diseases or pathogens during trade in animals and animal products. The ADA and
the AGFD are Concemed with animal-lo-animal diseases, as well as diseases transmitted from animals or arthropod
vectors to humans.
Many other hazards, such as floods, earthquakes or droughts, may create conditions that significantly increase the
frequency and severity of diseases. These hazards can affect basic services (e.g., water supply and quality,
wastewater disposal, electricity), the supply and quality of food. and the public and agricultural health $ystem
capactties. As a result, concentrations of diseases may result and grow rapidly. potentially leading to large losses of
life and economic value. In addition, since the anthrax attacks following the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001,
the threat of terrorism using disease to infest humans, animals, or plants, is of growing concem. This is particularly
true of those capable of disrupting the human or animal food chain.
5.4.2.2 History
The influenza pandemic of 1918 and 1919, known as the Spanish Flu or Swine Flu, had the highest infectious
disease mortality rate in recent history. More than 20 million persons were killed worldwide, some 500,000 of which
were in the U.S. alone (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, October 1998). More recent major infectious
diseases affecting people in the U.S. include the following:
· West Nile Virus (WNV), a seasonal infection transmitted by mosquitoes, grew from an initial U.S. outbreak of
62 disease cases in 1999 to 9,800 reported cases, including 264 deaths, in 2003 (Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention, December 23, 2004).
· Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), is estimated to have killed 916 and infected 8,422 worldwide by
mid-August 2003 (World Health Organization, August 15, 2003). In the U.S., only 8 cases had laboratory
evidence of infection with SARS-CoV. Since July 2003, v.tIen SARS-CoV transmission was declared
contained, active global surveillance for SARS-CoV disease has detected no person-ta-person transmission of
SARS-CoV. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, February 2004).
· Although most cases go unrecognized, Norwalk-like virus (NL V) is believed to affect over 20 million persons in
the U.S. each year. NLV accounts for 96 percent of all non-bacterial outbreaks of gastroenteritis (Arizona
Department of Health Services, March/ApriI2003).
Significant animal disease outbreaks have affected major U.S. trading partners resulting in huge economic losses.
These events include the following:
· The largest recent animal disease outbreak in the United States occurred in 1983-84, when avian influenza
swept through Pennsylvania and neighboring States. Poultry prices for consumers jumped by $350 million. A
6-month eradication plan cost the Federal Govemment $63 million (Federal Emergency Management Agency,
July 2002).
· In 1988, the value of British beef and beef products was estimated at US $880 million. After bovine spongiform
encephalopathy (BSE, or "mad cow disease") emerged, its value dropped considerably. After a 1996
announcement of a probable link between consumption of BSE-affected meat and a new variant of Creutzfeld-
Jakob disease in humans, the value fell to zero (Federal Emergency Management Agency. July 2002).
· The pig husbandry industry in the Netherlands was struck by a severe epidemic of Classical Swine Fever
(CSF) in 1997, resulting in the killing of up to 1.1 million pigs (Bouma and Stegeman). Other countries affected >
by CSF include Haiti, the Dominican Republic, and the U.K. (Lautner, March 18,2002).
· Approximately 1.1 million pigs were killed in Malaysia in the two years 1998 and 1999 in order to stop a major
outbreak of the Nipah Virus. The virus also affects people and resulted in the death of at least 115 persons
(Animal Production and Health Commission for Asia and the PacifIC, January 2002).
· More than a million cattle and sheep were destroyed in the U.K. due to an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease
in 2001. Other countries affected by foot-and-mouth disease include Argentina, Brazil, Egypt, Taiwan, Korea,
Japan, and South Africa (Lautner, March 18, 2002).
Pima County Mul/i.JtxisdictiOl1al Hazard Mitigation Plan (Dralt: October 31, 2005)
URS
47
.::~::: i
~
~fZ. . j~
According to figures provided by Cornell University, invasive species cost the United States more than $138 billion
each year (Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, April 2003). The following are examples of the impacts of a
number of invasive species in the U.S.:
. Boll weevils came to the United States from Mexico in 1892 and are the primary insect pest of cotton, costing
U.S. farmers more than $200 million annually in control efforts and yield losses (Animal and Plant Hea.h
Inspection Service, April 2003).
. In 1970, leaf blight destroyed about $1 billion worth of com in the United States. Between 1993 and 1998,
fusarium head blight affected successive wheat harvests in the Dakotas, Minnesota, and Manitoba. The
disease spread over 10 million acres, probably with the help of abnormally wet weather, and cost an estimated
$1 billion in lost production (Federal Emergency Management Agency, July 2002).
. An invasive insect detected in California in the early 1990s, the glassy-winged sharpshooter carries the plant
bacterium Xylella fastidiosa, which causes a variety of plant diseases, including Pierce's disease. This disease
has already caused multi-million-dollar losses of California grape crops and continues to pose a major threat
to the grape, raisin, and wine industries, and the tourism associated with them (Animal and Plant Hea.h
Inspection Service, April 2003).
. Tropical bont tick is present on the Caribbean Islands and is a pest of concem to the U.S. mainland due to
frequent travel and commerce between the areas. It can carry a parasite that causes heartwater disease-a
major threat to domestic livestock (Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, April 2(03).
In Pima County, there have been seven disaster declarations (Presidential, USDA, or Gubernatorial disaster or
emergency declaration) due to disease and four additional undeclared events, as shown in Table 5-3.There were no
identified fatalities or injuries associated with these events as recorded. Major infectious disease outbreaks in Pima
County that affected humans include the following:
. In 1918 the Spanish influenza pandemic entered Arizona resulting in a great number of deaths, although the
exact number is undocumented.
. In 1952, large numbers of influenza cases were reported throughout Arizona, including Pima County, although
no death statistics are available.
. In 1975, a Rabies quarantine was issued for Pima County.
. There have been relatively few reported incidents or concerns related to animal disease outbreaks in Arizona.
Those reported include the following:
. On May 18, 2002 the Arizona Game and Fish Department placed an emergency ban on the importation of live
hoofed animals (e.g., deer and elk) into Arizona due to a fear of Chronic Wasting Disease (CWO). CWO is a
disease closely related to "mad cow disease" in cattle and scrapie in domestic sheep and goats, but also
affects deer and elk (Arizona Game and Fish).
. On January 8, 2003, the Arizona Department of Agriculture issued an Administrative Order implementing
procedures to prevent the introduction of Exotic Newcastle Disease (END) into Arizona. END is a contagious
and fatal viral disease affecting domestic, wild, and caged pou~ and birds, and is one of the most infectious
diseases of poultry in the wor1d. On February 5, 2003, Governor Napolitano declared a state of emergency to
contain END threatening Arizona's poultry. The US Secretary of Agriculture, Ann M. Veneman, signed
declarations of extraordinary emergency with respect to END in Arizona on February 7,2003 (United States
Department of Agricu.ure, February 12, 2003).
Pima County has been subject to a number of major infestations, the largest of which is still affecting the state and
region (pine bar!< beetle). Further details on these infestations are given below:
. On May 22, 2003, Governor Janet Napolitano declared a State disaster and a state of emergency due to the
ravages of the pine bar!< beetle on the state's forests. An estimated 2.5 million ponderosa pines and 4 mUlion
pinon pines were killed by the pine bar!< beetle in Arizona in 2002-2003. The last significant bar!< beetle
outbreak in Arizona occurred from 1951 to 1956. The bar!< beetles are killing so many trees for two reasons,
first the forest has too many trees and second the trees are very dry. Overcro..wed forest conditions coupled
with drought lead to the high probability of beetle attack. The forests of Arizona have been able to survive in
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
48
J
relatively dry conditions because in past centuries low intensity tires helped to maintain a low density of trees
in the forest. In the past century, however, fires have been controlled allowing many forested areas to become
overcrowded (DeGomez, April 23, 2003).
· Exotic and imported ants are listed on the Arizona Department of Agriculture website as "Arizona's Most
Unwanted Pest", Some people are allergic to the sting and in some cases may cause death. Fire ants are also
known to out compete and drive away local native ants (Arizona Department of Agriculture).
· Arizona periodically experiences major grasshopper infestations. Four infestations have resutted in State
declarations of emergency in the last quarter century (Arizona Division of Emergency Management, March 6,
2003).
· A declared plant disease disaster involved the wheat disease-Kamal Bunt-in 1996, Other undeclared plant
disease events include the citrus disease red scale in 1942 (Arizona Division of Emergency Management,
March 6, 2003).
5.4.2.3 Problbllity and Magnitude
The probability and magnitude of disease, particularly an epidemic, is difficult to evaluate due to the wide variation in
disease characteristics, such as rate of spread, morbidity and mortality, detection and response time, and the
availability of vaccines and other forms of prevention. A review of the historical record (see above) indicates that
disease related disasters do occur in humans, animals, and plants with some regularity and severity, There is
growing concern, however, about emerging infectious diseases as well as the possibility of a bioterrorism attack.
5.4.2.4 Warning Time
Due to the wide variation in disease characteristics, the warning time for a disease disaster can vary from immediate
to months, depending upon the nature of the disease. No warning time may be available due to an extremely
contagious disease, particularly if combined with a terrorist attack in a crowded environment. Balancing this are the
numerous agencies and programs in place to prevent, detect, and respond to diseases, such as the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention, Arizona Department of Health Services, Pima County Department of Public Health,
Organization Internationale des Epizooties, USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA Plant
Protection and Quarantine, and Arizona Department of Agriculture.
5.4.3 Drought
5.4.3.1 Nature
Drought is a normal, recurrent feature of virtually all climatic zones, including areas of both high and low rainfall,
atthough characteristics will vary significantly from one region to another. Erroneously, many consider it a rare and
random event. Drought differs from normal aridity, which is a permanenHeature of the climate in areas of low rainfall
and is the result of a natural decline in the expected precipitation over an extended period of time, typically one or
more seasons in length. Other climatic characteristics, such as high temperature, high wind, and low relative
humidity, impact the severity of drought conditions.
Drought can be defined using. both conceptual and operational definitions, Conceptual definitions of drought are often
utilized to assist in the widespread understanding of drought. Many conceptual definitions portray drought as a
protracted period of deficient precipitation resulting in extensive damage to agricultural crops and the consequential
economic losses occurring. Operational definitions define the beginning, end, and degree of severity of drought.
These definitions are often used to analyze drought frequency, severity, and duration for given periods of time. Such
definnions often require extensive weather data on hourly, daily, monthly, or other time scales and are utilized to
provide a greater understanding of drought from a regional perspective. Four common definitions for drought are
provided as flows:
· Meteorological drought is defined solely on the degree of dryness, expressed as a departure of actual
precipitation from an expected average or normal amount based on monthly, seasonal, or annual time scales.
· Hydrological drought is related to the effects of precipitation shortfalls on stream flows and reservoir, lake, and
groundwater levels.
Pima County Alulfi-msdictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft October 31. 2005)
URS
49
.:::;:-'.;
,..;~-,
,-~' .)
. Agricultural drought is defined principally in terms of soil moisture defICiencies relative to water demands of
plant life, usually crops.
. Socioeconomic drought associates the supply and demand of economic goods or 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. The may also be called a water
management drought.
Drought severity depends on numerous factors. including duration, intensity, and geographic extent as well as
regional water supply demands by humans and vegetation. Due to its multi-dimensional nature, drought is difficult to
define in exact terms and also poses difficulties in terms of comprehensive risk assessments.
Drought differs from other natural hazards in three ways. First, the onset and end of a drought are difficult to
determine due to the slow accumulation and lingering of effects of an event after its apparent end. Second, the lack
of an exact and universally accepted definition adds to the confusion of its existence and severity. Third. in contrast
with other natural hazards, the impact of drought is less obvious and may be spread over a larger geographic area.
These characteristics have hindered the preparation of drought contingency or mitigation plans by many
governments.
The effects of drought increase with duration as more moisture-related activities are impacted. Non-irrigated
croplands are most susceptible to precipitation shortages. Rangeland and irrigated agricultural crops many not
respond to moisture shortage as rapidly, but yields during periods of drought can be substantiaRy affected. During
periods of severe drought, lower moisture in plant and forest fuels create an increased potential for devastating
wildfires. In addition, lakes, reservoirs, and rivers can be subject to water shortages that impact recreational
opportunities, irrigated crops, and availability of water supplies for activities such as fire suppression and human
consumption, and natural habitats of animals. Socioeconomic effects include higher unemployment and lower land
values. Insect infestation can also be particularly damaging impact from severe drought conditions.
5.4.3.2 History
Nine notable droughts occurred in the United States during the 20th century. Although damage estimates are not
available for many of these events, those events for which data is available depict costly economic damages
associated with drought. For example, the Great Plains Drought of the 1930's, precipitating the Oklahoma Dust Bowl
and lasting approximately a decade, cost $475 million in federal funds. However, not figured into this cost is the loss
of at least five inches of topsoil from nearly 10 million acres and departure of near1y 10% of the State of Oklahoma's
population by 1938. In 1976-1977 drought again hit the Great Plains, the Upper Midwest, and the far western portion
of the United States causing direct losses of $10-15 billion. Furthermore, the drought in the Central and Eastern .
States during 1987-89 caused an estimated $39 billion in damages (FEMA, 1997, Oklahoma Department of Libraries,
State of Oklahoma History and Culture).
It is also important to note that in addition to affecting people, drought may severely affect livestock and pets. Such
events may require emergency wateringlfeeding, shelter, evacuation, and possible increase in event-caused deaths
and burying of animals, such as duting the statewide droughts in the 1990's. Range animals were affected resulting
in range closures and the institution of dry-milk programs (Lanman, May 27, 2003).
Pima County experienced 12 droughts that were declared disasters/emergencies and 57 undeclared drought events
(droughts affecting multiple years are recorded as a distinct event for each year affected), as shown in Table 5-3.
Arizona. including Pima County, experienced the most prolonged period of drought conditions in the past 300 years
between 1849 and 1905 (NOAA, July 29, 2003). Data collected by the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), as
shown in Figure 5-2, show that between 1998 and 2004 there have been more months with a below normal amount
of precipitation than months with above normal precipitation. From mid-2Q01 to mid-2oo2, there has been a
continuous below normal amount of precipitation.
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional HazlMd Mitigation Plan (Dralt: October 31, 2(05)
URS
50
.)
Fi ure 5.2: Arizona Preci itation, Normal and D. artur., Jan 1998.Nov 2004
4.0
Arizona Statewide Precipitation
Normal & Departure, Jan 1998 - Nov 2004
100
~
...
I Above Normal
. BelOw Notmal
- Nonnal
Year
National Climatic Data Center / NESDIS / NOAA
Source: N AA, December 2004.
At the time of this writing, rainfall for Pima County has been below the average for six out of the last seven years.
Surface water flows and reservoir storage levels are the lowest ever recorded in many areas. Rural areas are most
affected due to heavy reliance on dwindling ground water supplies and lack of atternatives. The urban areas
surrounding Tucson have been less affected thanks to supplies from the Central Arizona Project (CAP) and
significant Investments in recharge systems, and ground water sources (Jacobs and Morehouse, June 11-13,2003).
5.4.3.3 Probability and Magnitude
No commonly accepted approach exists to assessing risks associated with drought. The Palmer Drought Severity
Index (PSDI) is a commonly used index that measures the severity of drought for agriculture and water resource
management. It is calculated from observed temperature and precipitation values, and estimates of soil moisture.
However, the Palmer Index is not considered to be consistent enough to characterize the risk of drought on a
nationwide basis (FEMA, 1997).
The principal objective of the National Study of Water Management During Drought was to develop strategies for
improving water management to reduce the nation's vulnerability to drought (USACE, September 1995). An outcome
of this study was the National Drought Atlas, which was managed by the United States Army Corps of Engineers and
is the first nationwide study of drought frequency. The Atlas provides a useful tool for answering questions about the
likely duration, timing, and severity of drought in a region (Willeke et ai, 1994). It is based on precipnation, stream
flow, and Palmer Drought Severity Index data from 1,119 sites (grouped into 111 regions) in the National Climatic
Data Center's Historical Climate Network (with an average record length of 85 years).
While there is no commonly accepted return period or non-exceedance probability for defining the risk from
hydrological drought (such as the 100-year or 1 percent annual chance of flood), as noted above, the National
Drought Atlas can be used to answer questions on drought at the regional level (FEMA, 1997). Table 5-6 shows the
July-ta-January mean stream flow in cubic feet per second per square mile with a 5-percent chance of non-
exceedance (meaning that stream flow will be less than this value once in every twenty years). The map indicates
that Pima County, including all of the communnies in the greater metropolitan area, will be subject to a drought every
Pima CouTlly Mulli-Juriscktional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: OcIobar 31, 2005)
URS
51
:"::..~:;<>
,5: .)
twenty years in which mean stream flows are 0.1 cubic feet per second per square mile or less. The entire state is
susceptible to a drought at any time, though the drought season tends to be from January through May.
It is notable that temperatures in the Western U.S. rose 2-SoF during the 20th century. While this increase was
accompanied by precipitation increases of up to 50 perrent in some areas of the West, some places have become
drier and experienced more droughts (including Arizona). The tv<<> major climate change models, the Canadian Model
and the Hadley Model, both forecast continued temperature increases in the West of 5-11 OF during the 21st century,
including Arizona. However, both mocIels also forecast significant increases in rainfall in much of the West, with the
increase on the older of 75-100 perrent across much of Arizona. These increases may lead to elevated water
supplies, although current reservoir systems may be inadequate to control eartier spring runoff and to maintain
supplies for the summer (National Assessment Synthesis Team, May 2001).
While evaluating the probability and magnitude of drought in Pima County, it is helpful to consider the sources for
potable water within the County. Pima County predominantiy derives its potable water from groundwater, although
the relatively recent extension of the Central Arizona Project (CAP) canals to the Tucson Water Management Area in
1990 and the use of effluent provide alternatives to groundwater use. Two main aquifers supply water to Pima
County, one located in the Tucson Basin and the other in the Avra Valley Basin. Water pumped from these
underground natural reservoirs has historically been pumped out much more rapidly than it is replenished. Several
major impacts associated with excessive groundwater pumping include oveldraft, subsidence, and earth fissures.
Oveldraft is a condition leading to limits in groundwater availability by location, depth, and quality. Subsidence is the
downward movement or sinking of the earth's surface caused by the removal of undertying supports. Fissures are
visible cracks or crevices creating a break in the earth's surface. Urban areas within Pima County are especially
vulnerable to the effects of subsidence due to their higher population densities and large number of buildings and
other structures. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) reports that since 1940 groundwater levels in Central Arizona
have dropped by nearty 220 feet, with the Tucson area subsiding at least one foot since 1950 (Gelt, Henderson,
Seasholes, Tellman, and Woodwald, 1998). In 1980, Arizona implemented the Groundwater Management Code in
older to promote conservation and long-range planning of water resources, including reducing reliance on
groundwater supplies.
Surface water to Pima County users comes from two SOUIreS, the Colorado River (through the Central Arizona
Project (CAP) Canal) and in-state rivers (including streams and lakes). As the largest renewable water supply in the
Tucson metropolitan area, CAP water is transported from the Colorado River through open canals, siphons, and
pipes 336 miles to Pima County. In response to water quality issues experienced in the earty 1990's during the
initiation of the direct delivery of treated CAP water to consumers, the City of Tucson passed the Water Consumer
Protection Act prohibiting direct delivery and injection recharge of CAP wat~r unless stringent water quality criteria is
met. In response to this initiative, Tucson presently uses its CAP allocation for groundwater recharge efforts.
Reclaimed water, or effluent, use cunentiy meets about five percent of the Tucson area's municipal water demand
(Gelt, Henderson, Seasholes, Tellman, and Woodward, 1998). Primarily utilized to irrigate golf courses, Tucson has
built an 8S-mile reclaimed water system that serves to offset the previous demand for groundwater.
5.4.3.4 Warning TIme
Predicting drought depends on the ability to forecast two fundamental climatic variables, precipitation and
temperature. As dimate is inherentiy variable, predicting drought a month or more in advance is often inaccurate. In
addition, anomalies in precipitation and temperature may last for several months to several decades, further
emphasizing the imprecise nature of drought predication (National Drought Mitigation Center, 2003).
Several forecasts exist to assist in identifying drought conditions. The U.S. Drought Outlook forecasts the drought
outlook for the United States for the remaining portion of the cunent month and the next three subsequent months.
This report is prepared monthly by the National Weather Service's Climate Prediction Center. Tools used in preparing
the drought outlook include the following: the official CPC long-lead precipitation outlook for the next 90 days; the
Palmer Drought Index probability projections for the next 3 months; various medium and short-range forecasts and
models, such as the 6-10 day and 8-14 day forecasts and the 2-week soil moisture forecast; and the constructed
analogue from soil moisture forecasts (National Weather Service, Climate Prediction Center).
Pima Counly Uulli-JlXislfc1ional Haz8d Uiligation Plan (Draft: Oc/obef 31, 2(05)
URS
52
J
The Drought Monitor is a product of the US Departments of Agriculture and Commerce in partnership with the
National Drought Mitigation Center. Produced weekly, the Drought Monitor summarizes information from several
different measurement systems to provide a current summary of drought condnions across the Unned States. It is a
joint effort product from the Climate Prediction Center (CPC) and National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), the U.S.
Department of Agriculture, and the National Drought Mitigation Center (NDMC). Data incorporated into the Drought
Monitor include climate outlooks, seasonal U.S. drought outlook, stream flow forecast, forecast Palmer Drought
Severity Index, and soil moisture forecasts.
Droughts typically take months or even years to occur and be identified, and may also persist for years. As noted
above, the U.S. Drought Outlook provides some waming time, perhaps months about the occurrence of a drought.
The U.S. Drought Monitor provides information on the extent and severity of existing drought conditions. The
information from both of these may provide waming time on the order of months that will be used to plan for Mure or
existing drought conditions.
Despne the ongoing drought, Arizona lacked a statewide drought plan until Govemor Janet Napolitano signed
Executive Order 2003-12 directing the establishment of the Govemor's Drought Task Force on March 20, 2003.
Although drought response activities were previously handled within the Department of Emergency Management, the
Govemor directed the Department of Water Resources to provide leadership in this effort in recognition of the
differences between drought and other types of emergencies. The Drought Task Force comprised a variety of state
agencies and elected officials, aided by experts from the National Drought Mitigation Center, and supported
financially by the US Department of the Interior and the Bureau of Reclamation. The result of the Task Force's efforts
was the draft Arizona Drought Preparedness Plan: Operational Drought Plan, which was completed in October 2004.
The stated goals of the Plan are as follows:
1. Identify the impacts of drought to the various sectors of water use;
2. Define the sources of drought vulnerability for water use sectors and outline monitoring programs to alert
water users and resource managers of the onset and severity of drought events; and
3. Prepare drought response options and drought mitigation strategies to reduce the impact of drought to water
users in Arizona. .
The Plan will be reviewed annually and-if necessary-updated to provide the most up-to-date information and
technology to not only prepare for drought, but to provide the tools necessary to reduce drought impacts. The
information in the Plan will assist State leaders, in concert with water users, planners, and resource managers,
prepare for and respond to current and future drought conditions in Arizona. It consists of two components:
1. Background and Impact Assessment - defines drought in Arizona, provides an historical context of drought,
and catalogues the historical impacts and sources of drought vulnerability of water use sectors and water
supplies, and
2. Operational Drought Plan - identifies regiqnal vulnerability to drought impacts, identifies drought response
options, defines drought mitigation strategies, outlines monnoring activities and programs to alert water
users and resource managers of the onset of drought, and provides an implementation plan to respond to
drought events.
The Operational Drought Plan is the key component for responding to drought conditions in Arizona. It recognizes
that drought events are natural disasters that touch all sectors of community, region, and state. To facilitate a
coordinated response to drought events, the Plan identifies a process for communication and coordination among
Arizona state agencies, Federal agencies, tribal governments, state lawmakers, water users, resource managers,
and scientists.
Pima county Mulli.Juriscfctional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Dran: October 31, 2005)
URS
53
r".
.,/-'j
Figure 5.3: Hydrologic Drought
Pima County Mulli.Jllisdidional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
54
,)
5.4.4 Earthquake
5.4.4.1 Nature
An earthquake is a sudden motion or trembling caused by an abrupt release of accumulated strain wnhin or along the
edge of the Earth's tectonic plates. These rigid tectonic plates, some 50 to 60 miles thick, move slowly and
continuously over the earth's interior, where they move away, past or under each other at rates varying from less
than a fraction of an inch up,to five inches per year. While this sounds small, at a rate of two inches per year, a
distance of 30 miles would be covered in approximately one million years (FEMA, 1997). The tectonic plates
continually bump, slide, catch, and hold as they move past each other which causes stress that accumulates along
faults. When this stress exceeds the elastic limit of the rock, an earthquake occurs, immediately causing sudden
ground motion and shaking. Secondary hazards may also occur, such as surface fauit ruptures, ground failure, and
tsunamis. While the majority of earthquakes occur near the edges of the tectonic plates, earthquakes may also occur
in the interior of plates.
Ground motion is the vibration or shaking of the ground during an earthquake caused by the radiation of seismic
waves. The severity of vibration generally increases with the amount of energy released and decreases with distance
from the causative fault or epicenter of the earthquake. Additional factors, such as soft soils, can further amplify
ground motions. Ground motion causes waves in the earth's interior, also known as seismic waves, and along the
earth's surface, known as surface waves. Seismic waves include P (primary) waves and S (secondary) waves
described as follows:
· P (primary) waves are longitudinal or compressional waves similar in character to sound waves that cause
back-and-forth oscillation along the direction of travel (vertical motiOn), with particle motion in the same
direction as wave travel. They move through the earth at approximately 15,000 mph.
· S (secondary) waves, also known as shear waves, are slower than P waves and cause structures to vibrate
from side-te-side (horizontal motion) due to particle motion at right-angles to the direction of wave travel.
Unreinforced buildings are more easily damaged by S waves.
Surface waves include Raleigh waves and Love waves. These waves travel more slowly and typically are
significantly less damaging than seismic waves.
, Seismic activity is commonly described in terms of magnitude and intensity. Magnnude (M) describes the total energy
released and intensity (I) subjectively describes the effects at a particular location. Aithough an earthquake has only
one magnitude, its intensity varies by location. Magnitude is the measure of the amplitude of the seismic wave and is
expressed by the Richter scale. The Richter scale is a logarithmic measurement, where an increase in the scale by
one whole number represents a tenfold increase in measured amplitude of the earthquake. Intensity is a measure of
how strong the shock is felt at a particular location, expressed by the Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) scale.
Another way of expressing an earthquake's severity is to compare its acceleration to the normal acceleration due to
gravity. If an object is dropped while standing on the surface of the earth (ignoring wind resistance), it will fall towards
earth and accelerate faster and faster until reaching terminal velocity. The acceleration due to gravity is often called
"gO and is equal to 9.8 meters per second squared (980 cm/see/see). This means that every second something falls
towards earth, it's velocity increases by 9.8 meters per second. Peak ground acceleration (PGA) measures the rate
of change of motion relative to the rate of acceleration due to gravity. For example, acceleration of the ground
surface of 244 cm/sec/see equals a PGA of 25.0 percent.
It is possible to approximate the relationship between PGA, the Richter scale, and the MMI, as shown in Table 5-7.
The relationships are, at best, approximate, and also depend upon such specifICS as the distance from the epicenter
and depth of the epicenter. An earthquake with 10.0 percent PGA would roughly correspond to an MMI intensity of V
or VI, described as being felt by everyone, overturning unstable objects, or moving heavy furniture.
Pima County Mu/ti-Juriscfctional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
55
,;;?,.:,
-5....
I. Not felt exce t b a va few under es iall favorable conditions.
II. Felt only by a few persons at best, especially on upper ftoors of buildings.
III. Felt quite noticeably by persons indoors, especially on upper ftoors of
buildings. Many people do not recognize ~ as ill earthquake. Standing motor cars
m rock sl' h . Vibrations similar to the . of a truck. Duration estimated.
1.4 - 9.2 4.0 - 4.9 IV - V IV. 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 motorcars rock noticeably.
V. Felt by nearly everyone; many awakened. Some dishes, windows broken.
Unstable 00' overturned. Pendulum clocks m sto.
9.2 - 34 5.0 - 5.9 VI . VII VI. Felt by all, many frightened. Some heavy furniture moved; a few instances of
fallen plaster. Damage slight.
VII. Damage negligible in buildings of good design lI1d construction; slight to
moderate in well-built ordinary structures; considerable damage in poorly built or
bad! de . structures; some chimne broken.
34 - 124 6.0 - 6.9 VII-IX VIII. Damage slight in specially designed structures; considerable damage in
ordinary substantial buildings ....;th partial coIapse. Damage great in poorly built
structures. Fall of chimneys, factOf)' stacks, columns, monuments, and waUs.
Heavy furniture overturned.
IX. Damage considerable in specially designed structures; weU-designed frame
structures thrown out of plumb. Damage great in substantial buildings, v.rilh partial
coli . Buildin s shifted olf foundations.
>124 7.0 and higher Vlll or X. Some well-built V<<lOden structures destroyed; most masonry and frame
higher structures destroyed ....;th foundations. Rails bent.
XI. Few, if any (masonry) structures remain standing. Bridges destroyed. Rails
bent greatly.
XII. Damage total. Unes of sight and level are distorted. Objects thrown into the
air.
Source: Wald, Quitoriano, Healon,lI1d KlI18f1lOri, 1999.
One of the secondary hazards from earthquakes is surface faulting, the differential movement of tv.o sides of a fault
at the earth's surface. Unear structures built across active surface faults, such as railways, highways, pipelines, and
tunnels, are at high risk to damage from earthquakes. Displacement along faults, both in terms of length and width,
varies but can be significant (e.g., up to 20 feet), as can the length of the surface rupture (e.g., up to 200 miles).
Earthquake-related ground failure, due to liquefaction, is another secondary hazard. liquefaction occurs when
seismic waves pass through saturated granular soil, distorting its granular structure, and causing some of the empty
spaces between granules to collapse. Pore-water pressure may also increase sufficiently to cause the soil to behave
like a fluid (rather than a soil) for a brief period, causing deformations, liquefaction causes lateral spreads (horizontal
. movement commonly 10-15 feet, but up to 100 feet), flow failures (massive flows of soil, typically hundreds of feet,
but up to 12 miles), and loss of bearing strength (soil deformations causing structures to settle or tip).
5.4.4.2 History
As shown in Table 5-3, several earthquakes have been recorded in Pima County, including:
. The earliest recorded earthquake affecting Arizona, and possibly the largest, occurred in 1830. With an
estimated Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) of IX recorded at San Pedro, AZ, approximately 25 miles west of
Tucson, the earthquake would have caused massive damage to buitt structures (ADEM, March 1998).
. The 1887 Sonoran earthquake caused significant destruction in Southern Arizona towns, including Tucson,
and was one of the largest earthquakes in North American history. The epicenter was located approximately
100 miles south of Douglas, Arizona, along the Pitaycachi fault in Mexico, and caused great destruction at
its epicenter. The quake was so large that it was felt from Guaymas, Mexico to Albuquerque, New Mexico,
and was probably felt in Phoenix. It is estimated to have been an intensity MMI VII and magn"ude (M) 7.2
Pima County Uu/Ii.Jl6isdictional HazMd Mitigation Plan (Drall: Oc.tober 31, 2005)
URS
56
J
earthquake. In Arizona, water tanks spilled over, buildings cracked, chimneys were toppled, and railroad
cars were set in motion. An observer at Tombstone, near the Mexican border, reported sounds "like
prolonged artillery fire." (ADEM, March 1998; Bausch and Brumbaugh, May 23, 1994; USGS, September
12, 2003; University of Arizona).
5.4.4.3 Probability and Magnitude
Probabilistic ground motion maps are typically used to assess the magnitude and frequency of seismic events. These
maps measure the probability of exceeding a certain ground motion, expressed as peak ground acceleration (PGA),
over a specified period of years. For example, Figure 5-4 displays the probability of exceeding a certain ground
motion, expressed as PGA, in 50 years in the Western United States. This is a common earthquake measurement
that shows three things: the geographic area affected, represented by all colored areas on the map; the probability of
an earthquake of each level of severity, 10.0 percent chance in 50 years; and the severity, the PGA as indicated by
color.
The Arizona Geological Survey (AZGS) prepared a map displaying the intensity of historical earthquakes that have
affected Pima County using the Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) scale, as shown in Figure 5-5. With intensity ranges
defined through Table 5-7, Pima County demonstrates MMI scale levels of V in the vast majority of the county,
progressing to levels below V in the upper central-west region, and levels of VI in the central-eastem part of the
county. In general, these MMllevels indicate comparatively minor earthquake damage in Pima County.
Figure 5.4: Western.Unlted States Peak Ground Acceleration Map
i>eak Acceleration (%g) with 1 (10.4 Probability of Exceedance in 50 Years
USGS Map, Oct. 2002rw
wo'W 96'W 60'~
lBO
100
BO
60
.0
30
25
20
16
10
26'N
J~5,..,..
26'~
'20'W
115'W
110"W
106'W
100'W
~w
Source: United Slates Geological Survey, April 2003
Pima County Mul/i..JlKisclcliona/ Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
57
P"
...~10~ ",,",
Figure 5-5: Maximum Intensity Ground Shaking and Earthquake Damage, 1887-1999
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Orall: October 31, 2(05)
URS
58
,.)
Note that Figure 5-4 expresses a 10.0 percent probability of exceedance and, therefore, there is a 90.0 percent
chance that the peak ground acceleration displayed will not be exceeded during 50 years. The use of a 50-year
period to characterize the chance of exceedance is arbitrary and does not imply the structures are thought to have a
useful life of only 50 years. Similar maps exist for other measures of acceleration, probabilities, and time periods.
It is useful to note that, according to the USGS, a PGA of approximately 10.0 percent gravity (pg) is the approximate
threshold of damage to older (pre-1965) dwellings or dwellings not made resistant to earthquakes. The 10 pg
measure was chosen because, on average, it corresponds to the Modified Merealli Intensities of VI to VII levels of
threshold damage in California within 25 km of an earthquake epicenter. The earthquake hazard maps combine near
and distant ground motions indiscriminately and should not be used to calculate the potential for particular buildings
(USGS, February 7, 2003).
Figure 5-6 provides a more detailed view of the PGA map for Pima County. As demonstrated by this map, the
eastern portion of Pima County has a PGA of about 5.0 percent gravity (pg), with the western portion of the county
increasing from 6.0 to 10.0 pg along the border with Yuma County. Overall, Pima County presents PGA values that
are low in comparison with other counties within the State, especially in areas of high population. As such, FEMA's
Earthquakes Hazard Reduction Program has designated Arizona a "high risk" .state for earthquakes in response to
certain counties within the State (Le. Yuma, Coconino, etc.) having a propensity for a higher magnitude and
frequency (Bausch and Brumbaugh, May 23, 1996).
In general, the risk of seismic hazard in the urbanized portions of Pima County are relatively low; hovvever, denser
populations, existence of high rise buildings, existence of unreinforced masonry buildings, and the lack of earthquake
awareness among its population elevate the risks associated with seismic activity. The western portion of the county
has elevated seismic risk where the PGA level increases to 10.0 pg. Although this region is sparsely populated in
comparison with the Tucson Metropolitan area, PGA's of 10.0 or higher equal the approximate threshold of damage
to older (pre-1965) dwellings or dwellings not made resistant to earthquakes.
The rate of seismicity in Pima County has historically been low, with the area's most recent quake originating in San
Luis in 1976 (M 6). However, the area has been influenced by major quakes in southern California and northern
Mexico, including the 1887 Sonoran quake (M 7.2) which caused ground shaking and triggered rock falls in the
greater metropolitan area. The largest impact of an earthquake on the metropolitan area would be the economic
impact from a catastrophic southern California earthquake, which would disrupt approximately 60 percent of
Arizona's fuel and 90 percent of Arizona's food goods. The Tucson metropolitan area could also be significantly
affected by a major quake in the Yuma or Northern Arizona Seismic Ben (NASB). A repeat of the 1887 earthquake
would result in significant damage to Arizona's population centers, particularly where development is located on
alluvial plains and steep slopes, which is the case in much of region. It should also be noted that although the small
earthquakes occurring in Pima County are of low seismic risk to buildings, the repeated shaking could eventually
cause structural damage. Small earthquakes may also trigger, in unstable areas, landslides and boulders rolling off
mountain slopes (Jenny and Reynolds, 1989).
5.4.4.4 Warning Time
Currently, there is no scientifically verifiable method used to predict earthquakes. Although prediction is improbable,
historical information and other geologic information can be utilized to forecast the probability of future events. In
addition, because earthquakes tend to occur in clusters striking the same area within a limited time period, scientists
are able to make some forecasts based on the determination of mainshocks (the largest quake in a cluster),
foreshocks (those occurring prior to the mains hock), and aftershocks (those occurring after the mainshock) (USGS,
1995).
Pima County Mul/i-JuriscfctionaJ Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 20(5)
URS
59
:::-;'"'-.
OP.'7". .~
.,";'0;..
Figure 5-6: Peak Acceleration Map
Pima County Mu/Ii.Jurisdictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
60
..J
In addition to earthquake prediction, communities are working on the development of early warning systems. For
example, an early warning system that will alert southern California residents seconds before a temblor begins is
under development. This system, Earthquake Alarm System (ElarmS), is designed to use the frequency content of
the P-wave arrival to determine earthquake magnitude, which allows magn~ude estimation and could provide a
warning tens of seconds before damaging ground motion occurs. This could be sufficient time for people to take
cover beneath a table or shut off gas lines and water mains (Allen and Kanamori, May 5, 2003).
While advance prediction of earthquakes may not immediately be possible, there are three major networks of
seismological instrumentation used to monitor earthquake activity, each operated largely by the United States
Geological Survey:
· The Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS) will be a nationwide network of at least 7,000 shaking
measurement system on the ground and on buildings. The system will make it possible to provide emergency
response personnel with real-time earthquake information, engineers with information about building and s~e
response, and scientists with high-quality data to understand earthquakes (USGS, May 20(0).
· The United States National Seismic Network (USNSN) provides uniform coverage of the U.S. and
integrates data from its own stations and the more than 2,500 seismograph stations in regional networks of the
United States. Regional networks provide information about earthquakes to the USGS National Earthquake
Information Center (NEIC) in Colorado, which serves as a national point of contact for distributing earthquake
information (USGS, March 14, 2003).
· The National Strong-Motion Program (NSMP) has the primary federal responsibility for recording damaging
earthquakes in the United States on the ground and in man-made structures in densely urbanized areas in
order to improve public earthquake safety. The program maintains a national cooperative instrumentation
network, a national data center, and a supporting strong-motion data analyses and research center in support
of this responsibility (USGS, November 14, 2002).
5.4.5 Extreme Heat
5.4.5.1 Nature
Extreme summer heat is the combination of very high temperatures and exceptionally humid conditions. "Heat
waves' occur when such conditions persist for an extended period of time. The major human risks associated with
extreme heat are as follows:
· Heatstroke: Considered a medical emergency, heatstroke is often fatal. It occurs when the body's responses
to heat stress are insuffICient to prevent a substantial rise in the body's core temperature. While no standard
diagnosis exists, a medical heatstroke condition is usually diagnosed when the body's temperature exceeds
1050F due to environmental temperatures. Rapid cooling is necessary to prevent death, with an average
fatality rate of 15 percent even with treatment.
· Heat Exhaustion: While much less serious than heatstroke, heat exhaustion victims may complain of
dizziness, weakness, or fatigue. Body temperatures may be normal or slightly to moderately elevated. The
prognosis is usually good with fluid treatment.
· Heat Syncope: This refers to sudden loss of consciousness and is typically associated with people exercising
who are not acclimated to warm temperatures. Causes Imle or no harm to the individual.
· Heat Cramps: May occur in people unaccustomed to exercising in the heat and generally ceases to be a
problem after acclimatization.
In addition to affecting people, severe heat places significant stress on plants and animals. The effects of severe heat
on agricultural products, such as cotton, may include reduced yields and even loss of crops (Brown and Zeiher,
1997). Similarly, cows may become overheated, leading to reduced milk production and other problems. (Garcia,
September 2002).
Pima County Mul/i-JuriscHctional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
61
.:-:.:,,,~t
...-"
5Jl
5.4.5.2 History
Extreme summer heat occurs with some regularity in the U.S. and in other countries. Major historic events have
included the following:
. In 1980, summer temperatures reached all time highs in Central and Southern States, with over 1,700 deaths
identified as heat related (FEMA, 1997).
. In July and August 2003, a heat wave across Europe caused thousands of deaths, including at least 11,000 in
France alone. Again, a high proportion of the victims were elderly (Brock, September 14, 2003).
Although summer temperatures in Pima County regularly reach levels considered extreme in many parts of the
country, no extreme heat events have been recorded as shown in Table 5-3. Although there are no recorded events,
extreme heat in Pima County is a well-documented occurrence with 200 heat related deaths reported between 1992
and 2002 (Mrela, March 2004). Triple digit temperatures (100+oF) are regularly experienced in Pima County and
have been recorded in the months of April to October. The record high temperature in Tucson was set on June 26,
1990 when temperatures reached 1170 F.
Over the past two decades, as the metropolitan area has dramatically grown in size the "urban heat island" effect has
developed, which cause temperatures in the center of metropolitan areas to become much warmer than those in rural
areas. The concrete and asphalt of urban areas retains the heat of the day, and releases it slowly as compared to the
surrounding desert terrain, which cools much quicker at night. As development continues to occur within Tucson and
its environs, heat conditions will continue to increase.
5.4.5.3 Probability and Magnitude
The probability and frequency of heat hazards may be characterized by a heat index using temperature and humidity
readings. Such an index has been developed for the entire U.S., with the Pima County portion shown in Figure 6-7.
This map was prepared using hourly readings between 2 PM and 5 PM for June, July, and August (based on the
assumption that the annual maximum temperature and relative humidity occurs during summer afternoons). The data
was used to conduct a frequency analysis from which the heat index map was prepared (with a 5.0 percent chance of
exceedance in any given year). As illustrated through this figure, Pima County has a very high probability of reaching
temperatures classified as dangerous or even extremely dangerous.
The National Weather Service (NWS) Phoenix Weather Forecast Office (WFO) , with the technical support of the
University of Maryland, designed a science-based, customized, Extreme Heat derivation technique developed
specifically for the Phoenix metropolitan region. This technique is based upon mortality rates in relation to air-mass
temperature, humidity, sunshine, and the persistence of these elements. It has long been recognized by both health
agencies and the NWS that the "Heat Index. (HI) or similar "humidity indices' commonly used in the eastern two-
thirds of the nation is not an accurate model for the desert southwest. Arizona Department of Heatth Services is a
partner with the National Weather Service Phoenix Weather Forecast Office in this program and has endorsed it
since 2000. Although specifically developed for the Phoenix area, the use of this model results in significant
information for other nearby metropolitan areas, such as Tucson.
5.4.5.4 Warning Time
It is a welJ.known fact that Pima County regularly experiences months of high summer temperatures and relatively
high humidity levels (caused largely by the late summer monsoons). As a result, extreme summer temperatures are
hardly surprising and the warning time could be considered on the order of months. The presence of unusual and
potentially deadly hot weather events in Arizona led to the launch of a heat warning service in 2001. The service is a
joint effort by the National Weather Service (NWS), Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS), Salt River
Project (SRP), and Arizona Department of Commerce (ADOC). This service will warn the public of danger up to 2%
days in advance via press releases and will remind people to take precautions to prevent heat-related illnesses
(Arizona Department of Health Services, June 18, 2001). In addition, the National Weather Service (NWS) routinely
provides a wide range of weather related information, including current conditions, regional weather forecasts, and
storm information (e.g. watches, warnings, statements, or advisories).
Pima County MuIti-JlIislidiona/ Haz;rd Mitigation Plan (Draft: Odober 31, 2005)
URS
62
.J
Figure 5-7: Summer Heat Severity
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictiona/ Halwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
63
~.:;'\;
,..<<;'<>0" '~
_~J.
5.4.6 Flood
5.4.6.1 Nature
Flooding is the accumulation of water where it usually is not present or the overflow of excess water from a stream,
river, lake, reservoir, etc. onto adjacent floodplains. As illustrated in Figure 5-8, floodplains are lowlands, adjacent to
water bodies that are subject to recurring floods. Floods are natural events and are considered hazards only when
people and property are affected. Nationwide, hundreds of floods occur each year, making ~ one of the most
common hazards in all 50 states and U.S. territories (FEMA, 1997).
There are a number of categories of floods in the U.S., including the following:
. Riverine flooding, including overflow from a river channel, flash floods, alluvial fan floods, ice-jam floods, and
dam break floods
. Local drainage or high groundwater levels
· Fluctuating lake levels
. Coastal flooding, including storm surges
· Debris flows
· Subsidence
The most common type of flooding event is riverine flooding, also known as overbank flooding. Riverine floodplains
range from narrow, confined channels in the steep valleys of mountainous and hilly regions, to wide, flat areas in
plains and coastal regions. The amount of water in the floodplain is a function of the size and topography of the
contributing watershed, the regional and local climate, and land use characteristics. In steep valleys. flooding is
usually rapid and deep, but of short duration, while flooding in flat areas is typically slow, relatively shallow, and may
last for long periods of time.
The cause of flooding in large rivers is typically the resu~ of prolonged periods of rainfall from weather systems
covering large areas (e.g., tropical storms). These systems may saturate the ground and overload the rivers and
reservoirs in numerous smaller basins that drain into larger rivers. Localized weather systems (e.g., thunderstorms),
may cause intense rainfall over smaller areas, leading to flooding in smaller rivers and streams. Annual spring floods,
due to the melting of snowpack, may affect both large and small rivers and areas.
While there is no sharp distinction between riverine floods, flash floods, alluvial fan floods, ice jam floods, and dam-
break floods, these types of floods are widely recognized and may be helpful in considering the range of flood risks
and appropriate responses:
Pima County Mulli-Jurislfctional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Drall: Odobef 31, 2(05)
URS
64
J
· Flash Flood - A term widely used by experts and the general population, there is no single definition or clear
means of distinguishing flash floods from other riverine floods. Flash floods involve a rapid rise in water level,
high velocity, and large amounts of debris that can lead to significant damage including the tearing out of
trees, undermining of buildings and bridges, and scouring of new channels. The degree of flash flooding is a
function of the intensity and duration of rainfall, steepness of the watershed, stream gradients, watershed
vegetation, natural and artificial flood storage areas, and configuration of the streambed and floodplain. Dam
failure. and ice jams may also lead to flash flooding. Urban areas are increasingly subject to flash flooding due
to the removal of vegetation, replacement of ground cover with impermeable surfaces, and construction of
drainage systems. Flash floods are a signifICant hazard in Arizona.
· Alluvial Fan Floods - As indicated by the name, alluvial fan floods occur in the deposits of rock and soil
eroded from mountainsides that accumulate on valley floors in the pattem of a fan. Alluvial fan floods often
cause greater damage than straightforward riverine flooding due to the high velocity of the flow, amount of
debris, and broad area affected. Alluvial fan flooding is most prevalent in urbanized areas of the arid westem
states, such as Arizona. Human activities may exacerbate flooding and erosion on alluvial fans via increased
velocity along roadways which act as temporary drainage channels or changes to natural drainage channels
from fill, grading, and structures. Flooding on alluvial fans is extremely dangerous due to their unpredictable
nature. Channels may migrate quickly, for example, and the water flow often travels at high velocity-much
higher than usually found in rivers or streams. This velocity is usually much more of a problem than the depth
of the flow. Such action on alluvial fans is often characterized as 'sheet flow" due to the high speed and
shallow depth. In contrast to other flood hazards (i.e. riverine situations), FEMA puts an average velocity on
the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) when mapping an alluvial fan to draw attention to the additional hazard
posed by velocity.
· Ice Jam Floods - Ice jam floods are primarily a function of the weather and are most likely to occur where the
channel slope naturally decreases, culverts freeze solid, reservoir headwaters, natural channel constructions
(e.g., bends and bridges), and along shallows. Ice jam floods are not considered a significant hazard in
Arizona.
· Dam Break Floods - Dam break floods may occur due to structural failures (e.g., progressive erosion),
overtopping or breach from flooding, earthquakes, or as unintended consequences of human actions. Dam
breaks or failures are examined in detail in Section 5.4.1.
In addition, local drainage floods may occur outside of recognized drainage "channels or delineated floodplains due to
a combination of locally heavy precipitation, a lack of infiltration, inadequate facilities for drainage and stormwater
conveyance, and increased surface runoff. Such events frequently occur in flat areas, particularly during winter and
spring in areas with frozen ground, and also in urbanized areas with large impermeable surfaces. High groundwater
flooding is a seasonal occurrence in some areas, but may occur in other areas after prolonged periods of above-
average precipitation. Losses associated with local drainage are most signifICant when they occur with other hazards
described in this document, such as widespread flooding and thunderstorms; therefore, they are not analyzed as a
distinct hazard. "
It is also important to note that in addition to affecting people, floods may severely affect livestock and pets. Such
events may require the emergency watering/feeding, shelter, evacuation, and a possible increase in event-caused
deaths and burying of animals, such as during the floods in Maricopa County in the 1980's (Lanman, May 27,2003).
The Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) urges individuals to consider pets when developing
their preparedness plans.
5.4.6.2 History
Floods occur in all 50 U.S. states and territories, with an estimated four percent of the total area of the United States
subject to the 1-percent annual chance floodplain. An estimated nine million US households and $390 billion in
property are at risk within the 1-percent annual chance floodplain. Nationwide damage from flooding has increased
from $902 million annually prior to 1950 to $2.15 billion annually, an increase of almost two-and-one-half times. The
worst flood disaster in US history was caused by a series of storms from April to September of 1993 in the Upper
Mississippi Basin. Nationwide there were 38 to 47 flood-related deaths and damage was estimated at $12 to $16
billion, including $4 to $5 billion in agricultural losses (FEMA, 1997). Flash floods are the top weather-related killer in
Pima County Mulli.Jurisclctiona/ Haza'd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
65
,,"'-, -,
--"-"'>
~..,
"'.
0.7. -I
the United States, resulting in approximately 150 deaths every year. Most, if not all, of these fatalities could have
been avoided if those involved would have recognized the dangers of flash floods and taken a few simple actions to
protect themselves (National Weather Service, Flagstaff).
As shown in Table 5-3, Pima County experienced nine flooding incidents of sufficient magnitude to prompt
Presidential or Gubernatorial disaster declarations, which is third behind wildfire and drought in the largest number of
declarations issued within Pima County. In addition, there were 24 undeclared signifICant flood events. The combined
flood total of 33 declared and undeclared events is reported to have killed 56 persons and injured 119. Furthermore,
these events are reported to have caused over $920 million dollars in damages, by far the largest of any hazard in
Pima County. Most o.f these events occurred in the eastern portion of the county in the Tucson metropolitan area and
its environs. The following three seasonal atmospheric conditions trigger the largest number of flood events within
Pima County:
. Tropical Storm Remnants: The worst flooding tends to occur when the remnants of a tropical storm enter
Arizona. These events occur infrequently (I.e. every ten years or so), mostly in the early autumn, but when
they do occur the storms bring intense precipitation over large regions causing severe flooding
. Winter Rains: Winter brings the threat of lower intensity, longer duration rains covering large areas resulting
in extensive flooding and erosion, particularly when combined with snowmeh.
. Summer Monsoons: A third atmospheric condition that brings flooding to Pima County is the annual summer
monsoon. In mid- to Iate-summer the monsoon winds bring humid subtropical air into Arizona. Solar heating
triggers potentially devastating aftemoon thunderstorms. Flash flooding often resuhs as heavy rains are
dumped in confined areas over a relatively short timeframe.
Multiple examples of flooding from the aforementioned conditions are evident throughout Pima County's history,
including the following:
. October 1983: During August and September of 1983, nearly seven inches of rain fell, saturating the soil
around the Tucson metropolitan area. These conditions were exacerbated when a surge of moisture from
Tropical Storm Octave, which was located off the central Baja Califomia coast, moved northeast across the
area. The result over a four-day period were torrential rains ranging from five to nine inches, causing flooding
in Tucson and southeast Arizona. Bridges in the area, including all spanning the Santa Cruz River except one,
were damaged or partially washed away. Additional damage occurred along the other watercourses
throughout the area. Several buildings fell into Rillito Creek due to bank erosion and extensive damage
occurred to agriculture in Marana. Cost estimates (using 1984 dollars) to repair and mitigate flood damage
were estimated at $105.7 million. Four deaths in Eastern Pima County were attributed to the flood.
. On January 7, 1993. on all-time record of 4.81 inches fell in Tucson, eclipsing the previous record of 4.0
inches set in 1916. Numerous rescues were made throughout the county as motorists tried to drive vehicles
through creeks or floodplains. Several thousand people were isolated in their homes as floodwaters from the
Rillito River obstructed access to roads. In parts ofTucson, phone service was interrupted and at least 15 road
closures were reported including two major bridges over the Santa Cruz River. Seven injuries were reported
and an estimated property damages were $5,000,000 (National Climatic Data Center, January 2003, Storm
Event Database).
. During January and February of 1993, winter storms associated with the EI Nino phenomenon caused
numerous instances of flood conditions throughout Arizona. These storms flooded watersheds by dumping
excessive rainfall amounts that saturated soils and increased runoff. Warm temperature snowmelt
exacerbated the situation over large areas. Erosion caused tremendous damage and some communities.
along normally dry washes, were devastated. Stream flow discharges and runoff volumes exceeded historic
highs. Many flood prevention channels and retention reservoirs were filled to capacity, so water was diverted
to the emergency spillways or the reservoirs were breached, causing extensive damage in some cases (e.g.,
Painted Rock Reservoir spillway). Ultimately, the President declared a major federal disaster that freed federal
funds for both public and private property losses statewide. Damages were widespread and significant,
impacting over 100 communities. Total public and private damages exceeded $400 million, and eight deaths
and 112 injuries were reported to the Red Cross (FEMA, April 1, 1993; ADEM, March, 1998).
Pima County Mu/Ii-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
66
~
Figure 5-9: Significant Floods
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
67
_'7>
~''"''-
-7- .I'
In 1968, Congress created the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) in response to the rising cost of taxpayer
funded disaster relief for flood victims and the increasing amount of damage caused by floods. The Mitigation
Division, a component of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) manages the NFIP, and oversees
the floodplain management and mapping components of the Program. Nearly 20,000 communities across the United
States and its territories participate in the NFIP by adopting and enforcing floodplain management ordinances to
reduce future flood damage. In exchange, the NFIP makes federally backed flood insurance available to
homeowners, renters, and business owners in these communities. A measure of the degree and location of floods in
Pima County is apparent in the examination of NFIP losses and payments. During the period 1978 to 2003, there
were 308 losses and approximately $2.2 million in payments within Pima County as depicted in Table 6-8.
Table 5-8: National Flood Insurance Program
NFIP Loss Statistics, 1978.2003
Losses P ments
7 $17,918.17
3 $ 2,666.86
102 $ 739,766.70
196 $1,439,726.19
Total 308 S 2,200,077.92
Note: Data for aI Pima County communities was not nlble
Source: FEMA. November 2. 2004
The NFIP Community Rating System (CRS) was implemented in 1990 as a program to recognize and encourage
community floodplain management activities that exceed minimum NFIP standards. The National Flood Insurance
Reform Act of 1994 codified the CRS in the NFIP. Under the CRS, flood insurance premium rates are adjusted to
reflect the reduced flood risk resulting from community activities that meet the three goals of the CRS: (1) reduce
flood losses; (2) facilitate accurate insurance rating; and (3) promote the awareness of flood insurance. Nationally,
flood damage is reduced by nearly $1 billion a year through partnerships with NFIP and CRS communities, the
insurance industry. and the lending industry. Buildings constructed in compliance with NFIP building standards also
suffer approximately 80 percent less damage annually than those not built in compliance. Furthermore, every $3 paid
in flood insurance claims saves $1 in disaster assistance payments.
