HomeMy WebLinkAboutPR 19833: Draft Jefferson County HMAP - FEMA Copy.4.13.17JEFFERSON COUNTY
DRAFT: April 13, 2017
Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017
Maintaining a Safe, Secure, and
Sustainable Community
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
For more information, visit our website at:
www.co.jefferson.tx.us/em
Written comments should be forwarded to:
H2O Partners, Inc.
P. O. Box 160130
Austin, Texas 78716
info@h2opartnersusa.com
www.h2opartnersusa.com
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 2
Section 1 – Introduction
Background ....................................................................................................................................1-1
Scope and Participation...................................................................................................................1-2
Purpose ..........................................................................................................................................1-3
Authority ........................................................................................................................................1-3
Summary of Sections.......................................................................................................................1-4
Section 2 – Planning Process
Plan Preparation and Development .................................................................................................2-1
Review and Incorporation of Existing Plans ......................................................................................2-7
Timeline for Implementing Mitigation Actions ............................................................................... 2-10
Public and Stakeholder Involvement ............................................................................................. 2-10
Section 3 – County Profile
Overview ........................................................................................................................................3-1
Population and Demographics .........................................................................................................3-4
Future Development .......................................................................................................................3-6
Economic Impact ............................................................................................................................3-6
Existing and Future Land Use and Development Trentds ..................................................................3-6
Section 4 – Risk Overview
Hazard Identification .......................................................................................................................4-1
Natural Hazards and Climate Change ...............................................................................................4-3
Overview of Hazard Analysis ...........................................................................................................4-4
Hazard Ranking ...............................................................................................................................4-6
Section 5 – Flood
Hazard Description ..........................................................................................................................5-1
Location .........................................................................................................................................5-2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 3
Extent .......................................................................................................................................... 5-12
Historical Occurrences .................................................................................................................. 5-15
Probability of Future Events .......................................................................................................... 5-19
Vulnerability and Impact .............................................................................................................. 5-19
NFIP Participation ........................................................................................................................ 5-23
NFIP Compliance and Maintenance .............................................................................................. 5-25
Repetitive Loss ............................................................................................................................. 5-25
Section 6 – Lightning
Hazard Description .........................................................................................................................6-1
Location .........................................................................................................................................6-1
Extent ............................................................................................................................................6-1
Historical Occurrences ....................................................................................................................6-2
Probability of Future Events ...........................................................................................................6-4
Vulnerability and Impact ................................................................................................................6-4
Section 7 – Hurricane
Hazard Description ..........................................................................................................................7-1
Location ..........................................................................................................................................7-2
Extent .............................................................................................................................................7-4
Historical Occurrences .....................................................................................................................7-5
Probability of Future Events ............................................................................................................7-7
Vulnerability and Impact .................................................................................................................7-7
Section 8 – Extreme Heat
Hazard Description ..........................................................................................................................8-1
Location ..........................................................................................................................................8-1
Extent .............................................................................................................................................8-2
Historical Occurrences .....................................................................................................................8-4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 4
Probability of Future Events ............................................................................................................8-6
Vulnerability and Impact .................................................................................................................8-6
Section 9 – Hail
Hazard Description ..........................................................................................................................9-1
Location ..........................................................................................................................................9-1
Extent .............................................................................................................................................9-1
Historical Occurrences .....................................................................................................................9-2
Probability of Future Events ............................................................................................................9-7
Vulnerability and Impact .................................................................................................................9-7
Section 10 – Thunderstorm Wind
Hazard Description ........................................................................................................................ 10-1
Location ........................................................................................................................................ 10-1
Extent ........................................................................................................................................... 10-2
Historical Occurrences ................................................................................................................... 10-3
Probability of Future Events .......................................................................................................... 10-8
Vulnerability and Impact ............................................................................................................... 10-8
Section 11 – Tornado
Hazard Description ........................................................................................................................ 11-1
Location ........................................................................................................................................ 11-2
Extent ........................................................................................................................................... 11-2
Historical Occurrences ................................................................................................................... 11-5
Probability of Future Events .......................................................................................................... 11-8
Vulnerability and Impact ............................................................................................................... 11-8
Section 12 – Drought
Hazard Description ....................................................................................................................... 12-1
Location ....................................................................................................................................... 12-2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 5
Extent .......................................................................................................................................... 12-3
Historical Occurrences .................................................................................................................. 12-5
Probability of Future Events ......................................................................................................... 12-6
Vulnerability and Impact .............................................................................................................. 12-6
Section 13 – Wildfire
Hazard Description ....................................................................................................................... 13-1
Location ....................................................................................................................................... 13-1
Extent ........................................................................................................................................ 13-11
Historical Occurrences ................................................................................................................ 13-23
Probability of Future Events ....................................................................................................... 13-25
Vulnerability and Impact ............................................................................................................ 13-26
Section 14 – Winter Storm
Hazard Description ........................................................................................................................ 14-1
Location ........................................................................................................................................ 14-3
Extent ........................................................................................................................................... 14-3
Historical Occurrences ................................................................................................................... 14-4
Probability of Future Events .......................................................................................................... 14-6
Vulnerability and Impact ............................................................................................................... 14-6
Section 15 – Coastal Erosion
Hazard Description ........................................................................................................................ 15-1
Location ........................................................................................................................................ 15-1
Extent ........................................................................................................................................... 15-2
Historical Occurrences ................................................................................................................... 15-4
Probability of Future Events .......................................................................................................... 15-4
Vulnerability and Impact ............................................................................................................... 15-4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 6
Section 16 – Mitigation Strategy
Mitigation Goals ........................................................................................................................... 16-1
Goal 1 ........................................................................................................................................... 16-1
Goal 2 ........................................................................................................................................... 16-1
Goal 3 ........................................................................................................................................... 16-2
Goal 4 ........................................................................................................................................... 16-2
Goal 5 ........................................................................................................................................... 16-2
Goal 6 ........................................................................................................................................... 16-3
Section 17 – Previous Actions
Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 17-1
Jefferson County ........................................................................................................................... 17-2
Beaumont ................................................................................................................................... 17-19
Bevil Oaks ................................................................................................................................... 17-47
China .......................................................................................................................................... 17-60
Groves ........................................................................................................................................ 17-71
Nederland .................................................................................................................................. 17-86
Nome ....................................................................................................................................... 17-101
Port Arthur ............................................................................................................................... 17-112
Port Neches .............................................................................................................................. 17-132
Southeast Texas Regional Planning Commission (SETRPC) .......................................................... 17-144
Section 18 – Mitigation Actions
Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 18-1
Jefferson County ........................................................................................................................... 18-7
Beaumont ................................................................................................................................... 18-42
Bevil Oaks ................................................................................................................................... 18-93
China ........................................................................................................................................ 18-109
Groves ...................................................................................................................................... 18-131
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 7
Nederland ................................................................................................................................ 18-154
Nome ....................................................................................................................................... 18-181
Port Arthur ............................................................................................................................... 18-202
Port Neches .............................................................................................................................. 18-239
SETRPC ..................................................................................................................................... 18-261
Section 19 – Plan Maintenance
Plan Maintenance Procedures ....................................................................................................... 19-1
Incorporation ................................................................................................................................ 19-1
Monitoring and Evaluation ............................................................................................................ 19-5
Updating....................................................................................................................................... 19-6
Continued Public Involvement ....................................................................................................... 19-7
Appendix A – Low Risk and Manmade Hazards
Appendix B – Planning Team
Appendix C – Public Survey Results
Appendix D – Critical Facilities
Appendix E – Dam Locations
Appendix F – Meeting Documentation
Appendix G – Capability Assessment
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
Background ................................................................................................................................................... 1
Scope and Participation ................................................................................................................................ 2
Purpose ......................................................................................................................................................... 3
Authority ....................................................................................................................................................... 3
Summary of Sections .................................................................................................................................... 4
Background
Jefferson County is located in far southeastern Texas along the Texas-Louisiana border and the Gulf of
Mexico. Jefferson County was formed in 1836 and organized in 1837, and was named for the municipality
that preceded it, which was in turn named for Thomas Jefferson.
Jefferson County is bounded by Hardin and Orange Counties to the north, the Sabine River and Lake Sabine
and Cameron Parish, Louisiana on the east, Chamber County is to the west and Liberty County is to the
northwest. The county seat is the City of Beaumont, located 75 miles east of Houston and 17 miles
northwest of Port Arthur.
Texas is prone to extremely heavy rains and flooding with half of the world record rainfall rates (48 hours
or less).1 While flooding is a well-known risk, Jefferson County is susceptible to a wide range of natural
hazards, including but not limited to extreme heat, tornadoes, hail, and wildfires. These life-threatening
hazards can destroy property, disrupt the economy, and lower the overall quality of life for individuals.
While it is impossible to prevent an event from occurring, the effect from many hazards to people and
property can be lessened. This concept is known as hazard mitigation, which is defined by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as sustained actions taken to reduce or eliminate long-term risk
to people and property from hazards and their effects.2 Communities participate in hazard mitigation by
developing hazard mitigation plans. The Texas Division of Emergency Management (TDEM) and FEMA
have the authority to review and approve hazard mitigation plans through the Disaster Mitigation Act of
2000.
In 2005-2006, Jefferson County and the participating cities originally developed their Hazard Mitigation
Action Plan (HMAP). Then in 2011, information about the planning area and hazard events were updated
and incorporated into their HMAP update titled, “Jefferson County Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Version
1.9”. This plan was developed by the Jefferson County Hazard Mitigation Team with assistance from
Metro Planning, Inc.
1 http://floodsafety.com/texas/regional_info/regional_info/dallas_zone.htm
2 http://www.fema.gov/hazard-mitigation-planning-resources
Section 1: Introduction
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 2
The Disaster Mitigation Act requires that hazard
mitigation plans be reviewed and revised every five years
to maintain eligibility for Hazard Mitigation Assistance
(HMA) grant funding. Since FEMA originally approved
the Jefferson County HMAP in 2006, and then approved
an update in 2011, the County began the process of
developing a HMAP Update in order to maintain
eligibility for grant funding within the five-year window.
The South East Texas Regional Planning Commission
(SETRPC) coordinated among Orange County, Hardin
County, and Jefferson County to update each of their
HMAP plans and selected the consultant team of H2O
Partners, Inc. to write and develop the HMAP Update
2017 for each of the three counties, including Jefferson
County. The HMAP Update planning process provided an
opportunity for Jefferson County to evaluate successful
mitigation actions and explore opportunities to avoid
future disaster loss. The 2011 HMAP Update will expire in 2016; therefore, the SETRPC and Jefferson
County has selected H2O Partners, Inc. to write and develop the 2017 HMAP Update, hereinafter titled:
“Jefferson County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017: Maintaining a Safe, Secure and Sustainable
Community” (Plan or Plan Update).
Hazard mitigation activities are an investment in a community’s safety and sustainability. It is widely
accepted that the most effective hazard mitigation measures are implemented at the local government
level, where decisions on the regulation and control of development are ultimately made. A
comprehensive update to a hazard mitigation plan addresses hazard vulnerabilities that exist today
and in the foreseeable future. Therefore, it is essential that a plan identify projected patterns of how
future development will increase or decrease a community’s overall hazard vulnerability.
Scope and Participation
Jefferson County’s 2017 Plan Update is a multi-jurisdictional Plan. The participating jurisdictions include
Jefferson County, the City of Beaumont, the City of Bevil Oaks, the City of China, the City of Groves, the
City of Nederland, the City of Nome, the City of Port Arthur, the City of Port Neches, and the South East
Texas Regional Planning Commission (SETRPC). These jurisdictions provided valuable input into the
planning process.
Throughout the Plan “Jefferson County planning area” refers to the entire planning area including all
participating jurisdictions. Similarly, the term “countywide” refers to the entire planning area including all
participating jurisdictions.
The focus of the 2017 Plan Update is to identify activities to mitigate hazards classified as “high” or
“moderate” risk, as determined through a detailed hazard risk assessment conducted for Jefferson County
and the participating jurisdictions. Hazards that pose a “low” or “negligible” risk will continue to be
Section 1: Introduction
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 3
evaluated during future updates to the Plan, but may be included in the appendices and not be fully
addressed until they are determined to be a high or moderate risk. The hazard classification enables the
County and participating jurisdictions to prioritize mitigation actions based on hazards which can present
the greatest risk to lives and property in the geographic scope (i.e., planning area).
Purpose
The 2017 Plan Update was prepared by Jefferson County, participating jurisdictions, and H2O Partners,
Inc. The purpose of the Plan Update is to protect people and structures, and to minimize the costs of
disaster response and recovery. The goal of the Plan Update is to minimize or eliminate long-term risks
to human life and property from known hazards by identifying and implementing cost-effective hazard
mitigation actions. The planning process is an opportunity for Jefferson County, the participating
jurisdictions, stakeholders, and the general public to evaluate and develop successful hazard mitigation
actions to reduce future risk of loss of life, and damage to property resulting from a disaster in the
Jefferson County planning area.
The Mission Statement of the Plan Update is, “Maintaining a secure and sustainable future through the
revision and development of targeted hazard mitigation actions to protect life and property.”
Jefferson County, participating jurisdictions, and planning participants identified eleven natural hazards
to be addressed by the Plan Update. Additional hazards that have a very low risk or no risk to the planning
area are included in Appendix A. The specific goals of the Plan Update are to:
Provide a comprehensive update to the 2011 HMAP;
Minimize disruption to Jefferson County and the participating jurisdictions following a disaster;
Streamline disaster recovery by articulating actions to be taken before a disaster strikes to
reduce or eliminate future damage;
Demonstrate a firm local commitment to hazard mitigation principles;
Serve as a basis for future funding that may become available through grant and technical
assistance programs offered by the State or Federal government. The Plan Update will enable
Jefferson County and participating jurisdictions to take advantage of rapidly developing
mitigation grant opportunities as they arise; and
Ensure that Jefferson County and participating jurisdictions maintain eligibility for the full range
of future Federal disaster relief.
Authority
The Plan Update is tailored specifically for Jefferson County, participating
jurisdictions, and plan participants including Planning Team members,
stakeholders, and the general public who participated in the Plan Update
development process. The Plan Update complies with all requirements
promulgated by the Texas Division of Emergency Management (TDEM) and all applicable provisions of the
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, Section 104 of the Disaster Mitigation
Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) (P.L. 106-390), and the Bunning-Bereuter-Blumenauer Flood Insurance Reform
Act of 2004 (P.L. 108–264), which amended the National Flood Insurance Act (NFIA) of 1968 (42 U.S.C.
Section 1: Introduction
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 4
4001, et al). Additionally, the Plan complies with the Interim Final Rules for the Hazard Mitigation Planning
and Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (44 CFR, Part 201), which specify the criteria for approval of
mitigation plans required in Section 322 of the DMA 2000 and standards found in FEMA’s “Local Mitigation
Plan Review Guide” (October 2011), and the “Local Mitigation Planning Handbook” (March 2013).
Additionally, the Plan is developed in accordance with FEMA’s Community Rating System (CRS) Floodplain
Management Plan standards and policies.
Summary of Sections
Sections 1 and 2 of the Plan Update outline the Plan’s purpose and development, including how Planning
Team members, stakeholders, and members of the general public were involved in the planning process.
Section 3 profiles the planning area’s population and economy. Sections 4 through 15 present a hazard
overview and information on individual natural hazards in the planning area. The hazards generally
appear in order of priority based on potential losses to life and property, and other community concerns.
For each hazard, the Plan Update presents a description of the hazard, a list of historical hazard events,
and the results of the vulnerability and risk assessment process. Section 16 presents hazard mitigation
goals and objectives; Section 17 gives an analysis for the previous actions; and Section 18 presents hazard
mitigation actions for Jefferson County and the participating jurisdictions. Section 19 identifies Plan
maintenance mechanisms.
Several hazards that were included in the previous plans that have very low or no risk to the planning area
are included in Appendix A and are updated with any occurrence that have occurred in the past five years.
A list of Planning Team members is located in Appendix B. Public survey results are analyzed and
presented in Appendix C. Appendix D contains a detailed list of critical facilities for the planning area, and
Appendix E provides a list of dam locations. Appendix F contains information regarding workshops, and
meeting documentation. The Capability Assessment for Jefferson County and the participating
jurisdictions is located in Appendix G.3
3 Information contained in some of these appendices are exempt from public release under the Freedom of Information
Act (FOIA).
SECTION 2: PLANNING PROCESS
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
Plan Preparation and Development ............................................................................................................ 1
Overview of the Plan ................................................................................................................................. 1
Planning Team ........................................................................................................................................... 2
Planning Process ....................................................................................................................................... 4
Kickoff Workshop ...................................................................................................................................... 5
Hazard Identification ................................................................................................................................. 5
Risk Assessment .................................................................................................................................... 5
Mitigation Review and Development ................................................................................................... 6
Review and Incorporation of Existing Plans .................................................................................................. 7
Review ....................................................................................................................................................... 7
Incorporation of Existing Plans into the HMAP Process ........................................................................... 7
Incorporation of the HMAP into Other Planning Mechanisms ................................................................. 8
Plan Review and Plan Update ................................................................................................................. 10
Timeline for Implementing Mitigation Actions ........................................................................................... 10
Public and Stakeholder Involvement .......................................................................................................... 10
Stakeholder Involvement ........................................................................................................................ 11
Public Meetings ....................................................................................................................................... 12
Public Participation Survey ................................................................................................................. 13
Plan Preparation and Development
Hazard mitigation planning involves coordination with various constituents and stakeholders to develop
a more disaster-resistant community. Section 2 provides an overview of the planning process including
the identification of key steps, and a detailed description of how stakeholders and the public were
involved.
Overview of the Plan
The Southeast Texas Regional Planning Commission (SETRPC) hired H2O Partners, Inc. (Consultant Team),
to provide technical support and oversee the development of the Plan Update 2017 for Jefferson County.
The Consultant Team used the FEMA “Local Mitigation Plan Review Guide” (October 1, 2011), and the
Local Mitigation Planning Handbook” (March 2013) to develop the Plan. The overall planning process is
shown in Figure 2-1 below.
Section 2: Planning Process
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 2
Jefferson County, participating jurisdictions, and the Consultant Team met in March 2016 to begin
organizing resources, identify Planning Team members, and conduct a Capability Assessment.
Planning Team
Key members of H2O Partners, Inc. developed the Plan Update in conjunction with the Planning Team.
The Planning Team was established using a direct representation model. Some of the responsibilities of
the Planning Team included: completing Capability Assessment surveys, providing input regarding the
identification of hazards, identifying mitigation goals, and developing mitigation strategies. An Executive
Planning Team consisting of key personnel from each of the participating jurisdictions as well as Jefferson
County, shown in Table 2-1, was formed to coordinate planning efforts, and request input and
participation in the planning process. Table 2-2 reflects the Advisory Planning Team, consisting of
additional representatives from area organizations and departments from the participating jurisdictions
and Jefferson County that participated throughout the planning process.
Table 2-1. Executive Planning Team
ORGANIZATION/JURISDICTION TITLE
Jefferson County Emergency Management Coordinator
City of Beaumont Emergency Management Coordinator
City of Bevil Oaks Mayor/ Floodplain Manager
City of China Mayor
City of Groves Emergency Management Coordinator
Figure 2-1. Mitigation Planning Process
Organize
Resources
and Assess
Capability
Identify and
Assess Risks
Develop
Mitigation
Strategies
Implement
Actions and
Evaluate
Progress
Section 2: Planning Process
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 3
ORGANIZATION/JURISDICTION TITLE
City of Nederland Emergency Management Coordinator
City of Nome Mayor
City of Port Arthur Senior Planner
City of Port Neches Emergency Management Coordinator
SETRPC Homeland Security and Emergency Management
Planning Director
Table 2-2. Advisory Planning Team
ORGANIZATION/JURISDICTION TITLE
City of Beaumont Community Manager
City of Beaumont Emergency Management Assistant
City of Beaumont Emergency Specialist
City of Beaumont Police Department Assistant Chief
City of China City Secretary
City of Nederland Police Department Assistant Chief
City of Nome City Secretary
City of Port Arthur Senior Planner
City of Port Arthur Development Services Director
City of Port Arthur Fire Department Emergency Management Coordinator
City of Port Arthur Police Department Emergency Management Coordinator
City of Port Neches Fire Department Emergency Management Coordinator
City of Taylor Landing Mayor
Jefferson County Assistant Emergency Management Coordinator
SETRPC Regional Emergency Planner
Additionally, a Stakeholder Group was invited to participate in the planning process via e-mail. The
Consultant Team, Planning Team, and Stakeholder Group coordinated to identify mitigation goals, and
develop mitigation strategies and actions for the Plan Update. Appendix B, provides a complete listing of
all participating Planning Team members and stakeholders by organization and title.
Section 2: Planning Process
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 4
Based on results of completed Capability Assessment, Jefferson County and participating jurisdictions
described methods for achieving future hazard mitigation measures by expanding existing capabilities.
For example, the City of Bevil Oaks and the City of Groves each have an emergency manager, but no
emergency operations plan in place. Other options for improving capabilities include the following:
Establishing Planning Team members with the authority to monitor the Plan Update and identify
grant funding opportunities for expanding staff.
Identifying opportunities for cross-training or increasing the technical expertise of staff by
attending free training available through FEMA and the Texas Division of Emergency Management
(TDEM) by monitoring classes and availability through preparetexas.org.
Reviewing current floodplain ordinances for opportunities to increase resiliency such as modifying
permitting or building codes.
Developing ordinances that will require all new developments to conform to the highest
mitigation standards.
Sample hazard mitigation actions developed with similar hazard risk were shared at the meetings. These
important discussions resulted in development of multiple mitigation actions that are included in the Plan
Update to further mitigate risk from natural hazards in the future.
The Planning Team developed hazard mitigation actions for mitigating risk from potential flooding and
hurricanes, including storm-hardening or retrofitting critical facilities, regional communication sites and
infrastructure throughout the County to mitigate hazard damage from water and wind, and practicing
hazard mitigation techniques. In order to reduce the damage resulting from county-wide flooding that
occurs during heavy rain periods, the Plan Update also includes county-wide actions to elevate or upgrade
bridges, culverts and other crossings throughout Jefferson County to reduce damages to infrastructure
and reduce flooding caused by undersized crossing and culverts.
Planning Process
The process used to prepare the 2017 Plan Update followed the four major steps included at Figure 2-1.
After the Planning Team was organized, a capability assessment was developed and distributed at the
Kick-Off Workshop. Hazards were identified and assessed, and results associated with each of the hazards
were provided at the Risk Assessment Workshop. Based on Jefferson County’s identified vulnerabilities,
specific mitigation strategies were discussed and developed at the Mitigation Strategy Workshop. Finally,
Plan maintenance and implementation procedures were developed and are included in Section 19.
Participation of Planning Team members, stakeholders, and the public at each of the workshops is
documented in Appendix F.
At the Plan Update development workshops held throughout the planning process described herein, the
following factors were taken into consideration:
The nature and magnitude of risks currently affecting the community;
Hazard mitigation goals to address current and expected conditions;
Whether current resources will be sufficient for implementing the Plan Update;
Implementation problems, such as technical, political, legal, and coordination issues that may
hinder development;
Section 2: Planning Process
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 5
Anticipated outcomes; and
How Jefferson County, participating jurisdictions, agencies, and partners will participate in
implementing the Plan Update.
Kickoff Workshop
The Kickoff Workshop was held at the SETRPC Offices on March 30, 2016. The initial workshop informed
County officials and key department personnel about how the planning process pertained to their distinct
roles and responsibilities, and engaged stakeholder groups such as Lamar University. In addition to the
kickoff presentation, participants received the following information:
Project overview regarding the planning process;
Public survey access information;
Hazard Ranking form; and
Capability Assessment survey for completion.
A risk ranking exercise was conducted at the Kickoff Workshop to get input from the Planning Team and
stakeholders pertaining to various risks from a list of natural hazards affecting the planning area.
Participants ranked hazards high to low in terms of perceived level of risk, frequency of occurrence, and
potential impact.
Hazard Identification
At the Kickoff Workshop, and through e-mail and phone correspondence, the Planning Team conducted
preliminary hazard identification. The Planning Team in coordination with the Consultant Team reviewed
and considered a full range of natural hazards. Once identified, the teams narrowed the list to significant
hazards by reviewing hazards affecting the area as a whole, the 2013 State of Texas Hazard Mitigation
Plan Update, and initial study results from reputable sources such as federal and state agencies. Based
on this initial analysis, the teams identified a total of eleven natural hazards which pose a significant threat
to the planning area.
Risk Assessment
An initial risk assessment for Jefferson County and the participating jurisdictions was completed in May
2016 and results were presented to Planning Team members at the Risk Assessment Workshop held on
June 1, 2016. At the workshop, the characteristics and consequences of each hazard were evaluated to
determine the extent to which the planning area would be affected in terms of potential danger to
property and citizens.
Potential dollar losses from each hazard were estimated using the Federal Emergency Management
Agency’s National Centers for Environmental Information. The resulting risk assessment profiled hazard
events, provided information on previous occurrences, estimated probability of future events, and
detailed the spatial extent and magnitude of impact on people and property. Each participant at the Risk
Assessment Workshop was provided a risk ranking sheet that asked participants to rank hazards in terms
of the probability or frequency of occurrence, extent of spatial impact, and the magnitude of impact. The
results of the ranking sheets identified unique perspectives on varied risks throughout the planning area.
Section 2: Planning Process
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 6
The assessments were also used to set priorities for hazard mitigation actions based on potential loss of
lives and dollar losses. A hazard profile and vulnerability analysis for each of the hazards can be found in
Sections 4 through 15.
Mitigation Review and Development
Developing the Mitigation Strategy for the Plan Update involved identifying mitigation goals and new
mitigation actions. A Mitigation Workshop was held at the SETRPC Offices on August 24, 2016. In addition
to the Planning Team, stakeholder groups were invited to attend the workshop. Regarding hazard
mitigation actions, Workshop participants emphasized the desire for flood and hurricane projects.
Additionally, the County and participating jurisdictions were proactive in identifying mitigation actions to
lessen the risk of all the identified hazards included in the Plan Update.
An inclusive and structured process was used to develop and prioritize new hazard mitigation actions for
the 2017 Plan Update. The prioritization method was based on FEMA’s STAPLE+E criteria and included
social, technical, administrative, political, legal, economic and environmental considerations. As a result,
each Planning Team Member assigned an overall priority to each hazard mitigation action. The overall
priority of each action is reflected in the hazard mitigation actions found in Section 18.
Planning Team Members then developed action plans identifying proposed actions, costs and benefits,
the responsible organization(s), effects on new and existing buildings, implementation schedules,
priorities, and potential funding sources.
Specifically the process involved:
Listing optional hazard mitigation actions based on information collected from previous plan
reviews, studies, and interviews with federal, state and local officials. Workshop participants
reviewed the optional mitigation actions and selected actions that were most applicable to their
area of responsibility, cost-effective in reducing risk, easily implemented, and likely to receive
institutional and community support.
Workshop participants inventoried federal and state funding sources that could assist in
implementing the proposed hazard mitigation actions. Information was collected, including the
program name, authority, purpose of the program, types of assistance and eligible projects,
conditions on funding, types of hazards covered, matching requirements, application deadlines,
and a point of contact.
Planning Team Members considered the benefits that would result from implementing the hazard
mitigation actions compared to the cost of those projects. Although detailed cost-benefit
analyses were beyond the scope of the Plan Update, Planning Team Members utilized economic
evaluation as a determining factor between hazard mitigation actions.
Planning Team Members then selected and prioritized mitigation actions.
Hazard mitigation actions identified in the process were made available to the Planning Team for review.
The draft 2017 Plan Update was made available to the general public for review on Jefferson County’s
website with the chance to comment via responding to Jefferson County’s Assistant Emergency
Management Coordinator’s email at mwhite@co.jefferson.tx.us.
Section 2: Planning Process
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 7
Review and Incorporation of Existing Plans
Review
Background information utilized during the planning process included various studies, plans, reports, and
technical information from sources such as FEMA, the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE),
the U.S. Fire Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the Texas Water
Development Board (TWDB), the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), the Texas State
Data Center, Texas Forest Service, the Texas Division of Emergency Management (TDEM), and local hazard
assessments and plans. Section 4 and the hazard-specific sections of the Plan (Sections 5-15) summarize
the relevant background information.
Specific background documents, including those from FEMA, provided information on hazard risk, hazard
mitigation actions currently being implemented, and potential mitigation actions. Previous hazard events,
occurrences and descriptions were identified through NOAA’s National Center for Environmental
Information (NCEI). Results of past hazard events were found through searching the NCEI. The USACE
studies were reviewed for their assessment of risk and potential projects in the region. State Data Center
documents were used to obtain population projections. The State Demographer webpages were
reviewed for population and other projections and included in Section 3 of the Plan Update. Information
from the Texas Forest Service was used to appropriately rank the wildfire hazard, and to help identify
potential grant opportunities. Materials from FEMA and TDEM were reviewed for guidance on Plan
Update development requirements.
Incorporation of Existing Plans into the HMAP Process
A Capability Assessment was completed by key Jefferson County and participating jurisdictions’
departments which provided information pertaining to existing plans, policies, ordinances and regulations
to be integrated into the goals and objectives of the Plan Update. The relevant information was included
in a master Capability Assessment, Appendix G.
Existing projects and studies were utilized as a starting point for discussing hazard mitigation actions
among Planning and Consultant Team members. For example, the City of Beaumont had a study
completed in 2005 that suggested moving several fire stations and the health department in order to
improve neighborhood coverage. This was included as an action for the City of Beaumont. Additionally
the Continuity of Operations plan from several participating jurisdictions is incorporated into the Plan
Update as many critical facilities were identified to install generators with hardwired quick connections
to ensure continuity of operations during a hazard event, along with retrofitting and storm-hardening
these facilities. Other plans were reviewed, such as Floodplain Management Plans and Storm water
Management Plans, to identify any additional mitigation actions. Finally, the 2013 State of Texas
Mitigation Plan Update, developed by TDEM, was discussed in the initial planning meeting in order to
develop a specific group of hazards to address in the planning effort. The 2013 State Plan Update was
also used as a guidance document, along with FEMA materials, in the development of the Jefferson County
Plan Update.
Section 2: Planning Process
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 8
Incorporation of the HMAP into Other Planning Mechanisms
Planning Team members will integrate implementation of the Plan Update with other planning
mechanisms for Jefferson County, such as the Floodplain Management Plan. Existing plans for Jefferson
County will be reviewed, and incorporated into the Plan Update, as appropriate. This section discusses
how the Plan Update will be implemented by Jefferson County and the participating jurisdictions. It also
addresses how the Plan Update will be evaluated and improved over time, and how the public will
continue to be involved in the hazard mitigation planning process.
Jefferson County and the participating jurisdictions will be responsible for implementing hazard mitigation
actions contained in Section 18. Each hazard mitigation action has been assigned to a specific County and
City department that is responsible for tracking and implementing the action.
A funding source has been listed for each identified hazard mitigation action and may be utilized to
implement the action. An implementation time period has also been assigned to each hazard mitigation
action as an incentive and to determine whether actions are implemented on a timely basis.
Jefferson County and the participating jurisdictions will integrate hazard mitigation actions contained in
the Plan Update with existing planning mechanisms such as Stormwater Management Plans and
ordinances, Emergency Operations or Management Plans, Evacuation Plans and other local and area
planning efforts. Jefferson County will work closely with area organizations to coordinate implementation
of hazard mitigation actions that benefit the planning area in terms of financial and economic impact.
Upon formal adoption of the 2017 Plan Update, Planning Team members from Jefferson County and the
participating jurisdictions will review existing plans, along with building codes to guide development and
ensure that hazard mitigation actions are implemented. Each of the jurisdictions will be responsible for
coordinating periodic review of the Plan Update with members of the Advisory Planning Team to ensure
integration of hazard mitigation strategies into these planning mechanisms and codes. The Planning Team
will also conduct periodic reviews of various existing planning mechanisms and analyze the need for any
amendments or updates in light of the approved Plan Update. Jefferson County and the participating
jurisdictions will ensure that future long-term planning objectives will contribute to the goals of the Plan
Update to reduce the long-term risk to life and property from moderate and high risk hazards. Within
one year of formal adoption of the Plan Update, existing planning mechanisms will be reviewed and
analyzed as they pertain to the Plan Update.
Planning Team members will review and revise, as necessary, the long-range goals and objectives in its
strategic plan and budgets to ensure that they are consistent with the Plan Update.
Further, Jefferson County will work with neighboring jurisdictions to advance the goals of the Plan Update
as it applies to ongoing, long-range planning goals and actions for mitigating risk to natural hazards
throughout the planning area.
Table 2-3 identifies types of planning mechanisms and examples of methods for incorporating the Plan
Update into other planning efforts.
Section 2: Planning Process
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 9
Table 2-3. Examples of Methods of Incorporation
Planning Mechanism Incorporation of Plan
Grant Applications
The Plan Update will be evaluated by Jefferson County
and participating jurisdictions when grant funding is
sought for mitigation projects. If a project is not in the
Plan Update, an amendment may be necessary to include
the action in the Plan Update.
Annual Budget Review
Various departments and key personnel that participated
in the planning process for Jefferson County and
participating jurisdictions will review the Plan Update and
mitigation actions therein when conducting their annual
budget review. Allowances will be made in accordance
with grant applications sought, and mitigation actions
that will be undertaken, according to the implementation
schedule of the specific action.
Regulatory Plans
Currently, Jefferson County and participating
jurisdictions have regulatory plans in place, such as
Emergency Management Plans, Continuity of Operations
Plans, Economic Development, and Evacuation Plans.
The Plan Update will be consulted when County and City
departments review or revise their current regulatory
planning mechanisms, or in the development of
regulatory plans that are not currently in place.
Capital Improvement Plans
Jefferson County and participating jurisdictions have a
Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) in place. Prior to any
revisions to the CIP, County and City departments will
review the risk assessment and mitigation strategy
sections of the HMAP, as limiting public spending in
hazardous zones is one of the most effective long-term
mitigation actions available to local governments.
Floodplain Management Plans
Floodplain management plans include preventative and
corrective actions to address the flood hazard.
Therefore, the actions for flooding, and information
found in Section 5 of this Plan Update discussing the
people and property at risk to flood, will be reviewed and
revised when Jefferson County updates their
management plans or develops new plans.
Appendix G provides an overview of Planning Team members’ existing planning and regulatory capabilities
to support implementation of mitigation strategy objectives. Appendix G also provides further analysis of
Section 2: Planning Process
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 10
how each intends to incorporate hazard mitigation actions into existing plans, policies, and the annual
budget review as it pertains to prioritizing grant applications for funding and implementation of identified
hazard mitigation projects.
It should be noted for the purposes of the plan update that the HMAP has been used as a reference when
reviewing and updating all plans and ordinances for the entire planning area, including all participating
jurisdictions. The Emergency Management Plan developed independently by all participating jurisdictions
is updated every 5 years and incorporates goals, objectives and actions identified in the mitigation plan.
Plan Review and Plan Update
As with the development of Plan Update, Jefferson County will oversee the review and update process for
relevance and to necessary make adjustments. At the beginning of each fiscal year, Planning Team
Members will meet to evaluate the Plan Update and review other planning mechanisms to ensure
consistency with long-range planning efforts. In addition, planning participants will also meet twice a
year, by conference call or presentation, to re-evaluate prioritization of the hazard mitigation actions.
Timeline for Implementing Mitigation Actions
Both the Executive Planning Team (Table B-1, Appendix B), and the Advisory Planning Team (Table B-2,
Appendix B), will engage in discussions regarding a timeframe for how and when to implement each
hazard mitigation action. Considerations include when the action will be started, how existing planning
mechanisms’ timelines affect implementation, and when the action should be fully implemented.
Timeframes may be general, and there will be short, medium, and long term goals for implementation
based on prioritization of each action, as identified on individual Hazard Mitigation Action worksheets
included in the Plan Update for Jefferson County and participating jurisdictions.
Both the Executive and Advisory Planning Team will evaluate and prioritize the most suitable hazard
mitigation actions for the community to implement. The timeline for implementation of actions will
partially be directed by Jefferson County’s comprehensive planning process, budgetary constraints, and
community needs. Jefferson County and the participating jurisdictions are committed to addressing and
implementing hazard mitigation actions that may be aligned with and integrated into the Plan Update.
Overall, the Planning Team is in agreement that goals and actions of the Plan Update shall be aligned with
the timeframe for implementation of hazard mitigation actions with respect to annual review and updates
of existing plans and policies.
Public and Stakeholder Involvement
An important component of hazard mitigation planning is public participation and stakeholder
involvement. Input from individual citizens and the community as a whole provides the Planning Team
with a greater understanding of local concerns, and increases the likelihood of successfully implemented
hazard mitigation actions. If citizens and stakeholders, such as local businesses, non-profits, hospitals,
and schools are involved, they are more likely to gain a greater appreciation of the risks that hazards may
present in their community and take steps to reduce or mitigate their impact.
Section 2: Planning Process
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 11
The public was involved in the development of Jefferson County’s 2017 Plan Update at different stages
prior to official Plan Update approval and adoption. Public input was sought using three methods: (1)
open public meetings; (2) survey instruments; and (3) making the draft Plan Update available for public
review at Jefferson County’s website.
The draft 2017 Plan Update was made available to the general public for review and comment on the
Jefferson County’s website. The public was notified at the public meetings that the draft Plan Update
would be available for review. No feedback was received on the draft 2017 Plan Update, although it was
given on the public survey, and all relevant information was incorporated into the Plan Update.
The 2017 Plan Update will be advertised and a copy available at the SETRPC office and the County’s
Engineering office upon approval from FEMA.
Stakeholder Involvement
Stakeholder involvement is essential to hazard mitigation planning since a wide range of stakeholders can
provide input on specific topics and input from various points of view. Throughout the planning process,
members of community groups, local businesses, neighboring jurisdictions, schools, and hospitals were
invited to participate in development of the 2017 Plan Update. The Stakeholder Group (Table B-3 in
Appendix B, and Table 2-4, below), included a broad range of representatives from both the public and
private sector, and served as a key component in Jefferson County’s outreach efforts for development of
the Plan Update. Documentation of stakeholder meetings is found in Appendix F. A list of organizations
invited to attend via e-mail is found in Table 2-4.
Table 2-4. Stakeholder Working Group
AGENCY TITLE PARTICIPATED
Colonial Pipeline Manager X
Lamar University Assistant Professor X
Local Emergency Planning Committee Chairperson X
Jefferson County Drainage District 7 Graduate Engineer X
Jefferson County Drainage District 7 Supervisor X
RPS Senior Consulting Engineer X
South East Texas Disaster Recovery Group Executive Director X
Texas House of Representatives Texas US Representative X
Texas State Senate Texas State Senator
United Way Executive Director X
City of Kountze Emergency Management Coordinator X
City of Lumberton City Manager X
Section 2: Planning Process
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 12
AGENCY TITLE PARTICIPATED
City of Rose Hill Acres Mayor X
City of Silsbee Emergency Management Coordinator X
City of Silsbee Assistant Emergency Management
Coordinator X
City of Sour Lake City Manager X
City of Sour Lake Police Chief X
Hardin County Emergency Management Coordinator X
Hardin County Floodplain Administrator X
South East Texas Regional Planning
Commission
Homeland Security and Emergency
Management Planning Director X
City of Bridge City Emergency Management Coordinator X
City of Orange Deputy Chief/Emergency
Management Coordinator X
City of Pinehurst Emergency Management Coordinator X
City of Pine Forest Emergency Management Coordinator X
City of Rose City City Secretary X
City of Vidor Police Department Emergency Management Coordinator X
City of West Orange Emergency Management Coordinator X
Orange County Tax Assessor-Collector X
Orange County Office of Emergency
Management
Deputy Emergency Management
Coordinator X
Orange County Office of Emergency
Management Emergency Management Coordinator X
Stakeholders and participants from neighboring communities that attended the Planning Team and public
meetings played a key role in the planning process. For example, hurricanes and flooding were major
concerns to the stakeholders, so many of the participating jurisdictions included mitigation actions to
improve their drainage systems to reduce flood damages to structures and infrastructure in the area, as
well as revising their evacuation routes and plans to ensure safety to the residents during times when an
evacuation is necessary.
Public Meetings
A series of public meetings were held throughout the planning area, to collect public and stakeholder
input. Topics of discussion included the purpose of hazard mitigation, discussion of the planning process,
and types of natural hazards. Representatives from area neighborhood associations, and area residents
were invited to participate. Additionally, Jefferson County utilized social media sources including
Section 2: Planning Process
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 13
Facebook, Twitter, and the local media to increase public participation in the Plan Update development
process. Documentation on the public meetings are found in Appendix F.
Public meetings were held on the following dates and locations:
March 30, 2016, SETRPC Homer E Nagel Conference Room
June 1, 2016, Hardin County Courthouse Commissioners’ Courtroom
August 24, 2016, Orange County Expo Center
Public Participation Survey
In addition to public meetings, the Planning and Consultant Teams developed a public survey designed to
solicit public input during the planning process from citizens and stakeholders, and to obtain data
regarding the identification of any potential hazard mitigation actions or problem areas. The survey was
promoted by local officials and a link to the survey was posted on Jefferson County’s website. A total of
69 surveys were completed online. The survey results are analyzed in Appendix C. Jefferson County
reviewed the input from the surveys and decided which information to incorporate into the Plan Update
as hazard mitigation actions. For example, many citizens mention concerns about flooding, and suggested
levee/drainage improvements as potential steps the jurisdictions could take. In response to public input
several hazard mitigation actions were added to the Plan Update to pursue funding and implement
drainage improvements through the County to include installing/upgrading culverts and headwalls as well
as enlarging storm water ditches and canals.
SECTION 3: COUNTY PROFILE
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
Overview ....................................................................................................................................................... 1
Population and Demographics ...................................................................................................................... 4
Population Growth .................................................................................................................................... 5
Future Development ..................................................................................................................................... 6
Economic Impact ........................................................................................................................................... 6
Existing and Future Land Use and Development Trends .............................................................................. 6
Building Permits ........................................................................................................................................ 7
Overview
Jefferson County was established in 1836 as a municipality of Mexico and was organized as a county in
1837. It is named for U.S. president Thomas Jefferson, and Beaumont is the county seat. Jefferson County
has a total area of 1,113 square miles, of which 876 square miles is land and 236 square miles (21%) is
water. The County consists of several cities, a few census-designated places, and unincorporated areas.
The following cities are participating within this plan and are considered part of the planning area: the
City of Beaumont, the City of Bevil Oaks, the City of China, the City of Groves, the City of Nederland, the
City of Nome, the City of Port Arthur, and the City of Port Neches. The other unincorporated communities
will be considered under Jefferson County.
Primary waterways within Jefferson County include the Neches River, Pine Island Bayou and its tributaries,
Walker Branch and Walker Branch Tributary, Taylor Bayou and its tributaries, Rhodair Gully, Mayhaw
Bayou, Hillebrandt Bayou (a major tributary of Taylor Bayou) with its tributaries, Willow Marsh Bayou,
Bayou Din and its tributaries, Bayou Din Tributary, Kidd Gully and Cotton Creek. Soils in Jefferson County
have high concentrations of clay and silt, with low infiltration rates and high runoff potential.
Jefferson County is characterized by flat, featureless terrain that slopes gently to
the Gulf of Mexico. Elevations range from sea level to approximately forty-five
(45) feet. Belts of hardwood and pine are found in the upland portions of the
county. Swamps exist in the floodplains of the Neches River and the major bayous.
The swamps support vegetation such as cypress trees, and water tolerant grass
and sedges in a few cleared areas. Most open land is prairie land used for grazing
and rice production. Large areas of tidal marsh along the Gulf of Mexico/Sabine
Lake support a dense growth of salt-water vegetation, principally cord grass and
marsh cane.
The majority of developed land in the county is primarily agricultural, although many parts are highly
industrialized. Commercial, residential, and recreational areas are generally located in the eastern portion
of the county. The Gulf of Mexico shore is mostly undeveloped and is used extensively for public
recreation. Leading industries in the area produce petroleum and natural gas, sulfur, petrochemicals, and
petroleum and natural gas products.
Section 3: County Profile
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 2
Figure 3-1 shows the general location of Jefferson County, along with the Cities that are located within
the County.
Figure 3-1. Location of Jefferson County Planning Area
Figure 3-2 shows the Jefferson County Study Area, including the participating jurisdictions that are
covered in the risk assessment analysis of the Plan.
Section 3: County Profile
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 3
Figure 3-2. Jefferson County Study Area
Section 3: County Profile
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 4
Provided in Table 3-1 below is a listing of the jurisdictions in Jefferson County that participated in the
Hazard Mitigation Plan Update.
Table 3-1. Participating Jurisdictions
PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS
Jefferson County
City of Beaumont
City of Bevil Oaks
City of China
City of Groves
City of Nederland
City of Nome
City of Port Arthur
City of Port Neches
Southeast Texas Regional Planning
Commission (SETRPC)
Population and Demographics
In the official Census population count, as of April 1, 2010, Jefferson County had a population of 252,273
residents. By July 2014, the number had grown to 252,439, and by July 2015, the population was 254,308.
Table 3-2 provides the population distribution by jurisdiction within Jefferson County.1
Between official U.S. Census population counts, the estimate uses a formula based on new residential
building permits and household size. It is simply an estimate and there are many variables involved in
achieving an accurate estimation of people living in a given area at a given time.
Table 3-2. Population Distribution by Jurisdiction
JURISDICTION TOTAL 2010
POPULATION PERCENTAGE
ESTIMATED VULNERABLE OR
SENSITIVE POPULATIONS
Elderly
(Over 65)
Below
Poverty Level
Beaumont 118,296 46.9% 14,432 25,789
Bevil Oaks 1,274 0.5% 280 41
China 1,160 0.4% 186 263
1 http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/48245,00
Section 3: County Profile
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 5
JURISDICTION TOTAL 2010
POPULATION PERCENTAGE
ESTIMATED VULNERABLE OR
SENSITIVE POPULATIONS
Elderly
(Over 65)
Below
Poverty Level
Groves 16,144 6.4% 2,518 2,147
Nederland 17,547 7.0% 2,527 1,491
Nome 588 0.2% 67 106
Port Arthur 53,818 21.3% 7,158 14,692
Port Neches 13,040 5.2% 2,034 1,630
Unincorporated Jefferson
County 30,406 12.1% 2,837 7,323
JEFFERSON COUNTY TOTAL 252,273 100% 32,039 53,482
Population Growth
The official 2010 Jefferson County population is 252,273. Overall, Jefferson County experiences a slight
increase in population between 1980 and 2010 by 1.46%, or an increase by 3,621 people. Beaumont,
Nederland, Nome, and the unincorporated areas of Jefferson County experienced a population growth
between 1980 and 2010, while the rest of the cities experienced a decrease in their population.
Beaumont, China, Groves, Nederland, and Nome experienced an increase in population between 2000
and 2010, while the rest of the cities and the unincorporated areas of the County exhibited a decrease in
population during this time period. Table 3-2 provides historic growth rates in Jefferson County.
Table 3-2. Population for Jefferson County, 1980-2010
JURISDICTIONS 1980 1990 2000 2010
POP
CHANGE
1980-2010
PERCENT OF
CHANGE
POP
CHANGE
2000-2010
PERCENT OF
CHANGE
Beaumont 118,102 114,323 113,866 118,296 194 0.164% 4,430 3.89%
Bevil Oaks 1,306 1,350 1,346 1,274 -32 -2.45% -72 -5.35%
China 1,351 1,144 1,112 1,160 -191 -14.14% 48 4.32%
Groves 17,090 16,744 15,733 16,144 -964 -5.54% 411 2.61%
Nederland 16,855 16,192 17,422 17,547 692 4.11% 125 0.72%
Nome 550 448 515 588 38 6.91% 73 14.17%
Port Arthur 61,251 58,724 57,755 53,818 -7,433 -12.14% -3,937 -6.82%
Port Neches 13,944 12,908 13,601 13,040 -904 -6.48% -561 -4.12%
Unincorporated
Jefferson County 18,203 17,556 30,701 30,406 12,203 67.04% -295 -0.96%
COUNTY TOTAL 248,652 239,389 252,051 252,273 3,621 1.46% 222 0.08%
Section 3: County Profile
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 6
Future Development
To better understand how future growth and development in the County might affect hazard
vulnerability, it is useful to consider population growth, occupied and vacant land, the potential for future
development in hazard areas, and current planning and growth management efforts. This section includes
an analysis of the projected population change, the number of permits that have been issued throughout
the county, and economic impacts.
Population projections from 2010 to 2040 are listed in Table 3-3, as provided by the Office of the State
Demographer, Texas State Data Center, and the Institute for Demographic and Socioeconomic Research.
Population projections are based on a 0.5 scenario growth rate, which is 50 percent of the population
growth rate that occurred during 2000-2010. This information is only available at the County level;
however, the population projection shows an increase in population density for the County, which would
mean overall growth for the County.
Table 3-3. Jefferson County Population Projects
County
LAND
AREA
(SQ MI)
2010 2020 2030 2040
Population
Total
Number
Density
(Land
Area, SQ
MI)
Total
Number
Density
(Land
Area, SQ
MI)
Total
Number
Density
(Land
Area, SQ
MI)
Total
Number
Density
(Land
Area, SQ
MI)
Jefferson 1,113 252,273 226.7 267, 88 240.1 283,813 255.0 300,728 270.2
Economic Impact
Building and maintaining infrastructure depends on the economy; therefore, protecting infrastructure
from risk due to natural hazards in the planning area is important to Jefferson County. Whether it’s
expanding culverts under a road that washes out during flash flooding, shuttering a fire station, or flood-
proofing a wastewater facility, infrastructure must be mitigated from natural hazards in order to continue
providing essential utility and emergency response services in a fast-growing planning area.
Major employers in the area are critical to the health of the economy, as well as effective transportation
connectivity.
Existing and Future Land Use and Development Trends
Jefferson County is part of the South East Texas Regional Planning Commission (SETRPC) which has many
departments to promote intergovernmental cooperation and coordination, conduct comprehensive
regional planning, and provide a forum for the discussion and study of area issues. The Community
Development Department focus on building a stronger more prosperous region through the focus on an
individual community, while the Transportation and Environmental Resources department provides
assistance through grants and resources regarding the environment and working with state, city, and
Section 3: County Profile
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 7
county entities to coordinate transportation planning for the Jefferson-Orange-Hardin Regional
Transportation Study area.
Additionally, the City of Beaumont, the City of Groves, the City of Nederland and the City of Port Arthur
all have a Comprehensive Land Use Plan in place. These plans, along with the planning department are
responsible for the comprehensive planning activities of the city and for administering the subdivision
regulations.
Building Permits
Building permits indicate what types of buildings are being constructed and their relative uses. Table 3-4
lists the number of residential building permits for Jefferson County that have been granted between 1996
and 2015. The data includes all sizes of family homes for reported permits, as well as the construction
costs, to show the potential increase in vulnerability of structures to the various hazards reviewed in the
risk assessment. The increase in vulnerability can be attributed to the higher construction costs that
would be factored into repairing or replacing a structure using current market values. Permits are
reported annually in September; data reflects permits for years 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015
to demonstrate growth rates.
Table 3-4. County Residential Building Permits2
Jefferson County
Year Buildings Units Construction Cost
1996 428 453 $40,661,459
2000 602 615 $73,176,250
2005 450 819 $83,568,395
2010 965 1,111 $104,441,681
2011 588 743 $81,941,185
2012 552 995 $106,460,700
2013 362 364 $70,423,743
2014 839 1,061 $122,734,784
2015 513 599 $95,208,119
2 http://censtats.census.gov/cgi-bin/bldgprmt/bldgdisp.pl
SECTION 4: RISK OVERVIEW
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
Hazard Description ........................................................................................................................................ 1
Natural Hazards and Climate Change ........................................................................................................... 3
Overview of Hazard Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 4
Hazard Ranking ............................................................................................................................................. 6
Hazard Description
Section 4 is the first phase of the Risk Assessment, providing background information for the hazard
identification process, and descriptions for the hazards identified. The Risk Assessment continues with
Sections 5 through 15, which include hazard descriptions and vulnerability assessments.
Upon a review of the full range of natural hazards suggested under FEMA planning guidance, Jefferson
County and the participating jurisdictions identified eleven natural hazards that are addressed in the 2017
Hazard Mitigation Plan Update (Plan or Plan Update). Of the hazards identified, eleven natural hazards)
were identified as significant, as shown in Table 4-1. The hazards were identified through input from
Planning Team members, and a review of the current 2013 State of Texas Hazard Mitigation Plan Update
(State Plan Update). Readily available online information from reputable sources such as federal and state
agencies were also evaluated and utilized to supplement information as needed.
In general, there are three main categories of hazards including atmospheric, hydrologic, and
technological. Atmospheric hazards, are events or incidents associated with weather generated
phenomenon. Atmospheric hazards that have been identified as significant for the Jefferson County
Planning area include extreme heat, hail, hurricane, lightning, thunderstorm wind, tornado, and winter
storm (Table 4-1).
Hydrologic hazards, are events or incidents associated with water related damage and account for over
75 percent of Federal disaster declarations in the United States. Hydrologic hazards identified as
significant for the planning area include flood and drought.
Technological hazards, refers to the origins of incidents that can arise from human activities, such as the
construction and maintenance of dams. Technological hazards are distinct from natural hazards primarily
because they originate from human activity. The risks presented by natural hazards may be increased or
decreased as a result of human activity, however they are not inherently human-induced.
For the Risk Assessment, the wildfire hazard is considered “other,” since a wildfire may be natural or
human-caused, and is not considered atmospheric or hydrologic.
Section 4: Risk Overview
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 2
Table 4-1. Hazard Descriptions
HAZARD DESCRIPTION
ATMOSPHERIC
Extreme Heat
Extreme heat is the condition whereby temperatures hover ten
degrees or more above the average high temperature in a region for
an extended period of time.
Hail
Hailstorms are a potentially damaging outgrowth of severe
thunderstorms. Early in the developmental stages of a hailstorm, ice
crystals form within a low‐pressure front due to the rapid rising of
warm air into the upper atmosphere and subsequent cooling of the
air mass.
Hurricane
A hurricane is an intense tropical weather system of strong
thunderstorms with a well-defined surface circulation and maximum
sustained winds of 74 mph or higher.
Lightning
Lightning is a sudden electrostatic discharge that occurs during an
electrical storm. This discharge occurs between electrically charged
regions of a cloud, between two clouds, or between a cloud and the
ground.
Thunderstorm Wind
A thunderstorm occurs when an observer hears thunder. Radar
observers use the intensity of the radar echo to distinguish between
rain showers and thunderstorms. Lightning detection networks
routinely track cloud-to-ground flashes, and therefore
thunderstorms.
Tornado
A tornado is a violently rotating column of air that has contact with
the ground and is often visible as a funnel cloud. Its vortex rotates
cyclonically with wind speeds ranging from as low as 40 mph to as
high as 300 mph. The destruction caused by tornadoes ranges from
light to catastrophic, depending on the location, intensity, size, and
duration of the storm.
Winter Storm
Severe winter storms may include snow, sleet, freezing rain, or a mix
of these wintry forms of precipitation. Blizzards, the most dangerous
of all winter storms, combine low temperatures, heavy snowfall, and
winds of at least 35 miles per hour, reducing visibility to only a few
yards. Ice storms occur when moisture falls and freezes immediately
upon impact on trees, power lines, communication towers,
structures, roads, and other hard surfaces. Winter storms and ice
storms can down trees, cause widespread power outages, damage
property, and cause fatalities and injuries to human life.
HYDROLOGIC
Drought
A prolonged period of less than normal precipitation such that the
lack of water causes a serious hydrologic imbalance. Common
effects of drought include crop failure, water supply shortages, and
fish and wildlife mortality.
Section 4: Risk Overview
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 3
HAZARD DESCRIPTION
Flood
The accumulation of water within a body of water, which results in
the overflow of excess water onto adjacent lands, usually
floodplains. The floodplain is the land adjoining the channel of a
river, stream, ocean, lake, or other watercourse or water body that
is susceptible to flooding. Most floods fall into the following three
categories: riverine flooding, coastal flooding, and shallow flooding.
Coastal Erosion
Coastal erosion is a hydrologic hazard defined as the wearing away
of land and loss of beach, shoreline, or dune material as a result of
natural coastal processes or manmade influences. Coastal Erosion
occurrences and damages are not well documented, however, team
members indicate that coastal erosion pose little to no risk for the
area based on local knowledge and experience. Coastal Erosion is
ranked as a minimal hazard risk in the State’s HMAP and for the
purposes of this Plan, is addressed as a sub-hazard of Hurricanes.
OTHER
Wildfire
A wildfire is an uncontrolled fire burning in an area of vegetative
fuels such as grasslands, brush, or woodlands. Heavier fuels with
high continuity, steep slopes, high temperatures, low humidity, low
rainfall, and high winds all work to increase the risk for people and
property located within wildfire hazard areas or along the
urban/wildland interface. Wildfires are part of the natural
management of forest ecosystems, but most are caused by human
factors.
Hazards that weren’t considered significant and were not included in the Plan are located in Table 4-2,
along with the evaluation process used for determining the significance of each of these hazards. These
natural hazards are not addressed in detail due to their no to minimal level of risk within the Jefferson
County planning area. Hazards not identified for inclusion at this time may be addressed during future
evaluations and updates.
Table 4-2. Hazard Identification Process
HAZARD DESCRIPTION
ATMOSPHERIC
Expansive Soils
Expansive soils occurrences and damages are not well documented.
There are no historical occurrences of expansive soils for the
Jefferson County planning area and it is located in an area where
occurrences are considered rare. Expansive Soils poses little to no
risk for the area and was not addressed further in the plan.
Earthquakes
According to the State Plan, an earthquake occurrence for the
Jefferson County planning area is considered exceedingly rare.
Although a small event is possible, it would pose little to no risk for
the area. There are no recorded earthquake events or damages for
Section 4: Risk Overview
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 4
HAZARD DESCRIPTION
the planning area. Due to the low frequency of the hazard and
limited impact, the hazard was not addressed further in the plan.
Land Subsidence
There are no historical occurrences of land subsidence for the
Jefferson County planning area and it is located in an area where
occurrences are considered rare. The impact would be limited and
the frequency of occurrence is unlikely according to the State Plan.
Land Subsidence poses little to no risk for the area and was not
addressed further in the plan.
Dam Failure
There are 3 dams in the Jefferson County planning area. However,
there are no historical occurrences of these dams failing and there is
none expected in the future. If the dams were to fail Jefferson
County would not experience any impact to life, property, or services
provided by the community.
Natural Hazards and Climate Change
Climate change is defined as a long-term hazard which can increase or decrease the risk of other weather
hazards; and directly endangers property due to sea level rise, and biological organisms due to habitat
destruction.
Global climate change is expected to exacerbate the risks of certain types of natural hazards impacted
through rising sea levels, warmer ocean temperatures, higher humidity, the possibility of stronger storms
and an increase in wind and flood damages due to storm surges. While sea level rise is a natural
phenomenon and has been occurring for several thousand years, the general scientific consensus is that
the rate has increased in the past 200 years, from 0.5 millimeters per year to 2 millimeters per year.
Texas is considered one of the more vulnerable states in the U.S. to both abrupt climate changes and to
the impact of gradual climate changes to the natural and built environments. Mega-droughts can trigger
abrupt changes to regional ecosystems and the water cycle, drastically increase extreme summer
temperature and fire risk, and reduce availability of water resources, as Texas experienced during 2011-
2012.
Paleoclimate records also show that the climate over Texas had large changes between periods of
frequent mega-droughts and the periods of mild droughts that Texas is currently experiencing. While the
cause of these fluctuations is unclear, it would be wise to anticipate that such changes could occur again,
and may even be occurring now.
Overview of Hazard Analysis
The methodologies utilized to develop the Risk Assessment are a historical analysis and a statistical
approach. Both methodologies provide an estimate of potential impact by using a common, systematic
framework for evaluation.
Section 4: Risk Overview
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 5
Records retrieved from the National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) and the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) were reported for the Jefferson County planning area,
including the participating jurisdictions. Remaining records identifying the occurrence of hazard events
in the planning area and the maximum recorded magnitude of each event were also evaluated.
The use of geographic information system (GIS) technology to identify and assess risks for the Jefferson
County planning area, and evaluate community assets and their vulnerability to the hazards.
The four general parameters that are described for each hazard in the Risk Assessment include frequency
of return, approximate annualized losses, a description of general vulnerability, and a statement of the
hazard’s impact.
Frequency of return was calculated by dividing the number of events in the recorded time period for each
hazard by the overall time period that the resource database was recording events. Frequency of return
statements are defined in Table 4-3, and impact statements are defined in Table 4-4 below.
Table 4-3. Frequency of Return Statements
PROBABILITY DESCRIPTION
Highly Likely Event is probable in the next year.
Likely Event is probable in the next three years.
Occasional Event is probable in the next five years.
Unlikely Event is probable in the next ten years.
Table 4-4. Impact Statements
POTENTIAL
SEVERITY DESCRIPTION
Substantial
Multiple deaths. Complete shutdown of facilities for 30 days or
more. More than 50 percent of property destroyed or with
major damage.
Major
Injuries and illnesses resulting in permanent disability. Complete
shutdown of critical facilities for at least two weeks. More than
25 percent of property destroyed or with major damage.
Minor
Injuries and illnesses do not result in permanent disability.
Complete shutdown of critical facilities for more than one week.
More than 10 percent of property destroyed or with major
damage.
Limited
Injuries and illnesses are treatable with first aid. Shutdown of
critical facilities and services for 24 hours or less. Less than 10
percent of property destroyed or with major damage.
Section 4: Risk Overview
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 6
Each of the hazard profiles includes a description of a general Vulnerability Assessment. Vulnerability is
the total of assets that are subject to damages from a hazard, based on historic recorded damages. Assets
in the region were inventoried and defined in hazard zones where appropriate. The total amount of
damages, including property and crop damages, for each hazard is divided by the total number of assets
(building value totals) in that community to determine the percentage of damage that each hazard can
cause to the community.
To better understand how future growth and development in the County might affect hazard
vulnerability, it is useful to consider population growth, occupied and vacant land, the potential for future
development in hazard areas, and current planning and growth management efforts. Hazard Vulnerability
for Jefferson County, and all participating jurisdictions, was reviewed based on recent development
changes that occurred throughout the County. The Jefferson County planning area has grown slightly
between 2010 and 2015 according to the U.S. Census Bureau, therefore there has been no significant
factors or development trends with a consequential effect or increase in vulnerability to the population,
infrastructure, and buildings for hazards.
Once loss estimates and vulnerability were known, an impact statement was applied to relate the
potential impact of the hazard on the assets within the area of impact.
Hazard Ranking
Table 4-5 portrays the results of the County’s self-assessment for hazard ranking, based on the preliminary
results of the risk assessment presented at the Risk Assessment Workshop. This table also takes into
account local knowledge regarding frequency of occurrence and the potential impact of each hazard.
Table 4-5. Hazard Risk Ranking
HAZARD FREQUENCY OF
OCCURENCE POTENTIAL SEVERITY RANKING
Flood Highly Likely Limited/Major1 High
Hurricane Highly Likely Substantial High
Lightning Highly Likely Substantial Moderate
Extreme Heat Occasional Minor Moderate
Thunderstorm Wind Highly Likely Substantial Moderate
Drought Occasional Limited Moderate
Hail Highly Likely Limited Low
Tornado Highly Likely Major Low
Wildfire Highly Likely Minor Low
1 The Potential Severity for the City of Beaumont is considered “Major” while the rest of the jurisdictions, including Jefferson
County have a Potential Severity of “Limited”.
Section 4: Risk Overview
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 7
HAZARD FREQUENCY OF
OCCURENCE POTENTIAL SEVERITY RANKING
Winter Storm Highly Likely Limited Low
Coastal Erosion Highly Likely Limited Low
SECTION 5: FLOOD
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
Hazard Description ........................................................................................................................................ 1
Location ......................................................................................................................................................... 2
Extent .......................................................................................................................................................... 12
Historical Occurrences ................................................................................................................................ 15
Significant Events .................................................................................................................................... 19
Probability of Future Events ....................................................................................................................... 19
Vulnerability and Impact ............................................................................................................................. 19
Assessment of Impacts............................................................................................................................ 22
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Participation ............................................................................. 23
NFIP Compliance and Maintenance ............................................................................................................ 25
Repetitive Loss ............................................................................................................................................ 25
Hazard Description
Floods generally result from excessive precipitation. The severity of a flood event is determined by a
combination of several major factors, including: stream and river basin topography and physiography;
precipitation and weather patterns; recent soil moisture conditions; and the degree of vegetative clearing
and impervious surface. Typically, floods are long-term events that may last for several days.
The primary types of general flooding are inland and coastal flooding. Inland or riverine flooding is a result
of excessive precipitation levels and water runoff volumes within the watershed of a stream or river.
Inland or riverine flooding is overbank flooding of rivers and streams, typically resulting from large-scale
weather systems that generate prolonged rainfall over a wide geographic area; thus it is a naturally
occurring and inevitable event. Some river floods occur seasonally when winter or spring rainfalls fill river
basins with too much water, too quickly. Torrential rains from decaying hurricanes or tropical systems
can also produce river flooding.
Coastal flooding occurs when normally dry, low-lying land is flooded by seawater. The extent of coastal
flooding is a function of the elevation inland flood waters penetrate, which is controlled by the topography
of the coastal land exposed to flooding.
Coastal flooding is largely a natural event, however human influence on the coastal environment can
exacerbate coastal flooding. Extraction of water from groundwater reservoirs in the coastal zone can
enhance subsidence of the land, increasing the risk of flooding. Engineered protection structures along
the coast, such as sea walls, alter the natural processes of the beach, often leading to erosion on adjacent
stretches of the coast, which also increases the risk of flooding. Coastal flooding is covered in detail under
the profile for Hurricanes, located in Section 7.
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 2
Location
The Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFIRM) data provided by FEMA for Jefferson County shows the
following flood hazard areas:
Zone A: Areas subject to inundation by the 1-percent-annual-chance flood event generally
determined using approximate methodologies. Because detailed hydraulic analyses have not
been performed, no Base Flood Elevations (BFEs) or flood depths are shown. Mandatory flood
insurance requirements and floodplain management standards apply.
Zone AE: Areas subject to inundation by 1-percent-annual-chance shallow flooding. It is the base
floodplain where BFEs are provided. AE zones are now used on new format FIRMs instead of A1-
30 zones.
Zone AH: Areas subject to inundation by the 1-percent-annual-chance shallow flooding, usually
areas of ponding, where average depths range from 1 to 3 feet. BFEs derived from detailed
hydraulic analyses are shown. Mandatory flood insurance purchase requirements and floodplain
management standards apply.
Zone VE: Areas subject to inundation by the 1-percent-annual-chance flood event with additional
hazards due to storm-induced velocity wave action. BFEs derived from detailed hydraulic analyses
are shown. Mandatory flood insurance purchase requirements and floodplain management
standards apply.
Zone X: Moderate risk areas within the 0.2-percent-annual-chance floodplain, areas of 1-percent-
annual-chance flooding where average depths are less than 1 foot, areas of 1-percent-annual-
chance flooding where the contributing drainage area is less than 1 square mile, and areas
protected from the 1-percent-annual-chance flood by a levee. No BFEs or base flood depths are
shown within these zones.
Locations of flood zones in Jefferson County based on the DFIRM from FEMA are illustrated in Figures 5-
1 to 5-9.
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 3
Figure 5-1. Estimated Flood Zones in Jefferson County
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 4
Figure 5-2. Estimated Flood Zones in the City of Beaumont, SETRPC
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 5
Figure 5-3. Estimated Flood Zones in the City of Bevil Oaks
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 6
Figure 5-4. Estimated Flood Zones in the City of China
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 7
Figure 5-5. Estimated Flood Zones in the City of Groves
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 8
Figure 5-6. Estimated Flood Zones in the City of Nederland
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 9
Figure 5-7. Estimated Flood Zones in the City of Nome
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 10
Figure 5-8. Estimated Flood Zones in the City of Port Arthur
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 11
Figure 5-9. Estimated Flood Zones in the City of Port Neches
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 12
Extent
The severity of a flood event is determined by a combination of several factors including: stream and river
basin topography and physiography; precipitation and weather patterns; recent soil moisture conditions;
and degree of vegetative clearing and impervious surface. Typically, floods are long-term events that may
last for several days.
Determining the intensity and magnitude of a flood event is dependent upon the flood zone and location
of the flood hazard area, in addition to depths of flood waters. The extent of flood damages can be
expected to be more damaging in the areas that will convey a base flood. FEMA categorizes areas on the
terrain according to how the area will convey flood water. Flood zones are the categories that are mapped
on Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Table 5-1 provides a description of FEMA flood zones and the flood impact
in terms of severity or potential harm. Flood Zones A, AE, and X are the only hazard areas mapped in the
region. Figures 5-1 through 5-9 (above) should be read in conjunction with the extent for flooding in Tables
5-1, 5-2, and 5-3 in order to determine the intensity of a potential flood event.
Table 5-1. Flood Zones
INTENSITY ZONE DESCRIPTION
HIGH
ZONE A
Areas with a 1-percent-annual-chance of flooding and a 26-percent-
chance of flooding over the life of a 30-year mortgage. Because
detailed analyses are not performed for such areas, no depths or base
flood elevations are shown within these zones.
ZONE A1-30
These are known as numbered A Zones (e.g., A7 or A14). This is the
base floodplain where the FIRM shows a Base Flood Elevation (BFE)
(old format).
ZONE AE The base floodplain where base flood elevations are provided. AE
Zones are now used on the new format FIRMs instead of A1-A30 Zones.
ZONE AO
River or stream flood hazard areas and areas with a 1-percent or
greater chance of shallow flooding each year, usually in the form of
sheet flow, with an average depth ranging from 1 to 3 feet. These areas
have a 26-percent-chance of flooding over the life of a 30-year
mortgage. Average flood depths derived from detailed analyses are
shown within these zones.
ZONE AH
Areas with a 1-percent-annual-chance of shallow flooding, usually in
the form of a pond, with an average depth ranging from 1 to 3 feet.
These areas have a 26-percent chance of flooding over the life of a 30-
year mortgage. Base flood elevations derived from detailed analyses
are shown at selected intervals within these zones.
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 13
INTENSITY ZONE DESCRIPTION
ZONE A99
Areas with a 1-percent-annual-chance of flooding that will be
protected by a federal flood control system where construction has
reached specified legal requirements. No depths or base flood
elevations are shown within these zones.
ZONE AR
Areas with a temporarily increased flood risk due to the building or
restoration of a flood control system (such as a levee or a dam).
Mandatory flood insurance purchase requirements will apply, but rates
will not exceed the rates for unnumbered A zones if the structure is
built or restored in compliance with Zone AR floodplain management
regulations.
ZONE V
Areas along coasts subject to inundation by the 1-percent-annual-
chance flood event with additional hazards associated with storm-
induced waves. Because detailed hydraulic analyses have not been
performed, no BFEs or flood depths are shown. Mandatory flood
insurance purchase requirements and floodplain management
standards apply.
ZONE VE
Areas subject to inundation by the 1-percent-annual-chance flood
event with additional hazards due to storm-induced velocity wave
action. BFEs derived from detailed hydraulic analyses are shown.
Mandatory flood insurance purchase requirements and floodplain
management standards apply.
MODERATE to
LOW ZONE X 500
An area inundated by 500-year flooding; an area inundated by 100-year
flooding with average depths of less than 1 foot or with drainage areas
less than 1 square mile; or an area protected by levees from 100-year
flooding.
Zone A is interchangeably referred to as the 100-year flood, the 1-percent-annual chance flood, the
Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA), or more commonly, the base flood. This is the area that will convey the
base flood and constitute a threat to the planning area. The impact from a flood event can be more
damaging in areas that will convey a base flood.
Structures built in the SFHA are subject to damage by rising waters and floating debris. Moving flood
water exerts pressure on everything in its path and causes erosion of soil and solid objects. Utility systems,
such as heating, ventilation, air conditioning, fuel, electrical systems, sewage maintenance systems, and
water systems, if not elevated above BFE, may also be damaged.
The intensity and magnitude of a flood event is also determined by the depth of flood waters. Table 5-2
below describes the category of risk and potential magnitude of an event in correlation to water depth.
The water depths depicted in Table 5-2 are approximations based on elevation data. Table 5-3 describes
the extent associated with stream gauge data provided by the United States Geological Survey (USGS).
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 14
Table 5-2. Extent Scale – Water Depth
SEVERITY DEPTH (in feet) DESCRIPTION
BELOW FLOOD STAGE 0 to 15 Water begins to exceed low sections of banks
and the lowest sections of the floodplain.
ACTION STAGE 16 to 23
Flow is well into the floodplain, minor lowland
flooding reaches low areas of the floodplain.
Livestock should be moved from low lying areas.
FLOOD STAGE 24 to 28
Homes are threatened and properties
downstream of river flows or in low lying areas
begin to flood.
MODERATE FLOOD STAGE 29 to 32
At this stage the lowest homes downstream
flood. Roads and bridges in the floodplain flood
severely and are dangerous to motorists.
MAJOR FLOOD STAGE 33 and above
Major flooding approaches homes in the
floodplain. Primary and secondary roads and
bridges are severely flooded and very dangerous.
Major flooding extends well into the floodplain,
destroying property, equipment, and livestock.
Table 5-3. Extent for Jefferson County1
JURISDICTION2 ESTIMATED SEVERITY PER FLOOD EVENT PEAK FLOOD EVENT
Jefferson County Below Flood Stage, 0 to 15 feet
Below Flood Stage: Taylor Bayou reached an
overflow elevation of 11.29 feet in September
1963 near the City of LaBelle.
Jefferson County Below Flood Stage, 0 to 15 feet
Below Flood Stage: Hillebrandt Bayou reached
an overflow elevation of 12.30 feet in
September 1963 near Lovell Lake.
Jefferson County Below Flood Stage, 0 to 15 feet
Action Stage: Pine Island Bayou reached an
overflow elevation of 16.18 feet in October
2006 near Sour Lake, Texas.
City of Beaumont Below Flood Stage, 0 to 15 feet
Below Flood Stage: Neches River reached an
overflow elevation of 11.71 feet in October
2006 in Beaumont, Texas.
1 Severity estimated by averaging floods at certain stage level over the history of flood events. Severity and peak events are based
on U.S. Geological Survey data.
2 Severity is provided for jurisdictions where peak data was provided.
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 15
The range of flood intensity that the County can experience is high, or Zone A. Based on reporting from
the USGS, a flood event can place the County at the extent of “Below Flood Stage” as shown in Tables 5-
2 and 5-3. Based on historical occurrences, on average, the entire planning area, including all participating
jurisdictions, could expect to experience 7 inches of water within a 5 hour period due to flooding.
The data described in Tables 5-1 through 5-3, together with Figures 5-1 through 5-9, and historical
occurrences for the area, provides an estimated potential magnitude and severity for the County. For
example the City of Port Arthur, as shown in Figure 5-8, has areas designated as Zone AE and Zone VE.
Reading this figure in conjunction with Table 5-1 means the area is of high risk for flood. It is noted that
the SETRPC is not located in a special flood hazard area and has no known localized flood risk.
Historical Occurrences
Historical evidence indicates that areas within Jefferson County are susceptible to flooding, especially in
the form of flash flooding. It is important to note that only flood events that have been reported have
been factored into this risk assessment; therefore it is likely that additional flood occurrences have gone
unreported before and during the recording period. Table 5-4 identifies historical flood events that
resulted in damages, injuries, or fatalities within the Jefferson County planning area. Table 5-5 provides
the historical flood event summary by jurisdiction. Historical Data is provided by the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration and the National Weather Service’s (NOAA/NWS) Storm Prediction Center,
in addition to the National Center for Environmental Information (NCEI) database for Jefferson County.
Table 5-4. Historical Flood Events, 1996-20163
JURISDICTION DATE TIME DEATHS INJURIES PROPERTY
DAMAGE
CROP
DAMAGE
Beaumont 1/26/1996 10:00 AM 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 9/27/1996 9:00 AM 0 0 $137,243 $0
Port Arthur 7/30/1997 3:00 PM 0 0 $29,814 $0
Port Arthur 9/23/1997 3:45 PM 0 0 $14,907 $0
Nederland 1/21/1998 11:00 PM 0 0 $58,714 $0
Beaumont 8/14/1998 1:00 PM 0 0 $14,679 $0
Beaumont 9/11/1998 1:00 PM 0 0 $146,786 $0
Jefferson County 9/13/1998 10:00 AM 0 0 $146,786 $0
Beaumont 10/6/1998 8:30 AM 0 0 $29,357 $0
Nederland 4/12/2000 10:00 AM 0 0 $347,359 $0
3 Values are in 2016 dollars.
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 16
JURISDICTION DATE TIME DEATHS INJURIES PROPERTY
DAMAGE
CROP
DAMAGE
Beaumont 6/7/2001 3:30 AM 0 0 $13,509,938 $0
Jefferson County 9/1/2001 10:00 AM 0 0 $33,775 $0
Jefferson County 9/2/2001 10:00 AM 0 0 $101,325 $0
Beaumont 11/28/2001 5:30 PM 0 0 $27,020 $0
Jefferson County 6/27/2002 3:00 AM 0 0 $6,650 $0
Jefferson County 8/15/2002 4:00 AM 0 0 $26,599 $0
Beaumont 10/29/2002 12:30 AM 1 0 $6,649,833 $0
Beaumont 11/3/2002 11:10 AM 0 0 $1,329,967 $0
Port Arthur 12/4/2002 7:00 AM 0 0 $66,498 $0
Beaumont 2/21/2003 1:34 AM 0 0 $32,508 $0
Jefferson County 9/12/2003 7:00 AM 0 0 $32,508 $0
Beaumont 10/9/2003 3:45 PM 0 0 $1,300,332 $0
Port Neches 10/25/2003 2:00 PM 0 0 $130,033 $0
Port Arthur 5/11/2004 8:40 PM 0 0 $2,533 $0
Nederland 5/13/2004 3:45 PM 0 0 $6,333 $0
Beaumont 6/26/2004 4:10 PM 0 0 $6,333 $0
Nederland 9/23/2004 8:50 PM 0 0 $12,666 $0
Jefferson County 5/29/2006 10:25 AM 1 0 $11,868 $0
Beaumont 5/29/2006 3:09 AM 0 0 $59,341 $0
Beaumont 5/29/2006 6:18 AM 0 0 $29,670 $0
Beaumont 7/23/2006 4:30 PM 0 0 $29,670 $0
Beaumont 7/26/2006 1:00 PM 0 0 $2,374 $0
Beaumont 10/16/2006 7:00 AM 0 0 $0 $0
Beaumont 10/16/2006 4:15 PM 0 0 $11,868 $0
Port Arthur 10/16/2006 6:00 PM 0 0 $5,934 $0
Bevil Oaks 2/12/2007 6:00 PM 0 0 $11,539 $0
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 17
JURISDICTION DATE TIME DEATHS INJURIES PROPERTY
DAMAGE
CROP
DAMAGE
Jefferson County 7/6/2007 9:30 AM 0 0 $5,770 $0
Jefferson County 9/13/2007 1:00 AM 0 0 $57,697 $0
China 1/4/2009 3:25 AM 0 0 $5,576 $0
Jefferson County 4/18/2009 12:00 AM 0 0 $22,305 $0
Beaumont 4/27/2009 8:15 PM 0 0 $5,576 $0
Jefferson County 9/9/2009 10:30 AM 0 0 $0 $0
Beaumont 10/22/2009 8:00 AM 0 0 $111,524 $0
Port Arthur 10/22/2009 9:00 AM 0 0 $11,152 $0
Beaumont 10/26/2009 9:00 AM 0 0 $11,152 $0
Jefferson County 8/17/2010 3:00 PM 0 0 $1,097 $0
Port Arthur 7/19/2011 6:30 AM 0 0 $10,637 $0
Jefferson County 1/25/2012 3:20 PM 0 0 $1,042 $0
Jefferson County 3/20/2012 12:00 AM 0 0 $0 $0
Bevil Oaks 3/20/2012 12:00 PM 0 0 $10,421 $0
Jefferson County 7/13/2012 6:00 AM 0 0 $2,084 $0
Jefferson County 1/9/2013 2:58 PM 0 0 $0 $0
Beaumont 5/10/2013 4:00 AM 0 0 $51,353 $0
Beaumont 10/31/2013 8:15 AM 0 0 $51,353 $0
Port Neches 7/18/2014 6:52 AM 0 0 $0 $0
Beaumont 3/21/2015 9:35 AM 0 0 $15,142 $0
Port Arthur 4/16/2015 9:57 PM 0 0 $0 $0
Beaumont 5/12/2015 5:25 PM 0 0 $10,095 $0
Beaumont 5/21/2015 1:23 PM 0 0 $5,047 $0
Beaumont 5/27/2015 4:07 AM 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 6/17/2015 7:29 PM 0 0 $1,009 $0
Jefferson County 10/25/2015 8:00 AM 0 0 $0 $0
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 18
JURISDICTION DATE TIME DEATHS INJURIES PROPERTY
DAMAGE
CROP
DAMAGE
Port Arthur 11/7/2015 6:35 AM 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 3/9/2016 7:30 AM 0 0 $0 $0
Beaumont 3/10/2016 12:50 AM 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 3/30/2016 11:00 PM 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 4/18/2016 10:20 AM 0 0 $0 $0
Beaumont 5/1/2016 11:30 AM 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 5/22/2016 8:13 AM 0 0 $0 $0
Beaumont 6/2/2016 11:10 PM 0 0 $0 $0
Table 5-5. Summary of Historical Flood Events, 1996-20164
JURISDICTION NUMBER
OF EVENTS DEATHS INJURIES PROPERTY
DAMAGE CROP DAMAGE
Jefferson County 23 1 0 $587,759 $0
Beaumont 29 1 0 $23,440,918 $0
Bevil Oaks 2 0 0 $21,960 $0
China 1 0 0 $5,676 $0
Groves 0 0 0 $0 $0
Nederland 4 0 0 $425,073 $0
Nome 0 0 0 $0 $0
Port Arthur 9 0 0 $141,476 $0
Port Neches 2 0 0 $130,033 $0
TOTAL LOSSES 70 2 0 $24,752,796
Based on the list of historical flood events for the Jefferson County planning area (listed above), including
the SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions, 24 events have occurred since the 2011 Plan.
4 Values are in 2016 dollars.
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 19
Significant Events
Flash Flood on June 7, 2001 – Jefferson County
Tropical Storm Allison caused minor problems along coastal sections of southeast Texas, but eventually
resulted in catastrophic flood losses further inland. Wind gusts of 30 to 40 miles per hour (mph) resulted
in minor roof damage to less than 10 homes along the coast in Jefferson County between the evening of
June 5, 2001 and the early morning hours of June 6, 2001. A 2 foot storm surge resulted in minor beach
erosion and portions of Highway 82 between Sabine Pass and Port Arthur to go underwater during the
nighttime high tide of June 5 to 6, 2001. The specific flood events that occurred between June 7 and 9,
2001 were a result of the remnants of Tropical Storm Allison, as it meandered across southeast and east
Texas. Around ten inches of rain fell in less than 6 hours, resulting in widespread flooding across northern
Jefferson County. Nearly 900 homes were damaged, but only ten were classified as destroyed. Roads and
bridges also received some damage from the flood waters.
Flash Flood on October 29, 2002 – Jefferson County, City of Beaumont
Excessive rainfall in a short period of time impacted portions of Jefferson County on October 29, 2002.
Between 6 and 8 inches of rain fell in less than 6 hours. Water filled up to 8 feet deep in underpasses. A
woman drove her car into the deep water and drowned. A hospital had the emergency room floor flooded.
Over 500 homes in Beaumont had water enter them. Damages were estimated at approximately
$5,000,000.
Flood on October 9, 2003 – Jefferson County
Excessive rainfall in a short period of time impacted portions of Jefferson County on October 9, 2003.
Around 6 to 8 inches of rain fell in less than 2 hours, causing significant flooding to sections of Beaumont.
Water entered homes, vehicles were left stranded on the roads, but fortunately no injuries or deaths were
reported. Damages were estimated at approximately $1,000,000.
Probability of Future Events
Based on recorded historical occurrences and extent within the Jefferson County planning area including
all participating jurisdictions, flooding is highly likely and an event will likely occur within the next year.
The SETRPC facilities has no history of flood events and an event impacting the SETRPC is unlikely.
Vulnerability and Impact
A property’s vulnerability to a flood depends on its location and proximity to the floodplain. Structures
that lie along banks of a waterway are the most vulnerable and are often repetitive loss structures.
All participating jurisdictions encourage development outside of the floodplain, although there are some
critical facilities, homes, and businesses already located in the floodplain. Table 5-6 includes critical
facilities in the planning area that are located in the floodplain and are vulnerable to flooding.
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 20
Table 5-6. Critical Facilities in the Floodplain by Jurisdiction
JURISDICTION CRITICAL FACILITIES
Jefferson County 1 School, Port Authority Facility
Beaumont 3 Water District Facilities, 1 Drainage District Facility, 3 Schools
Bevil Oaks 1 Fire Station
China None
Groves None
Nederland None
Nome None
Port Arthur 1 School
Port Neches 1 School
SETRPC None
Historic loss estimates due to flood are presented in Table 5-7 below. Considering 70 flood events over a
21-year period, frequency is approximately 2 to 3 events every year.
Table 5-7. Potential Annualized Losses by Jurisdiction, 1996-20165
JURISDICTION NUMBER OF EVENTS PROPERTY & CROP LOSS ANNUAL LOSS
ESTIMATES
Jefferson County 23 $587,759 $27,989
Beaumont 29 $23,440,918 $1,116,234
Bevil Oaks 2 $21,960 $1,046
China 1 $5,576 $266
Groves 0 $0 $0
Nederland 4 $425,073 $20,242
Nome 0 $0 $0
Port Arthur 9 $141,476 $6,737
Port Neches 2 $130,033 $6,192
5 Values are in 2016 dollars.
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 21
JURISDICTION NUMBER OF EVENTS PROPERTY & CROP LOSS ANNUAL LOSS
ESTIMATES
SETRPC 0 $0 $0
Total Losses 70 $24,752,796 $1,178,705
The severity of a flooding event varies depending on the relative risk to citizens and structures located
within each city. Table 5-8 depicts the level of impact for Jefferson County and each participating city.
Table 5-8. Impact by Jurisdiction
JURISDICTION IMPACT DESCRIPTION
Jefferson County Limited
Any injuries or illnesses would be treatable with first aid, with minor quality
of life lost. If critical facilities are shut down it would be for 24 hours or less,
and it is expected that less than 10 percent of property would be destroyed
or damaged in the county.
Beaumont Major
Injuries or illnesses result in permanent disability. Complete shutdown of
critical facilities for at least 2 weeks, and it is expected that more than 25
percent of property would be destroyed or with major damage in the city.
Bevil Oaks Limited
Any injuries or illnesses would be treatable with first aid, with minor quality
of life lost. If critical facilities are shut down it would be for 24 hours or less,
and it is expected that less than 10 percent of property would be destroyed
or damaged in the city.
China Limited
Any injuries or illnesses would be treatable with first aid, with minor quality
of life lost. If critical facilities are shut down it would be for 24 hours or less,
and it is expected that less than 10 percent of property would be destroyed
or damaged in the city.
Groves Limited
Any injuries or illnesses would be treatable with first aid, with minor quality
of life lost. If critical facilities are shut down it would be for 24 hours or less,
and it is expected that less than 10 percent of property would be destroyed
or damaged in the city.
Nederland Limited
Any injuries or illnesses would be treatable with first aid, with minor quality
of life lost. If critical facilities are shut down it would be for 24 hours or less,
and it is expected that less than 10 percent of property would be destroyed
or damaged in the city.
Nome Limited
Any injuries or illnesses would be treatable with first aid, with minor quality
of life lost. If critical facilities are shut down it would be for 24 hours or less,
and it is expected that less than 10 percent of property would be destroyed
or damaged in the city.
Port Arthur Limited
Any injuries or illnesses would be treatable with first aid, with minor quality
of life lost. If critical facilities are shut down it would be for 24 hours or less,
and it is expected that less than 10 percent of property would be destroyed
or damaged in the city.
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 22
JURISDICTION IMPACT DESCRIPTION
Port Neches Limited
Any injuries or illnesses would be treatable with first aid, with minor quality
of life lost. If critical facilities are shut down it would be for 24 hours or less,
and it is expected that less than 10 percent of property would be destroyed
or damaged in the city.
SETRPC Limited
Facilities are unlikely to be impacted. If critical facilities are shut down it
would be for 24 hours or less, and it is expected that less than 10 percent of
property would be destroyed or damaged at the SETRPC.
Assessment of Impacts
Flooding is the deadliest natural disaster that occurs in the U.S. each year, and it poses a constant and
significant threat to the health and safety of the people in the planning area. Impacts to the planning area
can include:
Recreation activities at Sabine Lake and Sea Rim State Park may be unavailable and tourism can
be unappealing for years following a large flood event, devastating directly related local
businesses and negatively impacting economic recovery.
The McFaddin National Wildlife Refuge may suffer significant wildlife mortality during and
following a flood due to damaged or destroyed ecosystems and water contamination.
The Port Arthur-Orange Bridge may be damaged or inaccessible, cutting off critical emergency
services to Port Arthur.
Flood-related rescues may be necessary at swift water and low water crossings or in flooded
neighborhoods where roads have become impassable, placing first responders in harm’s way.
Evacuations may be required for entire neighborhoods because of rising floodwaters, further
taxing limited response capabilities and increasing sheltering needs for displaced residents.
Health risks and threats to residents are elevated after the flood waters have receded due to
contaminated flood waters (untreated sewage and hazardous chemicals) and mold growth typical
in flooded buildings and homes.
Significant flood events often result in widespread power outages, increasing the risk to more
vulnerable portions of the population who rely on power for health and/or life safety.
Extended power outage can result in an increase in structure fires and/or carbon monoxide
poisoning, as individuals attempt to cook or heat their home with alternate, unsafe cooking or
heating devices, such as grills.
Floods can destroy or make residential structures uninhabitable, requiring shelter or relocation of
residents in the aftermath of the event.
First responders are exposed to downed power lines, contaminated and potentially unstable
debris, hazardous materials, and generally unsafe conditions, elevating the risk of injury to first
responders and potentially diminishing emergency response capabilities.
Emergency operations and services may be significantly impacted due to damaged facilities.
Significant flooding can result in the inability of emergency response vehicles to access areas of
the community.
Critical staff may suffer personal losses or be otherwise impacted by a flood event and unable to
report for duty, limiting response capabilities.
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 23
City or County departments may be flooded, delaying response and recovery efforts for the entire
community.
Private sector entities that the City and its residents rely on, such as utility providers, financial
institutions, and medical care providers may not be fully operational and may require assistance
from neighboring communities until full services can be restored.
Damage to infrastructure may slow economic recovery since repairs may be extensive and
lengthy.
Some businesses not directly damaged by the flood may be negatively impacted while utilities are
being restored or water recedes, further slowing economic recovery.
When the community is affected by significant property damage it is anticipated that funding
would be required for infrastructure repair and restoration, temporary services and facilities,
overtime pay for responders, as well as normal day-to-day operating expenses.
Displaced residents may not be able to immediately return to work, further slowing economic
recovery.
Residential structures substantially damaged by a flood may not be rebuilt for years and uninsured
or underinsured residential structures may never be rebuilt, reducing the tax base for the
community.
Large floods may result in a dramatic population fluctuation, as people are unable to return to
their homes or jobs and must seek shelter and/or work outside of the affected area.
Businesses that are uninsured or underinsured may have difficulty reopening, which results in a
net loss of jobs for the community and a potential increase in the unemployment rate.
Flooding may cause significant disruptions of clean water and sewer services, elevating health
risks and delaying recovery efforts.
The psycho-social effects on flood victims and their families can traumatize them for long periods
of time, creating long term increases in medical treatment and services.
Extensive or repetitive flooding can lead to decreases in property value for the affected
community.
Flood poses a potential catastrophic risk to annual and perennial crop production and overall crop
quality, leading to higher food costs.
Flood related declines in production may lead to an increase in unemployment.
Large floods may result in loss of livestock, potential increased livestock mortality due to stress
and water borne disease, and increased cost for feed.
The overall extent of damages caused by floods is dependent on the extent, depth, and duration of
flooding, and the velocities of flows in the flooded areas. The level of preparedness and pre-event planning
done by government, businesses, and citizens will contribute to the overall economic and financial
conditions in the aftermath of a flood event.
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Participation
Flood insurance offered through the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) is the best way for home
and business owners to protect themselves financially against the flood hazard. All of the jurisdictions
located in Jefferson County participate in the NFIP. The SETRPC is not an eligible entity for participation in
the NFIP and is not located in a special flood hazard area.
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 24
As an additional indicator of floodplain management responsibility, communities may choose to
participate in FEMA’s Community Rating System (CRS). This is an incentive-based program that allows
communities to undertake flood mitigation activities that go beyond NFIP requirements. Currently, 3 of
the communities in Jefferson County participate in CRS, including Beaumont (class 7), Bevil Oaks (class 7),
and Port Arthur (class 9). The remaining jurisdictions in the planning area understand the value of
participation in this program and have identified this as a goal and objective of the Plan that was discussed
during Planning Team meetings.
Some participating jurisdictions in the NFIP currently have in place minimum NFIP standards for new
construction and substantial improvements of structures; these jurisdictions include: China, Groves,
Nome, and Port Neches. The remaining jurisdictions have adopted higher regulatory NFIP standards to
limit floodplain development including: Jefferson County, Beaumont, Bevil Oaks, Nederland, and Port
Arthur.
The flood hazard areas throughout Jefferson County are subject to periodic inundation, which may result
in loss of life and property, health and safety hazards, disruption of commerce and governmental services,
and extraordinary public expenditures for flood protection and relief, all of which adversely affect public
safety.
These flood losses are created by the cumulative effect of obstructions in floodplains which cause an
increase in flood heights and velocities, and by the occupancy of flood hazard areas by uses vulnerable to
floods and hazardous to other lands because they are inadequately elevated, flood-proofed, or otherwise
protected from flood damage. Mitigation actions are included to address flood maintenance issues as
well, including routinely clearing debris from roadside ditches and bridges, and expanding drainage
culverts and storm water structures to more adequately convey flood waters.
It is the purpose of Jefferson County and NFIP jurisdictions participating in the Hazard Mitigation plan to
continue to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare by minimizing public and private losses
due to flood conditions in specific areas. Each of the NFIP participating jurisdictions in the Plan are guided
by their local Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance. These communities will continue to comply with NFIP
requirements through their local permitting, inspection, and record-keeping requirements for new and
substantially developed construction. Furthermore, the NFIP program for each of the participating
jurisdictions promotes sound development in floodplain areas and includes provisions designed to:
Protect human life and health;
Minimize expenditure of public money for costly flood control projects;
Minimize the need for rescue and relief efforts associated with flooding and generally undertaken
at the expense of the general public;
Minimize prolonged business interruptions;
Minimize damage to public facilities and utilities such as water and gas mains, electric, telephone
and sewer lines, streets, and bridges located in floodplains;
Help maintain a stable tax base by providing for the sound use and development of flood-prone
areas in such a manner as to minimize future flood blight areas; and
Ensure that potential buyers are notified that property is in a flood area.