The NFIP is self-supporting for the average historical loss year, which means that operating expenses and flood
insurance claims are not paid for by the taxpayer, but through premiums collected for flood insurance policies. The
Program has borrowing authority from the U.S. Treasury for times when losses are heavy; these loans are paid back
with interest. Flood insurance is available to any property owner located in a community participating in the NFIP. All
areas are susceptible to flooding. although to varying degrees. In fact, 25 percent of all flood claims occur in low-to-
moderate risk areas (FEMA, 2003). Nearly 5,000 eligible homeowners in Pima County participate in the NFIP
program (see Table 5-9). It should be noted that only a minority of property owners in floodplains actually purchase
flood insurance, so the actual financial loss experienced locally is probably much greater than indicated in Table 5-8).
Table 5.9: National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP) Polley Holders 2003
Community Policies In.Force
Marana 211
Om VaHey 68
Pima County* 2,099
Sahuarita 2
South Tucson 4
Tucson 2,612
Total 4.996
Note: Data for aU Pima County convnunities was not available
Source: FEMA, December 2003, URS 2004
According to FEMA records, there are three identifIed Repetitive Loss (RL) properties in unincorporated Pima
County, with a total of $146 thousand in associated total payments (building and contents value), as displayed by
location in Figure 5-10. FEMA is attempting to eliminate or reduce damage to property and the disruption of life
Pima County Mulli-Jllisdictional HaziM'd Mitigation Plan (Draft: Odober 31, 2(05)
URS
68
J
caused by repeated flooding on the same property through ns Repetitive Loss Properties Strategy. Under this
program, a specific target group of repetitive loss properties are identified and serviced separately from other NFIP
policies. The target group includes every NFIP-insured property that, since 1978 (regardless of any change in
ownership) experienced the following:
· Four or more paid flood losses of more than $1,000 each; or
· Two paid flood losses within a 10-year period that, in the aggregate, equal or exceed the current value of the
insured property; or
· Three of more paid losses that, in the aggregate, equal or exceed the current value of the insured property.
5.4.6.3 Probability and Magnitude
Floods are described in terms of their extent (including the horizontal area affected and the vertical depth of
floodwaters) and the related probabilny of occurrence. Historical records are often utilized to determine the probability
of occurrence for different extents of flooding. The probability of occurrence is expressed in percentages as the
chance of a flood of a specific magnitude occurring in any given year. Table 5-10 shows a range of flood recurrence
intervals and their probabilities of occurrence.
Table 5-10: Flood Probabil' Terms
Percent Chance of
Occurrence Annual!
10.0%
2.0%
1.0%
0.2%
Flood Recurrence Intervals
10 ear
50 ear
100 ear
500 ear
Source: FEMA, Augusl2001.
The most widely adopted design and regulatory standard for floods in the United States is the one-percent annual
chance flood (this is the standard formally adopted by FEMA). The one-percent annual flood, also known as the base
flood, has a one percent chance of occurring in any particular year. It is also often referred to as the "100-year flood"
since its probability of occurrence suggests it should only reoccur once every 100 years (although this is not the case
in practice). Experiencing a 1 OO-year flood does not mean a similar flood cannot happen for the next 99 years; rather
it reflects the probability that over a long period of time, a flood of that magnitude should only occur in one percent of
all years. Smaller floods occur more often than larger (deeper and more widespread) floods. Thus, a "10-year" flood
has a greater likelihood of occurring than a "100-year" flood.
Pima County Mul/i-Jurisclctional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
69
:::>','
r'.~
-.(; ~
Figure 5.10: Repetitive Loss Properties
Pima County Mulli-Jtxisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft; 0d0l1er 31. 20(5)
URS
70
.,.)
Figure 5-11 displays the 100-Year 24-hour Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP) in Pima County. This map
displays an event with a one percent chance of exceedance in any year, not an event that is expected to occur once
every 100 years. The map was developed using multiple methods, including judgments based on record storms and
related meteorological processes, with the resuns of the studies considered estimates because changes are likely to
occur as understanding increases. The studies assumed that storm records for the preceding 80 years were
representative and no allowance was made for climate change.
Figure 5-12 highlights the known 100-year floodplain areas within Pima County as determined by FEMA. The total
area within the 100-year floodplain is shown by jurisdiction in Table 5-11, as well as the amount within urban
boundaries. As illustrated through these figures, Pima County contains 380 square miles within the 100-year
floodplain. This figure represents 4.1 % of the 9,184 total square miles that comprise Pima County. Many of the areas
prone to flooding within the County are within the floodplains of the Santa Cruz River and Rillito Creek. In some
areas, these channels have become deeply incised, with bottoms as much as 40 feet below their banks, giving the
perception that adjacent homes and businesses are safe from flooding. These are However, many of these areas are
potentially subject to bank erosion as dry soils break away with the introduction of swiftly moving water. Starting in
the 1970s, Pima County adopted techniques aimed at stabilizing riverbanks with soil cement along the Santa Cruz
River and Rillito Creek (Gelt, Henderson, Seasholes, Tellman, and Woodward, 1998). Other floodprone areas in
Pima County are also created through roads and canals that interrupt the natural flow of the water.
Table 5.11: 100.Year Floodplains In Pima County bv Jurisdiction
Area Within 100.Year FloodDlain
Total Area in Square Total
Jurisdiction Miles Sa. Mi. Percent
Marana 116.5 42.56 36.5
Oro Vallev 32.9 3.67 11.2
Pascua Yaqui 0.9 -
Sahuarita 29.4 1.96 6.7
South Tucson 1.0 0.03 3.0
Tohono O'dham 3,867.1 No floodolain Information
Tucson 226.1 15.23 6.7
Unincoroorated 4,910.1 276.26 5.6
Total Pima County 9,184.0 339.71 3.7%
Note: Floods may still occur outside of identified llood prone areas.
Source: FEMA, April 22, 2003; URS, December 2004.
In contrast to its northern Arizona counterparts, Pima County communities are susceptible to the hazards of intense
rainfall due to differences in topography, vegetation, and urbanization. Frequently, low-intensity, long-duration rains
cover large areas of Pima County, particularly in the winter. When combined with snowmen, heavy winter rains may
also cause extensive flooding and erosion (National Weather Service - Phoenix, May 11, 2003). Runoff channels are
not well defined in the desert basins of central and southern Arizona, resulting in a high probability of flooding within
Pima County resulting from this topographic phenomenon. Contributing to the widespread occurrence of flooding is
an urbanization and sprawl pattern spreading development onto the washes and sediment piedmonts. In addition,
runoff from thunderstorms can quickly overtop a wash, thereby flooding adjacent areas (FEMA, January 1991;
DEMA, March 1998).
As previously mentioned, temperatures in the Western U.S. rose 2-50F during the 20th century, accompanied by
precipitation increases up to 50 percent in some areas of the west (National Assessment Synthesis Team, May
2001). Increased precipitation could lead to increased flooding in Pima County and elseWhere in the west.
Pima county MUI/i.Juriscfctional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Dralt: October 31, 2005)
URS
71
_.-:-'..~'
_...~.:"-
r~
^-~ j
Figure 5-11: 100.Year 24.Hour Probable Maximum Precipitation
Pima County Mul/i-Jllisdictional Haz~d Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
72
.)
Figure 5.12: 100.Year Flood Hazard Zones
Pima County Mul/i-Juriscfctional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Oral!: October 31, 2005)
URS
73
':."53
~
""J. .J
5.4.6.4 Warning Time
Flood warning times vary based on storm location, direction, intensity, duration, and the topography and size of the
drainage area. Depending upon the type of flooding event and the location, the warning time available for a flood can
vary from seconds to days. Warning times for flash floods or dam breaks can be as short as a couple of minutes,
while flooding resulting from periods of prolonged rain can extend from hours to days.
Before severe weather watches and warnings are issued, the NWS, private forecasters, newspapers, radio and
television normally try to alert the public to potential weather dangers. Often, forecasters begin issuing severe
weather statements, advisories, or bulletins on hurricanes and winter storms three or four days before the storm h"s.
However, due to the immediate nature of severe thunderstorms, tornadoes, and flash floods, forecasters often can
only issue advisory statements several hours to one day in advance or while an event is occurring. UsuaRy, the NWS
Storm Prediction Center sends out alerts the day before dangerous weather is likely. All severe weather broadcasts
covering Arizona originate from NWS offices in Tucson, Phoenix, Flagstaff, or Las Vegas, Nevada.
The hydrologic service program at the Tucson Weather Forecast Office is designed to address the rapid onset of
flooding following heavy rains in a short period and the flooding of "main stem" rivers caused by persistent rains.
Advisories issued for flooding events are described in Table 6-12 below.
Table 5-12: Tucson WFO Weather Advisories
Product
Flood Watch
Flood Wamin
Flood Statement
Urban and Small
Stream Adviso
Flash Flood
Warning
Issued when a moderate to high risk of spring snowmelt flooding is expected.
Can be used to provide local interests with current conditions and a short-term ouUook during prolonged dry
Is.
Informs public, media, and emergency managers of hazardous weather conditions. Includes heavy rainfall
and floodi tential.
Issued to convey events of general interest to the public. Includes rainfall summaries from recent storms.
In addition to weather advisories issued by the NWS, the Pima County Flood Control District operates and maintains
a network of real-time sensors utilized to collect hydrometerological data. This flood recognition system, called
ALERT (Automated Local Evaluation in Real Time), provides information to the District and other agencies regarding
precipitation, stormwater runoff, and weather conditions affecting watersheds in Pima County. Currently, the system
consists of a fully automated network of 85 precipitation sensors, 30 stream stage sensors, and four weather stations
operating in Pima County and adjoining counties. These sensors send data via radio wave transmission to base
station computers at the District's office and the Tucson NWS office. This information can be used to verify radar
determined rainfall estimates, assist in the issuance of flood watches and warning by the NWS and, if necessary,
prepare for evacuations.
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional HaziNd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
74
J
5.4.7 Hail
5.4.7.1 Nature
An outgrowth of severe thunderstorms, hails develops within a low-pressure front as warm air rises rapidly in the
upper atmosphere and is subsequently cooled leading to the formation of ice crystals. This cycle continues until the
hailstone is too heavy to be lifted by the updraft winds and falls to the earth. The higher the' temperature at the
Earth's surface, the stronger the updraft thereby increasing the amount of time the hailstones are developed. As
hailstones are suspended longer within the atmosphere, larger hailstones are developed. Other factors impacting the
size of hailstones include storm scale wind profile, elevation of the freezing level. and the mean temperature and
relative humidity of the downdraft air. The complexities associated with hailstone formation make utilization of
Doppler radar data to forecast its occurrence difficun.
Fi ur. 5-13: How Hail Is Formed
<
~ '.
w \
U rafts
~( Cold"
-f
; 0.. Downdr , s
:-.' ~
~rJ .."---~
.i';,J;I.t:I~\~i,i.:\"\\'
. 'tl , ..- '\
.- I I I ) I I ~'\11\"~\'
I'" ...i f . tn.,n'-"i,
Sou~ce: NWS, January 10, 2003
Hailstorms occur most frequently during the late spring and early summer, when the jet stream moves northward
across the Great Plains. During this period, extreme temperature changes occur from the surface up to the jet
stream, resuning in the strong updrafts required for hail formation. The National Weather Service (NWS) defines
severe thunderstorms as those with downdraft winds in excess of 58 miles an hour and/or hail %-inches in diameter
or greater. While only approximately 10 percent of thunderstorms are classified as severe, all thunderstorms are
dangerous because they produce numerous dangerous conditions, including one or more of the following: hail,
strong winds, lightning, tornadoes, and flash flooding (National Weather Service - Flagstaff).
Hailstones vary widely in size, as shown in Table 5-13. Generally, hail %-inches in diameter (penny size) are
considered severe. Large hail can be very destructive to plants, cars, homes, buildings, and crops and can fall at
speeds in excess of 100 mph. Occasionally, hailstones can contain foreign matter, such as pebbles, leaves, twigs,
nuts, and insects. Outdoor pets and livestock are particularly vulnerable to hail, and should be shenered immediately.
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
75
:::~":::-~
p-"'"
.:/- ~
Table 5.13: Estimatina Hail Size
Size Inches in Diameter
Pea 1/4 inch
Marble/mothball 1/2 inch
DimelPenny 3/4 inch
Nickel 7/8 inch
Quarter 1 inch
Ping-PonQ Ball 11/2 inch
Golf Ball 1 3/4 inches
Tennis Ball 2 1/2 inches
Baseball 23/4 inches
Tea cup 3 inches
Grapefruit 4 inches
Softball 4 1/2 inches
Source: NWS, January 10, 2003.
5.4.7.2 History
Hail causes $1 billion in damage to crops and property each year in the Un~ed States. The costliest hailstorm in the
United States was in Denver in July 1990 with reported damage of $625 million. The largest hailstone ever recorded,
which fell in Aurora, Nebraska in June of 2003, measured seven inches in diameter and weighed one and one-half
pounds (National Geographic News, 2003). Five significant hail events were identified in Pima County, as shown in
Table 5-3. None of these events prompted a disaster declaration, no fatal~ies or injuries were recorded, and
damages were relatively minor with a total of $50,000 in estimated property damages. These events include:
. Tropical moisture brought heavy thunderstorms and intermittent hail to the Tucson area on September 24 and
25, 1976. Normally dry washes filled, especially the Pantano Wash and Rillito Creek and flooding occurred on
almost 100 streets and roads throughout the city, particular1y in the north and east side, where local amounts
of rain ranged to 3.5 inches. Nearly a dozen cars, some with occupants, where swept into washes on the east
side. Sizes of hail ranged upward to % inches in diameter, with some reported to reach the size of golf balls,
and up to 5 inches of hail covered the ground at Mount Lemmon (National Climate Data Service, Storm Event
Database, January 2003).
. On August 14, 1996, strong winds blew a carport and awning off a mobile home in the Picture Rocks area
west of Tucson Mountain and another roof was blown off a mobile home on Vegas Drive. Estimated damage
from this event was $50,000 (National Climate Data Service, Storm Event Database, January 2003).
Based on past occurrences, Pima County hailstorms are likely to produce hailstones less than two inches in
diameter. Table 5-14 displays the average number of days with thunderstorms and average number of days with hail
in Pima County by month between 1961 and 1990. Based on these data, Pima County is most likely to experience
thunderstorms in July and August. Despite the predominance of thunderstorms during the monsoon months of July,
August, and September, thunderstorms with hail are less likely to occur during this part of the year.
Table 5-14: Averaae Number of Days with Thunderstorms and Hail In Pima County B Month (1961.1990)
J F M A M J J A S 0 N 0
Thunderstonns 0.4 0.3 0.5 0.7 1.5 2.6 13.4 13.5 5.5 1.9 0.5 0.3
Thunderstonns wlHail 0.1 0.1 0.1 OS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5. 0.1
· Denotes a of less than .05
Source: NWS, 2004.
5.4.7.3 Probability and Magnitude
Figure 5-14 illustrates the frequency of hailstorms in Pima County. Note that the map originally dates from 1991, with
no more recent frequency data available. Most hail in Pima County is less than 2 inches in diameter, however the
NWS does not typically report hailstone sizes of less than %-inches in diameter. Severe thunderstorms can occur in
any month of the year, but the months of July, August and September account for most of the severe thunderstorm
occurrences (National Weather Service - Flagstaff). The real extent and severity of hailstorms is somewhat similar to
Pima County Jlulti-Juisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
76
.)
that for maximum thunderstorm and tornado activity. Severe thunderstorms are Iik~ly to generate concurrent effects,
such as severe winds, tornadoes, and hail.
5.4.7.4 Warning Time
As a consequence of severe thunderstorms, hail warnings are often associated with the issuance of severe
thunderstorm watches under favorable conditions by the National Weather Service (NW). The NWS considers a
thunderstorm severe if it produces hail at least %-inch in diameter and/or winds of 58 'mph or higher. When a watch is
issued for a region, residents are encouraged to continue normal activities, but should remain alert for signs of
approaching storms and continue to listen for weather forecasts/statements from the local NWS office. When a
severe thunderstorm has been detected by weather radar or trained storm spotters report one, the local NWS offICe
will issue a severe thunderstorm warning. A severe thunderstorm warning is an urgent message to the affected
counties that a severe thunderstorm is imminent. The warning time provided by a severe thunderstorm watch may be
on the order of hours, while a severe thunderstorm warning typically provides warning time in the range of an hour or
less.
Unfortunately, there is no universal answer for every storm event. Warning times vary based on storm location,
direction, intensity, duration, and the topography and size of the drainage area. Before watches and warnings are
issued, the NWS, private forecasters, newspapers, radio and television normally try to alert the public to potential
weather dangers. Often, forecasters begin issuing severe weather statements, advisories, or bulletins on hurricanes
and winter storms three or four days before the storm hits. However, forecasters cannot issue alerts for the danger of
severe thunderstorms, tornadoes and flash floods that far ahead. Usually, the NWS Storm Prediction Center sends
out alerts the day before dangerous weather is likely. Most television weathercasters highlight these alerts on the
evening news the day before threatening weather. All severe weather broadcasts covering Arizona originate from
NWS offices in Tucson, Phoenix, Flagstaff, and Las Vegas, Nevada.
Pima County Multi-Jllisrictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
77
":::;-"",
",....~
r-" .
..#\ ~
Figure 5.14: Annual Frequency of Hailstorms
Pima County Multi.Jurisdictional HaziM'd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
78
.,)
5.4.8 Hazardous Material (HAlMA T) Event
5.4.8.1 Nature
Hazardous material (HAZMA T) includes hundreds of substances that pose a significant risk to humans or the
environment. These substances may be highly toxic, reactive, corrosive, flammable, radioactive or infectious.
HAZMA T substances are used in industry, agriculture, medicine, research, and consumer goods and are present in
nearly every community in the United States. Hundreds of HAZMAT release events are reported annually in the U.S.
resulting in the contamination of air, soil, and groundwater resources; millions of dollars in clean-up costs; human and
wildlife injuries; and occasionally, human deaths (FEMA, 1997). Hazardous material releases generally occur from
any of the following:
· Fixed site facilities (e.g., refineries, chemical plants, storage facilities, manufacturing, warehouses, wastewater
treatment plants, swimming pools, dry cleaners, automotive sales/repair, gas stations)
· Highway and rail transportation (e.g., tanker trucks, chemical trucks, railroad tankers)
· Marine transportation (e.g., bulk liquefied gas carriers, oil tankers, tank barges)
· Air transportation (e.g., cargo packages)
· Pipeline transportation (liquid petroleum, natural gas, other chemicals)
In response to concerns over the environmental and safety hazards posed by the storage and handling of toxic
chemicals in the U.S., Congress passed the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act (EPCRA) in
1986, enacted as Title III of the federal Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act ((SARA) 42 U.S.C.
~~11oo1-11050 (1988)). Triggered by the 1984 disaster in Bhopal, India, in which more than 2,000 people died or
were seriously injured from the accidental release of methyl isocyanate from an American owned Union Carbide
plant, the EPCRA legislation established specifIC requirements for federal, state and local governments, Indian tribes,
and industry to plan for hazardous materials emergencies. Unless exempted, facilnies that use, manufacture, or store
hazardous materials in the U.S. fall under the regulatory requirements of EPCRA and under Arizona Revised
Statutes ~26-350. EPCRA has four major provisions:
· Emergency Planning (Section 301-303) is designed to help communnies prepare for and respond to
emergencies involving hazardous substances. It requires every community in the United States to be part of a
comprehensive emergency response plan.
· Emergency Release Notification (Section 304) includes a list of chemicals that if spilled must be reported,
including Extremely Hazardous Substances (EHS). The Governor of Arizona designated a SERC responsible
for implementing EPCRA provisions within Arizona in coordination with fifteen countywide Local Emergency
Planning Committee (LEPC) districts. The SERC supervises and coordinates activities of each LEPC,
establishes procedures for receiving and processing public requests for information collected under EPCRA,
and reviews LEPC developed local emergency response plans. Facilities holding an Extremely Hazardous
Substance (EHS) at quantities exceeding the Threshold Planning Quantities (TPQ) must notify the SERC and
LEPC and provide a representative to participate in the county emergency planning process.
· Hazardous chemical storage reporting requirements (Sections 311-312) requires facilities possessing a
threshold reporting quantity of a hazardous material under EPCRA (Section 311/312, 40 CFR Part 370) to
submit an annual chemical inventory report (Tier" Hazardous Chemical Inventory Form) to the SERC, LEPC
and local fire department by March 1 of each year; and
· Toxic chemical release inventory (Section 313).
In addition, EPCRA's Community Right-to-Know provisions help increase the public's knowledge and access to
information on chemicals at individual facilities, their uses, and releases into the environment. States and
communities working with facilities can use the information to improve chemical safety and protect public health and
the environment (EPA, May 2003). Under EPCRA, hazardous materials must be reported to the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), even if they do not result in human exposure. Such releases may include the following:
· Air emissions (e.g., pressure relief valves, smokestacks, broken pipes, water or ground emissions with vapors)
Pima County Mul/i-JlKiscfctional Hazard Mitigation Plan (o,a/l: October 31, 2005)
URS
79
-~-:...-<
~",-
~' -
.,J - J'
. Discharges into bodies of water (e.g., outflows to sewers, spills on land, water runoff, contaminated
groundwater)
. Discharges onto land
. Solid waste disposals in onsITe landfills
. Transfer of wastewater to public sewage plants
. Transfers of waste to offsite facilities for treatment or storage
In addition to accidental human-caused hazardous material events, such as an unintended release from a pressure
valve or a transportation accident, natural hazards may cause the release of hazardous materials complicating
response activities. The impact of earthquakes on fixed facilities may be particularly hazardous due to the impairment
of the physical integrity or failure of containment facilities. The threat of any hazardous material event may be
magnified due to restricted access, reduced fire suppression and spill containment. and even complete isolation of
response personnel and equipment. In addition, the risk of terrorism invoMng hazardous materials is considered a
major threat due to the location of hazardous material facilities and transport routes throughout communities and the
frequently limited anti-terrorism security at these facilITies.
Releases of EHSs can occur during transport and from fixed facilities, with transported EHSs exposed to greater risk
of release due to the inherently greater risk of transport. Transportation related releases are generally more
troublesome because they may occur anywhere, including close to human populations, critical facilities, or sensitive
environmental areas. Transportation related EHS releases are also more diffiCult to mitigate due to the variability of
locations and distance from response resources.
Due to the high level of risk posed by hazardous materials, numerous federal, state and local agencies are involved
in their regulation, including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), U.S. Department of Transportation
(DOT), National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), U.S. Army,
and the International Maritime Organization. It should be noted that while comprehensive and readily accessible
information is available on hazardous material release and facilITies subject to EPCRA, there are numerous other
sources of information on hazardous material facilities and incidents that are beyond the scope of this plan.
According to the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ), a complete analysis of potential hazardous
material events would include all of the following:
. Risk Management Plan (RMP) facilities
. Tier II Hazardous Chemical Inventory Form facilITies
. Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) facilities
· Pipelines and related facilities
. Railroad transportation facilities
. Explosive storage, sales, use, and manufacturing facilities
. Hazardous Materials Management Plan (HMMP) permitJHazardous Materials Inventory Statement (HMIS) facilITies
. Hazardous waste facilities (RCRA information and RMS databases)
. Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) Material Incident Logbook
. National Response Center Incident Database
. U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Incident Database
. Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT)
· Trucking terminal facilities
. U.S. Office of Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Injury, Illness, and Fatality Database
. 911 regional dispatch centers (e.g., Tucson)
. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Envirofacts and Window to My Environment
. EPA Enforcement and Compliance History Online (ECHO)
. EPA Central Data Exchange. (ADEQ, April 3, 2003)
Pima County Multi.Jurisdictional HazlIfd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
80
,)
5.4.8.2 History
The National Response Center (NRC) reported an average of 280 hazardous material releases and spills occurring
at fixed sites throughout the U.S. each year during the period from 1987-1990. In addition, the U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT) reported an average of 6,774 hazardous material events annually during the period 1982-1991,
with highways accounting for 81.4 percent, railroads 14.7 percent, and other events 6.6 percent. Additionally, during
the same time period highway transportation hazardous material events caused more than 100 deaths, 2,800
injuries, and $22.4 million in damages (FEMA, 1997).
Hazardous Material (HAlMA T) releases are a major concern for communnies in Pima County. The Arizona Division
of Emergency Management (ADEM) provided information on the declared hazardous material events throughout the
state, while information on nearly all of the undeclared events came from the National Response Center (NRC). In
addition, undeclared hazardous material events were collected from NRC release reports from 1990-2003 and
screened to include only releases reported to the NRC of Extremely Hazardous Substances (EHS) that met the
Reportable Quantity (RQ) test under Section 304 of EPCRA. Of the hundreds of hazardous materials under the
EPCRA regulatory scheme, those hazardous materials posing the greatest risk for causing catastrophic emergencies
are identified as an EHS. The presence of EHSs in quantities at or above Threshold Planning Quantnies (TPQ)
requires additional emergency planning and mitigation activities. These chemicals are identified by the US EPA in the
List of Lists - Consolidated List of Chemicals Subject to the Emergency Planning and Community Right- To-Know Act
(EPCRA) and Section 112 of the Clean Air Act (EPA, October 2001).
A total of 7 significant HAZMA T events in Pima County were identified, four of which prompted a disaster declaration
by the Governor, as shown in Figure 5-15. These incidents represent one-fifth of the total incidents reported in
Arizona during that time. As the state's second largest metropolitan area, the relatively high number of hazardous
material incidents is not surprising given the concentration of industry and major infrastructure in the region. In
general, the greatest intensity of EHS releases occurred in the urbanized areas of the county and along primary
transportation corridors. The location of EHS incidents within Pima County is reflected in Table 5-15 and Figure 5-15.
Table 5.15: National Response Center Extremely Hazardous
Substances Incidents In Pima Count} ,1990.2003
Uurisdictlon Incidents Percent
Marana 1 14.3%
Oro Valley 0 0%
Pascua Yaqui 0 0%
~ahuarita 0 0%
South Tucson 0 0%
ohono O'odham 1 14.3%
ucson 4 57.1%
Unincorporated Pima County 1 14.3%
Total 7 100.0~.
Note: Includes only releases reported to the National Response Center (NRC) of Extremely
Hazardous Substances (EHSs) that met the Reportable Quantity (RQ) test under
Section 304 of EPCRA (see EPA Ust of Usts. Section 304 EHS RQ),
Source: NRC, May 2003; URS. October 2003.
Pima County Multi-JuriscRctional Haz8fd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31. 2005)
URS
81
;:~~'
~.d: .~
Figure 5.15: Extremely Hazardous Substances (EHS) Releases, 1990-2002
Pima County Mul/i-Jllisdidional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Dra/!: October 31, 2005)
URS
82
"~
5.4.8.3 Probability and Magnitude
Comprehensive information on the probability and magnitude of hazardous material events across all types of
sources (e.g., fixed facility, transport vehicle) is not available. Wide variations in the characteristics of hazardous
material sources and between the materials themselves make evaluation difficult. The U.S. Department of
Transportation's (DOT) Hazardous Materials Transportation Program is one of the most advanced probability and
magnitude estimation programs. This program collects information on unintentional releases of hazardous materials,
including the consequences, and conducts an analysis to identify low probability, high consequence events (which
may not be apparent from incident data). From this analysis, the DOT is able to provide recommendations for
appropriate levels of protection (DOT, September 2003).
While n is beyond the scope of this plan to evaluate the probability and magnitude of hazardous material events in
Pima County in detail, n is possible to determine the exposure of population, buildings, and critical facilnies should
such an event occur. Of the facilities that were required to file an annual Tier II Material Inventory Report (under
EPCRA) in Pima County because of the presence of hazardous materials, 67 were identified as having Extremely
Hazardous Substances (EHS), as shown in Table 5-16 and Figure 5-16. As noted above, EHSs pose the greatest
risk for causing catastrophic emergencies. Therefore, facilities with EHSs are considered a greater threat than
situations where Hazardous Materials, as compared to Extremely Hazardous Substances, are involved.
Table 5-16: Extremely Hazardous Substance (EHS) Facilities in Pima
County,2003
~urisdiction Facilities Percent
Marana 2 3.0%
Ora Valley 0 0%
Pascua Yaqui 0 0%
Sahuarita 1 1.5%
South Tucson 0 0%
Tohono O'odham 0 0%
Tucson 59 88%
Unincorporated Pima Counti 5 7.5%
Total 67 100-.4
Note: Includes only facilities with Extremely Hazardous Substances (EHSs). Based on Arizona
Online Tier II Reporting System RY2002.
Source: Arizona Emergency Response Commission, April 6, 2003.
5.4.8.4 Warning Time
The amount of warning time for a hazardous material (HAZMA T) event varies widely by type and size of event. The
release of a small amount of non-gaseous hazardous material onto land that is immediately contained may allow
significant warning time to nearby people (perhaps hours, not to mention the fact that such an event presents a
relatively low level of immediate risk). By contrast, the release of a large amount of a gaseous Extremely Hazardous
Substance (EHS) may provide no warning time, potentially seriously injuring or killing those nearby and effectively
delaying the detection of and response to such an event.
Pima County Mul/i-Jlliscfctional Haza-d Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
83
--=--~;-:;'
p';'A
.y. j.
Figure 5.16: Extremely Hazardous Substance Facilities, 2002
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
84
.,)
5.4.9 Lightning
5.4.9.1 Nature
Within a thunderstorm the action of rising and descending air separates positive and negative charges, resuning in
the buildup and discharge of energy between positively and negatively charge areas referred to as lightning. Water
and ice particles may also affect the distribution of the .electrical charge. As the lightning channel moves through the
atmosphere in millionths of a second, heat is generated by the electrical discharge to the order of 20,000 degrees
(three times the temperature of the sun). This heat compresses the surrounding clear air producing a shock wave,
which then decays to an acoustic wave as it moves away from the lightning channel resulting in thunder. (NASA,
2004).
The hazard posed by lightning is significantly underrated. High winds, rainfall, and a darkening cloud cover are the
warning signs for possible cloud-to-ground lightning strikes. While many lightning casuanies happen at the beginning
of an approaching storm, more than half of all lightning deaths occur after a thunderstorm has passed. The lightning
threat diminishes after the last sound of thunder, but may persist for more than 30 minutes. The threat can exist when
skies are clear as lightning has been known to strike more than 10 miles from the storm in an area with clear sky
above.
According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), there are an average of 20 million cloud-
to-ground flashes detected every year in the continental US. About half of all flashes have more than one ground
strike point, so at least 30 million points on the ground are struck on the average each year. In addition, there are
roughly five to ten times as many cloud-to-cloud flashes as there are to cloud-to-ground flashes (NOAA, July 7,
2003).
Lightning is the most dangerous and frequently encountered weather hazard that most people in the US experience
annually. Lightning is the second most frequent killer in the US, behind fIoodslflash floods, with nearly 100 deaths
and 500 injuries annually. These numbers are likely to underestimate the actual number of casualties because of the
under reporting of suspected lightning deaths and injuries.
Cloud-to-ground lightning can kill or injure people by either direct or indirect means. The lightning current can branch
off to strike a person from a tree, fence, pole, or other tall object. It is not known if all people are killed who are
directly struck by the flash itself. In addition, their current may be conducted through the ground to a person after
lightning strikes a nearby tree, antenna, or other tall object. The current also may travel through power or telephone
lines, or plumbing pipes to a person who is in contact with an electric appliance, telephone, or plumbing fixture.
Lightning may use similar processes to damage property or ignite fires.
5.4.9.2 History
Nationally, lightning strikes rank second only to flash floods in weather-related deaths. Lightning causes around 100
deaths annually in the U.S. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) undertook a major study
of lightning-related fatality, injury, and damage reports in the US for the period 1954.1994, with the following findings
(October 1998):
· There were 3,239 deaths, 9,818 injuries, and 19,814 property-damage reports from lightning. The number of
Iightning-caused casualty and damage events was less variable from year to year than other weather causes.
For this reason, lightning is the most constant and widespread threat to people and property during the
thunderstorm season.
· Florida led the nation in the actual number of deaths and injuries, while the largest number of damage reports
came from Pennsylvania.
· Taking population into account, there were large variations among decades in casualties and damages, with
New Mexico and Wyoming leading the nation in death, injury, and casualty rates. High casualty rates tended
to be in Florida, the Rocky Mountains (including Arizona), Plains, Southeast, and New England. The highest
rates of population-weighted damage reports were on the Plains.
Pima county Mul/i-Jllislfctiona/ Hazard Mitigation Plan (Oral!: October 31, 2005)
URS
85
~>::'
r~"'-
...:;. j.
Similarly, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and Prevention studied lightning mortality and morbidity in the U.S.
during the period 1980-1995, with the following findings:
. A total of 1,318 deaths were attributed to lightning, equating to an average of 82 deaths per year.
. The greatest number of deaths attributable to lightning occurred in Florida and Texas (145 and 91,
respectively) .
. Accounting for population, New Mexico, Arizona, Arkansas, and Mississippi had the highest lightning death
rates, respectively, with 10.0, 9.0, 9.0, and 9.0 per 10.0 million population (CDC, October 5, 1998).
. Using the NOM Storm Event Database, a total of 9 significant lightning events in Pima County were
identified, none of which prompted a disaster declaration, as shown in Table 5-3. Significant events include
those with at least one death, one injury, or $50,000 worth of damage, or that were severe enough to have
been identified in historical records. The 9 undeclared events resulted in 1 fatality, 14 injuries, and $100,000 in
damages.
5.4.9.3 . Probability and Magnitude
The rrlean annual lightning strike density in Pima County is shown in Figure 5-17. In general most of urbanized Pima
County is subject to two to four lightning strikes per square kilorrleter annually, while areas of the county in the higher
elevations reflect averages of four to nine lightning strikes per square kilometer. The real extent and density of
lightning strikes is somewhat similar to that for maximum thunderstorm and tomado activity. Severe thunderstorms
are likely to generate concurrent effects, such as severe winds, tomadoes, and hail.
5.4.9.4 Warning Time
Lightning is a consequence of severe thunderstorms. The NWS issues a severe thunderstorm watch when conditions
are favorable for the development of severe thunderstorms. The local NWS office considers a thunderstorm severe if
it produces hail at least ~....inch in diarrleter, wind of 58 mph or higher, or tornadoes. When a watch is issued for a
region, residents are encouraged to continue normal activities but should remain alert for signs of approaching
storms, and continue to listen for weather forecasts and staterrlents from the local NWS office. When a severe
thunderstorm has been detected by weather radar or one has been reported by trained storm spotters, the local NWS
office will issue a severe thunderstorm warning. A severe thunderstorm warning is an urgent message to the affected
counties that a severe thunderstorm is imminent. The waming time provided by a severe thunderstorm watch may be
on the order of hours, while a severe thunderstorm warning typically provides waming time in the range of an hour or
less.
A severe thunderstorm watch may be issued by a NWS office to give advanced notice that severe thunderstorms are
possible in an area, providing tirrle to make preliminary plans for moving to a safe location if a severe thunderstorm
warning is issued. A NWS office may issue a severe thunderstorm warning in order to urgently announce that a
severe thunderstorm has been reported or is imminent in the area and that people should take immediate cover. The
warning time provided by a severe thunderstorm watch may be on the order of hours, while a severe thunderstorm
warning typically provides warning time in the range of an hour or less.
As noted previously, lightning strikes may occur in areas with clear skies, up to 10 miles from thunderstorms and
before or after thunderstorm activity. Lightning strikes occur in millionths of a second.
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigaffon Plan (Draft: Odober 31, 2005)
URS
86
J
Figure 5.17: lightning Flash Density, 1996.2000
Pima County Multi-Jrlisdiclional HalMd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
87
. --~-~"'-"~''''''''''''-'-~~-''''~-'''~'''h''_'~'''
~";~>
r:-)
--?'.. ..,I
5.4.10 Severe Winds
5.4.10.1 Nature
Wind is the motion of air relative to the surface of the earth. The most significant aspects of wind are the horizontal
flow and the near-surface phenomena. Severe winds, also known as extreme winds or windstorms, are associated
with tropical cyclones, winter cyclones, and severe thunderstorms and accompanying events, such as tornadoes,
downbursts, and microbursts. Wind speeds vary from near zero at ground level to 200 miles per hour (mph) in the jet
stream approximately six to eight miles above the earth (FEMA, 1997).
Wind speed is measured in many ways, such as peak gusts, fastest mile wind speed, one-minute wind speed, 10-
minute wind speed, sustained wind speed, and gradient wind speed. The main factors in all wind speed measures
are the following:
. Duration: The shorter the period over which the wind is measured, the higher the wind speed due to the affect
of gusts
. Altitude: Wind speed increases with altitude to a certain extent, after which wind speed becomes constant.
The height over which the wind speed increases is called the boundary layer, with gradient wind speed
measured above the boundary layer.
. Terrain: Wind speeds over smooth surfaces (e.g., fields, water) are much higher than over rough surfaces
(e.g., cities, rough terrain).
In the mainland US, the mean annual wind speed is 8 to 12 mph, with frequent wind speeds of 50 mph, and
occasional speeds of more than 70 mph. Tropical cyclone winds on the East and Gulf Coast may exceed 100 mph.
Foehn-type winds are regional down slope winds in mountainous regions (e.g., Rocky Mountains, Southern
California) that may exceed 100 mph in small areas and for short periods. In add~ion, severe thunderstorms often
produce wind downbursts, microbursts, and tomadoes. These events are often interrelated, making it difficu~ to
separate the individual wind components that cause damage.
Near-surface winds and their associated pressure effects (pos~ive and negative) exert pressure on structural
components, such as the walls, doors, windows, and roofs. Pos~ive wind pressure directly pushes the components
inward, while negative pressure indirectly creates lift and suction forces that pull the components outward and
upward. The upper levels of multi-story structures are subject to magnified effects from such pressures. In addition to
the pressure effects, intemal building pressures rise and resu~ in the failure of roof or leeward structural components.
In addition, debris carried by extreme winds causes additional damage to structures and people.
5.4.10.2 History
The entire U.S. is vulnerable to the hazards of windstorms. including hurricanes, severe thunderstorms, tomadoes,
downbursts, and microbursts. In 1998, a calm year according to experts. wind related storms resu~ed in more than
$5.5 billion in damages, and at least 186 fatal~ies (ASCE, May 9, 2003).
A total of five distinct severe wind events in Arizona were identified, none of which occurred in Pima County, as
shown in Table 5-3. It is important to recognize the interrelated nature of severe winds in conjunction with other
significant severe weather events that Arizona and Pima County experience in high numbers, such as thunderstorms.
For example, a combined total of 60 thunderstorm, tornado, and tropical storm events were recorded in Pima County,
with a combined total of 43 fatalities, 1,041 injuries, and $780.7 million in damages, as shown in as shown in Table
5-3. Many of the accounts of these events relate the presence of winds and the destruction created by such forces.
5.4.10.3 Probability and Magnitude
There are various methods of measuring and displaying the probability and magnitude of wind speeds. These
measures are often used to make recommendations conceming the minimum building code standards in areas
subject to varying wind speeds in order to reduce the potential for damage to structures and injuries to people.
A traditional wind speed measure is the fastest mile wind speed, which measures the highest wind speed measured
at an altitude of 33-feet in open terrain. Technically speaking, it is the period of time required for one mile of wind to
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
88
.)
pass the anemometer, an instrument for measuring wind force and velocity. The measure is made over smooth
terrain (e.g., flat open country and grasslands), with an annual probability of two percent (equivalent to a retum
period of 5O-years).
The fastest mile speed has more recently been replaced by the three-second wind gust speeds, which is considered
by the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) to more accurately measure the potential for damage to
structures. According to this measure, the three-second gust wind speed for most of the US is 90 mph, with three-
second gust wind speeds for the East and Gulf Coast areas, including an area of 150-165 mph at the southern tip of
Florida (ASCE, 1999).
All of the communities located in Pima County experience a three-second gust wind speed of 85-90 mph, indicating
relatively low levels of risk from severe winds alone. Likewise, FEMA identifies most of Arizona in design wind speed
Zone I. In this zone, a design wind speed of 130 mph is recommended for the design and construction of community
shelters. (FEMA, July 2000). Tucson has the highest recorded wind speed in Arizona with 71 mph.
5.4.10.4 Warning Time
The National Weather Service (NWS) forecast office in Tucson provides a wide range of weather related information,
including current conditions, regional weather forecasts, and storm information (e.g., watches, warnings, statements,
or advisories). Severe winds are typically a consequence of tropical cyclones, winter cyclones, severe thunderstorms
and accompanying events, such as tornadoes, downbursts, and microbursts. The NWS issues a watch when
conditions are favorable for the development of severe weather conditions. When a watch is issued for a region,
residents are encouraged to continue normal activities but should remain alert for signs of approaching storms, and
continue to listen for weather forecasts and statements from the local NWS office. A warning is an urgent message to
the affected counties that severe weather is imminent. The forecast office Will be specifIC with the type of severe
weather event or events expected. The warning time provided by a watch may be on the order of hours, while a
warning typically provides warning time in the range of an hour or less.
5.4.11 Subsidence
5.4.11.1 Nature
Land subsidence is the loss of surface elevation and affects nearly every state in the U.S. Land subsidence has
numerous causes, aUhough the primary causes are underground coal mining, groundwater and petroleum
withdrawal, and the drainage of organic soils. Due to the diversity of causes and wide range of impacts, land
subsidence has been analyzed primarily by federal, state, and local agencies independently, with comparatively-little
focus nationally (FEMA, 1997).
Land subsidence is caused by numerous human activities and natural processes including the following: mining of
coal, metallic ores, limestone, saU, and sulfur; withdrawal of groundwater, petroleum, and geothermal fluids;
dewatering of organic soils; wetting of dry, low-density deposits known as hydrocompaction; natural sediment
compaction; melting of permafrost; liquefaction; and crustal deformation. Land subsidence takes three major forms:
· Collapse Into Voids: The collapse of surface materials into underground voids is the most dramatic form of
land subsidence and is most frequently caused by coal mining. Typically collapses are human-caused,
although some cavities may be natural, such as in limestone or halite. Lowering of the water table, rapid water
table fluctuation, diversion of surface water, construction, use of explosives, or impoundment of water most
commonly cause catastrophic subsidence.
· Sediment Compaction: Typically causing broad regional subsidence of a few millimeters per year, total
subsidence due to sediment compaction may reach several meters over decades. Sediment compaction is the
resuU of underground fluid withdrawal, natural compaction, or hydrocompaction,
· Drainage of Organic Soils: The draining of organic soils, such as peat and muck, causes a series of
processes that reduce the volume of soil. This primarily affects large wetlands or river delta areas.
Subsidence is primarily an economic hazard, threatening buildings and infrastructure, as opposed to a threat to life. It
may also lead to cracks in the earth's surface called fissures, which themselves are also hazardous.
Pima County MuIIi-.hliscfclional Hazlr'd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
89
j
5.4.11.2 History
Land subsidence is estimated to affect parts of at least 45 states. More than 17,000 square miles of land has been
lowered due to subsidence, an area roughly the size of New Hampshire and Vermont combined. More than 80
percent of the identified subsidence nationally has been due to the removal of underground water. In 1991, the
National Research Council (NRC) estimated that the cost of flooding and structural damage from land subsidence in
the U.S. exceeded $125 million annually. The estimation of less direct or hidden costs is complicated by difficulties
identifying and' mapping affected areas, establishing cause and affect relationships, assigning economic values to
environmental resources, and inherent legal system conflicts. As a resuh, the annual total cost of subsidence is
probably significantly larger (USGS, 1999).
In 1991, the NRC estimated cumulative damages from subsidence by type for U.S. states. While broad ranges were
used for these estimates, they provide an indication of the relative hazard level posed by different types of
subsidence. According to the NRC, underground fluvial withdrawal (i.e., withdrawal of underground water) is clearty
the largest subsidence hazard in Arizona, with $10-100 million in estimated cumulative damages in 1991, as shown
in Table 5-17. Relatively minor subsidence damage was posed by mining and hydrocompaction, with $0-1 million in
cumulative damages each. In south-central Arizona the combination of low rates of precipitation (3-20 inches per
year) and high rates of evapotransportation (60+ inches per year) has historically led to high rates of groundwater
withdrawal. Groundwater withdrawal in Arizona began before 1900 and was used largely for irrigation. By the 1960's,
increasing development and declining groundwater levels led to the approval of the Central Arizona Project (CAP)
Canal, which provided approximately 12 percent of Arizona's water in 1994. That same year, however, groundwater
accounted for 44 percent of water used in Arizona.
Table 5-17: Estimated Cumulative Damage From
Subsidence b T In Arizona, 1991
Cumulative Dama e mill.
$0-1
$0
$10-100
$0-1
snic Soils $0
Note: Costs not converted into constant dollars. Figwes can be used as a general measure of risk
ISSCICiIIId willi IInd subsidence, but do not indlcIII probabIIty or magnitude of land subsidence.
Source: FEMA, 1997 (from NIlIonII Reselldl Council, 1991).
The withdrawal of groundwater is the primary cause of land subsidence and earth fissures that affect significant
portions of Pima County. The areas of greatest subsidence correspond to the areas of greatest groundwater level
decline (USGS, 1999). In addition, areas affected by subsidence in Pima County have been identified by the USGS,
and are shown in Figure 6-18. As illustrated through this figure, areas within Pima County exposed to subsidence
due to either water-level decline that exceeds 100 feet or historical tendency are predominantly located along the
Santa Cruz River and Rillito Creek within central Tucson. Earth fissures, long linear cracks at the surface that have
little or no vertical offset, often occur in alluvial valley sediments in areas of subsidence in Pima County. Fissures
may start out only fractions of an inch wide and several hundred feet long. However. they may increase to 30 feet
wide, thousands of feet long, and more than 30 feet deep.
The Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR) is working with the Center for Space Research at the
University of Texas, Austin, to research land subsidence in Arizona. The research uses radar interferometry to
measure land subsidence in Phoenix, Arizona and Houston, Texas. Radar interferometry is a technique where radar
data, usually recorded from satellite, are used to map the elevation (topography) or the deformation of the ground -
such as in earthquakes or subsidence. The research is sponsored by the following: NASA's Earth Science
Enterprise. Solid Earth and Natural Hazards program; European Space Agency; Western North America InSAR
Consortium; and ADWR. The use of several interferograms spanning different time periods provides information
about the spatial and temporal progression of subsidence in these regions. From this work, tt is possible to identify
those areas in central Arizona that are experiencing subsidence at a rate of 0.5 cm/year or more.
Pima County Mu/ti-JlNisdictiona/ Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
90
.)
5.4.11.3 Probability and Magnitude
Procedures to determine the probability and magnitude of land subsidence have not been devised. However, the
major areas of subsidence in Pima County identified by the USGS shown in Figure 6-18 have historically been
subject to subsidence and may be considered to be susceptible to subsidence in the future. The magnitude of
subsidence is diffICult to predict, although it may be reasonable to expect that those areas shown via interferograms
to be subsiding at a rate of 0.5 em/year or more will continue to do so in the future.
5.4.11.4 Warning Time
Subsidence is a hazard that typically happens slowly, over a period of months, years or decades. As such, significant
warning time should be available to prepare for, and even avoid, subsidence. These warnings may come from the
National Geodetic Survey (NGS) which develops and maintains a national system of pos"ioning data needed for
transportation, navigation, and communication systems; land record systems; mapping and charting efforts; and
defense operations. The foundation of this system is the National Spatial Reference System (NSRS), which is a
national coordinate system that defines position (latitude, longitude and elevation), distances and directions betWeen
points, strength of gravitational pull, and how these change over time. A set of models that predict geophysical
processes such as land subsidence (sinking) and uplift, movement of the Earth's crust, and other phenomena
affecting spatial measurements are also included within the development of this system. The radar interferometry
research of the ADWR and Center for Space Research described above may also provide such warnings in the
future.
Pima county Uul/i-Jllisdctlonal Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
91
~
Figure 5.18: Areas Historically Affected by Subsidence
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
92
.)
5.4.12 Thunderstorm
5.4.12.1 Nature
A thunderstonn, also known as a thunder event, is a local stonn that produces lightning, thunder, and rainfall. A
thunderstorm may consist of a single cumulonimbus cloud, a cluster of clouds, or a line of clouds, which are formed
when moist, unstable air near the surface is lifted, as may occur due to strong surface heating, upward terrain, or the
convergence of surface winds. The duration of a thunderstonn is measured as the time between the first and the last
peals of thunder, with most storms lasting from 15 minutes to several hours. Compared with other atmospheric
hazards, such as tropical storms and winter stonns, most thunderstorms are relatively small (15 miles in diameter)
and last for a short time at a single location (30 minutes). However, thunderstorms may intensify into severe
thunderstonns capable of causing significant damage and able to travel signifICant distances (FEMA, 1997).
Thunderstonns typically have a three-stage life cycle, as illustrated in Figure 5-19. In the first state, known as the
cumulus stage, wann, moist air rises and water vapor condenses, releasing latent heat that enhances the upward
convection and growth of the cloud. As the cloud rises and cools, it eventually passes above the freezing level, where
super-cooled water droplets and ice crystals coexist. In the second stage, the mature stage, both updrafts and
downs-drafts exist within the cloud. Falling precipitation initiates downdrafts, although precipitation may evaporate
before reaching the ground. Cloud to ground lightning usually begins when precipitation first falls from the base of the
cloud. An anvil, or overhang of the top of the cloud may be visible at this stage. Finally, in the third or decaying stage,
downdrafts dominate the cloud. Here the cloud has lost updrafts due to the release of latent heat and most of the
water vapor has crystallized into frozen droplets that the cloud is no longer able to support which may fall to the
ground as hail. Precipitation may be particularty Intense at this stage.
Figure 5-19: Thunderstorm Life Cycle
Souroe: National Weather SeIVice Flagstaff.
Thunderstorms are categorized as ordinary and severe, with the latter meeting one of the following National Weather
Service (NWS) criteria: winds reaching or exceeding 58 mph; production of a tomado; or hail at least o/...inches in
diameter. Severe thunderstonns may also produce heavy precipitation, flash flooding, downbursts, and microbursts.
Downbursts are strong, straight-line winds created by falling rain and sinking air that may reach speeds of 125 mph.
Microbursts are more concentrated than downbursts, with speeds reaching up to 150 mph. Both down bursts and
microbursts typically last only fIVe to seven minutes, but can cause severe damage and pose a major hazard to
aircraft departuresJlandings due to wind shear and detection diffICulties (FEMA, 1997). The dangerous and damaging
effects of severe thunderstorms include lightning, tornadoes, hail, flash flooding, and severe winds. In addition to the
Pima County MuIi-Juis<ictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
93
J
information presented on these effects in this section, each is addressed in more detail in other sections contained in
this document.
5.4.12.2 History
Since 1986, severe thunderstorm winds have killed over 300 people and injured over 4,000 nationwide. Of the
estimated 100,000 thunderstorms that occur each year in the Unned States, only about 10 percent are classified as
severe (NWS Flagstaff).
A total of 41 signifICant thunderstorm events were identified in Pima County, only four of which prompted a disaster
declaration, as shown in Table 5-3. These events caused at least one injury, one death, $50,000 worth of damage, or
were severe enough to be identified in historical records. This is the third highest number of significant events, behind
wildfires and drought. It should be noted that the events detailed in this section are all associated with thunderstorms
in some fashion, but may also appear as a significant event in another hazard profile. Most of the significant
thunderstorm events were identified using the National Climate Center (NCOC) Storm Event Database, which has a
large number of well-recorded events from approximately 1950 forward. For all 41 events in Pima County, three
deaths, 15 injuries, and nearly $26 million in damages were recorded. Among these events are the following:
· October 1983, 4 fatalnies, National Weather Service, Tucson Office
· July 19, 1984, 1 injury. National Climatic Data Center, January 2003, Storm Event Database.
· June 20,1994, 1 injury. National Climatic Data Center, January 2003, Storm Event Database.
· August 7, 1995,2 injuries. National Climatic Data Center, January 2003, Storm Event Database.
· August 11,1995,1 fatality. National Climatic Data Center, January 2003, Storm Event Database.
· April 23, 1998,2 fatalnies. National Climatic Data Center, January 2003, Storm Event Database.
· August 28, 1998, 1 injury. National Climatic Data Center, January 2003, Storm Event Database.
· July 24,2001,1 injury. National Climatic Data Center, January 2003, Storm Event Database.
· July 30, 2004, 9 injuries. National Climatic Data Center, January 2003, Storm Event Database.
5.4.12.3 Problblllty Ind MIgnitude
Thunderstorms occur throughout the year in Pima County, but most commonly during the monsoon season as the
seasonal wind shift brings a dramatic increase in moisture to the region. Severe thunderstorms produce heavy rain,
flash flooding, severe winds, hail, and lightning, all of which are addressed in detail elsewhere within this document.
Rainfall is the most recognizable attendant feature of thunderstorms posing a significant flash flooding hazard, with
normal annual precipnation rates varying across the county. Severe thunderstorms may also produce'hail. Another
hazardous feature of severe thunderstorms is tomadoes, which are generally rare in Pima County, but may cause
damage and are most common in the summer months.
One thunderstorm feature, microbursts, generate localized, straight-line winds reaching from 60 to over 80 mph.
Microbursts are quite common in Pima County and may cause significant damage. On rare occasions thunderstorms
can develop much larger "macrobursr winds that have an affected outflow area of at least 2.5 miles wide and peak
winds lasting between 5 and 20 minutes. Intense macrobursts have been known to cause tornado-like damages
(NWS ,Phoenix).
The probability of a severe thunderstorm increases as the average duration and number of thunderstorm events
increases. The National Weather Service (NWS) collects information on the number of thunder days (days Mth a
thunder clap), number and duration of thunder events, and lightning strike density. An analysis of this data, collected
for the period 1948-19n, provides an indication of the aerial extent and frequency of thunderstorm severity. The
minimum average duration of thunderstorms is 90 minutes in the eastern part of the county decreasing to 80 minutes
in the west. On average, the duration of thunderstorms in Arizona is the longest in the nation with a statewide
average of 70 minutes.
Indicators of potential thunderstorm severity and frequency for Pima County provide specifIC probability and
magnitude estimates for storm events in the County. Figure 5-20 indicates the thunderstorm severity for Pima County
based upon the average duration of these events between 1949-1977. Figure 5-21, reflecting the average number of
thunder events, indicates that Pima County averaged 60-70 thunder events in the east with numbers gradually
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31. 2005)
URS
94
",}
decreasing to the west with the far western part of the county averaging less than 40 per year. Figure 5-22 illustrates
the average density of lightning strikes in Pima County between 1947-1977. This figure indicates that most of the
County experienced an average of 4-6 lightning flashes per square mile between 1947-1977, while the southeast
corners averaged 12-14 and the northwest comer averaged 2-4 events.
5.4.12.4 Warning Time
The National Weather Service (NWS) forecast office in Tucson provides a wide range of weather related information,
including current conditions, regional weather forecasts, and storm information (e.g., watches, warnings, statements,
or advisories). Unfortunately, there is no universal answer for every severe weather event. Warning times vary based
on storm location, direction, intensity, and duration. Before watches and warnings are issued, the NWS, private
forecasters, newspapers, radio and television normally try to alert the public to potential weather dangers.
Forecasters can't issue alerts for the danger of severe thunderstorms, tornadoes and flash floods days in advance,
as they are able to for a hurricane or winter storm. Usually, the NWS Storm Prediction Center sends out alerts the
day before dangerous weather is likely. Most television weathercasters highlight these alerts on the evening news the
day before threatening weather. All severe weather broadcasts covering Pima County originate from NWS offices in
Tucson, Phoenix, Flagstaff, or Las Vegas, Nevada.