In order to accomplish these tasks, Jefferson County and participating NFIP jurisdictions seek to follow the
following guidelines to achieve flood mitigation:
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 25
Restrict or prohibit uses that are dangerous to health, safety, or property in times of flood, such
as filling or dumping, that may cause excessive increases in flood heights or velocities;
Require that uses vulnerable to floods, including facilities, which serve such uses, be protected
against flood damage at the time of initial construction, as a method of reducing flood losses;
Control the alteration of natural floodplains, stream channels, and natural protective barriers,
which are involved in the accommodation of floodwaters;
Control filling, grading, dredging and other development, which may increase flood damage; and
Prevent or regulate the construction of flood barriers which will unnaturally divert floodwaters or
which may increase flood hazards to other lands.
NFIP Compliance and Maintenance
As mentioned, Jefferson County and participating jurisdictions have developed mitigation actions that
relate to either NFIP maintenance or compliance. Compliance and maintenance actions can be found in
Section 18.
Flooding was identified by the majority of the communities as a high risk hazard during hazard ranking
activities at the Risk Assessment Workshop. As a result, many of the mitigation actions were developed
with flood mitigation in mind. A majority of these flood actions address compliance with the NFIP and
implementing flood awareness programs. County-wide, communities recognize the need and are working
towards adopting additional higher NFIP regulatory standards to further minimize flood risk in their
community. Smaller no-growth communities that typically do not have personnel or funds to implement
more stringent NFIP compliance measures are focusing on NFIP public awareness activities. This includes
promoting the availability of flood insurance by placing NFIP brochures and flyers in public libraries or
public meeting places.
Repetitive Loss
The Severe Repetitive Loss (SRL) Grant Program under FEMA provides federal funding to assist states and
communities in implementing mitigation measures to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk of flood
damage to SRL residential structures insured under the NFIP. The Texas Water Development Board
(TWDB) administers the SRL Grant Program for the State of Texas.
Severe Repetitive Loss properties are defined as residential properties that are:
Covered under the NFIP and have at least 4 flood related damage claim payments (building and
contents) over $5,000 each, and the cumulative amount of such claims payments exceed $20,000;
or
At least 2 separate claim payments (building payments only) have been made with the cumulative
amount of the building portion of such claims exceeding the market value of the building.
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 26
In either scenario, at least 2 of the referenced claims must have occurred within any 10-year period, and
must be greater than 10 days apart.6 Table 5-9 shows repetitive loss and severe repetitive loss properties
for Jefferson County and all participating jurisdictions.
Table 5-9. Repetitive Loss and Severe Repetitive Loss Properties
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Jefferson County 0177501 Yes Other-Nonres 2 $18,447 -
Jefferson County 0016017 No Single Fmly 5 $84,858 VU
Jefferson County 0071531 No Single Fmly 2 $98,851 -
Jefferson County 0013029 Yes Single Fmly 4 $104,045 -
Jefferson County 0004178 SDF Single Fmly 10 $423,856 V
Jefferson County 0026644 Yes Single Fmly 3 $7,147 -
Jefferson County 0182118 Yes Single Fmly 2 $19,961 -
Jefferson County 0158314 No Single Fmly 3 $22,502 -
Jefferson County 0001457 No Single Fmly 6 $120,317 VU
Jefferson County 0180869 No Single Fmly 2 $118,698 -
Jefferson County 0137536 No Single Fmly 2 $13,204 -
Jefferson County 0241281 Yes Single Fmly 2 $45,054 -
Jefferson County 0017351 No Single Fmly 4 $43,252 PU
Jefferson County 0163518 No Single Fmly 2 $106,277 -
Jefferson County 0041486 No Single Fmly 4 $27,869 -
Jefferson County 0067919 No Single Fmly 4 $17,625 -
Jefferson County 0173735 No Single Fmly 2 $8,280 -
Jefferson County 0148780 Yes Single Fmly 3 $59,135 -
Jefferson County 0108329 No Single Fmly 3 $68,125 -
Jefferson County 0153950 Yes Single Fmly 3 $95,317 -
Jefferson County 0108430 SDF Single Fmly 6 $198,046 V
Jefferson County 0153949 Yes Single Fmly 3 $99,955 -
Jefferson County 0108476 No Single Fmly 2 $6,354 -
6 Source: Texas Water Development Board
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 27
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Jefferson County 0152782 No Single Fmly 2 $44,617 -
Jefferson County 0108527 Yes Single Fmly 3 $37,792 -
Jefferson County 0120084 No Single Fmly 2 $4,976 -
Jefferson County 0182072 No Single Fmly 2 $125,385 -
Jefferson County 0115988 No Single Fmly 3 $94,047 -
Jefferson County 0179239 No Single Fmly 2 $55,738 -
Jefferson County 0164706 No Single Fmly 2 $92,206 -
Jefferson County 0185403 No Single Fmly 2 $64,634 -
Jefferson County 0048506 No Other-Nonres 2 $6,542 -
Jefferson County 0179193 No Other-Nonres 2 $118,800 -
Jefferson County 0012918 No Single Fmly 5 $49,221 -
Jefferson County 0083532 No Single Fmly 2 $8,428 -
Jefferson County 0250441 Yes Single Fmly 2 $34,987 -
Jefferson County 0044550 No Single Fmly 3 $12,788 -
Jefferson County 0013026 No Single Fmly 11 $294,171 VU
Jefferson County 0182115 Yes Single Fmly 2 $66,076 -
Jefferson County 0044740 No Single Fmly 2 $12,748 -
Jefferson County 0045848 Yes Single Fmly 6 $75,679 -
Jefferson County 0001528 No Single Fmly 18 $158,394 VU
Jefferson County 0004169 No Single Fmly 10 $59,674 VU
Jefferson County 0042051 No Single Fmly 2 $5,826 -
Jefferson County 0003757 SDF Single Fmly 8 $156,202 V
Jefferson County 0017283 No Assmd Condo 4 $70,716 PU
Jefferson County 0017396 No Single Fmly 4 $22,327 -
Jefferson County 0173644 No Single Fmly 2 $56,737 -
Jefferson County 0180156 No Single Fmly 2 $18,766 -
Jefferson County 0083543 No Single Fmly 5 $148,547 VU
Jefferson County 0120315 No Single Fmly 2 $28,298 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 28
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Jefferson County 0153952 SDF Single Fmly 2 $380,597 V
Jefferson County 0001952 No Single Fmly 8 $66,827 VU
Jefferson County 0125137 No Single Fmly 2 $3,054 -
Jefferson County 0043339 No Single Fmly 2 $17,735 -
Jefferson County 0179752 Yes Single Fmly 2 $49,457 -
Jefferson County 0045117 No Single Fmly 5 $99,614 -
Jefferson County 0070472 No Other-Nonres 3 $60,171 -
Jefferson County 0128395 No Single Fmly 3 $45,981 -
Jefferson County 0165546 No Single Fmly 2 $40,529 -
Jefferson County 0108434 Yes Single Fmly 5 $58,179 -
Jefferson County 0108777 No Single Fmly 2 $14,137 -
Jefferson County 0163519 No Single Fmly 2 $96,223 -
Jefferson County 0173721 SDF Single Fmly 4 $142,389 V
Jefferson County 0002601 Yes Single Fmly 5 $87,823 -
Jefferson County 0002600 Yes Single Fmly 4 $121,623 -
Jefferson County 0041009 No Single Fmly 4 $7,203 -
Jefferson County 0071449 No Single Fmly 2 $5,032 -
Jefferson County 0042675 No Single Fmly 3 $9,768 -
Jefferson County 0004786 No Single Fmly 6 $33,939 -
Jefferson County 0113811 No Single Fmly 3 $272,767 PU
Jefferson County 0169147 Yes Single Fmly 3 $118,177 -
Jefferson County 0168573 Yes Other Resid 3 $112,610 -
Jefferson County 0004107 No Single Fmly 4 $21,688 -
Jefferson County 0073580 No Single Fmly 4 $87,941 VU
Jefferson County 0088112 No Single Fmly 4 $72,447 -
Jefferson County 0002864 No Single Fmly 6 $166,606 VU
Jefferson County 0165197 No Single Fmly 2 $5,852 -
Jefferson County 0044800 No Single Fmly 2 $7,410 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 29
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Jefferson County 0002678 SDF Single Fmly 5 $78,867 V
Jefferson County 0157861 No Single Fmly 2 $30,689 -
Jefferson County 0186703 Yes Other-Nonres 4 $153,427 VN
Jefferson County 0038223 No Single Fmly 3 $21,787 -
Jefferson County 0080468 SDF Single Fmly 6 $148,689 V
Jefferson County 0039714 No Single Fmly 7 $40,950 VU
Jefferson County 0108360 Yes Single Fmly 6 $72,399 -
Jefferson County 0178162 Yes Single Fmly 2 $50,732 -
Jefferson County 0122037 Yes Single Fmly 2 $41,202 -
Jefferson County 0108238 No Single Fmly 4 $35,291 -
Jefferson County 0108230 No Single Fmly 2 $36,963 -
Jefferson County 0214533 No Single Fmly 2 $45,558 -
Jefferson County 0160070 Yes Single Fmly 2 $75,551 -
Jefferson County 0026342 No Single Fmly 2 $26,231 -
Jefferson County 0025462 No Single Fmly 2 $4,420 -
Jefferson County 0044016 No Single Fmly 5 $153,408 MVU
Jefferson County 0040340 No Single Fmly 8 $233,738 MVU
Jefferson County 0040116 No Single Fmly 4 $137,523 -
Jefferson County 0026029 No Assmd Condo 3 $65,173 -
Jefferson County 0046295 No Single Fmly 4 $60,113 -
Jefferson County 0114070 No Single Fmly 3 $233,637 -
Jefferson County 0117301 No Other-Nonres 2 $6,344 -
Jefferson County 0067979 No Single Fmly 2 $12,305 -
Jefferson County 0041990 No Single Fmly 5 $54,108 -
Jefferson County 0048831 No Single Fmly 3 $152,011 -
Jefferson County 0186075 No Single Fmly 2 $131,591 -
Jefferson County 0180352 No Single Fmly 2 $191,252 -
Jefferson County 0183152 No Assmd Condo 2 $449,097 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 30
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Jefferson County 0026121 No Single Fmly 6 $118,247 MVU
Jefferson County 0121931 No Single Fmly 2 $19,911 -
Jefferson County 0179733 No Single Fmly 2 $68,076 -
Beaumont 0070066 No Single Fmly 2 $2,560 -
Beaumont 0182124 No Single Fmly 2 $11,266 -
Beaumont 0043492 No Single Fmly 12 $155,860 VU
Beaumont 0182135 No Single Fmly 2 $33,190 -
Beaumont 0038907 No Single Fmly 2 $12,491 -
Beaumont 0128504 No Single Fmly 3 $14,526 -
Beaumont 0043346 No Single Fmly 3 $15,097 -
Beaumont 0089788 No 2-4 Family 2 $5,703 -
Beaumont 0115540 No Single Fmly 5 $55,255 -
Beaumont 0182764 Yes Single Fmly 2 $12,261 -
Beaumont 0017381 No Single Fmly 4 $11,309 -
Beaumont 0157279 Yes Single Fmly 4 $125,138 V
Beaumont 0067939 No Single Fmly 2 $6,479 -
Beaumont 0122426 No Single Fmly 2 $40,740 -
Beaumont 0067960 No Single Fmly 4 $36,206 -
Beaumont 0049134 No Single Fmly 2 $15,120 -
Beaumont 0002569 No Assmd Condo 3 $56,493 -
Beaumont 0002588 No 2-4 Family 3 $14,187 -
Beaumont 0116431 SDF Other-Nonres 5 $300,016 VN
Beaumont 0042980 No Single Fmly 5 $39,482 -
Beaumont 0003237 No Single Fmly 4 $57,354 -
Beaumont 0067968 No Single Fmly 2 $16,138 -
Beaumont 0067969 No Single Fmly 5 $66,118 -
Beaumont 0125431 Yes Single Fmly 2 $35,184 -
Beaumont 0002599 SDF Single Fmly 6 $127,564 V
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 31
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Beaumont 0125433 Yes Single Fmly 2 $39,856 -
Beaumont 0002698 No Other-Nonres 26 $1,464,159 VNU
Beaumont 0082203 No Single Fmly 3 $10,138 -
Beaumont 0173620 Yes Other-Nonres 2 $15,453 -
Beaumont 0005811 Yes Single Fmly 5 $60,891 -
Beaumont 0026764 No Single Fmly 3 $29,717 -
Beaumont 0045178 No Single Fmly 2 $7,268 -
Beaumont 0121694 No Single Fmly 2 $11,687 -
Beaumont 0151747 No Single Fmly 3 $57,066 -
Beaumont 0002580 No Single Fmly 2 $8,304 -
Beaumont 0002575 No Assmd Condo 3 $27,883 -
Beaumont 0002585 No Assmd Condo 2 $21,922 -
Beaumont 0002590 No 2-4 Family 3 $15,041 -
Beaumont 0002581 No 2-4 Family 2 $7,227 -
Beaumont 0002589 No 2-4 Family 2 $7,723 -
Beaumont 0002574 No 2-4 Family 2 $7,240 -
Beaumont 0002583 No 2-4 Family 3 $13,239 -
Beaumont 0002582 No 2-4 Family 2 $7,027 -
Beaumont 0002576 No 2-4 Family 3 $14,512 -
Beaumont 0002568 No 2-4 Family 3 $14,083 -
Beaumont 0002596 No Assmd Condo 3 $58,348 -
Beaumont 0002592 No Assmd Condo 2 $21,866 -
Beaumont 0002593 No 2-4 Family 2 $7,890 -
Beaumont 0002594 No 2-4 Family 2 $10,722 -
Beaumont 0002595 Yes 2-4 Family 4 $82,377 -
Beaumont 0122098 No Single Fmly 2 $29,978 -
Beaumont 0113248 SDF Single Fmly 4 $103,457 V
Beaumont 0120023 Yes Single Fmly 2 $49,718 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 32
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Beaumont 0004631 Yes Single Fmly 4 $60,627 -
Beaumont 0067978 SDF Single Fmly 7 $100,986 V
Beaumont 0122261 No Single Fmly 2 $9,172 -
Beaumont 0121260 No Single Fmly 2 $15,797 -
Beaumont 0046922 No Single Fmly 7 $39,355 -
Beaumont 0122366 Yes Single Fmly 4 $89,533 V
Beaumont 0132737 No Single Fmly 2 $12,416 -
Beaumont 0114740 No Single Fmly 3 $8,656 -
Beaumont 0120004 Yes Single Fmly 2 $26,303 -
Beaumont 0114774 Yes Other-Nonres 2 $16,534 -
Beaumont 0071539 Yes Single Fmly 3 $17,200 -
Beaumont 0183470 Yes Single Fmly 2 $3,887 -
Beaumont 0179716 Yes Single Fmly 2 $15,556 -
Beaumont 0120093 No Single Fmly 2 $7,223 -
Beaumont 0126222 No Other-Nonres 2 $47,645 -
Beaumont 0067949 No Single Fmly 3 $9,318 -
Beaumont 0240104 Yes Single Fmly 2 $111,011 -
Beaumont 0004650 SDF Single Fmly 7 $67,213 V
Beaumont 0046556 No Single Fmly 5 $49,800 -
Beaumont 0073389 No Single Fmly 5 $67,086 -
Beaumont 0128354 No Single Fmly 3 $9,027 -
Beaumont 0113792 Yes Single Fmly 3 $24,978 -
Beaumont 0067981 SDF Single Fmly 5 $54,053 V
Beaumont 0088111 No Single Fmly 3 $23,743 -
Beaumont 0166575 Yes Single Fmly 2 $6,595 -
Beaumont 0039928 No Single Fmly 4 $69,994 -
Beaumont 0121676 No Single Fmly 2 $5,373 -
Beaumont 0115539 No Single Fmly 3 $68,729 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 33
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Beaumont 0048616 No Single Fmly 2 $9,678 -
Beaumont 0003398 No Single Fmly 3 $24,920 -
Beaumont 0152109 No Other-Nonres 2 $32,421 -
Beaumont 0067959 No Single Fmly 4 $42,663 -
Beaumont 0083533 No Single Fmly 2 $19,334 -
Beaumont 0044211 No Other-Nonres 2 $2,847 -
Beaumont 0114917 SDF Single Fmly 6 $49,013 V
Beaumont 0168158 No Single Fmly 2 $26,616 -
Beaumont 0113804 No Single Fmly 3 $32,531 -
Beaumont 0067962 No Single Fmly 2 $4,805 -
Beaumont 0158046 No Single Fmly 2 $56,874 -
Beaumont 0127398 No Single Fmly 2 $13,922 -
Beaumont 0112832 SDF Single Fmly 4 $78,260 V
Beaumont 0002520 No Single Fmly 3 $6,077 -
Beaumont 0120305 No Single Fmly 2 $13,702 -
Beaumont 0237955 Yes Single Fmly 2 $26,324 -
Beaumont 0237956 Yes Other Resid 2 $12,242 -
Beaumont 0036099 No Single Fmly 2 $4,940 -
Beaumont 0116577 No Other-Nonres 3 $115,136 -
Beaumont 0067937 No Single Fmly 6 $41,590 VU
Beaumont 0121499 Yes Other-Nonres 2 $174,474 -
Beaumont 0002422 No Single Fmly 11 $69,927 VU
Beaumont 0067971 No Single Fmly 6 $51,994 -
Beaumont 0121689 No Single Fmly 2 $5,726 -
Beaumont 0157223 No Single Fmly 2 $87,574 -
Beaumont 0173160 No Single Fmly 2 $12,283 -
Beaumont 0181178 No Single Fmly 2 $7,898 -
Beaumont 0037562 No Single Fmly 2 $49,987 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 34
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Beaumont 0157056 No Single Fmly 4 $49,085 VU
Beaumont 0247942 Yes Single Fmly 2 $8,217 -
Beaumont 0239937 No Other-Nonres 2 $7,310 -
Beaumont 0036557 No Single Fmly 2 $5,332 -
Beaumont 0044946 No Other-Nonres 2 $28,596 -
Beaumont 0043814 No Single Fmly 3 $5,461 -
Beaumont 0067916 No Single Fmly 5 $51,199 -
Beaumont 0067952 No Single Fmly 2 $17,093 -
Beaumont 0013120 No Single Fmly 2 $6,402 -
Beaumont 0070494 No Other-Nonres 6 $60,752 VNU
Beaumont 0113806 No Single Fmly 3 $9,515 -
Beaumont 0003192 No Single Fmly 3 $56,695 -
Beaumont 0235028 No Single Fmly 2 $4,893 -
Beaumont 0045522 No Single Fmly 7 $64,851 VU
Beaumont 0070115 No Single Fmly 2 $28,288 -
Beaumont 0069904 No Other-Nonres 2 $63,383 -
Beaumont 0115894 No Single Fmly 3 $26,352 -
Beaumont 0043374 No Single Fmly 2 $3,173 -
Beaumont 0043197 No Other-Nonres 3 $16,137 -
Beaumont 0002673 No Other-Nonres 5 $24,201 PNU
Beaumont 0045889 No Single Fmly 3 $17,937 -
Beaumont 0047508 No Assmd Condo 2 $14,112 -
Beaumont 0044866 SDF Single Fmly 5 $65,046 V
Beaumont 0070303 No Single Fmly 6 $156,220 VU
Beaumont 0069941 No Single Fmly 4 $15,654 -
Beaumont 0048673 No Single Fmly 3 $46,442 -
Beaumont 0043698 No Single Fmly 4 $11,190 -
Beaumont 0013037 No Single Fmly 3 $12,556 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 35
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Beaumont 0044455 No Single Fmly 4 $100,040 -
Beaumont 0044919 No Single Fmly 2 $11,501 -
Beaumont 0125434 No Single Fmly 3 $24,944 -
Beaumont 0044382 No Single Fmly 3 $74,960 -
Beaumont 0067945 No Single Fmly 2 $7,393 -
Beaumont 0067980 No Single Fmly 2 $5,017 -
Beaumont 0043598 No Single Fmly 3 $101,464 VU
Beaumont 0237813 Yes Single Fmly 2 $10,543 -
Beaumont 0044997 No Single Fmly 3 $35,678 -
Beaumont 0173890 No Single Fmly 3 $11,880 -
Beaumont 0120003 No Single Fmly 2 $28,542 -
Beaumont 0086078 No Single Fmly 3 $68,338 -
Beaumont 0003353 No Single Fmly 3 $10,920 -
Beaumont 0120038 Yes Single Fmly 4 $40,735 -
Beaumont 0121912 No Single Fmly 2 $37,151 -
Beaumont 0162445 No Single Fmly 2 $14,806 -
Beaumont 0122004 Yes Single Fmly 2 $16,815 -
Beaumont 0026335 No Other-Nonres 3 $21,253 -
Beaumont 0088878 Yes Single Fmly 2 $10,648 -
Beaumont 0067970 No Single Fmly 2 $9,699 -
Beaumont 0120307 No Single Fmly 2 $20,326 -
Beaumont 0044573 No Single Fmly 2 $5,231 -
Beaumont 0237895 No Single Fmly 2 $13,111 -
Beaumont 0003413 No Single Fmly 4 $49,101 VU
Beaumont 0008406 No Single Fmly 7 $50,400 -
Beaumont 0067934 No Single Fmly 2 $7,265 -
Beaumont 0002559 Yes Single Fmly 3 $31,088 -
Beaumont 0121435 No Single Fmly 2 $10,639 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 36
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Beaumont 0084605 No Single Fmly 2 $40,252 -
Beaumont 0067947 No Single Fmly 3 $4,760 -
Beaumont 0084817 No Single Fmly 2 $12,875 -
Beaumont 0121914 No Single Fmly 2 $92,394 -
Beaumont 0044439 No Single Fmly 5 $101,539 VU
Beaumont 0067932 No Single Fmly 2 $13,353 -
Beaumont 0043922 SDF Other-Nonres 6 $247,669 VN
Beaumont 0186070 No Other-Nonres 2 $95,623 -
Beaumont 0003912 No Other-Nonres 8 $528,406 VNU
Beaumont 0122196 No Other-Nonres 5 $527,383 VNU
Beaumont 0115972 No Other-Nonres 6 $405,225 VNU
Beaumont 0002782 No Other-Nonres 3 $5,790 -
Beaumont 0113801 Yes Other-Nonres 3 $365,974 -
Beaumont 0043228 No Single Fmly 7 $100,269 VU
Beaumont 0046414 No Single Fmly 2 $5,809 -
Beaumont 0025461 No Single Fmly 6 $81,486 -
Beaumont 0042478 No Single Fmly 2 $10,791 -
Beaumont 0025410 No Single Fmly 3 $14,121 -
Beaumont 0004259 No Other-Nonres 3 $158,835 -
Beaumont 0005654 No Single Fmly 4 $32,680 -
Beaumont 0025298 No Other-Nonres 6 $37,457 -
Beaumont 0004293 No Single Fmly 3 $36,052 -
Beaumont 0046461 No Single Fmly 5 $92,986 MVU
Beaumont 0002744 No Single Fmly 4 $22,586 -
Beaumont 0014106 No Assmd Condo 11 $100,300 MVU
Beaumont 0048689 No Other-Nonres 2 $18,649 -
Beaumont 0067907 No Single Fmly 2 $14,745 -
Beaumont 0121005 No Single Fmly 3 $55,544 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 37
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Beaumont 0067909 No Single Fmly 2 $12,263 -
Beaumont 0067946 No Single Fmly 3 $37,077 -
Beaumont 0113793 No Single Fmly 3 $103,254 MVU
Beaumont 0157055 No Single Fmly 4 $45,132 -
Beaumont 0073385 No Single Fmly 2 $22,968 -
Beaumont 0116242 No Single Fmly 4 $32,899 -
Beaumont 0004779 No Single Fmly 6 $202,733 -
Beaumont 0121461 No Single Fmly 4 $37,076 -
Beaumont 0173760 No Single Fmly 3 $10,714 -
Beaumont 0080411 No Single Fmly 3 $4,728 -
Beaumont 0160048 No Single Fmly 2 $4,277 -
Beaumont 0005575 No Single Fmly 12 $66,171 -
Beaumont 0005574 No Single Fmly 11 $56,840 MVU
Beaumont 0005557 No Single Fmly 10 $61,424 -
Beaumont 0001250 No Single Fmly 13 $100,603 -
Beaumont 0007187 No Other Resid 16 $276,817 MVU
Beaumont 0007186 No Other Resid 12 $556,517 MVU
Beaumont 0007185 No Other Resid 12 $273,182 MVU
Beaumont 0069905 No Single Fmly 2 $10,082 -
Beaumont 0045245 No Single Fmly 2 $6,094 -
Beaumont 0184310 No Other-Nonres 2 $511,817 -
Beaumont 0088109 No Other-Nonres 2 $13,306 -
Beaumont 0122245 No Other-Nonres 2 $15,502 -
Beaumont 0017628 Yes Other-Nonres 7 $157,483 -
Beaumont 0001884 Yes Single Fmly 4 $44,018 -
Beaumont 0025380 No Single Fmly 2 $2,724 -
Beaumont 0120310 Yes Single Fmly 2 $55,601 -
Beaumont 0003781 No Single Fmly 6 $110,785 MVU
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 38
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Beaumont 0114644 No Single Fmly 3 $25,180 -
Beaumont 0067935 Yes Single Fmly 3 $29,184 -
Beaumont 0067957 No Single Fmly 2 $7,176 -
Beaumont 0043903 No Single Fmly 2 $12,548 -
Beaumont 0080717 Yes Single Fmly 3 $87,052 -
Beaumont 0122216 Yes Single Fmly 2 $41,954 -
Beaumont 0044574 No Single Fmly 5 $53,646 MVU
Beaumont 0151750 No Single Fmly 2 $34,330 -
Beaumont 0168670 No Single Fmly 2 $29,471 -
Beaumont 0167875 No Single Fmly 2 $20,334 -
Beaumont 0120321 No Single Fmly 2 $30,669 -
Beaumont 0120376 No Single Fmly 2 $12,790 -
Beaumont 0120298 No Single Fmly 2 $10,098 -
Beaumont 0173860 No Single Fmly 2 $46,961 -
Beaumont 0115537 No Single Fmly 3 $46,623 -
Beaumont 0116239 Yes Single Fmly 3 $43,080 -
Beaumont 0067914 No Single Fmly 4 $97,317 MVU
Beaumont 0120031 Yes Single Fmly 2 $34,800 -
Beaumont 0121437 No Single Fmly 2 $79,788 -
Beaumont 0067961 Yes Single Fmly 2 $2,801 -
Beaumont 0120309 No Single Fmly 2 $29,623 -
Beaumont 0122579 No Other-Nonres 2 $64,621 -
Beaumont 0121009 No Single Fmly 2 $47,570 -
Beaumont 0067902 No Other-Nonres 2 $7,040 -
Beaumont 0043261 No Other-Nonres 2 $4,387 -
Beaumont 0025267 Yes Single Fmly 5 $52,992 -
Beaumont 0004755 No Other-Nonres 9 $32,967 -
Beaumont 0004100 Yes Other-Nonres 25 $945,255 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 39
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Beaumont 0122596 Yes Other-Nonres 3 $285,356 -
Beaumont 0070422 No Single Fmly 3 $26,138 -
Beaumont 0121465 No Single Fmly 3 $26,395 -
Beaumont 0121294 No Single Fmly 2 $46,399 -
Beaumont 0067965 No Single Fmly 2 $12,776 -
Beaumont 0067953 No Single Fmly 3 $101,925 -
Beaumont 0003442 Yes Single Fmly 4 $269,055 MV
Beaumont 0003991 No Single Fmly 4 $168,689 MVU
Beaumont 0005799 No Single Fmly 5 $296,966 MVU
Beaumont 0002563 No Single Fmly 4 $83,419 MVU
Beaumont 0013090 No Single Fmly 4 $6,583 -
Beaumont 0026742 No Single Fmly 2 $3,119 -
Beaumont 0124952 No Single Fmly 2 $31,328 -
Beaumont 0047488 Yes Single Fmly 3 $19,140 -
Beaumont 0003021 No Single Fmly 7 $164,791 MVU
Beaumont 0046268 No Single Fmly 2 $14,195 -
Beaumont 0067973 No Single Fmly 4 $28,698 -
Beaumont 0043305 No Single Fmly 4 $126,787 MVU
Beaumont 0067974 No Single Fmly 4 $29,586 -
Beaumont 0067975 No Single Fmly 3 $9,303 -
Beaumont 0043077 No Single Fmly 2 $10,092 -
Beaumont 0043164 No Single Fmly 2 $6,369 -
Beaumont 0067976 No Single Fmly 2 $30,867 -
Beaumont 0067943 Yes Single Fmly 3 $27,170 -
Beaumont 0044356 No Single Fmly 3 $21,774 -
Beaumont 0044589 No Single Fmly 2 $9,961 -
Beaumont 0044737 No Single Fmly 5 $67,122 MVU
Beaumont 0043997 No Single Fmly 4 $77,451 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 40
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Beaumont 0043171 No Single Fmly 4 $58,040 -
Beaumont 0067977 No Single Fmly 4 $77,196 MVU
Beaumont 0045181 No Single Fmly 3 $17,988 -
Beaumont 0073390 No Single Fmly 4 $43,273 -
Beaumont 0073391 No Single Fmly 4 $72,526 MVU
Beaumont 0046314 No Single Fmly 5 $70,852 MVU
Beaumont 0121014 No Single Fmly 3 $56,654 -
Beaumont 0080904 No Single Fmly 3 $47,722 -
Beaumont 0067944 No Single Fmly 5 $95,029 MVU
Beaumont 0121073 Yes Single Fmly 3 $50,164 -
Beaumont 0043038 Yes Single Fmly 6 $93,780 MV
Beaumont 0044931 No Single Fmly 7 $94,813 MVU
Beaumont 0036835 Yes Single Fmly 4 $31,974 -
Beaumont 0048688 No Single Fmly 2 $14,130 -
Beaumont 0025756 No Single Fmly 8 $126,000 MVU
Beaumont 0121067 Yes Single Fmly 3 $34,658 -
Beaumont 0113791 No Single Fmly 3 $55,762 -
Beaumont 0174600 Yes Other Resid 5 $71,252 -
Beaumont 0174601 Yes Other Resid 5 $63,814 -
Beaumont 0067982 Yes Other Resid 5 $63,541 -
Beaumont 0126221 Yes Other-Nonres 2 $46,207 -
Beaumont 0121631 Yes Other-Nonres 3 $227,994 -
Beaumont 0166425 Yes Single Fmly 2 $17,447 -
Beaumont 0039157 No Single Fmly 5 $27,840 -
Beaumont 0067922 Yes Single Fmly 3 $34,866 -
Beaumont 0067954 Yes Single Fmly 3 $162,635 -
Beaumont 0067955 Yes Single Fmly 3 $80,982 -
Beaumont 0067918 No Single Fmly 2 $65,187 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 41
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Beaumont 0067948 No Assmd Condo 2 $14,446 -
Beaumont 0035313 No Single Fmly 2 $4,458 -
Beaumont 0091338 Yes Single Fmly 3 $28,379 -
Beaumont 0025381 No Single Fmly 4 $59,806 MVU
Beaumont 0013023 No 2-4 Family 4 $36,653 -
Beaumont 0002381 No Single Fmly 5 $117,743 MVU
Beaumont 0043237 Yes Single Fmly 2 $3,417 -
Beaumont 0025449 No Single Fmly 4 $42,639 -
Beaumont 0025340 No Single Fmly 4 $36,690 -
Beaumont 0168614 No Single Fmly 2 $29,785 -
Beaumont 0043390 No Single Fmly 4 $47,932 MVU
Beaumont 0041200 No Single Fmly 3 $31,644 -
Beaumont 0046367 No Single Fmly 2 $23,780 -
Beaumont 0067972 No Single Fmly 2 $11,792 -
Beaumont 0013095 No Single Fmly 3 $18,287 -
Beaumont 0003331 No Single Fmly 5 $101,558 MVU
Beaumont 0120347 No Single Fmly 2 $29,541 -
Beaumont 0002997 No Single Fmly 3 $33,492 -
Beaumont 0067942 No Single Fmly 3 $11,518 -
Beaumont 0013214 No Single Fmly 2 $16,988 -
Beaumont 0013040 No Single Fmly 3 $4,939 -
Beaumont 0044352 No Single Fmly 4 $21,222 -
Beaumont 0046170 Yes Single Fmly 3 $46,474 -
Beaumont 0067912 No Single Fmly 6 $53,576 MVU
Beaumont 0154186 No Single Fmly 2 $21,129 -
Beaumont 0043677 Yes Single Fmly 2 $11,346 -
Beaumont 0045631 No Single Fmly 3 $5,338 -
Beaumont 0067921 No Single Fmly 2 $9,667 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 42
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Beaumont 0001932 No Single Fmly 4 $38,988 -
Beaumont 0113236 No Other-Nonres 3 $88,993 -
Beaumont 0002610 Yes Other-Nonres 4 $107,347 -
Beaumont 0113250 Yes Other Resid 3 $81,049 -
Beaumont 0002611 No Other-Nonres 3 $147,906 -
Beaumont 0004227 No Other-Nonres 8 $1,566,257 -
Beaumont 0067903 No Single Fmly 2 $6,178 -
Beaumont 0067983 No Single Fmly 2 $12,677 -
Beaumont 0067984 No Single Fmly 4 $21,888 -
Beaumont 0122404 No Single Fmly 2 $47,406 -
Beaumont 0038812 Yes Single Fmly 4 $17,114 -
Beaumont 0067966 No Single Fmly 4 $17,912 -
Beaumont 0013232 No Single Fmly 3 $22,847 -
Beaumont 0046057 No 2-4 Family 2 $7,296 -
Beaumont 0125740 No Single Fmly 2 $35,778 -
Beaumont 0067985 No Single Fmly 4 $65,285 MVU
Beaumont 0121368 Yes Single Fmly 2 $31,741 -
Beaumont 0120353 Yes Single Fmly 2 $72,755 -
Beaumont 0122067 Yes Single Fmly 3 $115,732 -
Beaumont 0002719 Yes Single Fmly 6 $222,093 MV
Beaumont 0120306 Yes Single Fmly 3 $87,160 -
Beaumont 0121454 Yes Single Fmly 2 $67,456 -
Beaumont 0125275 Yes Single Fmly 2 $50,214 -
Beaumont 0125274 No Single Fmly 2 $50,369 -
Beaumont 0122457 No Single Fmly 6 $136,673 MVU
Beaumont 0067926 No Single Fmly 6 $91,772 MVU
Beaumont 0121264 No Single Fmly 3 $53,584 -
Beaumont 0067950 No Single Fmly 2 $9,097 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 43
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Beaumont 0119972 No Single Fmly 3 $46,345 -
Beaumont 0043050 No Single Fmly 5 $90,867 MVU
Beaumont 0053309 No Single Fmly 4 $66,084 MVU
Beaumont 0067986 No Single Fmly 3 $46,710 -
Beaumont 0045446 Yes Single Fmly 4 $46,066 -
Beaumont 0002558 No Other-Nonres 5 $60,783 -
Beaumont 0122200 Yes Other-Nonres 2 $194,825 -
Beaumont 0121255 No Single Fmly 2 $60,386 -
Beaumont 0002670 No Single Fmly 3 $29,910 -
Beaumont 0067905 Yes Single Fmly 2 $35,991 -
Beaumont 0026687 No Single Fmly 3 $38,061 -
Beaumont 0037275 Yes Single Fmly 5 $226,525 MV
Beaumont 0067936 No Other-Nonres 3 $42,446 -
Beaumont 0002350 No Other-Nonres 3 $65,496 -
Beaumont 0013038 No Single Fmly 6 $48,263 -
Beaumont 0080899 No Single Fmly 2 $6,573 -
Beaumont 0067908 No Single Fmly 2 $14,111 -
Beaumont 0122479 No Single Fmly 2 $8,411 -
Beaumont 0017248 Yes Single Fmly 4 $119,606 -
Beaumont 0048680 No Single Fmly 2 $2,483 -
Beaumont 0044024 No Assmd Condo 3 $188,218 -
Beaumont 0043701 No Single Fmly 5 $71,699 MVU
Beaumont 0007714 No Single Fmly 10 $191,607 MVU
Beaumont 0043626 No Single Fmly 3 $25,071 -
Beaumont 0048067 No Single Fmly 2 $25,197 -
Beaumont 0043229 No Single Fmly 2 $15,163 -
Beaumont 0044116 No Single Fmly 2 $17,480 -
Beaumont 0153951 Yes Single Fmly 2 $31,256 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 44
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Beaumont 0067930 No Single Fmly 2 $4,594 -
Beaumont 0069691 No Single Fmly 5 $33,516 MVU
Beaumont 0122368 No Single Fmly 3 $27,716 -
Beaumont 0158059 Yes Single Fmly 2 $53,145 -
Beaumont 0043477 No Other Resid 3 $39,591 -
Beaumont 0067951 Yes Single Fmly 3 $36,681 -
Beaumont 0084043 No Other-Nonres 5 $44,749 -
Beaumont 0002564 Yes Other Resid 6 $67,028 MV
Beaumont 0017444 No Single Fmly 4 $75,195 -
Beaumont 0067958 No Single Fmly 3 $51,093 -
Beaumont 0042996 No Single Fmly 4 $79,633 -
Beaumont 0025505 Yes Single Fmly 2 $21,212 -
Beaumont 0067923 Yes Single Fmly 3 $61,622 -
Beaumont 0048683 No Single Fmly 2 $14,160 -
Beaumont 0017443 No Single Fmly 4 $48,259 -
Beaumont 0043642 No Single Fmly 6 $150,001 MVU
Beaumont 0116303 No Single Fmly 2 $2,180 -
Beaumont 0120017 No Single Fmly 2 $25,557 -
Beaumont 0044677 No Single Fmly 2 $30,927 -
Beaumont 0044377 No Single Fmly 3 $38,336 -
Beaumont 0067938 No Single Fmly 5 $151,489 MVU
Beaumont 0044563 No Single Fmly 3 $63,948 -
Beaumont 0121192 No Single Fmly 3 $47,322 -
Beaumont 0125281 No Single Fmly 2 $26,813 -
Beaumont 0121008 No Single Fmly 4 $164,751 MVU
Beaumont 0048024 No Single Fmly 2 $2,588 -
Beaumont 0001249 No Single Fmly 16 $150,821 -
Beaumont 0001350 No Single Fmly 13 $123,846 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 45
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Beaumont 0018763 No Single Fmly 2 $10,928 -
Beaumont 0067910 Yes Single Fmly 5 $54,614 -
Beaumont 0151749 No Single Fmly 3 $4,871 -
Beaumont 0120304 No Single Fmly 3 $72,328 -
Beaumont 0114423 No Single Fmly 2 $17,521 -
Beaumont 0125992 Yes Single Fmly 2 $31,592 -
Beaumont 0125273 Yes Single Fmly 2 $7,962 -
Beaumont 0072233 No Single Fmly 5 $57,943 MVU
Beaumont 0124682 No Single Fmly 4 $53,765 -
Beaumont 0126927 No Single Fmly 2 $15,831 -
Beaumont 0121953 Yes Single Fmly 2 $18,925 -
Beaumont 0067956 No Single Fmly 2 $18,742 -
Beaumont 0042987 No Single Fmly 3 $57,944 -
Beaumont 0119960 No Single Fmly 2 $3,483 -
Beaumont 0122244 Yes Single Fmly 2 $65,915 -
Beaumont 0121004 Yes Single Fmly 2 $180,070 -
Beaumont 0122032 No Single Fmly 3 $92,692 -
Beaumont 0115532 Yes Single Fmly 3 $246,558 -
Beaumont 0122242 Yes Single Fmly 2 $152,383 -
Beaumont 0067964 Yes Single Fmly 7 $47,265 MV
Beaumont 0148788 Yes Single Fmly 2 $3,933 -
Beaumont 0013146 No Single Fmly 3 $132,349 -
Beaumont 0054021 No Single Fmly 4 $174,452 -
Beaumont 0121193 Yes Single Fmly 3 $50,810 -
Beaumont 0067940 No Single Fmly 3 $52,300 -
Beaumont 0001915 No Single Fmly 6 $107,137 MVU
Beaumont 0121248 Yes Single Fmly 2 $27,770 -
Beaumont 0002664 No Single Fmly 5 $61,704 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 46
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Beaumont 0123219 Yes Single Fmly 3 $168,724 -
Beaumont 0044509 No Single Fmly 4 $78,377 -
Beaumont 0073387 No Single Fmly 3 $12,246 -
Beaumont 0121913 No Single Fmly 3 $31,783 -
Beaumont 0067963 Yes Single Fmly 7 $125,037 MV
Beaumont 0182144 No Single Fmly 2 $8,494 -
Beaumont 0181222 No Single Fmly 2 $47,385 -
Beaumont 0116244 No Single Fmly 4 $62,794 -
Beaumont 0160118 No Single Fmly 2 $5,804 -
Beaumont 0120037 No Single Fmly 2 $13,621 -
Beaumont 0122047 No Single Fmly 2 $25,367 -
Beaumont 0121406 No Single Fmly 2 $47,048 -
Beaumont 0121011 Yes Single Fmly 3 $7,303 -
Beaumont 0073388 No Single Fmly 6 $198,169 MVU
Beaumont 0043469 No Single Fmly 5 $43,863 -
Beaumont 0036436 No Single Fmly 3 $16,224 -
Beaumont 0025316 No Single Fmly 4 $56,616 -
Beaumont 0067941 No Single Fmly 3 $38,538 -
Beaumont 0121275 Yes Single Fmly 2 $21,064 -
Beaumont 0121372 No Single Fmly 3 $44,027 -
Beaumont 0122391 No Single Fmly 3 $77,942 -
Beaumont 0043174 No Single Fmly 5 $86,509 MVU
Beaumont 0025455 No Single Fmly 7 $208,942 MVU
Beaumont 0041309 Yes Single Fmly 4 $25,759 -
Beaumont 0160195 No Single Fmly 2 $39,507 -
Beaumont 0069886 No Single Fmly 3 $27,554 -
Beaumont 0157054 No Single Fmly 2 $67,667 -
Beaumont 0070674 No Single Fmly 2 $84,068 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 47
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Beaumont 0112944 Yes Single Fmly 2 $136,809 -
Beaumont 0113800 Yes Single Fmly 2 $71,415 -
Beaumont 0071441 Yes Single Fmly 2 $100,318 -
Beaumont 0070124 Yes Single Fmly 2 $86,669 -
Beaumont 0073393 No Single Fmly 2 $45,636 -
Beaumont 0070006 SDF Single Fmly 8 $533,292 V
Beaumont 0073386 SDF Single Fmly 6 $518,909 V
Beaumont 0013074 Yes Single Fmly 2 $121,983 -
Beaumont 0013261 Yes Single Fmly 5 $98,251 -
Beaumont 0115904 No Single Fmly 2 $41,501 -
Beaumont 0071593 Yes Assmd Condo 2 $66,356 -
Beaumont 0073394 No Single Fmly 2 $117,062 -
Groves 0158057 Yes Single Fmly 2 $6,580 -
Groves 0212638 No Single Fmly 2 $8,559 -
Groves 0166491 No Single Fmly 2 $8,371 -
Groves 0165547 No Single Fmly 2 $35,486 -
Groves 0240001 Yes Single Fmly 3 $67,437 -
Groves 0166488 Yes Single Fmly 2 $41,798 -
Groves 0178844 No Single Fmly 2 $24,219 -
Groves 0179760 No Single Fmly 2 $32,253 -
Groves 0073544 No Single Fmly 5 $52,562 -
Groves 0181067 No Single Fmly 2 $17,571 -
Groves 0240289 No Single Fmly 2 $13,882 -
Groves 0160604 No Single Fmly 2 $15,594 -
Groves 0153959 No Single Fmly 2 $28,097 -
Groves 0148796 No Single Fmly 2 $6,149 -
Groves 0239948 No Single Fmly 2 $13,847 -
Groves 0239950 No Single Fmly 2 $49,883 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 48
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Groves 0167200 No Single Fmly 3 $66,186 -
Groves 0179719 No Single Fmly 2 $2,726 -
Groves 0173542 Yes Single Fmly 2 $54,810 -
Groves 0148797 No Single Fmly 2 $25,011 -
Groves 0164893 No Single Fmly 2 $30,830 -
Groves 0025570 No Single Fmly 2 $5,916 -
Groves 0165766 Yes Single Fmly 3 $65,093 -
Groves 0018654 No Single Fmly 2 $23,364 -
Groves 0026439 No Single Fmly 2 $16,767 -
Groves 0122123 No Single Fmly 4 $61,325 -
Groves 0239758 No Single Fmly 2 $23,586 -
Groves 0165373 No Single Fmly 3 $50,691 -
Groves 0035811 No Other Resid 2 $24,221 -
Groves 0127798 Yes Single Fmly 2 $10,617 -
Groves 0166755 No Other-Nonres 2 $36,409 -
Groves 0165938 No Other-Nonres 2 $136,473 -
Groves 0048991 No Single Fmly 2 $4,069 -
Groves 0046237 No Other-Nonres 3 $14,951 -
Nederland 0080461 SDF Single Fmly 4 $135,837 V
Nederland 0151764 Yes Single Fmly 2 $60,411 -
Nederland 0177321 Yes Single Fmly 2 $3,018 -
Nederland 0167359 Yes Single Fmly 2 $9,853 -
Nederland 0184788 No Single Fmly 2 $42,169 -
Nederland 0080462 No Single Fmly 3 $126,812 -
Nederland 0151762 Yes Single Fmly 2 $28,833 -
Nederland 0108336 SDF Single Fmly 3 $166,368 V
Nederland 0148769 No Single Fmly 2 $60,463 -
Nederland 0120095 SDF Other-Nonres 4 $174,127 VN
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 49
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Nederland 0163517 No Single Fmly 2 $64,748 -
Nederland 0157073 Yes Single Fmly 2 $60,693 -
Nederland 0120317 No Single Fmly 2 $4,951 -
Nederland 0108428 Yes Single Fmly 3 $24,251 -
Nederland 0108431 No Single Fmly 3 $62,615 -
Nederland 0152853 No Single Fmly 2 $57,422 -
Nederland 0108351 No Single Fmly 2 $16,475 -
Nederland 0153448 No Single Fmly 2 $78,644 -
Nederland 0108429 No Single Fmly 3 $10,015 -
Nederland 0157076 No Single Fmly 2 $102,000 -
Nederland 0157074 No Single Fmly 2 $33,370 -
Nederland 0108352 No Single Fmly 3 $56,515 -
Nederland 0108547 Yes Other-Nonres 5 $32,927 -
Nederland 0167853 No Other-Nonres 4 $43,456 -
Nederland 0184364 No Other-Nonres 2 $221,712 -
Nederland 0112589 No Single Fmly 3 $30,912 -
Nederland 0073827 No Single Fmly 7 $102,499 VU
Nederland 0199335 Yes Single Fmly 2 $33,740 -
Nederland 0158682 No Single Fmly 2 $61,901 -
Nederland 0108243 No Single Fmly 2 $16,416 -
Nederland 0148779 Yes Single Fmly 2 $34,330 -
Nederland 0080463 Yes Single Fmly 3 $112,358 -
Nederland 0080464 No Single Fmly 4 $122,651 -
Nederland 0080465 Yes Single Fmly 3 $80,097 -
Nederland 0080466 SDF Single Fmly 5 $112,375 V
Nederland 0043005 No Single Fmly 2 $2,980 -
Nederland 0041191 No Single Fmly 11 $63,676 VU
Nederland 0025453 No Other-Nonres 3 $5,913 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 50
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Nederland 0148785 No Single Fmly 2 $67,781 -
Nederland 0108233 No Single Fmly 2 $13,664 -
Nederland 0144557 Yes Single Fmly 2 $51,731 -
Nederland 0148775 No Single Fmly 2 $61,064 -
Nederland 0154378 Yes Other-Nonres 2 $65,490 -
Nederland 0108229 Yes Single Fmly 2 $26,697 -
Nederland 0108235 No Single Fmly 2 $4,564 -
Nederland 0116427 Yes Single Fmly 6 $40,088 -
Nederland 0212439 No Other-Nonres 2 $20,627 -
Nederland 0181107 No Single Fmly 2 $54,439 -
Nederland 0153948 No Single Fmly 2 $9,861 -
Nederland 0181750 No Single Fmly 3 $42,981 -
Nederland 0080467 No Single Fmly 4 $44,718 -
Nederland 0073581 Yes Single Fmly 4 $36,154 -
Nederland 0108514 Yes Single Fmly 3 $68,400 -
Nederland 0073582 No Single Fmly 3 $27,735 -
Nederland 0108028 No Single Fmly 2 $53,577 -
Nederland 0152831 Yes Single Fmly 2 $77,440 -
Nederland 0109443 No Single Fmly 2 $17,940 -
Nederland 0153953 Yes Single Fmly 2 $34,696 -
Nederland 0108318 Yes Single Fmly 3 $91,043 -
Nederland 0158063 No Single Fmly 2 $95,355 -
Nederland 0182998 No Single Fmly 2 $95,097 -
Nederland 0108116 Yes Single Fmly 3 $58,059 -
Nederland 0157668 No Single Fmly 2 $68,321 -
Nederland 0108280 No Single Fmly 2 $38,020 -
Nederland 0108316 No Single Fmly 3 $89,909 -
Nederland 0148798 Yes Single Fmly 2 $54,943 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 51
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Nederland 0151765 Yes Single Fmly 2 $50,069 -
Nederland 0144556 Yes Single Fmly 2 $20,126 -
Nederland 0158062 No Single Fmly 2 $19,185 -
Nederland 0157848 No Single Fmly 2 $79,411 -
Nederland 0108433 Yes Single Fmly 4 $165,672 -
Nederland 0160073 No Single Fmly 2 $67,371 -
Nederland 0148791 No Single Fmly 2 $36,405 -
Nederland 0108237 No Single Fmly 2 $21,449 -
Nederland 0160071 Yes Single Fmly 2 $133,921 -
Port Arthur 0121692 No Single Fmly 2 $2,237 -
Port Arthur 0183693 Yes Single Fmly 2 $69,074 -
Port Arthur 0046046 No Single Fmly 4 $72,094 -
Port Arthur 0043993 No Single Fmly 2 $30,300 -
Port Arthur 0018413 No Single Fmly 2 $4,589 -
Port Arthur 0181881 Yes Single Fmly 2 $125,502 -
Port Arthur 0191554 Yes Single Fmly 3 $141,128 -
Port Arthur 0182778 No Single Fmly 2 $31,017 -
Port Arthur 0158061 SDF Single Fmly 5 $79,472 V
Port Arthur 0026126 Yes Single Fmly 5 $89,436 -
Port Arthur 0148789 SDF Single Fmly 5 $105,153 V
Port Arthur 0025772 SDF Single Fmly 7 $130,266 V
Port Arthur 0043531 No Single Fmly 5 $72,270 VU
Port Arthur 0017271 No Single Fmly 2 $14,959 -
Port Arthur 0148776 No Single Fmly 2 $100,676 -
Port Arthur 0025217 No Single Fmly 3 $29,308 -
Port Arthur 0239760 No Single Fmly 2 $49,578 -
Port Arthur 0025668 Yes Single Fmly 5 $35,885 -
Port Arthur 0016038 Yes Single Fmly 4 $20,229 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 52
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Port Arthur 0044089 No Single Fmly 3 $37,206 -
Port Arthur 0183097 Yes Single Fmly 2 $61,940 -
Port Arthur 0181246 No Other-Nonres 2 $82,900 -
Port Arthur 0121182 Yes Single Fmly 3 $110,547 -
Port Arthur 0045140 No Single Fmly 3 $11,081 -
Port Arthur 0157060 No Single Fmly 3 $49,839 -
Port Arthur 0040436 No Single Fmly 2 $11,254 -
Port Arthur 0240282 Yes Single Fmly 2 $133,359 -
Port Arthur 0181273 Yes Single Fmly 2 $78,582 -
Port Arthur 0043740 No Single Fmly 2 $7,085 -
Port Arthur 0015184 Yes Single Fmly 5 $91,835 -
Port Arthur 0239940 No Single Fmly 2 $13,266 -
Port Arthur 0067850 No Single Fmly 4 $14,094 -
Port Arthur 0162789 No Other Resid 2 $32,559 -
Port Arthur 0163773 No Assmd Condo 2 $106,620 -
Port Arthur 0163515 No Other Resid 2 $26,741 -
Port Arthur 0164169 No Other Resid 2 $45,394 -
Port Arthur 0128020 No Single Fmly 3 $21,417 -
Port Arthur 0018764 No Single Fmly 2 $17,876 -
Port Arthur 0033274 No Single Fmly 2 $11,377 -
Port Arthur 0039658 No Single Fmly 2 $11,629 -
Port Arthur 0039659 No Assmd Condo 2 $39,934 -
Port Arthur 0043279 No Single Fmly 2 $16,616 -
Port Arthur 0016071 No Single Fmly 2 $39,845 -
Port Arthur 0036493 No Single Fmly 2 $17,130 -
Port Arthur 0026537 No Single Fmly 2 $45,033 -
Port Arthur 0067833 No Single Fmly 2 $18,477 -
Port Arthur 0017502 No Single Fmly 2 $4,405 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 53
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Port Arthur 0017477 No Single Fmly 2 $14,964 -
Port Arthur 0026213 Yes Single Fmly 3 $101,381 -
Port Arthur 0240281 No Single Fmly 2 $7,869 -
Port Arthur 0244472 Yes Single Fmly 2 $69,408 -
Port Arthur 0179771 No Single Fmly 2 $44,488 -
Port Arthur 0018696 No Single Fmly 2 $14,235 -
Port Arthur 0045668 No Other-Nonres 2 $8,971 -
Port Arthur 0025188 No Other-Nonres 5 $73,368 -
Port Arthur 0044418 No Other-Nonres 8 $61,774 VNU
Port Arthur 0026111 No Other-Nonres 2 $4,369 -
Port Arthur 0239941 Yes Other-Nonres 2 $149,791 -
Port Arthur 0186628 Yes Single Fmly 2 $82,978 -
Port Arthur 0183915 No Other-Nonres 2 $397,735 -
Port Arthur 0179222 No Single Fmly 2 $116,900 -
Port Arthur 0190401 SDF Other-Nonres 2 $652,024 PN
Port Arthur 0179200 No Assmd Condo 2 $532,276 -
Port Arthur 0179440 No Single Fmly 2 $406,159 VU
Port Arthur 0181124 No Single Fmly 2 $117,500 -
Port Arthur 0049019 No Other-Nonres 3 $7,749 -
Port Arthur 0045629 No Other-Nonres 2 $10,315 -
Port Arthur 0025220 SDF Other-Nonres 10 $535,976 PN
Port Arthur 0025577 No Other-Nonres 2 $18,633 -