The NWS issues a severe thunderstorm watch when conditions are favorable for the development of severe
thunderstorms. The local NWS office considers a thunderstorm severe if it produces hail at least 314-inch in diameter,
wind of 58 mph or higher, or tornadoes. When a watch is issued for a region, residents are encouraged to continue
normal activities but should remain alert for signs of approaching storms, and continue to listen for weather forecasts
and statements from the local NWS office. When a severe thunderstorm has been detected by weather radar or one
has been reported by trained storm spotters, the local NWS offICe will issue a severe thunderstorm warning. A severe
thunderstorm warning is an urgent message to the affected counties that a severe thunderstorm is imminent. The
warning time provided by a severe thunderstorm watch may be on the order of hours, while a severe thunderstorm
warning typically provides warning time in the range of an hour or less.
Pima County MuIti-Jlliscfdiona/ Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
95
J
Figure 5-20: Thunderstorm Hazard Severity Based on Average Duration, 1949-19n
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 20(5)
URS
96
.J
Figure 5.21: Thunderstorm Hazard Severity Based on Average Number of Thunder Events, 1949.1977
Pima County AluIi..JOOstfc1ional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
97
J
Figure 5.22: Thunderstorm Hazard Severity Based on Lightning Strike Density, 1949.1977
Pima County Mul/i-Jurisclictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Oral/: October 31, 2005)
URS
98
J
5.4.13 Tornado
5.4.13.1 Nature
A tornado is a rapidly rotating column (or vortex) of air extending from a cumulonimbus cloud and is often (but not
always) visible as a funnel cloud. In order for a vortex to be classified as a tornado, it must be in contact with the
ground and the cloud base from which it originates. In practice. the identification of tornadoes can be diffICult as the
difference between a strong mesocyclone (parent thunderstorm circulation) on the ground and a large, weak tornado
often become obscured. The formation of tornadoes from thunderstorms is explained in Figure 5-23.
Before dI..dento...s develop. a
d!a.ae i. wiad direm08 aDd all
i.crease i. wiad speed wid!
i.ereasia& lIei"'t ereates a.
i.visible. bonz08t.lspiaaia. effect
i. ttle IOlll"er a..ospllere.
'Y'
Aisiaa air widlia die
ttl..dersto.... updraft tilts ttle
rotan_. air f~ "onz08tal
tG vertical.
A8 area of rotan08. 2-6 .iles
wide. aow elitea. tltroaalt Bllld!
or the sto.... MMt strODe aad
violeat to....does ro... with,a
this area of stroa, nMati08
NOAA
Figure 5.23: How Do Tornadoes Form?
Source: NWS Phoenix.
The Fuj~a Scale (also known as the Fujita-Pearson Scale) is used to rate the intensity of a tornado by examining the
damage caused by the tornado after it has passed over a man-made structure. Although the premise of estimating
wind speeds from damage to non-engineered structures is subjective and difficult to defend from various
meteorological perspectives, the Fujita Scale is the only accepted mechanism for classifying tornados. A numerical
value of zero to five is assigned to a tornado based on the intensity of the tornado as measured by the path length
and width, wind speeds, and damage as shown in Table 5-18. After the tornado has passed, personnel from the
National Weather Service (NWS) office that issued the warning or experts in the field survey the sne to determine the
F-scale rating. Some of the cond~ions the NWS utilizes to determine the classification is as follows:
· Attachment of the walls and floor to the foundation of the building,
· Attachment of the roof to the rafters and walls,
· Whether or not there are steel reinforcing rods in concrete or cinder block walls, and,
· Whether there is mortar between the cinder blocks.
Most tornadoes last less than 30 minutes, but can occur for up to an hour. The path of a tornado can range from a
few hundred feet to miles. The width of a tornado may range from tens of yards to more than a quarter of a mile.
Table 5.18: Fujita Tornado Scale
Pima County Mulli-Jllisdictional HazW'd Mitigation Plan (Dralt: October 31, 2005)
URS
99
~
F1 73-112 mph
F2 113-157 mph
F3 158-206 mph
F4 207-260 mph
F5 261-318 mph
Source: FEMA,1997.
5.4.13.2 History
In an average year, 800-1200 tornadoes are reported nationwide, resulting in approximately 80 deaths and 1,500
injuries. Nearly 75 percent of tornado damage is relatively minor, with the associated tomadoes rated FO or F1.
However, some tornadoes are capable of tremendous destruction, particularly to densely populated areas (NWS
Flagstaff, McCarthy 2003).
A total of eight significant tornadoes affecting Pima County were identified, as shown in Table 5-3 on page 38, none
of which resulted in a disaster/emergency declaration. Most of the signifICant tornado events were identified using the
National Climate Center (NCDC) Storm Event Database, which has a large number of weIkecorded events from
approximately 1970 forward. A total of 51 injuries were recorded and $3.8 million in damages resulted from these
events, including the following:
· On August 27,1964, an F2 tornado in Pima County caused two fatal~ies and nine injuries (NCDC Storm Event
Database, October 2003).
· On June 23, 1974, one person was killed and 40 injured by an F2 tornado in Pima County (NCDC Storm
Event Database, October 2003).
5.4.13.3 Probability and Magnitude
Tornados in Arizona generally occur from July to September, with most being categorized as FO and F1 on the Fujita
scale. Compared to Oklahoma, which receives on average 7.5 tornadoes annually per 10,000 square miles (the
highest rate of occurrence of any U.S. state), tomadoes are rare in Arizona occurring at a rate of 0.3 annually per
10,000 state square miles. In Pima County, this trend continues with seven of the eight identified tornados occurring
in the months of June, July, or August.
Arizona ranks 34lh in comparison with other states for frequency of tornadoes, 31st for number of deaths, 32nd for
injuries and 32nd for cost of damages. When compared to other states in terms of square miles, Arizona ranks 45th for
frequency of tomadoes, 35lh for fatalities per square mile, 38lh for injuries per square mile, and 39th for costs per
square mile (Disaster Center).
5.4.13.4 Warning Time
The National Weather Service issues a tornado watch to give advanced notice of weather conditions conducive to
the development of tornadoes giving people time to make preliminary plans for moving to a safe location if a tornado
warning is issued. A tornado warning is an urgent announcement that a tornado has been reported or is imminent
and warns ~pIe to take immediate cover. The warning time provided by a tornado watch may be on the order of
hours, while a tornado warning is an announcement that the event is occurring or is imminent decreasing the warning
time to as little as minutes.
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 20(5)
URS
100
.)
5.4.14 Tropical Cyclone
5.4.14.1 Nature
A tropical cyclone is a low-pressure area of closed circulation winds originating over tropical waters, with winds that
rotate counterclockwise in the Northern Hemisphere. Ranging from 100 to 500 miles in diameter, tropical cyclones
rotate around an area of low barometric pressure, known as the eye, which may be 10 to 30 miles in diameter.
Tropical cyclones cause damage through a variety of associated phenomena, including severe winds, storm surge
flooding, high waves, coastal erosion, extreme rainfall, thunderstorms, lightning, and tomadoes and are among the
most destructive forces on the planet. Considerable monitoring and mitigation efforts are employed to eliminate or
reduce the impacts of tropical cyclones. Mitigation planning associated with this phenomena in Arizona and Pima
County is focused on accompanying hazards such as extreme rainfall, flooding, high wind, and lightning as these
events rarely retain the qualities of an organized tropical system past their point of landfall.
Tropical cyclones start as a tropical depression, with winds speeds below 39 mph, that may intensify into a tropical
storm and may go on to become a hurricane or typhoon. Eventually the storm weakens as it travels over land or
colder waters. The classifICation criteria for tropical storms are shown in Table 5-19. Hurricanes are further classified
based on the SafirlSimpson scale, as shown in Table 5-20.
Tropical Storm
Hurricane
Tropical Depression (dissipation)
Extratropical Cyclone
Subtropical Depression
Subtropical Stonn
Table 5-20: Saffir/Simpson Hurricane Scale Ranges
Scale Central Pressure
Number Wind Speed Storm Surge Potential
(Category) (mbar) (inches) (mph) (feet) Damage
1 980+ 28.94+ 74 - 95 4-5 Minimal
2 965 - 979 28.50 - 28.91 96-110 6-8 Moderate
3 945 - 964 27.91 - 28.47 111-130 9-12 Extensive
4 920 - 944 27.17-27.88 131 -155 13 -18 Extreme
5 <920 <27.17 >155 >18 Catastrophic
Sourte: FEMA, 1997; Helbert lIld olhers, 1995.
Pima County lIuI/i-Jllisdctional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31,2005)
URS
101
j
5.4.14.2 History
Tropical cyclones approaching the western U.S. from the Pacific Ocean tend to weaken quickly, but their remnants
are capable of delivering large amounts of rainfall to California, Nevada, Arizona, and New Mexico. The remnants of
tropical cyclones rarely affect Arizona, but are responsible for some of the most intense rainfall and flooding events
on record Within the state. Moisture associated with eastern Pacific hurricanes and tropical storms gets can be pulled
north by the monsoon flow resulting in continuous intense rainfall persisting for 24 to 48 hours or longer, often leading
to serious flooding.
A total of 11 tropical cyclones have affected Pima County, as shown in Table 5-3 on page 38, three of which resulted
in disaster/emergency declarations. A total of 37 fatalities and 975 injuries were recorded with $750 million in
damages, most of which were due to flooding associated with these events. The most severe of these storms include
the following:
. In October 1962, the remnants of Tropical Storm Claudia caused severe flash flooding in and around
Tucson. Up to seven inches of rain fell in the desert just west of Tucson near the Arizona Desert Museum.
FIoocJ waters inundated Marana and Sells (ADEM, December 2001).
. In September 1970, the remains of Tropical Storm Norma brought severe flooding to Arizona and became
the deadliest storm in Arizona history, leading to a Presidential disaster declaration. There were 23 fatal~ies
in central Arizona, including 14 from flash flooding in Tonto Creek in the vicinity of Kohl's ranch. The total
rainfall at Workman Creek about 30 miles north of Globe in the Sierra Ancha Mountains was 11.92 inches,
with 11.40 inches in 24 hours. This remained the 24 hour rainfaU record for Arizona untH 1997. Other rainfall
amounts included 9.09 at Upper Parker Creek, 8.74 inches at Mount Lemmon, 8.44 inches at Sunflower,
8.08 at Kilt Peak, 7.12 at the Tonto Creek fish hatchery, and 7.01 inches at Crown King (ADEM, December
2001 ).
. In September 1976, the remains of Hurricane Kathleen moved across Baja and into southern California near
EICentro. With ns circulation still intact, tropical storm force winds produced considerable damage in Yuma.
Sustained winds exceeded 50 mph and gusts as high as 76 mph. One man was killed when a 75-foot palm
tree crashed into his mobile home. Severe flooding occurs in Mohave County and across southem
California. Residual moisture brought more severe thundel'$torms to the state on September 24 and 25. The
Tucson area was particularly hard hit with flash flooding and hail as large as golf balls. Hail covered the
ground to a depth of 5 inches on Mount Lemon (ADEM, December 2001).
. In October 1977, the remains of Hurricane Heather produced heavy rain and major flooding over extreme
southern Arizona.8.3 inches of rain fell at Nogales, with as much as 14 inches in the surrounding mountains
(ADEM, December 2001).
. From September 28 through October 7 1983, the remnants of Hurricane Octave (Tropical Storm Octave),
caused heavy rain over Arizona during a 10 day period. Southeast Arizona was hn particularly hard, with
severe flooding in Tucson. Statewide, 14 deaths and 975 injuries were attributed to the flooding and at least
10,000 Arizonans were left temporarily homeless. Rainfall reached 6.4 inches in Tucson. (National Weather
Service)
5.4.14.3 Probability and Magnitude
Tropical cyclone probability is generally derived from coastal flooding caused by storm surge or by the frequency of
tropical cyclones as determined by the number of landfall events over a given period of time for specifIC geographic
areas. Pima County is not located in a coastal region and, as such, experiences few tropical cyclones. Therefore, the
probability and magnnude of tropical cyclone events for Pima County have not been estimated. However, as
indicated by the historic data above, Pima County has been affected by 11 identified tropical cyclone events during
the timefrarne from 1921 to 1997, several of which caused massive damage, primarily via flooding. This suggests a
low probability, but potentially high magnitude for tropical cyclones in the County.
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Haz"d Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
102
J
5.4.14.4 Warning TIme
The Tropical Prediction Center (TPC), a program within the National Weather Service, issues watches, warnings,
forecasts, and analyses of hazardous weather conditions in the tropics. The National Hurricane Center (NHC), a part
of the TPC, maintains a continuous watch on tropical cyclones over the Atlantic, Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and the
Eastern Pacific from May 1511l through November 3()1h. A hurricane watch indicates the possibility that hurricane
conditions are expected within 36 hours. A watch should trigger disaster plans and protective measures, especially
those actions that require extra time such as securing a boat, leaving a barrier island, etc. A hurricane warning
indicates that sustained winds of at least 74 mph are expected within 24 hours or less. Once a warning has been
issued, protective actions should be complete and movement to the safest location during the storm underway.
The NWS forecast office in Tucson provides a wide range of weather related information, including current
conditions, regional weather forecasts, and storm information (e.g., watches, warnings, statements, or advisories).
The warning time provided by a hurricane watch is on the order of days, while a hurricane warning typically provides
warning time of 24 hours. This time should be sufficient for people to move to safety, although damage from a
hurricane may still be signifteant. Given the historically small impact hurricane systems have had on Pima County, an
elaborate system to effectively provide advance notice for hurricane events may not be necessary. Instead, advance-
warning techniques are most appropriate for SpecifIC hazards associated with the hurricane system, including flash
floods, high winds, and lightning. Unfortunately, there is no universal answer for every rainfall event and warning
times vary based on storm location, direction, intensity, duration, and the topography and size of the drainage area.
5.4.15 Wildfire
5.4.15.1 Nature
A wildfire is an uncontrolled fire spreading through vegetative fuels, exposing and possibly consuming structures.
They often begin unnoticed, spread quickly, and are usually signaled by dense smoke. Wildfires can be human-
caused through acts such as arson, campfires, or the improper burning of debris, or can be caused by natural events
such as lightning. Wildfires can be categorized into four types:
· Wildland fires occur mainly in areas under federal control, such as national forests and parks, and are fueled
primarily by natural vegetation. Generally, development in these areas is nonexistent, except for roads,
railroads, power lines, and similar features.
· Interface or intermix fires occur in areas where both vegetation and structures provide fuel. These are also
referred to as urban-wildland interface fires.
· Firestorms occur during extreme weather (e.g., high temperatures, low humidity, and high winds) with such
intensity that fire suppression is virtually impossible. These events typically bum until the conditions change or
the fuel is exhausted.
· Prescribed fires and prescribed natural fires are intentionally set or natural fires that are allowed to burn for
beneficial purposes.
The following three factors contribute significantly to wildfire behavior and, as detailed more fully later, they can be
used to identify wildfire hazard areas:
· Topography: As slope increases, the rate of wildfire spread increases. South facing slopes are also subject to
greater solar radiation, making them drier and thereby intensifying wildfire behavior. However, ridgetops may
mark the end of wildfire spread, since fire spreads more slowly or may even be unable to spread downhill.
· Fuel: Wildfires spread based on the type and quantity of available flammable material, referred to as the fuel
load. The basic characteristics of fuel include size and shape, arrangement and moisture content. Each fuel is
assigned a bum index (the estimated amount of potential energy released during a fire), an estimate of the
effort required to contain a wildfire, and an expected flame length.
· Weather: The most variable factor affecting wildfire behavior is weather. Important weather variables are
temperature, humidity, wind, and lightning. Weather events ranging in scale from localized thunderstorms to
large fronts can have major effects on wildfire occurrence and behavior. Extreme weather, such as high
temperatures and low humidity, can lead to extreme wildfire activity. By contrast, cooling and higher humidity
often signals reduced wildfire occurrence and easier containment. Wind has probably the largest impact on a
PIma County UuIi-.1clistfctiona Hazenlllitigation Plan (Draft. October 31, 2005)
URS 1ro
-~<>..'
~'"
_17' J
wildfire's behavior, and is also the most unpredictable. Winds supply the fire with additional oxygen, further dry
potential fuel, and push fire across the land at a quicker pace.
The frequency and severity of wildfires is also dependent upon other hazards, such as lightning, drought, and
infestations (e.g., Pine Bark Beetle). In Arizona, these hazards combine with the three other wildfire contributors
noted above (topography, fuel, weather) to present an on-going and significant hazard across much of Arizona.
If not promptly controlled, wildfires may grow into an emergency or disaster. Even small fires can threaten lives,
resources, and destroy improved properties. It is also important to note that in addition to affecting people, wildfires
may severely affect livestock and pets. Such events may require the emergency wateringlfeeding, shener,
evacuation, and increased event-caused deaths and burying of animals.
The indirect effects of wildfires can also be catastrophic. In addition to stripping the land of vegetation and destroying
forest resources, large, intense fires can harm the soil, waterways and the land itself. Soil exposed to intense heat
may lose its capability to absorb moisture and support life. Exposed soils erode quickly and enhance siltation of rivers
and streams thereby enhancing flood potential, harming aquatic life and degrading water quality. lands stripped of
vegetation are also subject to increased landslide hazards.
5.4.15.2 History
Pima County forests have historically been the subject of numerous wildfires, burning thousands of acres each year.
On average, 58 percent of these wildfires are human caused, while the remaining 42 percent are caused by lightning.
Information on the location and size of wildfire events in Pima County were collected from a variety of sources, with a
majority of the information gathered from the following two agencies:
. The USDA Forest Service published a study titled Development of Coarse-Scale Spati81 Data for Wildland Fire
and Fuel Management (April 2002). This study describes and makes available seven coarse-scale (1 square
kilometer) resolution spatial data layers for the contiguous U.S. to" support national-level fire planning and risk
assessments. One of the layers, National Fire Occurrence, 1986 to 1996, contains information on Federal and
non-Federal wildfire occurrence, including date, location, area burned, and cause. Information for wildfires in
Arizona was retrieved from this layer. These events were screened to include only fires 100 acres or more in
size.
. The Arizona State land Department's wildfire dispatcher working database of wildfire incidents in Arizona
from 1994 to 2002 (Pearlberg, April 3, 2003). This database included information on the date, location, area
burned, and cause of wildfires. In order to avoid overlap, information from this database was used for the
period 1997 to 2002. These events were screened to include only fires 100 acres or more in size
A total of 107 significant wildfires in Pima County were identified during the timeframe from 1968-2002, as shown in
Table 5-21, which is the largest hazard identified for Pima County. These events were at least 100 acres in size or
were severe enough to be identified in historical records. A disaster/emergency declaration was made for 18
wildfires. One of the largest fires in Pima County, the Aspen wildfire started on June 17, 2003 in the Catalina
Mountains by an unknown hiker in the Marshall Gulch and Aspen loop trail. The Fire was first observed on the south
face portion of Marshall Peak around 7000 ft. On June 19th, winds increased across southeast Arizona with the
highest winds recorded at Hopkins RAWS site (south of Catalina Mountains). Sustained winds of 23 knots (26 mph)
and gusts up to 42 knots (48 mph) were recorded at this site for one hour during the afternoon. The combination of
strong winds and low relative humidity pushed the fire northeast into the town of Summerhaven on top of Mt.
lemmon. Numerous structures were destroyed including Alpine lodge, a Pima County transportation facility, Post
Office, and many others. The fire consumed a total of 84,750 acres and 333 structures were lost. Damage estimates
indicated total property damage was $66 million, suppression costs were $16 million, and loss of trees and resources
were $33 million. (National Climatic Data Center, November 2004, Storm Database).
The location of significant wildfires (100+ acres) in Pima County is shown in Figure 6-24 and tabulated in Table 6-21
for those fires with suffICient information to be geocoded. As illustrated through Figure 6-24, many of the wildfires
occurring in Pima County over the past 34 years occurred within relatively close proximity to urbanized areas. As
development continues to expand, it is projected that wildfire events will impact a significantly larger number of
residents. Previously, Pima County's development pattems have not necessitated the development of infrastructure
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
104
.)
needed to facilitate new construction in forested or other non-urban areas. As available land continues to decrease,
these development patterns will change as metropolitan areas continue to expand closer to vulnerable natural
features.
Table 5-21: Sianificant Wildfires in Pima County by Jurisdiction, 1968.2002
Wildfire Size
Jurisdiction 100-499 acres 500-999 acres 1,000+ acres Total
Marana 4 1 0 5
Oro Valley 1 0 1 2
Pascua Yaaui 0 0 0 0
Sahuarita 0 0 0 0
South Tucson 0 0 0 0
Tohono O'odham 2 2 0 4
Tucson 1 0 0 1
Unincorporated 43 4 20 67
Total 51 7 21 79
Note: Counts taken from Figure 6-24, only those wildfires that could be accurately located (geocoded) are counted above.
Source: USDA Forest Servioe, April 2001 ; Arizona Slate Land Department; URS, October 2003.
<1 da rear
Fuel Slo -J,
Class <40 41-40
Li ht M M
Medium M M
Hea H H
Note: M = Medium, H = High, E = Extreme.
Souroe: International Fire Code InstiMe, January 2000.
5.4.15.3 Probability and Magnitude
Depending upon the needs of the user and the availability of data, there are many different approaches to fire
modeling, However, nationally accepted or utilized wildfire models have not been developed for the evaluation of
wildfire risk or determination of vulnerability. In addition, most wildfire modeling performed to date has been focused
on wildfire behavior, not the identification of the probability and magnitude of future events, This is largely because
the probability of ignition and the probable wildfire size have generally not been considered in previous models. In
addition, the limitations of available software, data availability, and the resolution of existing information have made
predicting the occurrence of future wildfire events difficult.
These limitations aside, recent improvements in Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and data availability have led
to the development of a growing number of wildfire hazard assessment models and information. For example, the
National Fire Plan identifted communities across the U.S. at risk for wildfires. In addition, FEMA suggested an
approach to identify wildfire hazard areas through the utilization of methods adopted by the International Fire Code
Institute (IFCI). In the absence of a wildfire risk assessment model for Arizona and Pima County, the FEMA specified
approach for the identifICation of wildfire hazard areas have been followed, with a number of adjustments taken to
account for conditions specific to Arizona and Pima County. The FEMA methodology is the same as that specified
from the International Fire Code Institute (IFCI) in the Urban-Wildland Fire Interface Code 2000.
To determine the risk of wildfire in Pima County it is first necessary to determine what areas are the most susceptible
and exposed to the greatest risk for wildfires. The Urban-Wildland Interface Code model relies on the relationship
between three primary fire potential factors to estimate fire hazard severity: topography, critical fire weather, and fuel
availability. The relationship between these three factors and wildfire susceptibility is shown in Table 5-22
Table 5.22: FEMAlIFCI Wildfire Susce ibil Matrix
Critical Fire Weather Fre uenc
2.7 da s r ear
Slo e 'I,
41-40
M
H
E
61+
M
H
H
<40
M
H
H
61+
M
H
E
<40
M
E
E
61+
H
E
E
Pima County Uul/i-Jllisdictional Hazard Uitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
105
J
Figure 5.24: Significant Wildfires, 1968.2002
Pima County Mul/i-Jurisc/ictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft October 31, 2005)
URS
106
.)
Topography information was obtained from the U.S. Geological Survey Digital Elevation Model (OEM). As previously
stated, steeper slopes generally increase fire velocity. The FEMAIIFCI model classifies slope into three broad
categories: less than 40 percent, 41-60 percent, and 61 percent or greater. As shown in Figure 5-25, the majority of
Pima County topography present slopes of less than 40 percent. As expected, regions of the County where slopes
exceed 40 percent are found to the east of Tucson in the Santa Catalina and Rincon Mountains, in the central Pima
County within the Baboquivari Mountains, and in the far west within the Growler and Granite Mountains.
The second factor, critical fire weather frequency, proved more difficult to evaluate due to the apparent unavailability
of long-term GIS coverage/data for Pima County. Discussions with the Pima County Hazard Mitigation Steering
Committee indicated that it was reasonable to assume that the county experiences 35 to 60 very high or extremely
high critical fire weather days per year during the summer months.
For the third factor, as recommended by FEMA, the US Forest Service's National Fire Danger Rating System
(NFDRS) fuel models, dated July 1999, was used. The NFDRS fuel models have been mapped in raster format
across the lower 48 states at 1 km resolution, derived from satellite imagery and ground sampling that can be
converted into GIS format. The models describe twenty regional vegetative biomes, each assigned a letter for
identification (e.g., A, B, C). Several of the 20 NFDRS fuel models were not utilized for the determination of wildfire
risk in Pima County. The fuel models for hardwoods (E and R) were not used as they are not prevalent within the
County. In addition, the slash fuel models (I, J, and K) were not used because the location, extent and condition of
activity fuels changes relatively quickly.
Each NFDRS fuel model was then classified as heavy, medium or light fuel based upon availability, moisture content,
and continuity. In addition, the NFDRS fuel model does not identify or exclude urbanized areas. In order to avoid
overstating the wildfire danger in highly urbanized areas, additional screening processes were conducted. Using
detailed existing land use layers for Pima County, only polygons greater than 10 acres in size with the following land
uses were included in the fuel modes: vacant; parks and recreation; and forests. All other existing land use polygons
were identified as urban.
By combining the three factors, topography, critical fire weather frequency, and fuel using the matrix in Figure 5-26,
the severity of wildfire hazards for Pima County is shown in Figure 5-27. The map shows a close correspondence
between the heavy fuel model and the areas of extreme wildfire susceptibility. In Pima County, areas of extreme
hazard severity lie in the forested areas of the Coronado National Forest east of Tucson within the Santa Catalina
and Rincon Mountains and in central Pima County within the Baboquivari Mountains.
5.4.15.4 Warning Time
Wildfire warnings typically provide suffICient time for people to evacuate potential hazard areas, with warning periods
often lasting days. The Wildland Fire Assessment System (WFAS) and the National Weather Service (NWS) provide
the major wildfire warning services and are described in detail in the following paragraphs.
Wildland Fire Assessment System (WFAS): During the fire season, national maps of selected fire weather and fire
danger components of the National Fire Danger Rating System (NFDRS) are produced daily by the Wildland Fire
Assessment System (WFAS) at the USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station in Missoula, Montana.
The maps characterize fire danger by evaluating the approximate upper limit of fire behavior in a fire danger rating
area during a 24-hour period. The NFDRS uses computer programs and algorithms based on'fuels, topography and
weather to estimate short-term (today and tomorrow) fire danger for a given rating area. The resulting fire danger
ratings are for the potential growth and behavior of a wildfire should one occur. These ratings are used to guide
presuppression activities and the selection of an appropriate level of initial response to a reported wildfire (in lieu of
detailed, site- and time-specific information). In essence, the ratings link an organization's readiness level (or pre-
planned fire suppression actions) to the fire problems of the day (NWS).
Pima County MuIli-JIliSllclional Halfi'd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
107
~
Figure 5.25: Slope Model
Pima County Mulli-Jurisdictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Dralt: October 31, 2(05)
URS
108
J
Note that the NFDRS relates only to the potential of an initiating fire, one that spreads without crowning or spotting,
through unfform fuels on a continuous slope. It measures fire only from a containment standpoint as opposed to full
extinction. In addition, the NFDRS represents near worst-case conditions measured at exposed locations at or near
the peak of the normal burning period and is a broad scale rating, approximately for 100,000 acres. Besides the basic
fire danger ratings of low, moderate, high, very high and extreme, the NFDRS calculates parameters to aid agencies
in determining staffing levels, how hot a fire will burn and spread, ignition component and flame length. One possible
outcome of a high fire danger is the banning of campfires or prescribed burning on federal lands.
National Weather Service: In addition to the NFDRS warnings, the National Weather Service (NWS) prepares fire
weather warnings for localized areas. The NWS forecast office in Tucson provides a wide range of weather related
information, including current conditions, regional weather forecasts, and storm information (e.g., watches, warnings,
statements, or advisories). These offices may issue the following wildfire warnings:
· Fire Weather Zones: Complete fire weather forecasts for states or forecast regions. These forecasts are
prepared twice daily during fire weather season, and once daily during the off-season. This forecast is used for
day-to-day planning of land management operations and for determining general weather trends that might
impact fire behavior.
· Fire Weather Spot Forecasts: Special point fire weather forecasts made for controlled burns or wildfires.
Spot forecasts are special, non-routine forecasts prepared upon request from user agencies that need site-
specific weather forecasts in order to control the spread of wildfire, plan and manage prescribed fires, or other
specialized forest management activities.
· Fire Weather Statements, Watches and Warnings: During periods in which critical fire weather conditions
are expected or are imminent, the NWS will issue statements, watches and warnings to describe the level of
urgency to the appropriate user agencies and the public. These are coordinated with the land management
agencies.
· Red Flag Warning I Event: Special forecast issued when red flag conditions exist or are highly probable and
the forecast time of onset is less than 24 hours. A Red Flag Event occurs when critical weather conditions
develop which could lead to extensive wildfire occurrences or to extreme fire behavior. Red Flag Events
represent a hazard to life and property and may adversely impact fire fighting personnel and resources.
Critical weather conditions include combinations of the following: strong, gusty wind, very low relative humidity,
highly unstable atmosphere, significant wind shifts or lightning. Typically, these weather conditions must be
coupled with very low fuel moistures.
· Fire Danger Statements and Blow-Up Alerts: When fire danger or fire occurrence is high and is coupled .
with critical weather conditions, the U.S. Forest Service or state land management agencies may request that
the NWS issue a Fire Danger Statement or Blow-Up Alert.
It should also be noted that longer-term forecasts are also made, typically prior to the fire season. An example is theoLong-Range Fire Risk Assessment, Southwest Geographic Area, 2003 Fire Season (Heckman et aI, April 30, 2003).
Pima County MuIli-JlIiscfctional Hazcrd Mitigation Plan (Dralf: October 31, 2(05)
URS
109
J
Figure 5.26: Modified National Fire Danger Rating System Fuel Model
Pima County MuJIi-Jurisclctlonal HazlEd Miligalion Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
110
J
Figure 5.27: Wildfire Hazard Areas
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
111
J
The third step in the risk assessment process is the identification of assets that may be affected by hazard events.
The inventory of assets is divided into the following categories, each of which is analyzed in detail below:
· Population
· Buildings
· Critical facilities and infrastructure
Assets include any type of residential or commercial structure, as well as critical facilities such as hospitals, schools,
communication towers and public infrastructure. This section of Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation
Plan is intended to identify the type and number of buildings, infrastructure, and other critical facilities at risk from the
hazards identified in the previous sections and to estimate the potential dollar losses resu~ing from each hazard.
5.5.1 Populltion
Historic and projected population for Pima County was provided earlier. This information was from a variety of
sources, including the Pima Association of Governments, Arizona Department of Commerce, Arizona Department of
Economic Security, and the US Census Bureau.
Similar information is provided here on population, with all information from FEMA's program, Hazards US Multi-
Hazard (HAZUS) that is based on 2000 Census information from the US Census Bureau. Information of interest
includes the following:
· Total population
· Number of persons 65+ years old (potentially vulnerable population group)
. Number of households with income <$20,000 income (potentially vulnerable population group)
Overall, Pima County includes both a moderate number and proportion of its population that is vulnerable to hazards.
As shown in Table 5-23 and depicted in Figure 5-28, in 2000 approximately 8.8 percent of the county's residents
were over the age of 65 and 24.6 percent of the county's households had an annual income below $20,000.
Table 5-23: Pima County Populations Potentiallv Vulnerable to Hazards, 2000
Population Households
Jurisdiction %of Income %of
Total 65+ years Total Total <$20,000 Total
MInna 13,443 667 5.0% 4,934 586 11.9%
01'0 Vallev 29,662 3,429 11.6% 12,307 1,129 9.2%
Pascua Yaaui 3,315 1,798 54.2% 745 332 44.6%
Sahuarita 3,242 244 7.5% 1,169 186 15.9%
South Tucson 5,490 315 5.7% 1,794 1,074 59.9%
Tohono O'odham 9,528 5,133 53.9% 2,605 1,237 47.5%
Tucson 486,591 34,828 7.2% 192,884 59,360 30.8%
Unincomorated Pima County 305,318 28,755 9.4% 119,409 18,563 15.5%
Total 856,589 75,169 8.8'/, 335,847 82,467 24.6%
Pima County Mulli-JlIiscictional Hazard Mi/iga/ion Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
112
Figure 5.28: Potentillly Vulnerlbility Populltions
(Percentlge of Jurisdictionll Tolll)
70.0%
60.0%
59.9%
I_ Residents 65 and above I
_Annual Househdd Incane beIcw $20,000
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
Mll'llnl
Oro Vllley Plleul Vlqui Slhulrita
South
Tucson
Tohono
O'odham
Tucson Unlnc County TotII County
Pima County MuIti-Juriscictional HazNd Mitigalion Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
113
.J
5.5.2 Buildings
HAZUS-MH includes an inventory of buildings and their estimated values. Of particular interest for hazard mitigation
planning are the numbers of residential and commercial buildings. The concentration of population in Pima County
(noted above) is the source of the large number and value of buildings in the area, as shown in Table 5-24.
Table 5.24: Buildinas in Pima County, 2000
Residential Commercial Total
Jurisdiction Number 'I. of Total Number % ofTotal Buildings
Marana 5,525 98.9% 60 1.1% 5,585
Ora Vallev 13,920 99.8% 26 0.2% 13,946
Pascua Yaaui 646 99.7% 2 0.3% 648
Sahuarita 1,290 99.3% 9 0.7% 1,299
South Tucson 1,161 98.2% 21 1.8% 1,182
Tohono O'odham 2,541 99.5% 14 0.5% 2,555
Tucson 135,602 98.8% 1,682 1.2% 137,284
Pima County 116.590 99.6% 441 0.4% 117,031
TotIl m ,275 99.2'1. 2,255 0.1% 279.530
Source: us Census. 2000.
5.5.3
AIR
BRG
BRT
BUS
As shown through Table 5-26 critical facilities are summarized by type for each jurisdiction within Pima County. In all,
there are 1,236 critical facilities in Pima County with an estimated value of $2.9 billion in exposed losses. The single
facility class that presets the greatest potential for loss in Pima County is electrical generating facilities, with a
potential cumulative loss of $1.0 billion.
Pima County Mu/li-Jllisdctional Hazard Mitigs/ion Plan (Draft: October 31. 2(05)
URS
114
J{~
... 40 ~ .... II) .... II) ~ .. ... N ~ ... .... ! ~ = 40
II) ~ N f') f') II) .... II .... ...
~ ... 0 0 0 .-:, Ill!. <<"!. Ill!.
0 vi an ... 0 ... .. 40 ... ~
.... II) CD ... II) .. 0
l- N ... ... cot ~ ~
... N
M 1.0 <=> 0 0 0 M 1.0 0 0 0 0 CO 0 1.0 1.0 .... II)
~ 1.0 ..... <=> 1.0 M ..... ..,. .... ~ 8
~ ..... ~ co 0
~ ..... ..... M .n N
M M co ex) ...
N ....
<=> 0 <=> <=> ..... 1.0 co 0 M 1.0 0> 1.0 ex) <=> M 1.0 0 8
:x: ..... 1.0 ..... 1.0 ..... 1.0 N .... N <=> 0> ..... CD
.... .... ..,. ex) ~ N N M ..... f') .-:,
0 ~ ~ N ..... ~ uS ~ ...
en 0 ....
..... ...
c ... 0 0 <=> 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N 0 0 N ~
0 ~ ..,.
..... ...
U ~ ..
:s
.. ... <=> <=> <=> <=> <=> <=> <=> <=> <=> 0 <=> <=> <=> <=> <=> 0 0 0
"C 5
:lI
..,
~ Q. ..... 0 ..... :5 ..... N 0 <=> 0 0 co ex) ~ 1.0 0> co * E
0 co ~ co 0>
~ M M ~ N 1.0
.. M M ..... cD cD cD ,..:
"E :x: ..... ..... 1.0 N ...
a ... N
!> co g M 0 ..... g M 0 M 0 <=> 0 M 0 .... Cl f') I
:x: 0 0 <=> 1.0 :5 N Cl ~
E 0 <=> q <=> <=> <=>
0 cD M ..... M M M- ~ M
,g C-' 1.0 N ~
:I ~ <=> 0 0 0 0 0 Cl 0 0 0 0 <=> ..... ~ Cl 0 ... CD
~ q a
"u C-' ... ...
. ~ 1.0 0 .... 0 N 0 M 0 N 0 0 Cl ex) Cl co ~ f') 0
u.. ..... ..... 0 ..... 0 ..... g M ~ ..,. ... ....
"ii w M N Ol .... Ol ex) ... &I)
:Ie ....- cD ..... N ..... 0) .n M an
u W M M ~
~
0 ..... 0 ..... :5 0 <=> ..... :5 0 Cl Cl Cl co 8 ..... ~ 0 8
s 0 0 ...
1.0 1.0 1.0 0
W ~ ~ ~ ....: ~ ~
e ... <=> N
:lI W ..... ..... ..... co .....
In ...
0
.5 U) ..... co <=> <=> <=> <=> 0 <=> <=> <=> <=> <=> ..,. N 0 <=> &I) DO
M .... .....
:;:) q ..... .....
"ii m ..... ~ an
-
c Ii: 1.0 1.0 <=> <=> <=> 0 ..... 1.0 <=> <=> Cl 0 <=> <=> N Cl DO 0
GI .... 0> ..... 1.0 N 0> f') ...
'0 ..,. 0> 0 CD
Q. m N M
'0 ex) 1.0 ex) .... 0 0 tIC) 0 .... co 0> ..... N ..... M ex) DO 0
.~ C-' ..... N 0 ..... ..... N .... ..... ex) ~ 0 M ~ z:
~ ..... ex) .... I'-:. ~ N M
~ ..... ~ cD M 0 N uS ,..:
S m M ..... M ~ co f')
c ..... II)
GI
> ..... 1.0 0 <=> 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cl 0 ..... 0 M 1.0 &I) II)
.5 ~ ex) 1.0 ~
Ui .... ....
:c N .... N
N .... N CD
th C")
GI S ~ 16 S '6 '6 S S
:is
~ 0 <=> :5 :5 :5 :5 :5
Cl 0
..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .....
. - ~ ~ ~ ! I! I! ~
- ~
. e e e l! ~ e e l!
c .8 al .8 I .8 I I I .8 .8 II .8 al .8 :lI
E ~ E E E ! E E ! E a 0
:lI :lI ~ :lI ~ :lI ~ :lI -l :lI :lI )( 8
z w z z z z z z w ...
.,.
i .!:S.
c I l!!
0 l 5 ~ ... :lI
U "8 1: I
:s ~ >- ~ l3 0 e
.. :lI :lI .n
"C tV ~ tV t- o c: ~ z
i! i tV :5 c: 8
:lI :lI 0 ~ s
.., tV e ~ ~ ~ '2:
~ 0 :lI ~
a. I- ::> I-
~
iO'
8
'"
;;-
~
.Q
~
I
c::
~
c::
~
~
::l:
~
~
15
c::
,g
~
.~
~
lI!:
~
~
~
<IS
~
..i
The fourth step of the risk assessment, and its primary intent, is the vulnerability assessment. Vulnerability describes
the exposure or susceptibility to damage various assets posses. The degree of vulnerability depends on an asset's
construction, contents, and function. The vulnerability assessment development for Pima County provides an
approximation of vulnerability and potential losses from hazards, typically based on a commonly accepted
methodology and event type. Wherever possible, a quantitative and comparable assessment of vulnerability to
hazards was made.
Note that the loss estimates provided herein use the best data currently available and the methodologies applied
result in an approximation of risk. These estimates may be used to understand relative risk from hazards and
potential losses. However, uncertainties are inherent in any loss estimation methodology, arising in part from
incomplete scientifIC knowledge concerning hazards, their effects on the built environment, as well as approximations
and simplifications that are necessary for a comprehensive analysis.
It is also important to note that the quantitative vulnerability assessment results are limited to the exposure of people,
buildings, and critical facilijies and infrastructure to hazards and, where possible, annualized loss estimates in dollar
value for the buildings and critical facilijies. It was beyond the scope of this first Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional
Hazard Mitigation Plan to analyze other types of hazard impacts (e.g., people injured or killed, shelter requirements,
loss of facility/system function, and economic losses). Such impacts will be addressed as possible with future
updates of the plan.
In addition, several of the hazards profiled in the preceding sections may not include corresponding exposure and
loss data and are therefore not included in the vulnerability assessment which follows. Disease, for example, is a
wide-ranging and unpredictable hazard to humans, animals, and plants. This variability in historic occurrence of these
phenomena prevents meaningful predictability for disease. The vulnerability of people, buildings, and critical
facilitieslinfrastructure associated with other hazards, such as lightning, are nearly impossible to evaluate given the
uncertainty associated with where these hazards will occur as well as the relatively limited focus and extent of
damage. Due to these factors the following hazards, though creating vulnerability for the residents and structures in
Pima County, do not include a quantitative analysis in the vulnerabHity assessment.
· Disease
· Extreme Heat
· Lightning
· Tropical Cyclone
· Winter Storm
Several of these phenomena have been included in the following discussion because a quantitative review of
vulnerability does provide some insight to the nature of loss associated with the hazard. Through subsequent
updates of this plan the data used to evaluate these unpredictable hazards may become refined such that a
comprehensive vulnerability statement and thorough loss estimates can be made for hazards currently left out of the
following review.
5.6.1 Methodology
The specific methods and results of all analyses are presented below for each hazard. Results are shown as
potential exposure in thousands of dollars, and as the worst-case scenario. Exposure characterizes the estimated .
cost of replacement of structures within the hazard zone, and is shown as estimated exposure based on the overlay
of the hazard on the population, structure, and critical facility databases. Loss estimates were also prepared for
certain hazards in addijion to exposure. Loss is that portion of the exposure that is expected to be lost to a hazard,
and is estimated by referencing frequency and severity of previous hazards. When calculated, loss estimates are
presented as Annualized Losses. Annualized losses address several key components of risk including the probability
of the hazard occurring in the study area, the consequences of the hazard should ij occur, and the intensity of the
hazard. By annualizing estimated losses, the historic patterns of events are taken into account. The loss or exposure
value is then determined with the assumption that the given structure is totally destroyed (worst case scenario),
which is not always the case in hazard events. This assumption is valuable, however, to the planning process so that
Pima County Mulli-JlKiscfc/ional Haz<ld Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 20(5)
URS
116
~-~11
$.)
the total potential damage value was identified when determining capabilities and mitigation measures for each
jurisdiction.
A quantitative risk assessment was performed for the hazards for which there were adequate quantitative information
and standardized software available for analysis. For example, FEMA's loss estimation software, HAZUS.MH, was
applied to earthquake hazards in Pima County. HAZUS-MH uses a statistical approach and mathematical modeling
of risk to predict a hazard's frequency of occurrence and estimated impacts based on recorded or historic damage
information. The HAZUS-MH risk assessment methodology is parametric, in that distinct hazard and inventory
parameters (e.g., wind speed and building types) are used to determine the impact (e.g., damages and losses) on
the built environment. Built on an integrated Geographic Information System (GIS) platform, this software contains
structural and valuation data used in the basic framework of all quantitative analyses conducted.
For hazards outside the scope of HAZUS-MH, specific statistical vulnerability assessment models were developed.
These statistical models utilized a consistent approach based on the same principals as HAZUS.MH, but do not rely
on readily available automated software. Historical data for each hazard are used and statistical evaluations are
performed using manual calculations. The general steps used in the statistical risk assessment rnethodoIogy are
summarized below:
· Compile data from national and local sources,
· Conduct statistical analysis of data to relate historical patterns within data to existing hazard models
(minimum, maximum, average, and standard deviation),
· Categorize hazard parameters for each hazard to be modeled (e.g., tornado), and,
· Develop model parameters based on analysis of data, existing hazard models, and risk engineering judgment.
Where quantitative information or standardized software was lacking, a more qualitative evaluation has been made
on the basis of each hazard's characteristics. This methodology is less rigorous than that available via the
quantitative methodologies (Le., HAZUS-MH, statistical vulnerability), but provides an indication as to potential
consequences due to hazard events.
These approaches are discussed in more detail below, followed by the individual hazard vulnerability assessments.
General descriptions of the methodologies used for assessing the risks associated with the different hazards are
included in the individual hazard profile/risk assessments. These estimates should be used to understand the relative
risk from hazards and potential losses associated with such events. Uncertainties and assumptions are inherent in
any loss estimation methodology, arising in part from incomplete scientific knowledge concerning natural events and
their effects on the built environment. In addition, data limitations and simplifications are often necessary for a
comprehensive analysis and in some instances must rely on incomplete inventories, demographics, or economic
parameters. It should be noted that the information contained within this risk assessment is based upon "best data
available.. Each successive revision of this plan should incorporate new or more accurate data as appropriate.
5.6.1.1 Dam Failure
To quantitatively assess the vulnerability of Pima County to individual dam failures, data was used from the United
States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) National Inventory of Dams (NID) and the Arizona Department of Water
Resources (ADWR). NID data includes the location, capacity, and distance to the community, normal capacity, and a
hazard rating for each dam. ADWR data also includes a safety-rating for each ADWR jurisdiction dam. In the
absence of inundation maps, the vulnerability assessment is based on the following:
1. Selection of dams with an NID hazard rating of "high,. an ADWR safety rating of "unsafe non-ernergency,.
or both,
2. Determination of the projected inundation area based on the maximum capacity of the dam and the
surrounding topography based on digital elevation data, and,
3. Estimation of the total population and exposure to residences, businesses, and critical facilities falling inside
the projected inundation area.
Only one dam in Pima County is listed on the NID inventory as a "high" hazard, and there are no dams considered
.unsafe non-emergency" by the ADWR. Upon evaluation of the dam in question, a full breach is projected to inundate
Pima county Mul/i-Jllisdictionlll Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
117
~~
only a portion of an uninhabited park. There would be no projected impact to residential, commercial, or critical
structures. As such, although communities w~hin Pima County should be conscious of the impacts of dam breeches
and prepare for such events, the existing level of severity of this risk is minimal within the County.
5.6.1.2 Disease
The wide variation in disease characteristics makes evaluation of the vulnerability of people, animals, and plants
difflCu~ to analyze. Preventable diseases and injuries are studied and vulnerability assessments have been made.
However, a highly contagious and severe disease, such as smallpox or a new strain of influenza, could swiftly kill
large numbers of people and incapac~ate critical facilities (e.g. hosp~als). A~hough the vulnerability to people,
animals and plants is valuable and desirable information for emergency planning purposes, a wlnerability
assessment of the hea~hcare infrastructure would be invaluable in assessi'lg the ability of hospitals, public health
departments, clinics, urgent care centers and the like to ensure continued hea~ care in an of Pima County should
any one hea~hcare support system become inoperable or overwhelmed. Systems that should be included in a future
vulnerability assessment study would include, but would not be limited to, local and outside pharmaceutical suppliers
and their alternate sources, means of delivery, and timeframe; local laboratories and their a~emate sources, means
of delivery, and timeframe; general and specialized medical suppliers and their alternate sources, means of delivery
and timeframe; and local military medical and hazardous materials support and possible a~ernate resources from the
private sector to include means of delivery and timeframe.
Likewise, an animal equivalent, such as foot-and-mouth disease, could resu~ in the destruction of numerous animals
and cause tremendous economic impacts. The Arizona Department of Agriculture has identified numerous systemic,
administrative, or organizational vulnerabilities that currently affect disease prevention in Arizona. Some of the more
compelling factors that influence these wlnerabilities in Pima County include the following:
. Inspection services at all ports. No port has an animal inspector; most ports are manned by the Motor Vehicle
Division and plant hea~h inspection personnel who assist the Animal Services Division by visualizing animal
hea~h papers, without examining the animals.
. Safeguarding the food supply by inspecting commercial trucks destined for areas both inside and outside
Arizona's borders.
. Continued observation of border crossings for animals arriving from Mexico after their USDA inspection.
. Create and enforce animal identification plan for cattle and horses in the United States.
. Prevent the illegal smuggling of fighting birds, pet birds, and other pou~ry; as weN as meat products.
. The importation of shell eggs to the United States without USDA approval.
. Biosecurity at Arizona dairies, feedlots, and pou~ producers.
5.6.1.3 Drought
No standardized methodology exists for estimating vulnerability to drought. As opposed to posing a direct threat to
life, drought is primarily measured by its potential and actual economic effect. Therefore, it makes sense to note
economic sectors at greater risks to the hazards of drought than to delineate hazardous areas of the County. Drought
sensitive sectors of the economy and natural resources include the following:
· Agricu~re and livestock;
. Forestry from the increased risk of wildland fire;
· Wildlife and wildlife habitat; and
· Municipal and industrial water supply.
Rural and agricultural areas of Pima County are particularly sensitive to the ravages of drought. Rural areas rely
heavily on dwindling groundwater supplies, generally have small surface water drainage to recharge supply lakes,
and generally lack altemative sources of water (Jacobs and Morehouse, June 11-13, 2003), so they are particularly
susceptible to the effects of drought.
Table 5-27 identifies the potential for both exposure and losses due to the influence of drought in Pima County. All of
Pima County's 277,275 residential and 2,255 commercial buildings are at risk to damage created through the affects
of drought. These building counts translate to a potential exposure value of $43 billion for residential buildings and
Pima County Mul/i-Juriscictional Hazard Miligation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
118
~{:,
~',
..aJ
$4.5 billion for commercial structures. In addition, losses associated with drought in Pima County may be expected in
connection with agricultural assets. In Pima County, agricultural assets represent a potential exposure of $43 million,
with a potential annualized loss estimate of only $2.1 million. These figures create a countywide Ioss-to-exposure
ratio of 0.0495.
Table 5-27: Potential Exposure and Losses from Drought HlZlrd
Residential Commercial Agriculture Critical Facilities
Exposed Building Potential Building Potential Potential Potential Lou Building Potential
Jurisdiction Exposure Exposure Loss Exposure Exposure
Population Count (x$1000) Count (x$1000) (x$1ooo) (x$1000) Ratio Count (x$1ooo)
Marana 14,402 5,525 805,901 60 108,214 64 1,296 .04938 51 270,196
010 Valley 31,690 13,920 2,350,794 26 58,925 71 1,436 .04944 40 156,027
Pascua Yaqui 3,315 646 46,231 2 2,308 0 0 0 5 5,037
Sahuarita 3,839 1,290 188,135 9 18,133 15 306 .04902 35 161,440
South Tucson 5,507 1,161 201,073 21 39,180 9 178 .05056 12 10,051
Tohono O'odham 9.528 2,541 291,786 14 29,234 8 167 .05389 57 36,654
Tucson 487,966 135,602 23,218,546 1,682 3,267,100 1,302 26,243 .04961 591 1,388,8n
Unincorporated 287,499 116,590 16,064,814 441 975,375 681 13,743 .04955 445 890,790
Total 843,746 277,275 43,167,280 2,255 4,491,469 2,150 43,_ .04957 1,236 2,919,072
5.6.1.4 Earthquake
The earthquake hazard assessment utilized the HAZUS-MH software model including the following data: 100-, 250-,
500-,750-, 1000-,1500-, 2000., and 2500- year return period USGS probabilistic hazards. Developed for FEMA by
the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS), HAZUS-MH integrates earthquake hazard modeling with GIS
technology to determine the following annualized loss estimates for each jurisdiction:
1. The aggregated population at risk at the census block level,
2. The aggregated exposure and building count at the census block level for residential and commercial
occupancies, and,
3. The critical infrastructure at risk:
The earthquake risk assessment performed for Pima County did not explore the potential for collateral hazards such
as liquefaction or landslide. However, losses associated with these ground failures would have been negligible given
the level of shaking expected for Pima County (i.e., not enough strong shaking to trigger significant ground failure).
The annualized loss estimates developed represent the average of all eight of the modeled return periods (100-year
through 2,500-year events). Table 5-28 provides a breakdown of potential exposure and losses due to annualized
earthquake events by jJJrisdiction. Approximately 850,000 people may be at risk from earthquake hazards within
Pima County, including 119,813 low-income and 82,467 elderly persons. Annualized losses associated with
earthquakes in Pima County may be expected to cause $3.1 million in damage to residential buildings and $310,000
in damage to commercial buildings. These anticipated losses are expected equattt to a countywide Ioss-to-exposure
ratio of less than 0.0007.
The largest potential annualized losses to communities in Pima County include the City of Tucson and the
unincorporated portions of Pima County. Together these jurisdictions account for $2.6 billion in residential losses and
$273 million in commercial losses equating to 84 percent and 88 percent respectively of the total losses countywide.
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: Odober 31, 2(05)
URS
119
:::;..;}'
...-~"
r.~' .
oj" ,.,10
Table 5.28: Potential Exposure and Loss from Earthquake Hazard
Residential Commercial Critical Facilities
Exposed Building Potential Potential Loss Building Potential Potential Loss Building Potential
Jurisdiction Loss Exposure Loss Exposure Loss
Population Count (x$1000) (x$1000) Ratio Count (x$1000) (x$1000) Ratio Count (x$1000)
Marana 14,402 5,525 130 805,901 .00016 60 8 108,214 .00007 51 270,196
Om Valley 31,690 13,920 170 2,350,794 .00007 26 7 58,925 .00012 40 156.027
Pascua Yaqui 3,315 646 5 46,231 .00011 2 Negligible 2,308 .00022 5 5,037
Sahuarita 3,839 1,290 64 188,135 .00034 9 3 18,133 .00017 . 35 161,440
South Tucson 5,507 1,161 31 201,073 .00015 21 Negligible 39,180 .00001 12 10,051
Tohono O'odham 9,528 2,541 86 291,186 .00030 14 14 29,234 .00048 57 36,654
Tucson 487,966 135,602 1,408 23,218,546 .00006 1,682 179 3,267,100 .00006 591 1,388,877
Unincorporated 287,499 116,590 1,256 16,064,814 .00008 441 94 975,375 .00010 445 890,790
Total 143,746 277.275 3.150 43,167,210 .00007 2,255 310 4.41'.469 .00007 1,236 2,919,072
5.6.1.5 Extreme Heat
While no standardized methodology exists for estimating vulnerability to extreme heat, as shown in Figure 5-7 most
of Pima County has a high probability of reaching summer temperatures that may be classified as dangerous or even
extremely dangerous. While Pima County is relatively well prepared for excessive summer heat (e.g., most buildings
have evaporative coolers or air conditioning), an average of 29 Arizona residents die of heatstroke or sunstroke every
year. Of these deaths, it is estimated that 70 percent were individuals over age 45 and 42 percent were over the age
of 65 (Arizona Department of Health, July 2004).
Dependence on air conditioning in most of Arizona to moderate the effects of high summer temperatures could result
in a hazardous situation should the electricity supply be interrupted for an extended period of time. In addition, Pima
County has a relatively high proportion of elderly and Iow-income people, with both groups historically vulnerable to
extreme summer heat.
As noted previously, temperatures in the Western U.S. rose 2-50F during the 20'" century. The two major climate
change models, the Canadian Model and the Hadley Model, both forecast continued temperature increases in the
West of 5-11 OF during the 21st century, including Arizona (National Assessment Synthesis Team, May 2001). If these
increases occur during the summer months, Pima County could be subject to even more severe summer heat.
5.6.1.6 Flood
The effects of flooding include loss of life, property damage and destruction, damage and disruption of
communications, transportation, electric service, and community services, crop and livestock damage and loss and
interruption of business. Hazards of fire, health and transportation accidents, and contamination of water supplies are
likely secondary effects of flooding.
Digitized 100-year flood maps with base flood elevations (BFE) from the FEMA FIRM program were utilized to
perfonn the vulnerability assessment for floods within Pima County. Census blocks intersecting with this infonnation
were used in this analysis in conjunction with structure and exposure information from the HAZU8-MH database.
Table 5-29 provides a breakdown of potential exposure of structures and critical infrastructure by jurisdiction for a
100-year flood event. Approximately 53,000 people may be at risk, with the largest numbers of at-risk populations
located in Tucson and the unincorporated portions of Pima County.
Data limitations in delineated floodplain infonnation for the T ohona Q'odham Nation made it diffIcult at this time to
adequately assess the impact of flooding within this jurisdiction. Future mitigation strategies should consider the
development of this infonnation as critical for assessments in the future.