Port Arthur 0186523 No Single Fmly 2 $8,367 -
Port Arthur 0157061 No Single Fmly 2 $48,131 -
Port Arthur 0179663 Yes Single Fmly 2 $153,617 -
Port Arthur 0180138 Yes Single Fmly 2 $199,051 -
Port Arthur 0181767 Yes Single Fmly 2 $180,870 -
Port Arthur 0181851 No Single Fmly 2 $189,100 VU
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 54
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Port Arthur 0181125 No Single Fmly 2 $112,788 VU
Port Arthur 0026049 No Single Fmly 2 $19,873 -
Port Arthur 0017672 No Single Fmly 2 $11,569 -
Port Arthur 0158058 No Single Fmly 2 $19,005 -
Port Arthur 0122910 No Single Fmly 3 $41,241 -
Port Arthur 0179078 No Other-Nonres 2 $54,258 -
Port Arthur 0025172 No Single Fmly 2 $25,839 -
Port Arthur 0179781 Yes Single Fmly 2 $33,484 -
Port Arthur 0157059 Yes Single Fmly 2 $38,540 -
Port Arthur 0017297 No Single Fmly 2 $8,632 -
Port Arthur 0040469 No Single Fmly 2 $18,438 -
Port Arthur 0180881 No Single Fmly 2 $75,873 -
Port Arthur 0181228 Yes Single Fmly 2 $79,229 -
Port Arthur 0181314 No Single Fmly 2 $8,238 -
Port Arthur 0043554 No Single Fmly 2 $3,365 -
Port Arthur 0183963 Yes Single Fmly 2 $12,401 -
Port Arthur 0182783 No Single Fmly 2 $125,696 -
Port Arthur 0178112 Yes Single Fmly 2 $43,007 -
Port Arthur 0180880 No Single Fmly 2 $65,197 -
Port Arthur 0185394 No Single Fmly 2 $145,387 -
Port Arthur 0184075 Yes Single Fmly 2 $88,838 -
Port Arthur 0179666 No Single Fmly 2 $95,291 -
Port Arthur 0185462 Yes Single Fmly 2 $50,458 -
Port Arthur 0043706 No Single Fmly 2 $12,992 -
Port Arthur 0212548 Yes Single Fmly 2 $11,334 -
Port Arthur 0179778 No Single Fmly 2 $65,262 -
Port Arthur 0184986 SDF Single Fmly 2 $187,249 V
Port Arthur 0183694 Yes Single Fmly 2 $182,101 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 55
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Port Arthur 0179748 Yes Single Fmly 2 $28,369 -
Port Arthur 0026839 No Single Fmly 4 $102,819 -
Port Arthur 0180080 Yes Single Fmly 2 $46,149 -
Port Arthur 0184110 No Single Fmly 2 $105,200 -
Port Arthur 0191141 No Single Fmly 2 $37,588 -
Port Arthur 0026429 No Single Fmly 3 $5,824 -
Port Arthur 0043287 No Other-Nonres 2 $48,900 -
Port Arthur 0178175 Yes Single Fmly 2 $136,457 -
Port Arthur 0182111 Yes Single Fmly 2 $404,954 -
Port Arthur 0181445 Yes Single Fmly 2 $263,089 -
Port Arthur 0182136 Yes Assmd Condo 2 $586,755 -
Port Arthur 0183157 SDF Single Fmly 2 $369,716 V
Port Arthur 0181955 No Single Fmly 2 $246,306 VU
Port Arthur 0178197 Yes Other-Nonres 2 $102,752 -
Port Arthur 0177177 Yes Single Fmly 2 $66,748 -
Port Arthur 0181355 Yes Single Fmly 2 $191,496 -
Port Arthur 0177163 Yes Single Fmly 2 $24,803 -
Port Arthur 0183308 Yes Single Fmly 2 $135,645 -
Port Arthur 0179216 Yes Single Fmly 2 $66,637 -
Port Arthur 0178190 Yes Single Fmly 2 $126,081 -
Port Arthur 0160104 No Single Fmly 2 $32,629 -
Port Arthur 0116245 No Single Fmly 2 $14,691 -
Port Arthur 0035930 No Single Fmly 5 $124,516 VU
Port Arthur 0026465 No Single Fmly 2 $4,231 -
Port Arthur 0158043 No Single Fmly 3 $16,135 -
Port Arthur 0182779 No Single Fmly 2 $43,978 -
Port Arthur 0239759 No Single Fmly 2 $24,722 -
Port Arthur 0160056 No Single Fmly 3 $9,199 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 56
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Port Arthur 0047348 No Single Fmly 6 $36,195 -
Port Arthur 0176706 No Single Fmly 2 $29,034 -
Port Arthur 0180151 Yes Single Fmly 2 $36,221 -
Port Arthur 0049655 No Single Fmly 13 $81,463 VU
Port Arthur 0042615 No Single Fmly 2 $6,241 -
Port Arthur 0026746 No Single Fmly 4 $14,707 -
Port Arthur 0181363 Yes Other-Nonres 2 $179,744 -
Port Arthur 0017582 No Other-Nonres 2 $14,296 -
Port Arthur 0148790 Yes Other-Nonres 2 $49,255 -
Port Arthur 0180882 No Single Fmly 2 $9,856 -
Port Arthur 0179009 No Single Fmly 2 $32,967 -
Port Arthur 0238882 Yes Single Fmly 2 $16,097 -
Port Arthur 0180883 No Single Fmly 2 $4,530 -
Port Arthur 0153449 SDF Single Fmly 5 $45,145 V
Port Arthur 0026488 No Single Fmly 2 $9,676 -
Port Arthur 0157063 No Single Fmly 3 $12,409 -
Port Arthur 0026522 Yes Single Fmly 3 $13,412 -
Port Arthur 0035476 No Single Fmly 2 $9,544 -
Port Arthur 0017438 No Other-Nonres 4 $67,340 PNU
Port Arthur 0157058 No Single Fmly 2 $9,073 -
Port Arthur 0179717 Yes 2-4 Family 3 $30,450 -
Port Arthur 0178772 No Single Fmly 2 $9,591 -
Port Arthur 0158053 No Other-Nonres 3 $168,900 -
Port Arthur 0178771 No Single Fmly 2 $17,431 -
Port Arthur 0041485 No Single Fmly 3 $11,872 -
Port Arthur 0025562 No Single Fmly 2 $22,315 -
Port Arthur 0240279 No Single Fmly 2 $37,789 -
Port Arthur 0044571 No Single Fmly 3 $8,639 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 57
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Port Arthur 0184077 No Single Fmly 2 $51,943 -
Port Arthur 0180264 No Single Fmly 2 $20,698 -
Port Arthur 0178770 No Single Fmly 2 $41,723 -
Port Arthur 0018482 No Single Fmly 2 $11,038 -
Port Arthur 0180162 Yes Single Fmly 2 $29,457 -
Port Arthur 0173145 No Single Fmly 2 $13,006 -
Port Arthur 0039584 No Single Fmly 4 $40,633 -
Port Arthur 0018444 No Single Fmly 2 $31,545 PU
Port Arthur 0158052 No Single Fmly 2 $16,852 -
Port Arthur 0073356 No Single Fmly 3 $9,619 -
Port Arthur 0070053 No Other-Nonres 2 $10,989 -
Port Arthur 0244554 No Single Fmly 2 $54,045 -
Port Arthur 0043795 No Single Fmly 2 $18,377 -
Port Arthur 0178998 No Single Fmly 2 $153,400 -
Port Arthur 0178897 Yes Single Fmly 2 $53,477 -
Port Arthur 0191890 No Single Fmly 2 $163,200 PU
Port Arthur 0181708 SDF Single Fmly 2 $390,511 V
Port Arthur 0162606 No Single Fmly 2 $25,753 -
Port Arthur 0069866 No Single Fmly 2 $6,385 -
Port Arthur 0179773 No Single Fmly 3 $40,961 -
Port Arthur 0183034 No Single Fmly 2 $16,780 -
Port Arthur 0037866 No Single Fmly 3 $28,910 -
Port Arthur 0148787 No Single Fmly 2 $14,174 -
Port Arthur 0158050 Yes Single Fmly 2 $47,988 -
Port Arthur 0025154 No Single Fmly 2 $31,859 -
Port Arthur 0026151 No Single Fmly 2 $33,739 -
Port Arthur 0076301 Yes Single Fmly 4 $51,543 -
Port Arthur 0154084 Yes Single Fmly 2 $24,729 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 58
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Port Arthur 0048784 No Single Fmly 2 $9,268 -
Port Arthur 0154136 No Single Fmly 2 $26,086 -
Port Arthur 0067839 No Single Fmly 8 $195,360 VU
Port Arthur 0122980 No Single Fmly 3 $97,516 -
Port Arthur 0026266 No Single Fmly 2 $4,040 -
Port Arthur 0157064 Yes Single Fmly 3 $59,999 -
Port Arthur 0158060 No Other Resid 2 $120,398 -
Port Arthur 0044729 Yes Single Fmly 3 $10,656 -
Port Arthur 0067846 No Other-Nonres 3 $28,577 -
Port Arthur 0153955 No Single Fmly 3 $45,599 -
Port Arthur 0184624 No Single Fmly 2 $75,251 -
Port Arthur 0015989 No Single Fmly 2 $29,135 -
Port Arthur 0026168 No Single Fmly 2 $18,394 -
Port Arthur 0239721 Yes Single Fmly 2 $95,833 -
Port Arthur 0183696 No Single Fmly 2 $48,619 -
Port Arthur 0015126 No Single Fmly 3 $80,405 -
Port Arthur 0122981 Yes Single Fmly 4 $182,330 -
Port Arthur 0157066 No Single Fmly 2 $43,629 -
Port Arthur 0039204 No Single Fmly 3 $25,238 -
Port Arthur 0026588 No Single Fmly 2 $8,636 -
Port Arthur 0026179 No Single Fmly 2 $3,759 -
Port Arthur 0070125 No Single Fmly 2 $6,361 -
Port Arthur 0148801 No Single Fmly 2 $36,473 -
Port Arthur 0040259 Yes Single Fmly 3 $37,080 -
Port Arthur 0018748 Yes Single Fmly 2 $19,248 -
Port Arthur 0178165 No Single Fmly 2 $15,848 -
Port Arthur 0016075 No Single Fmly 2 $12,746 -
Port Arthur 0182278 No Single Fmly 2 $149,353 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 59
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Port Arthur 0179741 Yes Single Fmly 2 $226,309 -
Port Arthur 0148778 No Single Fmly 2 $21,488 -
Port Arthur 0039990 No Single Fmly 2 $3,259 -
Port Arthur 0160605 Yes Single Fmly 4 $32,861 -
Port Arthur 0121521 No Single Fmly 2 $8,142 -
Port Arthur 0179067 No Single Fmly 2 $7,213 -
Port Arthur 0015179 No Single Fmly 2 $4,209 -
Port Arthur 0017256 Yes Single Fmly 3 $35,981 -
Port Arthur 0179089 Yes Single Fmly 2 $89,077 -
Port Arthur 0017339 Yes Single Fmly 4 $119,309 -
Port Arthur 0183160 Yes Single Fmly 2 $116,406 -
Port Arthur 0016044 Yes Single Fmly 4 $225,909 -
Port Arthur 0026284 Yes Single Fmly 3 $69,861 -
Port Arthur 0026714 Yes Single Fmly 4 $170,018 -
Port Arthur 0183695 No Single Fmly 2 $200,265 -
Port Arthur 0181388 No Other-Nonres 2 $98,457 PNU
Port Arthur 0185445 Yes Single Fmly 2 $19,106 -
Port Arthur 0244159 Yes Single Fmly 2 $6,001 -
Port Arthur 0080912 No Single Fmly 2 $4,863 -
Port Arthur 0197230 No Single Fmly 3 $69,257 -
Port Arthur 0042551 No Single Fmly 2 $16,857 -
Port Arthur 0026487 No Single Fmly 2 $14,434 -
Port Arthur 0182784 No Single Fmly 2 $40,483 -
Port Arthur 0036863 No Single Fmly 5 $21,564 -
Port Arthur 0035778 Yes Single Fmly 4 $12,502 -
Port Arthur 0067845 No Single Fmly 2 $4,644 -
Port Arthur 0158047 Yes Single Fmly 2 $16,268 -
Port Arthur 0240109 Yes Single Fmly 2 $19,504 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 60
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Port Arthur 0240284 No Single Fmly 2 $40,465 -
Port Arthur 0160057 Yes Single Fmly 2 $25,881 -
Port Arthur 0157065 Yes Single Fmly 2 $57,037 -
Port Arthur 0046161 No Single Fmly 2 $14,792 -
Port Arthur 0239942 Yes Single Fmly 2 $31,798 -
Port Arthur 0240100 Yes Single Fmly 2 $88,370 -
Port Arthur 0240676 Yes Single Fmly 2 $128,955 -
Port Arthur 0239722 No Single Fmly 2 $68,560 -
Port Arthur 0240111 No Single Fmly 2 $11,371 -
Port Arthur 0025821 No Single Fmly 2 $5,625 -
Port Arthur 0018631 No Single Fmly 2 $29,506 -
Port Arthur 0177210 Yes Other-Nonres 2 $210,072 -
Port Arthur 0043780 No 2-4 Family 2 $2,573 -
Port Arthur 0025311 No Single Fmly 3 $16,117 -
Port Arthur 0015136 No Single Fmly 2 $11,454 -
Port Arthur 0033264 No Single Fmly 2 $12,349 -
Port Arthur 0178195 No Single Fmly 2 $82,305 -
Port Arthur 0023243 No Single Fmly 3 $8,001 -
Port Arthur 0068035 No Single Fmly 2 $27,235 -
Port Arthur 0048901 No Other-Nonres 2 $13,220 -
Port Arthur 0146219 No Single Fmly 2 $62,409 -
Port Arthur 0043272 No Single Fmly 2 $19,266 -
Port Arthur 0043036 No Single Fmly 3 $6,943 -
Port Arthur 0178901 No Other-Nonres 2 $399,300 -
Port Arthur 0183138 No Other-Nonres 2 $1,025,600 -
Port Arthur 0177058 No 2-4 Family 2 $64,000 -
Port Arthur 0177123 No Single Fmly 2 $23,300 -
Port Arthur 0182274 No Single Fmly 2 $92,630 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 61
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Port Arthur 0183132 No Single Fmly 2 $201,764 -
Port Arthur 0043391 No Single Fmly 3 $8,365 -
Port Arthur 0083549 No Single Fmly 3 $40,436 -
Port Arthur 0044523 No Single Fmly 2 $20,439 -
Port Arthur 0026216 No Single Fmly 2 $22,813 -
Port Arthur 0167671 No Single Fmly 2 $92,681 -
Port Arthur 0181923 No Single Fmly 2 $488,277 MVU
Port Arthur 0144555 No Single Fmly 2 $116,031 -
Port Arthur 0179375 Yes Single Fmly 2 $244,316 -
Port Arthur 0180142 No Single Fmly 2 $69,500 -
Port Arthur 0181807 No Single Fmly 2 $155,109 -
Port Arthur 0238125 Yes Single Fmly 2 $337,696 -
Port Arthur 0181364 Yes Single Fmly 2 $700,000 MV
Port Arthur 0025694 Yes Single Fmly 3 $16,411 -
Port Neches 0108117 No Single Fmly 2 $12,755 -
Port Neches 0160055 No Single Fmly 2 $13,716 -
Port Neches 0160049 Yes Single Fmly 2 $61,248 -
Port Neches 0240283 Yes Single Fmly 2 $61,201 -
Port Neches 0160054 No Single Fmly 2 $18,904 -
Port Neches 0163795 Yes Single Fmly 3 $57,456 -
Port Neches 0125284 No Single Fmly 3 $10,074 -
Port Neches 0038458 No Single Fmly 3 $5,284 -
Port Neches 0158044 No Single Fmly 2 $6,641 -
Port Neches 0239723 Yes Single Fmly 2 $89,706 -
Port Neches 0117149 No Single Fmly 3 $42,584 -
Port Neches 0121919 No Single Fmly 4 $13,328 -
Port Neches 0181744 No Single Fmly 2 $9,687 -
Port Neches 0127223 Yes Single Fmly 3 $43,309 -
Section 5: Flood
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 62
COMMUNITY
NAME PROPERTY INSURED BUILDING
TYPE LOSSES TOTAL PAID SRL
INDICATOR
Port Neches 0080414 No Other-Nonres 4 $278,651 VNU
Port Neches 0182782 No Single Fmly 2 $10,935 -
Port Neches 0147441 No Single Fmly 2 $8,681 -
Port Neches 0038382 Yes Single Fmly 2 $20,193 -
Port Neches 0181378 No Single Fmly 2 $65,742 -
Port Neches 0179531 Yes Single Fmly 2 $269,884 -
Port Neches 0076703 Yes Single Fmly 4 $58,048 -
Port Neches 0108425 No Single Fmly 6 $116,641 VU
Port Neches 0113302 No Single Fmly 2 $20,894 -
Port Neches 0157062 No Single Fmly 2 $43,361 -
Port Neches 0179765 No Single Fmly 2 $19,209 -
Port Neches 0180884 Yes Single Fmly 2 $25,024 -
Port Neches 0073897 No Single Fmly 3 $49,693 -
Port Neches 0080415 No Single Fmly 3 $59,179 -
Port Neches 0038168 No Single Fmly 2 $3,941 -
Port Neches 0045286 No Single Fmly 4 $16,746 -
SECTION 6: LIGHTNING
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
Hazard Description ........................................................................................................................................ 1
Location ......................................................................................................................................................... 1
Extent ............................................................................................................................................................ 1
Historical Occurrences .................................................................................................................................. 2
Significant Past Events .............................................................................................................................. 3
Probability of Future Events ......................................................................................................................... 4
Vulnerability and Impact ............................................................................................................................... 4
Assessment of Impacts ............................................................................................................................. 6
Hazard Description
Lightning is a discharge of electrical energy resulting from the buildup of positive and negative charges
within a thunderstorm, creating a “bolt” when the buildup of charges becomes strong enough. This flash
of light usually occurs within the clouds or between the clouds and the ground. A bolt of lightning can
reach temperatures approaching 50,000 degrees Fahrenheit. Lightning rapidly heats the sky as it flashes
but the surrounding air cools following the bolt. This rapid heating and cooling of the surrounding air
causes the thunder, which often accompanies lightning strikes. While most often affiliated with severe
thunderstorms, lightning often strikes outside of heavy rain and might occur as far as 10 miles away from
any rainfall.
According to FEMA, an average of 300 people are injured and 80 people are killed in the United States
each year by lightning. Direct lightning strikes also have the ability to cause significant damage to
buildings, critical facilities, and infrastructure. Lightning is also responsible for igniting wildfires that can
result in widespread damages to property before firefighters have the ability to contain and suppress the
resultant fire.
Location
Lightning can strike in any geographic location, and is considered a common occurrence in Texas. The
Jefferson County planning area is located in a region of the country that is moderately susceptible to
lightning strikes. Therefore lightning could occur at any location within the Jefferson County planning area.
It is assumed that the Jefferson County planning area, including the SETRPC and all participating
jurisdictions, is uniformly exposed to the threat of lightning.
Extent
The planning area considers a flash density of less than two to be a minor severity and a flash density of
three or greater to be a major severity. Any lightning strike that causes death or property damage is
considered a major severity. Vaisala’s U.S. National Lightning Detection Network lightning flash density
Section 6: Lightning
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 2
map (Figure 6-1) shows a range of 12 to 20 lightning flashes per square mile per year for the Jefferson
County planning area, including the SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions.
Figure 6-1. Lightning Flash Density, 2005-20141
Historical Occurrences
Table 6-1 depicts historical occurrences of lightning for the Jefferson County planning area, including all
participating jurisdictions, with associated damages according to the National Center for Environmental
Information (NCEI) data. Since January 1996, 11 recorded lightning events are known to have impacted
Jefferson County, based upon NCEI records.
The NCEI is a national data source organized under the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
and is the largest archive available for climate data. However, it is important to note that the incidents
factored into this risk assessment only include incidents that were reported to the NCEI. SETRPC is located
within the City of Beaumont. There may be some occurrences that have occurred for the SETRPC and may
not have been recorded, but are included in the City of Beaumont occurrence data because of their
1 The black circle indicates the Jefferson County planning area.
Section 6: Lightning
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 3
location. Damage estimates provided in Table 6-1 and Table 6-2 have been modified to reflect the damage
in 2016 dollars.
Table 6-1. Historical Lightning Events, 1996-2016
JURISDICTION DATE TIME DEATHS INJURIES PROPERTY
DAMAGE
CROP
DAMAGE
Beaumont 8/12/1996 9:00 PM 0 1 $15,249 $0
Beaumont 7/12/1999 2:00 PM 0 1 $0 $0
Port Arthur 8/29/2007 8:00 PM 1 0 $0 $0
Port Arthur 7/23/2009 2:22 PM 0 8 $5,576 $0
Beaumont 7/5/2011 3:45 PM 0 0 $31,910 $0
Beaumont 7/6/2011 2:00 PM 0 0 $106,367 $0
Beaumont 7/6/2011 4:50 PM 0 0 $265,918 $0
Groves 7/19/2011 5:20 AM 0 0 $74,457 $0
Beaumont 8/19/2014 3:00 PM 0 0 $5,053 $0
Jefferson County 12/23/2014 12:55 PM 0 0 $50,533 $0
Port Neches 6/30/2015 10:39 AM 0 0 $1,009 $0
Table 6-2. Summary of Historical Lightning Events, 1996-2016
JURISDICTION NUMBER OF
EVENTS DEATHS INJURIES PROPERTY
DAMAGE
CROP
DAMAGE
Jefferson County 1 0 0 $50,533 $0
Beaumont 6 0 2 $424,497 $0
Bevil Oaks 0 0 0 $0 $0
China 0 0 0 $0 $0
Groves 1 0 0 $74,457 $0
Nederland 0 0 0 $0 $0
Nome 0 0 0 $0 $0
Port Arthur 2 1 8 $5,576 $0
Port Neches 1 0 0 $1,009 $0
TOTAL LOSSES 11 1 10 $556,073
Section 6: Lightning
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 4
Based on the list of historical lightning events for the Jefferson County planning area (listed above),
including the SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions, 7 of the events have occurred since the 2011 Plan.
Significant Past Events
August 12, 1996 – Beaumont
An unusual storm system produced extensive lightning in the area. As many as 9,000 lightning strikes that
evening resulted in one man injured, one house fire, and several telephone poles damaged.
July 6, 2011 – Jefferson County
An upper level disturbance helped produce thunderstorms that had numerous lightning strikes in
southeast Texas. A two story home on the west side of Beaumont was struck by lightning. The resulting
fire was quickly put out, but not before the home was severely damaged. Excessive lightning also caused
a fire at the Stone Hearth Apartments. One unit with eight apartments was on fire and the roof partially
collapsed. Damage estimates exceeded $350,000.
July 19, 2011 – Groves
An upper level low pressure area helped produce thunderstorms that had numerous lightning strikes in
southeast Texas. A house that was struck by lightning caught fire in Groves. The fire started in the attic of
the two story home, and caused considerable water damage on the first floor and fire damage on the
second floor.
Probability of Future Events
Based on historical records and input from the planning team, the probability of occurrence for future
lightning events in the Jefferson County planning area, including the SETRPC and all participating
jurisdictions, is considered highly likely, or an event probable in the next year. According to NOAA, the
Jefferson County planning area is located in an area of the country that experiences 12-20 lightning flashes
per square mile per year (approximately 13,332 to 22,220 flashes per year). Given this estimated
frequency of occurrence, it can be expected that future lightning events will continue to threaten life and
cause minor property damages throughout the planning area.
Vulnerability and Impact
Vulnerability is difficult to evaluate since lightning events can occur at different strength levels, in random
locations, and can create a broad range of damages depending on the strike location. Due to the
randomness of these events, all existing and future structures, and facilities in the Jefferson County
planning area could potentially be impacted and remain vulnerable to possible injury and property loss
from lightning strikes.
The direct and indirect losses associated with these events include injury and loss of life, damage to
structures and infrastructure, agricultural losses, utility failure (power outages), and stress on community
resources. The entire population of Jefferson County is considered exposed to the lightning hazard. The
peak lightning season in the State of Texas is from June to August; however, most fatalities occur in July.
Fatalities occur most often when people are outdoors and/or participating in some form of recreation.
Section 6: Lightning
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 5
Populations located outdoors are considered at risk and more vulnerable to a lightning strike compared
to populations inside a structure. Moving to a lower risk location will decrease a person’s vulnerability.
The entire general building stock and all infrastructure of Jefferson County are considered exposed to the
lightning hazard. Lightning can be responsible for damages to buildings, cause electrical, forest and/or
wildfires, and damage infrastructure such as power transmission lines and communication towers.
Agricultural losses can be extensive due to lightning and resulting fires.
The following critical facilities would be vulnerable to lightning events in each participating jurisdiction:
Table 6-2. Critical Facilities by Jurisdiction
JURISDICTION CRITICAL FACILITIES
Jefferson County Port Authority Facility, Fire Station, Water District Facility, 1 School
Beaumont 2 Fire Stations, 2 Police Stations, 32 Schools, Port Authority Facility, 5 Water
District Facilities, 3 Drainage District Facilities, 4 Hospitals
Bevil Oaks Fire Station
China Fire Station, 2 Schools
Groves Fire Station, Police Station, 4 Schools
Nederland Fire Station, Police Station, Water District Facility, 3 Hospitals, Airport, 8
Schools
Nome Fire Station
Port Arthur Fire Station, Police Station, Drainage District Facility, 2 Port Authority
Facilities, 2 Hospitals, 14 Schools
Port Neches Fire Station, Police Station, 5 Schools
SETRPC SETRPC Facility
The impact of lightning experienced in the Jefferson County planning area has resulted in ten injuries and
one fatality. While property damage and shutdown of critical facilities would be limited, the risk posed to
residents provides a “Substantial” impact of lightning events experienced in the Jefferson County planning
area, including the SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions, with multiple potential injuries and fatalities.
Overall, the average loss estimate for Jefferson County, including the SETRPC and all participating
jurisdictions, (in 2016 dollars) is $556,073 (Table 6-2), with an approximate annual loss estimate of
$26,480 (Table 6-3).
Section 6: Lightning
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 6
Table 6-3. Potential Annualized Losses by Jurisdiction, 1996-20162
JURISDICTION PROPERTY & CROP LOSS ANNUAL LOSS ESTIMATES
Jefferson County $50,533 $2,406
Beaumont $424,497 $20,214
Bevil Oaks $0 $0
China $0 $0
Groves $74,457 $3,546
Nederland $0 $0
Nome $0 $0
Port Arthur $5,576 $266
Port Neches $1,009 $48
SETRPC $0 $0
Planning Area $556,073 $26,480
Assessment of Impacts
Lightning events have the potential to pose a significant risk to people, and can create dangerous and
difficult situations for public health and safety officials. Impacts to the planning area can include:
Individuals exposed to the storm can be directly struck, posing significant health risks and
potential death.
Structures can be damaged or crushed by falling trees damaged by lightning, which can result in
physical harm to the occupants.
Lightning strikes can result in widespread power outages increasing the risk to more vulnerable
portions of the population who rely on power for health and/or life safety.
Extended power outage often results in an increase in structure fires and carbon monoxide
poisoning, as individuals attempt to cook or heat their homes with alternate, unsafe cooking or
heating devices, such as grills.
Lightning strikes can be associated with structure fires and wildfires, creating additional risk to
residents and first responders.
The Lower Neches Wildlife Management Area may see an elevated risk of wildfire during
lightning events.
Residents and visitors engaged in outdoor recreational activities along Sabine River and Sabine
Lake may be at greater risk during lightning events.
Emergency operations and services may be significantly impacted due to power outages and/or
loss of communications.
2 Values are in 2016 dollars.
Section 6: Lightning
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 7
City or county departments may be damaged, delaying response and recovery efforts for the
entire community.
Economic disruption due to power outages and fires negatively impacts the programs and
services provided by the community due to short and long term loss in revenue.
Some businesses not directly damaged by lightning events may be negatively impacted while
utilities are being restored, further slowing economic recovery.
Businesses that are more reliant on utility infrastructure than others may suffer greater
damages without a backup power source.
The economic and financial impacts of lightning on the area will depend entirely on the scale of the event,
what is damaged, and how quickly repairs to critical components of the economy can be implemented.
The level of preparedness and pre-event planning done by the county, communities, local businesses, and
citizens will also contribute to the overall economic and financial conditions in the aftermath of any
lightning event.
SECTION 7: HURRICANE
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
Hazard Description ........................................................................................................................................ 1
Location ......................................................................................................................................................... 2
Extent ............................................................................................................................................................ 4
Historical Occurrences .................................................................................................................................. 5
Significant Past Events .............................................................................................................................. 6
Probability of Future Events ......................................................................................................................... 7
Vulnerability and Impact ............................................................................................................................... 7
Assessment of Impacts.............................................................................................................................. 9
Hazard Description
According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), a hurricane is an intense
tropical weather system of strong thunderstorms with well-defined surface circulation and maximum
sustained winds of 74 miles per hour (mph) or higher. In the Northern Hemisphere, circulation of winds
near the Earth’s surface is counterclockwise.
Hurricanes often begin as tropical depressions that
intensify into tropical storms when maximum sustained
winds increase to between 35 – 64 knots (39 – 73 mph).
At these wind speeds, the storm becomes more
organized and circular in shape and begins to resemble
a hurricane. Tropical storms resulting in high winds and
heavy rainfall can be equally problematic without ever
becoming a hurricane and can be dangerous to people
and property, resulting in high winds and heavy rainfall,
as Tropical Storm Frances did for southeast Texas in
September 1998. Once sustained winds reach or exceed
74 mph, the storm becomes a hurricane. The intensity of a land falling hurricane is expressed in categories
relating wind speeds to potential damage. Tropical storm-force winds are strong enough to be dangerous
to those caught in them. For this reason, emergency managers plan to have evacuations completed and
personnel sheltered before winds of tropical storm-force arrive, which precedes the arrival of hurricane-
force winds.
According to the National Hurricane Center (NHC), the greatest potential for loss of life related to a
hurricane is from storm surge. This happens when low pressure and high circular winds “pile” the water
into a dome shape that can be 50-100 miles wide. The surge travels with the storm and is most severe on
the right side of the storm, relative to the direction the storm travels. The surge can be 15 feet deep,
topped by waves, and make landfall ahead of the center, or “eye” of the hurricane. Wind-driven waves
are superimposed on the storm tide. This rise in water level can cause severe flooding in coastal areas,
particularly when the storm tide coincides with normal high tides.
Section 7: Hurricane
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 2
Texas has some of the highest coastal erosion rates in the country, eroding at an average rate of 4.1 feet
per year, according to the Texas General Land Office. Coastal erosion is caused by large storms, flooding,
sea level rise, and human activities that wear away the beaches and bluffs along the ocean. Erosion can
have long-term economic and social consequences. Coastal erosion is fully profiled in Section 15 of the
plan.
Location
As a coastal community, the Jefferson County planning area is vulnerable to threats directly and indirectly
related to a hurricane event, such as high-force winds, storm surge, flooding, and coastal erosion (Section
15). Hurricanes and/or tropical storms can impact Jefferson County from June to November, the official
Atlantic U.S. hurricane season. The Jefferson County planning area, including the SETRPC and all
participating jurisdictions, is in a moderate to high risk area for hurricane wind speeds up to 155 mph as
shown in Figure 7-1.
Section 7: Hurricane
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 3
Figure 7-1. Location of Historic Hurricane Tracks
Section 7: Hurricane
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 4
Extent
As a hurricane develops, the barometric pressure (measured in millibars or inches) at its center falls
and winds increase. If the atmospheric and oceanic conditions are favorable, it can intensify into a
tropical depression. When maximum sustained winds reach or exceed 39 mph, the system is designated
a tropical storm, given a name, and is closely monitored by the National Hurricane Center in Miami,
Florida. When sustained winds reach or exceed 74 mph, the storm is deemed a hurricane.
Hurricanes are categorized according to the strength and intensity of their winds using the Saffir-Simpson
Hurricane Scale (Table 7-1). A Category 1 storm has the lowest wind speeds, while a Category 5 hurricane
has the highest. However, a lower category storm can inflict greater damage than higher category storms
depending on where they strike, the amount of storm surge, other weather they interact with, and how
slow they move.
Table 7-1. Extent Scale for Hurricanes1
CATEGORY MAXIMUM SUSTAINED
WIND SPEED (Mph)
MINIMUM SURFACE
PRESSURE (Millibars)
STORM SURGE
(Feet)
1 74 – 95 Greater than 980 3 – 5
2 96 – 110 979 – 965 6 – 8
3 111 – 130 964 – 945 9 – 12
4 131 – 155 944 – 920 13 – 18
5 155 + Less than 920 19+
Based on the historical storm tracks for hurricanes and tropical storms, as well as the location of Jefferson
County, the average extent to be mitigated is a Category 4 storm. The Jefferson County planning area,
including the SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions, has experienced wind speeds up to 155 mph,
therefore a Category 4 should be mitigated in the event of a hurricane. Figure 7-2 displays the location of
hurricane risk by storm category along the Gulf Coast.
1 Source: National Hurricane Center
Section 7: Hurricane
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 5
Figure 7-2. Location of Hurricane Risk along the Texas Coast
The planning area is located along the coast, and therefore all participating jurisdictions including the
SETRPC have a greater risk, with all land and buildings being vulnerable to all storms, category 1 through
5.
Historical Occurrences
Previous occurrences include storms that had a direct path through the Jefferson County study area. Table
7-2 below lists the storms that have impacted the Jefferson County planning area during the years of 1996-
2016.
Table 7-2. Historic Hurricane/Tropical Storm Events, 1996-20162
YEAR STORM NAME CATEGORY PROPERTY DAMAGE CROP DAMAGE
1998 Charlie Tropical Storm $88,430 $0
2 Only events resulting in injury, fatality, or damages are listed.
Section 7: Hurricane
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 6
YEAR STORM NAME CATEGORY PROPERTY DAMAGE CROP DAMAGE
1998 Earl Category 2 $14,738 $0
1998 Frances Tropical Storm $7,369,202 $0
2001 Allison Tropical Storm $0 $0
2005 Rita Category 3 $1,537,608,808 $0
2007 Humberto Category 1 $28,966,153 $0
2008 Edouard Tropical Storm $278,951 $0
2008 Ike Category 2 $669,482,544 $0
TOTALS $2,243,808,826 $0
Based on the list of historical hurricane events for the Jefferson County planning area (listed above),
including the SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions, none of the events occurred after the 2011 Plan.
Significant Past Events
Tropical Storm Frances, September 9-11, 1998 – Jefferson County
Tropical Storm Frances was the third tropical system to impact southeast Texas in 3 weeks, and caused
the worst damage. Wind gusts in excess of 50 mph occurred along the coast on September 11th, but most
of the damage occurred from the high tides. At Sabine Pass, the tide reading reached 5.3 ft. Mean Sea
Level (MSL), which was one of the highest tides in the last 30 years. On top of the high tides, heavy rain
lasting several days dropped 8 to 10 inches of rain across the region. At Sea Rim State Park, water got to
the top of the dunes, which is 8 to 9 feet higher than normal.
Jefferson County incurred millions of dollars in storm damages, primarily a result of road damages.
Highway 87 between Sabine Pass and Port Arthur received major damage. Sabine Pass was totally isolated
from road traffic for three days due to high water. Nearly every home and business in Sabine Pass had salt
water flooding (over 70 places).
Hurricane Rita, September 18-26, 2005 – Jefferson County
Hurricane Rita made landfall just east of the Texas – Louisiana border. The hurricane moved northwest
and across southeast Texas in the morning hours of September 24th as a dangerous Category 3 hurricane
with sustained winds of 120 mph. Along the Jefferson County coast, storm surges near 10 feet occurred
near Sabine Pass, where over 90 percent of the homes were severely damaged or destroyed. The storm
surge backed up the Sabine River, and flooded a small section of neighboring Orange with around 4 to 5
feet of storm surge. Winds blew over 100 mph across the entire region, snapping and uprooting trees,
and damaged over 125,000 homes and businesses. Some homes in neighboring Jasper and Newton
counties did not have electricity restored for over six weeks. Six fatalities were indirectly attributed to the
storm in the City of Beaumont where a family died of carbon monoxide poisoning after running a
generator inside their apartment.
Section 7: Hurricane
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 7
Probability of Future Events
Based on historical occurrences of significant hurricane events, the probability of future events is highly
likely, with a hurricane event probable in the next year for the Jefferson County planning area, including
the SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions.
Vulnerability and Impact
Hurricanes and Tropical storms can cause major damage to large areas; hence all existing buildings,
facilities and populations are equally exposed and vulnerable to this hazard and could potentially be
impacted. The Jefferson County planning area features multiple mobile or manufactured home parks
throughout the planning area and all participating jurisdictions. These parks are typically more vulnerable
to hurricane events than typical site built structures. In addition, manufactured homes are located
sporadically throughout the planning area, including all jurisdictions. These homes would also be more
vulnerable. The U.S. Census data indicates a total of 3,138 manufactured homes located in the Jefferson
County planning area, including all participating jurisdictions (Table 7-3). In addition, 65.4%
(approximately 69,478 structures) of the single family residential (SFR) structures in the Jefferson County
planning area were built before 1980.3 These structures would typically be built to lower or less stringent
construction standards than newer construction, and may be more susceptible to damages during
significant events.
Table 7-3. Structures at Greater Risk by Jurisdiction
JURISDICTION MANUFACTURED
HOMES
SFR STRUCTURES BUILT BEFORE
1980
Beaumont 718 33,386
Bevil Oaks 27 361
China 87 249
Groves 69 5,388
Nederland 219 5,473
Nome 45 107
Port Arthur 234 16,809
Port Neches 82 3,887
SETRPC 0 0
Jefferson County4 3,138 69,478
3 Source: U.S. Census Bureau data estimates for 2014.
4 County totals include all participating jurisdictions and unincorporated areas.
Section 7: Hurricane
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 8
The following critical facilities would be vulnerable to hurricane events in each participating jurisdiction,
respectively.
Table 7-4. Critical Facilities by Jurisdiction
JURISDICTION CRITICAL FACILITIES
Jefferson County Port Authority Facility, Fire Station, Water District Facility, 1 School
Beaumont 2 Fire Stations, 2 Police Stations, 32 Schools, Port Authority Facility, 5 Water
District Facilities, 3 Drainage District Facilities, 4 Hospitals
Bevil Oaks Fire Station
China Fire Station, 2 Schools
Groves Fire Station, Police Station, 4 Schools
Nederland Fire Station, Police Station, Water District Facility, 3 Hospitals, Airport, 8
Schools
Nome Fire Station
Port Arthur Fire Station, Police Station, Drainage District Facility, 2 Port Authority
Facilities, 2 Hospitals, 14 Schools
Port Neches Fire Station, Police Station, 5 Schools
SETRPC SETRPC Facility
Table 7-5 shows impact or loss estimation for storms impacting the county. Damages are reported on a
countywide basis and are not available for each participating jurisdiction. Annual loss estimates were
based on the 21 year reporting period for such damages (Table 7-2). The average annual loss estimate for
Jefferson County, which includes the SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions, is approximately $106.85
million.
Table 7-5. Summary of Hurricane Events and Potential Annualized Losses, 1996-20165
JURISDICTION NUMBER OF EVENTS PROPERTY &
CROP LOSS
ANNUAL LOSS
ESTIMATES
Jefferson County 11 $2,243,808,827 $106,848,039
The potential severity of impact from a hurricane for the Jefferson County planning area, including the
SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions, is classified as substantial; meaning multiple deaths, complete
shutdown of critical facilities and services for 30 days or more, and more than 50 percent of property
would be destroyed or have major damage.
5 Values are in 2016 dollars.
Section 7: Hurricane
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 9
Assessment of Impacts
Hurricane events have the potential to pose a significant risk to people, and can create dangerous and
difficult situations for public health and safety officials. Impacts to the planning area can include:
Individuals exposed to the storm can be struck by flying debris, falling limbs, or downed trees,
causing serious injury or death.
Structures can be damaged or crushed by falling trees, which can result in physical harm to the
occupants.
Coastal communities may suffer substantial damage, requiring immediate shelter and long term
displacement assistance.
Driving conditions in all jurisdictions may be dangerous during a hurricane event, especially over
elevated bridges, heightening the risk of injury and accidents during evacuations if not timed
properly.
Additional resources may be required for emergency preparedness and response during the
summer months due to increases in populations along the coast.
Emergency evacuations may be necessary prior to a hurricane landfall, requiring emergency
responders, evacuation routing, and temporary shelters.
Significant debris and downed trees can result in emergency response vehicles being unable to
access areas of the community.
Downed power lines may result in roadways being unsafe for use, which may prevent first
responders from answering calls for assistance or rescue.
During hurricane landfall, first responders may be prevented from responding to calls, as the
winds may reach a speed in which their vehicles and equipment are unsafe to operate.
Hurricane events often result in widespread power outages, increasing the risk to more
vulnerable portions of the population who rely on power for health and/or life safety.
Extended power outage often results in an increase in structure fires and carbon monoxide
poisoning, as individuals attempt to cook or heat their homes with alternate, unsafe cooking or
heating devices, such as grills.
Extreme hurricane events may rupture gas lines and down trees and power lines, increasing the
risk of structure fires during and after a storm event.
Extreme hurricane events may lead to prolonged evacuations during search and rescue, in
addition to immediate recovery efforts requiring additional emergency personnel and resources
to prevent entry and protect citizens and property.
First responders are exposed to downed power lines, unstable and unusual debris, hazardous
materials, and generally unsafe conditions.
Emergency operations and services may be significantly impacted due to damaged facilities
and/or loss of communications.
Critical staff may be unable to report for duty, limiting response capabilities.
City or county departments may be damaged, delaying response and recovery efforts for the
entire community.
Private sector entities that the city and its residents rely on, such as utility providers, financial
institutions, and medical care providers may not be fully operational and may require assistance
from neighboring communities until full services can be restored.
Section 7: Hurricane
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 10
Economic disruption negatively impacts the programs and services provided by the community
due to short and long term loss in revenue.
Some businesses not directly damaged by the hurricane may be negatively impacted while roads
are cleared and utilities are being restored, further slowing economic recovery.
Older structures built to less stringent building codes may suffer greater damage as they are
typically more vulnerable to hurricane damage.
Large scale hurricanes can have significant economic impact on the affected area, as it must now
fund expenses such as infrastructure repair and restoration, temporary services and facilities,
overtime pay for responders, as well as normal day-to-day operating expenses.
Businesses that are more reliant on utility infrastructure than others may suffer greater
damages without a backup power source.
The economic and financial impacts of a hurricane on the area will depend entirely on the scale of the
event, what is damaged, and how quickly repairs to critical components of the economy can be
implemented. The level of preparedness and pre-event planning done by the county, communities, local
businesses, and citizens will also contribute to the overall economic and financial conditions in the
aftermath of any hurricane event.
SECTION 8: EXTREME HEAT
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
Hazard Description ........................................................................................................................................ 1
Location ......................................................................................................................................................... 1
Extent ............................................................................................................................................................ 2
Historical Occurrences .................................................................................................................................. 4
Probability of Future Events ......................................................................................................................... 6
Vulnerability and Impact ............................................................................................................................... 6
Assessment of Impacts ............................................................................................................................. 8
Hazard Description
Extreme heat is the condition whereby temperatures
hover ten degrees or more above the average high
temperature in a region for an extended period.
Extreme heat during the summer months is a common
occurrence throughout the State of Texas, and Jefferson
County is no exception. Severe, excessive summer heat
is characterized by a combination of exceptionally high
temperatures and humidity. When these conditions
persist over a period of time, it is defined as a heat wave.
Jefferson County and all participating jurisdictions typically experience extended heat waves.
Although heat can damage buildings and facilities, it presents a more significant threat to the safety and
welfare of citizens. The major human risks associated with severe summer heat include: heat cramps;
sunburn; dehydration; fatigue; heat exhaustion; and even heat stroke. The most vulnerable populations
to heat casualties are children and the elderly or infirmed, who frequently live on low fixed incomes and
cannot afford to run air-conditioning on a regular basis. This population is sometimes isolated, with no
immediate family or friends to look out for their well-being.
Location
Two heat related deaths have been reported in the Jefferson County area, including one in 2008 and one
in 20111. In addition, there have been heat related deaths reported in neighboring counties, including
Liberty and Chambers County. There is no specific geographic scope to the extreme heat hazard. Extreme
heat could occur anywhere within the Jefferson County planning area including the SETRPC and all
participating jurisdictions.
1 Sources: Texas Department of State Health Services (2008) and Beaumont Enterprise (2011)
Section 8: Extreme Heat
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 2
Extent
The magnitude or intensity of an extreme heat event is measured according to temperature in relation to
the percentage of humidity. According to the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), this
relationship is referred to as the “Heat Index,” and is depicted in Figure 8-1. This index measures how hot
it feels outside when humidity is combined with high temperatures.
Figure 8-1. Extent Scale for Extreme Summer Heat2
The Extent Scale in Figure 8-1 displays varying categories of caution depending on the relative humidity
combined with the temperature. For example, when the temperature is at 90 degrees Fahrenheit (ºF) or
lower, caution should be exercised if the humidity level is at or above 40 percent.
The shaded zones on the chart indicate varying symptoms or disorders that could occur depending on the
magnitude or intensity of the event. “Caution” is the first category of intensity and it indicates when
fatigue due to heat exposure is possible. “Extreme Caution” indicates that sunstroke, muscle cramps, or
heat exhaustion are possible, and a “Danger” level means that these symptoms are likely. “Extreme
Danger” indicates that heat stroke is likely. The National Weather Service (NWS) initiates alerts based on
the Heat Index as shown in Table 8-1.
2 Source: NOAA
Section 8: Extreme Heat
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 3
Table 8-1. Heat Index & Warnings
CATEGORY HEAT INDEX POSSIBLE HEAT DISORDERS WARNING TYPE
Extreme
Danger
125°F and
higher Heat stroke or sun stroke likely.
A heat advisory will be issued
to warn that the Heat Index
may exceed 105°F. Danger 103 – 124°F
Sunstroke, muscle cramps, and/or
heat exhaustion are likely.
Heatstroke possible with
prolonged exposure and/or
physical activity.
Extreme
Caution 90 – 103°F
Sunstroke, muscle cramps, and/or
heat exhaustion possible with
prolonged exposure and/or
physical activity.
An Excessive Heat Warning is
issued if the Heat Index rises
above 105°F at least 3 hours
during the day or above 80°F
at night. Caution 80 – 90°F Fatigue is possible with prolonged
exposure and/or physical activity.
Jefferson County’s terrain is relatively level terrain, with limited elevation variations located in Southeast
Texas. The county features saltwater marshes along the southern border of the county adjacent to the
Gulf of Mexico, the northern portion of the county is heavily forested with Southern Yellow Pine, and the
area along the middle of the county is primarily coastal prairie.
Due to its geography, and its warm, sunny, and humid subtropical climate, the Jefferson County planning
area can expect an extreme heat event each summer. Citizens, especially children and the elderly, should
exercise caution by staying out of the heat for prolonged periods when a heat advisory or excessive heat
warning is issued. Also at risk are those working or remaining outdoors.
Figure 8-2 displays the daily maximum heat index as derived from NOAA and based on data compiled from
1838 to 2015. The black circle shows the Jefferson County area. The brown and pink colors indicate a daily
maximum heat index of 100-110° F. The Jefferson County planning area, including the SETRPC and all
participating jurisdictions, could experience extreme heat from 90°F to 110°F and should mitigate to the
extent of “danger”, which can include sunstroke, muscle cramps, heat exhaustion, and potential
heatstroke with prolonged exposure.
Section 8: Extreme Heat
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 4
Figure 8-2. Average Daily Maximum Heat Index Days3
Historical Occurrences
Every summer, the hazard of heat related illness becomes a significant public health issue throughout
much of the United States. Mortality from all causes increases during heat waves, and excessive heat is
an important contributing factor to deaths from other causes, particularly among the elderly. Preliminary
data suggest that by August 21, 2009, record high summer temperatures in Texas resulted in more than
120 heat related deaths statewide. Table 8-2 depicts historical occurrences of mortality from heat from
1994 to 2004, sourced from the Texas Department of State Health Services, and 2005 to 2016, sourced
from the NCEI database.
Table 8-2. Extreme Heat Related Deaths in Texas
YEAR DEATHS
1994 1
1995 12
1996 10
3 Source: NCEI; the black circle indicates the Jefferson County planning area.
Section 8: Extreme Heat
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 5
YEAR DEATHS
1997 2
1998 66
1999 22
2000 71
2001 20
2002 1
2003 0
2004 3
2005 49
2006 2
2007 2
2008 7
2009 6
2010 4
2011 20
2012 2
2013 1
2014 0
2015 5
2016 1
Because the Texas Department of State Health Services reports on total events statewide, previous
occurrences for extreme heat are derived from the NCEI database. According to heat related incidents
located solely within Jefferson County, there is two heat waves4 on record for Jefferson County (Table 8-
3). Historical extreme heat information, as provided by the NCEI, shows extreme heat activity across a
multi-county forecast area for each event. The appropriate percentage of the total property and crop
damage reported for the entire forecast area has been allocated to each county impacted by each event.
All participating jurisdictions including the SETRPC are reported under Jefferson County events. Only
4 Even though Jefferson County experiences heat waves each summer, NCEI data only records events reported. Based on reports,
only two events are on record.
Section 8: Extreme Heat
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 6
extreme heat events that have been reported have been factored into this Risk Assessment. It is likely
additional extreme heat occurrences have gone unreported before and during the recording period.
Table 8-3. Historical Extreme Heat Events, 1996-2016
JURISDICTION DATE DEATHS INJURIES PROPERTY
DAMAGE
CROP
DAMAGE
Jefferson County 8/29/2000 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 9/1/2000 0 0 $0 $0
TOTALS 0 0 $0 $0
Based on the list of historical extreme heat events for the Jefferson County planning area (listed above),
including the SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions, none of the events occurred after the 2011 Plan.
Probability of Future Events
According to historical records, the Jefferson County planning area has experienced 2 events in a 21 year
reporting period. This provides a frequency of occurrence of 1 event every five years. This frequency
supports an occasional probability of future events for the entire planning area including the SETRPC and
all participating jurisdictions.
Vulnerability and Impact
There is no defined geographic boundary for extreme heat events. While all of Jefferson County is
exposed to extreme temperatures, existing buildings, infrastructure, and critical facilities are not likely to
sustain significant damage from extreme heat events. Therefore, any estimated property losses
associated with the extreme heat hazard are anticipated to be minimal across the area.
However, extreme temperatures do present a significant threat to life and safety for the population of
the county as a whole. For example, heat casualties are typically caused by a lack of adequate air-
conditioning or heat exhaustion. The most vulnerable populations to heat casualties are the elderly or
infirmed, who frequently live on low fixed incomes and cannot afford to run air-conditioning on a regular
basis. This population is sometimes isolated, with no immediate family or friends to look out for their well-
being.
Populations over 65 in the Jefferson County planning area are estimated at 13% of the total population
and children under the age of 5 exceed 6% or an estimated total of 50,0745 potentially vulnerable
residents in the planning area based on age (Table 8-4).
5 US Census Bureau 2014 data for Jefferson County
Section 8: Extreme Heat
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 7
Table 8-4. Populations at Greater Risk by Jurisdiction
JURISDICTION POPULATION 65 AND
OLDER POPULATION UNDER 5
Beaumont 15,539 8,087
Bevil Oaks 290 42
China 183 25
Groves 2,685 971
Nederland 2,371 976
Nome 56 11
Port Arthur 6,344 5,073
Port Neches 1,939 904
Jefferson County6 32,774 17,300
Another segment of the population at risk are those whose jobs consist of strenuous labor outdoors.
Livestock and crops can become stressed, decreasing in quality or in production, during times of extreme
heat. Extreme high temperatures can have significant secondary impacts, leading to droughts, water
shortages, increased fire danger, and prompt excessive demands for energy. The possibility of rolling
blackouts increases with unseasonably high temperatures in what is a normally mild month with low
power demands.
Typically more than 12 hours of warning time would be given before the onset of an extreme heat event.
Only minor property damage would result. The potential impact of excessive summer heat is considered
“Minor” as injuries and/or illnesses do not result in permanent disability.
In terms of vulnerability to structures, the impact from extreme heat would be negligible. It is possible
that critical facilities and infrastructure could be shut down for 24 hours if cooling units are running
constantly, leading to a temporary power outage. Less than ten percent of residential and commercial
property could be damaged if extreme heat events lead to structure fires.
The potential impact of extreme heat for the Jefferson County planning area, including the SETRPC and all
participating jurisdictions, can be considered “Minor”, resulting in few injuries and minimal disruption to
the quality of life. Based on historical records over a 21 year period, annualized losses for the entire
Jefferson County planning area are negligible.
6 County totals include all participating jurisdictions and unincorporated areas.
Section 8: Extreme Heat
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 8
Assessment of Impacts
The greatest risk from extreme heat is to public health and safety. Potential impacts to the community
may include:
Vulnerable populations, particularly the elderly and infants, can face serious or life-threatening
health problems from exposure to extreme heat including hyperthermia; heat cramps; heat
exhaustion; and heat stroke (or sunstroke).
Response personnel including utility workers, public works personnel, and any other professions
where individuals are required to work outside, are more subject to extreme heat related
illnesses since their exposure would typically be greater.
High energy demand periods can outpace the supply of energy, potentially creating the need for
rolling brownouts which would elevate the risk of illness to vulnerable residents.
Highways and roads may be damaged by excessive heat causing asphalt roads to soften and
concrete roads to shift or buckle.
Vehicle engines and cooling systems typically run harder during extreme heat events, resulting
in increases in mechanical failures.
Extreme heat events during times of drought can exacerbate the environmental impacts
associated with drought, decreasing water and air quality, and further degrading wildlife
habitat.
Extreme heat increases ground-level ozone (smog), increasing the risk of respiratory illnesses.
Tourism and recreational activities predominant in the Sabine Lake area and Sea Rim State Park
may be negatively impacted during extreme heat events, reducing seasonal revenue.
Food suppliers can anticipate an increase in food costs due to increases in production costs and
crop and livestock losses.
Fisheries may be negatively impacted by extreme heat, suffering damage to fish habitats (either
natural or man-made), and a loss of fish and/or other aquatic organisms due to decreased water
flows or availability.
Negatively impacted water suppliers may face increased costs resulting from the transport
water or develop supplemental water resources.
Outdoor activities may see an increase in injury or illness during extreme heat events.
The economic and financial impacts of extreme heat on the community will depend on the duration of
the event, demand for energy, drought associated with extreme heat, and many other factors. The level
of preparedness and the amount of planning done by the jurisdiction, local businesses, and citizens will
impact the overall economic and financial conditions before, during, and after an extreme heat event.
SECTION 9: HAIL
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
Hazard Description ........................................................................................................................................ 1
Location ......................................................................................................................................................... 1
Extent ............................................................................................................................................................ 1
Historical Occurrences .................................................................................................................................. 2
Significant Past Events .............................................................................................................................. 6
Probability of Future Events ......................................................................................................................... 7
Vulnerability and Impact ............................................................................................................................... 7
Assessment of Impacts ............................................................................................................................. 9
Hazard Description
Hailstorm events are a potentially damaging outgrowth of severe
thunderstorms. During the developmental stages of a hailstorm, ice crystals
form within a low pressure front due to the rapid rising of warm air into the
upper atmosphere, and the subsequent cooling of the air mass. Frozen
droplets gradually accumulate into ice crystals until they fall as round or
irregularly shaped masses of ice typically greater than 0.75 inches in
diameter. The size of hailstones is a direct result of the size and severity of
the storm. High velocity updraft winds are required to keep hail in suspension
in thunderclouds. The strength of the updraft is a by-product of heating on
the Earth’s surface. Higher temperature gradients above Earth’s surface
result in increased suspension time and hailstone size.
Location
Hailstorms are an extension of severe thunderstorms that could potentially cause severe damage. As a
result, they are not confined to any specific geographic location, and can vary greatly in size, location,
intensity, and duration. Therefore, the Jefferson County planning area, including the SETRPC and all
participating jurisdictions, is equally at risk to the hazard of hail.
Extent
The National Weather Service (NWS) classifies a storm as “severe” if there is hail 0.75 inches in diameter
(approximately the size of a penny) or greater, based on radar intensity or as seen by observers. The
intensity category of a hailstorm depends on hail size and the potential damage it could cause, as depicted
in the National Center for Environmental Information (NCEI) Intensity Scale in Table 9-1.
Section 9: Hail
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 2
Table 9-1. Hail Intensity and Magnitude1
SIZE
CODE
INTENSITY
CATEGORY
SIZE
(Diameter Inches)
DESCRIPTIVE
TERM TYPICAL DAMAGE
H0 Hard Hail Up to 0.33 Pea No damage
H1 Potentially
Damaging 0.33 – 0.60 Marble Slight damage to plants and crops
H2 Potentially
Damaging 0.60 – 0.80 Dime Significant damage to plants and
crops
H3 Severe 0.80 – 1.20 Nickel Severe damage to plants and crops
H4 Severe 1.2 – 1.6 Quarter Widespread glass and auto damage
H5 Destructive 1.6 – 2.0 Half Dollar Widespread destruction of glass,
roofs, and risk of injuries
H6 Destructive 2.0 – 2.4 Ping Pong Ball Aircraft bodywork dented and brick
walls pitted
H7 Very Destructive 2.4 – 3.0 Golf Ball Severe roof damage and risk of
serious injuries
H8 Very Destructive 3.0 – 3.5 Hen Egg Severe damage to all structures
H9 Super Hailstorms 3.5 – 4.0 Tennis Ball Extensive structural damage, could
cause fatal injuries
H10 Super Hailstorms 4.0 + Baseball Extensive structural damage, could
cause fatal injuries
The intensity scale in Table 9-1 ranges from H0 to H10, with increments of intensity or damage potential
in relation to hail size (distribution and maximum), texture, fall speed, speed of storm translation, and
strength of the accompanying wind. Based on available data regarding the previous occurrences for the
area, the Jefferson County planning area, including the SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions, may
experience hailstorms ranging from an H0 to an H7. Jefferson County can mitigate a storm from low risk
(hard hail) to a serious hailstorm with golf ball sized hail that leads to severe roof damage and could cause
serious injuries.
Historical Occurrences
Historical evidence shown in Figure 9-1 demonstrates that the planning area is vulnerable to hail events
overall, which typically result from severe thunderstorm activity. Only those events for Jefferson County,
including the SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions, with latitude and longitude available were plotted
(Figure 9-1). Historical events with reported damages, injuries, or fatalities are shown in Table 9-2. A total
of 58 reported historical hail events impacted Jefferson County between 1996 and August 2016 (Table 9-
3). These events were reported to NCEI and NOAA databases, and may not represent all hail events to
have occurred during the past 21 years. It is important to note that the SETRPC is located within the City
1 Source: NCEI Intensity Scale, based on the TORRO Hailstorm Intensity Scale.
Section 9: Hail
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 3
of Beaumont. There may be some occurrences that have occurred for the SETRPC and may not have been
recorded, but are included in the City of Beaumont occurrence data because of their location. Only hail
events that have been reported have been factored into this Risk Assessment. It is likely that additional
hail occurrences have gone unreported before and during the recording period.
Figure 9-1. Spatial Historical Hail Events, 1996–2016
Section 9: Hail
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 4
Table 9-2. Historical Hail Events, 1996-20162
JURISDICTION Date MAGNITUDE INJURIES FATALITIES PROPERTY
DAMAGE
CROP
DAMAGE
Beaumont 4/12/1996 1.75 0 0 $0 $0
Beaumont 9/9/1997 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 1/21/1998 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 1/21/1998 1 0 0 $0 $0
Port Arthur 1/21/1998 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Port Neches 3/7/1998 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Nederland 7/17/1998 0.88 0 0 $0 $0
Port Arthur 5/11/1999 1.75 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 8/3/1999 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Beaumont 8/31/1999 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 4/2/2000 1.75 0 0 $0 $0
Beaumont 4/2/2000 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Port Arthur 4/2/2000 1.75 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 4/3/2000 0.88 0 0 $0 $0
Bevil Oaks 9/1/2000 1.75 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 9/2/2000 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Nederland 7/1/2001 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Nederland 3/13/2003 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 4/7/2003 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Port Arthur 4/7/2003 2.75 0 0 $0 $0
Port Arthur 4/8/2003 0.88 0 0 $0 $0
Beaumont 4/20/2003 1.5 0 0 $0 $0
China 4/20/2003 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Port Arthur 8/21/2003 0.88 0 0 $0 $0
Port Arthur 4/30/2004 1 0 0 $0 $0
2 Damages reported in 2016 dollars.
Section 9: Hail
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 5
JURISDICTION Date MAGNITUDE INJURIES FATALITIES PROPERTY
DAMAGE
CROP
DAMAGE
Groves 5/13/2004 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Nederland 5/13/2004 0.88 0 0 $0 $0
Port Arthur 5/13/2004 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Beaumont 9/18/2004 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Beaumont 6/15/2005 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Bevil Oaks 7/11/2005 0.88 0 0 $0 $0
Beaumont 12/4/2005 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Groves 6/14/2007 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 12/20/2007 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 2/12/2008 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Groves 5/22/2008 0.88 0 0 $0 $0
Beaumont 3/25/2009 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Bevil Oaks 3/27/2009 0.88 0 0 $0 $0
Bevil Oaks 3/27/2009 1.5 0 0 $0 $0
Beaumont 2/26/2010 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 3/29/2011 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 6/6/2011 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Beaumont 6/6/2011 1 0 0 $0 $0
Groves 6/6/2011 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Port Arthur 6/6/2011 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Port Arthur 6/6/2011 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Port Arthur 9/29/2011 1 0 0 $0 $0
Groves 4/2/2012 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Beaumont 6/8/2012 1 0 0 $0 $0
China 5/10/2013 0.75 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 5/22/2013 1 0 0 $0 $0
Bevil Oaks 7/12/2013 0.88 0 0 $0 $0
Beaumont 7/3/2014 0.88 0 0 $0 $0
Section 9: Hail
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 6
JURISDICTION Date MAGNITUDE INJURIES FATALITIES PROPERTY
DAMAGE
CROP
DAMAGE
Jefferson County 4/19/2015 1 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 4/27/2015 1 0 0 $0 $0
Beaumont 4/27/2015 1 0 0 $0 $0
Port Arthur 4/27/2015 1.75 0 0 $0 $0
Port Arthur 1/8/2016 1.25 0 0 $0 $0
Table 9-3. Historical Hail Events Summary, 1996-20163
JURISDICTION Number of
Events MAGNITUDE INJURIES FATALITIES PROPERTY
DAMAGE
CROP
DAMAGE
Jefferson County 20 2.75 inches 0 0 $0 $0
Beaumont 10 1.75 inches 0 0 $0 $0
Bevil Oaks 5 1.75 inches 0 0 $0 $0
China 2 0.75 inches 0 0 $0 $0
Groves 5 0.88 inches 0 0 $0 $0
Nederland 4 0.88 inches 0 0 $0 $0
Nome 0 N/A 0 0 $0 $0
Port Arthur 11 1.75 inches 0 0 $0 $0
Port Neches 1 0.75 inches 0 0 $0 $0
SETRPC 0 N/A 0 0 $0 $0
TOTAL LOSSES 52 (Max Extent) 0 0 $0
Based on the list of historical hail events for the Jefferson County planning area (listed above), including
the SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions, 18 events have occurred since the 2011 Plan.
Significant Past Events
May 11, 1999 – Port Arthur
On May 11, 1999 a hail storm brought half dollar size hail to the City of Port Arthur. Hail of sizes up to 1.75
inches damaged several cars in the area.
March 25-27, 2009 – Jefferson County/Bevil Oaks
A 3-day series of severe weather across southeast Texas began when a squall line of severe thunderstorms
developed across central Texas during the evening hours on March 25,2009 and moved rapidly eastward
3 Values are in 2016 dollars.
Section 9: Hail
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 7
across Southeast Texas. A few reports of wind damage and large hail were received. An industrial plant
along the Neches River ESE of Beaumont reported penny size hail. A Beaumont TV station reported nickel
size hail in Bevil Oaks.
Probability of Future Events
Based on available records of historic events, 58 events in a 21 year reporting period for the Jefferson
County planning area provides a frequency of occurrence of 2 to 3 events every year. This frequency
supports a “highly likely” probability of future events for the entire planning area including the SETRPC
and all participating jurisdictions. The numbers listed for the jurisdictions within the County are historical
events that are known to have specifically impacted those jurisdictions.
Vulnerability and Impact
Damage from hail approaches $1 billion in the U.S. each year. Much of the damage inflicted by hail
impacts crops. Even relatively small hail can shred plants to ribbons in a matter of minutes. Vehicles,
roofs of buildings and homes, and landscaping are also most commonly damaged by hail.
Utility systems on roofs at school districts and critical facilities would be vulnerable and could be damaged.
Hail could cause a significant threat to people as they could be struck by hail and falling trees and
branches. Outdoor activities and events may elevate the risk to residents and visitors in the planning area
when a hailstorm strikes with little warning. Older structures not built to current codes may be more
vulnerable to damages than newer structures.
The Jefferson County planning area features multiple mobile or manufactured home parks throughout
the planning area and all participating jurisdictions. These parks are typically more vulnerable to hail
events than typical site built structures. In addition, manufactured homes are located sporadically
throughout the planning area, including all jurisdictions. These homes would also be more vulnerable. The
U.S. Census data indicates a total of 3,138 manufactured homes located in the Jefferson County planning
area, including all participating jurisdictions (Table 9-4). In addition, 65.4% (approximately 69,478
structures) of the single family residential (SFR) structures in the Jefferson County planning area were built
before 1980.4 These structures would typically be built to lower or less stringent construction standards
than newer construction and may be more susceptible to damages during significant hail events.
Table 9-4. Structures at Greater Risk by Jurisdiction
JURISDICTION MANUFACTURED
HOMES
SFR STRUCTURES BUILT BEFORE
1980
Beaumont 718 33,386
Bevil Oaks 27 361
China 87 249
4 Source: U.S. Census Bureau data estimates for 2014.
Section 9: Hail
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 8
JURISDICTION MANUFACTURED
HOMES
SFR STRUCTURES BUILT BEFORE
1980
Groves 69 5,388
Nederland 219 5,473
Nome 45 107
Port Arthur 234 16,809
Port Neches 82 3,887
SETPRC 0 0
Jefferson County5 3,138 69,478
The following critical facilities would be vulnerable to hail events in each participating jurisdiction:
Table 9-5. Critical Facilities by Jurisdiction
JURISDICTION CRITICAL FACILITIES
Jefferson County Port Authority Facility, Fire Station, Water District Facility, 1 School
Beaumont 2 Fire Stations, 2 Police Stations, 32 Schools, Port Authority Facility, 5 Water
District Facilities, 3 Drainage District Facilities, 4 Hospitals
Bevil Oaks Fire Station
China Fire Station, 2 Schools
Groves Fire Station, Police Station, 4 Schools
Nederland Fire Station, Police Station, Water District Facility, 3 Hospitals, Airport, 8
Schools
Nome Fire Station
Port Arthur Fire Station, Police Station, Drainage District Facility, 2 Port Authority
Facilities, 2 Hospitals, 14 Schools
Port Neches Fire Station, Police Station, 5 Schools
SETRPC SETRPC Facility
First responders could not be able to respond to calls due to blocked roads. Also, hail could cause power
outages which could cause health and safety risks to more vulnerable populations in the planning area.
Hail has been known to cause injury to humans, and occasionally has been fatal. There are no reported
damages to crops or property in the planning area, including the SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions.
Based on historic loss and damages, the impact of hail damages on the Jefferson County planning area,
5 County totals includes all participating jurisdictions and unincorporated areas.
Section 9: Hail
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 9
including the SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions, can be considered “Limited”. This severity of
impact indicates minor injuries that are treatable with first aid, Jefferson County area facilities shut down
for 24 hours or less, and less than 10% of property destroyed or with major damage.
Table 9-4. Potential Annualized Losses by Jurisdiction, 1996-2016
JURISDICTION PROPERTY & CROP DAMAGE ANNUAL LOSS ESTIMATE
Jefferson County $0 $0
Beaumont $0 $0
Bevil Oaks $0 $0
China $0 $0
Groves $0 $0
Nederland $0 $0
Nome $0 $0
Port Arthur $0 $0
Port Neches $0 $0
SETRPC $0 $0
Planning Area $0 $0
Assessment of Impacts
Hail events have the potential to pose a significant risk to people and can create dangerous situations.
Impacts to the planning area can include:
Hail may create hazardous road conditions during and immediately following an event, delaying
first responders from preserving or providing for public health and safety.
Individuals and first responders who are exposed to the storm may be struck by hail, falling
branches, or downed trees resulting in injuries or possible fatalities.
Residential structures can be damaged by falling trees, which can result in physical harm to
occupants.
Large hail events will likely cause extensive roof damage to residential structures, along with
siding damage and broken windows, creating a spike in insurance claims and a rise in premiums.
Automobile damage may be extensive depending on the size of the hail and length of the storm.
Hail events can result in power outages over widespread areas, increasing the risk to more
vulnerable portions of the population who rely on power for health and/or life safety.
Extended power outage can result in an increase in structure fires and/or carbon monoxide
poisoning, as individuals attempt to cook or heat their home with alternate, unsafe cooking or
heating devices, such as grills.
Section 9: Hail
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 10
First responders are exposed to downed power lines, damaged structures, hazardous spills, and
debris that often accompany hail events, elevating the risk of injury to first responders and
potentially diminishing emergency response capabilities.
Downed power lines and large debris, such as downed trees, can result in the inability of
emergency response vehicles to access areas of the community.
Hazardous road conditions may prevent critical staff from reporting for duty, limiting response
capabilities.
Economic disruption negatively impacts the programs and services provided by the community
due to short and long term loss in revenue.
Some businesses not directly damaged by the hail event may be negatively impacted while
roads are cleared and utilities are being restored, further slowing economic recovery.
Businesses that are more reliant on utility infrastructure than others may suffer greater
damages without a backup power source.
Hazardous road conditions will likely lead to increases in automobile accidents, further straining
emergency response capabilities.
Depending on the severity and scale of damage caused by large hail events, damage to power
transmission and distribution infrastructure can require days or weeks to repair.
A significant hail event could significantly damage agricultural crops, resulting in extensive
economic losses for the community and surrounding area.
Hail events may injure or kill livestock and wildlife.
A large hail event could impact the accessibility of recreational areas and parks due to extended
power outages or debris clogged access roads.
The economic and financial impacts of hail will depend entirely on the scale of the event, what is damaged,
and how quickly repairs to critical components of the economy can be implemented. The level of
preparedness and pre-event planning conducted by the community, local businesses, and citizens will
contribute to the overall economic and financial conditions in the aftermath of any hail event.
SECTION 10: THUNDERSTORM WIND
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
Hazard Description ........................................................................................................................................ 1
Location ......................................................................................................................................................... 1
Extent ............................................................................................................................................................ 2
Historical Occurrences .................................................................................................................................. 3
Significant Past Events .............................................................................................................................. 7
Probability of Future Events ......................................................................................................................... 8
Vulnerability and Impact ............................................................................................................................... 8
Assessment of Impacts ........................................................................................................................... 10
Hazard Description
Thunderstorms create extreme wind events which includes straight line winds. Wind is the horizontal
motion of the air past a given point, beginning with differences in air pressures. Pressure that is higher at
one place than another sets up a force pushing from the high pressure toward the low pressure; the
greater the difference in pressures, the stronger the force. The distance between the area of high pressure
and the area of low pressure also determines how fast the moving air is accelerated.
Thunderstorms are created when heat and moisture near the
Earth's surface are transported to the upper levels of the
atmosphere. By-products of this process are the clouds,
precipitation, and wind that become the thunderstorm.
According to the National Weather Service (NWS), a
thunderstorm occurs when thunder accompanies rainfall.
Radar observers use the intensity of radar echoes to
distinguish between rain showers and thunderstorms.
Straight line winds can have gusts of 100 miles per hour (mph) or more. Unlike tornadoes, windstorms
have a broader path that is several miles wide and can cover several counties. Straight line wind may down
trees and power lines, overturn mobile homes, and cause damage to well-built structures.
Straight line winds are responsible for most thunderstorm wind damages. One type of straight line wind,
the downburst, is a small area of rapidly descending air beneath a thunderstorm. A downburst can cause
damage equivalent to a strong tornado and make air travel extremely hazardous.
Location
Thunderstorm wind events can develop in any geographic location and are considered a common
occurrence in Texas. Therefore, a thunderstorm wind event could occur at any location within Jefferson
County’s planning area, as these storms develop randomly and are not confined to any geographic area
Section 10: Thunderstorm Wind
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 2
within the County. It is assumed that the Jefferson County planning area, including the SETRPC and all
participating jurisdictions, is uniformly exposed to the threat of thunderstorm winds.
Extent
The extent or magnitude of a thunderstorm wind event is measured by the Beaufort Wind Scale. Table
10-1 describes the different intensities of wind in terms of speed and effects, from calm to violent and
destructive.
Table 10-1. Beaufort Wind Scale1
FORCE WIND
(KNOTS)
WMO
CLASSIFICATION APPEARANCE OF WIND EFFECTS
0 Less than 1 Calm Calm, smoke rises vertically
1 1-3 Light Air Smoke drift indicates wind direction, still wind vanes
2 4-7 Light Breeze Wind felt on face, leaves rustle, vanes begin to move
3 8-12 Gentle Breeze Leaves and small twigs constantly moving, light flags
extended
4 13-18 Moderate Breeze Dust, leaves and loose paper lifted, small tree
branches move
5 19-24 Fresh Breeze Small trees in leaf begin to sway
6 25-31 Strong Breeze Larger tree branches moving, whistling in wires
7 32-38 Near Gale Whole trees moving, resistance felt walking against
wind
8 39-46 Gale Whole trees in motion, resistance felt walking
against wind
9 47-54 Strong Gale Slight structural damage occurs, slate blows off roofs
10 55-63 Storm Seldom experienced on land, trees broken or
uprooted, considerable structural damage
11 64-72 Violent Storm If experienced on land, widespread damage
12 73+ Hurricane Violence and destruction
Figure 10-1 displays the wind zones as derived from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA).
1 Source: World Meteorological Organization
Section 10: Thunderstorm Wind
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 3
Figure 10-1. Wind Zones in the United States2
On average, the planning area experiences 3 to 4 thunderstorm wind events every year. The County is
located within the Zone III, meaning the entire planning area including the SETRPC and all participating
jurisdictions can experience winds up to 200 mph. Jefferson County has experienced a significant wind
event – an event with winds above 64 knots in the range of “Force 11” on the Beaufort Wind Scale.
Historical Occurrences
Tables 10-2, 10-3, and 10-4 depict historical occurrences of thunderstorm wind events for the Jefferson
County planning area according to the National Center for Environmental Information (NCEI) data. Since
January 1996, 77 thunderstorm wind events are known to have impacted Jefferson County, based upon
NCEI records. Table 10-3 presents information on known historical events impacting the Jefferson County
planning area, with resulting damages. It is important to note that high wind events associated with other
hazards, such as tornadoes, are not accounted for in this section.
The NCEI is a national data source organized under NOAA and is the largest archive available for climate
data. Only NCEI reported incidents were factored into this risk assessment. It is important to note that the
2 Source: NOAA; the black circle indicates the Jefferson County planning area.
Section 10: Thunderstorm Wind
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 4
SETRPC is located within the City of Beaumont. There may be some occurrences that have occurred for
the SETRPC and may not have been recorded, but are included in the City of Beaumont occurrence data
because of their location. In the tables that follow throughout this section, some occurrences seem to
appear multiple times in one table. This is due to reports from various locations throughout the County.
In addition, property damage estimates are not always reported. When this occurs, estimates are
provided when reasonable. Where an estimate has been provided in a table for losses, the dollar amounts
have been altered to indicate the damage in 2016 dollars.
Table 10-2. Historical Thunderstorm Wind Events, With Reported Damages, 1996-2016
MAXIMUM WIND SPEED
RECORDED (KNOTS)
NUMBER OF REPORTED
EVENTS
0-30 0
31-40 0
41-50 19
51-60 20
61-70 4
71-80 0
81-90 0
91-100 0
Unknown 34
Table 10-3. Historical Thunderstorm Wind Events, 1996-20163
JURISDICTION DATE TIME MAGNITUDE DEATHS INJURIES PROPERTY
DAMAGE
CROP
DAMAGE
Beaumont 5/29/1996 9:15 PM Unknown 0 0 $15,249 $0
Beaumont 8/12/1996 10:40 PM Unknown 0 0 $7,625 $0
China 4/5/1997 2:39 AM Unknown 0 0 $7,454 $0
Beaumont 8/21/1997 5:30 PM Unknown 0 0 $29,814 $0
Groves 8/22/1997 4:25 PM Unknown 0 0 $14,907 $0
Nederland 12/3/1997 5:12 AM Unknown 0 1 $74,536 $0
Port Arthur 2/10/1998 2:30 PM Unknown 0 0 $29,357 $0
Port Arthur 2/10/1998 2:40 PM 57 knots 0 0 $14,679 $0
3 Only recorded events with fatalities, injuries, or damages are listed. Magnitude is listed when available. Damage values are in
2016 dollars.
Section 10: Thunderstorm Wind
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 5
JURISDICTION DATE TIME MAGNITUDE DEATHS INJURIES PROPERTY
DAMAGE
CROP
DAMAGE
Nederland 2/22/1998 12:30 AM Unknown 0 0 $14,679 $0
Port Arthur 3/16/1998 1:00 PM Unknown 0 0 $146,786 $0
China 7/14/1998 1:50 PM Unknown 0 0 $220,179 $0
Beaumont 8/13/1998 3:52 PM Unknown 0 0 $22,018 $0
Beaumont 8/14/1998 12:00 PM Unknown 1 1 $110,089 $0
Beaumont 8/29/1998 8:00 PM Unknown 0 0 $73,393 $0
Beaumont 5/10/1999 7:00 AM Unknown 0 0 $143,614 $0
Beaumont 5/29/1999 11:10 AM Unknown 0 0 $7,181 $0
Beaumont 7/12/1999 1:50 PM Unknown 0 0 $7,181 $0
Groves 8/3/1999 4:50 PM Unknown 0 0 $143,614 $0
Beaumont 8/20/1999 6:30 PM Unknown 0 0 $71,807 $0
Beaumont 8/31/1999 1:15 PM Unknown 0 0 $35,904 $0
Port Arthur 4/3/2000 3:30 AM 52 knots 0 0 $27,789 $0
Beaumont 7/23/2000 2:05 PM Unknown 0 0 $2,779 $0
Jefferson County 8/11/2000 3:30 PM Unknown 0 0 $2,779 $0
Bevil Oaks 9/2/2000 6:55 PM Unknown 0 0 $2,779 $0
Nederland 9/2/2000 5:50 PM Unknown 0 0 $2,779 $0
Nome 2/28/2001 6:30 AM Unknown 0 0 $33,775 $0
Port Arthur 3/14/2001 6:15 PM Unknown 0 0 $6,755 $0
Port Arthur 3/14/2001 5:45 PM 63 knots 0 0 $6,755 $0
Beaumont 5/26/2001 3:00 PM Unknown 0 0 $13,510 $0
China 10/11/2001 11:30 AM Unknown 0 0 $13,510 $0
Jefferson County 5/17/2002 8:17 AM Unknown 0 0 $33,249 $0
Groves 7/16/2002 8:00 AM 65 knots 0 0 $1,994,950 $0
Beaumont 8/26/2002 6:10 PM Unknown 0 0 $33,249 $0
Beaumont 8/27/2002 12:00 PM Unknown 0 0 $6,650 $0
Beaumont 10/28/2002 11:25 PM Unknown 0 0 $6,650 $0
Nederland 10/29/2002 1:07 AM Unknown 0 0 $6,650 $0
Section 10: Thunderstorm Wind
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 6
JURISDICTION DATE TIME MAGNITUDE DEATHS INJURIES PROPERTY
DAMAGE
CROP
DAMAGE
Port Arthur 12/23/2002 11:15 PM Unknown 0 0 $6,650 $0
Port Arthur 12/30/2002 10:45 PM Unknown 0 0 $6,650 $0
Beaumont 5/11/2004 5:00 PM 50 knots 0 0 $31,665 $0
Groves 11/27/2004 12:25 AM 50 knots 0 0 $25,332 $0
Beaumont 5/29/2005 7:45 PM 50 knots 0 0 $30,627 $0
Beaumont 6/15/2005 5:20 PM 50 knots 0 0 $2,450 $0
China 8/7/2005 5:15 PM 50 knots 0 0 $2,450 $0
Jefferson County 4/29/2006 11:39 AM 50 knots 0 0 $59,341 $0
Jefferson County 7/17/2006 5:00 PM 50 knots 0 0 $5,934 $0
Beaumont 8/27/2007 4:50 PM 50 knots 0 0 $23,079 $0
Beaumont 8/27/2007 4:10 PM 50 knots 0 0 $2,308 $0
Jefferson County 6/25/2008 11:55 AM 50 knots 0 0 $5,556 $0
Jefferson County 8/3/2008 5:00 PM 57 knots 0 0 $11,113 $0
Beaumont 2/1/2009 1:50 PM 50 knots 0 0 $5,576 $0
Beaumont 7/18/2009 4:25 PM 52 knots 0 0 $2,230 $0
Beaumont 8/16/2010 12:45 PM 52 knots 0 0 $1,097 $0
Beaumont 8/16/2010 12:40 PM 52 knots 0 0 $5,486 $0
Beaumont 8/16/2010 12:40 PM 52 knots 0 1 $27,431 $0
Port Arthur 8/16/2010 1:30 PM 52 knots 0 0 $1,097 $0
Jefferson County 8/23/2010 6:30 PM 52 knots 0 0 $3,292 $0
Beaumont 3/30/2011 3:00 AM 48 knots 0 0 $1,064 $0
Groves 10/31/2013 8:33 AM 61 knots 0 0 $5,135 $0
Groves 4/27/2016 5:44 AM 50 knots 0 0 $5,000 $0
Section 10: Thunderstorm Wind
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 7
Table 10-4. Summary of Historical Thunderstorm Wind Events, 1996-20164
JURISDICTION NUMBER OF
EVENTS MAGNITUDE DEATHS INJURIES PROPERTY
DAMAGE
CROP
DAMAGE
Jefferson County 8 57 knots 0 0 $121,263 $0
Beaumont 35 63 knots 1 2 $719,727 $0
Bevil Oaks 1 Unknown 0 0 $2,779 $0
China 4 50 knots 0 0 $243,593 $0
Groves 6 65 knots 0 0 $2,188,939 $0
Nederland 4 Unknown 0 1 $98,643 $0
Nome 1 Unknown 0 0 $33,775 $0
Port Arthur 17 63 knots 0 0 $246,517 $0
Port Neches 1 50 knots 0 0 $0 $0
SETRPC 0 N/A 0 0 $0 $0
TOTAL LOSSES 77 50-65 knots 1 3 $3,655,236
Based on the list of historical thunderstorm wind events for the Jefferson County planning area (listed
above), including the SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions, 7 events have occurred since the 2011
Plan.
Significant Past Events
July 14, 1998 – China
Severe thunderstorm winds blew down trees across China in western Jefferson County. A home under
construction was leveled due to the estimated 60 mph winds. Houses and barns next door were not
damaged. The China Elementary School had parts of its roof torn off, and debris from the roof went
through the windows of a classroom. No injuries were reported.
August 14, 1998 – Beaumont
Two men were in a house under construction when a combination of wind and rain caused the collapse
of the building. One man was killed, and the other was slightly injured.
July 16, 2002 – Groves
High winds associated with a severe thunderstorm blew down numerous trees and power lines. The most
significant damage was to the Groves Middle School, where the gymnasium lost part of its roof and one
wall.
4 Values are in 2016 dollars.
Section 10: Thunderstorm Wind
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 8
April 29, 2006 – Jefferson County
Severe thunderstorm winds produced damages in the county estimated at $50,000. An old rice dryer was
wrapped around a utility pole. A small building was moved 2 feet off its blocks.
Probability of Future Events
Most thunderstorm winds occur during the spring, in the months of March, April, and May, and in the fall,
during the month of September. Based on available records of historic events, 77 events in a 21 year
reporting period provides a frequency of occurrence of 3 to 4 events every year. Even though the intensity
of thunderstorm wind events is not always damaging for the Jefferson County planning area, the
frequency of occurrence for a thunderstorm wind event is highly likely, meaning that an event is probable
within the next year for the Jefferson County planning area, including the SETRPC and all participating
jurisdictions.
Vulnerability and Impact
Vulnerability is difficult to evaluate since thunderstorm wind events can occur at different strength levels,
in random locations, and can create relatively narrow paths of destruction. Due to the randomness of
these events, all existing and future structures, and facilities in Jefferson County could potentially be
impacted and remain vulnerable to possible injury and property loss from strong winds.
Trees, power lines and poles, signage, manufactured housing, radio towers, concrete block walls, storage
barns, windows, garbage receptacles, brick facades, and vehicles, unless reinforced, are vulnerable to
thunderstorm wind events. The Jefferson County planning area features multiple mobile or manufactured
home parks throughout the planning area and all participating jurisdictions. These parks are typically more
vulnerable to thunderstorm wind events than typical site built structures. In addition, manufactured
homes are located sporadically throughout the planning area, including all jurisdictions. These homes
would also be more vulnerable. The U.S. Census data indicates a total of 3,138 manufactured homes
located in the Jefferson County planning area, including all participating jurisdictions (Table 10-5). In
addition, 65.4% (approximately 69,478 structures) of the single family residential (SFR) structures in the
Jefferson County planning area were built before 1980.5 These structures would typically be built to lower
or less stringent construction standards than newer construction and may be more susceptible to
damages during significant thunderstorm wind events.
Table 10-5. Structures at Greater Risk by Jurisdiction
JURISDICTION MANUFACTURED
HOMES
SFR STRUCTURES BUILT BEFORE
1980
Beaumont 718 33,386
Bevil Oaks 27 361
China 87 249
5 Source: U.S. Census Bureau data estimates for 2014.
Section 10: Thunderstorm Wind
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 9
JURISDICTION MANUFACTURED
HOMES
SFR STRUCTURES BUILT BEFORE
1980
Groves 69 5,388
Nederland 219 5,473
Nome 45 107
Port Arthur 234 16,809
Port Neches 82 3,887
SETRPC 0 0
Jefferson County6 3,138 69,478
More severe damage involves windborne debris; in some instances, patio furniture and other lawn items
have been reported to have been blown around by wind and, very commonly, debris from damaged
structures in turn have caused damage to other buildings not directly impacted by the event.
The following critical facilities would be vulnerable to thunderstorm wind events in each participating
jurisdiction:
Table 10-6. Critical Facilities by Jurisdiction
JURISDICTION CRITICAL FACILITIES
Jefferson County Port Authority Facility, Fire Station, Water District Facility, 1 School
Beaumont 2 Fire Stations, 2 Police Stations, 32 Schools, Port Authority Facility, 5 Water
District Facilities, 3 Drainage District Facilities, 4 Hospitals
Bevil Oaks Fire Station
China Fire Station, 2 Schools
Groves Fire Station, Police Station, 4 Schools
Nederland Fire Station, Police Station, Water District Facility, 3 Hospitals, Airport, 8
Schools
Nome Fire Station
Port Arthur Fire Station, Police Station, Drainage District Facility, 2 Port Authority
Facilities, 2 Hospitals, 14 Schools
Port Neches Fire Station, Police Station, 5 Schools
SETRPC SETRPC Facility
6 County totals include all participating jurisdictions and unincorporated areas.
Section 10: Thunderstorm Wind
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 10
A thunderstorm wind event can also result in traffic disruptions, injuries, and in rare cases, fatalities. The
impact of extreme winds experienced in the Jefferson County planning area has resulted in three injuries
and one fatality. While damages and shutdown of critical facilities would have a minor impact on the
planning area, historic injuries and fatalities indicate an impact of “Substantial” with multiple potential
deaths and injuries. Overall, the average loss estimate (in 2016 dollars) is $3,655,236, having an
approximate annual loss estimate of $174,058 (Table 10-7).