Pima County Uulli-Jllisfictional Hazwd Mi/igaIioo Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
120
'~~\
..ff;j
Table 5-29: Potential Exposure and Loss from Flood HlZlrd
Residential Commercill Critical Facilities
Exposed Building Potential Building Potential Building Potential
Jurisdiction Exposure Exposure Exposure
Population Count (x$1ooo) Count (x$1ooo) Count (x$1000)
Marana 2,270 913 124,867 1 7,099 15 840,845
Ora Valley 1,540 719 118,488 2 5,330 8 9,162
Pascua YaQui 2,915 571 81,958 2 2,265 4 4,037
Sahuarita 298 84 8,916 1 625 8 35,576
South Tucson 3 1 110 0 0 0 0
Tohono O'odham (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1)
Tucson 25,841 6,775 1,200,909 101 245,717 65 90,604
Unincoroorated 20,598 7,331 915,206 11 47,059 165 518,311
Total 53,4&5 16,394 2,450,454 11. 308,095 265 1.498,535
(1) Aoodplain information was unavailable for \he Tohono O'odhilll Nation.
5.&.1. 7 Hail
Hailstorm frequency and damage data for Pima County was derived from a National Oceanographic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) funded study that analyzed hailstorm impacts for recorded events between 1948
and 2000. Historical data was compiled by the size of the hailstone. The vulnerability assessment for hail in Pima
County is based on the following methodology developed for the statewide Hazard Mitigation Plan:
1. Hail stone size and frequency of recurrence were utilized as the main parameters for the hazard model. The
duration of storms and number of hail per square feet are implicidy included in the model due to the high
correlation to hail frequency.
2. Hazard severity parameters were measured for hail size and were calculated for both residential property
and crops.
3. Vulnerability-Exposure was modeled utilizing hail-size versus property loss value relation, with losses
simulated for the subset of data for which historical losses are unavailable.
4. A probabilistic loss model is then developed through the development of EP curves (Exceeding Annual
Probability of Observed Losses). AEL values (Annualized Expected Loss) are computed.
Table 5-30 identifies the potential for both exposure and losses due to the influence of hail in Pima County. As the
table shows, agricutturallosses associated with hail damage within Pima County are estimated at $95,000, with the
greatest losses occurring in Tucson and unincorporated portions of Pima County.
Table 5-30: Potential Exposure and Losses from Hall Hazard
Residential Commercial Agriculture Critical Facilities
Exposed Building Potential Building Potential Potential Potential Loss Building Potential
Jurisdiction Exposure Exposure Loll Exposure Exposure
Population Count (x$1ooo) Count (1$1000) (x$1ooo) (x$1ooo) Ratio Count (x$1000)
Marana 14,402 5,525 805,901 60 108,214 3 1,296 .00232 51 270,196
Ora Vallev 31,690 13,920 2,350,794 26 58,925 3 1,436 .00209 40 156,027
Pascua Yaaui 3,315 646 46,231 2 2,308 0 0 0 5 5,037
Sahuarita 3,839 1,290 188,135 9 18,133 1 306 .00327 35 161,440
South Tucson 5.507 1,161 201,073 21 39.180 Neolioible 178 .00281 12 10,051
Tohono O'odham 9,528 2,541 291,786 14 29,234 Nealiaible 167 .00230 57 36,654
Tucson 487,966 135,602 23,218,546 1,682 3,2676,100 58 26,243 .00213 591 1,388.877
Unincoroorated 287,499 116,590 16,064,814 441 975,375 30 13,743 .00218 445 890,790
Total 843,746 277,275 43,167,280 2,255 4,498,469 95 43,369 .00219 1,236 2,919,072
5.6.1.8 Hazardous Materials
Vulnerability assessment for hazardous materials were obtained by applying a GIS overlay of exposure and
population at risk with information on the location of facilities where hazardous materials meeting EPA's criteria for an
extremely hazardous substance. Persons and buildings at risk from exposure to hazardous materials were calcula.ted
Pima County Mul/i-JlliSllctional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
121
:.:.,,:.,
r""--;
5' .)
based on one- and two-mile radiuses from each location. Table 5-31 and Table 5-32 identify the potential for both
exposure and losses due to the influence of hazardous materials in Pima County. Approximately 250,000 persons,
$10 billion in residential buildings, $1.4 billion in commercial structures, and $1.4 billion in critical infrastructure are at
risk. The largest risks are associated with the City of Tucson and unincorporated portions of Pima County. Although
there are no facilities potentially impacting the Pascua Yaqui, this analysis does not account for the transportation of
hazardous materials. All communities should consider the transportation of such materials when developing
mitigation strategies.
Table 5-31: Potential Exposure from HAlMAT Hazard (1.Mile Radius)
Residential Commercial Critical Facilities
Exposed Building Potential Building Potential Building Potential
Jurisdiction Exposure Exposure Exposure
Population Count (x$1ooo) Count (x$1000) Count (x$1ooo)
Marana 1,415 520 86,121 48 83,927 12 24,583
Oro VlMey 3,381 1,253 204,073 1 582 2 1,475
Pascua YaQui 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sahuarita 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
South Tucson 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tohono Q'odham 66 17 1,725 3 3,398 3 4,343
Tucson 39,950 10,019 1 604,466 206 394,009 90 98,862
Unin ed 11,749 3677 403,721 74 166,403 148 460,577
Total 56,561 15,486 2,300,106 332 648,319 255 589,840
Table 5-32: Potential Exposure from HAlMAT Hazard (2.MI.. Radius)
Residential Commercial Critical Facilities
Exposed Building Potential Building Potential Building Potential
Jurisdiction Exposure Exposure Exposure
Population Count (1$1000) Count . (x$1000) Count lx$1000)
Marana 4,415 1,714 275,432 55 99,895 23 62,145
Oro VaHey 11,205 4,884 806,826 3 11,909 10 37,505
Pascua YaQui 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sahuarita 1.010 313 48,298 1 1,854 2 570
South Tucson 5311 1,102 190,059 21 39180 12 10,051
Tohono Q'odham 1,719 625 48.527 10 11,616 11 15,660
Tucson 174,453 42,808 6,804,924 505 1,009,101 278 403,038
Unincoroorated 49,995 17,353 2,037.991 110 240,996 420 952,857
Total 248.107 A.799 10.212.057 705 1.414.551 756 1.481 826
5.6.1.9 Severe Wind
Any person or structure may be at risk within the County, as such potential loss estimates were generated from
residential and commercial structures based on historical damage reports and information from the American Society
of Civil Engineers (ASCE) on design wind speed (7-98 Design Wind Speed). The ASCE design wind speed maps
account for historical events such as hurricanes, tropical storms, as well as in-land windstorms. Damage parameters
to general building .stock were extracted from HAZU5-MH and anchored to the ASCE Design Wind Speed map.
Damage estimates were then calculated for the average wind speeds for 100 and 500-year return period for Pima
County, and subsequenUy each jurisdiction. Table 5-33 identifieS the potential for both exposure and losses due to
the influence of severe wind in Pima County. Residential loss estimates are expected to cause $441,000 in damage
to ~sidential buildings and $63,000 in damage to commercial structures.
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005}
URS
122
Table 5-33: Potential Exposure and Loss from Severe Wind Hazard
Raldential Commercial Criticll FlCiIities
Exposed Building Potential Potential Loss Building Potentill Potential Loa Potential Potential
Jurisdiction Loss Exposure Loss Exposure Loss Exposure
Population Count (x$1ooo) (1$1000) Ratio Count (1$1000) 1x$1ooo) RItio (1$1000) (1$1000)
Marana 14,402 5,525 8 805,901 . 60 2 108,214 .00018 51 270,196
Oro Valley 31,690 13,920 24 2,350,794 .00001 26 1 58,925 .00017 40 156,027
Pascua Yaaui 3,315 646 NeQliQible 46,231 . 2 Negligible 2,308 .00004 5 5,037
Sahuarita 3,839 1,290 2 188,135 .00001 9 Negligible 18,133 .00006 35 161,440
South Tucson 5,507 1,161 2 201,073 . 21 1 39,180 .00026 12 10,051
Tohono O'odham 9,528 2,541 3 291,786 .00001 14 NeGligible 29,234 .00003 57 36,654
Tucson 487,966 135,602 237 23,218,546 .00001 1,682 46 3,267,100 .00014 591 1,388,8n
Unincoroorated 287,499 116,590 8 16,064,814 . 441 2 975,375 .00002 445 890,790
Total 843,746 277.275 441 43.167.210 .00001 2.255 63 4....469 .00014 1.236 2.919.072
. Loss ratio <.00001
5.6.1.10 Subsidence
Vulnerability assessment for subsidence were obtained by applying a GIS overlay of exposure and population at risk
with information on historical areas of subsidence and areas of significant water decline as determined by the United
States Geological Survey (USGS). Table 5-34 demonstrates the historical exposure to each jurisdiction to
subsidence, while Table 5-35 represents exposure created by water level decline of greater than 100 feet. For each
jurisdiction within Pima County, water level decline exhibits the greater risk to persons and property. Within Pima
County approximately 380,000 people, $17 billion in residential buildings, and $2 billion in commercial structures are
exposed to risk based on historical areas of subsidence, while over 620,000 persons, $15 billion in residential
buildings, and $5 billion in commercial structures are at risk to subsidence from water level decline.
Table 5-34: Exposure from Subsidence Hazard (Historical
Raidential Commercial CritiCII FlCilities
Exposed Building Potential Building Potential Building Potential
Jurisdiction Exposure Exposure Exposure
Population Count (x$1ooo) Count (x$1ooo) Count (x$1ooo)
Marana 4,157 1,307 173,184 50 96,169 34 782,250
Ora Valley 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pascua Yaqui 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sahuarita 3,344 1,121 168,091 9 16,618 28 155,402
South Tucson 5,428 1,152 199,373 21 39,180 12 478
Tohono O'odham 2,229 748 66,043 11 12,460 21 22,939
Tucson 274,599 70,787 12,110,098 1,102 2,151,061 364 434,890
Unincoroorated 89,740 33,311 4,670,166 168 389,468 559 1,339,467
Totll 379,.7 101.426 17.316,955 1,361 2;704,956 1,011 2,744.999
Pima County Mulli-Jurise6ctional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
123
J
Table 5-35: Exposure from Subsidence Hazard (Water Level Decline)
Residential Commercial Critical Facilities
Exposed Building Potential Building Potential Building Potential
Jurisdiction Exposure Exposure Exposure
Population Count (1$1000) Count (x$1ooo) Count (x$1ooo)
Marana 10,729 3,897 587,829 53 100,823 14 114,906
Oro Valley 1,406 1,463 122,938 2 6,551 2 6,891
Pascua Yaoui 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sahuarita 3,694 1,236 90,772 9 17,451 5 1,137
South Tucson 5,410 1,141 98,055 19 39,298 0 0
TOOooo O'odham 2,299 870 37,689 11 12,460
Tucson ~,045 122,026 10,568,762 1,659 3,431,201 164 283,504
Unincoroorated 150,673 58,624 3,737,675 302 679,371 278 685,679
Total 622,256 189,258 15,243,721 2055 4.287,156 463 1,092,117
5.6.1.11 Thunderstorm
Exposed populations and structures, as well as the associated risk created by thunderstorms, were identified utilizing
information from national weather databases and historical data for thunderstorm events between 1980 and 2000.
From this information, frequency and damage parameters for thunderstorm hazards within Pima County were
developed. Due to limitations in the information available, historical patterns were assumed to be the dominant
indicator to determine future events. IntensityJfrequency tables were developed that outlined the recurrence for each
type of severe thunderstorm event. Based on the intensitylfrequency relationship, damage data were applied to
estimate the probability of occurrence and its relation to a particular level of damage. This process is summarized as
follows:
1. NOAA statistical thunderstorm data is cleaned and duplicate data is removed.
2. Historical observed losses are plotted against time. Non-linear regression modeling is assumed in modeling
the trend underiying the historical losses.
3. To estimate the expected loss that might occur in a given future year, the above regressed relationship is
extrapolated.
4. To account for historical changes to exposure, historical losses are modified/normalized by the ratio of the
above-expected loss and average historical.
5. Exceedance Probability (EP) curve is extracted from the modified set of historical data.
6. Annualized loss is then computed as the area under the EP curve.
Table 5-36 identifIeS the potential for both exposure and losses due to the influence of thunderstorms in Pima
County. Due to the inability to Predict the precise nature, timing, and location of thunderstorm events coupled with
Pima County's historical record of such events, exposure estimates for population and structures account for all
persons and buildings within each jurisdiction. Other effects associated with thunderstorms, such as flooding, can be
isolated to specific areas of the county. Thus, the areas facing the greatest risk associated with thunderstorm events
are the unincorporated portions of Pima County and Tucson.
Losses associated with thunderstorms in the rural portions of Pima County may be expected in association with
agricultural assets. A potential exposure of $43.3 million in agricultural resources is coupled with a potential annual
loss of $952,000, creating a Ioss-to-exposure ratio of 0.02195.
Pima County MuIIi-JlMisdidional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31. 20(5)
URS
124
.~~:}
$.)
Table 5-36: Potential Exposure IIId Losses from Thunderstorm Hazard
Residential Commen:iII AgricuIure Critical FICiIitiIs
Exposed Building Patentlll Building PotIIIIiII Pote.diII PatenIiII Loss Building PattntiII
Jurisdiction Exposure Exposure Loss &poIure Exposure
Populltion Count (x$1000) Count (x$1000) (x$1000) (x$1000) RIIio Count (x$1000)
Marana 14,402 5,525 805,901 60 108,214 28 1,296 .02160 51 270,196
Oro Valley 31,690 13,920 2,350,794 26 58,925 31 1,436 .02159 40 156,027
Pascua Yaqui 3,315 646 46.231 2 2,308 0 0 0 5 5,037
Sahuarita 3,839 1,290 188,135 9 18,133 7 306 .02288 35 161.440
South Tucson 5,507 1,161 201,073 21 39,180 4 178 .02247 12 10.051
Tohono O'odham 9,528 2,541 291,786 14 29.234 4 167 .02395 57 36,654
Tucson 487,966 135,602 23,218.546 1,682 3,267,100 575 26,243 .02191 591 1,388.877
Unincorporated 287,499 116,590 16.064,814 441 975,375 303 13,743 .02205 445 890,790
Total 843,746 227,275 43,167,280 2,255 4.49I,46t 152 43,369 .02195 1,231 2,119,072
5.6.1.12 Tornado
Exposed populations and structures, as well as the associated risk created by tornadoes, were determined utilizing
the following process, which was developed for the Statewide Hazard Mitigation Plan to determine wlnerability:
,. Hazard frequency and weather data from the NOAA national tornado database for the period from 1950 to
2002 was collected, reviewed, and analyzed.
2. Tornado Intensity-Frequency relation was then developed based on the probability of experiencing or
exceeding certain Fujita Intensity.
3. Vulnerability-Exposure was modeled by developing a Tornado-loss relation (Fujtta Intensity versus property
loss value). losses are simulated for the subset of data for which historical losses are not provided.
4. Probabilistic loss model is then developed utilizing EP curves (Exceeding Annual Probability of observing
losses). AEl values (Annualized Expected loss) are computed based on the EP curves.
Table 5-37 identifies the potential for both exposure and losses due to the influence of tornadoes in Pima County.
losses associated with tornadoes could amount to $397.000 in da~ to residential buildings and $44,000 in
damage to commercial buildings. These anticipated losses are expected to create Ioss-to-exposure ratios that are
less than 0.0001. The jurisdiction at the greatest risk for losses associated with tornado events is Tucson with an
estimated $211,000 in damage to residential buildings and $32,000 in damage to commercial buildings.
Table 5-37: Potential Exposure.nd Loss from Tornado HlZlrd
R.1dtntIII atltisk CommerdaI Buildings at Risk Critical FICiIities
Potential Potential PatenIiII Potential Building PotentiII
Exposed Building Lou Exposure Lou Building Loss Exposure Lou Count Exposure
Jurisdiction Population Count jx$1000) (x$1000) RItio Count (x$1000) (x$1000) RItio (x$1000)
Marana 14,402 5,525 7 805,901 . 60 1 108,214 . 51 270,196
Oro Val~ 31,690 13,920 21 2.350,794 . 26 1 58.925 .??oo1 40 156.027
Pascua 'Laqui 3,315 646 Negligible 46,231 . 2 . Negligible 2,308 .00022 5 5,037
Sahuarita 3,839 1,290 2 188,135 .??oo1 9 Negligible 18,133 .??oo2 35 161.440
South Tucson 5,507 1,161 2 201,073 . 21 39,180 .??oo1 12 10.051
Tohono O'odham 9,528 2,541 3 291,786 .??oo1 14 Negligible 29,234 .??oo1 57 36,654
Tucson 487,966 135,602 211 23,218,546 . 1,682 32 3,267,100 . 591 1,388,877
Unincorporated 287,499 116,590 7 16,064,814 . 441 1 975,375 . 445 890,790
Total 843,746 277.275 397 43167.280 . 2,255 44 ~498.469 . 1,236 2,919.072
. loss Ratio < 0.??oo1
Pima County Mul/i-Jllisdctiona/ HazW'd Mitigation Plan (Oral/: October 31, 2005)
URS
125
J
5.6.1.13 Wildfire
By combining information on topography, critical fire weather frequency, and fuel, the severity of wildfire hazards in
Pima County was developed and is presented in Figure 5-27. Vulnerability assessment values .were obtained for
wildfire hazards by applying a GIS overlay of exposure and population at risk with these wildfire hazard areas based
on the following severity levels: extreme, high, and medium risk. Presented in Table 5-38 through Table 5-41, these
findings reflect the potential exposure created by wildfires at both the county and jurisdiction level.
Based upon these findings the greatest risk to Pima County residents is created through the "Medium Risk" category.
This type of wildfire event presents a cumulative exposure to 34,834 residents, with 12,165 residential buildings and
35 commercial buildings at risk. These structure counts translate to a total risk of approximately $1.5 billion for
residential structures and $87 million for commercial structures. Based on the population and structures at risk, the
greatest wildfire hazards are faced in the unincorporated areas of Pima County, the City of Tucson, and the ToOOoo
O'odham Nation. Areas of extreme hazard severity lie in the forested areas of the Coronado National Forest east of
Tucson within the Santa Catalina and Rincon Mountains and in central Pima County within the Baboquivari
Mountains.
Table 5-38: Potential EXDOsure from Wildfire HlZlrd (Extreme Risk)
Residential Buildings Commercill Buildinas Critlcal Facilities
Exposed Building Potential Building Potential Building Potential
Jurisdiction Exposure Exposure Exposure
Population Count (1$1000) Count Ix$1ooo) Count Ix$1000)
Mnna 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oro VaJley 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pascua Yaqui 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sahuarita 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
South Tucson 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tohono Q'odham 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tucson 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Unincorporated Pima County 287 219 32,514 0 408 8 717
Total 287 219 32,514 0 401 8 717
Table 5-39: Potential ExDOsure from Wildfire HlZlrd (HIgh Risk
Residential Buildings Commercial Bulldlnas Critical Facilities
Exposed Building Potential Building Potential Building Potential
Jurisdiction Exposure Exposure Exposure
Population Count (x$10oo) Count Ix$1ooo) Count Ix$1ooo)
Marana 1 1 106 1 14 0 0
Oro VeA'tey 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pascua yaqui 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sahuarita 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
South Tucson 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tohono Q'odham 0 1 46 0 0 0 0
Tucson 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Unincorporated Pima County 5 1 734 2 25 0 0
Total 6 3 886 3 39 0 0
Pima County UuIi-Jllisdctional Hazard UiIigaIion Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
126
J
Table 5-40: Potential ExDOsure from Wildfire HlZlrd (Medium Risk)
Residential Buildings Commercial Buildings Critical FICiIities
Exposed Building Potential Building Potential Building Pottntial
Jurisdiction Exposure Exposure Exposure
Population Count (X$1ooo) Count (1$1000) Count (x$1ooo)
Marana 974 419 52,236 4 4,548 1 712,485
Oro Valley 1,139 635 101,815 1 4,749 4 14,398
Pascua Yaqui 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sahuarita 184 68 11,418 1 418 5 5,219
South Tucson 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tohono O'odham 7,810 1,964 236.511 4 14,690 50 25,344
Tucson 9,538 2,092 314,536 5 12,277 20 11,362
Unincorporated Pima County 15,189 6,987 775.439 20 50,851 160 377,202
Total 34,834 12,165 1,491,955 35 17,533 240 1,146,010
Table 5-41: Potential EXDOSure from Wildfire HlZlrd (Combined Extreme, Hiah and Medium Risks)
Residentill Buildinas Commercial Buildings Critical Facirlties
Exposed Building Potential Building Potential Building Potential
Jurisdiction Exposure Exposure Exposure
Population Count (x$1000) Count (x$10oo) Count 1x$1ooo)
Marana 975 420 52,342 5 4,561 1 712,485
Oro Valley 1,139 635 101,815 1 4,749 4 14,398
Pascua Yaqui 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sahuarita 184 68 11,418 1 418 5 5,219
South Tucson 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tohono O'odham 7,810 1,965 236,557 4 14,690 50 25,344
Tucson 9,538 2,092 314,536 5 12,277 20 11,362
Unincorporated Pima County 15,481 7,207 808,687 22 50,867 168 377,919
Total 35,127 12,287 1,525,355 38 87,572 248 1,146,727
5.6.1.14 Summary of Vulnerable Populations in Pima County by Jurisdiction
Table 5-42 through Table 5-50 illustrate the total exposure and loss by jurisdiction for each of the identified hazards.
As shown here, exposed populations, residential and commercial building counts and exposures, agricuKural
exposure. and critical facility counts and exposuresnosses are summarized.
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
127
.'ii~-
.. :;:I ::I 0
~ c.8
.u .s 8.;
3!. cf dj .!S.
1
~
o
l;--
._ C
=::1
~ 0
11..0
~
::I
~
::I
U
~
-c:
~
::I
o
o
..
E
a:
.5 1i
Uhf.
:c u a.. .!S.
E
e
-
tit
tit
..3
"0
C
..
e
::I
tit
a
ali~_ _
0.. i =g
~~ ~.3;.
E ~ a.. .!S.
E
::I
U)
~
..
:s
..
....
1ii ~ - 0'>
:;:1::12
c.C5~
.so 8.; M
a..dj_v
! 10 0
c 8 10
.s ~-roo
o..J~ N
a.. -
.!-
iig
I!~
g>>-
._ C
"a::l
=0
~u
.f-
i::lo
~ I!
a..dj.!S.
.~1:
"a::l
=0
~u
c
'i .2
...
0-
0.::1
dj8-
a..
'E
B
:J:
N
I'--
o
c>>
0;
N
co
(")
~
......
0'>
co
v
00
~
~
10
10
N
N
o
00
N
~
......
M
..,.
10
I'--
N
,..:
I'--
N
co
..,.
I'--
M
~
1i Iii
lcl 16 Q)
_~E >-
-5. 0" c: g
::;'€<()j!......
e t'a 0
OW u::
N
I'--
o
c>>
......
0'>
N
-
co
(")
N,
......
10 N
(") I'--
10 0
00C>>
0'> ......
..,. 0'>
~"N
--
lOCO
CO(")
N~
......
- ---'-
-
0'>
co
. (")
M
v
~-
.
.
-
0'>
co
..,.
00
0'>
..,.
~
f-
--
100'>
0'> co
o ..,.,
-~
~~
..,.
--
o
..-
(")
. .
c--
--
10
10
N
N
oo~
...... N
......N
--
;1;~
..,.~
c:i~
~"'":
N~
~-
-
~
N
,..:
co
......
M
..,.
-
~
......
M
. .
-
10
I'--
N
~
N
f-
--
a;le
...,~
, I'--
COI'--
......N
-I--
co
..,.
I'--
M
~
- --
lOCO
~~
-(")
~~
10
0>
n;
-I:
~ -~.~
~"2"2
"'0:::0:::
5.!!.!!
"E -- --
t'a~~
N...... N
t'a
'iij :::c
:::c
OCON
~~~
- ~ 0)
~~m
IO......N
IOCO~
~le~
....
. . .
. . .
0>U:;~
p;1O..,.
~-~OO
.... 0>
..,. ..,.
...: ~..
.
NIOIO
~o~
.., I'-- N
co 1'--0
01000
......C!.~
, N I'--
8""" co
(") N......._
'0 (")
N........,.
<< << ~
~mle
""I'--~
, -J::
~:8N
u;~~
t.O or- ,......_
, 00 (")
l8~~
O'>I'--NN
0'> ...... I'-- I'--
0'>......00
:;tNC>>C>>
~~o;a;
N......NN
~(")~~
C!.~~N,
...... ........
0>
co
. . ('1').
..;
..,.
N
. .. '1').
0>
l8l8
0> ....
~~
I'-- N
N~
0> 0>
co co
..,. ..,.
0000
0'> 0>
..,. ..,.
~~
(")
co
.. . .. ~
...... 10 10 10
~:g~~
......NNN
~N~~
O>I'--NN
I' M ,..: ,..:
..,. co co
N...... .....
"':.nMM
.... .... ~ ..
I'-
...en
C"')
co 00 1010
NIOI'-I'-
..,. N N N
000)"':"':
0001'-1'-
..........NN
I'- co co co
0'> 10 ..,. ..,.
~~~~
~~~~
Q)
~
_l
"0 ~.3E Q)
e~.5li>2 E
~Q)U)1\'il!?o i
~]x~~~~W
~~ ~~~
co
~
o
....
I'- ~
r:::ooq-
"'":
.....
o
co 0 ..,.
N
. . .
. . .
(")
COo>C"')
~(")1O
~
. . .
ON~
10
..,. 10
~tD~
Nggo>
(") ..,.-
.....
. . .
10
0> co
..... C"') .....
N N
.....
~
....
--
<')
I
~
e.
lii
c::
i
I
~
~
16
'"
~
~
"'"
-5
;e
~
K
~
I'- ~
co co co
N ~
(")
i
:I:
'"
;s
~
Q)
:c
"~
c.
E ~
::l ~
~~ .!!l
:::c ~ ~
::>
15
!r'
..
C
I!
..
:E
.5
"'-
'E .!!
! i
E ~
00
J::
'"
'"
o
..J
"CI
C
..
!
:::iI
'"
2
an
-ii
0:0::1
~ i
E~
E U
:::iID:::
en
~
CD
:is
~
~,'
:({\)
ii ! -. c.c
It :0::1:10 0)
:_-E! clIlg.....
.! 8.; ci
~.f~.!S.~
rJ
:0::1
'C
o
~c:
=:1
U 0
Ifo
ii!-
:0::1:12<0
c-CSo)
.!! &.... ~
.f~!!t
!
:E
:I
U
'C
~
~=i
UO...~
1)..J-
a. .!S.
1i!-~
~ i8 N
~ 8.... .,;j
a.~!!t~
;! 1Il0g
jiB...<<
0..J-
a. .!S.
.~c:
"Cl:l 0
= 0 <0
~o
.!-
:o::I:loC;
i8.lIlg~
1) :; 0
a. ~.!S. co
1i 6"
~=8
4D 0.... ...
1)..J-
a. .!S.
g'-
._ C
"Cl:l
=0
~o
c
l:i
0-
a.:I
~g.
a.
"E
a
x
.....
<n
<n
N
<n
<n-
N
o
-.:t
-.:t-
.....
~
::;)
e
o
"Cl
.~ Ie
Q) lU Q)
~::;) >-
g. 2 g
€~8"'"
&1 u:
<0
0)
.....
d
,....
N
-
<n <0
-.:t 0)
co .....
dd
o ,....
N N
1---
.....
<n
- r---
~
"!.
.....
-
f---
- --
-.:t
.....
N
.,;j
o
.....
- -r--
co
r-- -r--
o
<0
I-- -I--
C;
0)
Il'i
o
co
f-- - f--
o
C")
.....
f-- r---
<n
N
<n
Il'i
- --
N
o
-.:t
-.:t-
.....
ON
,....0
N'"":
- -.:t
N.....
- -r--
<n .....
..... <n
<<
<< C")
-.:t
0) .....
0) N
O.,;j
""'-0
.....
<< <<
.....~
~~
.q:1l'i
N 0
..... co
<< <<
C")~
..... <n
0) -
<n
C")ll')tO
co-.:to)
Lt)~~
- - 0
-.:tN,....
NtON
N C").....
..... N <n
<0
0)
"!.
.....
<<
<<
o to
<n 0
NO)
N.q:
-.:t .....
..... .....
~~
..... .....
dd
,.... ,....
N N
<<
<<
~;:r~u:;
~
"!.<<
.....
<<
1!!3<<
""'Il')-.:t
NO).....
o)ClON
rrio>.,;j
ClOo)~
<< << N
~:g~
.....N
N~
~Lri
co~
<< << co
o~~
N"':.<n
<n.....1l'i
<nIl')N
~~~
- --.:t
.....-.:t.....
<<
<<
m~~~
...~"!.N
cDgl108
Q)~~~
.. ... ... ~
o C")O 0
<n <n <0 <0
~
Il'i
o
co
~~c;c;
..... co 0) 0)
rrit-:Il'ill'i
~~gg
<< ... ... .....-.
,.... ,.... <n Il')
~~~~
"-:cwiLl'iLl'i
,....~NN
~"':.~~
- 0 -.:t -.:t
<IIll:t.................
Q)
c
lU n
'1:: CI)
.;~~ 0
~'2'2 1!]e
~ D::: a: -g 8 'C ... .s
-e~~~c-a';f!?
IS~~ ~~._>~
cv.....Ng?:!x>c
~:I: ~~ ~
0>
~
Il')
GO
oo-.:t
N
,....
o 0.....
<<
<< <<
<< <<
co
0~;1;
.q:
<< << <<
o ..... -.:t
to
tOC")
OON
.....N
<n
<< << <<
0)
o ..... .....
-.:t
iC)'
8
...
......
<')
lis
~
!
,!
Q;
j
i
~
Cii
c::
~
'is
.~
~
~
~
~
.~
Q;
-.:t
o ..... ,....
0)
i
::L
'"
;s
.t!
..
:D
:!l
15.
Q.
Q) 'I'
E !S15
-8 ~';~i'~
CVq::W:I:":::1:
8~ ~
.....::> P
J
'ii
>
e
o
.5 _
.. .!!
"E1:!1i -
B~jl~.
::E: 0 15....-
E 0 0. .!So
e
-
:I
o
....I
"l:J
C
all
I!
::I
..
&
:i II
c;:g
~:;
E =
EOI::
::I
en
i
""t
..Ii~-t-
41 :;:l::lo N
~ c..80
.u .s &.; ~
.f .f.n.!So ...-
Ii
u
JE.
o
~1:
=::1
U 0
{t.o
Ii~-
.- ::18 co
~ i I.... ~
:E 1L~e. ~
::I
U
"C Ii 6"
~:g18 ...-
1.3; t-
o. .!So
Ii~-
:gi8~
.s &..... :8
.f.n~
.;>>1:
;Jg
iO
l~i~.
~l_ ~
0. .n.!So N
IIi.
I....;
0. .!So
CD
.a
all
I-
';>>1:
,,::1
=0
iO
Ii
.ng.
0.
o
~
CD
N
o
N
0)
C'f'i
-
8
~
.....
M
t-
N
o
<<5
ll')
...-
t-
N N
co 0
"'-cD
0) ll')
-
ll')ll')~
t-Oo
~ll') .
_ ,..: co
~('I')~
N~~
co
M
~
.....
. . .
t- t-
...- N N
o~qq
<<5:8:8
...- -
ON~~
co
.. '" ~_.
-
...c;;.
~:#3~
Oln"t"t
<<5:8:8
.4ItI.....
ON~~
~ctct
0)""':..""':..
o .~ ~
~MM
.....NN
~~~
o..,."t"t
-M M
.....-.....
~88
o :of ~.~
T-;;;r;;
<::>
~
co
0)
OoM
~
...-
o 0 ~
. . .
. . .
0)
oo;:!
~
. . .
00-
ll')
-
ooClC!.
.....
o
-
-
N
. . .
-
f---
. . .
~~
~O)O)
1n:::8
. . .....
.....M~
MCDO';
t-Nt-
o co -
- . ~
~2~
N
tl .. ~
Mi~
In 0)
N .
.......~
...-ll')8
co~CD
M _ .
. - ...-
M_M
it)'
~
LO
00 M
CD
....-
..,
li;
~
~
e.
.i
a.:
i
I
1
~
ill
i
"5
~
~
~
~
~
is:
o
~
coO
~
a>
OO~
f-- -f-- i
:J:
Ul
41 ;e
Iww ~ ~
~ ~~~ _1 ~
I ~ w~~~ N~E 41 E~
41 III 5 d' d. ~ ~ .C ... .s 1.2 c
~~ ~ ~~~~cS~~o ~~Ul
'E :s 5- 2 8 fS ""f ""f II) ~ .!!! :> -8 -0 t!! ,.l:O:' ::E ";;;
a ::I~<8"'- ...-N~..~:>CIll~W~ E
e1:: III >.D ::IE~ ::>
~ o~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~
I-- f-- f--
.
f--
-f--
. M
f--
-f--
In
N
0)
:8
Oll')
MN
M~
1l'i:8
I--
-I--
t-
. .
-
1---
~
N~
-
f---
000';
COt-
~ .
a:)~
..... M
..... .
N
1---
ct
t-
g
M
N
-
o
t-
...-
. .
-
o
N
a>
C'f'i
-
--
O)~
.....0)
t-C'f'i
-
f--
-~
o
a>
co.
-
M
08
;;I;<<!.
...-.....
M
'8-
..
>-
..
:s
u
..
..
D..
.5 ii
.. '!;!
"E I
; E
:t:8
E
e
-
..
..
o
...J
"0
C
..
!
:s
..
2
~:!
'0 i
~"O
'ii
.. u
Er:t::
E
:s
CI)
i
CD
:a
..
....
;;k.'
'ift\i
"""-c.. _
1i!-
:~:JOI'-
"_= c.g..,
;::;; uo...o
'u 1) a._ .0
~ a.. ~ .!So
D
~
.;::
u
~-
._ C
=:J
U 0
~u
!
:E
:J
U
.;::
~
ii!-
~:J~
c .
.s 0... 0
o ~_
a..w-
"ii 0
11!lg
uo...o
1)-'-
a.. .!So
ii!-
~:J2co
clog
~~E N
~I~
uo....
1)-'-
a.. .!So
.~c
;g 6 N
~u
ii!-
,- :J 08 ::;::
C. N
.!t &.; cD
.f ~.!So "<t
ii 0
11!18
,So....
0-'-
a.. .!So
,~C
"O:J
=0
~u
c
l:i
8.'3
~8"
a..
'E
IS
lIS
:x:
Lt)
to
;1;
Lt)
M
M
~
:::I
e
o
"0
.~ tv
~ni Q)
~ 2 ~
crC 0
€<(S...
8l u:
I'-
..,
o
.0
-
-I--
Lt)
- -t--
.
I-- -I--
.
t-- --
co
o
..,
N
f--
Q)
::c
g
~
Z
f--
N
f-- 1---
..-
..,
N
cO
"<t
f-- t---
Lt)
- 1---
to
;1;
- --
Lt)
.....
..,
..,-
- -I--
I'- I'-
M ..,
o 0
..j:.o
"<t Lt)
. 0
. 0
co
og
N
-r----
. .
--
ON
. .
..... to
[C;;OZ
Lt) Lt)
..... .....
0) ..,
NM
ni
'C
.s ~ ~
~'i'i
cnO::O::
~..!I!..9!
'E .- '-
~=F=F
CU.....N
'm :x:
::I:
I'-
oo~
.0
o 0 Lt)
. . .
. . .
lIIO
cog
N
.
00 N
.....
..,
N
cO
"<t
.....
..,
CON
cO
"<t
Q)
::c
. ~
Z
to
00;1;
Lt)
.....
00..,
M
I'- I'-
OO~~
.0.0
o 0 Lt) Lt)
.. . .. 0
...0
GO co
oogg
NN
~
~
i
z
.
00 N N
... .....
.., ..,
OONN
cOcO
"<t "<t
Q)
::c
. ;g
j
Z
to to
00;1;;1;
Lt) Lt)
ooC;;(;;
MM
Q)
C
~
Q)
"0 1!~E
J:~'C"'S
::>COQ)e
lD~:!!J!~.g~
i1i '0 :x: :> C IV !5
l;.o :::I E_
c75~ ~~~
..-
~
000
000
.. .. ..
. . .
000
..9!
.0
:j2l
~
z
. . .
000
000
. . .
liS'
~
o 0 0
..-
..,
16
~
!
j
a:
.5
I
l
~
1iI
'"
~
~
.'"
~
i!
~
~
~
o 0 0
"E
;
:I:
..
~
~
Q)
~
15.
Q) E fit
i :J 6
~ ~i'~
::J
~
'"
~
.!-o
= ~ ~g ""'".
;g cllto""'"
'u .s &. ;. w
.f ~~.!S. ......
11
~
o
~1:
=~
u 0
.fo
iil!!-
~~S!
ClltCSco
.s &..... g
~~~
lIIII
~
...
lIIII
::II
.c
lIIII
U)
.:
-
.,. ..
-e'U - _
Blil~.
:c ~ 0-';'
E 0 Q., .!S.
e
-
.,.
.,.
o
-'
"0
C
lIIII
!
::II
.,.
g
~-
..
'O~
~~
E :I
ED::
::II
rn
')
l!!
~
-
'3
u
'c
~
.. S
~ 18 Ln
~ 0.... ......
g-'~
Q., .!S.
"ii!-
~ ~~ ~
.so 1;. ~
CLdi-- "r-
.~1:
"ClI~
=0
~o
iil!!-Ln
~;:8~
~ &.;. ~
a.. ~ J5. <r-
~!!i
.so.....
o-'~
Q., .!S.
i
.~1:
"ClI~
=0
~o
..
:0
lIIII
I-
c
'2~
1'3
~g.
Q.,
"E
a
:J:
o
""'"
""'".
......
co
......
-
Ln
(")
Ln
(")
- --
co
. . 0
(")
- --
. .......
I-- -I--
(") (")
(") Ln(")
...... N......
00 COoO
...... ......
- --
(") ..
- --
0)
0) ...... 0)
- I-- '--
Ln Ln
(") co (")
...... ...... ......
~ :~
...... ......
- --
~ ..
- -~
o
~
~ ~~-
...... ......
- i---
0)
(")
00
(")
0) 0(0)
~ O)~
(") NC"i
-
~
~ 16 m
..... lU E >-
t~:i~~
.. to 0
ow u:
COO
ln~
. ......
LOCO
(")......
o
o ~~-
LOW
......
1---
COLO
(")
ON~
. . .
. . .
~~
000......
......~
. . 0
o ...... 0)
ooll)
~ ~.
o _~
~......
. . N
C'")~
o;;;~
o 0)
...... C'")
0000
"':('1")
~-
N
~
N 00
~~~~
lli ~ -r-- ~
LO...... co co
...... ............
0)
......
OON
.0
~LO~~
00 Ln
<0
.. ... 0'"
C'")
. . .
.. .. ,.........
. . .
co ow- (W') ('l')
..- a.n C"") ('I")
to ~ ..... ~
cO'''':oooo
..... .- ...... ......
00
00......
""'"
... << ... 00
. . .
0) 0) 0) 0)
00......
......NI.t)I,t)
O)NC'")C'")
ct................
00 - 00 00
~~~~
00
......
00""'".
......
......
<< .. .. N
. . .
it)'
~
...... co 0 0
~~-~-~
...... "t"""' ..... .....
...-
j
~
e.
j
0.:
i
J
1;;
c::
~
~
::0
~
S
.<!:-
~
~
OO~
3:a;~~
~<D0000
C"i(")(")(")
OO~
......
-e
m
:x:
'"
Ol ~
c: ~
~ i ~
CD en en 0 .~
fti .2 .2 1 Q.
:::E"2~ -OlE ~
j ; ~ ~ ~ i I ~ s I ~ I.!
~~~ ;i:f;:~ _j;B;E':::E ~
~:L ~b3 ~~~ ~
c
o
~
:;,
t-
~
-
:;,
o
U)
,5 Ii
en '~
'E ..
... E
U E
:J:S
E
e
-
en
en
o
...J
~
C
...
CD
...
:;,
en
a
><Ii
W:p
'0 i
i;~
'ii
... ..
E<<
E
:;,
CI)
~
.
It)
CD
:a
...
t-
~,'
. ,!/{\)
.!-
= ~~g u:;
~..o 0
'u ~ a..:;; 0
~Q..~.!1"""
1;
:p
'r::
o
~'E:
=:;, N
U 0 ......
~o
- ..
.. ...-
:P:;'g
c. co
..o_r-
~ a...,. ......
Q..~-
I!
:e
:;,
u
"I: - .-.
cti:g
So.... en
0-'-
Q.. .!1
.!-.
~ ~g @
~ 8.:;; 0>
~~_ M
!:Og
j 0.... to
15-'-
Q.. .!1
.~'E:
~:;,
=0
~o
7i ! - ('I')
~~gr-
.. 0.... ~
'0 a.._ 0
Q.. ~.!1 N
IR~to
0-'-
Q.. .!1
.~'E:
~:;,
=0
~o
c
1: ,2
lOll
8."5
~g.
Q..
'E
B
:x:
......
N
(0
......
......
r-
o
lO
.0
-,:,
.~ m
Q) 16 Q)
ill::J >-
- ::J c: 0
~{~~~
Ow u.
......
lO
o
o
......
-
1---
N
......
- --
-
-I--
Q)
;e
to :l2l
g:
Q)
Z
-I--
to
-
o
co
......
0>
M
I--
Q)
:0
:l2l
~
z
I--
-I--
--
N
I--
-I--
M
r-
q
......
o
N
I--
-I--
C;;
-
1---
......
<0
......
......
-
1---
r-
o
lO
.0
- 1---
u:;
00
o
......
ON
.......
co
to r-
......
o
co
0......
0>
M
0......
N
M
~~
~~
to to
......
<0
...... ......
......
r-
M:E
.0
...... ......
lO lO
000
00
...... ......
...... ............
lO II) lO
qooo
o 00
...... ............
o~~
~o~~
to to to
co
<< << ......<<
......
to to to
<< << ~.
00
co co
o ~..-=-
~~
~~~~
~ N ..- or-
0>0>0>0>
M M M M
to to ......
ONN
..- 0) ..- ..-
N...... N N
en M
lO r-
000
g~
...... N
MlOJ:2M
~lOO~
0>0 . -
~a1~~
to to N
.. .. .. N
N ......
o~~
...... ......
N ..- ..- ..-
II) ..,. co <0
..- ..- ..- ..-
..- ..- ..- ..-
...... r-
oC;;:E
.0.0
co 0 r- r-
~:;:E:E
.0.0.0.0
Q)
.5
~ lJ
I.~.~ ~
::!E1t'i -~E
tn~a::~ l!-,lS
~:I:I~~ilBi!
fS=F=Fe:!:f~~
cu......N!lo!.B 5
~:x: c7Ja.! t=
~
000
000
to to ..
to to to
000
Q)
:0
~
j
z
to to to
000
000
in'
~
000
.,:
..,
If;
~
~
e.
j
0.:
i
11
..
~
1
.g
~
.~
~
;e
~
.I!:-
~
~
0.:
000
~i
~~
i
:J:
'"
:s
~
Q)
j
Q.
Q.
~ E ~
CD .r:. .3 c
;n ~ ~ .~
~
I ii I!-
~ ~C) ~ ~ ;1; M C> ;1; 0) ;1; ~ ~
~ C .g to to ~ (0 M to
(0 (0 , (0 CC!. CC!. 0) <0 <0 C) C>
"u .!I &. :;; <.0 <.0 <.0 ~ to (0 N <.0 <.0 iii
ell rfJj.!S. M M M ~ M N M M N
U.
f-- - -
rJ .l;--
~ "_ C
=~ I'- I'- 0 I'- M ~ I'- ~ I'- I'- 0 C) C>
Uo to to to ~ to N to to to
0 .fO
- ~ -
- CD
elI"'-
~~g I'- I'- I'-
I! C I C) (0 - - (0 " - - " " <0" " " "
.!I ..- ~ ~ ~
~ rfJj!!.
~
~ - - -
U
"C 'ii - .!!!
.t C) .0
E ~.g co " - ~ - " - " - ~ - " " "
~o..- ~
ell .... ..,.
.z::: a.. .!S. z
'a - - c-
o
(:) 'ii I!- ~ ~ ~ (0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ig co
0 0) ~
C N N , N M CC!. N. ~ ~. ~ N. 0 0 CO
0 ~ &...- a) a) gf M ~ 0) N N ~ ~ ~
.z::: a..Jj!!. N N ~ N ~ ..- ..-
~ lii - - -
.5 ~ Iii CD CD
.. :0 :0
'E - ~ - " " " :21 " - " :21 " " "
s ~o..- ..... i J
a .... ..,.
0 a.. .!S. z Z
::E: c-- - >--
E "~c:
e 'a~ ~ ~ I ~ M 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 <:> ~
- =0 ~ ..... ..... ~ ~ ~ ~ ..... .....
.,. .i;O
.,.
0 - c- -
.... .!.......
'a <0 (0 co ~ M 0) ~ <0 ~
c ~ig co co co to {:;j ~ ~ co .....
ell ":. ":. . 1'-. N to 1'-. ":. 1'-. 0 co to
e ~ &.:;; ~ ~ ~ ":. '!i ~ $ ,.: ~ ~ ~ <.0
0) 0) ~ ~ 0) M M
~ a..Jj.!S. N N N N
.. - e-- -
8, ii
~ ~ I.i
u
- ~ " <0 " - - - M - " " M " " "
0 ~o..- co
~ "ii .... ..,.
CD a.. .!S.
u:
E - - -
E ~c: ~ l
~ ~ ~ ;;; to co 0 ~ ~
U) ~~ ~ ~ , I'- N ~ ~ I'- ~ ~ 0 ~
=ss ~ <0 I'- co
i N N N N N N ~
10
e-- - f--
U C
Ji "ii co co co 0) co 0) en co co 0
. 8- N N 0 N $ ~ N N ~ N N C> 0 .....
.... to to to 1'-. to N to to co
a.~ a) a) a) a) N N a) a) ,.:
Jj8- ~
a..
- - - i
:I:
.!/l
CD :Ei
C .t!
(ij 11 G>
"5j :is
III III 0 rl
16 ~ ~ ] 'a.
11 ... ~ ~ '2 ~ i ~
III III a: "0 CD E e
~ 'ai -:. i .!!! .!! ~ 8 "C I E ~
~ C ~ ~ .c '6 c
III :E :E .!/l
'E .... ~ C 0 ~ CD "i !! CJ) ~
~ CT C 0 ~ . c:.. j ::E 3: ~ w :i: c
a € .c( ~ ~ ..- B !5 e
~ ~ ::>
e 'i :x: ~ ~ ~
('lJ ~ .c
:x: 0 w u:: :x: I-
....
~
~
....
..,
.....
<')
!
!
~
i
i
...
~
l
:8
~
'"
~
~
~
~
~
c
o
r!
::s
I-
.E
en.
i .~
::E: E
E ~
eO
-
en
en
o
...J
"tJ
C
..
!
::s
en
~
)(
w
'O;!
~ ii
E~
E U
::s~
U)
i
GI
:is
..
I-
;:c" ""'
,~\)
Ii f - .......
=+I::J8~
ji CWocO
.!! 8.; Q)
~ .f~.!S. ~
"ii
u
+I
'C
o
,l;o-
.- C
=::J
U 0
~o
ii!-.
+I::JSi!C"')
CWCS~
.!l 8. or' cD
.f~!!. N
!
::J
~
::J
U
'C - -
~ ~ 18 ~
.s .9:;; ~
D.. .!S.
'iii!- g
~;:8;:-
I!~~
;!18
iio~<<
o...JW
D.. .!S.
.~c
"Cl::J
=0
&60
"ii!-~
:;:l ::J 8 LO
cWocO
.s 8.:;; N
D.. ~.!S. ~
1i c;
~18
.0.... .
o...JW
D.. .!S.
.~c
"Cl::J
=0
&60
c
::i
8.'3
~g.
D..
"E
a
x
.....
m
LO
N
co
'-'!.
.....
N
o
co
.0-
C"')
.....
co
co
m
t.:
co
~
~ tn
Q)ii'j ~
iIl::J ,....
..... ~ c 0
~CTC 0
::l€<(~"'"
&&1 u:
t-
t-
ClC!.
co
co
~
.....
-
-r-
c;;
LO
- -r--
C"')
~
N
cD
N
<<
I--
-r-
<<
r--
o
o
.....
t--
co
N
ri
--
t-8
..... .....
"":.,..:
LOCO
~N
Nri
r-- - I--
m
t-
.....
I-- - r--
N
co
'-'!.
.....
-
co
;1.;
cO
.....
C'!.
C"')
N
r--
r--,
mCO
~~
'CO
0.....
ON
N .
- C"')
.....N
r---
co
o
~.
.....
r--
N
o
co
.0-
C"')
.....
1---
N
~~
t- -
. LO
co C"')
.....
- 1---
co
co
m
,..:
co
~
- 1---
t-
(!!;~
'-'!.cO
OCO
m~
LO.....
com
LO
<<
<<
co
LO
<< <<
N
..... co
Oco
..... -
.....
<< <<
;,o~
~ -
- t-
LOCO
N~
ii'j
'C
"* ~ ~
~~~
5.!l..!l
li~~
iil.....N
'n; x
X
cot-
~C"')~
ClC!.~cO
cooOO
m~~
.....
Ocoor'
m~m
<< << <<
<< << <<
m08
8 "-... ...-..
-mt-
ct8~
C"') . .
..... C"')
<< <<
~~N
NLO~
.....
~~~
~mUl
- -00
~~~
.....- cD ~
t-
<< << C"')
N
m 00
..... 0
o co
ON
..... ~
~~~
m"": .
- ~ t-
mt-oo
C"').....~
~_t-t-
(;)ot-t-
ClC!.Ul~~
~C"')oooo
~ ~ ~ C"')_
or' .....
~~c;;c;;
C"') ..... LO LO
C"')
~
.. .. N.
cD
N
LO
.. .. ,........
LO
-r- ,.- 0 0
~~~~
,.-"" ~ 1"-" ,.......
LOC"')COCO
T'~NN
Nririri
co
~
NmNN
~~~~
,.- ..- ,.- ..-
~~
o t-
~~
NO
T' .....
co co
~~
cOcO
T' T'
N N
riri
N N
.....
.....-
N
N
~
.0-
C"')
T'
~~~~
t-_~~~
R~~~
m LO co co
~~~~
~cOt-"':
~::J:~~
Q)
.5
"Q
o
l
- Q) E
~~.g~~
:>16~"*~
~:2:r;:~
~ ~ C
Q) ::l .E
en en ....
10
~
N
co
OO~
.....
.....
OO~
<< << <<
<< << <<
t-
t-
OON
N
.....
N
C"')
00 LO
co
C"')
OO~
T'
C"')
<< << <<
N
OO~
N
~.
N
...:
""
ll;
~
oi:!
~
16
a:
i
f
~
~
1;;
<::
~
'6
.l@
~
~
:::E
~
~
00
OO~
a>
1
:x:
..
~
~
Q)
:c
.1:1
2:
~ ~ i
o ~ ~ '6 .fI
1il~w:r~~
~~ ~
II>
~
I "ii !- C> C> ...... C> r- r- C> 0) C> C> N
:;:; ::JO 0) 0) ...... 0) r- to 0) r- 0) 0) C>
~ C .8 r- r- M r- to a:> r- co r- r- r- N
11 &.; ci ci 00 ci ci N ci on ci ci ...... C> ,...:
"u r-
.f.n~ 0) 0) ...... 0) co to 0) a:> 0) ~ r-
lIlI a:> a:> to <0 ~ 0) <0 co a:> M
LL.
"ii - - -
U ~1:
~ In to to to a:> C> to a:> to In C>
=::J ~ ~ co ~ ~ N ~ r- ~ ~ a:> C> co
0 Uo ...... ...... ~ N ......
~o
- - -
"ii!- M M M
~;:8 ~ ~ ~
! r- .. .. .. .. .. .. .. r- .. .. .. ..
1! &..... M M M
S .f.n!!!. ...... ...... ......
~ ::J - - -
U
::I "C ~.i
0 :t C . co C> M
u ~..9; .. .. M .. .. .. .. .. C) .. .. .. ..
" <0 M
E CL ~
0: I-- - I--
"a -CD to co to $ In to
lIlI"'- to In 0) M ...... ......
.. :;:;::Jg r- r- to r- C) 0) r- r- r- ~ ~ II)
! c- M M C) ~ ~ 0) M ~ ~ ~ to ClO
~ &..... on on ,...: II) ~ ci on 0) 0) to II) ~ N g
e r- r- r- ~ r- a:> r- r- l:;;
CL.n!!!. 0) 0) ~ 0) ...... 0) M CD 0)
8 I - - -
c ~Ri
c
~ .. ~ .. .. .. .. N .. .. .. ...... .. .. ..
E ~...; 0)
.5 0
- 0 CL ~
l! - '-- -
; ~c ...... ...... ...... ~ ~ C> ~ a:> N ...... ...... ~
"O::J ~ ~ .... ~ co ~ ~ ~ C) N
:I: =0 .... r- .... ......
E ~o
e - - -
- .!- ~ ~ ~ i ~ CD to ~ ~
.. ...... .... 8 .... .... ...... co r- .... ...... ~ 0)
:;:;::Jg ClO a:> ClO N ClO .... CD CIC!. CIC!. M
.. ~ ~ ~ ~ ..... ~ ~
N r- ~ ci ,...: ~ 8 on
0 i &.; on M on
...I r- M N r-
...... C) C) co r- M ~
"a CL.n~ cD cD 0) cD ~ N cD ..t M cD cD
c .... ...... ...... ...... ...... ......
" - - -
l! "ii
:;:; ~:i
::I C ~
.. CD
2- "0 .. ~ .. .. .. .. a:> .. .. .. r- .. .. ..
". 1!0....
0...- ..-
)( ~ CL ~
w
'0 - - -
~ ~c li li ...... li r- M li ...... ~ ~ li r-
to ..- 0)
"O::J In to M II) r- M II) M co U1. on. ..- ...... ~
E =0 cD cD ~ cD <0 ,...: cD M ~ co co N
E ~o ..- ..... r- ..... M ..- ..- M ..- ..... cD
..- ...... ...... ..- .... ......
::I I-- - I--
en "Z~
5if 0) ~ a:> ~ 0) on 0) C) M 0) ~ 0)
0) 0) r- 0)
-1ii ~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ CD ~ ~ r- a:>
.A to r- re In ....
&."3 ,...: ,...: ~ r- ..... a) r- a) ci ,...: ,...: .n
.n~ a:> a:> ClO co In a:> co
.. N N N ...... ~ N co ..... N N ......
2i CL
" - - - i
I-
:I:
II>
Q) ;s
C l!
"ii i ..
.C ~
~ <n <n 0
::J :::I ~
~ ~ 'i lS.
... :!: B E ~
m <n IX:: "0 Q) E ~
Q) Cij 5 .!! .!! c ~ .C ... ~ E :::I
~ >- ~ i c
tU ::I "2 :E :E c s ~ -8 ~ '6 .1/1
'E ~ :::I C C) I Q) <n Q) l!! Q)
0- ~ C) ~ . N :2 :i: 3: "0 ~ c
t'lI W :J: E
S :::I € ~ ..- tU ..... .8 c ~ !5 :::I
::s
e tU .iij :J: ::s r= ~ ~
:I: 0 W u:: :J: en
~
~
it)'
~
..:
..,
~
I
~
j
f
J
16
~
~
'"
J
~
~
~
.,
~
J
5.6.1.15 Future Development
The Pima County Association of Governments developed growth projections that suggest steady, if not rapid growth
throughout Pima County through the year 2030 (Table 4-2: Population for Pilla County and Incorporated Entities,
2000-2030). This growth is estimated to vary from as low as 9%, in the unincorporated county area, to an extreme of
475%, in the Town of Sahuarita. The projected growth in the remaining commun~ies of Pima County include the
Town of Marana at 310% growth; the Town of Oro Valley at 84% growth; the C~ of South Tucson at 12% growth;
and, the City of Tucson at 75% growth. The growth within Indian Nations does not occur in the same fashion as n0n-
native communities. As such, projections are not developed through the Pima County Association of Governments.
For nearly a decade the State of Arizona has been working to actively manage growth and preserve open space. In
1998, the Arizona Legislature passed the Growing Smarter Act requiring numerous actions by municipalities within
the state; a few are as follows:
· Requires larger and fast-growing cities to obtain voter approval of their general plans at least once every ten
years and include a water resources element in their plans;
· Requires mandatory rezoning conformance with General and Comprehensive Plans;
· Requires more effective public participation in the planning process;
· Requires cities and counties to exchange plans, coordinate with regional planning agencies, and
encourages comments between entities prior to adoption to encourage regional coordination;
· Requires full disclosure to property buyers of the lack of available services and facilities;
· Requires land-owner permiSSion for plan designation and rezoning of private property to open space;
· Authorizes cities and counties to designate service area limits beyond which services and
infrastructure are not provided at public expense;
· Permits counties to impose development fees consistent with municipal development fee statutes; and
· Allows cities to create infill incentive districts and plans that could include expedited process incentives.
The Pima County Comprehensive Plan includes a separate section for .Special Area Plan Policies" which applies to
sites typically composed of multiple parcels that share a unique physical feature or location over a relatively large
area. Special area policies overlay areas such as transportation gateways into metro Tucson, protected floodplains,
or large areas covering a significant portion of a sub-region carried forward from a previous (rescinded) area plan.
Special area policies act as guidelines for rezoning conditions and are numbered individually on the Comprehensive
Plan sub-regional maps.
An example is area S-7 Santa Cruz Rive Corridor (TMlAV), which provides:
1. General location: T13S, R12E, portions of Sections 1, 2, & 12; t13S, R13E, portions of Sections 6,7,8, &
17.
2. Description: High risk flood area; river-park and other recreational opportunities; restriction against new
residential uses.
3. The policies for this area are: A. Due to high-risk flooding potential, land east of Silverbell Road and west of
the Santa Cruz River, as shown on the plan map, shall be procured by Pima County for multi-purpose
functions of flood control and recreation, including extension of the Santa Cruz River Park. Existing zoning
is the anemative land use recommendation, subject to acceptance by Pima County Flood Control District of
sufficient right-of-way (dedication in fee simple) to provide floocI control improvements and river park public
access. B. Property east of the Santa Cruz River is for industrial and commercial use only. Neighborhood
Activity Center (NAC) designation is restricted to non-residential uses.
The above format is provided for each of the 22 areas identified as Special Area Plan Policies throughout Pima
County.
Pima county Multi-Jurisdictional HaziJ'd Mitiga/ion Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
137
.:::;:.<~;
"._'Ok' ,
5: .)
5.6.1.16 Summary of Special Needs Populations
Table 5-51 provides a summary of the exposure the various hazards profiled in this document create to the special
populations of Pima County. Specifically, the total elde~y population in the County is defined as those older than the
age of 65. Households earning less than $20,000 also have been included in this review. These data indicate that
several non location-specific hazards, including Drought, Earthquakes, Hail, Severe Wind, and Thunderstorms, all
include a potentially vulnerable elde~y population of 191,813 and identify 82,467 low-income households susceptible
to these hazards. Among the remaining hazards, the largest impacts on elderly and low-income populations are
those residing within areas historically susceptible to subsidence and water decline.
Tlble 5-51: Summl of S ill Needs Po ulatlon ure to All HlZlrdsln Pima Coun
Oro PlICua South Tohono Unlncorpondtcl Pima
Marana Valley Sahuarlta Tucson Q'odham Tucson Pima County County
Total
Drou ht
22,077 119,813
18,563 82,467
22,077 119,813
18,563 82,467
2,502 6,254
1,374 5,889
Hall
22,077 119,813
18,563 82,467
908 5,140
926 6,068
4,155 23,065
3,310 27,153
22,077 119,813
18,563 82,467
16,196 47,594
6,854 49,794
30,403 88,161
10,572 70,137
22,077 119,813
18,563 82,467
22,077 119,813
18,563 82,467
44 44
15 15
0
0
5,183
2,443
Pima County Multi-Juriscfctional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
138
5.6.2 Development Trend Analysis
The metropolitan region of Pima County is geographically situated in the southern portion of the State of Arizona,
encompassing 9,189 square miles. The County is home to five incorporated cities and towns and two Native
American Nations. According to the Census 2000, Pima County contained 16 percent of the state's population,
including one jurisdiction (Tucson) greater 500,000 persons.
5.6.2.1 Populltion Projections
During the past decade, the urban areas within Pima County have been some of the fastest growing in the state.
According to the Census 2000, Pima County had a resident population of 843,746 persons. This was a population
growth of 26.5 percent, or 176,866 people, during the decade from 1990 to 2000. According to the Pima Association
of Governments (PAG), the population within Pjma County is anticipated to total 1,506,673 people by 2030. Over this
thirty-year period, the communities of Marana, Oro Valley, and Sahuarita are expected to experience growth rates of
137 percent, 611 percent, and 1,623 percent respectively, dramatically expanding their resident population. Table 4-2
presented population information for the county and each jurisdiction through 2030.
5.6.2.2 Employment Growth
By 2030, Pima County is estimated to almost double its 2000 employment total. This means that employment within
the region will grow by approximately 125,700 jobs each decade. The largest employment gains between 2000 and
2030 are expected in the rapidly growing communities on the periphery of the urbanized region including Sahuarita
(547 percent), Oro Valley (317 percent), and Marana (197 percent). In addition, these growth rates are projected to
decrease the collective share of the traditionally dominant Tucson downtown area. Table 5-3 presents employment
information within Pima County for 2000 and 2030.
5.6.2.3 Growth Arels
As reflected in the information provided on population and employment growth, the urbanized areas of Pima County
are growing at a rate that presents considerable challenges to hazard mitigation planning in two respects. First, this
region is adding thousands of new residents and structures every year. While these new residents are locating
throughout the region, they may add to the at risk populations through the susceptibility of the area to various
weather-related phenomena and other prevailing hazards. Second, much of this new development is planned for and
growing into specific areas that may present new hazard-based challenges to the population.
Rapid residential and employment growth is expected to occur in communities located along Interstates 10 and 19, in
particular the Towns of Marana and Sahuarita. The most prevalent vulnerability caused by this growth appears to be
the strain massive development will place on the physical and programmatic infrastructure that currently exists within
the respective jurisdictions in Pima County. Because of this pervasive and rapid population growth both natural
hazards, including wildfires and drought, as well as other hazards that include manmade resources, such as
hazardous materials releases, are expected to place an increasing number of residents and structures in danger of
being affected by these hazards. It should also be noted that densification of residential and commercial development
may also increase in more areas, presenting new types of structural fire hazards.
5.6.2.4 Analysis of Development Trends
Development is expected to continue to occur throughout the urban core with particularly strong development in the
peripheral urban regions of the County. Hazards mapped in these areas include floods, subsidence, and wildfire.
These development trends, and the intensified sprawled residential patterns prevalent within the communities along
Interstates 10 and 19, will add additional pressures to the existing identified hazards. It should be noted that rapid
growth throughout the region also intensifies the threat of human-caused hazards, as well as accidental events that
imperil hazardous materials facilities throughout Pima County.
Overall, the population of Pima County is expected to increase to over 1.6 million people by 2030. Forecasted land
uses must accommodate this growth and seek to mitigate the impact of the increase development pressures on the
sensitive land features of the County. Projected patterns of land use continue to describe residential land uses
predominating at the edges of the urban core. However, increases in population in these areas are also
demonstrating increases in employment centers as well.
Pima County Mul/i-Juriscfctional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Oral/: October 31, 2(05)
URS
139
:'~';'f,
~,."
5....
In the rapidly growing urban environment of Pima County, it is imperative that local jurisdictions maintain an accurate
database of the expanding number of commercial and residential structures that exist within these communities.
Accompanying this increase in the number of structures will be a commensurate increase in the quantity of critical
facilities that serve these communities. To adequately account for this rapidly expanding number of structures and
facilities, any subsequent update to this document must identify effICient methods to identify and incorporate updated
data. At the local level, the most accurate data for structures may be accessed from the jurisdiction. Most
communities, for instance, operate a Community Development or Building Safety department that catalogues annual
building permit statistics that may be used to provide a current structure count for both residential and commercial
buildings. These new figures (and accompanying spatial data) may be added to the existing dataset to create an
updated tool for these structures. Critical facility figures, by contrast, may prove to be more difficult to accurately
update. This is because the vulnerability assessment application of these sites created an assumption for the
frequency of these facilities, rather than using local-level data. Therefore, to update these figures at any point in the
future would require that either 1) a community gathers new and complete data for each category of critical facility, or
2) an assumption method similar to that employed for this document is used to apply new population figures. Given
the rapid growth in most Pima County jurisdictions, this calculation would most likely yield a higher value than
presented in this document.
5.6.2.5 Development of Tribal Lands: Pucua Yaqui Tribe
Development on tribal lands does not occur in tandem with the growth occurring in surrounding jurisdictions. Pima
County, as a whole, is projected to experience continual, rapid growth in all areas of development to include .
residential, commercial, and infrastructure. Conversely, the Pascua Yaqui Tribe will maintain levels of development
as it best meets the needs of the community members. Currently there is only one commercial industry within the
Community. Development in recent years has been held to necessary infrastructure, as 100% of the reservation is
located within the 100-year floodplain. The Land Office Department has supported the Tribal Government to apply
directly to Congress for federal funds to assist the Tribe to continue to develop a floodplain management program
that will complement both their Master Drainage Plan and their Master Land Use Plan. As federal support is
implemented, additional residential development will be realized. With the current status of their floodplain
management program, residential subdivisions are mostly cost-prohibitive (approximately 50% higher than the
neighboring non-native jurisdictions) as current tribal building codes require a higher degree of mitigation such as
raising the foundation, building burms, retention basins, and detention basins around housing developments. When
a fully develop, comprehensive floodplain management program is in place, additional residential and infrastructure
development will occur.
Pima County Multi-JlXiscfictional Hazard Mitigalion Plan (Draft: October 31,2(05)
URS
140
J
6. MITIGATION STRATEGY
The Pima County Hazard Mitigation Steering Group chose to create a multi-jurisdictional plan rather than individual
plans for each of the communities located within Pima County. This decision reflected the group's recognition of the
wide disparity in community size and resources, and the conclusion that a multi-jurisdictional planning process would
allow a uniform level of support to each of the participating communities. Furthermore, the muhHurisdictional
approach allows for a centralized planning function to coordinate and implement m"igation projects that benefrt
multiple communities. The multi-jurisdictional plan also allows the County to perform coordinated reviews and
updates of each of the individual community plans in a consistent and timely manner.
The Capability Assessment is required by the Disuter Mitigation Act of 2000 for stltHevel plans only, while
not required for Joeal and county plans., The Capability Assessment WlS completed for all partidpating
jurisdictions as it is required for the Pascua Yaqui Tribe, which must mitt all stlt.level pI.nning
requirements. The Capability Assessment is an important component 0' the Mitigation Strategy providing I
review of each jurisdiction's resources In order to identify, evaluate, and enh.nce the capacity of loc.1
resources to mitigate the effects of,huards. The first part of the Capability Assessment Is a review of legal
and regulatory clpabillty, Including ordinances, codes, and plans to address haurd mitigation activities.
This Assessment also describes the administrative and technical ability of staff and personnel resources.
The second part of the Assessment, which crosses an technical and regulatory boundaries, Is the fiscal
capability necessary to provide the financial resources to Implement the mitigation strategy. The final part of
the Capability Assessment Is a summary review of the activities of each administrative division that
supports hazard mitigation activities and details any previous mitigation activities undertaken by these
entitles. Considering the value of the Information captured through the completion of I Capability
Assessment, III participating jurisdictions were requested, whether required or not, to complete the
assessment. A summary of elch jurisdiction's caplbillty Issessment Is presented in Tlble 6-1 through Table
6.24.
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
141
:;;t.l
:5,)
Marana
Regulatory Tools (ordinances, codes, plans)
Local
Authority
(YIN)
Y
Y
Y
Does State
Prohibit?
(YIN)
N
N
N
Comments
Y N N
Y N Y
Y N N
Y N N
y. N N
N N N
an Y N Y Under revision
N N Y
ooIinance N N N
N N Y
Table &-2: 11_ Adminlltnltive and Technical
YIN and Position
Y Oept of Public Works, Subdivision Engineering Dept.
Y
r and Staff
Table 6.3: Marana Fiscal C
Financial Resources
Accessible or Eligible to Use
eslNoIDon't Know
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Pima County MuIi-Juisactional Hazard Mitigation Plan ({)faft: October 31, 200SJ
URS
142
'~:~i
,,,..V;
~.:Z J
6.1.1 Oro Valley
Table 6-4: Oro Vall L
Local
Regulatory Tools (ordinances, codes, plans) Authority
(YIN)
A. Y
B. Y
C. Y
D.
E.
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
Financial Resources
C r
Higher Level
Jurisdiction
Authority
IN
Comments
Y N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
and Position
Town of Orc Valley Planning and Zoning Administrator
Y
Town of Oro VaJley Building Safety
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
N
N
N
mentslhomes
Accessible or Eligible to Use
eslNoIDon't Know
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
143
.:':,:-,,"
r'~ ,
-5' .)
6.1.2 Pascua Yaqui
Table 6-7: Pascua Ya ui
local
Authority
(YIN)
Y
Y
Y
Regulatory Tools (ordinances, codes, plans)
Does State
Prohibit?
(YIN)
N
N
N
Comments
Y N N
E. Y N N
Y N If licable Tribal Land D l
Y N N Tribal Land De t.
Y N N
Y N N
Y N Plan needed
Y N Plan needed
Y N Plan needed
N N N
and Position
A,
A,
B.
Y
Inspector's Dept.
Y
Y
N
Y
N
N
Y
Tribal Land l
Tribal Land De l
Tribal Land De l
Tribal Grants/Contracts
Accessible or Eligible to Use
es/NoIDon't Know
Yes
Yes
Don't Know
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
Pima County Multi.Jl6isdictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 20(5)
URS
144
J
Table &-10: SIIIuda L
LocII
Regulltory Tools (ordinances, codes, pIInl) Authority
(YIN)
A. Y
B. Y
C. Y
D.
Table &-11: Slhuarill Admlnistnltive and T echnic:ll Ca
YIN Ind Position
Y Public Works Director, Planning Director
Y Public Works Director, Building Ol6cial
Y Public WOf1(s Director
Y PubrlC Works Director
Y Contract finn, Public Works Director
Y Public Works Director
Y Planni and Public Works
Y Public Works Director
6.1.3 Sahuarita
E.
A.
C.
D.
E.
F.
andR
Does State
Prohibit?
(YIN)
C
Higher Level
Jurisdiction
Authority
Comments
Y
Use CoIIIty floodplain
0I'dir1aIas
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
Table 6-12: Sahuarill Fiscal Ca bir
Financial Resources
lsA10mes
Accessible or Eligible to Use
es/NoIDon't Know
Yes
Yes
No
Yes, Sewer
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Pima county Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigalion Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
145
",.
6.1.4 South Tucson
Table 6.13: South Tucson L
Local
Authority
(YIN)
Y
Y
Y
Regulatory Tools (ordinances, codes, plans)
E.
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N"
Does State
Prohibit?
(YIN)
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Comments
2000 IBC
South Tucson C' Code
South Tucson C' Code
N
Being developed
N
N
N
"Growing Smarter"
atOO
Table 6-14: South Tucson Admlnlltrltlve and Technical Ca
A.
Financial Resources
YIN
Y
De tJA n and Position
Planning Department, Engineer consultants and University
of Arizona interns see . n' ree
Y Appointed by Mayor and Council (BKS Engineers)
Not Applicable
rtation Flood Control
Accessible or Eligible to Use
eslHo/Don't Know
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes el' ible to use
No
No
Pima County Multi.JlJIiscRctional Hazlld Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
146
.)
6.1.5 Tohono O'odham Nation
Table 6.16: Tohono O'odham NIIion L and R "I
Local Does Sbte HIgher Lwei
Regulatory Tools (ordinances, codes, plans) Authority Prohibit? Jurltdlctlon
(YIN) (YIN) Authority
A V N
B. V N
C. V N
D.
V N N
E. V N N
F. V N N
G. V N N
H. V N N
I. V N N
J. V N N
K. Y N N
L. V N N
M. Real estate disclosure requirements V N N
Tabl. 6-17: Tohono O'odham Administrative and Technical Ca
Staff/Personnel Resources YIN
A. Planne~s) or enginee~s) with knowledge of land
develo ment and land man ement actices
B. Engineer(s) or professional(s) trained in construction
ractices related to buildin s and/or infrastructure
C. Planners or Engineer(s) with an understanding of
natural and/or human-caused hazards
D. Flood lain mana er
E.
F.
Comments
val
May require some coordination
with Federal agencies
V
and Position
Planning and Ecoriomic Development
V
Planning and Economic Development
V
N
V
Planning and Economic Development
V
G. Personnel skilled in GIS and/or HAZUS
H.
I.
J.
Table 6-18: Tohono O'odham Fiscal Ca bir
Financial Resources
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft October 31, 2005)
URS
147
J
6.1.6 Tucson
Local
Regulatory Tools (ordinances, codes, plans) Authority
(Y/N)
A. Y
B. Y
C. Y
D.
Y N N
E.
Y N N
Y N N
Y N N
Y N N
Y N N
Y N N
Y N N
N N N
Y N N
Comments
A.
Table 6-20: Tucson Administrative and Technical Ca
YIN
Y
B.
Y
Development Services, Transportation
c.
D.
E.
F.
Table 6-21: Tucson Fiscal Ca
Financial Resources
Accessible or Eligible to Use
eslNoIDon't Know
Ves
Yes
Ves
Yes
Ves
Yes
Ves
Yes
Yes
A.
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft October 31, 2005)
URS
148
J
6.1.7 Unincorporated Pima County
Table 6-22: L IlK! R u C
Local Does Stlte
Regulatory Tool. (ordinances, code., plans) Authority Prohibit?
(Y/N) (YIN)
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N N
E. Y N N
Y N N
Y N N
Y N N
Y N N
Y N N
Y N N
Y N N
Y N N
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G. Personnel skilled in GIS andlor HAZUS
H.
I.
J.
Administrative and Technical C
VIN .amentl and Position
Y Development Services, DOT, Flood Control District,
Wastewater, Solid W8$te, Natural Resources and Parks
Y Development Services! DOT I Wastewater
Development Services I DOTI Flood ControllWastewater,
Natural Resources .-1d Parks, Health De rtment
Flood Control DistrictIDev Services
DOTI "n! Natural Resources and Parks
De" Services, DOT, Facilities Management Health, Comm
Services, Sheriff, Natural ResIParks, Risk mt
Development Services, DOT, Flood Control, Wastewater,
Facilities Man l Sheriff, Natural ResourceslParks
Heath De t, Wastewater, Medical Examiner, Sheriff
OEM, Sheriff
OEM, Dev Services, Health De
Table 6-24: Pima Coo
Financial Resources
Higher Level
Jurisclic:tion
Authority
Comments
Services
nt Services
t Services
Development Services
Developrnent Services
Deve Services
Services
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
nt cun Resources
Accessible or Eligible to Use
es/NoIDon't Know
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
A.
Pima County Multi-JurisrictionaJ HazfI'd Mitigation Plan (Drat/: Ck10ber 31, 2(05)
URS
149
.!'
The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) requires the development of hazard mitigation goals in order to
direct the selection of hazard mitigation and loss reduction actions, as shown in Table 6-25. Each entity within Pima
County developed hazard mitigation goals, objectives, and actions based on experience with disasters and hazard
events prior to the requirements of DMA 2000 as well as the risk assessment undertaken as a part of this plan.
6.2.1 Definitions
For the purpose of this Plan, the following definitions of Goals, Objectives, Actions and Implementation Strategy have
been adopted from Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 guiding documents, and have been accepted as functional by all
levels of govemment involved in hazard mitigation.
Goals: General guidelines that explain what you want to achieve. Goals are usually broad statements with long-term
perspective.
Example: G1: Protect subdivisions from flooding.
Objectives: Defined strategies or implementation steps intended to attain the identified goals. Unlike goals,
objectives are specific, measurable, and have a defined time horizon.
Examples: G1/0A: Reduce the number of structures in the 100-year floodplain.
G1/OB: Minimize future damage due to flooding of current structures in the 100-yearfloodplain.
Actions: Specific actions that help achieve goals and objectives. Multiple mitigation actions may be defined to feed
into an evaluation of the attemative actions.
Examples: G1/0AlA1: Adopt zoning ordinances prohibiting new residential development in the 100-year
floodplain.
GlIOAlA2: Relocate 5 residential structures on XYZ Street.
G11OB1A 1: Elevate 2 commercial structures on ABC Street.
G1/OB/A2: Retrofit 10 residential structures on XYZ Street with storm shutters, elevated utilities,
and water back flow valves.
Implementation Strategy: A comprehensive strategy that describes how the mitigation actions will be implemented.
Questions: How will the mitigation actions be prioritized?
Who will implement them?
When will they be implemented?
How will they be implemented?
6.2.2 GOIIs, Objectives and Potential Actions
In accordance with the Dissster MitigBtion Ad of 2000, each jurisdiction developed goals to reduce vulnerability to
natural and human-caused hazards, as shown in Table 6-25.
Section
Mitigation
Strategy
TItle
local Hazard
Mitigation Goals
Mitigation Idenlificalion ~201.6(c)(3) (ii):
Strategy and Anaysis of
Mitigation
Measures
Source: FEMA, July 11, 2002.
Listed below are each jurisdiction's specific hazard mitigation goals and objectives as well as related potential
actions. For each goal, one or more objectives have been identified that provide strategies to attain the goal. When
appropriate, each jurisdiction identified a range of specific actions to achieve the objective and goal.
Pima County Mulli-Jurisdictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (01all: October 31, 2005)
URS
150
.)
6.2.3 . Marana
Goal 1. Promote disaster. resistant development.
Objective 1.A: Encourage and facilitate the development and updating of the general plans and zoning
ordinance to limit development in hazard areas.
Action 1.A.1: Review the existing Town of Marana general plan, land development code and
zoning ordinance to determine how these documents help limit development in
hazard areas. Modify with additional guidelines, regulations, and land use
techniques as necessary within the limits of state statutes, while also respecting
private property rights.
Action 1.A.2: Establish periodic monitoring and review of the Town of Marana general plan and
relevant ordinances to determine effectiveness at preventing and mitigating hazards.
Based on the results, amend as necessary.
Objective 1.B: Encourage and facilitate the continued enforcement of building fire codes that protect
existing assets and reduce or eliminate the effects of hazards In newly developed areas.
Action 1.B.1: Review existing building codes to determine if they adequately protect new
development in hazard areas. Where feasible and necessary. modify codes to help
mitigate hazards occurring within the limits of state statutes, while also respecting
private property rights.
Objective 1.C: Promote consistent enforcement of general plans, zoning ordinances, and building codes.
Action 1.C.1: Distribute all development master plans, zone change, and subdivision applications
as applicable Marana Development Services for review to ensure consistency with
the adopted hazard mitigation plan.
Action 1. C.2: Marana Emergency ManagementIHomeIand Security will provide training to the
applicable Marana departments on the adopted hazard mitigation plan and its
requirements.
Action 1.C.3: Continued coordination between Town of Marana departments to identify and
mitigate hazards associated with new development.
Objective 1.0: Address identified data limitations regarding the lack of information about new development
and build-out potential in hazard areas.
Action 1. D.1 : Continued coordination between the Town of Marana departments, Pima County,
other municipalities, Pima Association of Governments, and other agencies in the
development, maintenance, and sharing of accurate geographic information system
information for those hazard areas identified in the adopted hazard mitigation plan.
Objective 1.E: Facilitate construction of public infrastructure to reduce loss in hazard areas.
Action 1.E.1: Follow guidelines established in the appropriate design manual(s).
Action 1.E.2: Conduct periodic monitoring and review of design manual(s) to ensure compliance
with federal regulations.
Action 1.E. 3: Provide public access at Internet site to design standard to facilitate Compliance
with Pima County. state and federal standards by private development companies.
Action 1.E.4: Applicable public entity facilities must comply with Town ordinances.
Pima County Mulli.Jurisdic/ion81 HazW'd Mitigation Plan (Orall: October 31. 2005)
URS
151
~
Goal 2. Promote public understanding, support and interest in hazard mitigation.
Objective 2.A: Promote partnerships between the state, counties, local, tribal governments, public sector,
private industry, civic and non-profit groups to identify, prioritize, and implement mitigation
actions.
Action 2.A.1: Pro-actively promote availability of Pre Disaster Mitigation and Hazard Mitigation
Grant Program funds.
Action 2.A.2: Educate jurisdictions how to explore variety of funding sources.
Action 2.A.3: Promote outreach of the Town Mitigation Plan throughout the Town of Marana.
Action 2.A.4: Continue and maintain relationship with the Arizona Emergency Services
Association and the Arizona Contingency Planners.
Objective 2.8: Educate the public to increase awareness of hazards and opportunities for mitigation
actions.
Action 2.8.1: Create or supplement the Town of Marana public information sheets to include
suggested mitigation actions.
Action 2.8.2: Add mitigation actions to the Town of Marana website.
Action 2.8.3: Announce approval of plan with suggested mitigation actions through a variety of
media outlets.
Goal 3. Build and support local capacity to warn the public about emergency situations and assist in their
response.
Objective 3.A: Improve upon existing capabilities to warn the public of emergency situations.
Action 3.A.1: Maintain a system to test the ability of Town of Marana personnel to activate the
Emergency Alert System (EAS).
Action 3.A.2: Provide technical support for the procurement of a reverse 9-1-1 system thru Pima
County .
Objective 3.8: Develop a program to enhance the safety of the residents of the Town of Marana during an
emergency.
Action 3.8.1: Develop a Mass Evacuation strategy for the Town of Marana.
Action 3.8.2: Develop a Shelter-In-Place educational program.
Goal4. Improve hazard mitigation coordination and communication within the Town of Marana.
Objective 4.A: Address identified data limitations regarding the lack of information about Town
infrastructure.
Action 4.A.1: Ensure that the Town's Office of Emergency Management and Homeland Security
has access to GIS layer info throughout the government.
Action 4.A.2: The Town of Marana will continue to request from Pima County Office of Emergency
Management and Homeland Security (PCOEM&HS) an updated Emergency
Response CD-ROM program which is provided by Pima County Regional Flood
Control District (PCRFCD) on an annual basis.
Goal 5. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to floods.
Objective 5.A: Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses on
new and existing buildings and infrastructure due to floods.
Pima Counly UuIIi-Jtxj$(jctional Hazwd Uiliga/ion Plan (Dral/: October 31. 20(5)
URS
152
,)
Action 5.A.1: Town of Marana Public Works will continue to work with PCRFCD will conduct a
study to address flood prevention needs within the Town limns.
Action 5.A.2: Each year for the next five years, the Town of Marana will inspect five PCRFCD-
owned flood control facilnies to insure they are in safe working order, properly
maintained and meet regulatory requirements. Corrective action will be considered
for problems identified during the inspection
Action 5.A.3: The Town of Marana Public Works will continue to notify developers of floodplain
regulations early on in the development process.
Action 5.A.4: Town of Marana Public Works will continue to plan for, design, and construct
appropriate flood control structures for public safety and damage reduction.
Action 5.A.5: Encourage bridge or culvert construction where roads are in locations susceptible to
flooding.
Action 5.A.6: Town of Marana Public Works will continue to cooperate wnh ADOT on inspecting
and monitoring all bridges and culverts under their control on a schedule in
compliance with federal regulations. This information will be supplied to the Town.
Action 5. A.7: Town of Marana Public Works will continue to enforce floodplain regulation and
erosion hazard building setbacks.
Objective 5.B: Coordinate with and support existing efforts to mnigate floods with other federal, State and
local agencies (e.g., FEMA, US Army Corps of Engineers, US Bureau of Reclamation,
Arizona Department of Water Resources).
Action 5.B.1: The Town of Marana will continue to participate in the National Flood Insurance
program.
Action 5.B.2: The Town will continue to work with PCRFCD, which operates ALERT (Automated
Local Evaluation in Real Time) flood hazard information system, as a means of
providing real-time weather information.
Objective 5.C: Minimize repetitive losses caused by flooding.
Action 5.C.1: The Town will continue to implement its Flood Prone Land Acquisition Program to
acquire properties that are located in flood hazard areas.
Action 5.C.2: To ensure compliance with federal and local floodplain management regulations,
The Town will continue to require that property owners provide federal elevation
certification for new construction in floodplains. .
Action 5.C.3: The Town will continue to coordinate roadway construction projects as necessary
with US Army Corps of Engineers and use measures to reduce risk of flooding.
Objective 5.0: Ensure participation in and compliance with National Flood Insurance Program
requirements.
Objective 5.E: Address identified data limitations regarding the lack of information about relative
vulnerability of assets from floods.
Action 5.E.1: The Town in cooperation with the PCRFCD will continue to incorporate Flood
Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) into the Geographical Information System (GIS) to
expand access to flood delineationlboundary maps to the public.
Action 5.E.2: The Town will support the PCRFCD development of an Intemet based combined
map repository to allow easier access for public and private entities.
Action 5.E.3: The Town of Marana will maintain a copy of the PCRFCD most applicable studies
and reports on floods within the Town limits.
Pima county Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
153
.I
Objective 5.F: Educate the public to increase awareness of hazards and opportunities for mitigation actions
through outreach projects.
Action 5.F.1: The Town will continue to support PCRFCD School Safety Presentation Program.
Action 5.F.2: The Town will continue to support PCRFCD outreach utilizing publicforums such as
Founder's Day, County Fair and Earth Day, the Town's and District's internet page,
and pamphlets available on basic flood preparedness.
Action 5.F.3: To increase awareness of potential residential flooding, the Town will continue the
distribution of flood hazard information directly to residents of known flood hazard
areas.
Goal 6. Reduce the potential for loss of life and property damage to businesses, homes and Town-owned
facilities due to wildfires.
Objective 6.A: Continue to work cooperatively with Northwest Fire District, Arizona State land Department
Fire management Division, and federal agencies to provide preparedness training such as
the Fire Wise program. Establish agreements for response by these agencies for
cooperative response to wildfires within the Marana Town Limits and areas of responsibility.
Action 6.A.1: Establish intergovernmental agreement between the Town and the Fire
Management Division of the State Land Department for assistance in the provision
of emergency services within each other's jurisdictions.
Action 6.A.2: Look at providing training and protective equipment to prepare the Town's heavy
equipment operators to operate in a support role in the vicinity of a wildfire.
Action 6.A.3: Continue the process of establishing intergovernmental agreements for wildfire
prevention/control with state and federal land management agencies that are
adjoining or within their jurisdictions.
Action 6.A.4: Develop programs to eradicate non-native buffel grass.
Objective 6.8: Protect new and existing Town assets from the effects of INildfires.
Action 6.8.1: Establish a standard defensible space of 30 feet around Town-owned structures that
are vulnerable to the effects of wildfire.
Objective 6.C: Continue to promulgate building codes for the Town that will minimize damage to homes
and other structures from wildfires (International Wildland Interface Code as locally
amended).
Action 6.C.1: Ensure that subdivision regulations for new subdivisions ensure adequate access for
fire trucks and defensible space.
Action 6.C.2: Ensure that building codes for all new homes prohibit the use of untreated wood
shake roofs and mandate the use a spark arresting system on the chimneys of
homes with wood burning fireplaces.
Objective 6.0: Educate the public about wildfire dangers and the steps that can be taken to prevent or
minimize their effects.
Action 6.0.1: Support the Office of Emergency Management's web page' to provide sufficient
guidance on wildfire mitigation to the public.
Goal 7. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to drouaht.
Objective 7.A: Support the State's comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and
losses due to drought.
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Drat!: Odobef 31, 20(5)
URS
154
.J.
Action 7 .A.1: Promote, where appropriate, the use of xeriscaping or desert landscaping at Town
facilities and projects.
Action 7.A.2: Lend technical support to those agencies tasked with conservation actions.
Objective 7.8: Protect new and existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of
drought.
Action 7.8.1: Promote the use of effluent and reclaimed (gray) water harvesting for appropriate
applications.
Objective 7.C: Support State and local water conservation messages and programs through a variety of
media.
Action 7.C.1: Participate in water summits and resource workshops identifying various water
conserving mechanisms (retrofrtting, landscaping, repairing, etc.).
Goal 8. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to infestations and diseases.
Objective 8.A: Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses due to
infestations and diseases.
Action 8.A.1: Conduct public outreach, information and immunizations.
Action 8.A.2: In coordination with federal, state and county agencies Enforce Health Code
requirements through on-going inspections of permitted establishments and
environmental surveillance. (i.e. routine inspection of public water systems and
treatment plants, air quality monitoring, food service inspections, vector control
enforcement and abatement activities).
Action 8.A.3: Conduct vulnerability assessments and develop incident response plans in
coordination with ADEQ at high-risk public water system facilities.
Action 8.A.4: Facilitate abatement, prevention and investigation of public health nuisance
conditions, illegal dumping activities and the storage and handling of potentially
infectious material and locations.
Objective 8.8: Protect new and existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of
infestations and diseases.
Action 8.8.1: Conduct and enhance environmental and epidemiological surveillance activities in
those areas identified as being of high public health importance and related to
environmental factors such as; air quality, drinking water/public water systems and
water/wastewater treatment plant operations, food safety and protection and vector
control activities in coordination with Pima County and State agencies. Surveillance
activities must include the identification of vulnerabilities and environmental factors
that may contribute to the transmission of the communicable diseases associated
with the operation and presence of these facilities in the Town of Marana, as well as
the implementation of preventative action which may be applied to reduce or
eliminate the potential for transmission of communicable illnesses. Develop and
improve the system of coordination and communication of these findings, trends and
observations with other federal, state and local agencies that have similar or related
interest.
Action 8.8.2: Participate in the development and implementation of multi-agency exercises, drills,
and training related to outbreaks of communicable illnesses and vector control.
Pima County Mul/i-Juriscictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
155
.,..
Goal 9. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to geological hazards.
Objective 9A: Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses due to
geological hazards.
Action 9.A.1: Work with Arizona Geological Survey and US Geological Survey on projects that
mitigate geo-hazards.
Action 9.A.2: Continue to promulgate building codes addressing structural integrity in light of
perceived seismic risk.
Objective 9.8: Protect new and existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of
geological hazards.
Action 9.8.1: Investigate the feasibility of utilizing recharge to mhigate subsidence.
Action 9.8.2: Incorporate use of geotechnical investigation into roadway and bridge design
process.
Goal 10. Prevent or minimize damage and losses due to hazardous materials (HAZMAT) incidents.
Objective 10.A: Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses due
to hazardous materials.
Action 10.A.1: Continue to ensure the involvement of industry, Northwest Fire, law enforcement
and other key players in the Town of Marana Local Emergency Planning Committee
(LEPC).
Action 10.A.2: Under the auspices of the Town's LEPC, provide guidance to HAlMAT incident first
responders in the Town of Marana Emergency Operations Plan.
Action 10.A.3: Continue using PCDOT Spill Response Plan to coordinate safe removal of
hazardous material from roadways and right-of-ways.
Objective 10.8: Protect new and existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of
hazardous materials.
Action 10.8.1: Develop and maintain a database of schools, hospitals, and other key facilities
within a one-mile radius of HAZMA T facilities and make that database available to
responders to incidents at those facilities.
Action 10.8.2: Assist operators of facitities that store hazardous materials in developing emergency
response plans for those facilities.
Action 10.8.3: Continue support of Pima County Department of Environmental Quality's, PDEQ's,
inspection program for facilities that generate hazardous waste, or produce air
emissions.
Objective 10.C: Reduce the number of, and volume of, hazardous materials.
Action 10.C.1: Through the LEPC, encourage the use of less hazardous alternatives to the
chemicals currently used when possible.
Objective 10.0: Reduce the risk of injury or loss of life to first responders to hazardous materials incidents.
Action 10.0.1: Provide emergency response guidebooks to all fire and law enforcement vehicles.
Action 10.0.2: Sponsor, under LEPC guidance, an annual exercise simulating response to a large-
scale HAZMA T incident.
Objective 10.E: Increase government and public knowledge of safe handling of extremely hazardous
substance (EHS).
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional HazEld Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 20(5)
URS
156
j
Action 10.E.1: Offer, basic HAZMA T awareness courses to Town employees.
Action 10.E.2: Provide information to the public regarding safe handHng of household chemicals on
the Town's website with a link to Pima County Office of Emergency Management&
Homeland Security's.
Goal 11. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses to existing assets due to other human-caused
hazards.
Objective 11.A: Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses due to
other human-caused hazards.
Action 11.A.1: Provide and support, through the Pima County Office of Emergency Management &
Homeland Security, basic weapons of mass destruction (WMD) courses to Town
employees and the public.
Action 11.A.2: Promote child drowning prevention programs throughout the Town.
Action 11.A.3: Provide program direction in support and development of Community Emergency
Response Teams (CERT).
Action 11.A.4: Promote and expand existing Town programs aimed at school violence and family
preparedness.
Objective 11.8: Protect new and existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of other
human-caused hazards.
Action 11.8.1: Reassess vulnerability of potential terrorist targets and share information among law
enforcement agencies.
Action 11.8.2: Provide support to Pima County Hospital's Preparedness efforts to standardize
capabilities to decontaminate patients in the event of a chemical, biological or
radiological terrorist event.
Objective 11.C: Coordinate with and support efforts to mitigate other human-caused hazards.
Action 11.C.1: Allocate and administer Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding to
appropriate departments throughout the Town.
Pima County Mul/i-JuriscRctional HaZEI'd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
157
..!
6.2.4 Oro Valley
Goal 1. Promote disaster-resistant future development
Objective 1.A: Encourage and facilitate the development and updating of the general plans and zoning
ordinance to limit development in hazard areas.
Action 1.A.1: Review the existing Town of Oro Valley general plan and zoning code to determine
how these documents help limit development in hazard areas. Modify with additional
guidelines, regulations, and land use techniques as necessary within the limits of
state statutes, while also respecting private property rights.
Action 1.A.2: Establish periodic monitoring and review of Oro Valley's general plan and zoning
code to determine effectiveness at preventing and mitigating hazards. Based on the
results, amend as necessary.
Objective 1.B: Encourage and facUitate the adoption of the current editions of the Building and Fire Codes
that protect existing assets and new development in hazard areas.
Action 1.B.1: Review existing building codes to determine if they adequately protect new
development in hazard areas. Where feasible and necessary, modify codes to help
mitigate'hazards imposed on such development within the limits of state statutes,
while also respecting private.property rights.
Objective 1.C: Promote consistent enforcement of general plans, zoning code, and Building and Fire
Codes.
Action 1.C.1: Distribute all development master plan, zone change, and subdivision applications
as applicable to the Oro Valley Local Emergency Planning Committee for review to
ensure consistency with the adopted hazard mitigation plan.
Action 1.C.2: Om Valley Local Emergency Planning Committee will provide training to applicable
Oro Vaney Planning and Development department staff of the adopted hazard
mitigation plan and its requirements.
Action 1.C.3: Om Valley local Emergency Planning Committee will provide training to the Oro
Valley Planning and Zoning Commission, Zoning Ordinance Review Committee, and
Building Code Advisory Board about the hazard mitigation plan and its requirements.
Action 1.C.4: Continued coordination between Oro Valley departments to identify and mitigate
hazards associated with new development.
Objective 1.0: Address identified data limitations regarding the lack of information about new development
and build-out potential in hazard areas.
Action 1.0.1: Continued coordination between Oro Valley departments, regional municipalities,
Pima Association of Govemments, and other agencies in the development and
maintenance of accurate geographic information system information for those
hazard areas identified in the adopted hazard mitigation plan.
Goal 2. Promote public understanding, support and demand for hazard mitigation.
Objective 2.A: Promote partnerships between the state, counties, local, tribal governments, public sector,
private industry, civic and non-profit groups to identify, prioritize, and implement mitigation
actions.
Action 2.A.1: Pro-actively promote availability of Pre Disaster Mitigation and Hazard Mitigation
Grant Program funds.
Pima County lIu11i-Jlrisdictiona/ Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31. 2(05)
URS
158
J
Action 2.A.2: Continue and maintain relationship with the Arizona Emergency Services
Association and the Arizona Contingency Planners.
Objective 2.8: Educate the public to increase awareness of hazards and opportunities for mitigation
actions.
Action 2.8.1: Create or supplement Oro Valley public information sheets to include suggested
mitigation actions.
Action 2.8.2: Add mitigation actions to Oro Valley Local Emergency Planning Committee website
as well as those websites affiUated with Pima County Office of Emergency
Management and Homeland Security (PCOEM&HS) Action 2.8.3 Announce
approval of plan with suggested mitigation actions through a variety of media outlets.
Action 2.8.3: Develop mitigation brochure.
Goal 3. 8uild and support local capacity to warn the public about emergency situations and assist in their response.
Objective 3.A: Improve upon existing capabilities to warn the public of emergency situations.
Action 3.A.1: Initiate a system to test the ability of local emergency managers to activate the
Emergency Alert System (EAS).
Action 3.A.2: Provide technical support for the development of a reverse 9-1-1 system.
Objective 3.8: Develop a program to enhance the safety of the residents of Oro Valley during an
emergency.
Action 3.8.1: Develop a Mass Evacuation strategy for Oro Valley.
Action 3.8.2: Develop a She~er-in-Place educational program.
Goal 4. Improve hazard mitigation coordination and communication within the Town.
Objective 4.A: Address identified data limitations regarding the lack of information about Town
infrastructure.
Action 4.A.1: Adopt a common Geographical Information System (GIS) data system throughout
Oro Valley government.
Goal 5. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to floods.
Objective 5.A: Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses due to
floods.
Action 5.A.1: The Town's Floodplain Ordinance is currently being revised to comply with current
State and Federal requirements. The revised Floodplain Ordinance will be adopted
by the Town Council in 2005.
Action 5.A.2: Department of Public Works will continue to work with and through the Pima County
Regional Flood Control District (PCRFCD) to acquire property located in the FEMA
1 OO-year floodplain.
Action 5.A.3: Department of Public Works will continue to work with the PCRFCD to obtain
funding for the construction of drainage and flood control projects identified in the
Town Wide Drainage plan and PCRFCD CIP program.
Objective 5.8: Protect new and existing Town owned assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the
effects of floods within the 1 OO-year floodplain.
Action 5.8.1: With the exception of drainage structures, no Town owned assets are within a FEMA
1 OO-year floodplain.
Pima County Mul/i-JlKiscfictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Oral!: October 31, 2(05)
URS
159
_.,---~-,-~,,_.. "<,,,,,,,~--,-,,,,,',,,,",,.~'~..,._"'"
--~,':~'
I".,i~~
_f ...
Objective 5.C: Coordinate with and support existing efforts to mitigate floods (e.g., Pima County Regional
Flood Control District, Arizona Department of Water Resources).
Action 5.C.1: Department of Public Works staff currently works with and will continue to work with
the PCRFCD staff in support of flood mitigation efforts. The Town will continue to
participate in the Community Rating System (CRS) program and get credit for the
various activities that assist property owners in receiving reduced insurance
premiums.
Action 5.C.2: Department of Public Works staff will continue to take advantage of and support the
PCRFCD in its ALERT (Automated Local Evaluation in Real Time) flood hazard
infonnation/mitigation system and other flood warning and response programs.
Objective 5.D: Minimize repetitive losses caused by flooding.
Action 5.0.1: Repetitive losses due to flooding are not an issue in the Town of Oro Valley.
Action 5.D.2: Department of Comrnunity Development staff will continue to require property
owners to provide the federal elevation certification forms for building elevations for
new construction to protect the public from flood damage.
Goal 6. Reduce the possibility of damage and loss to bUlinelles, homes and Town-owned facilities due to
wildfires.
Objective 6.A: Establish agreements with state and federal agencies that will reduce damage and losses
due to wildfires.
Action 6.A.1: Continue the existing intergovernmental agreement between the Town and the Fire
Management Division of the State Land Department for assistance in the provision
of emergency services within each other's jurisdictions.
Objective 6.8: Protect new and existing Town assets from the effects of wildfires.
Action 6.8.1: Establish a standard safety zone of 30 feet around Town-owned structures that are
vulnerable to the effects of wildfire.
Action 6.8.2: Establish standards for the clearing of brush on T own-owned lands that are subject
to wildfires.
Action 6.8.3: Ensure that subdivision regulations for new subdivisions ensure adequate access for
fire trucks as required by the Fire Code and the Town's Subdivision Street
Standards.
Action 6.8.4: Ensure that building codes for all new homes prohibit the use of untreated wood
shake roofs and mandate the use a spark arresting system on the chimneys of
homes with v.ood burning fireplaces.
Objective 6.C: Educate the public about wildfire dangers and the steps that can be taken to prevent or
minimize their effects.
Action 6.C.1: Ensure that the Town of Oro Valley's web page provides sufficient guidance on
wildfire mitigation to the public.
Goal 7_ Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to severe weather.
Objective 7.A: Protect existing and new infrastructure from the effects of severe weather.
Action 7 A 1 : Perform periodic assessments to identify infrastructure vulnerabilities to severe
weather.
Pima County MuIi.JfliS(jctional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Drat/: October 31, 20(5)
URS
160
J
Action 7.A.2: Support the under grounding of new transmission line construction and use of metal
power utility poles as replacements for existing wooden poles or when above ground
installation is required.
Goal 8. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to drouaht.
Objective 8.A: Support the State's comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and
losses due to drought as they may apply to southern Arizona and local regions.
Action 8.A.1: Mandate, where appropriate, the use of desert landscaping and Best Management
Practices for irrigation at all Town facilities and projects.
Action 8.A.2: Lend technical support to those agencies tasked with conservation actions.
Objective 8.B: Protect new and existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of
drought.
Action 8.B.1: Investigate the feasibility of using reclaimed, (gray) water and other alternative water
sources such as passive and active harvesting where appropriate..
Action 8.B.2: Investigate the feasibility of enhanced recharging of aquifers.
Objective 8.C: Support State and local water conservation messages and programs through a variety of
media.
Action 8.C.1: Participate in water summits and resource workshops identifying various water
conserving mechanisms (retrofitting, landscaping, repairing, etc.).
Goal 9. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to infestations and disHses.
Objective 9.A: Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses due to
infestations and diseases.
Action 9.A.1: Cooperate with the Pima County Health Department in its efforts to reduce the
possibility of damage and losses due to infestations and diseases.
Objective 9.B: Protect new and existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of
infestations and diseases.
Action 9.B.1: Cooperate with the Pima County Health Department in their environmental and
epidemiological surveillance activities in those areas identified as being of high
public health importance and related to environmental factors such as; air quality,
drinking water/public water systems and vector control activities.
Objective 9.C: Coordinate with and support existing efforts to mitigate infestations and diseases.
Action 9.C.1: Continue to cooperate with the Pima County Health to minimize mosquito breeding
and spread of West Nile Virus.
Goal 10. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to geological hazards.
Objective 10.A: Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses due to
geological hazards.
Action 1 0.A.1: Cooperate with all State and Federal agencies expanding the geo-physical
identification of geological hazards and their projects that mitigate geo-hazards in
the Town of Oro Valley.
Objective 10.B: Protect new and existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of
geological hazards.
Pima County Multi-Juriscfctional HazW'd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
161
::-.
ri''':~
,~..I'
Action 10.B.1: Continue to cooperate with the Arizona Department of Transportation in their
assessment of existing Town-owned bridges for their susceptibility to geo-hazards.
Goal 11. Prevent or minimize damage and losses due to hazardous materials (HAlMA T) incidents.
Objective 11.A: Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses due to
hazardous materials.
Action 11.A.1: Continue to ensure the involvement of industry, fire, law enforcement and other key
players in the Oro Valley Local Emergency Planning committee (LEPC).
Action 11.A.2: Under the auspices of the Oro Valley LEPC, provide guidance to HAZMA T incident
first responders in the Oro Valley Emergency Operations Plan.
Objective 11.B: Protect new and existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of
hazardous materials.
Action 11.B.1: Develop and maintain a database of schools, hospitals, and other key facil~ies
within a one-mile radius of HAZMA T facil~ies and make that database available to
responders to incidents at those facilities.
Action 11.B.2: Assist operators of faciUties that store hazardous materials in developing emergency
response plans for those facilities.
Objective 11.C: Reduce the number of, and volume of, hazardous materials.
Action 11.C.1: Through the LEPC, encourage the use of less hazardous alternatives to the
chemicals currently used when possible.
Objective 11.0: Reduce the risk of injury or loss of life to first responders to hazardous materials incidents.
Action 11.0.1: Provide emergency response guidebooks to all fire and law enforcement vehicles.
Action 11.0.2: Sponsor, under LEPC guidance, an annual exercise simulating response to a large-
scale HAZMA T incident.
Objective 11.E: Increase government and public knowledge of safe handling of extremely hazardous
substance (EHS).
Action 11.E.1: Offer, through the safety office, basic HAlMA T awareness ("Right-to-Know")
courses to Town employees.
Action 11.E.2: Provide information regarding safe handling of household chemicals on the
Department of Emergency Management's website.
Goal 12. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses to existing assets due to other human-caused
hazards.
Objective 12.A: Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses due to
other human-caused hazards.
Action 12.A.1: Offer, through the Department of Emergency Management, basic weapons of mass
destruction (WMO) courses to Town employees and the public.
Action 12.A.2: Support on going efforts of the Pima County Domestic Preparedness Council to
develop uniform procedures and equipment.
Action 12.A.3: Promote child drowning prevention programs throughout the Town.
Action 12.A.4: Provide program direction in support and development of Community Emergency
Response Teams (CERT).
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional HazW'd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
162
..)
Action 12.A.5: Promote and expand existing Town programs aimed at school violence and family
preparedness.
Objective 12.B: Protect new and existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of other
human~aused hazards.
Action 12. B.1: Reassess vulnerability of potential terrorist targets and share information among law
enforcement agencies.
Action 12.B.2: Provide leadership role to support NorthWest Hospital Oro Valley efforts to
standardize hospitals' capability to decontaminate patients in the event of a
chemical, biological or radiological terrorist event.
Objective 12.C: Coordinate with and support efforts to mnigate other human-caused hazards.
Action 12.C.1: Allocate and administer Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding to
appropriate agencies throughout the Town.
Pima County Multi..Jurisdictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
163
.::;.>.
r""
-5' ~
6.2.5 Pascua Yaqui
Goal 1. Promote disaster-resistant development.
Objective 1.A: Encourage and facilitate the development and updating of the general plan and zoning
ordinance to limit development in hazard areas.
Action 1.A.1: Review the existing Pascua Yaqui Tribe Master Land Use Plans and relevant
ordinances to determine how these documents help limit development in hazard
areas.
Action1.A.2: Establish periodic mon~oring and review of Pascua Yaqui Tribe Master Land Use plan
and relevant ordinances to determine effectiveness at preventing and mitigating
hazards. Based on the results, amend as necessary.
Objective 1.B: Encourage and facilitate the compliance of building codes that protect new and existing
assets and development in hazard areas.
Action 1.B.1: Review existing building codes to determine adequate protection from new
development in hazard areas. Where feasible and necessary, modify codes to help
mitigate hazards imposed on such development within the Iimijs of the Pascua
Yaqui Reservation, while also respecting private property rights adjacent to the
Reservation.
Objective 1.C: Promote consistent enforcement of Pascua Yaqui Tribe Master Land Use plans, zoning
ordinances, and building codes.
Action 1.C.1: Distribute all development master plans, zone change, and subdivision applications
as applicable to Tribal Land Office for review to ensure consistency with the adopted
Hazard Mitigation Plan.
Action 1.C.2: Pascua Yaqui Land Office will provide training to applicable Pascua Yaqui Land
Office staff of the adopted hazard mitigation plan and ijs requirements.
Action 1.C.3: Continued coordination between Pima County departments and Bureau of Indian
Affairs to identify and mitigate hazards associated with new development.
Objective 1.0: Address identified data limitations regarding the lack of information about new development
and build-out potential in hazard areas.
Action 1.0.1: Continued coordination between Pascua Yaqui Tribe, Pima County departments,
municipalities, Pima Association of Governments, and other agencies in the
development and maintenance of accurate geographic information system
information for those hazard areas identified in the adopted hazard mitigation plan.
Objective 1.E: Facilitate construction of public infrastructure to reduce loss in hazard areas.
Action 1.E.1: Follow guidelines established in the Bureau of Indian Affairs Design and Pima
County Roadway Design Manual and DOT guidelines.
Action 1.E. 2: Conduct periodic monitoring and review of design manual to ensure compliance with
federal regulations.
Action 1.E.3: Provide public access at internet sije to design manual to facilitate compliance with
Pascua Yaqui Tribe, Pima County, state and federal standards by private
development companies. www.dot.pima.Qov/transenQ/roaddesiQn/.
Action 1.E.4: All public facilities must comply with Pascua Yaqui Tribe guidelines and ordinances.
Pima County lIu1ti-Juriscictional Haztld llitigalion Plan (Draft: Octo/Jef 31,2(05)
URS
164
~)
Goal 2. Promote public understanding, support and interest in hazard mitigation.
Objective 2.A: Promote partnerships between the state, counties, local, tribal governments, public sector,
private industry, civic and non-profit groups to identify, prioritize, and implement mitigation
actions.
Action 2.A.1 : Pro-actively seek availability of Pre Disaster Mitigation and Hazard Mitigation Grant
Program funds.
Action 2.A.2: Promote outreach of the Pascua Mnigation Plan throughout the Pascua Yaqui
Reservation.
Action 2.A.3: Continue and maintain relationship with the Pima County Office of Emergency
Management.
Objective 2.8: Educate the public to increase awareness of hazards and opportunities for mitigation
actions.
Action 2.8.1: Create or supplement Pascua Yaqui Tribe public information sheets to include
suggested mitigation actions.
Action 2.8.2: Add mnigation actions to Pascua Yaqui Tribe website.
Action 2.8.3: Announce approval of plan with suggested mnigation actions through a variety of
media outlets.
Goal 3. Build and support local capacity to warn the public about emergency situations and assist in their
response.
Objective 3.A: Establish capabilities to warn the public of emergency snuations.
Action 3.A.1: Establish and promote a system to test the ability of tribal managers to activate the
Emergency Alert System (EAS).
Action 3.A.2: Obtain a reverse 9-1-1 system for the community.
Objective 3.8: Develop a program to enhance the safety of the residents of Pascua Yaqui Tribe during an
emergency.
Action 3.8.1: Develop a Mass Evacuation strategy for Pascua Yaqui Tribe.
Action 3.8.2: Develop a Shelter-in-Place educational program.
Goal 4. Improve hazard mitigation coordination and communication within the Tribe.
Objective 4.A: Address identified data limitations regarding the lack of information about Pascua Yaqui
Tribe infrastructure.
Action 4.A.1: Ensure that the Pascua Yaqui Land OffICe maintains GIS layer information for the
entire Pascua Yaqui Reservation.
Action 4.A.2: Pascua Yaqui Land OffICe will provide to the Public Safety Department, on an
annual basis, an updated Emergency Management CD program.
Goal 5. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to floods.
Objective 5.A: Develop an approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses to new and existing
buildings and infrastructure due to floods.
Action 5.A.1: The Pascua Yaqui Land Office has completed a Master Drain Study and is in
process of designing and improving flood prevention infrastructure within the Tribe.