Table 10-7. Potential Annualized Losses by Jurisdiction, 1996-2016
JURISDICTION PROPERTY & CROP LOSS AVERAGE ANNUALIZED LOSSES
Jefferson County $121,263 $5,774
Beaumont $719,727 $34,273
Bevil Oaks $2,779 $132
China $243,593 $11,600
Groves $2,188,939 $104,235
Nederland $98,643 $4,697
Nome $33,775 $1,608
Port Arthur $246,517 $11,739
Port Neches $0 $0
SETRPC $0 $0
Planning Area $3,655,236 $174,058
Assessment of Impacts
Thunderstorm wind events have the potential to pose a significant risk to people, and can create
dangerous and difficult situations for public health and safety officials. Impacts to the planning area can
include:
Individuals exposed to the storm can be struck by flying debris, falling limbs, or downed trees,
causing serious injury or death.
Structures can be damaged or crushed by falling trees, which can result in physical harm to the
occupants.
Significant debris and downed trees can result in emergency response vehicles being unable to
access areas of the community.
Downed power lines may result in roadways being unsafe for use, which may prevent first
responders from answering calls for assistance or rescue.
During exceptionally heavy wind events, first responders may be prevented from responding to
calls, as the winds may reach a speed in which their vehicles and equipment are unsafe to
operate.
Section 10: Thunderstorm Wind
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 11
Thunderstorm wind events often result in widespread power outages, increasing the risk to
more vulnerable portions of the population who rely on power for health and/or life safety.
Extended power outage often results in an increase in structure fires and carbon monoxide
poisoning, as individuals attempt to cook or heat their homes with alternate, unsafe cooking or
heating devices, such as grills.
First responders are exposed to downed power lines, unstable and unusual debris, hazardous
materials, and generally unsafe conditions.
Emergency operations and services may be significantly impacted due to damaged facilities
and/or loss of communications.
Critical staff may be unable to report for duty, limiting response capabilities.
County or City departments may be damaged, delaying response and recovery efforts for the
entire community.
Private sector entities that the County or City and its residents rely on, such as utility providers,
financial institutions, and medical care providers may not be fully operational and may require
assistance from neighboring communities until full services can be restored.
Economic disruption negatively impacts the programs and services provided by the community
due to short and long term loss in revenue.
Some businesses not directly damaged by extreme wind events may be negatively impacted
while roads are cleared and utilities are being restored, further slowing economic recovery.
Older structures built to less stringent building codes may suffer greater damage as they are
typically more vulnerable to extreme winds.
Large scale wind events can have significant economic impact on the affected area, as it must
now fund expenses such as infrastructure repair and restoration, temporary services and
facilities, overtime pay for responders, as well as normal day-to-day operating expenses.
Businesses that are more reliant on utility infrastructure than others may suffer greater
damages without a backup power source.
Sabine Lake is a large recreational lake that attracts fishing and boating activities throughout the
year. A large thunderstorm wind event could impact recreational water activities, placing
boaters and campers in imminent danger, potentially requiring emergency services or lake
evacuation.
Recreational areas and parks may be damaged or inaccessible due to downed trees or debris,
causing temporary impacts to area businesses.
The economic and financial impacts of thunderstorm winds on the area will depend entirely on the scale
of the event, what is damaged, and how quickly repairs to critical components of the economy can be
implemented. The level of preparedness and pre-event planning done by the community, local
businesses, and citizens will also contribute to the overall economic and financial conditions in the
aftermath of any thunderstorm wind event.
SECTION 11: TORNADO
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
Hazard Description ........................................................................................................................................ 1
Location ......................................................................................................................................................... 2
Extent ............................................................................................................................................................ 2
Historical Occurrences .................................................................................................................................. 5
Significant Past Events .............................................................................................................................. 8
Probability of Future Events ......................................................................................................................... 8
Vulnerability and Impact ............................................................................................................................... 8
Assessment of Impacts ........................................................................................................................... 11
Hazard Description
Tornadoes are among the most violent storms on the planet. A tornado is
a rapidly rotating column of air extending between, and in contact with, a
cloud and the surface of the earth. The most violent tornadoes are capable
of tremendous destruction, with wind speeds of 250 miles per hour (mph)
or more. In extreme cases, winds may approach 300 mph. Damage paths
can be in excess of 1 mile wide and 50 miles long.
The most powerful tornadoes are produced by “Supercell Thunderstorms.”
Supercell Thunderstorms are created when horizontal wind shears (winds
moving in different directions at different altitudes) begin to rotate the
storm. This horizontal rotation can be tilted vertically by violent updrafts,
and the rotation radius can shrink, forming a vertical column of very quickly
swirling air. This rotating air can eventually reach the ground, forming a
tornado.
Table 11-1. Tornado Variations
WEAK TORNADOES STRONG TORNADOES VIOLENT TORNADOES
69% of all tornadoes
Less than 5% of tornado
deaths
Lifetime 1-10+ minutes
Winds less than 110 mph
29% of all tornadoes
Nearly 30% of all tornado
deaths
May last 20 minutes or
longer
Winds 110 – 205 mph
2% of all tornadoes
70% of all tornado deaths
Lifetime can exceed 1 hour
Winds greater than 205 mph
Section 11: Tornado
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 2
Location
As with thunderstorms, tornadoes do not have any specific geographic boundary and can occur
throughout the Jefferson County planning area, including the SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions. It
is assumed that the Jefferson County planning area is equally exposed to tornado activity. Jefferson
County is located in Wind Zone III (Figure 11-1), where tornado winds can be as high as 200 mph.
Figure 11-1. FEMA Wind Zones in the United States1
Extent
The destruction caused by tornadoes ranges from light to inconceivable depending on the intensity, size,
and duration of the storm. Typically, tornadoes cause the greatest damage to structures of light
construction, such as residential homes (particularly mobile homes).
Tornado magnitudes prior to 2005 were determined using the traditional version of the Fujita Scale (Table
11-2). Since February 2007, the Fujita Scale has been replaced by the Enhanced Fujita Scale (Table 11-3),
which retains the same basic design and 6 strength categories as the previous scale. The newer scale
1 Jefferson County is indicated by the star.
Section 11: Tornado
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 3
reflects more refined assessments of tornado damage surveys, standardization, and damage
consideration to a wider range of structures.
Table 11-2. The Fujita Tornado Scale2
F-SCALE
NUMBER INTENSITY
WIND
SPEED
(MPH)
TYPE OF DAMAGE DONE
PERCENT OF APPRAISED
STRUCTURE VALUE LOST
DUE TO DAMAGE
F0 Gale Tornado 40 – 72
Some damage to chimneys; breaks branches
off trees; pushes over shallow-rooted trees;
damages sign boards.
None Estimated
F1 Moderate
Tornado 73 – 112
The lower limit is the beginning of hurricane
wind speed; peels surface off roofs; mobile
homes pushed off foundations or
overturned; moving autos pushed off roads;
attached garages may be destroyed.
0% – 20%
F2 Significant
Tornado 113 – 157
Considerable damage. Roofs torn off frame
houses; mobile homes demolished; boxcars
pushed over; large trees snapped or
uprooted; light object missiles generated.
50% – 100%
F3 Severe
Tornado 158 – 206
Roofs and some walls torn off well-
constructed houses; trains overturned; most
trees in forest uprooted.
100%
F4 Devastating
Tornado 207 – 260
Well-constructed homes leveled; structures
with weak foundations blown off some
distance; cars thrown and large missiles
generated.
100%
F5 Incredible
Tornado 261 – 318
Strong frame houses lifted off foundations
and carried considerable distances to
disintegrate; automobile sized missiles flying
through the air in excess of 330 yards; trees
debarked; steel reinforced concrete badly
damaged.
100%
2 Source: http://www.tornadoproject.com/fscale/fscale.htm
Section 11: Tornado
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 4
Table 11-3. Enhanced Fujita Scale for Tornados
Both the Fujita Scale and Enhanced Fujita Scale should be referenced in reviewing previous occurrences
since tornado events prior to 2007 will follow the original Fujita Scale. The largest magnitude reported
within the planning area is F3 on the Fujita Scale, a “Severe Tornado.” Based on the planning areas
location in Wind Zone III, the planning area could experience anywhere from an EF0 to an EF5 depending
on the wind speed.
The events in Jefferson County have been between F0 and F3 (Table 11-4). Therefore, the range of
intensity that the Jefferson County planning area, including the SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions,
would be expected to mitigate is a tornado event that would be a low to severe risk, an EF0 to EF5.
STORM
CATEGORY
DAMAGE
LEVEL
3 SECOND
GUST (MPH) DESCRIPTION OF DAMAGES PHOTO
EXAMPLE
EF0 Gale 65 – 85
Some damage to chimneys; breaks branches off
trees; pushes over shallow-rooted trees; damages
sign boards.
EF1 Weak 86 – 110
The lower limit is the beginning of hurricane wind
speed; peels surface off roofs; mobile homes
pushed off foundations or overturned; moving
autos pushed off roads; attached garages may be
destroyed.
EF2 Strong 111 – 135
Considerable damage; roofs torn off frame houses;
mobile homes demolished; boxcars pushed over;
large trees snapped or uprooted; light object
missiles generated.
EF3 Severe 136 – 165
Roof and some walls torn off well-constructed
houses; trains overturned; most trees in forest
uprooted.
EF4 Devastating 166 – 200
Well-constructed homes leveled; structures with
weak foundations blown off some distance; cars
thrown and large missiles generated.
EF5 Incredible 200+
Strong frame houses lifted off foundations and
carried considerable distances to disintegrate;
automobile sized missiles flying through the air in
excess of 330 yards; trees debarked; steel
reinforced concrete badly damaged.
Section 11: Tornado
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 5
Historical Occurrences
The NCEI is a national data source organized under NOAA and is the largest archive available for climate
data. Only NCEI reported incidents were factored into this risk assessment. It is likely that a number of
occurrences have gone unreported over the past 21 years. It is important to note that the SETRPC is
located within the City of Beaumont. There may be some occurrences that have occurred for the SETRPC
and may not have been recorded, but are included in the City of Beaumont occurrence data because of
their location.
Figure 11-2 identifies the locations of previous occurrences in the Jefferson County planning area from
1996 to 2016. A total of 10 events have been recorded by the Storm Prediction Center (National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration – NOAA) and the National Center for Environmental Information (NCEI)
databases for the Jefferson County planning area, including the SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions.
The most significant event reported occurred in Jefferson County near the Parkdale Mall area on August
18, 2009. The EF1 tornado was 100 yards wide and stayed on the ground in Jefferson County for just under
1 mile. The area impacted by the tornado was densely populated with commercial development and
damages exceeded 22 million dollars (2016 dollar value).
Section 11: Tornado
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 6
Figure 11-2. Spatial Historical Tornado Events, 1996-20163
3 Source: NOAA Records
Section 11: Tornado
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 7
Table 11-4. Historical Tornado Events, 1996-20164
JURISDICTION DATE TIME MAGNITUDE DEATHS INJURIES PROPERTY
DAMAGE
CROP
DAMAGE
Port Arthur 7/14/1997 3:05 PM F0 0 3 $74,536 $0
Nome 1/1/1999 11:45 PM F3 0 5 $718,070 $0
Jefferson County 4/3/2000 3:08 AM F1 0 1 $138,944 $0
Groves 4/3/2000 3:20 AM F1 0 0 $4,168,310 $0
Bevil Oaks 10/12/2001 2:04 PM F0 0 0 $0 $0
Beaumont 10/13/2001 3:55 AM F1 0 0 $1,350,994 $0
Beaumont 11/18/2003 1:00 AM F0 0 0 $130,033 $0
China 10/16/2006 5:00 AM F1 0 0 $356,043 $0
Beaumont 8/18/2009 12:57 PM F1 0 10 $22,304,870 $0
Nome 6/9/2010 4:32 AM F1 0 0 $109,725 $0
Table 11-5. Summary of Historical Tornado Events, 1996-20165
JURISDICTION NUMBER OF
EVENTS MAGNITUDE FATALITIES INJURIES PROPERTY
DAMAGE
CROP
DAMAGE
Jefferson County 1 F1 0 1 $138,944 $0
Beaumont 3 F1 0 10 $23,785,897 $0
Bevil Oaks 1 F0 0 0 $0 $0
China 1 F1 0 0 $356,043 $0
Groves 1 F1 0 0 $4,168,310 $0
Nederland 0 N/A 0 0 $0 $0
Nome 2 F3 0 5 $827,795 $0
Port Arthur 1 F0 0 3 $74,536 $0
Port Neches 0 N/A 0 0 $0 $0
SETRPC 0 N/A 0 0 $0 $0
TOTAL LOSSES 10 (Max Extent) 0 19 $29,351,525
4 Values are in 2016 dollars.
5 Values are in 2016 dollars.
Section 11: Tornado
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 8
Based on the list of historical tornado events for the Jefferson County planning area (listed above),
including the SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions, no events have occurred since the 2011 Plan.
Significant Past Events
January 1, 1999 – Nome
A strong tornado that developed in Liberty County moved into western Jefferson County, destroying
several rice dryers, 2 mobile homes, and a brick house. 5 people were injured in the mobile homes and
brick house. 2 people received broken necks and other injuries after they were ejected from a mobile
home.
A fiberglass tub from the destroyed brick home was found 1 mile away. Cancelled checks and other
paperwork were found 7 miles away in southern Hardin County. This tornado was strongest southwest of
Nome, and was weakening as it passed through the small community of Nome. At least 20 homes received
minor damage, such as blown off shingles, and many trees were blown down.
October 16, 2006 – China/Jefferson County
An abundance of moisture and high wind shear resulted in several tornadoes and flash floods across
southeast Texas. A tornado destroyed 5 mobile homes and damaged an additional 20 homes just east of
China. Trees and power lines were blown down.
August 18, 2009 – Jefferson County
An EF1 Tornado touched down just west of the Kohl’s Department Store in the Parkdale Mall area. The
tornado struck the Kohl’s, tearing off part of its roof and collapsing the front entrance. Damage to the
store forced it to close for several weeks. The tornado continued to the northeast and crossed a Walmart
parking lot, flipping over 4 vehicles and damaging dozens of others. Further to the northeast, the tornado
struck Parkdale Mall, damaging the roofs of several department stores. The tornado lifted in the east
parking lot of Parkdale Mall before reaching Highway 69. Numerous photographs and videos of the
tornado were taken.
Probability of Future Events
Tornadic storms can occur at any time of year and at any time of day, but they are typically more common
in the spring months during the late afternoon and evening hours. A smaller, high frequency period can
emerge in the fall during the brief transition between the warm and cold seasons. According to historical
records, Jefferson County experiences a tornado touchdown approximately every year. This frequency
supports a highly likely probability of future events for the Jefferson County planning area, including the
SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions.
Vulnerability and Impact
Because tornadoes often cross jurisdictional boundaries, all existing and future buildings, facilities, and
populations in Jefferson County are considered to be exposed to this hazard and could potentially be
impacted. The damage caused by a tornado is typically a result of high wind velocity, wind-blown debris,
lightning, and large hail.
Section 11: Tornado
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 9
The average tornado moves from southwest to northeast, but tornadoes have been known to move in
any direction. Consequently, the vulnerability of humans and property is difficult to evaluate since
tornadoes form at different strengths, in random locations, and create relatively narrow paths of
destruction. Although tornadoes strike at random, making all buildings vulnerable, three types of
structures are more likely to suffer damage:
Manufactured Homes;
Homes on crawlspaces (more susceptible to lift); and
Buildings with large spans, such as shopping malls, gymnasiums, and factories.
Tornadoes can possibly cause a significant threat to people as they could be struck by flying debris, falling
trees/branches, utility lines, and poles. First responders could also not be able to respond to calls due to
blocked roads. Tornadoes commonly cause power outages, which could cause health and safety risks to
patients in hospitals or other vulnerable populations that rely on power for medical necessities.
The Jefferson County planning area features multiple mobile or manufactured home parks throughout
the planning area and all participating jurisdictions. These parks are typically more vulnerable to tornado
events than typical site built structures. In addition, manufactured homes are located sporadically
throughout the planning area, including all jurisdictions. These homes would also be more vulnerable. The
U.S. Census data indicates a total of 3,138 manufactured homes located in the Jefferson County planning
area, including all participating jurisdictions (Table 11-6). In addition, 65.4% (approximately 69,478
structures) of the single family residential (SFR) structures in the Jefferson County planning area were built
before 1980.6 These structures would typically be built to lower or less stringent construction standards
than newer construction and may be more susceptible to damages during significant tornado events.
Table 11-6. Structures at Greater Risk by Jurisdiction
JURISDICTION MANUFACTURED
HOMES
SFR STRUCTURES BUILT BEFORE
1980
Beaumont 718 33,386
Bevil Oaks 27 361
China 87 249
Groves 69 5,388
Nederland 219 5,473
Nome 45 107
Port Arthur 234 16,809
Port Neches 82 3,887
SETRPC 0 0
Jefferson County7 3,138 69,478
6 Source: U.S. Census Bureau data estimates for 2014.
7 County totals includes SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions and unincorporated areas.
Section 11: Tornado
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 10
The following critical facilities would be vulnerable to tornado events in each participating jurisdiction:
Table 11-7. Critical Facilities by Jurisdiction
JURISDICTION CRITICAL FACILITIES
Jefferson County Port Authority Facility, Fire Station, Water District Facility, 1 School
Beaumont 2 Fire Stations, 2 Police Stations, 32 Schools, Port Authority Facility, 5 Water
District Facilities, 3 Drainage District Facilities, 4 Hospitals
Bevil Oaks Fire Station
China Fire Station, 2 Schools
Groves Fire Station, Police Station, 4 Schools
Nederland Fire Station, Police Station, Water District Facility, 3 Hospitals, Airport, 8
Schools
Nome Fire Station
Port Arthur Fire Station, Police Station, Drainage District Facility, 2 Port Authority
Facilities, 2 Hospitals, 14 Schools
Port Neches Fire Station, Police Station, 5 Schools
SETRPC SETRPC Facility
The average loss estimate of crops and property is $29,351,525 (in 2016 dollars), having an approximate
annual loss estimate of $1,397,692. Based on historic loss and damages, the impact of tornadoes on the
Jefferson County planning area, including the SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions, can be considered
“Major”, with more than 25 percent of property expected to be destroyed or with major damage, injuries
and/or illness that result in permanent disability, and critical facilities shut down for at least 2 weeks.
Annualized losses are not included for the SETRPC as there have not been events or losses to effect the
facilities separate and apart from a historical occurrence for the City of Beaumont.
Table 11-8. Potential Annualized Losses by Jurisdiction, 1996-2016
JURISDICTION PROPERTY AND CROP DAMAGE ANNUAL LOSS ESTIMATE
Jefferson County $138,944 $6,616
Beaumont $23,785,897 $1,132,662
Bevil Oaks $0 $0
China $356,043 $16,954
Groves $4,168,310 $198,491
Nederland $0 $0
Nome $827,795 $39,419
Section 11: Tornado
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 11
JURISDICTION PROPERTY AND CROP DAMAGE ANNUAL LOSS ESTIMATE
Port Arthur $74,536 $3,549
Port Neches $0 $0
SETRPC $0 $0
Assessment of Impacts
Tornadoes have the potential to pose a significant risk to the population and can create dangerous
situations. Providing and preserving public health and safety is often difficult. Impacts to the planning
area can include:
Individuals exposed to the storm can be struck by flying debris, falling limbs, or downed trees,
causing serious injury or death.
Structures can be damaged or crushed by falling trees, which can result in physical harm to the
occupants.
Manufactured homes may suffer substantial damage as they would be more vulnerable than
typical site built structures.
Sub-standard construction may suffer substantial damage as they are not built to code and
would be more vulnerable to tornado events than code compliant structures.
Significant debris and downed trees can result in emergency response vehicles being unable to
access areas of the community.
Downed power lines may result in roadways being unsafe for use, which may prevent first
responders from answering calls for assistance or rescue.
Tornadoes often result in widespread power outages, increasing the risk to more vulnerable
portions of the population who rely on power for health and/or life safety.
Extended power outage can result in an increase in structure fires and/or carbon monoxide
poisoning, as individuals attempt to cook or heat their home with alternate, unsafe cooking or
heating devices, such as grills.
Tornadoes can destroy or make residential structures uninhabitable, requiring shelter or
relocation of residents in the aftermath of the event.
First responders must enter the damage area shortly after the tornado passes to begin rescue
operations and to organize cleanup and assessments efforts. Therefore, they are exposed to
downed power lines, unstable and unusual debris, hazardous materials, and generally unsafe
conditions, elevating the risk of injury to first responders and potentially diminishing emergency
response capabilities.
Emergency operations and services may be significantly impacted due to damaged facilities, loss
of communications, and damaged emergency vehicles and equipment.
County or City departments may be damaged or destroyed, delaying response and recovery
efforts for the entire community.
Private sector entities that the County or City and its residents rely on, such as utility providers,
financial institutions, and medical care providers may not be fully operational and may require
assistance from neighboring communities until full services can be restored.
Section 11: Tornado
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 12
Economic disruption negatively impacts the programs and services provided by the community
due to short and long term loss in revenue.
Damage to infrastructure may slow economic recovery since repairs may be extensive and
lengthy.
Some businesses not directly damaged by the tornado may be negatively impacted while roads
and utilities are being restored, further slowing economic recovery.
When the community is affected by significant property damage it is anticipated that funding
would be required for infrastructure repair and restoration, temporary services and facilities,
overtime pay for responders, as well as normal day-to-day operating expenses.
Displaced residents may not be able to immediately return to work, further slowing economic
recovery.
Residential structures destroyed by a tornado may not be rebuilt for years, reducing the tax
base for the community.
Large or intense tornadoes may result in a dramatic population fluctuation, as people are unable
to return to their homes or jobs and must seek shelter and/or work outside of the affected area.
Businesses that are uninsured or underinsured may have difficulty reopening, which results in a
net loss of jobs for the community and a potential increase in the unemployment rate.
Recreation activities may be unavailable and tourism can be unappealing for years following a
large tornado, devastating directly related local businesses.
The economic and financial impacts of a tornado event on the community will depend on the scale of the
event, what is damaged, costs of repair or replacement, lost business days in impacted areas, and how
quickly repairs to critical components of the economy can be implemented. The level of preparedness
and pre-event planning done by government, businesses, and citizens will contribute to the overall
economic and financial conditions in the aftermath of a tornado event.
SECTION 12: DROUGHT
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
Hazard Description ........................................................................................................................................ 1
Location ......................................................................................................................................................... 2
Extent ............................................................................................................................................................ 3
Historical Occurrences .................................................................................................................................. 5
Significant Past Events .............................................................................................................................. 5
Probability of Future Events ......................................................................................................................... 6
Vulnerability and Impact ............................................................................................................................... 6
Assessment of Impacts.............................................................................................................................. 8
Hazard Description
Drought is a period of time without substantial rainfall that
persists from one year to the next. Drought is a normal part of
virtually all climatic regions, including areas with high and low
average rainfall. Drought is the consequence of anticipated
natural precipitation reduction over an extended period of time,
usually a season or more in length. Droughts can be classified as
meteorological, hydrologic, agricultural, and socioeconomic.
Table 12-1 presents definitions for these different types of
drought.
Table 12-1. Drought Classification Definitions1
METEOROLOGICAL
DROUGHT
The degree of dryness or departure of actual precipitation from an expected
average or normal amount based on monthly, seasonal, or annual time scales.
HYDROLOGIC
DROUGHT
The effects of precipitation shortfalls on stream flows and reservoir, lake, and
groundwater levels.
AGRICULTURAL
DROUGHT Soil moisture deficiencies relative to water demands of plant life, usually crops.
SOCIOECONOMIC
DROUGHT
The effect of demands for water exceeding the supply as a result of a weather-
related supply shortfall.
Droughts are one of the most complex of all natural hazards as it is difficult to determine their precise
beginning or end. In addition, droughts can lead to other hazards such as extreme heat and wildfires.
Their impact on wildlife and area farming is enormous, often killing crops, grazing land, edible plants, and
1 Source: Multi-Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment: A Cornerstone of the National Mitigation Strategy, FEMA
Section 12: Drought
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 2
even in severe cases, trees. A secondary hazard to drought is wildfire because dying vegetation serves as
a prime ignition source. Therefore, a heat wave combined with a drought is a very dangerous situation.
Location
Droughts occur regularly throughout Texas and Jefferson County, and are a frequent condition. However,
they can vary greatly in their intensity and duration. The Drought Monitor (Figure 12-1) shows the study
region is currently experiencing normal conditions. The planning area has experienced abnormally dry to
exceptional drought conditions over the last ten years (Figure 12-2). There is no distinct geographic
boundary to drought; therefore, it can occur throughout the Jefferson County planning area, including the
SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions, equally.
Figure 12-1. U.S. Drought Monitor, December 2016
Section 12: Drought
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 3
Figure 12-2. U.S. Drought Monitor, June 2011
Extent
The Palmer Drought Index is used to measure the extent of drought by measuring the duration and
intensity of long-term drought-inducing circulation patterns. Long-term drought is cumulative, with the
intensity of drought during the current month dependent upon the current weather patterns plus the
cumulative patterns of previous months. The hydrological impacts of drought (e.g., reservoir levels,
groundwater levels, etc.) take longer to develop. Table 12-2 depicts magnitude of drought, while Table
12-3 describes the classification descriptions.
Section 12: Drought
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 4
Table 12-2. Palmer Drought Index
DROUGHT INDEX
DROUGHT CONDITION CLASSIFICATIONS
Extreme Severe Moderate Normal Moderately
Moist
Very
Moist
Extremely
Moist
Z Index -2.75 and
below
-2.00 to
-2.74
-1.25 to
-1.99
-1.24 to
+.99
+1.00 to
+2.49
+2.50 to
+3.49 n/a
Meteorological -4.00 and
below
-3.00 to
-3.99
-2.00 to
-2.99
-1.99 to
+1.99
+2.00 to
+2.99
+3.00 to
+3.99
+4.00 and
above
Hydrological -4.00 and
below
-3.00 to
-3.99
-2.00 to
-2.99
-1.99 to
+1.99
+2.00 to
+2.99
+3.00 to
+3.99
+4.00 and
above
Table 12-3. Palmer Drought Category Descriptions2
CATEGORY DESCRIPTION POSSIBLE IMPACTS
PALMER
DROUGHT
INDEX
D0 Abnormally Dry
Going into drought: short-term dryness slowing
planting, growth of crops or pastures; fire risk above
average. Coming out of drought: some lingering
water deficits; pastures or crops not fully recovered.
-1.0 to
-1.9
D1 Moderate Drought
Some damage to crops, pastures; fire risk high;
streams, reservoirs, or wells low, some water
shortages developing or imminent, voluntary water
use restrictions requested.
-2.0 to
-2.9
D2 Severe Drought Crop or pasture losses likely; fire risk very high; water
shortages common; water restrictions imposed.
-3.0 to
-3.9
D3 Extreme Drought Major crop/pasture losses; extreme fire danger;
widespread water shortages or restrictions.
-4.0 to
-4.9
D4 Exceptional Drought
Exceptional and widespread crop/pasture losses;
exceptional fire risk; shortages of water in reservoirs,
streams, and wells, creating water emergencies.
-5.0 or less
Drought is monitored nationwide by the National Drought Mitigation Center (NDMC). Indicators are used
to describe broad scale drought conditions across the United States. Indicators correspond to the
intensity of drought.
2 Source: National Drought Mitigation Center
Section 12: Drought
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 5
Based on the historical occurrences for drought and the location of Jefferson County, the entire planning
area, including the SEPRTC and all participating jurisdictions, can anticipate a range of drought from
abnormally dry to exceptional, or D0 to D4 based on the Palmer Drought Category.
Historical Occurrences
Jefferson County may typically experience a severe drought. Table 12-4 and 12-5 list historical events that
have occurred in Jefferson County as reported in the National Center for Environmental Information
(NCEI). Historical drought information, as provided by the NCEI, shows drought activity across a multi-
county forecast area for each event. The appropriate percentage of the total property and crop damage
reported for the entire forecast area has been allocated to each county impacted by the event. Historical
drought data for the participating jurisdictions in the Jefferson County planning area, including the SETRPC
and all participating jurisdictions, is provided on a County-wide basis per the NCEI database.
Table 12-4. Historical Drought Years, 1996-2016
Table 12-5. Historical Drought Events, 1996-20163
JURISDICTION DATE DEATHS INJURIES PROPERTY
DAMAGE
CROP
DAMAGE
Jefferson County 5/1/1996 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 5/20/1998 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 6/1/1998 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 7/1/1998 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 2/1/2000 0 0 $0 $0
TOTALS 0 0 $0
Based on the list of historical drought events for the Jefferson County planning area (listed above),
including the SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions, no events have occurred since the 2011 Plan.
3 Values are in 2016 dollars.
DROUGHT YEAR
1996
1998
2000
3 unique events
Section 12: Drought
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 6
Significant Past Events
January - May, 1996 – Jefferson County
Rainfall totals from January through May averaged 10 to 15 inches below normal. The main areas affected
include farming and fire protection. Crop damage in neighboring counties exceeded 1 million dollars.
Drought conditions continue across southeast Texas through May.
May - July, 1998 – Jefferson County
Drought conditions began by mid-May, as southeast Texans had gone over 6 weeks without any significant
rainfall. By the end of May, many locations had seen less than 0.10 inches of rain for the month. This was
the start of a significant impact on agriculture and forestry resources. A mild to moderate drought
continued across southeast Texas in the month of June. Only 2 days provided any relief from the dry
weather, June 5 and June 26, 1998. Many places recorded less than 2 inches of rain for the entire month
of June. Crop losses continued to mount, primarily in the rice business, as well as forestry resources.
February, 2000 – Jefferson County
The month of February was one of the 5 driest Februarys on record across southeast Texas. Less than 1
inch of rain fell across the entire region. The 2 month total for January and February 2000 was the second
driest on record for the Beaumont/Port Arthur area, with less than 2.5 inches of rainfall.
Probability of Future Events
Based on available records of historic events, there have been 3 extended time periods of drought within
a 21 year reporting period, which provides a frequency of occurrence of 1 event probable in the next 5
years. This frequency supports an occasional probability of future events. All participating jurisdictions
including the SETRPC are included under the County.
Vulnerability and Impact
Loss estimates were based on 21 years of statistical data from the NCEI. A drought event frequency-
impact was then developed to determine an impact profile on agriculture products and estimate potential
losses due to drought in the area. Table 12-6 shows annualized exposure.
Table 12-6. Drought Event Damage Totals, 1996-2016
JURISDICTION PROPERTY & CROP LOSS ANNUALIZED LOSS ESTIMATES
Jefferson County $0 $0
Drought impacts large areas and crosses jurisdictional boundaries. All existing and future buildings,
facilities, and populations are exposed to this hazard and could potentially be impacted. However,
drought impacts are mostly experienced in water shortages and crop/livestock losses on agricultural lands
and typically have no impact on buildings.
In terms of vulnerability, population, agriculture, property, and environment are all vulnerable to drought.
The average person will survive only a few days without water, and this timeframe can be drastically
Section 12: Drought
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 7
shortened for those people with more fragile health – typically children, the elderly, and the ill.
Populations over 65 in the Jefferson County planning area are estimated at 13% of the total population
and children under the age of 5 exceed 6% – an estimated total of 50,0744 potentially vulnerable residents
in the planning area based on age (Table 12-7).
Table 12-7. Populations at Greater Risk by Jurisdiction
JURISDICTION POPULATION 65 AND
OLDER POPULATION UNDER 5
Beaumont 15,539 8,087
Bevil Oaks 290 42
China 183 25
Groves 2,685 971
Nederland 2,371 976
Nome 56 11
Port Arthur 6,344 5,073
Port Neches 1,939 904
Jefferson County5 32,774 17,300
The population is also vulnerable to food shortages when drought conditions exist and potable water is in
short supply. Potable water is used for drinking, sanitation, patient care, sterilization, equipment, heating
and cooling systems, and many other essential functions in medical facilities. All residents in the Jefferson
County planning area could be adversely affected by drought conditions, which could limit water supplies
and present health threats. However, during summer drought, or hot and dry conditions, elderly persons,
small children, infants, and the chronically ill who do not have adequate cooling units in their homes may
become more vulnerable to injury and/or death.
The economic impact of droughts can be significant as it produces a complex web of effects that span
many sectors of the economy and reach well beyond the area experiencing physical drought. This
complexity exists because water is integral to our ability to produce goods and provide services. If
droughts extend over a number of years, the direct and indirect economic impact can be significant.
Habitat damage is a vulnerability of the environment during periods of drought, for both aquatic and
terrestrial species. The environment also becomes vulnerable during periods of extreme or prolonged
drought due to severe erosion and land degradation.
The impact of droughts experienced in the Jefferson County planning area, including the SETRPC and all
participating jurisdictions, has resulted in 0 injuries and fatalities. This supports a “limited” severity of
4 U.S. Census Bureau 2014 data for Jefferson County
5 County totals includes all participating jurisdictions and unincorporated areas.
Section 12: Drought
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 8
impact, meaning injuries and/or illnesses are treatable with first aid, shutdown of facilities and services
for 24 hours or less, and less than 10% of property is destroyed or sustains major damage. Annualized loss
over the 21-year reporting period in Jefferson County is negligible.
Assessment of Impacts
The Drought Impact Reporter was developed in 2005 by the University of Nebraska-Lincoln to provide a
national database of drought impacts. Droughts can have an impact on: agriculture; business and
industry; energy; fire; plants and wildlife; relief, response, and restrictions; society and public health;
tourism and recreation; and water supply and quality. Table 12-8 lists the drought impacts for Jefferson
County from 2005 to 2016, based on reports received by the Drought Impact Reporter.
Table 12-8. Drought Impacts, 2005-2016
DROUGHT IMPACTS
Agriculture 29
Business & Industry 3
Energy 1
Fire 9
Plants & Wildlife 21
Relief, Response, & Restrictions 12
Society & Public Health 5
Tourism & Recreation 1
Water Supply & Quality 10
Drought has the potential to impact people in the Jefferson County planning area. While it is rare that
drought, in and of itself, leads to a direct risk to the health and safety of people in the U.S., severe water
shortages could result in inadequate supply for human needs. Drought is also frequently associated with
a variety of impacts, including:
Recreational activities at Sabine Lake that rely on water may be curtailed, such as hunting and
fishing, resulting in fewer tourists and lower revenue.
The McFaddin National Wildlife Refuge area may be especially vulnerable as severe and
prolonged drought can result in the reduction of a species, or cause the extinction of a species
altogether.
Plant life will suffer from long-term drought. Wind and erosion will also pose a threat to plant
life as soil quality will decline.
The number of health-related low-flow issues (e.g., diminished sewage flows, increased
pollution concentrations, reduced firefighting capacity, and cross-connection contamination)
will increase as the drought intensifies.
Section 12: Drought
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 9
Public safety from forest/range/wildfires will increase as water availability and/or pressure
decreases.
Respiratory ailments may increase as the air quality decreases.
There may be an increase in disease due to wildlife concentrations (e.g., rabies, Rocky Mountain
spotted fever, Lyme disease).
Jurisdictions and residents may disagree over water use/water rights, creating conflict.
Political conflicts may increase between municipalities, counties, states, and regions.
Water management conflicts may arise between competing interests.
Increased law enforcement activities may be required to enforce water restrictions.
Severe water shortages could result in inadequate supply for human needs as well as lower
quality of water for consumption.
Firefighters may have limited water resources to aid in firefighting and suppression activities,
increasing risk to lives and property.
During drought there is an increased risk for wildfires and dust storms.
The community may need increased operational costs to enforce water restriction or rationing.
Prolonged drought can lead to increases in illness and disease related to drought.
Utility providers can see decreases in revenue as water supplies diminish.
Utilities providers may cut back energy generation and service to their customers in order to
prioritize critical service needs.
Hydroelectric power generation facilities and infrastructure would have significantly diminished
generation capability. Dams simply cannot produce as much electricity from low water levels as
they can from high water levels.
Fish and wildlife food and habitat will be reduced or degraded over time during a drought and
disease will increase, especially for aquatic life.
Wildlife will move to more sustainable locations, creating higher concentrations of wildlife in
smaller areas, increasing vulnerability and further depleting limited natural resources.
Dry and dead vegetation will increase the risk of wildfire.
Land subsidence threat increases as groundwater is depleted.
Drought poses a significant risk to annual and perennial crop production and overall crop
quality, leading to higher food costs.
Drought related declines in production may lead to an increase in unemployment.
Drought may limit livestock grazing resulting in decreased livestock weight, potential increased
livestock mortality, and increased cost for feed.
Negatively impacted water suppliers may face increased costs resulting from the transport
water or develop supplemental water resources.
Long term drought may negatively impact future economic development.
The overall extent of damages caused by periods of drought is dependent on its extent and duration. The
level of preparedness and pre-event planning done by government, businesses, and citizens will
contribute to the overall economic and financial conditions in the aftermath of a drought event.
SECTION 13: WILDFIRE
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
Hazard Description ........................................................................................................................................ 1
Location ......................................................................................................................................................... 1
Extent .......................................................................................................................................................... 11
Historical Occurrences ................................................................................................................................ 23
Probability of Future Events ....................................................................................................................... 25
Vulnerability and Impact ............................................................................................................................. 26
Assessment of Impacts ........................................................................................................................... 37
Hazard Description
A wildfire event can rapidly spread out of control and occurs most often in the summer, when the brush
is dry and flames can move unchecked through a highly vegetative area. Wildfires can start as a slow
burning fire along the forest floor, killing and damaging trees. The fires often spread more rapidly as they
reach the tops of trees, with wind carrying the flames from tree to tree. Usually, dense smoke is the first
indication of a wildfire.
A wildfire event often begins unnoticed and spreads quickly, lighting brush, trees, and homes on fire. For
example, a wildfire may be started by a campfire that was not doused properly, tossed cigarette, burning
debris, or arson.
Texas has seen a significant increase in the number of wildfires in the past 30 years, which included
wildland, interface, or intermix fires. Wildland Urban Interface or Intermix (WUI) fires occur in areas where
structures and other human improvements meet or intermingle with undeveloped wildland or vegetative
fuels. Wildland fires are fueled almost exclusively by natural vegetation, while interface or intermix fires
are urban/wildland fires in which vegetation and the built-environment provide the fuel.
Location
A wildfire event can be a potentially damaging consequence of drought. Wildfires can vary greatly in
terms of size, location, intensity, and duration. While wildfires are not confined to any specific geographic
location, they are most likely to occur in open grasslands. The threat to people and property from a
wildfire event is greater in the fringe areas where developed areas meet open grass lands, such as the
WUI. (Figures 13-1 through 13-9). It is estimated that 30 percent of the total population in Jefferson
County live within the WUI. However, the entire Jefferson County planning area is at risk for wildfires.
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 2
Figure 13-1. Wildland Urban Interface Map – Jefferson County
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 3
Figure 13-2. Wildland Urban Interface Map – City of Beaumont, SETRPC
It is estimated that 23 percent of the total population in Beaumont live within the WUI. However, the
entire City of Beaumont, including the SETRPC, is at risk for wildfires.
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 4
Figure 13-3. Wildland Urban Interface Map – City of Bevil Oaks
It is estimated that 83 percent of the total population in Bevil Oaks live within the WUI. However, the
entire City of Bevil Oaks is at risk for wildfires.
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 5
Figure 13-4. Wildland Urban Interface Map – City of China
It is estimated that 96 percent of the total population in China live within the WUI. However, the entire
City of China is at risk for wildfires.
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 6
Figure 13-5. Wildland Urban Interface Map – City of Groves
It is estimated that 7 percent of the total population in Groves live within the WUI. However, the entire
City of Groves is at risk for wildfires.
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 7
Figure 13-6. Wildland Urban Interface Map – City of Nederland
It is estimated that 4 percent of the total population in Nederland live within the WUI. However, the
entire City of Nederland is at risk for wildfires.
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 8
Figure 13-7. Wildland Urban Interface Map – City of Nome
It is estimated that 86 percent of the total population in Nome live within the WUI. However, the entire
City of Nome is at risk for wildfires.
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 9
Figure 13-8. Wildland Urban Interface Map – City of Port Arthur
It is estimated that 16 percent of the total population in Port Arthur live within the WUI. However, the
entire City of Port Arthur is at risk for wildfires.
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 10
Figure 13-9. Wildland Urban Interface Map – City of Port Neches
It is estimated that 19 percent of the total population in Port Neches live within the WUI. However, the
entire City of Port Neches is at risk for wildfires.
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 11
Extent
Risk for a wildfire event is measured in terms of magnitude and
intensity using the Keetch Byram Drought Index (KBDI), a
mathematical system for relating current and recent weather
conditions to potential or expected fire behavior. The KBDI
determines forest fire potential based on a daily water balance,
derived by balancing a drought factor with precipitation and soil
moisture (assumed to have a maximum storage capacity of 8
inches), and is expressed in hundredths of an inch of soil moisture
depletion.
Each color in Figure 13-10 represents the drought index at that location. The drought index ranges from
0 to 800. A drought index of 0 represents no moisture depletion, and a drought index of 800 represents
absolutely dry conditions.
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 12
Figure 13-10. Keetch-Byram Drought Index (KBDI) for the State of Texas, December 20161
Fire behavior can be categorized at four distinct levels on the KBDI:
0 ‐200: Soil and fuel moisture are high. Most fuels will not readily ignite or burn. However, with
sufficient sunlight and wind, cured grasses and some light surface fuels will burn in spots and
patches.
1 The black circle indicates the Jefferson County planning area.
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 13
200 ‐400: Fires more readily burn and will carry across an area with no gaps. Heavier fuels will
not readily ignite and burn. Expect smoldering and the resulting smoke to carry into and
possibly through the night.
400 ‐600: Fires intensity begins to significantly increase. Fires will readily burn in all directions
exposing mineral soils in some locations. Larger fuels may burn or smolder for several days
creating possible smoke and control problems.
600 ‐800: Fires will burn to mineral soil. Stumps will burn to the end of underground roots and
spotting will be a major problem. Fires will burn through the night and heavier fuels will actively
burn and contribute to fire intensity.
The KBDI is a good measure of the readiness of fuels for a wildfire event. The KBDI should be referenced
as the area experiences changes in precipitation and soil moisture, and caution exercised in dryer, hotter
conditions.
The current range of intensity for Jefferson County in a wildfire event is within 0 to 200. The average
extent to be mitigated for the Jefferson County planning area, including the SETRPC and all participating
jurisdictions, is a KBDI of 566. At this level the intensity of fires begins to significantly increase and fires
readily burn in all directions, exposing mineral soils in some locations.
The Texas Forest Service’s Fire Intensity Scale identifies areas where significant fuel hazards and
associated dangerous fire behavior potential exist based on the weighted average of 4 percentile weather
categories. Jefferson County, including the SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions, is between a
potential low to moderate wildfire intensities. Figures 13-11 through 13-19 identify the wildfire intensity
for the Jefferson County planning area.
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 14
Figure 13-11. Fire Intensity Scale Map – Jefferson County
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 15
Figure 13-12. Fire Intensity Scale Map – Beaumont, SETRPC
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 16
Figure 13-13. Fire Intensity Scale Map – Bevil Oaks
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 17
Figure 13-14. Fire Intensity Scale Map – China
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 18
Figure 13-15. Fire Intensity Scale Map – Groves
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 19
Figure 13-16. Fire Intensity Scale Map – Nederland
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 20
Figure 13-17. Fire Intensity Scale Map – Nome
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 21
Figure 13-18. Fire Intensity Scale Map – Port Arthur
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 22
Figure 13-19. Fire Intensity Scale Map – Port Neches
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 23
Historical Occurrences
The Texas Forest Service reported 227 wildfire events between 2005 and 2015. The National Center for
Environmental Center (NCEI) reported 1 event from 1996 through June 2016. The Texas Forest Service
(TFS) started collecting wildfire data in 1985 and volunteer fire departments started reporting events after
2005. Due to a lack of recorded data for wildfire events prior to 2005, frequency calculations are based
on a twelve-year period, using only data from recorded years. The map below shows approximate
locations of wildfires, which can be grass or brushfires of any size (Figure 13-20). Table 13-1 identifies the
number of wildfires by jurisdiction, and total acreage burned. It is important to note that the SETRPC is
located within the City of Beaumont, however, none of the reported wildfire events have impacted the
SETRPC.
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 24
Figure 13-20. Location and Historic Wildfire Events for Jefferson County
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 25
Table 13-1. Historical Wildfire Events Summary
JURISDICTION NUMBER OF EVENTS ACRES BURNED
Jefferson County 228 4,207
Beaumont 13 345
Bevil Oaks 22 24
China 4 6
Groves 0 0
Nederland 4 4
Nome 0 0
Port Arthur 3 5
Port Neches 0 0
Table 13-2. Acreage of Suppressed Wildfire by Year
JURISDICTION 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Jefferson County 157 235 0 929 766 339 1,308 331 139 2 1
Beaumont 0 0 0 4 6 18 317 0 0 0 0
Bevil Oaks 0 0 0 0 11 2 11 0 0 0 0
China 0 0 0 0 0 4 2 0 0 0 0
Groves 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Nederland 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 0
Nome 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Port Arthur 0 0 0 0 3 0 2 0 0 0 0
Port Neches 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Probability of Future Events
Wildfires can occur at any time of the year. As the jurisdictions within the County move into wildland, the
potential area of occurrence of wildfire increases. With 228 events in a 12 year period, an event within
Jefferson County, including the SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions, is highly likely, meaning an event
is probable within the next year.
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 26
Vulnerability and Impact
Periods of drought, dry conditions, high temperatures, and low humidity are factors that contribute to the
occurrence of a wildfire event. Areas along railroads and people whose homes are in woodland settings
have an increased risk of being affected by wildfire.
The heavily populated urban areas of Jefferson County are not likely to experience large and sweeping
fires. Areas outside of city limits and in the unincorporated areas of Jefferson County are vulnerable.
Unoccupied buildings and open spaces that have not been maintained have the greatest vulnerability to
wildfire. The overall level of concern for wildfires is located mostly along the perimeter of the study area
where wildland and urban areas interface. Figures 13-1 through 13-9 (above) illustrate the areas that are
the most vulnerable to wildfire throughout the County.
The sparsely populated unincorporated areas of Dowling and Viterbo are capable of experiencing large
sweeping fires, especially where areas of vegetation are not maintained. Areas along major highways in
Cheek and China, as well as Jefferson County, have an increased vulnerability where empty lots and
unoccupied areas are located.
The following critical facilities (Table 13-3) are located in the WUI and are more susceptible to wildfire in
each participating jurisdiction:
Table 13-3. Critical Facilities Located in WUI by Jurisdiction
JURISDICTION CRITICAL FACILITIES
Jefferson County Port Authority Facility, Fire Station, Water District Facility, 1 School
Beaumont 1 Fire Station, 7 Schools, 3 Water District Facilities, 1 Drainage District
Facility, 1 Hospital
Bevil Oaks Fire Station
China Fire Station, 2 Schools
Groves None
Nederland Water District Facility
Nome Fire Station
Port Arthur None
Port Neches 1 School
SETRPC None
Within Jefferson County, a total of 228 fire events were reported from 2005 to 2016. All of these events
were suspected wildfires. Historic loss and annualized estimates due to wildfires are presented in Table
13-4 below. The frequency is approximately 19 events every year.
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 27
Table 13-4. Historic Loss Estimates Due to Wildfire2
JURISDICTION NUMBER OF
EVENTS ACRES BURNED ANNUAL ACRE
LOSSES
Jefferson County 228 4,207 350.58
Beaumont 13 345 28.75
Bevil Oaks 22 24 2
China 4 6 0.5
Groves 0 0 0
Nederland 4 4 0.33
Nome 0 0 0
Port Arthur 3 5 0.42
Port Neches 0 0 0
SETRPC 0 0 0
Figures 13-21 through 13-29 show Jefferson County and the threat of wildfire to the County and
participating jurisdictions.