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
165
^:;';:,-, .~
,-C,,<
-;; ~,.
Action 5.A.2: Each year for the next five years, the Pascua Yaqui Reservation will support Pima
County Facilities Management to inspect District owned flood control facilities within
the Reservation to insure they are in safe working order, prope~y maintained and
meet regulatory requirements. Corrective action will be requested for any problem
identified during the inspection.
Action 5.A.3: The Pascua Yaqui Land Office will continue working on a cooperative effort to notify
developers of floodplain regulations early on in the development process.
Action 5.A.4: The Pascua Yaqui Land Office will continue to plan for, design, and construct
appropriate flood control structures for public safety and damage reduction.
Action 5.A.5: Encourage bridge or culvert construction where roads are in locations susceptible to
flooding.
Action 5.A.G: Pascua Yaqui Facilities Management will inspect and monitor all bridges and
culverts under their control on a schedule in compliance with federal regulations.
Action 5.A.?: Pascua Yaqui Land Office will continue to enforce flood and erosion hazard building
setbacks.
Objective 5.B: Coordinate with and support existing efforts to mitigate floods with other federal, State and
local agencies (e.g., FEMA, US Army Corps of Engineers, US Bureau of Reclamation,
Arizona Department of Water Resources).
Action 5.B.1: The Pascua Yaqui Land Office will continue to incorporate riparian zone protection
in permitting through the floodplain and riparian ordinance.
Action 5.B.2: The Pascua Yaqui Land Office will continue to provide flood hazard information as a
means of providing real-time weather information and its affects to Tribal
departments and other agencies.
Objective 5.C: Minimize repetitive tosses caused by flooding.
Action 5.C.1: The Pascua Yaqui Land Office will continue to implement its Floodprone Land
Acquisition Program to acquire properties that are located in flood hazard areas.
Action 5.C.2: The Pascua Yaqui Land Office will continue to coordinate roadway construction
projects with Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Corps of Engineers as well as use
measures to reduce the risk of flooding. Objective 5.0 Participate in and maintain
compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program requirements.
Action 5.C.3: Pascua Yaqui Land Office staff will continue to offer technical assistance to
residents seeking information, and to ensure that the Community will maintain or
improve their Community Rating System (CRS) classification.
Objective 5.0: Address identified data limitations regarding the lack of information about relative
wlnerability of assets from floods.
Action 5.0.1: Pascua Yaqui land Office will continue to incorporate Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM) into the Geographical Information System (GIS) to expand access to flood
delineationlboundary maps to the public.
Action 5.0.2: Pascua Yaqui Land Office will continue to develop an internet based combined map
repository to allow easier access for public and private entities.
Objective 5.E: Educate the public to increase awareness of hazards and opportunities for mitigation actions
through outreach projects.
Action 5.E.1: The Pascua Yaqui Tribe will continue its School Safety Presentation Program.
Pima County MuIIi-Juristlctional Haz",d AIitigaIion Plan (Ora": October 31, 2005)
URS
166
J
Action 5.E.2: Pascua Yaqui Tribe will continue outreach utilizing public forums such as the County
Fair and Earth Day, the Reservation's internet page, and pamphlets available on
basic flood preparedness.
Action 5.E.3: To increase awareness of potential residential flooding, Pascua Yaqui Land OffICe
will continue to mail flood hazard information directly to residents of known flood
hazard areas.
Goal 6. Reduce the possibility of damage and loss to businesses, homes and Tribally-owned facilities due
to wildfires.
Objective 6.A: Continue to establish agreements with state and federal agencies that will reduce damage
and losses due to wildfires.
Action 6.A.1: Continue the existing intergovernmental agreement between the Tribe and the State
Forestry Department for assistance in the provision of emergency services within
each other's jurisdictions.
Action 6.A.2: Ensure that the Pascua Yaqui Facilities Management has heavy equipment
operators certified to operate in a support role in the vicinity of a wildfire.
Action 6.A.3: Encourage and enter into intergovernmental agreements for wildfire
prevention/control with state and federal land management agencies that are
adjoining or within their jurisdictions.
Action 6.A.4: Develop programs to eradicate non-native buffel grass.
Objective 6.8: Protect new and existing Pascua Yaqui Tribe assets from the effects of wildfires.
Action 6.8.1: Establish a standard safety zone of 30 feet around Tribally-owned structures that are
vulnerable to the effects of wildfire.
Action 6.8.2: Establish standards for the clearing of brush on Tribally-owned lands that are
subject to wildfires.
Action 6.8.3: Continue to enforce Open Burning Ordinance.
Objective 6.C: Continue to coordinate efforts with appropriate state and federal government entities to
minimize damage to homes and other structures from wildfires.
Action 6.C.1: Ensure that regulations for new residential development ensure adequate access for
fire trucks and defensible space.
Action 6.C.2: Ensure that building codes for all new homes prohibit the use of untreated wood
shake roofs and mandate the use a spark arresting system on the chimneys of
homes with wood burning fireplaces.
Objective 6.0: Educate the public about wildfire dangers and the steps that can be taken to prevent or
minimize their effects.
Action 6.0.1: Ensure that the Pascua Yaqui Tribe web page provides sufficient guidance on
wildfire mitigation to the public.
Action 6.0.2: Continue to distribute wildfire mitigation information to persons applying for building
permits in applicable areas of the Pascua Yaqui Reservation.
Goal 7. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to severe weather.
Objective 7.A: Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses due to
severe weather by moving beyond building codes regarding local wind area criteria to
addressing structural uplift due to microburst activity.
Pima County Mul/i-Jutisdic/ional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31. 2(05)
URS
167
,;~~-:'
~,,)
Action 7.A.1: Pursue partnerships with the National Weather Service and State Univers~ies to
research the prediction of microburst.
Action 7.A.2: Educate the public on the dangers of severe weather through various media and
outreach programs.
Action 7.A.3: Ensure building codes for construction are strengthened to prevent roof damage
from high winds.
Action 7.A.4: Ensure enough compliance inspectors are available to ensure construction
compliance.
Objective 7.8: Protect new-and existing infrastructure from the effects of severe weather.
Action 7.8.1: Perform periodic assessments to identify infrastructure vulnerabil~ies to severe
weather.
Action 7.8.2: Promote underground transmission lines in new transmission line construction.
Action 7.8.3: Promote higher levels of structural reliability in new and replacement utility poles for
transmission lines for improved resistance to extreme wind events.
Objective 7.C: Improve early warning communication to the public the threat of severe weather.
Action 7.C.1: Encourage the use of weather radios, especially in schools, clinics and other
locations where people congregate to inform them of the approach of severe
weather.
Action 7.C.2: Develop procedures of activation of the emergency alert system and coordination
~h the Tribal radio station for notification alerts to the Community.
Goal 8. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to drouaht.
Objective 8.A: Support the Tribes Master land Use Plan in an approach to reducing the possibility of
damage and losses due to drought.
Action 8.A.1: Promote, where appropriate, the use of xeriscaping or desert landscaping at Tribal
facilities and projects.
Action 8.A.2: lend technical support to those agencies tasked ~h conservation actions.
Objective 8.8: Protect new and existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of
drought.
Action 8.8.1: Promote the use of effluent and reclaimed (gray) water harvesting for appropriate
applications.
Goal 9. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to infestations and diseases.
Objective 9.A: Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses due to
infestations and diseases.
Action 9.A.1: Conduct public outreach, information, and immunizations.
Action 9.A.2: Enforce Health Code requirements through on-going inspections of permmed
establishments and environmental surveillance. (i.e. food service inspections, vector
control enforcement and abatement activities).
Action 9.A.3: Conduct vulnerability assessments and develop incident response plans at food
service establishments, and other areas and programs related to vector control
activities.
Pima County Mul/i-Jllisdictional HazlEd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
168
).
Action 9.A.4: Facilitate abatement, prevention and investigation of public health nuisance
condnions, illegal dumping activities and the storage and handling of potentially
infectious material and locations.
Objective 9.8: Protect new and existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of
infestations and diseases. _
Action 9.8.1: Conduct and enhance environmental and epidemiological surveillance activnies in
those areas identified as being of high public health importance and related to
environmental factors such as;, food safety and protection and vector control
activities. Surveillance activities must include the identification of vulnerabilnies and
environmental factors that may contribute to the transmission of the communicable
diseases associated with the operation and presence of these facilnies in the
Pascua Yaqui Tribe, as well as the implementation of preventative action which may
be applied to reduce or eliminate the potential for transmission of communicable
illnesses. Develop and improve the system of coordination and communication of
these findings, trends and observations wnh other federal, state and local agencies
that have similar or related interest.
Action 9.8.2: -Development and implementation of multi-agency exercises and drills related to
outbreaks of communicable illnesses and vector control.
Action 9.8.3: Enforcement of federal & state mandates in routine compliance inspections.
Action 9.8.4: Performing joint ventures and activities related to communicable disease outbreaks
and vector infestations, such as the response activnies to West NileVirus, Norwalk
virus, and roof rat infestation (Rattus rattus).
Action 9.8.5: Standardization practice and training of regulatory inspection staff.
Objective 9.C: Coordinate wnh and support existing efforts to mitigate infestations and diseases (e.g.,
Arizona Department of Agriculture, US Department of Agriculture).
Action 9.C.1: Provide designated staff access to and use of database information to
browse/analyze histories of permitted facilities, and nuisance abatements to observe
trends and identify needs in public health protection.
Action 9.C.2: Acquire GIS equipment and interactive software to identify pattems of transmission
of disease and at-risk facility locations.
Action 9.C.3: Development of common database for Public Health and other agencies to facilnate
effective communication of information on infectious illnesses, citizen complaints
and potential environmental disease sentinel observations.
Goal 10. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to geoloaical hazards.
Objective 10.A: Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses due to
geological hazards.
Action 1 0.A.1: Work with Arizona Geological Survey and US Geological Survey on projects that
mitigate gee-hazards.
Action 10.A.2: Continue to promulgate building codes addressing structural integrity in light of
perceived seismic risk.
Action 10.A.3: Use geotechnical investigation in roadway and bridge design.
Objective 10.8: Protect new and existing assets wnh the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of
geological hazards.
Action 10.8.1: Investigate the feasibility of utilizing recharge to mitigate subsidence.
Pima County Multi-Jl6isdictional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS 1~
J
Goal 11. Prevent or minimize damage and losses due to hazardous materials (HAlMA T) incidents.
Objective 11.A: Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses due to
hazardous materials.
Action 11.A.1: Coordinate to ensure the involvement of fire, law enforcement and other key players
in the Pascua Yaqui Tribe, Tribal Emergency Response Committee (TERC).
Action 11.A.2: Under the auspices of the Pascua Yaqui TERC, provide guidance to HAZMA T
incident first responders in the Pascua Yaqui Emergency Operations Plan.
Action 11.A.3: Coordinate with Pima County Hazardous Material Team to provide safe removal of
hazardous material from roadways and right-of-ways.
Action 11.A.4: Promote development of Tribal Emergency Response Committee (TERC) to
develop plans and coordination of resources.
Objective 11.8: Protect new and existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of
hazardous materials.
Action 11.8.1: Evaluate and maintain a database of schools, hospitals, and other key facilities
within a one-mile radius of HAlMA T corridors and make that database available to
Public Safety and Health agencies
Action 11.8.2: Assist operators of facilities that store hazardous materials in developing
"emergency response. and "contingency" plans for those facilities.
Objective 11.C: Reduce the number of, and volume of, hazardous materials.
Action 11.C.1: Through the TERC, encourage the use of less hazardous a~ernatives to the
chemicals currendy used when possible.
Objective 11.0: Reduce the risk of injury or loss of life to first responders to hazardous materials incidents.
Action 11.0.1: Provide emergency response guidebooks to all fire and law enforcement vehicles.
Action 11.0.2: Sponsor, under TERC guidance, an annual exercise simulating response to a large-
scale HAZMA T incident.
Objective 11.E: Increase government and public knowledge of safe handling of extremely hazardous
substance (EHS).
Action 11.E.1: Coordinate, through the Pima County Office of Emergency Management &
Homeland Security, basic HAZMAT awareness ("Right-to-Know") courses to Tribal
employees.
Action 11.E.2: Provide information to the public regarding safe handling of household chemicals on
the Pascua Yaqui Tribe website.
Goal 12. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses to existing assets due to other human-caused
hazards.
Objective 12.A: Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses due
to other human-caused hazards.
Action 12.A.1: Coordination and support, through the Pima County Office of Emergency
Management & Homeland Security, basic weapons of mass destruction (WMO)
courses to Tribal employees and the public.
Action 12.A.2: Promote child drowning prevention programs throughout the Pascua Yaqui
Reservation.
Pima County Uulti.JI6iSlidional HazlM'd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
170
.)
Action 12.A.3: Provide program direction in support and development of Community Emergency
Response Team (CERT).
Action 12.A.4: Promote and expand existing Tribal programs aimed at school violence and family
preparedness.
Objective 12.8: Protect new and existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of other
human-caused hazards.
Action 12.8.1: Reassess vulnerability of potential terrorist targets and share information among
Public Safety agencies.
Action 12.8.2: Provide support to Pima County Hospital Preparedness efforts to standardize
capabilities to decontaminate patients in the event of a chemical, biological or
radiological terrorist event.
Objective 12.C: Coordinate with and support efforts to mitigate other human-caused hazards.
Action 12.C.1: Obtain Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding to purchase necessary
equipment
Action 12.C.2: Develop a Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) to support disaster
operations.
Pima County Mulli-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
171
j
6.2.6 Sahuarita
Goal 1. Promote disaster-resistant future development.
Objective 1.A: Encourage and facilitate the development and updating of the general plan and zoning
ordinance to limit development in hazard areas.
Action 1.A.1: Review the existing Town of Sahuarita's general plan and Zoning Code to determine
how these documents help limit development in hazard areas. Modify with additional
guidelines, regulations, and land use techniques as necessary within the limits of
state statutes; while also respecting private property rights.
Action 1.A.2: Establish periodic monitoring and review of Sahuarita's general plan and Zoning
Code to determine effectiveness at preventing and mitigating hazards. Based on the
results, amend as necessary.
Objective 1.B: Encourage and facilitate the adoption of the current editions of the Building and Fire Codes
that protect existing assets and development in hazard areas.
Action 1.B.1: Review existing Building Codes to determine if they adequately protect new
developments in hazard areas. Where feasible and necessary, modify codes to help
mitigate hazards imposed on such development within the limits of state statutes,
while also respecting private property rights.
Objective 1.C: Promote consistent enforcement of general plans, Zoning Code, and Building and Fire
Codes.
Action 1.C.1: Distribute all development master plan, zone change, and subdivision applications
as applicable to the Public Works Department for review to ensure consistency with
the adopted hazard mitigation plan.
Action 1.C.2: Sahuarita's Public Works Department and the Fire Marshal will provide training to
applicable Sahuarita Planning and Development department staff of the adopted
hazard mitigation plan and its requirements.
Action 1.C.3: Sahuarita Public Works Department and the Fire Marshal will provide training. to the
Sahuarita's Planning and Zoning Commission, about the hazard mitigation plan and
its requirements.
Action 1.C.4: Continued coordination between Sahuarita's departments to identify and mitigate
hazards associated with new development.
Objective 1.0: Address identified data that limitations, regarding the lack of information on new
. development and build-out potential in hazard areas.
Action 1.0.1: Continued coordination between Sahuarita's departments, regional municipalities,
Pima Association of Governments, and other agencies in the development and
maintenance of accurate geographic information system. Information for hazardous
areas is to be identified in the adopted hazard mitigation plan.
Goal 2. Promote public understanding, support and demand for hazard mitigation.
Objective 2.A: Promote partnerships between the state, counties, local tribal governments, public sector,
private industry, and civic and non-profit groups to identify, prioritize, and implement
mitigation actions.
Action 2.A.1: Pro-actively promotes availability of Pre-Disaster Mitigation, and Hazard Mitigation
Grant Program funds.
Pima County Multi.JlKisdictiona/ Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
172
J
Action 2.A.2: Continue and maintain relationships with the Arizona Emergency Services
Association and the Arizona Contingency Planners.
Objective 2.B: Educate the public to increase awareness of hazards, and potential opportunities for
mitigation actions. Make Pima County's public information material sheets, websnes,
mnigation brochures, and media outlets available.
Goal 3. Support Pima County's local capacity to warn the public about emergency situations, and assist
their efforts In responding.
Objective 3.A: Improve upon existing capabilities to warn the public of emergency situations by initiating a
system to test the ability of local emergency managers to activate the Emergency Alert
System (EAS).
Goal 4. Improve hazard mitigation coordination and communication within the Town.
Objective 4.A: Address identified data limitations regarding the lack of information about Town
infrastructure.
Goal 5. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to floods.
Objective 5.A: Work wnh PCRFCD to develop a comprehensive and regional approach to reducing the
possibilny of damage and losses due to floods.
Goal 6. Reduce the possibility of damage and loss to businesses, homes and Town-owned facilities due to
wildfires by working with Pima County and the Fire Management Division of the State Land
Department.
Action 6.C.1: Ensure that subdivision regulations for new subdivisions provide adequate access
for fire trucks as required by the Fire Code.
Action 6.C.2: Ensure that Building Codes for all new homes prohibit the use of untreated wood
shake roofs and mandate the use of a spark arresting system on the chimneys of
homes with wood burning fireplaces.
Goal 7. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to severe weather.
Objective 7.A: Protect infrastructure from the effects of severe weather.
Action 7.A.1: Perform periodic assessments, and identify infrastructure's vulnerabilities to severe
weather.
Goal 8. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to drought.
Objective 8.A: Support the State's comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and
losses due to drought, as they may apply to Southern Arizona and local regions.
Action 8.A.1: Mandate where appropriate, the use of desert landscaping and Best Management
Practices for irrigation for all Town facilities and projects.
Objective 8.B: Protect existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of drought.
Action 8.B.1: Use reclaimed water where feasible. And utilize other alternative water sources such
as passive and active harvesting where appropriate.
Action 8.B.2: Continue the recharging of regional aquifers.
Action 8.B.3: Explore policies to ensure reclaimed water lines are installed to provide reclaimed
water to common areas for all new development plans.
Objective 8.C: Support State and local water conservation messages and programs through a variety of
media.
Pima county Mul/i-Juriscfc/ional HazlJ"d Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS m
J
Action 8.C.1: Participate in water summits and resource workshops identifying various water
conserving mechanisms (retrofitting, landscaping, repairing, etc.).
Goal 9. Work with Pima County to reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to infestations and
diseases. For example: continue to cooperate with the Pima County Health Department to minimize
mosquito breeding and the spread of West Nile Virus.
Goal 10. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to geological hazards.
Objective 10.A: Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage, and losses due
to geological hazards.
Action 1 0.A.1: Cooperate with State and Federal agencies in expanding the geo-physical
identifICation of geological hazards, and their projects that mitigate goo-hazards in
the Town of Sahuarita.
Action 10.8.1: Continue to cooperate with the Arizona Department of Transportation in their
assessment of existing Town-owned bridges for their susceptibility to goo-hazards.
Goal 11. Prevent or minimize damage and Iolses due to hlZlrdOUI materiall (HAlMA 1) incidents.
Objective 11A: Support Pima County's comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage, and
losses due to hazardous materials.
Objective 11.8: Support Pima County's effort to protect existing assets 'Ifflh the highest relative vulnerability
to the effects of hazardous materials.
Objective 11.C: Reduce the number of, and volume of, hazardous materials.
Objective 11.D: Reduce the risk of injury or loss of life to first responders of hazardous materials incidents.
Action 11.D.1: Provide Emergency Response Guidebooks to all Fire and Law Enforcement
vehicles.
Action 11.D.2: Sponsor, under LEPC guidance, an annual exercise simulating response to a large-
scale HAZMA T incident.
Objective 11.E: Increase government and public knowledge of safe handling of Extremely Hazardous
Substance (EHS).
Action 11.E.1: Offer, through the safety office, basic HAlMA T awareness ("Right-to-Know")
courses to Town employees.
Goal 12. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses to existing assets due to other human.caused
hazards.
Objective 12.A: Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses due to
other human-caused hazards.
Action 12.A.1: Provide and support through the Pima County Office of EmergenCy Management &
Homeland Security, basic Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) courses; to Town
employees and the public.
Action 12.A.2: Support ongoing efforts of the Pima County Domestic Preparedness Council to
develop uniform procedures and equipment.
Action 12.A.3: Promote Child Drowning Prevention programs throughout the Town.
Action 12.A.4: Provide program direction, and support development of Community Emergency
Response Teams (CERT).
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazlrd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31,2(05)
URS
174
J
Action 12.A.5: Promote and expand existing town programs aimed at school violence and family
preparedness.
Objective 12.8: Protect existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of other human-
caused hazards.
Action 12.8.1: Re-assess vulnerability of potential terrorist targets, and share information with law
enforcement agencies.
Objective 12.C: Coordinate and support efforts to mnigate other human-caused hazards.
Action 12.C.2: Allocate and administer Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding to
appropriate agencies throughout the Town.
Pima county Multi.Jwiscfctional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draf/: October 31, 2005)
URS
175
J
6.2.7 South Tucson
Goal 1. Promote disaster-resistant development.
Objective 1.A: The City of South Tucson will encourage and facilitate the development and updating of the
general plan and zoning ordinance to limit development in hazard areas.
Action 1.A.1: Review the existing City of South Tucson's general plan and relevant ordinances to
determine how these documents help limn development in hazard areas. Modify as
necessary the general plan and relevant ordinances to include additional guidelines,
regulations, and land use techniques within the limns of the Arizona Revised
Statutes, while respecting private property rights. Zoning ordinances are currently
undergoing updates, and disaster-resistant regulations will be included in the
modified code. The target date for general plan and/or zoning ordinance updates
and approval by the City of South Tucson Mayor and Council is December 2005.
Action 1.A.2: Establish a policy of periodically monitoring and reviewing the City of South
Tucson's general plan and relevant ordinances to determine their effectiveness at
preventing and mitigating hazards. Based on the resu~s, the general plan and
relevant ordinances wilt be amended as necessary. The University of Arizona's
Planning Program has provided graduate level planning interns and professional
oversight by PhD's in planning to aid in the periodic monnoring. The target date for
the next presentation to Mayor and Council concerning approval of the general plan
and ordinances update is September 2005.
Objective 1.B: The City of South Tucson will encourage and facilitate the adoption of building codes that
protect existing assets and development in hazard areas.
Action 1.B.1: Review existing building codes adopted by the City of South Tucson Mayor and
Council to determine if the building codes adequately protect new and existing
development in hazard areas. The City's Building OffICial is responsible for ensuring
new and existing development is adequately protected. When feasible and
necessary, building codes will be modified to aid in the mitigation of hazards existing
on parcels within the City's boundaries under the limitations of the Arizona Revised
Statutes, while respecting private property rights.
Objective 1.C. The City of South Tucson will promote consistent implementation and enforcement of the
general plan, zoning ordinances, and building codes.
Action 1.C.1: Distribute all development master plans, zone changes, and subdivision applications
to the City of South Tucson departments, as applicable, for review to ensure
consistency with the adopted hazard mitigation plan.
Action 1.C.2: In conjunction with Pima County's Office of Emergency Management to provide
training to any applicable City of South Tucson staff on the adopted hazard
mitigation plan and its requirements. One member of the South Tucson Fire
Department (currently the Fire Chief) will be the designated interface with Pima
County's Office of Emergency Management.
Action 1.C.3: Continue coordination between City of South Tucson departments to identify and
mitigate hazards associated with new development. Expand the current building
permit sign-off sheet to include hazards recognition in building construction.
Objective 1.0: The City of South Tucson will address the identified data limitations regarding the lack of
information about new development and build-out potential in hazard areas.
Pima County Mul/i-Jllisdictional HazlJ'd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31,2005)
URS
176
.J
Action 1.0.1: Continue coordination between City of South Tucson departments, municipalities,
Pima Association of Governments, and other agencies in the development and
maintenance of accurate geographic information system data for those hazard areas
identified in the adopted hazard m"igation plan. The City of South Tucson will
actively provide data into these databases via "s Planning and Zoning Department.
Objective 1.E: The City of South Tucson will facilitate additional construction of public infrastructure to
reduce loss in hazard areas.
Action 1.E.1: Follow road construction guidelines established by the State of Arizona and Pima
County's Department of Transportation..
Action 1.E.2: Conduct periodic monitoring and review of design manuals used by the City of South
Tucson to ensure compliance with Federal regulations.
Action 1.E.3: Provide public access to design requirements on the City's website to facilitate
compliance with City of South Tucson, state and Federal standards by private
development companies.
Action 1.E.4: All public facilities must comply with City of South Tucson ordinances.
Goal 2. Promote public understanding, support and interest in hazard mitigation.
Objective 2.A: The City of South Tucson will promote partnerships between the state, counties, local, tribal
governments, public sector, private industry, civic and non-profit groups to identify, prioritize,
and implement mitigation actions.
Action 2.A.1: Actively seek Pre Disaster M"igation and Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funds
from Pima County, the State of Arizona and the Federal government.
Action 2.A.2: The City's grant writers will explore the availability and type of funding sources that
deal with hazard mitigation.
Action 2.A.3: The City will promote the City of South Tucson Mitigation Plan throughout City by
holding public forums and making presentations; at schools, business events and
social gatherings.
Action 2.A.4: Maintain a relationship with the Pima County Office of Emergency Management, the
Arizona Emergency Services Association and the Arizona Contingency Planners.
Objective 2.8: The City of South Tucson will educate the public to increase awareness of hazards and
opportunities for mitigation.
Action 2.8.1: Create or supplement City of South Tucson public information sheets to include
suggested mitigation actions, as well as make presentations at public gatherings
and local conferences.
Action 2.8.2: Add mitigation actions to City of South Tucson website.
Action 2.8.3: Announce approval of plan with suggested mitigation actions through a variety of
media outlets including the "Ellndependiente" newspaper.
Goal 3. Build and support local capacity to warn the public about emergency situations and assist in their
response.
Objective 3.A: The City of South Tucson will improve upon the existing capabilities to warn the public of
emergency situations.
Action 3.A.1: Maintain a system to test the ability of the City of South Tucson emergency
Manager(s) to activate the Emergency Alert System (EAS).
Pima County Multi-Jllislfctional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
177
.)
Action 3A2: Seek and incorporate technical support for the procurement of a reverse 9-1-1
system.
Objective 3.8: The City of South Tucson will develop a program to enhance the safety of the residents of
City of South Tucson during an emergency.
Action 3.8.1: Develop a Mass Evacuation strategy for City of South Tucson.
Action 3.8.2: Develop a Shelter-in-Place educational program.
Goal 4. Improve hlZard mitigation coordination and communication within the City of South Tucson.
Objective 4.A: The City of South Tucson will address the identified data limitations regarding the lack of
information about City of South Tucson infrastructure.
Action 4.A.1: Ensure that Office of Emergency Management and Homeland Security has access
to GIS layer info throughout City of South Tucson.
Action 4.A.2: The South Tucson Fire Department, with the assistance of the South Tucson Police
Department, wilt continue to request from Pima County OffICe of Emergency
Management and Homeland Security (PCOEM&HS) an updated Emergency
Response CD-ROM program 'Nhich is provided by Pima County Regional Flood
Control District (PCRFCD) on an annual basis.
Goal 5. Reduce the possibility of damage and lossn due to flood..
Objective 5.A: The City of South TUCSOn will develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility
of damage and losses due to floods.
Action 5A1: The City of South Tucson's Department of Transportation and Flood Control will
'MlI'k with the Pima County Regional Flood Control District (PCRFCD) to study one
major area per year to address flood prevention needs.
Action 5.A.2: Each year for the next five years, the City's Department of Transportation and Flood
Control, with the assistance of PCRFCO will inspect five City owned flood control
facilities to insure they are in safe working Older, properly maintained and meet
regulatory requirements. These flood control facilities include channels, stormwater
drainage ways, stormwater underground pipeline systems, arroyos, Julian Wash,
and sheet flooding areas. Corrective action will be initiated for any problem identified
during the inspection
Action 5.A.3: The PCRFCD will continue working with City of South Tucson Planning and
Development Services on a cooperative effort to notify developers of floodplain
regulations early on in the development process.
Action 5.A.4: The City of South Tucson Transportation and Flood Control will continue to plan for,
design, and construct appropriate flood control structures for public safety and
damage reduction. Special attention will be paid to large developments (5 acres or
larger) to ensure compliance with all flood control regulations.
Action 5.A.5: Encourage bridge or culvert construction where roads are in locations susceptible to
flooding.
Action 5AG: The City of South Tucson Transportation and Flood Control, with the assistance of
South Tucson Public Works and Pima County Department of Transportation
(PCDOT) will inspect and monitor all bridges and culverts under their control on a
schedule in compliance with state and Federal regulations.
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Haz<ld Mitigation Plan (Dra/!: October 31, 2(05)
URS
178
,)
Action 5. A.7: The South Tucson Department of Transportation and Flood Control, with the
assistance of Public Works Department, Building Safety and PCRFCD will continue
to enforce flood and erosion hazard building setbacks.
Objective 5.B: The City of South Tucson will coordinate with and support existing efforts to mitigate floods
with other County, Federal, State and local agencies (e.g., FEMA, US Army Corps of
Engineers, US Bureau of Reclamation, Arizona Department of Water Resources).
Action 5.B.1: The City of South Tucson, with the assistance of PCRFCD will participate in the
Community Rating System (CRS) program and get credit for the various activities
that assist property owners in receiving reduced insurance premiums.
Action 5.B.2: As required, South Tucson and PCRFCD will continue to incorporate riparian zone
protection in permitting through the floodplain and riparian ordinance.
Action 5.B.3: The City of South Tucson and PCRFCD will continue its partnership in operations of
the Pima County ALERT (Automated Local Evaluation in Real Time) flood hazard
information/mitigation system as a means of providing real-time weather information
to City of South Tucson residents, departments and other agencies.
Objective 5.C: The City of South Tucson will minimize repet~ive losses caused by flooding.
Action 5.C.1: The City of South Tucson will develop policies to acquire properties that are located
in flood hazard areas and develop uses for these properties that are compatible with
flood-prone lands.
Action 5.C.2: To ensure compliance with Federal and local floodplain management regulations,
the City of South Tucson will develop policies to require that property owners
provide Federal elevation certification for new construction in floodplains as
applicable.
Action 5.C.3: The City of South Tucson, with the assistance of PCDOT will continue to coordinate
roadway construction projects with US Army Corps of Engineers and use measures
to reduce risk of flooding when applicable.
Objective 5.D: The City of South Tucson will request assistance from Pima County, to enable the
participation in and maintain compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program
requirements.
Action 5.D.1: The City of South Tucson will request that PCRFCD staff continue to provide
technical assistance to the City as their Floodplain Management Agency, and to
residents seeking information on floodplain management at their request.
Action 5.D.2: At the request of the City of South Tucson, PCRFCD will continue to assist in
improving their Community Rating System (CRS) classification.
Objective 5.E: Address identified data limitations regarding the lack of information about relative
vulnerability of assets from floods.
Action 5.E.1: South Tucson will work closely with PCRFCD to continue to incorporate Flood
Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) into the Geographical Information System (GIS) to
expand the access to flood delineation/boundary maps to the public.
Action 5.E.2: South Tucson will provide information as required to PCRFCD in order to continue to
develop an Internet based combined map repository to allow easier access for
public and private entities.
Action 5.E.3: South Tucson will provide information to PCRFCD to maintain and update a library
at the Pima County Flood Control District's office that contains most past studies
and reports.
Pima County AAulli-Jlliscfctional H8ZEI'd Mitigation Plan (Drall: October 31, 2005)
URS
179
- -_~_~"___'"_~"O>""_'__"'_"__'_'''''''''''_''''''_',",'~'''''''''~~~__ ,<
~
Objective 5.F: The City of South Tucson will educate the public through outreach projects to increase
general awareness of hazards and opportunities for mitigation actions.
Action 5.F.1: South Tucson will request participation in PCRFCD's School Safety Presentation
Program.
Action 5.F.2: South Tucson will request PCRFCD's continued aid in outreach which utilizes public
forums such as the City of South Tucson Fair and Earth Day, the District's website,
and available pamphlets on basic flood preparedness.
Action 5.F.3: To increase awareness of potential residential flooding, South Tucson will mail flood
hazard information directly to residents of known flood hazard areas as required.
Goal 6. Reduce the possibility of damage and loss to businesses, homes and City of South Tucson-owned
facilities due to tir..
Objective 6.A: The City of South Tucson will continue to establish agreements with state and Federal
agencies that will reduce damage and losses due to fire within the City of South Tucson.
Action 6.A.1: Establish an intergovernmental agreement between the City of South Tucson and
the Fire Management Division of the State Land Department and Pima County for
assistance in the provision of emergency services within each other's jurisdictions.
Action 6.A.2: Ensure that the City of South Tucson has heavy equipment operators certified to
operate in a support role in the vicinity of a fire. The City of South Tucson Public
Works heavy equipment operators will be required to train with the South Tucson
Fire Department and the Pima County Office of Emergency Management to
establish a coordinated and cooperative policy and training.
Action 6.A.3: The City of South Tucson will develop and enter into intergovernmental agreements
for fire prevention/control with state and Federal land management agencies that are
adjoining or within their jurisdictions, including Interstate Highway System right-of-
ways.
Action 6.A.4: Develop a program to eradicate non-native buffel grass.
Objective 6.B: The City of South Tucson will protect existing assets from the effects of fire.
Action 6.B.1: Establish a standard safety zone of 30 feet around South Tucson-owned structures
that are vulnerable to the effects of fire.
Objective 6.C: The City of South Tucson will continue to promulgate building codes that will minimize
damage to homes and other structures from fire (Uniform Fire Code and/or International Fire
Code as locally amended).
Action 6.C.1: Ensure that regulations for new developments ensure adequate access for fire
trucks and defensible space.
Action 6.C.2: Ensure that building codes for all new homes prohibit the use of untreated wood
shake roofs and mandate the use a spark arresting system on the chimneys of
homes with wood burning fireplaces.
Objective 6.0: The City of South Tucson will educate the public about fire dangers and the steps that can
be taken to prevent or minimize their effects.
Action 6.0.1: Ensure that city staff and residents are aware of various websites that may provide
guidance on fire mitigation to the public.
Action 6.0.2: Continue to distribute fire mitigation information to all persons applying for building
permits in applicable areas ofthe City of South Tucson.
Pima County Mul/i-Jwisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
180
.)
Goal 7. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to severe weather.
Objective 7.A: The City of South Tucson will develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility
of damage and losses due to severe weather by moving beyond building codes local wind
area criteria to addressing structural uplift due to microburst activity.
Action 7.A.1: Pursue partnerships with the National Weather Service and State Universijies to
research the prediction of microburst.
Action 7.A.2: Educate the public on the dangers of severe weather through various media and
outreach programs.
Action 7.A.3: Ensure building codes for construction are strengthened to prevent roof damage
from high winds.
Action 7.A.4: Ensure compliance inspectors are available to ensure construction compliance and
that they have received the proper training in this field.
Objective 7.B: The Cijy of South Tucson will protect infrastructure from the effects of severe weather.
Action 7.B.1: Perform periodic assessments to identify infrastructure vulnerabilijies to severe
weather. The Building OffICial and the Fire Department will make the assessments
jointly.
Action 7.B.2: Promote metal power utility poles used in new transmission line construction and
used as replacements for existing wooden poles when indicated.
Objective 7.C: The Cijy of South Tucson will improve early severe weather warning communication to the
public.
Action 7.C.1: Encourage the use of weather radios, especially in schools, hospitals and other
locations where people congregate to inform them of the approach of severe
weather. The information can be distributed through classroom presentations by the
Fire Department.
Goal 8. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to drouaht.
Objective a.A: The City South Tucson will support the State of Arizona's comprehensive approach to
reducing the possibility of damage and losses due to drought.
Action 8.A.1: Promote, where appropriate, the use of xeriscaping or desert landscaping in the City
of South Tucson facilities and road projects.
Action 8.A.2: Lend technical support to those agencies tasked with conservation actions.
Objective 8.B: The Cijy of South Tucson will protect existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to
the effects of drought.
Action 8.B.1: Promote the use of effluent and reclaimed (gray) water harvesting for appropriate
applications and ensure that the Building Codes permit the recycling of reclaimed
water.
Objective 8.C: The City of South Tucson will support State and local water conservation messages and
programs through a variety of media.
Action 8.C.1: Participate in water summits and resource workshops identifying various water
conserving mechanisms (retrofitting, landscaping, repairing, etc.). Additionally, the
Cijy will contact both Pima County and the City of Tucson to obtain a schedule of
training sessions. South Tucson staff will be encouraged to participate, train
addnional staff at the City and implement water saving projects.
Pima County Mulli-Jllisclctional HazlJ'd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31. 2005)
URS
181
J
Goal 9. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to infestations and diseases.
Objective 9.A: The City of South Tucson will develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility
of damage and losses due to infestations and diseases.
Action 9.A.1: Conduct public outreach, information and immunizations.
Action 9.A.2: South Tucson will participate in the enforcement of Pima County's Health Code
requirements and conduct on-going inspections of permitted establishments and
environmental surveillance (i.e., routine inspection of public water systems and
treatment plants, air quality monitoring, food service inspections, vector control
enforcement and abatement activities).
Action 9.A.3: The City of South Tucson will request that the Pima County Public Health Officials
conduct vulnerability assessments and develop incident response plans at high risk
public water system facilities and food service establishments, and other areas and
programs related to vector control activities and air quality monitoring activities
within South Tucson.
Action 9.A.4: Facilitate abatement, prevention and investigation of public health nuisance
conditions, illegal dumping activities and the storage and handling of potentially
infectious material and locations. An City departments in contact with the public are
required to actively monitor situations and report violations to their supervisors. .
Objective 9.8: The City of South Tucson will protect existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to
the effects of infestations and diseases.
Action 9.8.1: In conjunction with the Pima County Health Department, conduct and enhance
environmental and epidemiological surveillance activities in areas identified as being
of high public health importance and related to environmental factors such as; air
quality, drinking water/public water systems and water /wastewater treatment plant
operations, food safety and protection and vector control activities. Surveillance
activities will include the identification of vulnerabilities and environmental factors
that may contribute to the transmission of the communicable diseases associated
with the operation and presence of these facilities in City of South Tucson, as well
as the implementation of preventative action that may reduce or eliminate the
potential for transmission of communicable illnesses. Develop and improve the
coordination and communication of these findings, trends and observations with
federal, state, and local agencies that have similar or related interest.
Action 9.8.2: The City in conjunction with the City of Tucson, Pima County and PAG will develop
and implement multi-agency exercises and drills related to outbreaks of
communicable illnesses and vector control.
Action 9.8.3: Enforce Federal & state mandates through routine compliance inspections.
Action 9.8.4: Perform joint ventures and activities with Pima County related to communicable
disease outbreaks and vector infestations, such as response activities to Nigleria
fowleri, Norwalk virus, and roof rat infestation (Rattus rattus).
Action 9.8.5: Standardization practice and training of regulatory inspection staff with the
cooperation of Pima County's Health Department.
Objective 9.C: The City of South Tucson will coordinate with and support existing efforts to mitigate
infestations and diseases.
Action 9.C.1: Provide designated staff access to and use of Pima County's database information
to browse/analyze histories of permitted facilities, and nuisance abatements as well
as to observe trends and identify needs in public health protection.
Pima county Mul/i-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Oral!: October 31, 2005)
URS
182
.)
Action 9.C.2: Acquire GIS equipment and interactive software to identify patterns of transmission
of disease and at-risk facility locations.
Action 9.C.3: Assist in the development of common database for Environmental Services, Public
Hea~h and other agencies to facilitate effective communication of information on
infectious illnesses, citizen complaints and potential environmental disease sentinel
observations.
Goal 10. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to geological hazards.
Objective 10.A: The City of South Tucson will develop a comprehensive approach within the South Tucson
Planning Department to reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to geological
hazards.
Action 1 0.A.1: Work with Arizona Geological Survey and US Geological Survey on projects that
mitigate gee-hazards.
Action 10.A.2: Continue to promulgate building codes addressing structural integrity through the
adoption of the inclusive building codes and updating of the City building safety
requirements.
Objective 10.B: The City of South Tucson will protect existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to
the effects of geological hazards.
Action 1 0.B.1: Investigate the feasibility of utilizing recharge to mitigate subsidence.
Action 10.B.2: Incorporate use of geotechnical investigation into roadway and bridge design.
Goal 11. Prevent or minimize damage and losses due to hazardous materials (HAlMA T) incidents.
Objective 11.A: The City of South Tucson will develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility
of damage and losses due to hazardous materials.
Action 11.A.1: Continue to ensure the involvement of industry, fire, law enforcement and other key
players in formation of a Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC).
Action 11.A.2: Under the auspices of the City of South Tucson LEPC (once formed and trained),
provide guidance to the HAZMAT incident first responders under the City of South
Tucson Emergency Operations Plan.
Action 11.A.3: Continue interfacing with PCDEa and PCDOT Spill Response Plan to coordinate
safe removal of hazardous material from roadways and right-of-ways.
Objective 11.B: The City of South Tucson will protect existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to
the effects of hazardous materials.
Action 11.B.1: Develop and maintain a database of schools and other key facilities (Public
Housing) within a one-mile radius of HAZMA T facilities such as railroads and
Interstate Highway Systems and make that database available to responders to
incidents at those facilities.
Action 11.B.2: Assist operators of facilities that store hazardous materials in developing emergency
response plans for those facilities.
Action 11.B.3: Continue the South Tucson Fire Department's business inspection program for
facilities that generate hazardous waste, or produce air emissions.
Objective 11.C: The City of South Tucson will reduce the number of, and volume of, hazardous materials
uncovered during Fire Department or Building Safety scheduled inspections.
Action 11.C.1: Through the LEPC encourage when possible the use of less hazardous alternatives
to the chemicals currently used.
Pima County MuIIi.Jllislfctional Haz"d Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
183
J
Objective 11.0: The City of South Tucson will reduce the risk of injury or loss of life to first responders from
hazardous materials incidents. Fire Department, Police Department and Public Works
employees need to attend awareness training.
Action 11.0.1: Provide emergency response guidebooks to all fire and law enforcement vehicles,
and to Public Works staff.
Action 11.0.2: Sponsor, under LEPC guidance, an annual simulation response to a large-scale
HAZMAT incident within the City.
Objective 11.E: The City of South Tucson will increase city employees and general public knowledge of the
safe handling of extremely hazardous substance (EHS).
Action 11.E.1: Offer, through the City of South Tucson Public Safety and Pima County's Office of
Emergency Management & Homeland Security, basic HAZMAT awareness ("Right-
to-Know") courses to City of South Tucson employees.
Action 11.E.2: Provide information to the public regarding safe handling of household chemicals
through pamphlets, ons~e visits or other means of communications.
Goal 12. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses to existing assets due to other human-caused
hazards.
Objective 12.A: The City of South Tucson will develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility
of damage and losses due to other human-caused hazards.
Action 12.A.1: Provide and support, through the City of South Tucson Public Safety Departments
and the Pima County OffICe of Emergency Management & Homeland Security,
Basic Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) courses to City employees and the
public.
Action 12.A.2: Promote child drowning prevention programs throughout the City of South Tucson.
Action 12.A.3: Provide program direction in support and development of Community Emergency
Response Teams (CERT).
Action 12.A.4: Promote and expand existing City of South Tucson programs aimed at school
violence and family preparedness.
Objective 12.B: The City of South Tucson will protect existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to
the effects of other human-caused hazards.
Action 12. B.1: Reassess vulnerability of potential terrorist targets and share information among law
enforcement ageocies.
Action 12.B.2: Provide a leadership role to support the City of South Tucson Public Safety
Preparedness efforts to standardize the capabilities of the first responders to
decontaminate patients in the event of a chemical, biological or radiological terrorist
event.
Objective 12.C: The City of South Tucson will coordinate with and support efforts to mitigate other human-
caused hazards.
Action 12.C.1: Request, allocate and administer Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding
(through Pima County) to appropriate agencies throughout the City of South Tucson.
Action 12.C.2: Develop a City Emergency Response Team (CERT) to support disaster operations
with the cooperation of supporting Agencies and trained City of South Tucson
Departments to Fire, Police, Public Works, Housing Authority, Administration and
Court staff.
Pima County Mulli-JuriscJiclional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
184
.)
6.2.8 Tucson
Goal 1. Promote disaster-resistant development.
Objective 1.A: Continue to facilitate the development and updating of the general plan and zoning
ordinance to limn development in high hazard areas.
Action 1.A.1: Continue to develop new and update existing City Building Codes, Historical
Preservation and Land Use ordinances. Modify with additional guidelines,
regulations and land use techniques as necessary within the limns of State statutes,
while respecting private property rights.
Action 1.A.2: Review existing building codes to determine if they adequately protect new
development in hazard areas. Where feasible and necessary, modify codes to help
mnigate hazards imposed on such development within the limits of State statutes,
while respecting private property rights.
Objective 1.B: Promote consistent enforcement of general plans, zoning ordinances and building codes.
Action 1.B.1: Increase of Development Services pool of Code Enforcement inspectors.
Action 1.B.2: Maintain comprehensive continuing education program for inspectors.
Action 1.B.3: Continue coordination between cny of Tucson and Pima County Departments,
municipalities. Pima Association of Governments and other agencies in the
development and maintenance of an accurate geographic information system (GIS).
This system will identify those hazard areas listed in the adopted hazard mitigation
plan.
Objective 1.C: Facilitate construction of public infrastructure to reduce loss in hazard areas.
Action 1.C.1: Follow guidelines established in the appropriate Federal, State, County and City
design manuals.
Action 1.C.2: Conduct periodic monitoring and review of design manuals to ensure compliance
with Federal regulations.
Action 1.C.3: Promote disaster-resistant water delivery system by constructing redundant water
transmission lines.
Goal 2. Promote public understanding, support and interest in hazard mitigation.
Objective 2.A: Promote partnerships between the state, counties, local and tribal governments, public
sector, private industry, civic and non-profit groups to identify, prioritize and implement
mnigation actions.
Action 2.A.1: Pro-actively promote availability of Pre-Disaster Mitigation and Hazard Mitigation
Grant Program funds through training of relevant City staffs.
Action 2.A.2: Promote outreach of CitylMitigation Plan throughout the City.
Action 2.A.3: Continue relationship with the Arizona Emergency Services Association and the
Arizona Contingency Planners.
Objective 2.B: Educate the public to increase awareness of hazards and mitigation opportunities.
Action 2.B.1: Create or supplement cny public information sheets to include suggested mitigation
actions.
Action 2.B.2: Announce approval of plan with suggested mitigation actions through a variety of
media outlets.
Pima County Mufi-Jllislfctional Hazl'd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 20(5)
URS
185
~
Goal 3. Build and support local capacity to warn the public about emergency situations and assist in their
response.
Objective 3.A: Improve upon existing capabilities to warn the public of emergency situations.
Action 3.A.1 : Maintain a system to test the ability of local emergency managers and to activate the
Emergency Alert System (EAS).
Action 3.A.2: Expedite installation of a City of Tucson reverse 9-1-1 and State 2-1-1 systems.
Objective 3.B: Develop a program to enhance the safety of residents of the City of Tucson during an
emergency.
Action 3.B.1: Develop a mass evacuation strategy for the City of Tucson to include installing back-
up battery power at all 380 signaled intersections in the City of Tucson.
Action 3.B.2: Develop a shelter-in-p1ace educational program.
Goal 4. Improve hazard mitigation coordination and communication within the City.
Objective 4.A: Address identified data limitations regarding the lack of information about City of Tucson
infrastructure.
Action 4.A.1: Exped~e the process to obtain funds for the purchase, installation, operation and
maintenance of a City/County interoperability communications system.
Action 4.A.2: Adopt use of the Disaster Management Incident System (DMIS) as an interim
measure until Action 4,A,1 is accomplished.
Goal 5. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to floods.
Objective 5.A: Maintain and update City of Tucson's comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of
damage and losses due to floods.
Action 5.A.1: Install and maintain 2 bridges, 50 box culverts and 380 back-up power units for
signaled intersections in accord with the COT Department of Transportation 5 year
plan.
Action 5.A.2: The City of Tucson will continue working with the Pima County Planning and
Development Services on a cooperative effort to notify developers of floodplain
regulations early on in the development process.
Action 5.A.3: The City of Tucson will continue to plan for. design and construct appropriate flood
control structures for public safety and damage reduction.
Action 5.A,4: City of Tucson Department of Transportation will continue to inspect and mon~or all
bridges and culverts under their control on a schedule in compliance with Federal
regulations.
Action 5.A.5: The City of Tucson will continue to enforce flood and erosion hazard building
setbacks.
Objective 5.B: Coordinate with and support existing efforts to mitigate floods with other Federal. State and
local agencies (e.g.. FEMA, US Bureau of Reclamation, Arizona Department of Water
Resources).
Action 5.B,1: Continue to coordinate with the County to incorporate riparian zone protection in
permitting through the floodplain and riparian ordinance.
Action 5,B.2: The City of Tucson will continue to participate in the Community Rating System
(CRS) program and get credit for the various activities that assist property owners in
receiving reduced insurance premiums.
Pima County Mul/i-Jurisclictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
186
J
Action 5.8.3: The City of Tucson will continue to cooperate with PCRFCO in implementation of its
ALERT (Automated Local Evaluation in Real Time) flood hazard
information/mitigation system as a means of providing real-time weather information
to City departments and other agencies.
Objective 5.C: Educate the public to increase awareness of hazards and opportunities for flood mitigation
actions through outreach projects.
Action 5.C.1: City of Tucson will continue to work with local school districts in safety education
programs.
Action 5.C.2: Educate public on .Stupid Motorist Law".
Objective 5.0: Minimize repetitive losses caused by flooding.
Action 5.0.1: The City of Tucson will continue to implement its Floodprone Land Acquisition
Program to acquire properties that are located in flood hazard areas.
Action 5.0.2: To ensure compliance with Federal and local floodplain management regulations,
the City will continue to require that property owners provide Federal elevation
certification for new construction in flood plains.
Action 5.0.3: The City will continue to coordinate roadway construction projects with the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers and use measures to reduce risk of flooding.
Objective 5.E: Continue participation in and maintain compliance with the National Flood Insurance
requirement.
Action 5.E.1: City staff will continue to receive technical assistance from PCRFCO, and assist
residents seeking information.
Action 5.E.2: At their request, the City of Tucson will continue to assist other municipalities in
improving their Community Rating System (CRS) classification.
Goal 6. Reduce the possibility of damage and loss to businesses, homes, and City of Tucson owned
facilities due to wildfires (Urban Interface Fires).
Objective 6.A: Continue to establish agreements with State and Federal agencies that will reduce damage
and losses due to wildfires in urban interface areas of annexed properties.
Action 6.A.1: Continue the existing intergovernmental agreement between the City of Tucson and
the Fire Management Division of the State Land Department for assistance in the
provision of emergency services within each other's jurisdiction.
Action 6.A.2: Maintain the City of Tucson's database of heavy equipment operators certified to
operate in a support role in the vicinity of an urban interface fire.
Action 6.A.3: Assure the above operators are trained and meet the criteria set forth by
NIMSIICS/OSHA mandates.
Action 6.A.4: Encourage cities, towns and fire districts in the county to enter into
intergovernmental agreements for wildfire prevention/control with State and Federal
land management agencies that are adjoining or within their jurisdictions.
Action 6.A.5: Work with these other jurisdictions to maintain the City mutual aid agreements.
Objective 6.8: Protect existing City assets from the effects of Urban Interface Fires.
Action 6.8.1: Establish a standard safety zone of 30 feet around City owned structures that are
vulnerable to the effects of Urban Interface Fire.
Action 6.8.2: Continue to enforce open burning ordinance.
Pima County Mulli-JlXiscictiona/ Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
187
.J
Objective 6.C: Continue to promulgate building codes for newly annexed City properties that will minimize
damage to homes and other structures from Urban Interface fires.
Action 6.C.1: Ensure that subdivision regulations for new subdivisions ensure adequate access for
fire trucks and defensible space.
Action 6.C.2: Ensure that building codes for all new homes prohibit the use of untreated wood
shake roofs and mandate the use of a spark arresting system on the chimneys of
homes with wood burning fireplaces.
Objective 6.0: Educate the public about Urban Interface fire dangers and the steps that can be taken to
prevent or minimize their effects.
Action 6.0.1: Place Urban Interface fire information on Tucson Fire's website that will provide
suffICient guidance on Urban Interface fire mitigation to the public.
Action 6.0.2: Continue to distribute Urban Interface fire information to persons applying for
building permits in applicable areas of the City.
Goal 7. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to severe weather.
Objective 7.A: Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses due to
severe weather.
Action 7 .A.1 : Continue partnership with National Weather Service to predict microbursts.
Action 7 A.2: Educate the public on the dangers of severe weather through various media and
outreach programs.
Objective 7.B: Protect infrastructure from the effects of severe weather.
Action 7 .B.1 : Perform periodic assessments to identify infrastructure wlnerabilities to severe
weather.
Objective 7.C: Improve early warning communication to the public.
Action 7.C.1: Encourage the use of weather radios. especially in schools, hospitals and other
locations.
Goal 8. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to drouaht.
Objective 8.A: Support the State's comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and
losses due to drought.
Action 8.A.1: Promote, where appropriate, the use of xeriscaping or desert landscaping at City
facilities and projects.
Action 8.A.2: Lend technical support to those agencies tasked with conservation actions.
Objective 8.B: Protect existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of drought.
Action 8.B.1: Promote the use of effluent and reclaimed (gray) water harvesting for appropriate
applications.
Objective 8.C: Support State, County and City local water conservation messages and programs through a
variety of media.
Action 8.C.1: Participate in water summits and resource workshops identifying various water
conserving mechanisms (retrofitting, landscaping, repairing, etc.).
Goal 9. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to infestation and diseases.
Objective 9.A: Follow the direction of the State Health Department.
Pima County MunI-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
188
.J
Action 9.A.1: Conduct public outreach and information sessions on bees, West Nile Virus, Hanta
Virus, pesticides, etc.
Action 9.A.2: Enforce Health Code requirements through on-going inspections of permitted
establishments and environmental surveillance.
Action 9.A.3: Continue vulnerability assessments and develop incident response plans at high risk
public water system facilities and food service establishments and other areas and
programs related to vector control activities and air quality-monitoring activities.
Action 9.A.4: Continue following direction of State Health Department concerning mitigation
measure for various diseases (West Nile Virus, Pesticides, Hanta Virus, Flu, etc.)
Action 9.A.5: Facilitate abatement, prevention and investigation of public health nuisance
conditions, illegal dumping activities and the storage and handling of potentially
infectious material and locations.
Objective 9.8: Protect existing assets with highest relative vulnerability to the effects of infestations and
diseases.
Action 9.8.1: Maintain City of Tucson inspection program for water, food, wastewater, storm water
and vectors.
Action 9.8.2: Improve coordination and communication of inspection findings, trends and other
observations with Federal, State and local agencies that have similar or related
interests.
Action 9.8.3: Participate in multi-agency exercises and drills related to outbreaks of
communicable diseases and vector control.
Action 9.8.4: Follow all health alert directives from Pima County Department of Health.
Goal 10. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to aeolOGical hazards.
Objective 10.A: Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses to
geological hazards.
Action 10.A.1: Work with the Arizona Geological Society and U.S. Geological Survey on projects
that mitigate geo-hazards.
Action 10.A.2: Continue to promulgate building codes addressing structural integrity in light of
perceived seismic risk.
Action 10.A.3: Use geotechnical investigation in roadway and bridge design.
Objective 10.8: Protect existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of geological
hazards.
Action 10.8.1: Continue feasibility study of utilizing recharge to mitigate subsidence.
Action 10.8.2: Continue to incorporate use of geotechnical investigation into roadway and bridge
design process to assess roadways and bridges for susceptibility.