2 Events divided by 12 years of data.
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 28
Figure 13-21. Wildfire Ignition Density – Jefferson County
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 29
Figure 13-22. Wildfire Ignition Density – Beaumont, SETRPC
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 30
Figure 13-23. Wildfire Ignition Density – Bevil Oaks
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 31
Figure 13-24. Wildfire Ignition Density – China
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 32
Figure 13-25. Wildfire Ignition Density – Groves
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 33
Figure 13-26. Wildfire Ignition Density – Nederland
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 34
Figure 13-27. Wildfire Ignition Density – Nome
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 35
Figure 13-28. Wildfire Ignition Density – Port Arthur
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 36
Figure 13-29. Wildfire Ignition Density – Port Neches
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 37
Diminished air quality is an environmental impact that can result from a wildfire event and pose a
potential health risk. The smoke plumes from wildfires can contain potentially inhalable carcinogenic
matter. Fine particles of invisible soot and ash that are too microscopic for the respiratory system to filter
can cause immediate and possibly long term health effects. The elderly or those individuals with
compromised respiratory systems may be more vulnerable to the effects of diminished air quality after a
wildfire event.
Climatic conditions such as severe freezes and drought can significantly increase the intensity of wildfires
since these conditions kill vegetation, creating a prime fuel source for wildfires. The intensity and rate at
which wildfires spread are directly related to wind speed, temperature, and relative humidity.
The severity of impact from major wildfire events can be substantial. Such events can cause multiple
deaths, shut down facilities for 30 days or more, and cause more than 50 percent of affected properties
to be destroyed or suffer major damage. Severity of impact is gauged by acreage burned, homes and
structures lost, and the number of resulting injuries and fatalities. For the Jefferson County planning area,
the impact from a wildfire event can be considered “Minor", meaning injuries and/or illnesses are
treatable with first aid, shutdown of facilities and services for 24 hours or less, and less than 10% of
property is destroyed or sustains major damage.
Assessment of Impacts
A wildfire event poses a potentially significant risk to public health and safety, particularly if the wildfire
is initially unnoticed and spreads quickly. The impacts associated with a wildfire are not limited to the
direct damages. Potential impacts for the planning area include:
Persons in the area at the time of the fire are at risk for injury or death from burns and/or
smoke inhalation.
First responders are at greater risk of physical injury since they are in close proximity to the
hazard while extinguishing flames, protecting property, or evacuating residents in the area.
First responders can experience heart disease, respiratory problems, and other long term
related illnesses from prolonged exposure to smoke, chemicals, and heat.
Emergency services may be disrupted during a wildfire if facilities are impacted, roadways are
inaccessible, or personnel are unable to report for duty.
Critical City and/or County departments may not be able to function and provide necessary
services depending on the location of the fire, and the structures or personnel impacted.
Non-critical businesses may be directly damaged, suffer loss of utility services, or be otherwise
inaccessible, delaying normal operations and slowing the recovery process.
Displaced residents may not be able to immediately return to work, further slowing economic
recovery.
Roadways in or near the WUI could be damaged or closed due to smoke and limited visibility.
Older homes are generally exempt from modern building code requirements, which may require
fire suppression equipment in the structure.
Some high density neighborhoods feature small lots with structures close together, increasing
the potential for fire to spread rapidly.
Air pollution from smoke may exacerbate respiratory problems of vulnerable residents.
Section 13: Wildfire
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 38
Charred ground after a wildfire cannot easily absorb rainwater, increasing the risk of flooding
and potential mudflows.
Wildfires can cause erosion, degrading stream water quality.
Wildlife may be displaced or destroyed.
Historical or cultural resources may be damaged or destroyed.
Tourism can be significantly disrupted, further delaying economic recovery for the area.
Vegetated dunes can be stripped, significantly damaging the function of the dunes to protect
inland areas from the destructive forces of wind and waves.
Economic disruption negatively impacts the programs and services provided by the community
due to short and long term loss in revenue.
Fire suppression costs can be substantial, exhausting the financial resources of the community.
Residential structures lost in a wildfire may not be rebuilt for years, reducing the tax base for the
community.
Sabine Lake recreation and tourism can be unappealing for years following a large wildfire,
devastating directly related businesses.
Direct impacts to municipal water supply may occur through contamination of ash and debris
during the fire, destruction of aboveground delivery lines, and soil erosion or debris deposits
into waterways after the fire.
The economic and financial impacts of a wildfire event on local government will depend on the scale of
the event, what is damaged, costs of repair or replacement, lost business days in impacted areas, and how
quickly repairs to critical components of the economy can be implemented. The level of preparedness
and pre-event planning done by government, businesses, and citizens will contribute to the overall
economic and financial conditions in the aftermath of a wildfire event.
SECTION 14: WINTER STORM
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
Hazard Description ........................................................................................................................................ 1
Location ......................................................................................................................................................... 3
Extent ............................................................................................................................................................ 3
Historical Occurrences .................................................................................................................................. 4
Significant Past Events .............................................................................................................................. 5
Probability of Future Events ......................................................................................................................... 6
Vulnerability and Impact ............................................................................................................................... 6
Assessment of Impacts ............................................................................................................................. 8
Hazard Description
A severe winter storm event is identified as a storm
with snow, ice, or freezing rain. This type of storm
can cause significant problems for area residents.
Winter storms are associated with freezing or frozen
precipitation such as freezing rain, sleet, snow and
the combined effects of winter precipitation and
strong winds. Wind chill is a function of temperature
and wind. Low wind chill is a product of high winds
and freezing temperatures.
Winter storms that threaten Jefferson County usually begin as powerful cold fronts that push south from
central Canada. The County is at risk to ice hazards, extremely cold temperatures, and snow. However,
the effects and frequencies of winter storm events are generally mild and short-lived. As indicated in
Figure 14-1, on average, the area experiences 1-10 cold days a year, meaning 1-10 days per year are at or
around freezing temperatures. During these times of ice and snow accumulation, response times will
increase until public works road crews are able to assist in making the major roads passable. Table 14-1
describes the types of winter storms possible to occur in Jefferson County.
Section 14: Winter Storm
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 2
Figure 14-1. Extreme Cold Days 1960-20031
Table 14-1. Types of Winter Storms
TYPE OF WINTER
STORM DESCRIPTION
Winter Weather
Advisory
This alert may be issued for a variety of severe conditions. Weather advisories
may be announced for snow, blowing or drifting snow, freezing drizzle,
freezing rain, or a combination of weather events.
Winter Storm
Watch
Severe winter weather conditions may affect your area (freezing rain, sleet,
or heavy snow may occur separately or in combination).
Winter Storm
Warning Severe winter weather conditions are imminent.
Freezing Rain or
Freezing Drizzle
Rain or drizzle is likely to freeze upon impact, resulting in a coating of ice glaze
on roads and all other exposed objects.
Sleet Small particles of ice usually mixed with rain. If enough sleet accumulates on
the ground, it makes travel hazardous.
1 Source: National Weather Service. The black circle indicates the Jefferson County planning area.
Section 14: Winter Storm
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 3
TYPE OF WINTER
STORM DESCRIPTION
Blizzard Warning
Sustained wind speeds of at least 35 miles per hour (mph) are accompanied
by considerable falling or blowing snow. This alert is the most perilous winter
storm, with visibility dangerously restricted.
Frost/Freeze
Warning
Below freezing temperatures are expected and may cause significant damage
to plants, crops, and fruit trees.
Wind Chill
A strong wind combined with a temperature slightly below freezing can have
the same chilling effect as a temperature nearly 50 degrees lower in a calm
atmosphere. The combined cooling power of the wind and temperature on
exposed flesh is called the wind chill factor.
Location
Winter storm events are not confined to specific geographic boundaries. Therefore, all existing and future
buildings, facilities, and populations in the Jefferson County planning area, including the SETRPC and all
participating jurisdictions, are considered to be exposed to a winter storm hazard and could potentially
be impacted.
Extent
The extent or magnitude of a severe winter storm is measured in intensity based on the temperature and
level of accumulations as shown in Table 14-2. To determine the intensity of a winter storm, Table 14-2
should be read in conjunction with the wind-chill factor chart described in Figure 14-2. The chart is an
index developed by the National Weather Service (NWS) and is not applicable when temperatures are
over 50°F or winds are calm.
Table 14-2. Magnitude of Severe Winter Storms
INTENSITY TEMPERATURE RANGE
(Fahrenheit) EXTENT DESCRIPTION
Mild 40 – 50
Winds less than 10 mph and freezing rain or light
snow falling for short durations with little or no
accumulations.
Moderate 30 – 40 Winds 10 to 15 mph and sleet and/or snow up to
4 inches.
Significant 25 – 30
Intense snow showers accompanied with strong
gusty winds between 15 to 20 mph, with
significant accumulation.
Extreme 20 – 25
Wind driven snow that reduces visibility, heavy
winds (between 20 to 30 mph), and sleet or ice
up to 5 millimeters in diameter.
Severe Below 20 Winds of 35 mph or more and snow and sleet
greater than 4 inches.
Section 14: Winter Storm
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 4
Figure 14-2. Wind Chill Chart
Wind chill temperature is a measure of how cold the wind makes real air temperature feel to the human
body. Since wind can dramatically accelerate heat loss from the body, a blustery 30°F day would feel just
as cold as a calm day with 0°F temperatures. Jefferson County has never experienced a blizzard, but based
on 10 previous occurrences recorded from 1996 through August 2016, it has been subject to winter storm
watches, warnings, freezing rain, sleet, snow, and wind chill.
The average number of cold days is similar for the entire County planning area including the SETRPC and
all participating jurisdictions. Therefore, the intensity or extent of a winter storm event to be mitigated
for the area ranges from mild to significant according to the definitions from Table 14-2. During a winter
storm event, the Jefferson County planning area, including the SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions,
can expect anywhere between 0.1 to 3.0 inches of ice and snow, temperatures between 25 and 50
degrees, with winds ranging from 0 to 20 mph.
Historical Occurrences
Table 14-3 shows historical occurrences for Jefferson County from 1996 through August 2016 provided by
the National Center for Environmental Information (NCEI) database. There have been 10 recorded winter
storm events in Jefferson County. Historical winter storm information, as provided by the NCEI, identifies
winter storm activity across a multi-county forecast area for each event. The appropriate percentage of
the total property and crop damage reported for the entire forecast area has been allocated to each
county impacted by the event. Historical winter storm data for the SETRPC and all participating
jurisdictions are provided on a county-wide basis per the NCEI database. Table 14-3 shows historical
incident information which resulted in property or crop damage for the Jefferson County planning area.
Section 14: Winter Storm
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 5
Table 14-3. Historical Winter Storm Events, 1996-20162
JURISDICTION DATE DEATHS INJURIES PROPERTY
DAMAGE CROP DAMAGE
Jefferson County 2/4/1996 0 0 $76,557 $0
Jefferson County 1/12/1997 0 10 $14,967,975 $0
Jefferson County 12/11/2008 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 12/4/2009 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 1/8/2010 0 0 $550,859 $0
Jefferson County 2/23/2010 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 2/3/2011 0 0 $10,680 $0
Jefferson County 1/23/2014 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 1/28/2014 0 0 $0 $0
Jefferson County 3/4/2014 0 0 $0 $0
TOTALS 0 10 $15,606,071
Based on the list of historical winter storm events for the Jefferson County planning area (listed above),
including the SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions, 4 events have occurred since the 2011 Plan.
Significant Past Events
January 12 – 14, 1997 – Jefferson County
A record ice storm paralyzed southeast Texas and southwest Louisiana. Around 90,000 electric customers
across southeast Texas were without power for up to 6 days. Emergency shelters were opened for several
nights due to the cold weather following the ice storm. Hundreds of homes received minor damage due
to trees or tree limbs falling on roofs. Several house fires were directly or indirectly related to the ice
storm. Numerous traffic accidents attributed to icy roads led to several minor injuries. 1 death was
indirectly attributed to the ice storm. 2 men were electrocuted on Tuesday, January 21, 1997 while doing
cleanup work for a local electric company. A 48 year old man died, and a 19 year old man was seriously
injured in the accident.
January 8 – 11, 2010 – Jefferson County
A deep upper level trough moving eastward across the United States forced a bitterly cold Arctic air mass
southward from Canada into the Gulf Coast states on Thursday, January 7, 2010. This air mass remained
in place for several days across southeast Texas, leading to the coldest temperatures seen across this
region since February 1996. A few record low temperatures and record low maximum temperatures were
set. Many locations in the Lakes Region of southeast Texas remained below freezing for over 36 hours
2 Values are in 2016 dollars.
Section 14: Winter Storm
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 6
from around midnight early on Friday, January 8, 2010 through the afternoon on Saturday, January 9,
2010.
The cold temperatures led to several school closures, numerous weather-related fires, and widespread
plumbing ruptures throughout southeast Texas. The Insurance Council of Texas estimated losses across
southeast Texas from the cold weather at around $1 million. KFDM-TV and the Beaumont Enterprise
reported widespread damaged plumbing across Jefferson County due to the record cold temperatures.
10 petrochemical plants and refineries across the county experienced excessive emissions due to cracked
pipes, instrument failures, and equipment malfunctions. Entergy reported sporadic power outages
through the county. CenterPoint Energy used trucks to pump natural gas directly into a northwest
Beaumont neighborhood of 100 homes after natural gas lines failed due to the cold weather.
Probability of Future Events
According to historical records, Jefferson County experiences approximately 1 winter storm event per
year. Hence, the probability of a future winter storm event affecting the Jefferson County planning area
is highly likely, with a winter storm likely to occur within the next year. All participating jurisdiction events
including the SETRPC are included under the County.
Vulnerability and Impact
During periods of extreme cold and freezing temperatures, water pipes can freeze and crack and ice can
build up on power lines, causing them to break under the weight or causing tree limbs to fall on the lines.
These events can disrupt electric service for long periods.
An economic impact may occur due to increased consumption of heating fuel, which can lead to energy
shortages and higher prices. House fires and resulting deaths tend to occur more frequently from
increased and improper use of alternate heating sources. Fires during winter storms also present a
greater danger because water supplies may freeze and impede firefighting efforts.
All populations, buildings, critical facilities, and infrastructure in the entire Jefferson County planning area,
including all participating jurisdictions, are vulnerable to severe winter events.
People and animals are subject to health risks from extended exposure to cold air. Elderly people are at
greater risk of death from hypothermia during these events, especially in the rural areas of the county
where populations are sparse, icy roads may impede travel, and there are fewer neighbors to check in on
the elderly. According to the U.S. Center for Disease Control, every year hypothermia kills about 600
Americans, half of whom are 65 years of age or older.
Populations over 65 in the Jefferson County planning area are approximately 13% of the total population;
there is an estimated total of 32,7743 potentially vulnerable residents in the planning area based on age
(Table 14-4).
3 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2014 data for Jefferson County.
Section 14: Winter Storm
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 7
Table 14-4. Populations at Greater Risk by Jurisdiction
JURISDICTION POPULATION 65 AND
OLDER
Beaumont 15,539
Bevil Oaks 290
China 183
Groves 2,685
Nederland 2,371
Nome 56
Port Arthur 6,344
Port Neches 1,939
Jefferson County4 32,774
The following critical facilities would be vulnerable to winter storm events in each participating
jurisdiction:
Table 14-5. Critical Facilities by Jurisdiction
JURISDICTION CRITICAL FACILITIES
Jefferson County Port Authority Facility, Fire Station, Water District Facility, 1 School
Beaumont 2 Fire Stations, 2 Police Stations, 32 Schools, Port Authority Facility, 5 Water
District Facilities, 3 Drainage District Facilities, 4 Hospitals
Bevil Oaks Fire Station
China Fire Station, 2 Schools
Groves Fire Station, Police Station, 4 Schools
Nederland Fire Station, Police Station, Water District Facility, 3 Hospitals, Airport, 8
Schools
Nome Fire Station
Port Arthur Fire Station, Police Station, Drainage District Facility, 2 Port Authority
Facilities, 2 Hospitals, 14 Schools
Port Neches Fire Station, Police Station, 5 Schools
SETRPC SETRPC Facility
4 County totals includes all participating jurisdictions and unincorporated areas.
Section 14: Winter Storm
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 8
Historic loss, in 2016 dollars, is estimated at $15,606,071 in damages over the 21-year recording period,
giving an approximate loss of $743,146 in damages annually (Table 14-6). The potential severity of impact
for the planning area, including the SETRPC and all participating jurisdictions, is limited, meaning injuries
are treatable with first aid, shutdown of facilities and services for 24 hours or less, and less than 10% of
property destroyed or sustains major damage.
Table 14-6. Potential Annualized Losses for Jefferson County, 1996-20165
JURISDICTION PROPERTY & CROP LOSS ANNUALIZED LOSS ESTIMATES
Jefferson County $15,606,071 $743,146
Assessment of Impacts
The greatest risk from a winter storm hazard is to public health and safety. Potential impacts for the
planning area may include:
Vulnerable populations, particularly the elderly and infants, can face serious or life-threatening
health problems from exposure to extreme cold including hypothermia and frostbite.
Loss of electric power or other heat sources can result in increased potential for fire injuries or
hazardous gas inhalation because residents burn candles for light or use fires or generators to
stay warm.
Response personnel, including utility workers, public works personnel, debris removal staff, tow
truck operators, and other first responders are subject to injury or illness resulting from
exposure to extreme cold temperatures.
Response personnel would be required to travel in potentially hazardous conditions, elevating
the safety risk due to accidents and potential contact with downed power lines.
Operations or service delivery may experience impacts from electricity blackouts due to winter
storms.
Power outages are possible throughout the planning area due to downed trees and power lines
and/or rolling blackouts.
Critical facilities without emergency backup power may not be operational during power
outages.
Emergency response and service operations may be impacted by limitations on access and
mobility if roadways are closed, unsafe, or obstructed.
Hazardous road conditions will likely lead to increases in automobile accidents, further straining
emergency response capabilities.
Depending on the severity and scale of damage caused by ice and snow events, damage to
power transmission and distribution infrastructure can require days or weeks to repair.
A winter storm event could lead to tree, shrub, and plant damage or death.
Severe cold and ice could significantly damage agricultural crops.
Schools may be forced to shut early due to treacherous driving conditions.
5 Values are in 2016 dollars.
Section 14: Winter Storm
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 9
Exposed water pipes may be damaged by severe or late season winter storms at both residential
and commercial structures, causing significant damages.
The economic and financial impacts of winter weather on the community will depend on the scale of the
event, what is damaged, and how quickly repairs to critical components of the economy can be
implemented. The level of preparedness and pre-event planning done by businesses and citizens will also
contribute to the overall economic and financial conditions in the aftermath of a winter storm event.
SECTION 15: COASTAL EROSION
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
Hazard Description ........................................................................................................................................ 1
Location ......................................................................................................................................................... 1
Extent ............................................................................................................................................................ 2
Historical Occurrences .................................................................................................................................. 4
Probability of Future Events ......................................................................................................................... 4
Vulnerability and Impact ............................................................................................................................... 4
Assessment of Impacts.............................................................................................................................. 5
Hazard Description
Coastal erosion is the wearing away of land and loss of beach, shoreline, or dune material because of
natural coastal processes or manmade influences. Erosion is the process by which large storms, flooding,
strong wave action, sea level rise, and human activities wear away beaches and bluffs along coastlines. All
beaches are affected by storms and other natural events that cause erosion; however, the extent and
severity of the problem differs in different parts of the country. The two major erosion mechanisms are
wind and water. Wind that blows across sparsely vegetated or disturbed lands can cause erosion by
picking up soil, carrying it through the air, and displacing it in another place. Water erosion occurs over
land, and in streams and channels. Major storms can cause coastal erosion from the combination of high
winds and heavy surf and storm surge. Human interactions, such as construction and development in
coastal and riparian regions, can also exacerbate erosion.
While coastal erosion affects all regions of the United States, erosion rates and potential impacts are
highly localized. Average coastline recession rates of 25 feet per year are not uncommon on some barrier
islands in the Southeast. Texas has one of the longest coastlines in America coupled with some of the
highest rates of coastal erosion in the nation. Sixty-four percent of the Texas coast is eroding at an average
of 6 feet per year, with an overall average rate of 4.1 feet per year for the 367 miles of Texas coast,
according to the Texas General Land Office. However, some locations are losing more than 30 feet per
year. Coastal erosion can have long-term economic and social consequences.
Location
While the Jefferson County planning area is considered a coastal community, only one of the participation
jurisdictions is located directly on the coast and is subject to coastal erosion. The McFaddin National
Wildlife Refuge is located in unincorporated Jefferson County and expands the entire coast line of the
county. The wildlife refuge is vulnerable to threats directly related to coastal erosion resulting from
extreme hazards such as hurricane and tropical storm events. The most common time for such extreme
storm events to impact the planning area is from June to November, the official Atlantic U.S. hurricane
season. The water front community of Port Arthur is located on the mainland and protected by the barrier
island system along the gulf. As such, this community is not subject to coastal erosion.
Section 15: Coastal Erosion
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 2
Figure 15-1. Critical Eroding Areas of the Texas Gulf Shoreline
Extent
Some of the highest rates of Gulf shoreline erosion in Texas occur in Jefferson County.1 The McFaddin
National Wildlife Refuge is vulnerable to the effects of coastal erosion from the Gulf of Mexico. The island
has no stable (vegetated) dunes in the area located as close to the mean low water (MLW) line. Through
experience it has proven that barrier island development imposes risks on private property owners,
investors, and to taxpayers statewide. The average rate of retreat or extent of coastal erosion is estimated
between 4.9 and more than 14.8 feet per year for Jefferson County. The highest erosion rate occurs at
the eastern most portion of the wildlife refuge near the Sabine Pass.
1 Texas Coastal Resiliency Master Plan, March 2017, Texas General Land Office
Section 15: Coastal Erosion
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 3
Figure 15-2. Critical Eroding Areas, Unincorporated Jefferson County2
2 Coastal Erosion Planning and Response Act, A Report to the 84th Texas Legislature, Texas General Land Office, 2015
Section 15: Coastal Erosion
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 4
Historical Occurrences
Previous occurrences for coastal erosion are not reported by the NCEI. In addition, local governments do
not typically have the capabilities to monitor or report statistical data for coastal erosion for a specific
event. Coastal erosion is typically measured as an average annual shoreline change rate in linear feet.
While the Jefferson County Planning area does not record historical coastal erosion rates per event, the
2013 Texas Hazard Mitigation Plan depicts coastal erosion occurrences for the Jefferson County Planning
Area, including unincorporated areas along the coast (Table 15-1).
Table 15-1. Historical Coastal Erosion Rates, Jefferson County3
JURISDICTION GULF SHORELINE BAY SHORELINE CRITICAL EROSION EROSION RATES
Jefferson County 168,960 ft. 327,360 ft. 142,560 ft. -2 to -50 ft./yr.
Probability of Future Events
Due to data limitations, the planning team relied on available studies and research as well as the Texas
State Hazard Mitigation Plan to determine coastal erosion probability. According to Texas General Land
Office (GLO) the average coastal erosion rate for unincorporated Jefferson County is from 4 to more than
15 feet per year with an average of approximately 13 feet per year. This rate supports a highly likely
probability of future events, with an event probable in the next year.
Vulnerability and Impact
The unincorporated area of Jefferson County along the coast is continuously subject to coastal erosion, as
all barrier islands are. While usually a slow-evolving hazard, coastal erosion presents a serious threat to
the McFaddin National Wildlife Refuge. Any loss of land equates to an increase in the planning areas
vulnerability to hurricanes, coastal storms and above-average tidal events. When the land lost is beach
that provides valuable protections from these coastal storm events, that loss results in greater
vulnerability.
The wildlife refuge has a total area of 58,861 acres and is primarily tidally influenced, creating estuarine
environments important to a variety of fish, shrimp and crabs, as well as other life forms higher on the
food chain that feed on such organisms. These estuaries are productive communities and are vital to the
life cycle of many marine species. Land in the refuge is vulnerable to coastal erosion, particularly on the
eastern portions near Sabine Pass) which in turn threatens fish and wildlife in the area due to loss of
habitat. There are no critical structures or infrastructure vulnerable to coastal erosion in the planning
area.
The potential severity of impact from coastal erosion for the Jefferson County planning area is classified
as limited, meaning minor quality of life is lost and shutdown of critical facilities; services are loss less than
24 hours; and less than 10 percent of property would be destroyed or have major damage.
3 State of Texas Mitigation Plan Update 2013 Page 126 as reported by the Texas General Land Office
Section 15: Coastal Erosion
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 5
Assessment of Impacts
Coastal erosion events have the potential to pose a significant risk to structures, infrastructure and the
local economy. Impacts to the planning area can include:
Fish and wildlife habitat can be damaged or destroyed. Extreme erosion, typically resulting from
a significant storm event, may result in significant marine and wildlife losses.
Damaged bridges in and out of the wildlife refuge areas could prevent or delay emergency
response, strand or prevent entry of tourists, commuters, supply delivery, or goods and services
for extended periods.
Coastal erosion may dramatically reduce tourism negatively impacting the economy.
Economic disruption negatively impacts the programs and services provided by the community
due to short and long term loss in revenue.
Some businesses not directly damaged by the coastal erosion may be negatively impacted while
access roads or camping areas are repaired.
The economic and financial impacts of coastal erosion on the area will depend entirely on the scale of the
event, what is damaged, and how quickly repairs to critical components of the economy can be
implemented. The level of preparedness and pre-event planning done by the community, local businesses
and citizens will also contribute to the overall reduction of coastal erosion impacts.
SECTION 16: MITIGATION STRATEGY
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
Mitigation Goals ............................................................................................................................................ 1
Goal 1 ........................................................................................................................................................ 1
Goal 2 ........................................................................................................................................................ 1
Goal 3 ........................................................................................................................................................ 2
Goal 4 ........................................................................................................................................................ 2
Goal 5 ........................................................................................................................................................ 2
Goal 6 ........................................................................................................................................................ 3
Mitigation Goals
Based on the results of the risk and capability assessments, the Planning Team developed and prioritized
the mitigation strategy. This involved utilizing the results of both assessments and reviewing the goals
and objectives that were included in the previous 2011 Plan.
At the Mitigation Workshop in August 2016, Planning Team members reviewed the mitigation strategy
from the previous 2011 Plan. The consensus among all members present was that the strategy
developed for the 2011 Plan did not require changes, as it identified overall improvements to be
sought in the Plan Update. However, the order and priority of the goals and objectives were
reorganized.
Goal 1
Protect public health and safety.
Objective 1.1
Advise the public about health and safety precautions to guard against injury and loss of life from hazards.
Objective 1.2
Maximize utilization of the latest technology to provide adequate warning, communication, and
mitigation of hazard events.
Objective 1.3
Reduce the danger to, and enhance protection of, high risk areas during hazard events.
Objective 1.4
Protect critical facilities and services.
Goal 2
Build and support local capacity and commitment to continuously become less vulnerable to hazards.
Section 16: Mitigation Strategy
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 2
Objective 2.1
Build and support local partnerships to
continuously become less vulnerable to
hazards.
Objective 2.2
Build a cadre of committed volunteers to
safeguard the community before, during, and
after a disaster.
Objective 2.3
Build hazard mitigation concerns into county planning and budgeting processes.
Goal 3
Increase public understanding, support, and demand for hazard mitigation.
Objective 3.1
Heighten public awareness regarding the full range of natural and man-made hazards the public may face.
Objective 3.2
Educate the public on actions they can take to prevent or reduce the loss of life or property from all
hazards and increase individual efforts to respond to potential hazards.
Objective 3.3
Publicize and encourage the adoption of appropriate hazard mitigation measures.
Goal 4
Protect new and existing properties.
Objective 4.1
Reduce repetitive losses to the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
Objective 4.2
Use the most cost-effective approach to protect existing buildings and public infrastructure from
hazards.
Objective 4.3
Enact and enforce regulatory measures to ensure that future development will not put people in
harm’s way or increase threats to existing properties.
Goal 5
Maximize the resources for investment in hazard mitigation.
Section 16: Mitigation Strategy
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 3
Objective 5.1
Maximize the use of outside sources of funding.
Objective 5.2
Maximize participation of property owners in protecting their properties.
Objective 5.3
Maximize insurance coverage to provide financial protection against hazard events.
Objective 5.4
Prioritize mitigation projects, based on cost-effectiveness and sites facing the greatest threat to life,
health and property.
Goal 6
Promote growth in a sustainable manner.
Objective 6.1
Incorporate hazard mitigation activities into long-range planning and development activities.
Objective 6.2
Promote beneficial uses of hazardous areas while expanding open space
and recreational opportunities.
Objective 6.3
Utilize regulatory approaches to prevent creation of future hazards
to life and property.
SECTION 17: PREVIOUS ACTIONS
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
Summary ....................................................................................................................................................... 1
Jefferson County ........................................................................................................................................... 2
Beaumont .................................................................................................................................................... 19
Bevil Oaks .................................................................................................................................................... 47
China ........................................................................................................................................................... 60
Groves ......................................................................................................................................................... 71
Nederland ................................................................................................................................................... 86
Nome ......................................................................................................................................................... 101
Port Arthur ................................................................................................................................................ 112
Port Neches ............................................................................................................................................... 132
South East Texas Regional Planning Commission (SETRPC) ...................................................................... 144
Summary
Planning Team members were given copies of the previous mitigation actions submitted in the 2011 Plan
at the mitigation workshop. Jefferson County reviewed the previous actions and provided an analysis as
to whether the action had been completed, should be deferred as an ongoing activity, or be deleted from
the Plan. The actions from the 2011 Plan are included in this section as they were written in 2011, with
the exception of the “2017 Analysis” section.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 2
Jefferson County
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 1
Proposed Action: To build a structure or structures (including a dome or domes) in coastal
(or near coastal) jurisdictions that can withstand 200 mile per hour
winds and act as shelters. This is in conjunction with the Texas Safe
Shelter Initiative.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1.6 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County Emergency Management, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 2
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing structures and/or construct new structures to act as
shelters during and after Hurricanes/Tropical Storms and other severe
weather events.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1 - $2 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County, SETRPC, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 3
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 3
Proposed Action: Storm harden/retrofit critical facilities throughout Jefferson County.
Actions can include but are not limited to window shutters, roof straps,
flood proofing, roll-up door reinforcement (i.e. for fire stations, Ford
Park).
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm,
Tornado, Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-2 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County, municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HGMP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 4
Proposed Action: Public structure strengthening for Jefferson County Courthouse/
S.O./Jail.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1,000 - $300,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Estimated Cost to $200,000 - $1 Million.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 4
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 5
Proposed Action: Acquire flood prone properties (including Repetitive Loss and Severe
Repetitive Loss Properties).
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic, Environmental
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $140,000
Implementation Schedule: 12 months
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County, local municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, FMA, PDM, RFC, SRL
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Estimated Cost to $500,000 - $1 Million; revise
Implementation Schedule to 2 years.
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 6
Proposed Action: Storm harden/retrofit regional communication sites and infrastructure
throughout the County.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm,
Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $300,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County Emergency Management
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, EMPG
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 5
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 7
Proposed Action: Elevate new and existing flood prone structures and infrastructure
throughout Jefferson County.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm,
Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $20,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County, local municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Estimated Cost to $200,000 - $1 Million
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 8
Proposed Action: Replace and/or upgrade bridges, culverts, and other crossings
throughout Jefferson County.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flooding, Geologic Hazards, Hurricane/Tropical Storm,
Terrorism, Thunderstorm, Tornado, Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $200,000 - $1 Million
Implementation Schedule: 2-5 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County, TXDOT
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Estimated Cost to $2 -$5 Million.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 6
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 9
Proposed Action: Pursue drainage improvements through Jefferson County. Actions can
include but are not limited to installing/upgrading culverts and
headwalls as well as enlarging storm water ditches and canals.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storms, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County, local municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Estimated Cost to $1 - $5 Million.
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 10
Proposed Action: Coordinate with federal, state, and local partners to provide training
opportunities for first responders, including but not limited to
HAZMAT, terrorism, all hazard and other training.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Dam Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic
Hazard, Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe
Winter Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorm, Tornado, Tsunami,
Water Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $5,000 - $10,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County Emergency Management
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 7
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 11
Proposed Action: Bury underground, secure or otherwise harden exposed or vulnerable
pipelines.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hazardous Material, Hurricane/Tropical Storm,
Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 3-5 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County, local municipalities, Entergy
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise action to include Water/Sewer.
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 12
Proposed Action: Provide generators/back-up power systems for critical facilities
(including but not limited to lift stations, water plants, police, EMS, Fire
and other first responder facilities) throughout the Jefferson County.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Earthquake, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County, local municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Progress has been made, but not fully completed. Revise
Estimated Cost to $1 - $2 Million.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 8
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 13
Proposed Action: Pursue flood protection measures to protect from surge from
Hurricanes/Tropical Storms. Actions can include but are not limited to
constructing and/or upgrading sea walls, flood barriers, berms and
various wet and dry flood proofing measures.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tsunami, Water
Contamination
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $3 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County, USACE, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Baffles at Keith Lake ($2.5 Million) completed in June
2015. Will pursue additional locations. Revise Estimated Cost to $50,000 - $60 Million.
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 14
Proposed Action: Pursue the coordination, construction, expansion and maintenance of
flood control structures/barriers for the purpose of mitigating damage
and protect freshwater resources from storm surge, sea level rise and
other sources of salt water intrusion.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1 - $2 Million
Implementation Schedule: 2-5 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County, USACE, SETRPC, FEMA, local municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HGMP, PDM, USACE, Jefferson County, SETRPC
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 9
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 15
Proposed Action: Restore sand dunes to protect inland resources during storm surge
events.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricanes/Tropical Storms
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Legal, Environmental, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $60,000,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-2 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: PDM, HMGP, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Estimated Cost to $60,000,000 - $100,000,000.
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 16
Proposed Action: Construct or improve existing detention/retention ponds where
appropriate to collect storm water to reduce flooding.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorms,
Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic, Environmental
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County, local municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Estimated Cost to $50,000 - $1 Million.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 10
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 17
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing structures or construct new structures to act as safe
rooms during tornados or other severe weather events.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Tornados, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $5,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Estimated Cost to $50,000 - $1 Million.
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 18
Proposed Action: Identify and pursue any mitigation activities that would aid/ enhance
evacuations throughout the Jefferson County.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flood, Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm,
Thunderstorm, Tornado, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County, local municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 11
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 19
Proposed Action: Construct water retention ponds to collect storm water run-off and use
as an alternate water source throughout Jefferson County.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Drought, Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado,
Water Contamination
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Environmental
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $75,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County, local municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Priority to Low.
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 20
Proposed Action: Coordinate and work with the Lower Neches Valley Authority in order
to use an LNVA sand pit as a potential freshwater reservoir for all areas
south of I-10.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Drought, Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado,
Water Contamination
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Environmental
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $75,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County, local municipalities, Lower Neches Valley
Authority
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, LNVA, local operating budget
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Priority to Low.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 12
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 21
Proposed Action: Mitigate damage to utilities in order to maintain function during and
after a hazard event. Actions can include but are not limited to:
Burying utility lines underground
Provide frangible links/break away connections on utility
poles
Harden utility poles by converting from wood to concrete or
metal utility poles
Increasing the easement area/clearance of utility lines/ poles
from tree lines
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County, local municipalities, Entergy
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 22
Proposed Action: Joint, multi-jurisdictional EOC.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Dam Failure, Drought, Extreme Heat, Flood, Hazardous Materials,
Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado, Tsunami, Water
Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $1-2 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County, TDEM, FEMA
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, EMGP, Homeland Security Grants
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 13
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 23
Proposed Action: Provide the public with educational brochures for the hazards
identified as part of the 2011 Plan Update.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic Hazard,
Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe Winter
Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorm, Tornado, Tsunami, Water
Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $5,000 - $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County, local municipalities, TDEM, FEMA
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, EMPG
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 24
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing structures to act as cooling stations in times of extreme
heat.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Extreme Heat
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County, local municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budget
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 14
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 25
Proposed Action: Develop areas of defensible space to prevent damage due to wildfires.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County Emergency Management, local fire departments
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, EMPG, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Priority to Low.
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 26
Proposed Action: Develop and enact water conservation or drought management plans,
ordinances or strategies to be used during times of drought.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Drought
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $25,000 - $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 15
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 27
Proposed Action: Minimize damage to structures and infrastructure from falling trees.
Actions include but are not limited to the following:
Pursue and coordinate a dangerous tree and limb removal
program to protect infrastructure and critical facilities from
damage. This includes working with private homeowners for
voluntary removal of hazardous trees and limbs on private
property.
Coordinate contracting to remove and/or trim trees that
endanger structures, infrastructure, and vital roadways.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County, local municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: FEMA PA, HMGP, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Priority to Low.
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 28
Proposed Action: Work with State Fire Marshall and County and local fire departments
to enforce burn ban ordinances during times of drought to prevent
wildfire.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $1,000 - $10,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County, State Fire Marshall, local fire districts
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Completed.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 16
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 29
Proposed Action: Flood proof the Jefferson County courthouse elevators by installing
pump system.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm,
Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County, local municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 30
Proposed Action: Retrofit the LNVA pumping system, which includes a number of pump
stations, in order to increase capacity and allow stand-alone service
when the Neches River is contaminated or a failure of the primary
system.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hazardous Materials, Hurricanes/Tropical Storm, Terrorism,
Tsunami, Water Contamination
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $3,680,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: LNVA, Jefferson County, TDEM, local municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: LNVA operating budget, HMGP, PDM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 17
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 31
Proposed Action: Retrofit the primary diversion point and pumping system in order for
the LNVA to fully control isolation and selection of the source of the
water which flows into the pumping station and isolate either the
Neches River or Pine Island Bayou should contamination occur.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Terrorism,
Tsunami, Water Contamination
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $562,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: LNVA, Jefferson County, TDEM, local municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: LNVA operating budget, HMGP, PDM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 32
Proposed Action: Convert an existing 56 acre excavated dirt pit into a localized
freshwater storage impoundment which would be used to supply water
to municipal water plants and industrial users in the Nederland, Port
Neches, and Groves area of Jefferson County in the event of an
interruption of canal service to the region.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hazardous Materials, Hurricanes/Tropical Storm, Terrorism,
Tsunami, Water Contamination
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $5,468,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: LNVA, Jefferson County, TDEM, local municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: LNVA operating budget, HMGP, PDM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 18
Jefferson County (Past Action) – 33
Proposed Action: Enhance existing structures and construct additional water control
features to allow the LNVA to isolate segments of canals in the event of
contamination or localized bank failures in order to conserve and
protect unaffected waters and continue deliveries to as many
customers as possible while a clean-up or repair is addressed rather
than having a single event affect all customers of the entire system.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hazardous Materials, Hurricanes/Tropical Storm, Terrorism,
Tsunami, Water Contamination
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $375,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: LNVA, Jefferson County, TDEM, local municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: LNVA operating budget, HMGP, PDM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 19
Beaumont
Beaumont (Past Action) – 1
Proposed Action: To build a structure or structures (including a dome or domes) in coastal
(or near coastal) jurisdictions that can withstand 200 mile per hour
winds and act as shelters. This is in conjunction with the Texas Safe
Shelter Initiative.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1 - $2 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Jefferson County, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, TDEM, local funding sources
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Estimated Cost to $2,000,000.
Beaumont (Past Action) – 2
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing or construct new structures to act as shelters during
hurricanes and tropical storms and other severe weather events.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1 - $2 million
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM, local funding sources
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. This action was completed on some City structures, but
still needs to be done on existing Fire Stations 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 10.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 20
Beaumont (Past Action) – 3
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing or construct new structures to act as safe rooms during
tornados.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Tornados
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Delete Action. This action should be combined with Beaumont (Past Action) – 2.
Beaumont (Past Action) – 4
Proposed Action: Storm harden/retrofit critical facilities throughout the City of
Beaumont. Actions can include but are not limited to window shutters,
roof, flood proofing, roll-up door reinforcement (i.e. fire stations, police
headquarters, Health Department, EMS stations, and other critical
infrastructure facilities).
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm,
Tornado, Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $7.4 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. A new health department building was built to
standards; include EMS stations 1 and 2 in proposed action.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 21
Beaumont (Past Action) – 5
Proposed Action: Harden the City of Beaumont Emergency Operations Center at 700
Orleans and Police headquarters at 255 College. Actions include but
are not limited to installing a generator and storm shutters.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. The EOC facility was hardened, but a generator still
needs to be installed there. The Police headquarters received a generator, but still needs to be hardened.
Beaumont (Past Action) – 6
Proposed Action: Wind harden the Radio SHOP at 620 Marina Dr., the South Radio Tower
at 1550 Pine, Fire Headquarters at 400 Walnut, and EMS Headquarters
at 2870 Laurel. Actions include but are not limited to roof retrofits,
installing storm shutters/screens, installing generators, and hardening
of bay doors (specifically fire stations).
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $3,750,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, EMPG, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. The radio shop on Marina Drive was rebuilt to include
wind hardening measures, and EMS headquarter was merged into the new Public Health facility. Other listed
locations still need to be completed.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 22
Beaumont (Past Action) – 7
Proposed Action: Wind harden Baptist Hospital, at 3080 College, and Christus St.
Elizabeth Hospital at 2830 Calder. Actions include but are not limited to
roof retrofits, installing storm shutters/screens, installing generators,
and hardening of bay doors (specifically maintenance and facility
areas).
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $8 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, EMPG, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Beaumont (Past Action) – 8
Proposed Action: Retrofit main facility at Baptist Hospital with Built-in Decontamination
System to enable decontamination of patients from a hazardous
material incident.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hazardous Materials
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic, Environmental
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $150,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Baptist Hospital
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 23
Beaumont (Past Action) – 9
Proposed Action: At Christus St. Elizabeth Hospital install backup generators and elevate
key electrical equipment (such as Switchgear and ATS).
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm,
Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $3.1 Million
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, St. Elizabeth Hospital
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, EMPG, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Beaumont (Past Action) – 10
Proposed Action: Upgrade Christus St. Elizabeth Hospitals and Port of Beaumont
emergency communication systems to ensure continued
communication with outside sources and first responders.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Earthquake, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe Winter Weather,
Terrorism, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $62,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, St. Elizabeth Hospital, Port of Beaumont
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, EMPG, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 24
Beaumont (Past Action) – 11
Proposed Action: Install generators for the Beaumont Independent School District at
sites including but not limited to Westbrook, Police Building,
Administrative Building, and the Thomas Education Support Center
which are used for sheltering and emergency operation coordination
centers.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Earthquake, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe Winter Weather,
Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $650,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Beaumont Independent School District
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Beaumont (Past Action) – 12
Proposed Action: Procure mobile backup generators for the Port of Beaumont.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Earthquake, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe Winter Weather,
Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $60,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Port of Beaumont
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 25
Beaumont (Past Action) – 13
Proposed Action: Install backup generators for the 88 lift stations throughout the City of
Beaumont.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Earthquake, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe Winter Weather,
Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $3,400,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Beaumont (Past Action) – 14
Proposed Action: Mitigate damage to utilities in order to maintain function during and
after a hazard event. Actions can include but are not limited to:
Burying utility lines underground
Provide frangible links/break away connections on utility
poles
Harden utility poles by converting from wood to concrete or
metal utility poles
Increasing the easement area/clearance of utility lines/ poles
from tree lines
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe Winter Weather, Thunderstorm,
Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $300,000 per line
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Jefferson County, Entergy
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Estimated Cost to $5.5 Million. Modifications
have been made to the Proposed Action.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 26
Beaumont (Past Action) – 15
Proposed Action: Hardening Electric Grid and Communications to prevent damage to
electric, phone and cable infrastructure for major roadways/
thoroughfares or access routes to critical infrastructure.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe Winter Weather, Thunderstorm,
Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $300,000 per line
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Jefferson County, Entergy
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Estimated Cost to $1 Million.
Beaumont (Past Action) – 16
Proposed Action: Pursue drainage improvements in the City of Beaumont. Projects
include but are not limited to the South Park Relief Project (which
includes Moore Street project, Avenue A Project, Washington
Boulevard Phase I and II Projects), Madison Street Project, Tyrell Park
Project, Caldwood Outfall, Phelan Boulevard Drainage Project, and the
Cartwright/Corley Project.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm,
Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $60,302,900
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. There were several drainage projects completed that
were associated with this action, however, not all projects were completed, thus this action will be included
in the Plan Update with modifications to the Proposed Action.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 27
Beaumont (Past Action) – 17
Proposed Action: Maintain, pursue, and complete drainage improvements in the City of
Beaumont. Projects include, but are not limited to join Drainage
District 6 and Beaumont projects and Beaumont individual projects
such as the Calder Street Mitigation Project, Steve’s Drive project,
Concord Street project, High School Ditch Project (which include
Seventh Street, North Street, Broadway Box projects).
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm,
Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $62,255,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. The Concord project is expected to be completed by the
completion of this plan. The Calder Street project was completed. Revise Estimated Cost to $50 Million.
Beaumont (Past Action) – 18
Proposed Action: Pursue drainage improvements throughout the City of Beaumont.
Actions can include but are not limited to installing/ upgrading culverts
and headwalls as well as enlarging storm water ditches and canals.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm,
Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10,000,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 28
Beaumont (Past Action) – 19
Proposed Action: Construct water retention ponds to collect storm water run-off and use
as an alternate water source for agricultural resources throughout the
City of Beaumont.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm,
Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Environmental
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1,000,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Modify Proposed Action to read “storm control” rather
than “agricultural resources”.
Beaumont (Past Action) – 20
Proposed Action: Complete bank stabilization project at Riverfront Park.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Geologic Hazard
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $3,000,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Jefferson County, SETRPC
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Completed. Along COB Property Line.
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. A second phase that extends beyond City Hall area up
to the train tracks will be included.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 29
Beaumont (Past Action) – 21
Proposed Action: Pursue building a 50 million gallon holding lagoon to store wastewater
in case of power outages and plant failures, and removal of sludge
build-up in the two lagoons to increase the storage capacity at the
Wastewater Treatment Plan in case of power outages and plant failure.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Geologic Hazard, Hazardous Material, Hurricane/Tropical Storm,
Severe Winter Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $3,500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Beaumont (Past Action) – 22
Proposed Action: Pursue and construct alternate fresh water sources throughout the City
of Beaumont. This includes but is not limited to increased capacity to
maintain water pressure in case of system failures at the water
treatment plant; installation of a 36” water transmission line to provide
an alternate water transport method; installation of a raw water
pipeline to replace the existing canal to prevent intention or natural
pollution of the City’s water supply; installation of new chemical feed
facilities and building to safely store and use chlorine, etc.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Drought
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Environmental
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Estimated Cost to $5 Million.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 30
Beaumont (Past Action) – 23
Proposed Action: At Hermann Memorial Hospital, install 1) an on-site filtering system for
water well and new pressurized water supply system, and 2) install a
Built-in Decontamination System (includes shower, curtain system,
hazardous water tank, and drain) in the main facility.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hazardous Materials
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $210,000
Implementation Schedule: 12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Hermann Memorial Baptist Hospital
Potential Funding Sources: PDM, EMPG, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Beaumont (Past Action) – 24
Proposed Action: Retrofit the LNVA pumping system at Highway 105 to upgrade pumping
capacity. This will allow the system to operate at full stand-alone
service in times of contamination of water in the Neches River due to a
hazard event.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Water Contamination, Terrorism
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $3,680,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, LNVA, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 31
Beaumont (Past Action) – 25
Proposed Action: Retrofit the primary LNVA diversion point and pumping system at
10550 Helbig Rd. To allow the LNVA to fully control, isolate, and section
off the source of the water that flows into the pumping station. This
would allow the LNVA to isolate either the Neches River or Pine Island
Bayou should one suffer any form of contamination.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Water Contamination, Terrorism
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $562,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, LNVA, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Beaumont (Past Action) – 26
Proposed Action: Develop a database of contact information for first responders,
volunteers, and vulnerable populations. This also includes a database
of assisted living/nursing homes throughout the City of Beaumont.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Dam Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic
Hazard, Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe
Winter Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorm, Tornado, Tsunami,
Water Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $15,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont
Potential Funding Sources: EMPG, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. This is an ongoing mitigation item.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 32
Beaumont (Past Action) – 27
Proposed Action: Facilitate use of all mass notifications systems including but not limited
to the Southeast Texas Alerting Network (STAN), to notify and educate
the public of impending hazardous events.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Dam Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic
Hazard, Hazardous Material, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe
Winter Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorm, Terrorism, Tornado,
Tsunami, Water Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $25,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont Emergency Management, Jefferson County
Emergency Management, SETRPC
Potential Funding Sources: EMPG, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. This is an ongoing mitigation item.