Goal 11. Prevent or minimize damage and losses due to hazardous materials (HAlMA T) incidents.
Objective 11.A: Maintain City of Tucson's comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage
and losses due to hazardous materials.
Action 11.A.1: Continue City of Tucson involvement in the Pima County Local Emergency Planning
Committee (LEPC).
Action 11.A.2: Continue using the City of Tucson Spill Response Plan to coordinate safe removal of
hazardous materials from City of Tucson roadways and rights-of-ways.
Pima County MuIIi-./lIisddion81 Hazcrd AIitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
189
- ~ <_~_~_""""""_~"""h.....,,_ >,..__.,"_~"..."". ..-. ...~ l
J
Objective 11.8: Protect existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of hazardous
materials.
Action 11.8.1: Maintain a database of schools, hospitals and other key facilijies within a one-mile
radius of HAZMA T facilmes and make that database available to responders to
incidents at those facilijies.
Action 11.8.2: Continue to assist operators of facilijies that store hazardous materials in developing
"emergency response" and "contingency. plans for their facilities.
Action 11.8.3: Continue City of Tucson inspection program forfacilijjes that generate hazardous
waste.
Objective 11.C: Reduce the number of and volume of hazardous materials.
Action 11.C.1: Continue to encourage use of less hazardous alternatives to the chemicals currently
used.
Objective 11.0: Reduce the risk of injury or loss of life by first responders to hazardous materials incidents.
Action 11.0.1: Continue providing emergency response guidebooks to all City of Tucson response
vehicles.
Action 11.0.2: Continue City ofTucson annual exercise simulating response to a large scale
HAZMA T incident.
Objective 11.E: Increase government and public knowledge of safe handling of Extremely Hazardous
Substances (EHS).
Action 11.E.1: Continue offering basic HAZMA T awareness (Right-to-Know) courses to City of
Tucson employees.
Action 11.E.2: Continue annual Chemical Recognition dasses for Tucson Fire and other
employees that work with EHS.
Action 11.E.3: Provide information to the public regarding safe handling of household chemicals on
the City ofTucson websije.
Action 11.E.4: Continue operation, maintenance and outreach programs of the Hazardous Waste
Recyding facility.
Goal 12. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses to existing assets due to other human-caused
hazards.
Objective 12.A: Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses due to
other human-caused hazards.
Action 12.A.1: Continue to provide and support basic weapons of mass weapons of mass
destruction (WMO) courses for City of Tucson employees.
Action 12.A.2: Provide child drowning prevention programs throughout the City of Tucson.
Action 12.A.3: Continue Metropolitan Medical Response System (MMRS) participation and training,
including classes at Pima Community College (PCC).
Action 12.A.4: Provide program direction in support and development of Community Emergency
Response Teams (CERT).
Action 12.A.5: Promote and expand existing City of Tucson programs aimed at school, workplace
violence and family preparedness.
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
190
J
Action 12.A.6: Tucson Water, a division of the Utility Services Department, will secure ns assets
and facilities by implementing actions, in phases, as identified in the Federally
mandated Water System Vulnerability Assessment completed in October 2002.
Phase l: La Entrada Building Improvements - Implement modifications to building
structure. Customer access will be fimited to the first floor with all services in one
location, including a public restroom. Customer access to other floors will require
check-in with the security guards, stationed in full view of the entrance and next to
the cashier. Other engineering and administration functions will be moved to the
second and third floors resulting in remodeling requirements on the respective
floors. Employee security and improved workflow will result through completion of
this project.
Phase II: Upgrade the Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA)
Systemwide communication infrastructure to include the design and installation of
new netvaking, switchgear components and Master radio site equipment at various
locations to enhance fiber optic connectivity, improve network security and increase
the
SCADA master radio site coverage.
Phase III: SCADA System Improvements - improve the central SCADA
Computer system hardware and software. This will update the version of control
system software and migrates the SCADA application away from the aging 1994
digital equipment.
Each phase will include ongoing site security analysis, acquisition and installation of
security system hardware and software, video cameras, sensor equipment, as well
as building modifications including wiring and access card reader acquisition and
remodel WOf1( at reservoirs, pressure reducing valve stations, boosters and well
sites.
Objective 12.B: Protect existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of other human-
caused hazards.
Action 12.B.1: Continue assessing vulnerability of potential terrorist targets and share information
among law enforcement agencies.
Action 12.B.2: Continue participation in the Interagency Threat Assessment Group (ITAG).
Action 12.B.3: Continue MMRS program and preparedness efforts to standardize capabilities to
decontaminate patients in the event of a chemical, biological or radiological terrorist
event.
Objective 12.C: Coordinate with and support efforts to mitigate other human-caused hazards.
Action 12.C.1: Continue to support and assist State, County and other municipalities in their hazard
mitigation programs where appropriate and feasible.
Pima County Mufi-Nisdctional Hazifll AIifigaIion Plan (Dratt: October 31, 2005)
URS
191
,)
6.2.9 Unincorporated Pima County
Goal 1. Promote disaster-resistant development.
Objective 1.A: Encourage and facilitate the development and updating of the comprehensive plan and
relevant ordinances to limit development in hazard areas. .
Action 1.A.1: Review the existing Pima County comprehensive plan, Sonoran Desert
Conservation Plan and relevant ordinances to determine how these documents help
limit development in hazard areas. Modify with additional guidelines, regulations,
and land use techniques as necessary within the limits of state statutes.
Action 1.A.2: Establish periodic review of Pima County's comprehensive plan and relevant
ordinances to determine effectiveness at preventing and mitigating hazards and
amend as necessary.
Objective 1.8: Encourage and facilitate the adoption of building codes that protect existing assets and
development in hazard areas.
Action 1.8.1: Review existing building codes to determine if they adequately protect new
development in hazard areas. Where feasible and necessary, modify codes to help
mitigate hazards imposed on such development within the limits of state statutes.
Objective 1.C: Promote consistent enforcement of comprehensive plans, zoning ordinances, and building
codes.
Action 1.C.1: Distribute all development master plans, zone change, and subdivision applications
as applicable to the Pima County Development Services for review to ensure
consistency with the adopted hazard mitigation plan.
Action 1.C.2: Pima County Office of Emergency Management (OEM) will provide training to
applicable Pima County Planning and Developrnent (PCDS) department staff of the
adopted hazard mitigation plan and its requirements.
Action 1.C.3: Continue coordination between Pima County departments to identify and mitigate
hazards associated with new development.
Objective 1.0: Address identified data limitations regarding the lack of information about new development
and build-out potential in hazard areas.
Action 1.0.1: Continued coordination between Pima County departments, municipalities, Pima
Association of Governments, and other agencies in the development and
maintenance of accurate geographic information system information for those
hazard areas identified in the adopted hazard mitigation plan.
Objective 1.E: Facilitate construction of public infrastructure to reduce loss in hazard areas.
Action 1.E.1: Follow guidelines established in the Pima County Roadway Design Manua/.
Action 1.E.2: Conduct periodic review of design manual to ensure compliance with federal
regulations.
Action 1.E. 3: Provide public access at Internet site to design manual to facilitate Compliance with
Pima County, state and federal standards by private development companies.
www.dot.pima.QovltransenQ/roaddesiQn/
Action 1.E.4: All public facilities must comply with county ordinances.
Pima County Mulli-JuriscHctional HazlYd Mitigation Plan (Draft October 31, 2(05)
URS
192
J
Goal 2. Promote public understanding, support and interest in hazard mitigation.
Objective 2.A: Promote partnerships between the state, counties, local, tribal governments, public sector,
private industry, civic and non-profit groups to identify, prioritize, and implement mitigation
actions. .
Actions 2.A.1: Pro-actively promote availability of Pre Disaster Mitigation and Hazard Mitigation
Grant Program funds.
Action 2.A.2: Educate jurisdictions how to explore variety of funding sources.
Action 2.A.3: Promote outreach of County Mitigation Plan throughout Pima County.
Action 2.A.4: Maintain relationship with the Arizona Emergency Services Association and the
Arizona Contingency Planners.
Objective 2.8: Educate the public to increase awareness of hazards and opportunities for mitigation
actions.
Action 2.8.1: Create or supplement Pima County public information sheets to include suggested
mitigation actions.
Action 2.8.2: Add mitigation actions to Pima County Office of Emergency Management (OEM)
website. . .
Action 2.8.3: Announce approval of plan with suggested mitigation actions through a variety of
media outlets.
Goal 3. Build and support local capacity to warn the public about emergency situations and assist in their
response.
Objective 3.A: Improve upon existing capabilities to warn the public of emergency situations.
Action 3.A.1: Maintain a system to test the ability of local emergency managers to activate the
Emergency Alert System (EAS).
Action 3.A.2: Provide technical support for the procurement of a reverse 9-1-1 system.
Objective 3.8: Develop a program to enhance the safety of the residents of Pima County during an
emergency.
Action 3.8.1: Develop a Mass Evacuation strategy for Pima County.
Action 3.8.2: Develop a Shelter-in-Place educational program.
Goal 4. Improve hazard mitigation coordination and communication within the County.
Objective 4.A: Address identified data limitations regarding the lack of information about County
infrastructure.
Action 4.A.1: Ensure that the Office of Emergency Management and Homeland Security (OEM)
has access to GIS layer info throughout Pima County government.
Action 4.A.2: The Pima County Regional Flood Control District (RFCD) will continue to provide to
PCOEM&HS (OEM), on an annual basis, an updated Emergency Response CD-
ROM program for dispersal to interested emergency response agencies.
Objective 4.8: Design, develop, train and conduct community wide exercises as identified by Pima County
Office of Emergency Management and Homeland Security (OEM) and other agencies.
Action 4.8.1: Identify exercises for community needs.
Action 4.8.2: Develop exercises for community needs.
Pima County Iluli-JtliSlidiona/ Hazwd I.fifiga/ioo Plan (Orall: October 31, 2(05)
URS
193
J
Action 4.8.3: Train agencies and community groups involved in exercises.
Action 4.8.4: Conduct exercises in the community.
Goal 5. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to floods.
Objective 5.A: Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses due to
floods.
Action 5A1: Pima County Regional Flood Control District (RFCD) will continue to study major
areas of concern to address flood prevention as necessary..
Action 5.A.2: Each year for the next fIVe years, the RFCD will inspect five flood control facilities to
insure they are in safe working order, properly maintained and meet regulatory
requirements. Corrective action will be initiated for any problem identified during the
inspection
Action 5A3: The RFCD will continue working with Pima County Planning and Development
Services (PCDS) on a cooperative effort to notify developers of floodplain
regulations early on in the development process.
Action 5.A.4: RFCD will continue to plan for, design, and construct appropriate flood control
structures for public safety and damage reduction.
Action 5.A.5: Discourage new road construction in floodplains.
Action 5.A.6. Encourage the development of bridges to span the 100-year floodplains.
Action 5A? Encourage the design and placement of culverts to maintain natural watercourse
characteristics, including flow conveyance, sediment transport, and wildlife
movement
Action 5.A.8: Pima County Department of Transportation (PCDOT) will inspect and monitor all
bridges and culverts under their control on a schedule in compliance with federal
regulations.
Action 5.A.9: RFCD will continue to enforce flood and erosion hazard management ordinances.
Objective 5.B: Coordinate with and support existing efforts to mitigate floods with other federal, State and
local agencies (e.g., FEMA, US Army Corps of Engineers, US Bureau of Reclamation,
Arizona Department of Water Resources).
Action 5.B.1: Pima County through RFCD will continue to participate in the Community Rating
System (CRS) program and get credit for the various activities that assist property
owners in receiving reduced insurance premiums.
Action 5.B.2: RFCD will continue to incorporate riparian habitat protection through the floodplain
and riparian ordinance.
Action 5.B.3: RFCD will continue to operate its ALERT (Automated Local Evaluation in Real Time)
flood hazard information system as a means of providing real-time weather
information to county departments and other agencies.
Objective 5.C: Minimize repetitive losses caused by flooding.
Action 5.C.1: RFCD will continue to implement its Flood prone Land Acquisition Program to
acquire properties that are located in flood hazard areas.
Action 5.C.2: To ensure compliance with federal and local floodplain management regulations,
RFCD will continue to require that property owners provide federal elevation
certification for new construction in floodplains.
Pima County Mulli-Jurisdictional HazlJ'd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
194
,)
Action 5.C.3: Pima County agencies and departments will continue to coordinate affected
construction projects located in the "Waters ofThe U.S." with the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers and use measures to reduce potential for flooding.
Objective 5.0: Provide assistance to local governments, to enable them to participate in and maintain
compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program requirements.
Action 5.0.1: RFCD staff will continue to offer technical assistance to any individuals or
municipalities upon request.
Action 5.0.2: RFCD will continue to assist other municipalities in improving their Community
Rating System (CRS) classification.
Objective 5.E: Address identified data limitations regarding the lack of information about relative
vulnerability of assets from floods.
Action 5.E.1: RFCD will continue to incorporate Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) into the
Geographical Information System (GIS) to improve access to flood
delineationlboundary maps to the public.
Action 5.E.2: RFCD will continue to develop an Internet based combined map repository to allow
easier access for public and private entities.
Action 5.E.3: RFCD will continue to maintain and update a library that contains past studies and
reports.
Objective 5.F: Educate the public to increase awareness of hazards and opportunities for mitigation actions
through outreach projects.
Action 5.F.1: RFCD will continue outreach and public education utilizing public forums such as the
County Fair and Earth Day, the District's internet page, and pamphlets available on
basic flood preparedness.
Action 5.F.2: To increase awareness of potential residential flooding, RFCD will continue to mail
flood hazard information directly to residents of known flood hazard areas.
Goal 6. Reduce the possibility of damage and loss to businesses, homes and county-owned facilities due
to wildfires.
Objective 6.A: Continue to establish agreements with state and federal agencies that will reduce damage
and losses due to wildfires such as the Mount Lemmon Firewise program.
Action 6.A.1: Continue the existing intergovernmental agreement between the county and the Fire
Management Division of the State Land Department for assistance in the provision
of emergency services within each other's jurisdictions.
Action 6.A.2: Ensure that the county has heavy equipment operators certified to operate in a
support role in the vicinity of a wildfire.
Action 6.A.3: Encourage cities, towns, and fire districts in the county to enter into
intergovernmental agreements for wildfire prevention/control with state and federal
land management agencies that are adjoining or within their jurisdictions.
Action 6.A.4: Develop programs to eradicate non-native buffel grass and other non-native
vegetative species that enhance the threat of wildfires.
Objective 6.B: Protect existing county assets from the effects of wildfires.
Action 6.B.1: Establish a standard safety zone of 30 feet around county-owned structures that are
vulnerable to the effects of wildfire.
Pima County Mulli-Jurisdictional Haz;,d Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
195
.)
Objective 6.C: Continue to promulgate building codes for unincorporated Pima County that will minimjze
damage to homes and other structures from wildfires (International Wildland Interface Code
as locally amended).
Action 6.C.1: Ensure that subdivision regulations for new subdivisions ensure adequate access for
fire trucks and defensible space.
Action 6.C.2: Ensure that building codes for all new homes prohibit the use of untreated v.ood
shake roofs and mandate the use a spark arresting system on the chimneys of
homes with wood burning fireplaces.
Objective 6.0: Educate the public about wildfire dangers and the steps that can be taken to prevent or
minimize their effects.
Action 6.0.1: Ensure that the OffICe of Emergency Managemenfs web page provides suffICient
guidance on wildfire mitigation to the public.
Action 6.0.2: Continue to distribute wildfire mitigation information to persons applying for building
permns in applicable unincorporated areas of the county.
Goal 7 . Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to severe weather.
Objective 7.A: Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibilny of damage and losses due to
severe weather by moving beyond building codes local wind area criteria to addressing
structural uplift due to microburst activny.
Action 7 .A.1 : Pursue partnerships with the National Weather Service and State Universnies to
research the prediction of microburst.
Action 7.A.2: Educate the public on the dangers of severe weather through various media and
outreach programs.
Action 7.A.3: Ensure building codes for construction are strengthened to prevent roof damage
from high winds.
Action 7.A.4: Ensure enough compliance inspectors are available to ensure construction
compliance.
Objective 7.B: Protect infrastructure from the effects of severe weather.
Action 7.B.1: Perform periodic assessments to identify infrastructure vulnerabilnies to severe
weather.
Action 7.B.2: Promote metal power utilny poles used in new transmission line construction and
used as replacements for existing wooden poles when indicated.
Objective 7.C: Improve early warning communication to the public the threat of severe weather.
Action 7.C.1: Encourage the use of weather radios, especially in schools, hospitals and other
locations where people congregate to inform them of the approach of severe
weather.
Goal 8. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to drought
Objective 8.A: Support the State's comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and
losses due to drought.
Action 8 .A.1 : Promote, where appropriate, the use of xeriscaping or desert landscaping at County
facilities and projects.
Action 8.A.2: Lend technical support to those agencies tasked with conservation actions.
Objective 8.B: Protect existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of drought.
Pima County Mul/i-Juriswc/ional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31. 2(05)
URS
196
Action 8.B.1 : Promote the use of effluent and reclaimed (gray) water harvesting for appropriate
applications.
Objective 8.C: Support State and local water conservation messages and programs through a variety of
media.
Action 8.C.1: Participate in water summits and resource workshops identifying various water
conserving mechanisms (retrofitting, landscaping, repairing, etc.).
Goal 9. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to infestations and diseases.
Objective 9.A: Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses due to
infestations and diseases.
Action 9.A.1: Conduct public outreach, information and immunizations.
Action 9.A.2: Enforce Health Code requirements through on-going inspections of permitted
establishments and environmental surveillance, (I.e. routine inspection of public
water systems and treatment plants, air quality monitoring, food service inspections,
vector control enforcement and abatement activities).
Action 9.A.3: Conduct vulnerability assessments and develop incident response plans at high risk
public water system facilities and food service establishments, and other areas and
programs related to vector control activities and air quality monitoring activities.
Action 9.A.4: Facilitate abatement, prevention and investigation of public health nuisance
conditions, illegal dumping activities and the storage and handling of potentially
infectious material and locations.
Objective 9.B: Protect existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of infestations and
diseases.
Action 9.B.1: Conduct and enhance environmental and epidemiological surveillance activities in
those areas identified as being of high public health importance and related to
environmental factors such as; air quality, drinking water/public water systems and
waterlwastewater treatment plant operations, food safety and protection and vector
control activities. Surveillance activities must include the identification of
vulnerabilnies and environmental factors that may contribute to the transmission of
the communicable diseases associated with the operation and presence of these
facilities in Pima County, as well as the implementation of preventative action which
may be applied to reduce or eliminate the potential for transmission of
communicable illnesses. Develop and improve the system of coordination and
communication of these findings, trends and observations with other federal, state
and local agencies that have similar or related interest.
Action 9.B.2: Development and implementation of multi-agency exercises and drills related to
outbreaks of communicable illnesses and vector control.
Action 9.B.3: Enforcement of federal & state mandates in routine compliance inspections.
Action 9.B.4: Performing joint ventures and activities related to communicable disease outbreaks
and vector infestations, such as the response activities to Nigleria fowleri, Norwalk
virus, West Nile Virus and roof rat infestation (Rattus rattus).
Action 9.B.5: Implement and conduct standardization practice and training of regulatory inspection
staff.
Objective 9.C: Coordinate with and support existing efforts to mitigate infestations and diseases (e.g.,
Arizona Pine Bark Beetle Task Force, Arizona Department of Agriculture, US Department of
Agriculture).
Pima county MuIIi-JlliscHctiona/ Hazll'li Mitigation Plan (Dralf: October 31, 2005)
URS
197
J.
Action 9.C.1: Provide designated staff access to and use of database information to
browse/analyze histories of permitted facil"ies, and nuisance abatements to observe
trends and identify needs in public health protection.
Action 9.C.2: Acquire GIS equipment and interactive software to identify patterns of transmission
of disease and at-risk facility locations.
Action 9.C.3: Development of common database for Environmental Services, Public Health and
other agencies to facilitate effective communication of information on infectious
illnesses, citizen complaints and potential environmental disease sentinel
observations.
Goal 1 O. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses due to geolOGical hazards.
Objective 10.A: Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses due
to geological hazards.
Action 1 O.A.1: Work with Arizona Geological Survey and US Geological Survey on projects that
m"igate geo-hazards.
Action 10.A.2: Continue to promulgate building codes addressing structural integrity in light of
perceived seismic risk.
Objective 10.8: Protect existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of geological
hazards.
Action 10.8.1: Investigate the feasibility of utilizing recharge to mitigate subsidence.
Action 10.B.2: Incorporate use of geotechnical investigation into the roadway and bridge design
processes.
Goal 11. Prevent or minimize damage and losses due to hazardous materials (HAZMAT) Incidents.
Objective 11.A: Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses due to
hazardous materials.
Action 11.A.1: Continue to ensure the involvement of industry, fire, law enforcement and other key
players in the Pima County Local Emergency Planning committee (LEPC).
Action 11.A.2: Provide guidance to HAlMA T incident first responders in the Pima County
Emergency Operations Plan, under the auspices of the Pima County LEPC.
Action 11.A.3: Continue using PCDOT Spill Response Plan to coordinate safe removal of
hazardous material from roadways and right-of-ways.
Objective 11.8: Protect existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of hazardous
materials.
Action 11.8.1: Develop and maintain a database of schools, hosphals, and other key facilities
within a one-mile radius of HAZMA T facilhies and make that database available to
responders to incidents at those facilhies.
Action 11.8.2: Assist operators of facilities that store hazardous materials in developing emergency
response plans for those facilhies.
Action 11.8.3: Continue Pima County Department of Environmental Quality's, PDEQ's, inspection
program for facilities that generate hazardous waste, or produce air emissions.
Objective 11.C: Reduce the number of, and volume of, hazardous materials.
Action 11.C.1: Through the LEPC, encourage the use of less hazardous altematives to the
chemicals currently used when possible.
Pima County Multi-Juriscfjctional Haz~d Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
198
~;t
.,.aJ
Objective 11.0: Reduce the risk of injury or loss of life to first responders to hazardous materials incidents.
Action 11.0.1: Provide emergency response guidebooks to all fire and law enforcement vehicles.
Action 11.0.2: Sponsor, under lEPC guidance, an annual exercise simulating response to a large-
scale HAlMA T incident.
Objective 11.E: Increase govemment and public knowledge in safe handling of extremely hazardous
substance (EHS).
Action 11.E.1: Offer, through the Pima County Office of Emergency Management & Homeland
Security, basic HAZMAT awareness ("Right-to-Know) courses to county
employees.
Action 11.E.2: Provide information to the public regarding safe handling of household chemicals on
the Pima County Office of Emergency Management & Homeland Security's website.
Goal 12. Reduce the possibility of damage and losses to existing assets due to other human-caused
hazards.
Objective 12.A: Develop a comprehensive approach to reducing the possibility of damage and losses due to
other human-caused hazards;
Action 12.A.1: Provide and support, through the Pima County Office of Emergency Management &
Homeland Security, basic weapons of mass destruction (WMD) courses to county
employees and the public.
Action 12.A.2: Promote child drowning prevention programs throughout the County.
Action 12.A.3: Provide program direction in support and development of Community Emergency
Response Teams (CERT).
Action 12.A.4: Promote and expand existing County programs aimed at school violence and family
preparedness.
Objective 12.8: Protect existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to the effects of other human-
caused hazards.
Action 12.8.1: Reassess vulnerability of potential terrorist targets and share information among law
enforcement agencies.
Action 12.8.2: Provide leadership role to support Pima County Hospital's Preparedness efforts to
standardize capabilities to decontaminate patients in the event of a chemical,
biological or radiological terrorist event.
Objective 12.C: Coordinate with and support efforts to mitigate other human-caused hazards.
Action 12. C.1 : Allocate and administer Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding to
appropriate agencies throughout the County.
Action 12.C.2: Maintain a Disaster Medical Assistance Team (DMA T) to support disaster
operations.
Pima County Mulli-Jurislfc1ional Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31. 2(05)
URS
199
.)
As listed above, each entity participating in the plan identified potential hazard mitigation actions that will assist in
mitigating the impact of natural and human-caused hazards. As noted previously, the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000
requires the evaluation of the potential mitigation actions. In order to evaluate these potential actions, jurisdictions
used the ST APLEE evaluation process, which is a systematic approach weighing the pros and cons of potential
mitigation actions. STAPLEE stands for .Qocial, Iechnical, Administrative, fol~ical, begal, ~conomic, and
~nvironmental. For each of these characteristics, a series of questions was posed that assisted in evaluating the
appropriateness of each potential action to the community, as described below:
Social. The public must support the overall implementation strategy and specifIC m~igation actions. Therefore, the
projects will have to be evaluated in terms of community acceotance by asking questions such as:
· Will the proposed action adversely affect one segment of the population?
· Will the action disrupt established neighborhoods, break up voting districts, or cause the
· Relocation of lower income people?
· Is the action compatible with present and future community values?
· If the community is a tribal entity, will the actions adversely affect cultural values or resources?
Technical. It is important to determine if the proposed action is technically feasible, will help to reduce losses in the
lona term, and has minimal secondary imoacts. Here, you will determine whether the a~emative action is a whole or
partial solution, or not a solution at all, by considering the following types of issues:
. How effective is the action in avoiding or reducing future losses? If the proposed action involves upgrading
culverts and storm drains to handle a 10-year storm event, and the objective is to reduce the potential impacts
of a catastrophic flood, the proposed mitigation cannot be considered effective. Conversely, if the objective
were to reduce the adverse impacts of frequent flooding events, the same action would certainly meet the
technical feasibility criterion.
· Will it create more problems than it solves?
· Does it solve the problem or only a symptom?
Administrative. Under this part of the evaluation criteria, you will examine the anticipated staffina, fundina, and
maintenance requirements for the mitigation action to determine if the jurisdiction has the personnel and
administrative capabil~ies necessary to implement the action or whether outside help will be necessary.
. Does the jurisdiction have the capability (staff, technical experts, and/or funding) to imp/ement the action, or
can it be readily obtained?
. Can the community provide the necessary maintenance?
· Can it be accomplished in a timely manner?
Political. Understanding how your current community and state pol~icalleadership feels about issues related to the
environment, economic development, safety, and emergency management will provide valuable insight into the level
of political support you will have for mitigation activities and programs. Proposed mitigation objectives sometimes fail
because of a lack of political acceptability. This can be avoided by determining:
. Is there political support to implement and maintain this action?
. Have political leaders participated in the planning process so far?
. Is there a local/departmental champion willing to help see the action to completion?
· Who are the stakeholders in this proposed action?
· Is there enough public support to ensure the success of the action?
· Have all of the stakeholders been offered an opportunity to participate in the planning process?
. How can the mitigation objectives be accomplished at the lowest "cost" to the public?
Pima Coun/y Mu/tj-Jurisdictlonal Hazard MitjgaVon Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
200
,.)
legal. Without the appropriate legal authority, the action cannot lawfully be undertaken. When considering this
criterion, you will determine whether your jurisdiction has the legal authority at the state, tribal, or local level to
implement the action, or whether the jurisdiction must pass new laws or regulations. Each level of government
operates under a specific source of delegated authority. As a general rule, most local govemments operate under
enabling legislation that gives them the power to engage in different activities. Legal authority is likely to have a
significant role later in the process when your state, tribe, or community will have to determine how mitigation
activities can best be carried out, and to what extent mitigation policies and programs can be enforced.
· Does the state, tribe, or community have the authority to implement the proposed action?
· Is there a technical, scientific, or legal basis for the mitigation action (i.e., does the mitigation action "fit" the
hazard setting)?
· Are the proper laws, ordinances, and resolutions in place to implement the action?
· Are there any potentia/legal consequences?
· Will the community be liable for the actions or support of actions, or lack of action?
· Is the action likely to be challenged by stakeholders who may be negatively affected?
Economic. Every local, state, and tribal govemment experiences budget constraints at one time or another. Cost-
effective mitigation actions that can be funded in current or upcoming budget cycles are much more likely to be
implemented than mitigation actions requiring general obligation bonds or other instruments that would incur long-
term debt to a community. States and local communities with tight budgets or budget shortfalls may be more willing
to undertake a mitigation initiative if it can be funded, at least in part, by outside sources. "Big ticket" mitigation
actions, such as large-scale acquisition and relocation, are often considered for implementation in a post-disaster
scenario when additional federal and state funding for mitigation is available. Economic considerations must include
the present economic base and projected growth and should be based on answers to questions such as:
· Are there currently sources of funds that can be used to implement the action?
· What benefits will the action provide?
· Does the cost seem reasonable for the size of the problem and likely benefits?
· What burden will be placed on the tax base or local economy to implement this action?
· Does the action contribute to other community economic goals, such as capital improvements or economic
development?
· What proposed actions should be considered but be "tabled" for implementation until outside sources of
funding are available?
Environmental. Impact on the environment is an important consideration because of public desire for sustainable
and environmentally healthy communities and the many statutory considerations, such as the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA), to keep in mind when using federal funds. You will need to evaluate whether, when implementing
mitigation actions, there would be negative consequences to environmental assets such as threatened and
endangered species, wetlands, and other protected natural resources.
· How will this action affect the environment (land, water, endangered species)?
· Will this action comply with local, state, and federal environmental laws or regulations?
· Is the action consistent with community environmental goals?
Numerous mitigation actions may well have benefICial impacts on the environment. For instance, acquisition and
relocation of structures out of the floodplain, sediment and erosion control actions, and stream corridor and wetland
restoration projects all help restore the natural function of the floodplain. Also, vegetation management in areas
susceptible to wildfires can greatly reduce the potential for large wildfires that would be damaging to the community
and the environment. Such mitigation actions benefit the environment while creating sustainable communities that
are more resilient to disasters.
Each jurisdiction used the STAPLEE criteria to evaluate the potential mitigation actions, including the probable costs
and benefits of the actions. This formed the basis of each community's Action Plan (presented in Section 6.4).
Pima County lIu1U-Jt.riSiictional Hazwd MiIigatioo Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
201
~,)
The Disaster Mitigation Action of 2000 requires the development of an action plan that includes prioritized actions
and information on how the prioritized actions will be implemented, as shown in Table 6-26. Members of each
jurisdictional hazard mitigation team worked together and with appropriate departments and organizations to prepare
an implementation strategy for the top priority mitigation actions.
Tlbl. 6-26: DMA 2000 R uirem.nts -1m Iementation of M ation M.lsures
Titl. R uirement Lan UI .
Implementation Requirement: (The mitigation strategy section shall include] an action plan
of Mitigation ~201.6(c)(3) [Iii): describing how the actions identified in section (c)(3)(ii) 'Nin be
Measures prioritized, implemented, and administered by the local jurisdiction.
Prioritization shall include a special emphasis on the extent to which
benefits are maximized according to a cost benefit review of the
. and their associated costs.
Section
Mitigation
Strategy
Source: FEMA., July 11, 2002.
In order to focus on identified hazard mitigation priorities and to comply with the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, the
Team members identified the City's top priorities for hazard mitigation for the next five years (after which local
jurisdiction hazard mitigation plans must be updated), as shown in Table 6-27 through Table 6-33. Note that
additional actions may be considered if the prioritized actions are accomplished or events warrant consideration of
additional actions. Information is provided for each of the actions listed in the Mitigation Action Plan on associated
goals/objectives, category of benefit, implementation responsibility, and resources required.
Pima County Multi.JuriscHctional HazlJ'd Mitigation Plan (Orall: October 31, 20(5)
URS
202
c: c: Ul Q)
0 0 Q) "0
"g~ .. Ul "0 0
ro a. ro 0
!g 0) ro u
.. E 'E 1::
i~ ~ Ul
U) c: ro "E Q)
"E "E ~ ro .0 ro E
o::~ ro i:I5 a::: u> "0 a.
~ <n c: c: 0
. ro U) c: 0.0) ro Qi
..:x: :x: ::> ,groi:l5ll;:Ci5 a;
u- - 0 ro~....J9c: 0
.. c: c: "E
S~c:~ ~c:~~ B~:;:JCf.lO) "0
tV .9Cf.l'iiljgc:
.:;:J.!!!_ :],.!2tV..... JjCf.l~a~Cf.l~
..00...Cf.l 00...:x:Cf.l
0:: . . . . . . . . . . . .
1::
o
~2:
=::J
:aU)
. -
Cj!:o
0:;::;
a.c
. Q)
"Q)U) -g
0:: :0 .92 .!!
C'1iiZ~Q)
.28.:558
! en e's
i~ ~5a
E>- wE1i5
A'= roQ)c:
.: ro c: liP'-
a.E ec:"E
E 'C ro ro ~
- !!:.. ::: ::H5
.
C
.
ii:
C .2
o 15-
t; ::J~~
c( o...aa;c;;
S :5~~&i
~ i .- ul ~ '2
.~c~mwo..
:e ~ e m C:-lO
:E _ 0.. :;; .Q 5
.. 0 ~ ,................
:;~Q)~~~
li 08--0 eCi)
Q",-Co..
:'..o..tVenul
..1;; -cQ)8
~ 0 a .Q e '- 6
. :;::;10:::1.2:..
CD C(.)OQ)C:
.!! ~.gmCf.l~
.g ~wO:: ~
....!!:.. c;
~-~U)
"iii ..!!. {s ~
o CP -0 '-
C).~ tV &i
"g 1i ~:5
';:a'E 0
'-0 en~
8-oaE
. C'-:::I
..uE
c( ::s
~
'C:
B
c?3
~
Q)
<3
i
{!.
"0 "0
li 6 j
g~ ~ ~~
~~ ~ i::!:
.... ... {!. <n e>>;:i
~c:a.-:~~~a
w~~~~w16~
~ liP 'E &..2 ~ liP &'-
e c: ~ 0.:0 l! c:
~~u~~~~
. ..
~
'C:
B
c?3
la
Q)
c:
~
~
<
"0
c:
ro
c:
o
~
:;:J
"0
W
u
:B
:;:J
0...
.
M
ai
N
N
ai
N
.....
ai
N
U) c:
Q)"OJg ~,g
;;~~"O oca~
.geg-li ~.c:e
O)~ <<l c: :B '0 E
c:"'" ro :;:J<n....
'2 - Q) 0.. a. <n oS!
. 'jU 0 ;; c: Q) ~ i
C .:= ~ c:.o ;; 11>.
OQ)~o1i 'Q)""
~ ~ I- .!l ,g>> J!J 1i5 g! ~c:
c( ..., Q) C:._ i u ~
",:cQ)EE:;:JQ) .
"i ~ .!3 i "E .~ ii3 !I! g- g
.!::!cjo..o.~ am t5"O'f(
:c ....: ~-8 ~ ~ N .5 li t6
o
'C
Q..~ N
~~
~
]
<n
~
.~ la
Q) ~
Cf.l ~
~c:g!
c:,g~
Q)c:.....
r~~
wo...o...
. . .
U)
~
~
.2
:0
:;:J
0...
j
.
c:
o
~
e
c: 0...
ti~
c: J:. ~ gJ
,g t~ 0::
c: :;:J-
~ tse
ee.st6
o...o...Cf.lZ
. . . .
Q)
"0
0
.!l 0
c: 1::
Q)
E l!iQ)<n 8
B roEt? '"
0 ::: g- ro ~
0 Q)-"O c:
Q) 6 ~ c: ::>
NQ).!9 0
0) 0Cf.l 0
ro
~.5 "8"O~jg ll;:ro
_e OC:tV ro E
Cf.l0 u::~Ci5Cf.l Ci5a::
. . . . . . . .
_ E
<n tV
ro ~ ....
2:;:J~
'C: 00...
<gJ~
-0:: ~ ~
~....
<n <ng~:;:J en g
~ 583:~ ~~
~ 3:tV'O~
.2 .2.~ 1:: u E
:0 :oo...Q)U:: :is a::
~ ~ .. ~ 15 :;:J ..
0...1::
i iiroc: i2:
a. o.,g
{!. {!.~~~ o :;:J
I-Cf.l
. . . . .
la m
~ c: ~
i ~ i
< e <
<n"O <no... "0
c:~~li C:~<n~c:li
~.~ ~ c: ~ .~ ~ ~ :8 6
as Q)';;f: ~ as Q) ;;i!'5 16 'la
eCf.leu eCf.lilS~eu
c: 0... ~o... :;:J c: 0... ~ Q) 0... 0... ::l
,g ~ c: ~ ii3 :8 ~ C 0:: i! ~ii3
~ 8. ~ti .Q ~ 8. ~~ fi 8.~
~eE.s~ee~ro.5e::l
0... 0... WCf.l0...0...0... WZCf.l0...0...
. . . . . . . . . . . .
N
ai
...; < < < 0
ai Lri Lri Lri Lri
...;
c:
,gtV
tV c:
~;
i)~
<nO
tai
Eo
tV I-
o.Q)
iJ=
~~
.. lir
~~
M <n
M
c:
tV <n
0.. -g <<l
~.9 tV ae.
eQ)ts ~ Q)eO)
tV g .s ~ -m Ol Q) .5
:::E~<nS<fII ~i~
~ ~ 8 ~ ~ g ~,g:S
~'~-g cs 5.'6 ~ U Q)
{!.J2 ~""'.2-6 g~~
Q)1Sc:~ ec:c:o.
(:. ~ '~'C: e ~ W 8 ~
~,g-8 tfl !!Li1i ill
<t; .g .,; o..s ~ <t; ~ ~
100000J2<<1<n"OLOuro
~
U5"
it)'
~
~
l;;
~
o
~
e.
!!
a.:
~
-);!E5>
;~~;~~
eJgo...iiilu~
~1:6:5"E:f
_Q):e~!1l1li
OEJQ~ca~
i-[g.8,.c ~
{!. .5 ~ [~ ~
Q).9C:Q)C:!E!
(:. ~ ~ 's .- ~
"C:Q)O"~~
~:.;:::Jc:o-~
OC:Olll~~
Lri8~.9~<J
'i
COQ)
c:=
;.5 ~
~Q)C:
'O~~
'0 II)
i:e.E
{!. l! ~
~.9LL
,:":~~E
"":~.o ~
1l:!c:1ie
L08zo...
<0
r:::-
<II
~
-c
e~
~i ~
O:::E
I-SE
f.:!-8~
~Q)Q)-
o.c~iii
= ~ 2'Ci5
0:::. .
t:
~8: u)
:o=' -~ ~
". ~ 8 ~ 'C:
S:$' 15g a
f!0~-~~ ~
O:::-Q) es;: CI:l
S~~ ,g~{)'~
._c8.~en<""'io
! en i5 i e? 2>5
i~ ~oU:~~l5
E>- fij':":iWEfti
:.'~ ~ l~ ~ t~.5
E 'C 0 ~ 0 CI:l CI:l
- e::.. ..... (I) Z :e :e
. .
C
aI
ii:
c
o
15 .g~~
~ a...a~(j)
S C ~ 2l~
! i ~ ~ ~ 'e
.=:' io Q)Wa..
~m"'mcl!!
:IE _ a.. (ij.2 ='
ii~ictj~ C:8
Ii & ~ ~ J: (j) ,g .~
:lE4Pa..co ~ j!~
.. 1;j - c Xl B e
~ 0 .~ :S e .~ ,g Q. g
CD c:J.lJ8~c~~
.!! ~ -6 l6 ~ .~ ~
"i ~ W 0::: ct D.. W
.... e::.. . . .
,g
_ In_
en_InCi)
:=-en~Q)
~ ar:g .2:
C).~ co~
"'C '2 >-:5 <(
I:s'~ Oeo
.- 0 In ~
8-c5=
en c'- ='
enaltSe
~ ~
~
.
J!l
c
Q) "i
~....o;::
CI:lc;>
c..Q)c
~~~~
CI:l c.. III
C Q) CI:l
lIll!!o III
i>CI:l~lB
c>>:e u: .5
CI:l_ III
CO'1ii='
~i~~
s;:~.cfti
:S:'- "t:: >
o - 0 'C
.....CCZD..
. . . .
gj
0)
c c
~o
~j
<(e
ci~8~ 8
~5~'~~ .~
~ 'B 8 ~ .~ ~
C D.. ~ i ~D.. C ~
:! ~~ ~ IC l! :! IC
~~.Yi -fi~
~ e-~ IV .5 ~
D..D..D..ZW(/)D..W
. . . . . . . .
ocr;
..-
..-
~
.....
~ l!! lfi
~~(I)'1ii
8C1:lD..!Q
u C!)(!)
. . . .
'0
c
CO.!!!
cO)
1;8
:e:J:(I)
_~D..
.~ ~>
LLO)":
- ~i
~C]c
~~
z~
i::i~
!Q 8: f"a
(!)~W~
. .
iiS'
~
q
..-
..-
..:
..,
~
~
e.
~
I
J
I
'I::
-=)
~
::il
~
~
~
c(
..-
..-
'1ii co
~~ ~ c m
CI:lO~ ~ Q):S:~; ~~co CI:l
C:CI:l~s~m ===:e _~c.c
~O) fa :~ c: C.5 ~ ~ .g ~ ~ ~ '0.;5 ~..... ~
i\J 0 ~ 2 :5 ;::) c .- i\J en -~ '0
:e....-e:!e.~ ii~i~ E~lB fti~
~~~!~i00;::)~~~ ~~~ =~
~"fi s~ ~ 9t~~' i ~~i~ g ~.ts~ -! ~
0:.= ..... l6''O'' . .C ~ c: 0) .2 in >-.3 E 0)
._,g O)ccc = '-2> ~ 0)"2'0'"-
~~e=~~i~~~-~~;~~Q)~~~fij2
-- W ~ c CD j t'=' <3 ~ >- E :t:S 0 lB 0) .!i en .!i
"'C .. 2.J ~ E Ill" CI:l co W '-E .. co =.- O).c
4P~~ U:(I)en !~~~~- ~.cOeE.!!!
~CCD O)O)~~ ocr;g~>-~E~S'O~~~
~ . c CD ..r:!:. .L:: tn ....... c.- Q) 8 ....... as C em>
.1;; co ._ .c +> +> CI:l 0..- ._ LL ~. ..- '0 co 0 _ co
o
~Q;)
m
s
..-
c
Q)
E
'1:1 c.
4>> 0
.~~
i~
~"O
c:::
.. m
4>>0)
Co) c:::
... .-
::Jgle
Omro
:O:Ui
~ .
c
Q)
a llij
o en
~ c
Q) Q) u>
a E ~
"0 1::.0
c::: 11 E
m Q)Q)
g' a E
'c ~u
~~'5a.w
a.(/)a....J
. ..
1::
o
~ 2: 0
=::J ~
aU) i1)
.. - ...
c.z:. is
0:.;::::; ....
~~ ii
4>> Q) en a
~ :0 .~ 0
a.~~~
1i 8.. Q) ~
- en "0
i ~ lij
E..2:- 0)
4>>'C:: c:::
- ro .-
Q.E g
E.c .!!!
_.~ a.
.
~
'l:>
J9
c:::
3l
~
c.
~
u
a.
w
...J
-
c:::
Q)
~
m
c.
Q)
a
.~
(5
a.
.
C
ell
is:
c
:8 .2
u :0->. 1!
c( ::J ~ (,) .a
a. _::J C -=
a _roQ)enm
:g_5Z~~Z_
ell q:::;:; _ Q) ';::' c:::
_gu~~Ee.Q
:eC_Q)Wa.~
:E4>>ecc:(ij-
__ma.~o...e
Ii - >- ro'- ::J a.
ei ~as~~~~~
> 0 Q..-o e - 8.ai
o i>>e ca.U)_eo
o..~~~~a._o:
a; 0 5.2 e.~ 5 ~
~ ~~5Q)~~
CD Q)::JenU)~5
~ ~~& ~&!
ell a.
.... -
c -
Q) ... l6 ...
leE ~leE ~
J9 8" IE J9 c. IE
(/)- o(/)..Q 0
E~ c:c:~ c:tt=
Q)Q) OQ)Q) OlU
~a lil~a lilUile
ll-g E lU-g E~~
Q)lU .glit-co .go
ag' .sag' .s~8
Q)'- (,) Q)'- (,) (,)~
oC:::q;;=oC:::q;;==~
'5~.B.g'5~.B.g.gu
a. a. (/)a. a. a. (/)a. a. a.
.. ... ...
~
c:::
Q)
~6
~~
~'E
168
~-
1116
~f6
.~ ~
;f~
.
~
l6
E!l.e
~ ~
~~
ic
a.Q)
~Ll
0)
,~ ~
;f~
.
c
Q)
E
c.
o
~ le
~ ~
"0 U>
lij ~
g' ~
.- (.)
gle:5
l2jg::)
a.(/)a.
. .
'"
C
<'I
i
is
U>
~
~
.~
:is
::J
a.
.
...
o
i
is
C
Q)
E
c.
o
~
Q)
a
"0
c:::
lU
0)
c:::
'c
c:::
lU
0:
.
U> gj
U>
Q) Q)
c::: c:::
~ J c:::
~ ~
lU e
"0 U> "0 U>
lij ~ lij ~ c:::a. .5 ~
c:::'~ 5'~ ~~
:SJ3 ~J3 -~ j.~
c:::B~ e~ e '"
c::: C::J~ c::: a. Q) ca.a.
0 o ~ :SiIl16 :S ~~ :S ~ l!!
'l:> ~-g16
c::: i~E!l ~8.1! c::: ~
~ ~.~ i ~ 8. 1:S
~ ~:g ~::J~ ~e~ ~e~
a. a.a.w a.a.w a.a.z a.a.(/)
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
- en
.!!.-~Ci)
1i .!!. -6 ~
o 4>> -0 .- U
C) .~ ro 1j ..-
'a ~ >";!E -
.,iiro-CCD
.. 1i' E ~ ..-_
.u 0 en "" ~
0'05:2
.. C'-::J
encauE
4( ::S.
u
..-
CD
C")
<i
C")
>. _ Q) C
~S~ ~ m ~Q) 0 :S
~Q)16 p UiO) =:is llijc::: lU
>~E ~. ~lI)oc::: 'E-B _0 8
e~"c:::-~~:~~ ER_~~~m
o c::: C5.- -- !il> Q) E 8. 8 lU ~ Q) 'l:> c:::
0)'- "0 - :0 ~ ::J = II) '"N c::: E'- Q) II) >.
c::: c::: Q) C 0 - l:r ~ ~ C5 O)S lU 'E E E II) ~
~2m~~~~1 j...J~o)g'lU~~~~
en .~ -g:; 8" l(j 'is of< .5 j'c ~ g .~ 'c lit-!.'l'5 lU >
C lU ~Q) "'"0 ai::e;lUi;'- m,- C"O ro is C.e
.S! ~ lij~ a> f6'3i'~~ ~~O:~~c..c: ~~o
~~~ ~~ g:~ ~~g~ g~~[!~~~
'i ~ ~.~ ~ ~ ,5 ~ gj gJ s .. ~ e ~ ..Q.g lij .. fir
N 'cQ)c.~16"O~i~~Q)a. ~lUc""":-
~~~~~~alf6~Ui'a~~~~~I~~~
o
.C
a.;::' N M
~~^'
.~\)
CD
C")
~
~
0:
,5
...
Q)
'llE
me?
lU~
8"c.
~~
~i
.~
~"2
~
iO'
8
<'I
...
<")
I
o
~
e.
15
it
_a si
'i~ Q) .~~f
1I):5~S:5 (1)-
>. 5 "0 ~ 6".5 .5 .!!! 0 ];
:m>c~u"O~liiE31~
m> lU(ij~S -"0 II) ~_
>,~::e; c~ ~~ 3 fa "0 1&
o :0 .;: .2 u 0 C5 J:l c::: c:
o ~ 1 fire:.>. ': I ~Q) ~ ~
-- ~1:S"t:m1::c!2'6
02 .?:-E 8.~ s.-'ts ~
i ~c S 3'!!! e 0 c.:; ~ ""
o Q)8ac.o::Jcu>'S
I- ~ -Q)"-(/):OC::::::<
.. C e .!i:: ~ .. c 8 ...
~ll'l:>lUc~::!:~~ """'
CZ;!P !O:*8 R"w CZ; e ~ ~
\t) 0 l:S.... III u. ..... 0)= C5
.~
a.:
CD
\t)
<(
.....
~
L()
co
:t::
" 1tJ
.~ Ci5
.....
j <::
al
~:t::
a:: ~b5
en~
~:s ~~
...=>
::1- ~ 0
o rJ =1-
en 0 0=
CD-I a..<(
a:: . . .
1::
.c:-2.
=0-
.- ::J
:aU)
en - ~
C>-
o~ <::
a..c: al
enQ) ~S
CDQ)Ul alC'O
a::-Q) E c
.0 ._ ~&
C -iij ~
o C c
.- 8.. Q)
!VJ ~c
i ~ c.G)
E~ ~~
CD.;::
-('0 ~~
C a..E __ c
ell E-;:: oC'O
0: -e::.. a..::E
.
C
0 ,g
~ .0->-
::J ~ to)
C o..::JC=
- Cii Q) VJ
0 Cz f?g m
:g i!:.2 _ Q) -=- G)
~ CDg~Ee c
c_Q)WQ.. ~
::E CDeC -- ~
~ mo..~5~
O~('O~-fi "011)
'ii ~ ~.$.5 Iii~
> o 8..""0 e U) 8~
e ",e co.. _
CD Q.. ('0 VJ VJ ~
0 1ii -c~8
ciO 05-2 -- c::J~
.- ~::J ~ ~~ t
d: - o~
l5 ::J ~ ~.Si!
CD e~cr:: ~~w
:is
~ e::.. . . .
_ VJ
.!!.-~Ul
'ii .!!. -0 g? u
o CD ""0 -- N
C).~ ('0 g ......
" 1 i;':5 ai
I:S'Eo N
......
.- 0 VJ ~ ~
8-C5:;:l
en C .- "3 ......
enelloE
c( ~
j~ 1I).!::i!
o~~
08
~e G) ~ ~o~
,.,. Cl ~15I~i
Kl .~ ~ ~ ~ r.~ - i
'" ~.8"i
en G) .e C'O ew C'O c ~
C &.,SC'" ~o~~.S!
0
:g ~ 15 j .- G)c152~
c( ~ E .....~ ~G)E1i)G)
1 j~O~ -=-:~ ~~ ~
-.l.f! <(C.CII)~
:@ 8. ~ 8."~ N~ltJC'O
...... ::EE.B
0
'C R
a..
<0
C
'"
it)'
~
...:
CO)
i
ol;:
ti
j
a:
I
J
i
-a
~
~
~
~
<\I
~
~,.'""\
,,~'i
"
-ro
t=.c
.Q 6C:::
iijl-
'1:Jt:"O
CDOt=
... a. ltl
.- <n
ac:~
"~Q)
0:: t::. ~
en:=ltl
CD J9 0._
l:!CI)~TI
=lii _t=
o.c~5
=~iI:U
0:: .
+-'
t=
Q)
:=E
:= .s~
.s Cl)lU
CI) clii
t= Q) :::!:
,g 1; >.
ltl "lijO
15lfijo.15
f$ CiS ~ !6
~~ ~ E
1-(!)iI:!:!:!.
. . .
c
Q)
:=E
ltlQ):=
Ci5 ~ jg
cliiCl)
Q):::!: t=
~ ~~
~151::
Q)E?'8..
0Q)<n
~ E Iii
iI:!:!:!.~
. .
1::
o
~2:
;ec7.l
en -
5~
a..c:
enQ)
CDQ)U;
0:: :is .~
5'~~
.- 0 Q)
! g- .-
i ~ g
E~ 5
CUOJ:: U
'ii ~ lii
E'J:: ,g
- e:. l-
.
- :i
j .le
.z= .z=
U U
I I
i5 +-' C
c:
c: Q) CD
0 ~ ~
:as
1:: ltl lU
8.. a. a.
<n ~ ~
c: ~ ~
~
l- ii: iI:
. . .
C
.
ii:
C
o
1S .2
<C( :i5 - :>,
::J ~ 0
5 a..::JC:-=
.- -1VQ)~
1i 522l(1)
.~ = U en Q)e o~
~ CU Q) (I) c: c:
:l!C_Q)Wa.. 0
.- CD e c: c: (ij li
~rDa..~o"" _
.o~~U~ ~
>-~Q)~.$2 C:<n
.oo.ueCi) ~~
~g)ec:a.. (1)5
en CU a.. m (I) en +-' 0
llII1ic:c:~~ e<n
~ Co) .Q ,g 5 .~ ,g ';.~
~ c:~oQ)C:lU~
tD ~ -5 ~ CI) ~ 0.,3
CU ~wa:: ~eltl
_ a.. 0.. 0.. Z
it - ...
t-
'"
:B 5
c:=
~~
~ e
~o..<n
C:~<n~
~ 5 ~.~
.!~5c?3
C:~::J:B~
,g >- w"o a:: c:
c:'t: -Q)
~ 8..s.! ~ !6
~e~1ilE
0.. 0.. 0.. zw
. . . . .
'" <n
:B5 :B
~~ ~
~e ~
~o..'" ~U)
C:~"'~~ ~~
,g 5 ~.~ liS 5'~
1~5c?3g ~c?3
c: 0.. ::J :B >.0.. c: ::> >-
o "Oa::O-o"05.!
:g ~w fti 15 ~ ~ w i
Q) 8. os.! i:: E?' 1:) CD.s.! t::'
~e~~~.$~~~
0..0.. 0.. ZWCl) 0.. 0.. W
. . . . . . . . .
- (1)-
..!!...-.8J'Ui
1i .!!. -5 ~
o CU u .-
C).~m~
_ 1"; :>,.: U
"'Clim.Q 0
-= :ii' E 0 ..-
!LV Q) ..-
.uo (1)=
o'05~
en C .- :;
enllllUE
c( ~
q
..-
aJ
N
M
ci
N
C',;
+-' 5~C: "0 ~ c:
a I~S"i~~ 5 Iii E~~ 0
~i ~:B~~~CDI is ~....c s~~ :as
~::JCDJ~~S~ls ~~_IQ)~ ~lU.z= .....
.c i" > l:S 1i.5 ai'iS. +-' .5 I- c: ~ S Ci. Q) tI) ~ "i -'" S :::!:
rlljl~~~~l i!J~illjia !~~f
.. os< 'S C . ~ ~ i! l"i "1:l lU I- a: .,;"1:l ~ E S ~ . 1 ~ ~ ~
C Q) 16 ~ ; ~.z= E J!! ~ B"1:l . ~ CD 0 S .... Q) c: 'R 0.. E
~~_~;~CD~~ ~ '~=b~~S~~SSSffi~~lU
~ 'S -81 It 11 ~ = 51 .g>>.5 51; 0.. 5 ~ E.5 c.s.! 5 .5 is e b lU g
'0 ~ s. ~ ~ f -8 0.. a; ~ ~ U JC 8 .~ ~ oil i f:as :! ,g 0.. :5 ~ It
CD ~ ~U) iV c: CD CD 8. II) ~ lU .s.! Q g c ~ E = .~ ~ Sac
~~ ~.z="O~~S~e:Bd ES(!)CD"iii 515=ci"iii=ltl
~~ ~~Iii~~~~o.a::~~a:E~~Ea~~~N~~~
o
.C
~~ N M
:=
ltl
en
c
CD
E
1::
lU
a.
Q)
o
~
iI:
.
aJ
M
M
c:
:icD
lU.c
B'c
ltll-
>.-
wg.
tI) lU
<n>-
lUlU
:::!!:::J
lU~
o.lU
00..
'Q)....
ijjS
0>'
a
T-:~
cq.=
M <n
~
......
c
<'<
it)'
8
<'<
;;;-
~
"'"
-B
o
cl:i
l!!
e.
16
it
i
l
j!
1&
s::
:e
'is
.~
~
~
~
~
~
it
c: ll=
0>
E III
0> en
'a ll= ll=C> ~
.~ III III III
en .....C ll=m
CJ)1ll
j .....:::: III ::>
.- en~
C C '"
0> 0> 0> >.J!}
0:: ~ E:;::; C>c
U) -r= ..Qo>
Q) III (\J"O "2 E
c.. c..1ll
e 0> o>LL E C
::s 0 0- 0> e
g.jg ~~~ :2 ">
._ c..... c..c
Q)LL LLr-CJ) ww
0:: . . . . .
1::
b8.
.- a.
=:;,
:!aU)
U) - ~
c~ ~
0:;:>
CoC ~
U)Q) ~ Q)
Q)Q)"ii i5
0::- .&:'. :2 ~
.0 .- t.> t.> oS
c '0 :$
o C C I I C
.- 8. Q) c: c: 0>
t.>
Srn 0> 0> >.
a~ ~ ~ ~
S~ (\J III "5
c.. c..
Q)'C ~ ~ 'E
c - co 0>
ca a.E ~ ~ "C
a:: S.c '5.
-~ u:: u:: w
c . . .
0
:u ,g
c( .0->>
c :;, ~ (.)
0 a.:;,c=
1i _1ijQ)rn
5 z e>~
.~ i .. en ~ 'e 0
- 8 ~
!i c$lGwa. ~ e:
~ Q)2c -- ~
lDa.~5~
- ~ co.- :;, e ~
~ ~Q)~E~ a.'" '"
e: ~ C ~ ~
ca 08"-0 eU) I ~.~ ~.~ 8
::s
Co) B'!t ffi a.. -
= 1ii rnrn a.Ji .....~ e:~
- C ~ B e:el;
Q. U 5.2 .- 00.
~ :;:>-:;,~ ~1! Q) ~~lii ,SjE
c~o~ e:
ch Q):;,lG ~i i ~8.i ~.Y
eiBa:: ~e !!~
Q) o.zw o.o.w 0.0.
:i5 ~ . . . . . . . .
ca
I- a:i
_ rn It)
~-lGC;; to ai
_U)...Q) ~ m
~ Gi":g .2: < .
(!).2: co ~ to ai
"i 1 ia'15 M't.> m m
....: M'
1ii:i5'EO <to ,..:
.- 0 rn ~ to ai
8-a5E N m
U) c'-:;, < a:i
U)caoE to m
c( ~ <D a>
~ -Q)~ Q)
Q) i J!} ..c Q) -:0
....16 S 0= ':"0 lii:6~ ~ Q)oJg~~"C
ien '0 ~ ~ .&:'. lQ Ii o. Q):6'- > .... i ~ e:
= -e:::> ~ - (\J
g'~Q) e:e: .~t Ii SI1s~e: ~'O~~~;'O! ~1&~Eg
'i :6 .2 .-
'K j oS .sa i .&:'. ;= i sz'j 01 (I) E 8.>,0 E. ~ (\J ~ ~Q) E:01il
Q)lir ....> ! ~~I_Se~!~liil!~~~~~~~8Iii
Q) lii~i(l) IJ--
U) i'~ir I Iii i i !!1l c..~~~i >.:6:tU ~~ '" '0 ~l6'O.B-~
c iS$f y i .&:'.~-"O e: (\J-~c.. (\JC e:CQ)
0 :S ~ Q) .- ~i I' j E l'G 1! Ii ~ l'G ~ ~ E 0 -g Q) = ,g ~ :~ .~ > '0
:s ,liE" 81"" "0 ~'O~e:b 8~~16~lQl'G~~~~~~~~
<C ..~Cij .; Q.~i 8~. ~ Ole: ~-m 8j:6:O:6.~ ~ g";;; lQ Q)j 6 5i (I)....
1 "":~j~.sa ~ .;.:- ; .;.:~I.~I~j6It~S5ilQ~~jlg~!~~
~ <s;c:~o:a = m ,J:> m S. ~ :> 1J "U..5}1 e: $ ~"Q"C c..~ ~ ~ e: Q)
co "_ LL (\J 0> 0 ....: lQ.5 m miQ) lQ~i_>~~~_g~ _r-~ S~:6
0
.;: G" c0- r::-
Q.
Q:>
C
'"
it)"
~
....
..,
li;
~
!
c::
l
I
f
I
"li5
~
I
~
'Ii
~
~
S
~
it
lI=
ro
en
'0 lI=i!;- lI=
e ro= ro
-ro en
i U)~lI=
cO.e c: 0>
C
CI)(ijU) CI) N
0:: E-- E
tit 1::C::ro 1::
ID ro~:g ro
0.
~ lG-c::1- CI)
::J oeu 0
0 CI)':;: a::: ~
tit ,Eo c:: W u::
ID LLWI-
0:: . . . .
t:
o
~2:
- :::I
:2cn
tit -
C~
0'-
a.c:
tit CI)
IDCI)U)
O::-CI)
..0 ,_
C "- -
o~~
1i 8. CD
- VI
i ~
E~
1D.t::
- <<I
a.E
E.t::
-e::.
'Q) 'Q)
:E :E
U U
- c:
c::
CI) CI)
~ ~
ro ro
0. 0.
CI) CI)
0 0
~ ~
u:: u::
. .
C
<<II
0::
C
o
:u .2
c( :g"'ffi>-
S a..sg-=
:;= c-ni&{S
"~ = .2 :0:: lis "~
:elD~~Ee
:Ec_CDWa..
.- mID e c::: c-1U
;! a..~o""
iiiiO~~t5~
>-~CD<(~2
<<II 0 CL"'O e en
::J a>> e c::: a..
~~a..<<IVlu)
flwc-C:::CD8
-:': (,) :8 ~ ~ .~
G) c:::uOCD
~ ~.g ~cn
ID ~ W a:::
:is e::.
<<II
....
en
eng
~'R
~ ai
;-e
~o..en
~en~
g ~.~
~5c73
c::~~~
,gw-oa::: c::
c:: - CI)
g,!.s.! e E'
e~fi~
a..o..zw
. . . .
_ VI
..!!.-~U)
"iii .!!. -0 ~
o ID "'0 .-
C).2: <<I ~
'i 1i iQ':5-
1iiFEO
'-0 VI~
8'O5~
tit c .- 3
~"~E
N
~
..-
..-
..-
~
..-
..-
c(
..-
..-
..-
..-
en
g.~
~~
-c73
c:: ct ~
,g >- c::
c:: 1:: ~
CI) 8. ;::'
~e~
o..o..w
. . .
U
N
..-
N
..-
ij)'
:5
N
,..:
..,
li;
~
Ii::!
!!!
e.
Iii
it
i
f
1
~
15
co
~
"C5
.l(!
.OJ
;e
~
~
~
'"
~
... .
- Q) cn'E:
w=m 0 .5C1)
~ 0 '0 - 0. _ -g E
~ t i"i i ~ l ~ ~.~
!!wai'16 8"&.CI)O GU)ai
:j~~ lisj i~~
tit 0 i ~ ~ ~ g-~.5 ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ;; i I ~~ i j j c::
-clJ-g-a: o..~Z-g:i8-g~
'a5:1Ii~~.w~..e.:-:.!!!~
.E-oc..c:~ "1ijEw:;J '~$
~ei5C1)1ii!DCC;..oE1651~Ea
'C 8J:>~=:e~~815..e~~.s
o
"C
Q. <<) m
~ 0"'1
,fit\)
.- ~
"4\'\)
en
>-
-.:t -.:t m N ClO
N (0 N "0 ..- -.:t
..... ..... ..... N ..... N .....
-0 .E 5 .E .E ..... .E S ..... .E
l!! w w w .E w 0 .E 5 W
Sg 0
.~ l- I- I- W ti:: 0 w ti::
LL o _ LL LL 0
00 ti:: 0 ti:: 0
CD LO 0"- LO LO LO ..- 0 LO
~ "! N. ~ N N LO N ~ 0 ..- "!
In S ~c e. e. ~ e. c ~ ~ Ie
CD ~U;16~ ~~ !!cn II:: ~_a1 II:: U) ~
e ....CI) aI II)~ aI 1li
::I Ci5 ~.<:: ::I 00:5 00:5 Ci5 OO:5iiJ Ci5 ~'i
0 ~cS~ ~c ~c ~ ~cc ~::I"" I~
In C3~~8 C3~ C3~ <3 C3~8 C3~~
CD (.)
a:: . . . . . . . . . . .
t
~8..
.- a.
=::1
:!:!cn
In -
g~
a.c: c i
1nQ)
CDQ)u; 0)
~-Q) E ~
.0 ._ 1::
C --..... .... ....a1 aI
r.n~ c C c
o c c c co. !
.- 8.. 0> 0) O)~ 0) I ~
!1Il ~ ~U) ~ ~ I
ii l!:! aI a1-t: aI ~
a. 0.0 a.
E~ ~ ~3:: 0) ~ ~ ~
0 c
CD'c aI
- CtI .~ 2P~ .~ 8 .Si! 8 ~
c o.E '8:g '8 :is ~ en
E,t:: (5 (5 ::I
.. -e::.- o.. 0..0.. a.. a.. a.. 5
a: . . . . . . . .
C
0 ,g
:g .g ~ ~
c( Q...acu;
c - CtI 0>'1
0 5Z ~ :g :g
1i i!: ~ - 0> '0 0) 0)
:I CD m E "'- ~ ~
C_o>WQ..
::Ii II) e c -- ~ ~
1DQ..l!:!5~
:E - CtI:o:l::l
~~~~~ '011) "0 ~ ~ II)
168 c c 8
.. o 8-'0 e U5 aI ~
::I <:: 8'- c l .~ i
.I:. i' a: ffi ~ .n 0 ~j 0
.. ~ :0:> c'3
II) aI e
. -c~~ 8-6 ~ u I ~ i
~ (.) 5 .Q .... .- c ::I ::I co..
,gjj3 "0 it
'-1j ::I ~ ~wi W CI)
cC - o~ c u
55 ::I III g!.- g!.Si! i .Si! i
CD >-oQ) e1:g e1:g :is e12
:a l!:!wO::: ::I
.. e::.- 0..0.. o..o..w a.. W 0..0.. W W
l- . . . . . . . . . . .
_ 1Il-=
.!!.-~1Il
Cii .!!. -0 ~
o CD 'O.:i
C>>.~ CtI ("') N ..- ..- ..-
-g 1 ;>.. < <( CD q ai q
CtI.o q
.:FE 0 N M N ..- ci ..- ..-
.- 0 Ill:! ..- ..- ..- ..-
g "0 5:o:l
In C ,- :;
~"!E
en.... oi~~ <Ii .!!! - e1 '
.S: 8 B i~~i <Ii! ~,~:t 11)0 I u:::~ 8
~j :8:eo~E l! i <Ii -(3
en&.c II) t i 0 ~ ~ 1li ,- 'fil
02 i ~~ 0 us t.....~.= ~ iBiS c
u~. lD c ~ ~ a1.... :.e
0) :is .... >- '-0' ii S aI 2>>11)>
'0:5 - C ~'- C1)OC
'~:6 II) aI I!! ~ ~ i i- s1lii:B 'ij):a~ ~ lI).>o:c 8
= U) &.II):IE !! E~ ~
~E [ fi i ~ ~~ B~~.~ 6 is
UaI II)lB <Ii,S ::I. _::I C C
In II) ..... :61 ~t.WJ!i~~ i !i 8. j:: ~ a1'- 0).... wO)~ 'i
c o~ ~i""c~ c88-II)B -8:2 ::I
0 ~B,J~& &16!!~ "'" 0 II)I~ '> ::I.E C
:g ~~. K lB ~B ~ ~ I il~i ~'~~i~"" e C) C ~
c( -~~ <( '<:::is o..O)w
o..,gi ;ecEcli) ::I jcU) cm ..8:;:>::I: il~:;:> .. ~ ~
1 ,. c E:iS 8,11) tE.,.,; '0 ~ 8. i 2:- 1ii :i .;.:~ 'i~ ~ 8.~
("')0)0 wgJ 'j ~ NCal ..-
<>1- :: ~ li) 1iS W 00 ~ 13 '0 ~ ~ 1ii ~~ ci~'3.9! CD:6C ~II) qlB'O q
~ . e1 0) <( E~EO)L:i ..- E ~ d ';i l! ::I
~o..:6 N.s:16e ee8 T- ~._ :=0:::16
Mr!o)a1O):6~ ..- en II) ..- 1-(1011) ..-
0
.;:: - N M ~ ;:n (0 Ir::
Q.. ..-
~
'"
in"
~
....'
CO)
j
~
e.
.!
a:
I
I
I
,g
~
1E!
~
.i!:-
S
'"
~
~ ~.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
i li~ E~ ~= ~ tV tV
~tV~~~S~~ ~!S ~ ~~ i ~
I~~I~~~I ~~i~ 1~;1 ~ ~t
~;~~2c~~c~tV~c ~~e~ ~o ~-
~~ ;g Ii ! 0 i m ! -a :Q J 1 ~ ! 1 ~ ~ ~ Q) i ~ I.ts ~
~ ~ .~8 ,S ~ !; .c: .S j 8. ~ .- s ~ 'ij ~ .s ~ "1'ii~ ~ ~ ~ I-
o ~,~o '" li'isj' ~--a ~ '" i~ 2" 1:5 liCLiij
~~~'ll~~j~~II~ii~~:i ~fri~
"a i 1U. i"ij i- tV ~ W E j 5 is :::> ~ 11 ~ tV ~ 'fi ~ 0) .~ ~
"~ .!'~ ~ ~ 8>>_~ 1r li ~ 'ij K ~ J m~ ~ fi'~ ; "-c(': E U) fir,;; liS
:c 1r ~ '8 li 8>>..s s ~ 00 i s 8 ~ 00 .i 15 ~ i 00 ~ ~ ~ :~'~
o
".:
Q.
'0
! g
~i g
0: ~
. ~
3-.5
~:5~
~5g
CDEU
0: .
o
o
o
c:i
N
~
~
.5
"5
<II
c::
o
U
.
t
~&.
- 0.
=::1
:2w
. -
c~
0'-
a.c:
. Q)
CDQ)0
O:-Q)
..0 ,_
c.- .......
0~'E
1il 8.. Q)
-en
i~
E~
CD'c
- m
a.E
E,c
-e::.
....
c::
~
E
1::
tV
Q.
~
o
~
~
,!.?
:0
~
CL
.
C
.
ii:
C
o ,2
1i :g (ij >-
<( O-sg-;::-
C -1VQ)~
.2 5Z 2lQj
11 i ~ (i) ~ 'e
~cjmwO-
::& CD E c ct (ij
mO-~o"'"
..!!!- >-m~::I
'EOt~OO
.~Q)<(S2g
::I 0 0.-0 E ~ 'R
.J::. l:D E c 0- ~, ii
~ CDQ... m en (i)....
.. ~ c 5 ~ ,~ ~
~ ,g1ij5~>-
. CoOQ)1::
CD Q)::I en W ~
CD >"QQ) Q.
4 ~wa::: e
. Q... 0-
I- - .
c::
o
~
e
CL
<II
~
~
l1l
c:: 0)
,go::
c::-
~~
~1'ii
CLZ
. .
_ en
.!!.-mcn
'ii .!!.. -0 ~
o CD -0 ,-
C).2: tU &j
"a i ~:5
';:S-EO
'-0 en~
8'05E
. C'-::I
..oe
< ::s.
C"')
ci
00
~.')
~~t\~
.\, , .,
ex;
o
o
o
c:i
..-
~
~
.5
"5
10
C
o
U
.
~
~
E
1::
tV
Q.
2:
~
~
Co)
25
~
CL
.
c::
o
~
e
0-
<II
~
~
o
<II
C::~
,go::
c-
~~
~i
CLZ
. .
..-
ai
00
5)
C"')
....
s
W
I-
u..
~
e.
~fi)
(/):5
2:;-C::
C3~
.
....
....
<'I
~
~
~
tV
Q.
2:
<II
i!:
~
,!.?
:0
~
CL
.
g
~
e
CL
<II
~
~
cO)
,go::
c,!
~i
CLZ
. .
iC5'
~
..-
<i
00
..:
""
~
~
o
~
e.
~
n.:
i
f
i
~
16
c:::
.g
~
.~
~
;e
~
.<!:-
~
.~
n.:
o
..-
C
ftII
a::
C
o
:g .!:2
c( :g n; >-
g a.,ag-;;:-
.- -coQ)U)
'5 a z 2l~ U)
~ Ii 'fl vi ~ '2 ~I
::E c2 mwa. :g
celie c -- Q)
oUla.l!:!ar!? ~ <
3o~co:,;:>.a ~
::J~Q)~j~ c8< i8
~ 0 8-"'0 e Ci) ,g.~ C 15 .~
-S2'a:ffi';vi j~~ ~~
o'5c:CQ)B e>-~ >-
fI) (.) 0 0 0._ C a.. u :::l C U
.. :.;:>'B 3 ~,g~iiH8ill ct
~ 55:::l ~ ~ i ~ ~.!:2 i.!.l
U, >"'O~ ~eE:g~:g
ell ~w a..a..wa..a..a..w
:a; '-"" .......
ftII
I-
"
.~
5r
&
U) ......
ell fij
~ s
s~~
:008
I:t: . .
1::
~ 8.. .s
== ~ Cll U)
.a - .5 c:
.- C/) "E Q)
III - 8-€
g~ t)Cll
~55 e5t
eIIQ)li)Q)Q
~;g~t3~
o ~ ~ ~~
i:8.Q)fij<(
J:I U) ::!: >-
i l!:! ~..o
E>- c"i
ell =t: Q) "1::
'ii. co 2> ~
EE Q)Q:
'C E:;J
- e:. w cn
. .
- en~
..!!.-men
"iii..!!.-S ~
oell'"t:l'R
C)~coa:s
-g 1 iQ':fi
'5:ii'EO
.- 0 en:!
8"aE
III c'-:::l
IIIft11t'SE
c( ~
:go
:!~
Cllt)
8-.2
ll;;
In Q).!l
CQ~ .
.2 .. U) 15
ts'"":c~
c( ~.52 :::l
"M1ij1-
Cbc"-=
:S:B!!iil
'C <wc'i5
o
-i: _
D........
c e ......
c:
Q) Q) Q)
U) E ~K ~K
~.9- '"
.!!5- 'i'S 'i'S N
1i'iaR" ......0"
CllW CllW
::!:Q) ::!:Q) ::!:Q)
C)U) C)U) C)U)
c: c: c c: c: c:
.- 8. . .- 8. .- 8.
~.5 U) =.5 ~ ~'fii ~
cn/!l.t2. os/!l.a: cn~a:
. . . . . . . " .
.... .... ....
B ~ ~
Cll
C c Ji
=e 'E....
ge 8c
t)Q) t)Q)
....-€ ....-€ ....-€
c Cll cCll c Cll
~Q. ~Q. Q)Q.
Q)~ ~~ i~
~~ ~~
c.- fiju:: c.-
CllUo CllUo
::!:~ ::!:~ ::E~
II go"i go"i
Q)"1:: Q)"1::
2>8. 2>8.
~g. Q)Q. ~g.
W cn .n~ W cn
. . . . . .
e
.s
"S
~~
cn8
. .
....
o
1ij
c:
'6
81::
t)Q)
....-€
c: Cll
Q)Q.
t3~
~~
c: .-
CllUo
::i:~
go"i
~8.
~Q.
w~
. .
:g
Q)
~
~
"'OU)
ffi~
15'~
~~
C:::l~
,g w"'O C
C Q)
~~ i
a..a..w
. . .
~
C
~
~
"'OU)
ffi~
15'~
~~
C:::l~
8ille
i.!.l ~
~:g ~
a..a..w
. . .
:g
Q)
C
~
~
"'OU)
fij~
i~
~:::l~
~ w"'O C
C Q)
~:8 ~
l!!:::l~
a..a..w
. . .
~ :5 :g ~ Q).!l ~
C 15 :::l Cll. t) -=~ - E
iil ~~ ~ ::i:B~ Q)~ 0- E ~ U)E
o 'S e "'0 0 i"; 0 lB ~ :5 -I lB j .52 ~ ~ ca
Cll ~ ca ~ 8> ffi ~ .~ Ii i ~ ~ c. ca UJ :e C Cll ~ a .~ ~
lif!l~ 1~I!JJI!illiil!i~ il]i
::E:Ei f:~ ~ .. j!.l Ii ~o ~.2 ~ l<< .. Q; 15 = ~ ~ : E....l ~ g.Ci J
~~~.... 2 -~~s e=-a:s~~~~~"'O-=~i~U)e-
~.~~go~~~-=~ic ~~!I~.~~~is:~~~~~
NU)oiPtQ)~-I-c Q)~u!:!E- "~C:!QJ!3'V"""""" Q.Q)
15 :8 Ii -= ~ 15 ~ ~'c .s Q) C ~ 8. Cll l!! C .2.~ c. ..2 ~
'B~~li "'OJ'B ~~~lia~~:Bi~l!!j~~jg:B!~~
<l!!O::Ewlia..<~l-oO::E~ot)<~Cia..U)~Q.u.!l<"'O"'Ow
N
c;)
~
10
iiS'
~
...:
<")
~
Ii::
~
,!
a:
~
f
I
~
I
:0
~
S
~
d
~
it
....:
""
~
~
~
e.
~
it
.=ai ~ ~ Q) _Q) ~
~ ~ ~m ~ e - e -~ ~=0 m
~ .~ .-3It~'B~ ~>-O ~ Q) Jg~Q)~C>>OQ)J!j ~
i ~ s -g B 81 : ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ J ~ o~ ~ :8 .; ~ j .e j 'g ~ lij ~ ~ .~; ~
u. .c <Ii ~ E i i j ~ t .e i.g. ~ 08 i t ~ ~ ~ .~ I i~ !! i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :g!:5 I
.U~Hi~IHISin8~HhiijHjH~~HH I
r::: w ~ Is ~. 8 ~ 1& ;I 5. -g ~ ~ := - ~ I e '0 ~ ~ \Q = ~ - l; it 05 g Qj l:S e 31 lij '" ~
~ ~ f .: ~ 81- .~ } : ~ ~ i t -g 1 a: j j i .e 'g ~ ~ ~ j E ~ :~ ~ ~ i ~ E: ~
c( : ~ ~ : ~ B 02 .;; = e E .0_ :: i i !f!' E J! E .; B.:;! ie ~ 5 ~ iii J! 02 lij ~ E ~
1 .~ ; 1- .s ~ lij j 01 ~ ~8.'~ ~ j s ~ ~ ~. o~ ~ ~'a ~ = e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .g ~ O(jj ~
.- 'tiE '8 Cl t).c'a.0.5 5: ~ ~!R'; ~~ i s: ~ Q) l;l ~ 6 :S"2 Q) Q) ~ c~= ~
:c c:( ~ c:( = a i Q) .8 .s i 5- ~ .s ~ l:S i :2 i l:S = = c. en.s ~ "- l2 ~ == 8 ~ _'~ Cl
o
d:co
t:
~8.
=g- <(
:aU) :t;
~.z:. "2
8. ~ ~
tnQ)_~
G Q) U) 0-
0:: :0 .!:! ~
S'~~ 0-
1i8.Q)~~
-(I) 8~
i~ 1::
E ~tv
G=E liji}
-nJ ~a
CL E ~
E .~ tv b
-~ ::EU
.
r:::
~
a::
r:::
o
1) .2
c( :g (ij >-
S a..sg=
.- -mQ)(I)
. _ 5 Z e>~
~'i~ u)~'e
:Er:::~~wa..
r:::Gec: --
oma..~5l!!
fj'O~~~-5
~ ~8.<(oS
.r:::OO-O"'U)
~ za a: as r; u)
0.c::C:Q)~
U) U 0 .Q ~ .~ g
~m:::lC:=
.... c: (,) 0 c'-l e
~ ~.g~ ~
.!! ~wcr: a-
..Q - .
ell
....
_ (1)=
.!!.,......8lrn
1i .!!. -0 ~
o G -0 .-
C)2:m~
-g i iO' 1i
.:a-Eo
'uO (I)~
0'052
tn r:::'-:::l
~elIRE
~, '"
~~
'0
!
]
0::
Ie
e13
::I i
=8
0:: .
e
Q)
U) E
~.~
~Jr
e ::EQ)
~ Cl en
:;, .5 g
:g lI::.5 fir
o'se:!Q)
uenl-[X:
. . . .
~
<'0
~
~ e
o tv
<<i-
05 i
"E~
8m
uc.
e~
Q)C)
E e
Q)02
2>c:o
e.!!!W
tva-a
::E :t; b
~~ c:
e Q) :;,
Q)1::O
C) 8.. u
"- tv
~ g..5
wena-
. .
c:
o
:0:>
c:
~
a-
.
it)"
~
t::"
'"
~
"0
!
j
0:: 0
II) 0
C1HI::C!.
Umo
~05g
o ~c:i
II) .- r--
CDt.)~
0::..
~ ~
c::::l c:
couel.....
C) 2.- 0 c:
.!: Ci) ~ Q e
~li;=..;.2
~ ~.~ CI) J! b
mo 0'~ 11>>-
;;-~C'O~c:()
o_~ii'i~.c:
OOmlOu~
c:iCl)~CI)"
o C)'I:: ~ ~ .ac
ol!lL..aU
c:iCl)lO~..!
6; 1;.!: ~ E u
.
o
o 0
o 0 C> 0
~&g&
~~'"":~
~""'~I':..
..:..:==0;
(1); (1)..
o 11)-
IV C'OC'O
.c:.c:-,=o
a..a..a..~
. . . .
1::
~8. l5
Eg. ~
:SC/) 8.
II) "
&~ l5 ~
o.c 'ai e
II) Cl) 1:: '" ~
.! .92 f.i) 8. "-'
... .0 JI? en i ~
& .~ ~ ~ .!: i
.- 8. Cl) ~ .fi 1;
!CI) '0 -16
CQ) _C)~OQ.
~ .; i'2 ~ e- ~
CD '1:: .e lB <3 U C'O
1im c c
E ~.- C'O >- 0
E[ ~.fi~~~
. . . . .
~
CI)
jl
~.~
~~
II)Jj
~~
~5
~~
a..-J
. .
c l5
i.~1
g~li
I~J8
~a.Ej
::J~a..a..
. . . .
C
C'I
a:
& .2
- :g Cii >.
"~ ... 0
4( 0... ~ ~ c;;
& I::~ ~n II)
.- iE.Q - Cl) .~ ~
J!i~.n~ ~
:e~e&5cCii !I
:E _ a.. ~.Q :; <(
C O~~go 0"Q
~ ~ 8. c( 1"; .5 iC .~ .I!,! fa
~ &~-g I:;C/) ..~ lIS l5
... CD a.. m ~ <Ii _ c7$ '~:e
..'t;j -1::Q)8 e Q:u
~ U s.Q e.- l5 a.. ~ "lR -6
J, ~B is ~~~~~w
CD Cl)::::l CI) C/) g! 8. ~ U .!.l
:is >"CCl) "'eE;::J~
C'I ~ W 0::: If a.. w c;s a..
... e::.
~
!
"Q
C
IV
~
G)
C
~
m
II) 3:
C ~<(
:S_ .~ g
~ Jj==
~ c ~g
tt~~
e~~:g
a..a..wa..
. . . .
ilj
C ~ (l
l{fl
a..lw~
. . . .
. . . . .
_ CI)
..!!.-$Cii
ii ..!!. Jo g?
O~'O'R~
C) .- m CIS N
'i 1 i;':E ~
't;j:s'EO~
.-0 CI)~-
8-os,e-
II) C'-::::l
tltC'lOE
c( ~
m
M
<(
N
-
?~" "
~~t 'l~
"Qx 1O~Q) ~ C c ~ ... .....0 _
fa.Bjj)0t.H; IVU.0 :SSj5!i! 5'i'S .5tC:! i
9l s'j'5:5 ::;::JcpC as= gQ).c:,,-~"2 '.r!!:- e
ti! S 8. 0 '1 c:: 1; .~ .~ .! ~ f11l =: ~..,. g> 5 ~ '8 ~ j.5 G) 16 :g N
~I' 'f~ .8-8-~ G)~,~~g~~~G)lm~~~=lO!~
Q is ~... c>"'S::::l i - -; Ii ~- IV 8 m - = ...: m l5 .!: ~ <[
~11~i~:;!;i~~ ~i;!iJli~j~~II!1111
~.Qi~j~~i~I~! l~i~~I~~~~l~~~~Q)~faEI~
u C 2j. 'ii" !"t:: C > ~ Iii ii i ::::S"""Q Ii '0 ::::s ~- m E 0 ::::l "2
4( ~ ts ... ~ R g! g>:c.!D oI:! .5 -' G).s 'S: -i 10 ~ :5 <:; m b> ~
-o-;::JJ!3<"> 8.- ==rn"2O>-G)ftl ,c0es fI)..=>a~~ii'iEG)
CD .;.: J:l a;"" ::::s fI) (3 'S .r!! ~ ~ .;.: ~"Q'" ~ Ii a.. "-' Cl:! Q) ~ -:I 16 Q) g
~~~2~~~5~xm~"Q';~~iis~~'O~~~~~~~m'iIe
~~tlBg:c'Oo~.Bfatlfa~MfI)~8.~~~fa~~o~'O~~~~m8
o
";::
D.. ;=- N c;)
....
c;:;
;n-
~
....
..,
~
~
e.
j
a.:
I
~
i
1ii
j
~
-5
~
::lE
~
S
.~
a.:
'a
CD
...
.~
0::0
.,.0
CD 0_
uo
... <.0
;:'0>
OeD
.,.N
CD -
0:: .
~
N
o
o
o
M
o
0>
,...:
-
.
o
o
o
c5
CO
....
....
10
-
.
1::
~8.
=g-
:2(1)
~~
O:;::l
a. c: U)
.,.Q)=Q)
CDQ)U)!e-
0:::0 Q) 00
C._:;::l'Q.m
o~'EEE
1ii8.(I)w8
"1:(1) ~c:
CD~ mo
E.2:- 3:13
CD 'C e: .5
Ci. El\1 ~ U)
E oe:
-it ~8
- ..
U)
CD
!e-
00
-m
a.~
E e:
Wo
....0
Be:
l\10
3:13
e:2
0-
~ ~
::J 0
~0
. .
~E
(/)8
~e:
3::6
~~
~8
. .
c
.
a::
g .2
~ :0->-
Q :::l ~ 0
c( a....a150
c c:: l\1 en 0
O...oZ'"-Q)
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '2 U)
.:!:e io (l)Wa... ~
~-'"-~c::m e:
:E....O"'~o... ~
- >-l\1:;::l :::l m
cOt::=oo U):;:
~ ~ Q) < ~ 2 .~ <..
U 0 8--0 e en ~ e:
.=lira:~~ui J3i
N1ii -cQ)~ >-~
(W') (.) 5 .Q e .- g 0 ~
fh 'E B 5 ~ 'E ~~
CD Q):::l U) CI) CD ':;".-
:a >"'00:::(1) ~~:g
. ~w ,fWD..
.... !:'!::-
. . .
U)
U)
CD
e:
~
~
<(
8
'fil
o
e: ::J
0"0
:Q W
ii.s.!
2!:g
D..D..
. .
e:
o
~
e
D..U)
U) 8
~.~
aJ3
e:~~
,ga::e:
~~ ~
~i E
D..ZW
. . .
.-~Cii
:::-"'~(I)
. --0 >
o CD "'0 .-
C)~l\1~
"a 1:) >-:5
CD CD l\1E 0 ....
1ii:a'
'uo U)~
O'O5:;::l
.,. c'-3
.,..oE
c( ::S.-
ij)"
:5
N
....-
(0)
~
-Q
~
o
"='
l.'!
e..
lij
it
C ~ C U)O 1ii = ii- ~
.s :iSU) I ~ ~'i "0 11m 16'~ e: ~ ~16g ~
U) ... ::> ~ Iii IE CD U) 5 CDE E E ftI.f.l >- ..!!!"O '~"O e: ;:e
'(ij B CD - ... E CD... = .2 - .-'m .2 g CI.i lIS "0 cri D.. e: ~ e "3 ~ "P
~ >- ~ ~ .8 '* 5 15 '* -f6 8 -g 8 ~ t" ~ 11 ~ ~ .l:! ::i 'e- ~ i-::i .!i a g >- ~ 8 15 i!l
CD ..c C c>> = == _ ~;:'I:::J C\J CD _ 4l a:: ftI a:: c( "0 a..!!.. b "0 m ~....: ..!!! CD b - ~
1j E m qj'~ 15 l! ::J - a."i CD = o. 0::: U) ..J e: CD Iii e: U);: c 3: 0 .8 Iii >;= ii (;j
U)B-g-b i CD~ea::~5ge~~::Jc.B = 0'E.e~U).5 >~~.s c::
~ ~ !- ~ .~ '5 ~ ~ -g ~ s ~ ~ i jl': i:e 1 ~ j ~ ! ~ ~ m .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a:: ~ ~ ~
:B ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ;; ~ e Ea:a ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ -S us ~ ~ i ~g> ~ ~ j E ~ it" .~ I
c( e == ~ U) 8 :0 "0 m e'm 0I,g b"O ~ l\1 = f :l.... .:> Iii m 01 m :5 CD CD a:: c ~
'a ~ -8 ~.~ CD '8. ~'6 D.. U ~ .~ 7i ftI ~ g>~'E 'E ~ -g ~ .~.& CD ~ .&~ ~ ~ e>><( CD ~
CD M :u U) U) = ~ ~ -8 .;..; l! CD .- 'ti .B ... "l 'E U) U) ~ ~ "": .5! 0 1ii J5 ~ 0 8 m c53 ~ ~ J!! .<e-
~~J~~~~~~~~jIRI~~~!~!~~~M~'8~~~1~lli ~
o
Q:~ LO co ~
lD
oci
c(
ci
....
as
c5
....
-'-, ")
~\)
"1:'
!
j
Ill:
en 0
0
CU 0
~ ~
~
0 CO
:= .0
~
Ill: .
t:
~8:
=::J
:2(/)
en _
c~
0;;
C.C
en Q)
CUQ)'ij
Ill:- lf6E
..0._
C.ii.i=
:iCC
8.Q) usc
-Ul 158
55 e 1ii5
E~ 3:13
CU.C c.s
-ro
c.E ~ ~
c E.c ::J 0
.. -e:. .....u
0:: . .
c ,g
0
:a ..0 - >.
::J~u
c( Q..::JC=
C -CiiQ)Ul
c: z e>~
0 =.2 _ Q) .;:;';
1i cu~Ulel2
:! c_~wa..
CU e C --
::& mQ..e5~
c O~~~U
0 e!
3 ~8.<(e 2
o "0 -
~ C)l2c:a..(/) f}
I- sa..ro en .5
N ca -c~B
05.2.... .- ccn
("') It
cD .- ~::J ~
c: OQ)
CU Q)::JUl(/)
::s >-oQ)
ewo::: l!!e
ca 0.0.
.... e:. . .
:g-'~ en
_en....Q)
ca..-o>
o>-o~
(.!)._ <<I
i 11 (U':5 N
:a"eo T-
'-0 Ul~
8"1:'5:=
en c.- ::J
encatse
<( ~
Q)1il- en(/) CI)
~i'i ~hU!f~H
~: c
-g :8
~ g'.5 IJjili~l t5
cu.- (/) Ii c lJ-;s.l c.:5 i
1 f:a 8..- ~ g' 8. j s .
en ~ ; _ ] :E' g' 5 i.~
C ~i:B-=
0 c'151jc CI) j,-Ecn.f!
:a 'e- .e ::: I; ~b CU~="O ;gEc(c
8 '- "0 ~ ~ C ::J 8 0 CI)
c( 0. 8: CI) :lSfijcucu cuoam c(E
1 cub::J> .;.: !6 .; ~~ ~ ~ l:l cu (!j ~ ~
c .~ (/)."
fi.l .mcu ~..5 ~ 0 0,_ E ~ ! c("o ~
:e .C ~ ~ oX N::Jj9EQ)'icu CUCE
c( !!l T- > cu_ "Oc(wcn ro_
o
";:: ;:::-
0.
<0
~
Li>'
~
...
..,
~
~
!
j
a.:
I
f
~
~
~
~
.",
~
;e
~
~
d
.~
is:
~
t!
~i
0::
fII
CU
~
::J~ ~ ~
o ro
100 00 00
0:: . . .
~ ~ ~ ~ .....
Q) Q) ~ Q)
Q) ~ ~ ~
C c:: c::
::> ::> ::> ::>
~ ~ ~ 0
>
oCl oCl oCl oCl
! ! ! ~ ! ~ !
00 (/)
. . . . . . .
n n
'C:: 'C:: C~ C~ C C C
iii iii Q) Cl) Cl)
is is ~'g Q).c:: E E E
:g :g ~ g Q) Cl) Cl)
OIQ) fi~ fi ~ ~
ro....
c:: c:: ffi.Q ffi.Q c:: c c
0 0 ro ro ro
U U ~m ~m ~ ~ ~
"8 "8 ~l ~l -~ l ~
0 c:: c:: c:: c:: c:: c::
u: u: Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) el
1ii 1ii ~E ~E ~~ ~
Q)t: ~i PJ PJ
c:: c:: E ro ~~
0 0
.~ '0 w~ wo.. ~w w w
Q) '00 'O~ '0 '0 '0
0:: 0:: ..c: ..c:..c:
ro ro 81ij 8 8lij 8iii 8 8 8
E E l5~18l5~18~15 15 l5
a: a:
. . . . . . . . . .
t:
o
~fr -
=::s c c:m
:e (I) Q) Q)E E
fII - E t:
C..;::. Q) l!!ro
o :;:: fi c iii 0..
~~ 15 ~ ffi~
CUQ)fij~ .e~<I)
0:::0 Q) >.c ro;., 8
~l~ ii~ll
-(I) Cl)20Q)-
CQ) ECU."EC::
."- worowPJ
E>- _~t:_
. 'E 0 c' &. 0 0..
Ci ro 8'2 <I) 8 ~
E .g IE ~ ~ IE iil
-0... 00...1-00
- .....
C
ca
a::
C
o
:u
c(
C
o
:g ,g
.2J .Q _ >-
~ ::>~u
:E 0...::J -
~ - Cii ~~'
1:' 5 z E> Q) l:l
::J i '"" u) ~ 'e- Q)
8c.$lGwo... ~ 'R_5
ca · e I: I:-Cii ~ i6
E mo... l!! 0..... <
'-'O~~n.a ~ e
a.. ~ Q) < ~ 2 15 5'~ ~
'i 0 g-~ eus C::'R~ 8
1;: aJo..."- lij 0... - ,g i6 - 5
Cell (1)(1) ~eo 0
!oti c::- 1:0 Q) B c:: ::>a..d: c:: ~
o e.- 0 ~ - 0 IV
o ,",,~:::l~=w>-~=~
U I: U 0 Q) c:: t:::>. c:: ro
C Q):::l(l)(J)~,g8.1:S~5
'2 >~~ l!?.ge.sl!?1O
::::) { w a.. a.. a.. (/) a.. z
;.,; ......
M
.
CD
ell
:g
ca
I-
--')
Wt~,
"" ~
- (1)=
..!!........ ~ tn
'iii .!!. -0 ~
o CU "0 .-
C).~ ro~
~ 1i iU":5
I:a-EO
'-0 (I)~
g~5~
fII C .- ::;
fIIl'lIOE
c( $
l:l l:l l:l
Q) Q) Q)
c:: c:: c:: c:: i
~ ~ l!? l!? '""
i6 i6 ~ ~ j
e e < < ......
a.. a.. ~<I) ~<I) ~<I)
5 <I) 5 <I) 15.8 15.8 ffi.~
'R~ 'R~ 5'~ 5~ 52:
i6::> i6::> =~ :;a~ 'il~
eg eO ~ u U
c::a..Q)c::a..~C:::::l~C:::l~C:::::l~
,g ;..,.0:: ,g >-0:: ,g w~ c:: ,g w~ ~c:: ,g w~ c::
c::t:-c::t:-c:: ~c:: c!Il
~ 8.~ ~ 8.~ ~.S2.....~,g Q) ~.S2 ~
l!?e16l!?e1il!?:g~l!?.gEl!?:gPJ
a..a..za..a..za..a..wa..a..wa..a..w
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
~ ,g c::
0:: ro ro oCl 5 0
.5 a ~ ~ 16 .~
~ ::: ~~ ~ ~
Q) . <I) 'B.~ ~
m~~ ~iO 8<1)
fllro~""'ro oCliiU u:8
co.. 0.. ~a.t: 815
:B l- ~ .~ E ID 5 .5
~~~~j~~~ .~~
.!:!1Ii :::l;;Ji!<c83 ~~~ ~
:CC'"i'iC'"it;..-: cJ5a..lri::C
o
'C
a.. <r- N c;:) ~
l:l l:l
Q) Q)
c:: c::
!! e
~ ~
~ <I) ~ <I)
158 158
5 .~ ~i"~
~~ .,,~
:8-5g,g~g
c:w~c:w~
~.S2 5: ~.S2 '""
l!?:g~l!?:g~
a..a..wa..a..w
. . . . . .
~
IIi
~
M
IIi
~
N
IIi
~
.s
~ Q)
'2 e
::> 0..
~8 :c
8::> .;
.5 ~ ~ 13 ~
~.s.~~~
.9- E l!? .:> ~
.S2 ~ is e l!?
i~8a..o..
c:': 01 15 c'j ;gj
~ :S 5 ai "0.
m ro <I) . <I)
1ri0::.5~~
~ ...
~<I) J!2 ~>
OC::c'2
16-E,gQ)~ oCl S
1iiro~EoCl
.~ ~ ~ -! ~ '0 ~ ~
o Q) 0 E.~ II) II) .~
ro 0 ..... .- ~..'OI: Q) i6'
c:~oClQ)ro~ )(11)
.5 ro lQ 0..)( l!?'- Cl) 'i
~~.!a~~t~ ~~
~~~~j;C:~0'~ 'i~
..- 0 -3.:Be:
N ~ .. ~ 15..-
cj:6::>C'olE~E.b..-;E
'Q)enm::>roec:me
~~.so;El!88~8
in CD
r:::-
co
6)
~
a:i
~
M
IIi
~
.....
IIi
~
...
.g
~
en
'e
Q) .
)( en
Q)~
~~
~~
~'g
.. E
C'olE
~o
~ (.)
0"
.....
iC5'
:5
'"
....
..,
li;
.Q
-B
o
&i::
!!!
e..
<::
J!!
0..:
<::
~
f
)
1;;
<::
~
~
-"'l
;e
~
~
~
.~
0..:
C
..
0::
C
o
:e
c(
C
o
1i
_2 ,~
~ -g~~
:Ii Q...acCi)
~ ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
si~~~'e Q) Q)
UC_Q)WQ.. ~ ;
"~~55c:~ ~ ;i:
E _ ffi ,2:J <( <(
0: O~::=~t) ~en ~!R
-g ~ ~ <( 0 .s 16 .~ 16 .l5
1!8t~~~(/)~- i~ ~~
ulS2ZS. c:J~cg
o ~ 1;;:; :8 iB .IC :8 iB
g a;gi~16.~ ,C.W
-- > "C Q) ~ :is ::g
:5 {Wa:: Q.~w Q.W
~ . . . . . .
C")
.
CD
CD
::i5
..
to-
"C
Q)
..
-- en
6 m
~c:
:;,
I~
~ad
s:m
100
a:: .
1::
~2:
;e~ i
~~ ~
0.. 5f
ft 55 16
lDQ)Cii~
O::-Q)
c~~ ~
o c c Iii
18.Q)~
Ii ~ ~
E~ ~
CD'C 0
l.~ ~
- e:.. Q
.
'0_:gCi)
:::-"~Q)~
.. -"0 > .
O~"O:;::lcq
C) -- Cll g ~
"C tS >>.: C"!
CDlDCll.Qm
1ij:a'E ~~
--0 "':g~
g "C lS .- ai
.. C'- '5 ~
""uE
c( ~
~
Q)
.s
C
:;,
~
ad
~
~
'"
.
c:
Q)
E
Q)
Cl
III
C
III
~
~
C
Q)
~
Q)
E
W
'0
~
~
.
('t)
ai
~
N
ai
~
~
ai
~
iO'
8
'"
;;
~
ot:
~
.Ii
a.:
i
l
~
~
,g
1
i
~
s
~
Q)
.5 =
~ 'i .5
16 ~ .~en
U)c
.~.;;;
cn16Q. ~
C5f~ n
~ Cl :5
uC "0.
c( 'i! ~ I' 5ii ~
I-c (5c
lloog. ..g
_t! ;ri E Q) ~ e
:c~8~~8
o
;t~
N
~
.J
7. PLAN MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES
In response to the DMA2000 requirements cited in Table 7-1, this section details the formal process that will ensure
that the Pima County Multi-Jurisdiction Hazard Mffigation Plan remains an active and relevant document. The plan
maintenance process includes a schedule for monitoring and evaluating the Plan annually and updating the Plan
every five years. This section describes how the County and the other jurisdictions adopting this Plan will integrate
public participation throughout the plan maintenance process. Finally, this section includes an explanation of how
Pima County jurisdictions intend to incorporate the mitigation strategies outlined in this plan into existing planning
mechanisms such as local general plans, capital improvement plans, and building codes.
Table 7.1: DMA 2000 R uirements- Monitorin ,Evaluatin ,and U atin the Plan
Title Requirement Language
Monitoring, S201.6{c){4){i): [The plan maintenance process shall include a section describing
Evaluating, and the] method and schedule of monitoring, evaluating, and updating
Updating the the mitigation plan within a five-year cycle.
Plan
Source: FEMA, July 11, 2002.
Section
Plan
Maintenance
Procedures
The Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan has been prepared as a collaborative effort between the
following jurisdictions within the County: Marana, Oro Valley, Pascua Yaqui, Pima County, Sahuarita; South Tucson,
and Tucson. As the initial step in the process of preparing this Plan, each of these jurisdictions identified a
representative who attended a series of meetings and workshops aimed at assisting the preparation of jurisdictional
hazard mitigation plans in compliance with the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. The following sections describe an
ongoing commitment by this group (the Hazard Mitigation Steering Committee) to implementing and maintaining the
Plan. The schedule to monitor, evaluate, and update this HMP, along with any additional triggering mechanisms, is
described within each of the applicable sections below. Within each jurisdiction a specific department is identified to
ensure all legal responsibilities related to emergency management and hazard mitigation are met, maintained, and
made available to the jurisdiction's personnel as well as to the public. Table 7-2: Means to Monitor, Evaluate, and
Update the Plan, list each jurisdiction along with the current responsible department and staff member for monitoring,
evaluating, and updating this HMP. Pascua Yaqui Tribe will formally update their plan every three years per the
requirements of a state-level HMP. Pima County along with each of the five incorporated jurisdictions will formally
update their plans every five years per guidance published in the Federal Register Vol. 67, dated February 26,2002.
All participating jurisdictions. city, county, and tribal, will monitor, evaluate, and informally update their applicable
portions of the HMP on an annual basis unless an accelerated schedule is deemed appropriate on any given year.
Table 7.2: Means to Monitor, Evaluate, and Update the Plan
Jurisdiction Staff Member Department
Pima County Unincorporated Area David Lenox Pima County Office of Emergency
Management and Homeland
Security
Town of Marana Sgt. Steve Johnson Police Department
Town of Oro Valley Lt. Jason Larter Police Department
Pascua Yaqui Tribe Chief Basillio Martinez Fire Department
Town of Saharita Martin Roush Town Engineer
City of South Tucson Chief Larry Anderson Fire Department
City of Tucson Lt. Sanford Levy Police Department
Pima County Mulli-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
219
.)
7.1.1 Plan Monitoring
The Hazard Mitigation Plan Steering Committee participants will be responsible for monitoring the plan annually for
updates to jurisdictional goals, objectives, and action items. These participants, to include those individuals and
departments specifically identified in Table 7-2, will coordinate through the Pima County Department of Emergency
Management to integrate these updates into the overall Plan. Each individual jurisdiction will be responsible for
monitoring the Plan for informal updates on an annual basis unless an accelerated schedule is deemed appropriate
on any given year. The review will include an evaluation of the following:
· Notable changes in the jurisdiction's risk to natural or human-caused hazards.
· Impacts of land development activities and related programs on hazard mitigation.
· Correspondence between the jurisdiction's hazards and the Plan's goals, objectives, and actions.
· Progress on implementation of the Plan. If necessary, this will include identification of problems and suggested
improvements.
· Actual progress implementing the Plan versus expectations.
· The adequacy of resources for implementation of the Plan.
· Participation of County agencies and others in the Plan's implementation versus expectations.
The informal annual review will provide the basis for possible changes in the Plan's implementation through
refocusing on new or more threatening hazards, changes to or increases in resources allocations, and engaging
additional support for the Plan's implementation. Atthough the Plan will be scheduled for an annual review based on
the month of adoption, an annual review may occur at any time deemed appropriate by the jurisdictions such as
immediately following a major or presidential declared event.
7.1.2 Plan Evaluation
The Plan will be evaluated by each participating jurisdiction on an annual basis, to coincide with the informal annual
update, to determine the effectiveness of programs, and to reflect changes in land development or programs that
may affect mitigation priorities. The Plan will also be re-evaluated annually by Hazard Mitigation Planning Group
based upon the initial ST APLEE criteria. The Pima County Department of Emergency Management and jurisdictional
representatives will also review the goals and action items to determine their relevance to changing situations in the
county, as well as changes in State or Federal policy, to ensure they are addressing cunrent and expected conditions.
County offICials and jurisdictional representatives will also review the risk assessment portion of the Plan to
determine if this information should be updated or modified, given any new available data. Each of the jurisdictional
representatives on the Hazard Mitigation Plan Steering Committee will work with their Local Hazard Mitigation
Planning Teams to report on the status of their projects, the success of various implementation processes, difficulties
encountered, success of coordination efforts. and which strategies should be revised. Based on the findings of these
analyses, recommended modifications will be summarized and forwarded to communities for consideration and
incorporation into revised plan sections.
7.1.3 Plan Updates
Each individual jurisdiction will be responsible for the continual review, evaluation, and update of the Pima County
Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. Pima County should take a leadership role in the coordination and
assimilation of all updates within the plan. All Hazard Mitigation Plan Steering Committee participants will be
responsible to provide this agency with jurisdictional-level updates to the Plan when/if necessary as described above.
In accordance with DMA 2000, Pima County and its five incorporated jurisdictions will formally update the Plan every
five years, whereas the Pascua Yaqui tribe will formally update their portions of the Plan every three years to comply
with state-level requirements. The Plan will be updated and submitted to the State of Arizona and FEMA for review.
To ensure that this occurs as appropriate, in the second and fourth year following adoption of the Plan, the Pima
County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Steering Committee will undertake the following activities:
· Work cooperatively and collaboratively to thoroughly analyze and update the County's and Tribe's risk to
natural and man-made hazards (as was done to prepare the original Plan).
Pima county Mulli-JurisclictionaJ Hazwd Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
220
J
. Provide a new annual review (as noted above), plus a review of the previous annual reports.
. Provide an additional detailed review and revision of the Mitigation Strategy, including each goal, objective,
and potential action.
. Prepare a new Action Plan with prioritized actions, responsible parties, and resources.
. Prepare a new draft Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan and submit to the County Board
of Supervisors and Tribal Council, as appropriate, for adoption.
. Submit an updated Plan to the Arizona Division of Emergency Management for county and city plans and to
FEMA directly for state-level plans (Pascua Yaqui Tribe) for approval.
7.1.4 Implementation Through Existing Programs
The many processes that allow the County to function as a community are also those that will ensure a viable
outcome due to a hazard event or natural disaster. Therefore, local-level experts are those expected to ensure that
the Plan's goals, objectives, and actions are implemented. In compliance with the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000
(see Table 7-2), described below are procedures to implement the hazard mitigation plan through existing programs.
Table 7.2: DMA 2000 Re ulrements -1m lementatlon Throu h Exlstln Pro rams
rltle Requirement language
Implementation !201.6(c)(4) (ii): [The plan shall include a] process by which local governments
Through Existing incorporate the requirements of the mitigation plan into other
Programs planning mechanisms such as comprehensive or capital
im vement lans, vAlen 'ate...
Section
Plan
Maintenance
Procedures
Source: FEMA, July 11, 2002.
Upon adoption of the mitigation plan, the County may assist local municipalities in developing their natural hazard
mitigation goals and actions by providing the Pima County Mufti-Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Plan as a baseline of
information on the natural hazards that impact the county. These goals and action items will help local governments,
as well as the Pima County Planning Department address countywide land-use planning goals. Current land-use
planning guidelines, including the fundamentals of Arizona's Growing Smarter initiatives, assist communities in
protecting life and property from natural disasters and hazards through planning strategies that restrict development
in areas of known hazards. These guidelines encourage local governments to create development plans that are
based at least partially on inventories of known areas of natural disasters and hazards and that the intensity of
development should be limited by the degree to which the natural hazard occurs within the areas of proposed
development. Local jurisdictions and the county can use periodic review as an avenue to update the Hazards
element of their comprehensive plan and to integrate mitigation into zoning and planning documents.
Jurisdictions within the County address statewide planning goals and legislative requirements through its
Comprehensive Land Use Plan and Capital Improvement Plan. The Pima County Mufti-Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation
Plan provides a series of recommendations - many of which are closely related to the goals and objectives of
existing planning documents and policies. Jurisdictions will have the opportunity to implement recommended
mitigation action items through existing programs and procedures.
Within six months of formal adoption of the mitigation plan, the recommendations listed within this plan should be
incorporated into existing planning programs, policies and documents at the community and county level. Meetings of
the Hazard Mitigation Plan Steering Committee will provide an opportunity for jurisdictions to report back on the
progress made on the integration of mitigation planning elements into community and county planning documents
and procedures.
7.1.5 Continued Public Involvement
Pima County is dedicated to involving the public directly in the continual reshaping and updating of the Hazard
Mitigation Plan. The County's Hazard Mitigation Plan Steering Committee members are responsible for the review
and update of the Plan. Although they represent the public to some extent, the public is entitled to directly comment
on and provide feedback regarding updates and revisio~s to the Plan. In compliance with the Disaster Mitigation Act
Pima County IIuIti-Jllisdictiona/ Hazard AIi/iga/ion Plan (Draft: October 31, 2(05)
URS
221
..J
of 2000 (see Table 7-3), public access to the Plan and to the various revision processes will be made through
mechanisms described below.
Table 7.3: DMA 2000 Requirements - Continued Public Involvement
Section Title Requirement Language
Plan Continued Public ~201.6(c)(4) (iii): [The plan maintenance process shall include a) discussion on how
Maintenance Involvement the community will continue public participation in the plan
Procedures maintenance process.
Source: FEMA, July 11, 2002.
A copy of the Plan will be publicized and available for review on the County website. In addition, copies of the plan
will be catalogued and kept at all of the appropriate agencies in the county. The sne will contain an email address
and/or address and the phone number of the appropriate community development office, the County Planning
Department, and/or other appropriate members of the Hazard Mitigation Plan Steering Committee to which people
can direct their comments and concems.
A press release calling for public comments will also be released atter each annual evaluation or when deemed
necessary. The press release will direct people to the websne or appropriate local agency location where the public
can review proposed updated versions of the Plan. These annual press releases will provide the public an outlet for
which they can express their concerns, opinions, or ideas about any updates/changes that are proposed to the Plan.
In addition, the County's Hazard Mitigation Plan Steering Committee win conduct an annual review of progress
implementing the Pima County Mufti-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, particularly the Action Plan.
In addition to being placed with local jurisdictions' Emergency Hazard Coordinators, copies of the Plan will be
provided to participating municipal Division Directors and kept on hand at the County Administrator's Office and the
Emergency Management Director's OffICe. Upon approval, the existence and location of these documents will be
made public through postings to be placed in visible locations in municipal facilities, and will be posted on the
County's website. Each participating jurisdiction will also identify opportunnies to raise awareness in the community
about the Plan and the County's hazards. This could include attendance and provision of materials at key County
sponsored events, such as festivals, chamber of commerce events, and neighborhood meetings.
Pima County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Draft: October 31, 2005)
URS
222