Beaumont (Past Action) – 28
Proposed Action: Identify special needs populations in the city by coordinating with
home health agencies, medical equipment companies, local churches,
and neighborhood associations. Organize strategies for evacuating
special needs populations during a coastal storm, hurricane, or other
such hazard.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $5,000 - $10,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, local health care agencies/facilities, Jefferson
County
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. This is an ongoing mitigation item.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 33
Beaumont (Past Action) – 29
Proposed Action: Coordinate public/private partnerships to ensure special needs
populations are protected from health risks due to extreme weather
conditions. Actions will be targeted toward citizens with physical
limitations and may be unable to reach safety in times of severe
weather. Volunteer groups may be available to assist by visiting special
needs groups to ensure their safety and comfort during severe
temperature extremes.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Dam Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic
Hazard, Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe
Winter Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorm, Tornado, Tsunami,
Water Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont Emergency Management, local health and special
needs agencies, Jefferson County Emergency Management
Potential Funding Sources: EMPG, local funding sources
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. This is an ongoing mitigation item.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 34
Beaumont (Past Action) – 30
Proposed Action: Coordinate a natural hazards public awareness campaign among
agencies and the community. Efforts may include tropical
storm/hurricane awareness presentations, shelter-in-place
presentations, evacuation maps, floodplain maps, flood control
projects, storm tracking maps, safety tips flyers, preparedness articles
in local newspapers, and other such information as it relates to natural
hazards. Target audiences will include schools, neighborhood watch
groups, various civic groups, neighborhood associations, community
groups, and industry groups. FEMA publication will also be made
available in city hall libraries, municipal courts, police and fire
departments, public works departments, public access TV channels,
city libraries, and on the SETRPC and jurisdictional websites.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Dam Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic
Hazard, Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe
Winter Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorm, Tornado, Tsunami,
Water Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $25,000 - $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont Emergency Management, Jefferson County
Emergency Management
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, EMPG, local funding sources
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. This is an ongoing mitigation item.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 35
Beaumont (Past Action) – 31
Proposed Action: Coordinate Emergency Management Plans for coastal storms/
hurricane events. Specific efforts will include encouraging agencies to
install and maintain back-up power at identified facilities, construct and
designate emergency operations centers for disaster/emergency
operations, and solicit participation in Community Emergency
Response Training.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Jefferson County, SETRPC
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. This is an ongoing mitigation item.
Beaumont (Past Action) – 32
Proposed Action: Maintain the floodplain mapping, planning, and databases project to
identify, map, and maintain systematic accountability for flood prone
areas.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm,
Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont Planning, Jefferson County, TDEM, FEMA
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. This is an ongoing mitigation item.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 36
Beaumont (Past Action) – 33
Proposed Action: Conduct flood insurance educational seminars for area realtors to
increase their knowledge of the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP) and the benefits to homeowners of securing flood insurance.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm,
Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost:
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, EMPG, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. This is an ongoing mitigation item.
Beaumont (Past Action) – 34
Proposed Action: Coordinate with federal, state, and local partners to provide training
opportunities for first responders.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Dam Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic
Hazard, Hazardous Material, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe
Winter Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorm, Tornado, Tsunami,
Water Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $15,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont Emergency Management
Potential Funding Sources: EMPG, PDM, HMGP, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. This is an ongoing mitigation item.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 37
Beaumont (Past Action) – 35
Proposed Action: Relocations of Fire Headquarters, Fire stations 1, 2, 7, and 11, and
Health Department (950 Washington) to improve neighborhood
coverage in accordance with the 2005 Pietsch (ISO) study.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Dam Failure, Earthquake, Flood, Geologic Hazard, Hazardous
Material, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe Winter Weather,
Terrorism, Thunderstorm, Tornado, Tsunami, Water
Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Legal
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $23,500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont Emergency Management, Local Fire Departments,
Jefferson County Emergency Management
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Estimated Cost to $21 Million.
Beaumont (Past Action) – 36
Proposed Action: Install on-site well and new pressurized water supply system to support
Christus St. Elizabeth Hospital during loss of potable water.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Water Contamination
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Legal
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $162,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, St. Elizabeth Hospital, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: PDM, EMPG, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 38
Beaumont (Past Action) – 37
Proposed Action: Develop a Hazard Mitigation Action specific to the City of Beaumont as
well as maintain interaction with the Jefferson County and Southeast
Texas Regional Planning Commission Hazard Mitigation Action Plans.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Dam Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic
Hazard, Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe
Winter Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorm, Tornado, Tsunami,
Water Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont Emergency Management, TDEM, FEMA
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, EMPG, local funding sources
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. This is an ongoing mitigation item.
Beaumont (Past Action) – 38
Proposed Action: Acquire flood prone structures throughout the City of Beaumont. This
includes the 481 properties on the current Repetitive Loss and Severe
Repetitive Loss lists.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm,
Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic, Environmental
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $55,800,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Some citizens were not willing to sell their property.
Modify Proposed Action to include “elevate” flood prone structures.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 39
Beaumont (Past Action) – 39
Proposed Action: Coordinate a consolidated security checkpoint on entry to Plant Road
to access industrial and chemical production and storage complexes.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Terrorism
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Legal
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $175,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont Emergency Management, Port of Beaumont,
Jefferson County Emergency Management
Potential Funding Sources: EMPG, Homeland Security Grants, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Beaumont (Past Action) – 40
Proposed Action: Upgrade security system at the Port of Beaumont for access control on
all exterior doors for all buildings as well as installing cameras and
increased perimeter surveillance capabilities.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Terrorism
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Legal
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $175,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont Emergency Management, Port of Beaumont,
Jefferson County Emergency Management
Potential Funding Sources: EMPG, Homeland Security Grants, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 40
Beaumont (Past Action) – 41
Proposed Action: Install security systems at the City of Beaumont water utility sites, to
include but not limited to, security walls around chemical tanks, water
treatment plant and a river pump station; monitoring stations for purity
testing at various sites throughout the city; surveillance at six elevated
storage tanks and wastewater plant, etc. for access control on all
exterior doors for all buildings as well as installing cameras and
increased perimeter surveillance capabilities.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Terrorism
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Legal
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $4,500,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont Emergency Management, Jefferson County
Emergency Management
Potential Funding Sources: EMPG, Homeland Security Grants, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Beaumont (Past Action) – 42
Proposed Action: Upgrade surveillance capabilities at critical infrastructure sites around
the City of Beaumont, to include, fire stations, police, fire and EMS
headquarters, lift stations, communication towers and headquarters,
etc.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Terrorism
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Legal
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont Emergency Management, Jefferson County
Emergency Management
Potential Funding Sources: EMPG, Homeland Security Grants, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 41
Beaumont (Past Action) – 43
Proposed Action: Install generators and harden roofs at sites at Lamar University. Sites
include but are not limited to the University Police Station and Soccer
Field House which serves as an emergency operations center.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricanes/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $1,000,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Lamar University, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Beaumont (Past Action) – 44
Proposed Action: At Lamar University, replace/upgrade radio repeater/tower,
replace/upgrade emergency notification siren tower equipment and
tower, cleaning and restoration of tunnel network, and upgrade safety
and security lighting throughout campus.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Dam Failure, Earthquake, Flood, Hazardous Materials,
Hurricanes/Tropical Storm, Severe Winter Weather, Terrorism,
Thunderstorm, Tornado, Tsunami, Water Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $2,357,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Lamar University, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, EMPG, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 42
Beaumont (Past Action) – 45
Proposed Action: Elevate flood prone properties/structures and key infrastructure and
electrical equipment throughout the City of Beaumont.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm,
Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $500,000 - $1,000,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 43
Beaumont (Past Action) – 46
Proposed Action: Minimize damage to structures and infrastructures due to falling trees.
Actions include but are not limited to the following:
Pursue and coordinate a dangerous tree and limb removal
program to protect infrastructure and critical facilities from
damage. This includes working with private homeowners for
voluntary removal of hazardous trees and limbs on private
property.
Coordinate to remove and/or trim trees that endanger
structures, infrastructure, and vital roadways.
Removal of dangerous trees and limbs (dead, leaners, and
hangers). Prevent blockage or damage to infrastructure
and/or major roadways/thoroughfares.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $1 Million
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont (Public Works), Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 44
Beaumont (Past Action) – 47
Proposed Action: Secure and maintain backup information systems to store critical
information at off-site locations.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Dam Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic
Hazard, Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe
Winter Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorm, Tornado, Tsunami,
Water Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Jefferson County, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, EMPG, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Beaumont (Past Action) – 48
Proposed Action: Improve quality of local information on vulnerable items (assets and
populations) for the purpose of more accurate risk and damage
assessments. Work with other agencies in city to get data as up to date
and complete as possible.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Dam Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic
Hazard, Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe
Winter Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorm, Tornado, Tsunami,
Water Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $1,000 - $5,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Jefferson County, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, EMPG, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 45
Beaumont (Past Action) – 49
Proposed Action: Elevate and/or upgrade Marina Drive in the City of Beaumont.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flooding, Geologic Hazard, Hurricane/Tropical Storm,
Thunderstorm, Tornado, Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $6 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Jefferson County, TXDOT
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Beaumont (Past Action) – 50
Proposed Action: Provide educational seminars and brochures regarding the voluntary
Community Rating System (CRS).
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm,
Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $15,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, Jefferson County, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. This is an ongoing mitigation item.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 46
Beaumont (Past Action) – 51
Proposed Action: Expand and upgrade security systems at St. Elizabeth Hospital for
access control on all exterior doors for all buildings as well as installing
cameras and increased perimeter surveillance and safety capabilities.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Terrorism
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $350,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Beaumont, St. Elizabeth Hospital
Potential Funding Sources: EMPG, Homeland Security Grants, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 47
Bevil Oaks
Bevil Oaks (Past Action) – 1
Proposed Action: To build a structure or structures (including a dome or domes) in coastal
(or near coastal) jurisdictions that can withstand 200 mile per hour
winds and act as shelters. This is in conjunction with the Texas Safe
Shelter Initiative.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricanes/Tropical Storms, Thunderstorms, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $1.6 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Bevil Oaks, Jefferson County, TDEM, SETRPC
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter funding, HMGP, PDM
2017 Analysis:
Delete Action.
Bevil Oaks (Past Action) – 2
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing structures and/or construct new structures to act as
shelters during and after Hurricanes/Tropical Storms and other severe
weather events.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storms, Thunderstorms, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $1 - $3 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: Bevil Oaks, Jefferson County, TDEM, SETRPC
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 48
Bevil Oaks (Past Action) – 3
Proposed Action: Storm harden/retrofit critical facilities throughout Bevil Oaks. Actions
can include but are not limited to window shutters, roof straps, flood
proofing, and roll-up door reinforcement (i.e. for fire stations).
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-2 years
Coordinating Agency: Bevil Oaks, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Priority to Low.
Bevil Oaks (Past Action) – 4
Proposed Action: Acquire flood prone properties (including Repetitive Loss and Severe
Repetitive Loss Properties).
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic, Environmental
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $140,000
Implementation Schedule: 12 months
Coordinating Agency: Bevil Oaks, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, FMA, PDM, RFC, SRL
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Note: Progress has been made on this action – HMGP
funding submitted to purchase 4 Repetitive Loss Properties: 2-100%, 1-90%, 1-75%.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 49
Bevil Oaks (Past Action) – 5
Proposed Action: Elevate new and existing flood prone structures and infrastructure
throughout Bevil Oaks.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $20,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Bevil Oaks, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Note: Progress Made – City ordinance now requires new
and substantially improved structures to use 2 foot free board.
Bevil Oaks (Past Action) – 6
Proposed Action: Replace and/or upgrade bridges, culverts and other crossings
throughout Bevil Oaks.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Geologic Hazards
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $200,000 - $1 Million
Implementation Schedule: 2-5 years
Coordinating Agency: Bevil Oaks, Jefferson County, TXDOT
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Note: Progress made – Culvert on River Road 100%
complete. Major ditch project underway, which should be completed in 2017.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 50
Bevil Oaks (Past Action) – 7
Proposed Action: Pursue drainage improvements throughout Bevil Oaks. Actions can
include but are not limited to installing/upgrading culverts and
headwalls as well as enlarging storm water ditches and canals.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storms, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Bevil Oaks, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Bevil Oaks (Past Action) – 8
Proposed Action: Bury underground, secure, or otherwise harden exposed or vulnerable
pipelines.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hazardous Material, Hurricane/Tropical Storm,
Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 3-5 years
Coordinating Agency: Bevil Oaks, Jefferson County, Entergy
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 51
Bevil Oaks (Past Action) – 9
Proposed Action: Provide generators/back-up power systems for critical facilities
(including but not limited to lift stations, water plants, police, EMS, Fire
and other first responder facilities) throughout Bevil Oaks.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Bevil Oaks, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Priority to Low; revise Implementation Schedule
to 3-5 years.
Bevil Oaks (Past Action) – 10
Proposed Action: Pursue flood protection measures to protect from surges from
Hurricanes/Tropical Storms. Actions can include but are not limited to
constructing and/or upgrading sea walls, flood barriers, berms and
various wet and dry flood proofing measures.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Water
Contamination
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $3 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: Bevil Oaks, Jefferson County, USACE, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Note: Progress made – permanent generator fir Fire
Station, EMS, water/sewer/City Hall and Civic Center. 3 lift stations have portable generators with plans to
install permanent ones with city funds.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 52
Bevil Oaks (Past Action) – 11
Proposed Action: Pursue the coordination, construction, expansion and maintenance of
flood control structures/barriers for the purpose of mitigating damages
and protect fresh water resources from storm surge, sea level rise, and
other sources of salt water intrusion.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1 - $2 Million
Implementation Schedule: 2-5 years
Coordinating Agency: Bevil Oaks, Jefferson County, USACE, SETRPC, FEMA
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM< USACE, Jefferson County, SETRPC
2017 Analysis:
Delete Action.
Bevil Oaks (Past Action) – 12
Proposed Action: Construct or improve existing detention/retention ponds where
appropriate to collect storm water to reduce flooding.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic, Environmental
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Bevil Oaks, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Delete Action.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 53
Bevil Oaks (Past Action) – 13
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing structures or construct new structures to act as safe
rooms during tornado or other severe weather events.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Tornados, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $5,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: Bevil Oaks, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Bevil Oaks (Past Action) – 14
Proposed Action: Identify and pursue any mitigation activities that would aid/ enhance
evacuations throughout Bevil Oaks.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm,
Thunderstorm, Tornado, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: Bevil Oaks, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 54
Bevil Oaks (Past Action) – 15
Proposed Action: Construct water retention ponds to collect storm water run-off and use
as an alternate water source throughout Bevil Oaks.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Drought, Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado,
Water Contamination
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Environmental
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $75,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Bevil Oaks, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Bevil Oaks (Past Action) – 16
Proposed Action: Mitigate damage to utilities in order to maintain function during and
after a hazard event. Actions can include but are not limited to:
Burying utility lines underground
Provide frangible links/break away connections on utility
poles
Harden utility poles by converting from wood to concrete or
metal utility poles
Increasing the easement area/clearance of utility lines/ poles
from tree lines
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: Bevil Oaks, Jefferson County, Entergy
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 55
Bevil Oaks (Past Action) – 17
Proposed Action: Provide the public with educational brochures for the hazards
identified as part of the 2011 Plan Update.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic Hazard,
Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe Winter
Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorm, Tornado, Tsunami, Water
Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $5,000 - $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: Bevil Oaks, Jefferson County, TDEM, FEMA
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, EMPG
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Bevil Oaks (Past Action) – 18
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing structures to act as cooling stations in times of extreme
heat.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Extreme Heat
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Bevil Oaks, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 56
Bevil Oaks (Past Action) – 19
Proposed Action: Develop areas of defensible space to prevent damage due to wildfires.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Bevil Oaks, Jefferson County Emergency Management, Texas Forest
Service
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, EMPG, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Bevil Oaks (Past Action) – 20
Proposed Action: Develop and enact water conservation or drought management plans,
ordinances or strategies to be used during times of drought.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Drought
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $25,000 - $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: Bevil Oaks, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 57
Bevil Oaks (Past Action) – 21
Proposed Action: Minimize damage to structures and infrastructure from falling trees.
Actions include but are not limited to the following:
Pursue and coordinate a dangerous tree and limb removal
program to protect infrastructure and critical facilities from
damage. This includes working with private homeowners for
voluntary removal of hazardous trees and limbs on property.
Coordinate contracting to remove and/or trim trees that
endanger structures, infrastructure, and vital roadways.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: Bevil Oaks, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: FEMA PA, HMGP, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Note: this is ongoing.
Bevil Oaks (Past Action) – 22
Proposed Action: Public structure strengthening for City Hall and Fire Department.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-2 years
Coordinating Agency: Bevil Oaks, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Completed.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 58
Bevil Oaks (Past Action) – 23
Proposed Action: Harden and provide generators/alternate power sources for the
following lift stations:
Lift Station #1 at the end of Shipley at the Sewer Plant
Lift Station #2 located at the end of Rolling Hills
Lift Station #3 located on Riverbend Road
Lift Station #4 located on River Oaks Blvd. at the east end
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Bevil Oaks, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
2017 Analysis:
Completed.
Bevil Oaks (Past Action) – 24
Proposed Action: Harden and install generators/alternate power sources at Bevil Oaks
Emergency Operations Center located at 7390 Sweetgum, Beaumont,
Texas.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Bevil Oaks, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
2017 Analysis:
Completed.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 59
Bevil Oaks (Past Action) – 25
Proposed Action: Provide generators/alternate power sources for the Bevil Oaks Fire
Station.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Bevil Oaks, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
2017 Analysis:
Completed.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 60
China
China (Past Action) – 1
Proposed Action: To build a structure or structures (including a done or domes) in coastal
(or near coastal) jurisdictions that can withstand 200 mile per hour
winds and act as shelters. This is in conjunction with the Texas Safe
Shelter Initiative.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1.6 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of China, Jefferson County Emergency Management, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
China (Past Action) – 2
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing structures and/or construct new structures to act as
shelters during and after Hurricanes/Tropical Storms and other severe
weather events.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1 - $2 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of China, Jefferson County, SETRPC, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 61
China (Past Action) – 3
Proposed Action: Develop and enact water conservation or drought management plans,
ordinances or strategies to be used during times of drought.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Drought
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $25,000 - $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of China, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
China (Past Action) – 4
Proposed Action: Minimize damage to structures and infrastructure from falling trees.
Actions include but are not limited to the following:
Pursue and coordinate a dangerous tree and limb removal
program to protect infrastructure and critical facilities from
damage. This includes working with private homeowners for
voluntary removal of hazardous trees and limbs on private
property.
Coordinate contracting to remove and/or trim trees that
endanger structures, infrastructure, and vital roadways.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of China, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: FEMA PA, HMGP, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 62
China (Past Action) – 5
Proposed Action: Public structure strengthening for City Hall.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-2 years
Coordinating Agency: City of China, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
China (Past Action) – 6
Proposed Action: Provide generators/back-up power systems for critical facilities
(including but not limited to lift stations, water plants, police, EMS, Fire
and other first responder facilities) throughout China.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of China, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 63
China (Past Action) – 7
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing structures or construct new structures to act as safe
rooms during tornados or other severe weather events.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Tornados, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $5,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of China, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
China (Past Action) – 8
Proposed Action: Identify and pursue any mitigation activities that would aid/ enhance
evacuations throughout China.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm,
Thunderstorm, Tornado, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of China, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 64
China (Past Action) – 9
Proposed Action: Construct water retention ponds to collect storm water run-off and use
as an alternate water source throughout China.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Drought, Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado,
Water Contamination
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Environmental
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $75,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of China, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
China (Past Action) – 10
Proposed Action: Mitigate damage to utilities in order to maintain function during and
after a hazard event. Actions can include but are not limited to:
Burying utility lines underground
Provide frangible links/break away connections on utility
poles
Harden utility poles by converting from wood to concrete or
metal utility poles
Increasing the easement area/clearance of utility lines/ poles
from trees lines
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of China, Jefferson County, Entergy
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 65
China (Past Action) – 11
Proposed Action: Provide the public with educational brochures for the hazards
identified as part of the 2011 Plan Update.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic Hazard,
Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe Winter
Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorm, Tornado, Tsunami, Water
Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $5,000 - $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of China, Jefferson County, TDEM, FEMA
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, EMPG
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
China (Past Action) – 12
Proposed Action: Storm harden/retrofit critical facilities throughout China. Actions can
include but are not limited to window shutters, roof straps, flood
proofing, and roll-up door reinforcement (i.e. for fire stations).
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-2 years
Coordinating Agency: City of China, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 66
China (Past Action) – 13
Proposed Action: Replace and/or upgrade bridges, culverts and other crossings
throughout China.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Geologic Hazards
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Legal
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $200,000 - $1 Million
Implementation Schedule: 2-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of China, Jefferson County, TXDOT
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
China (Past Action) – 14
Proposed Action: Pursue drainage improvements throughout China. Actions can include
but are not limited to installing/upgrading culverts and headwalls as
well as enlarging storm water ditches and canals.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storms, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of China, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 67
China (Past Action) – 15
Proposed Action: Pursue flood protection measures to protect from surges from
Hurricanes/Tropical Storms. Actions can include but are not limited to
constructing and/or upgrading sea walls, flood barriers, berms and
various wet and dry flood proofing measures.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical storm, Thunderstorm, Water
Contamination
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $3 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of China, Jefferson County, USACE, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
China (Past Action) – 16
Proposed Action: Construct or improve existing detention/retention ponds where
appropriate to collect storm water to reduce flooding.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic, Environmental
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of China, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 68
China (Past Action) – 17
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing structures to act as cooling stations in times of extreme
heat.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Extreme Heat
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of China, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
China (Past Action) – 18
Proposed Action: Acquire flood prone properties (including Repetitive Loss and Severe
Repetitive Loss Properties).
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Environmental, Economic
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $140,000
Implementation Schedule: 12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of China, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, FMA, PDM, RFC, SRL
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 69
China (Past Action) – 19
Proposed Action: Elevate new and existing flood prone structures and infrastructure
throughout China.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $20,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of China, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
China (Past Action) – 20
Proposed Action: Bury underground, secure or otherwise harden exposed or vulnerable
pipelines.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hazardous Material, Hurricane/Tropical Storm,
Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 3-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of China, Jefferson County, Entergy
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 70
China (Past Action) – 21
Proposed Action: Pursue the coordination, construction, expansion and maintenance of
flood control structures/barriers for the purpose of mitigating damage
and protect fresh water resources from storm surge, sea level rise, and
other sources of salt water intrusion.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $1 - $2 Million
Implementation Schedule: 2-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of China, Jefferson County, USACE, SETRPC, FEMA
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, USACE, Jefferson County, SETRPC
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
China (Past Action) – 22
Proposed Action: Develop areas of defensible space to prevent damage due to wildfires.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of China, Jefferson County Emergency Management
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, EMPG, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 71
Groves
Groves (Past Action) – 1
Proposed Action: To build a structure or structures (including a dome or domes) in coastal
(or near coastal) jurisdictions that can withstand 200 mile per hour
winds and act as shelters. This is in conjunction with the Texas Safe
Shelter Initiative.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1.6 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County Emergency Management, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
2017 Analysis:
Completed.
Groves (Past Action) – 2
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing structures and/or construct new structures to act as
shelters during and after Hurricanes/Tropical Storms and other severe
weather events.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1 - $2 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County, SETRPC, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 72
Groves (Past Action) – 3
Proposed Action: Storm harden/retrofit critical facilities throughout Groves. Actions can
include but are not limited to window shutters, roof straps, flood
proofing, and roll-up door reinforcement (i.e. for fire stations).
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-2 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Groves (Past Action) – 4
Proposed Action: Installation of a generator at the South Lift Station.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
2017 Analysis:
Completed.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 73
Groves (Past Action) – 5
Proposed Action: Installation of a generator at the North Lift Station.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
2017 Analysis:
Completed.
Groves (Past Action) – 6
Proposed Action: Provide generators/back-up power systems for critical facilities
(including but not limited to lift stations, water plants, police, EMS, Fire
and other first responder facilities) throughout Groves.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
2017 Analysis:
Completed.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 74
Groves (Past Action) – 7
Proposed Action: Identify and pursue any mitigation activities that would aid/ enhance
evacuations throughout Groves.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm,
Thunderstorm, Tornado, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Groves (Past Action) – 8
Proposed Action: Public structure strengthening for City Hall, Police Station and Activity
Center Complex.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-2 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 75
Groves (Past Action) – 9
Proposed Action: Public structure strengthening for Groves Fire Station.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-2 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Groves (Past Action) – 10
Proposed Action: Public structure strengthening for Public Works Complex.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-2 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 76
Groves (Past Action) – 11
Proposed Action: Public structure strengthening for Wastewater Treatment Plan.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-2 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Groves (Past Action) – 12
Proposed Action: Provide the public with educational brochures for the hazards
identified as part of the 2011 Plan Update.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic Hazard,
Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe Winter
Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorm, Tornado, Tsunami, Water
Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $5,000 - $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County, TDEM, FEMA
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, EMPG
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 77
Groves (Past Action) – 13
Proposed Action: Replace and/or upgrade bridges, culverts and other crossings
throughout Groves.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Geologic Hazards
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Legal
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $200,000 - $1 Million
Implementation Schedule: 2-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County, TXDOT
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Groves (Past Action) – 14
Proposed Action: Pursue drainage improvements throughout Groves. Actions can include
but are not limited to installing/upgrading culverts and headwalls as
well as enlarging storm water ditches, drains and canals.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storms, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 78
Groves (Past Action) – 15
Proposed Action: Pursue flood protection measures to protect from surge from
Hurricanes/Tropical Storms. Actions can include but are not limited to
constructing and/or upgrading sea walls, flood barriers, berms and
various wet and dry flood proofing measures.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Water
Contamination
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $3 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County, USACE, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Groves (Past Action) – 16
Proposed Action: Pursue the coordination, construction, expansion and maintenance of
flood control structures/barriers for the purpose of mitigating damage
and protect fresh water resources from storm surge, seal level rise and
other sources of salt water intrusion.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $1 - $2 Million
Implementation Schedule: 2-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County, USACE, SETRPC, FEMA
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, USACE, Jefferson County, SETRPC
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 79
Groves (Past Action) – 17
Proposed Action: Develop and enact water conservation or drought management plans,
ordinances, or strategies to be used during times of drought.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Drought
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $25,000 - $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Groves (Past Action) – 18
Proposed Action: Construct water retention ponds to collect storm water run-off and use
as an alternate water source throughout Groves.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Drought, Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado,
Water Contamination
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Environmental
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $75,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 80
Groves (Past Action) – 19
Proposed Action: Mitigate damage to utilities in order to maintain function during and
after a hazard event. Actions can include but are not limited to:
Burying utility lines underground
Provide frangible links/break away connections on utility
poles
Harden utility poles by converting from wood to concrete or
metal utility poles
Increasing the easement area/clearance of utility lines/ poles
from tree lines
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Legal, Economic
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County, Entergy
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Groves (Past Action) – 20
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing structures to act as cooling stations in times of extreme
heat.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Extreme Heat
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 81
Groves (Past Action) – 21
Proposed Action: Develop areas of defensible space to prevent damage due to wildfires.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County Emergency Management
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, EMPG, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Groves (Past Action) – 22
Proposed Action: Minimize damage to structures and infrastructure from falling trees.
Actions include but are not limited to the following:
Pursue and coordinate dangerous tree and limb removal
program to protect infrastructure and critical facilities from
damage. This includes working with private homeowners for
voluntary removal of hazardous trees and limbs on private
property.
Coordinate contracting to remove and/or trim trees that
endanger structures, infrastructure and vital roadways.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: FEMA PA, HMGP, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 82
Groves (Past Action) – 23
Proposed Action: Reduce flooding on Van Buren from Wilson to Grant.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storms, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Groves (Past Action) – 24
Proposed Action: Address flooding issues on 34th Street and the south end of Franklin
Street.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storms, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 83
Groves (Past Action) – 25
Proposed Action: Acquire flood prone properties (including Repetitive Loss and Severe
Repetitive Loss Properties).
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Environmental, Economic
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $140,000
Implementation Schedule: 12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, FMA, PDM, RFC, SRL
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Groves (Past Action) – 26
Proposed Action: Elevate new and existing flood prone structures and infrastructure
throughout Groves.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $20,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 84
Groves (Past Action) – 27
Proposed Action: Bury underground, secure or otherwise harden exposed or vulnerable
pipeline.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hazardous Material, Hurricane/Tropical Storm,
Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 3-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County, Entergy
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise action to include water, sewer, liquid petroleum,
and natural gas.
Groves (Past Action) – 28
Proposed Action: Construct or improve existing detention/retention ponds where
appropriate to collect storm water to reduce flooding.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic, Environmental
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Delete Action.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 85
Groves (Past Action) – 29
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing structures or construct new structures to act as safe
rooms during tornados or other severe weather events.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Tornados, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Groves, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Delete Action.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 86
Nederland
Nederland (Past Action) – 1
Proposed Action: To build a structure or structures (including a done or domes) in coastal
(or near coastal) jurisdictions that can withstand 200 mile per hour
winds and act as shelters. This is in conjunction with the Texas Safe
Shelter Initiative.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1.6 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County Emergency Management,
TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Nederland (Past Action) – 2
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing structures and/or construct new structures to act as
shelters during and after Hurricanes/Tropical Storms and other severe
weather events.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1 - $2 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County, SETRPC, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 87
Nederland (Past Action) – 3
Proposed Action: Storm harden/retrofit critical facilities throughout Nederland. Actions
can include but are not limited to window shutters, roof straps, flood
proofing, and roll-up door reinforcement (i.e. for fire stations).
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-2 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Nederland (Past Action) – 4
Proposed Action: Acquire flood prone properties (including Repetitive Loss and Severe
Repetitive Loss Properties).
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Environmental, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $140,000
Implementation Schedule: 12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, FMA, PDM, RFC, SRL
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise action to include relocation of flood-prone
properties.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 88
Nederland (Past Action) – 5
Proposed Action: Elevate new and existing flood prone structures and infrastructure
throughout Nederland.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $20,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Nederland (Past Action) – 6
Proposed Action: Replace and/or upgrade bridges, culverts, and other crossings
throughout Nederland.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Geologic Hazards
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $200,000 - $1 Million
Implementation Schedule: 2-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County, TXDOT
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 89
Nederland (Past Action) – 7
Proposed Action: Pursue drainage improvements throughout Nederland. Actions can
include but are not limited to installing/upgrading culverts and
headwalls as well as enlarging storm water ditches and canals.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storms, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Nederland (Past Action) – 8
Proposed Action: Bury underground, secure or otherwise harden exposed or vulnerable
pipelines.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hazardous Material, Hurricane/Tropical Storm,
Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 3-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County, Entergy
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise action to include water, sewer, liquid petroleum,
and natural gas.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 90
Nederland (Past Action) – 9
Proposed Action: Provide generators/back-up power systems for critical facilities
(including but not limited to lift stations, water plants, police, EMS, Fire
and other first responder facilities) throughout Nederland.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. This will be combined with the action to storm harden/
retrofit critical facilities.
Nederland (Past Action) – 10
Proposed Action: Pursue flood protection measure to protect from surge from
Hurricanes/Tropical Storms. Actions can include but are not limited to
constructing and/or upgrading sea walls, flood barriers, berms, and
various wet and dry flood proofing measures.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Water
Contamination
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $3 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County, USACE, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 91
Nederland (Past Action) – 11
Proposed Action: Pursue the coordination, construction, expansion and maintenance of
flood control structures/barriers for the purpose of mitigating damage
and protect fresh water resources from storm surge, sea level rise and
other sources of salt water intrusion.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1 - $2 Million
Implementation Schedule: 2-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County, USACE, SETRPC, FEMA
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, USACE, Jefferson County, SETRPC
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Nederland (Past Action) – 12
Proposed Action: Construct or improve existing detention/retention ponds where
appropriate to collect storm water to reduce flooding.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic, Environmental
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL< local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 92
Nederland (Past Action) – 13
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing structures or construct new structures to act as safe
rooms during tornados or other severe weather events.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Tornados, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $5,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Nederland (Past Action) – 14
Proposed Action: Identify and pursue any mitigation activities that would aid/ enhance
evacuations throughout Nederland.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm,
Thunderstorm, Tornado, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 93
Nederland (Past Action) – 15
Proposed Action: Construct water retention ponds to collect storm water run-off and use
as an alternate water source throughout Nederland.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Drought, Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado,
Water Contamination
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Environmental
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $75,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Nederland (Past Action) – 16
Proposed Action: Mitigate damage to utilities in order to maintain function during and
after a hazard event. Actions can include but are not limited to:
Burying utility lines underground
Provide frangible links/breakaway connections on utility poles
Harden utility poles by converting from wood to concrete or
metal utility poles
Increasing the easement area/clearance of utility lines/ poles
from trees lines
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County, Entergy
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 94
Nederland (Past Action) – 17
Proposed Action: Public structure strengthening for City Hall and Police and Fire
Complex.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-2 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Completed.
Nederland (Past Action) – 18
Proposed Action: Public structure strengthening for Water Treatment Plant.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/ Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-2 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 95
Nederland (Past Action) – 19
Proposed Action: Public structure strengthening for Service Center.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-2 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Nederland (Past Action) – 20
Proposed Action: Public structure strengthening for Wastewater Treatment Plant located
at 515 Hardy Avenue.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-2 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 96
Nederland (Past Action) – 21
Proposed Action: Public structure strengthening for Hughes Library.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-2 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Nederland (Past Action) – 22
Proposed Action: Provide the public with educational brochures for the hazards
identified as part of the 2011 Plan Update.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic Hazard,
Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe Winter
Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorm, Tornado, Tsunami, Water
Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $5,000 - $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County, TDEM, FEMA
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, EMPG
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 97
Nederland (Past Action) – 23
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing structures to act as cooling stations in times of extreme
heat.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Extreme Heat
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Nederland (Past Action) – 24
Proposed Action: Develop areas of defensible space to prevent damage due to wildfires.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County Emergency Management
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, EMPG, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 98
Nederland (Past Action) – 25
Proposed Action: Develop and enact water conservation or drought management plans,
ordinances or strategies to be used during times of drought.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Drought
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $25,000 - $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Nederland (Past Action) – 26
Proposed Action: Minimize damage to structures and infrastructure from falling trees.
Actions include but are not limited to the following:
Pursue and coordinate a dangerous tree and limb removal
program to protect infrastructure and critical facilities from
danger. This includes working with private homeowners for
voluntary removal of hazardous trees and limbs on private
property.
Coordinate contracting to remove and/or trim trees that
endanger structures, infrastructure, and vital roadways.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: FEMA PA, HMGP, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 99
Nederland (Past Action) – 27
Proposed Action: Public structure strengthening by replacing drainage tile main and
feeders.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-2 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Nederland (Past Action) – 28
Proposed Action: Public structure strengthening by installing transfer switches at named
lift stations.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-2 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Completed.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 100
Nederland (Past Action) – 29
Proposed Action: Public structure strengthening for D. Bob Henson Building.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-2 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Nederland (Past Action) – 30
Proposed Action: Improve underground storm sewer culvert size on Detroit Avenue.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Water
Contamination
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $3 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nederland, Jefferson County, USACE, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 101
Nome
Nome (Past Action) – 1
Proposed Action: To build a structure or structures (including a dome or domes) in coastal
(or near coastal) jurisdictions that can withstand 200 mile per hour
winds and act as shelters. This is in conjunction with the Texas Safe
Shelter Initiative.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1.6 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nome, Jefferson County Emergency Management, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Nome (Past Action) – 2
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing structures and/or construct new structures to act as
shelters during and after Hurricanes/Tropical Storms and other severe
weather events.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1- $2 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nome, Jefferson County, SETRPC, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 102
Nome (Past Action) – 3
Proposed Action: Storm harden/retrofit critical facilities throughout Nome. Actions can
include but are not limited to window shutters, roof straps, flood
proofing, and roll-up door reinforcement (i.e. for fire stations).
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-2 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nome, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Nome (Past Action) – 4
Proposed Action: Acquire flood prone properties (including Repetitive Loss and Severe
Repetitive Loss Properties).
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Environmental, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $140,000
Implementation Schedule: 12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Nome, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, FMA, PDM, RFC, SRL
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 103
Nome (Past Action) – 5
Proposed Action: Elevate new and existing flood prone structures and infrastructure
throughout Nome.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $20,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nome, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Nome (Past Action) – 6
Proposed Action: Replace and/or upgrade bridges, culverts and other crossings
throughout Nome.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Geologic Hazards
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $200,000 - $1 Million
Implementation Schedule: 2-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nome, Jefferson County, TXDOT
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 104
Nome (Past Action) – 7
Proposed Action: Pursue drainage improvements throughout Nome. Actions can include
but are not limited to installing/upgrading culverts and headwalls as
well as enlarging storm water ditches and canals.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storms, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nome, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Nome (Past Action) – 8
Proposed Action: Bury underground, secure or otherwise harden exposed or vulnerable
pipelines.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hazardous Material, Hurricane/Tropical Storm,
Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 3-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nome, Jefferson County, Entergy
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise action to include water and sewer.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 105
Nome (Past Action) – 9
Proposed Action: Provide generators/back-up power systems for critical facilities
(including but not limited to lift stations, water plants, police, EMS, Fire
and other first responder facilities) throughout Nome.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nome, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Estimated Cost to $1-$2 Million.
Nome (Past Action) – 10
Proposed Action: Pursue flood protection measures to protect from surge from
Hurricanes/Tropical Storms. Actions can include but are not limited to
constructing and/or upgrading sea walls, flood barriers, berms and
various wet and dry flood proofing measures.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Water
Contamination
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $3 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nome, Jefferson County, USACE, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 106
Nome (Past Action) – 11
Proposed Action: Pursue the coordination, construction, expansion and maintenance of
flood control structures/barriers for the purpose of mitigating damage
and protect fresh water resources from storm surge, seal level rise and
other sources of salt water intrusion.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1- $2 Million
Implementation Schedule: 2-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nome, Jefferson County, USACE, SETRPC, FEMA
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, USACE, Jefferson County, SETRPC
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Nome (Past Action) – 12
Proposed Action: Construct or improve existing detention/retention ponds where
appropriate to collect storm water to reduce flooding.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic, Environmental
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nome, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 107
Nome (Past Action) – 13
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing structures or construct new structures to act as safe
rooms during tornados or other severe weather events.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Tornados, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $5,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nome, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Nome (Past Action) – 14
Proposed Action: Identify and pursue any mitigation activities that would aid/ enhance
evacuations throughout Nome.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm,
Thunderstorm, Tornado, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nome, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 108
Nome (Past Action) – 15
Proposed Action: Construct water retention ponds to collect storm water run-off and use
as an alternate water source throughout Nome.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nome, Jefferson County, Entergy
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Nome (Past Action) – 16
Proposed Action: Mitigate damage to utilities in order to maintain function during and
after a hazard event. Actions can include but are not limited to:
Burying utility lines underground
Provide frangible links/break away connections on utility
poles
Harden utility poles by converting from wood to concrete or
metal utility poles
Increasing the easement area/clearance of utility lines/ poles
from trees lines
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nome, Jefferson County, Entergy
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 109
Nome (Past Action) – 17
Proposed Action: Provide the public with educational brochures for the hazards
identified as part of the 2011 Plan Update.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic Hazard,
Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe Winter
Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorm, Tornado, Tsunami, Water
Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $5,000 - $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Nome, Jefferson County, TDEM, FEMA
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, EMPG
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Nome (Past Action) – 18
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing structures to act as cooling stations in times of extreme
heat.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Extreme Heat
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nome, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 110
Nome (Past Action) – 19
Proposed Action: Develop areas of defensible space to prevent damage due to wildfires.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Nome, Jefferson County Emergency Management
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, EMPG, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Priority to Low.
Nome (Past Action) – 20
Proposed Action: Develop and enact water conservation or drought management plans,
ordinances or strategies to be used during times of drought.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Drought
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $25,000 - $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Nome, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 111
Nome (Past Action) – 21
Proposed Action: Minimize damage to structures and infrastructure from falling trees.
Actions include but are not limited to the following:
Pursue and coordinate a dangerous tree and limb removal
program to protect infrastructure and critical facilities from
damage. This includes working with private homeowners for
voluntary removal of hazardous trees and limbs on private
property.
Coordinate contracting to remove and/or trim trees that
endanger structures, infrastructure, and vital roadways.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Nome, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: FEMA PA, HMGP, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 112
Port Arthur
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 1
Proposed Action: To build a structure or structures (including a dome or domes) in coastal
(or near coastal) jurisdictions that can withstand 200 mile per hour
winds and act as shelters. This is in conjunction with the Texas Safe
Shelter Initiative.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1.6 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County Emergency Management, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 2
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing structures and/or construct new structures to act as
shelters during and after Hurricanes/Tropical Storms and other severe
weather events.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1 - $2 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County, SETRPC, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 113
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 3
Proposed Action: Storm harden/retrofit critical facilities throughout Port Arthur. Actions
can include but are not limited to window shutters, roof straps, flood
proofing, and roll-up door reinforcement (i.e. for fire stations).
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-2 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 4
Proposed Action: Acquire flood prone properties (including Repetitive Loss and Severe
Repetitive Loss Properties).
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Environmental, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $140,000
Implementation Schedule: 12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, FMA, PDM, RFC, SRL
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 114
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 5
Proposed Action: Elevate new and existing flood prone structures and infrastructure
throughout Port Arthur.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $20,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 6
Proposed Action: Replace and/or upgrade bridges, culverts and other crossings
throughout Port Arthur.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Geologic Hazards
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $200,000 - $1 Million
Implementation Schedule: 2-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County, TXDOT
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 115
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 7
Proposed Action: Pursue drainage improvements throughout Port Arthur. Actions can
include but are not limited to installing/upgrading culverts and
headwalls as well as enlarging storm water ditches and canals.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storms, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 8
Proposed Action: Bury underground, secure or otherwise harden exposed or vulnerable
pipelines.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hazardous Material, Hurricane/Tropical Storm,
Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 3-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County, Entergy
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 116
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 9
Proposed Action: Provide generators/back-up power systems for critical facilities
(including but not limited to lift stations, water plants, police, EMS, Fire
and other first responder facilities) throughout the Jefferson County.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
2017 Analysis:
Completed.
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 10
Proposed Action: Pursue flood protection measures to protect from sure from
Hurricanes/Tropical Storms. Actions can include but are not limited to
constructing and/or upgrading sea walls, flood barriers, berms and
various wet and dry flood proofing measures.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Water
Contamination
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $3 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County, USACE, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 117
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 11
Proposed Action: Pursue the coordination, construction, expansion and maintenance of
flood control structures/barriers for the purpose of mitigating damage
and protect fresh water resources from storm surge, seal level rise, and
other sources of salt water intrusion.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1 - $2 Million
Implementation Schedule: 2-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County, USACE, SETRPC, FEMA
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, USACE, Jefferson County, SETRPC
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 12
Proposed Action: Construct or improve existing detention/retention ponds where
appropriate to collect storm water to reduce flooding.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic, Environmental
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 118
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 13
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing structures or construct new structures to act as safe
rooms during tornados or other severe weather events.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Tornados, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $5,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 14
Proposed Action: Identify and pursue any mitigation activities that would aid/ enhance
evacuations throughout Port Arthur.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm,
Thunderstorm, Tornado, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 119
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 15
Proposed Action: Construct water retention ponds to collect storm water run-off and use
as an alternate water source throughout Port Arthur where possible.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Drought, Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado,
Water Contamination
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Environmental
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $75,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 16
Proposed Action: Mitigate damage to utilities in order to maintain function during and
after a hazard event. Actions can include but are not limited to:
Burying utility lines underground
Provide frangible links/break away connections on utility
poles
Harden utility poles by converting from wood to concrete or
metal utility poles
Increasing the easement area/clearance of utility lines/ poles
from trees lines
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County, Entergy
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 120
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 17
Proposed Action: Provide the public with educational brochures for the hazards
identified as part of the 2011 Plan Update.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic Hazard,
Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe Winter
Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorm, Tornado, Tsunami, Water
Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $5,000 - $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County, TDEM, FEMA
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, EMPG
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 18
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing structures to act as cooling stations in times of extreme
heat.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Extreme Heat
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 121
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 19
Proposed Action: Develop areas of defensible space to prevent damage due to wildfires.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County Emergency Management
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, EMPG, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 20
Proposed Action: Develop and enact water conservation or drought management plans,
ordinance or strategies to be used during times of drought.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Drought
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $25,000 - $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 122
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 21
Proposed Action: Minimize damage to structures and infrastructures from falling trees.
Actions include but are not limited to the following:
Pursue and coordinate a dangerous tree and limb removal
program to protect infrastructure and critical facilities from
damage. This includes working with private homeowners for
voluntary removal of hazardous trees and limbs on private
property.
Coordinate contracting to remove and/or trim trees that
endanger structures, infrastructure, and vial roadways.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: FEMA PA, HMGP, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 22
Proposed Action: Increase channel capacity and improve multiple culvert crossings of
Drainage Channel Main B.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storms, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 123
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 23
Proposed Action: In Drainage Channel Main C, improve culvert crossing at Hwy. 69.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storms, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Completed.
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 24
Proposed Action: Improve channel capacity and crossings in Lateral 3 of the Drainage
Channel Main A system.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storms, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 124
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 25
Proposed Action: Improve culvert crossings in the Lakeview Drainage system.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storms, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 26
Proposed Action: Increase drainage capacity to reduce flooding on Westside.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storms, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 125
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 27
Proposed Action: Improve concrete lining of the El Vista Pump Station.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storms, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 28
Proposed Action: Upgrade existing storm sewer in the Port Acres area and along Procter
Street.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storms, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 126
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 29
Proposed Action: Develop/implement shelter-in-place presentations.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricanes/Tropical Storms
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1,000 - $5,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 30
Proposed Action: Develop/implement emergency first responder teams with Sabine
Neches Chief’s Association.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Dam Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic
Hazard, Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe
Winter Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorm, Tornado, Tsunami,
Water Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1,000 - $10,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: Port Arthur Emergency Management, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 127
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 31
Proposed Action: Develop/implement coastal storm presentations to groups, schools,
etc.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricanes/Tropical Storms
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1,000 - $5,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 32
Proposed Action: Require all new construction to meet/exceed minimum established
flood elevations.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storms, Thunderstorms,
Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1,000 - $30,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Port Arthur Floodplain Management
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 128
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 33
Proposed Action: Receive maximum credit for the NFIP CRS.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storms, Thunderstorms,
Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1,000 - $30,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Port Arthur Floodplain Management
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 34
Proposed Action: Develop/implement bus transportation for hurricane evacuation.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricanes/Tropical Storms
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $300,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: Port Arthur Emergency Management, Jefferson County Emergency
Management
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 129
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 35
Proposed Action: Develop/implement transportation plan for special needs populations.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Dam Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic
Hazard, Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe
Winter Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorm, Tornado, Tsunami,
Water Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $300,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County Emergency Management
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 36
Proposed Action: Assist in implementation of 211 TX Linkage Access Service.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storms, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 130
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 37
Proposed Action: Add 8-foot by 7-foot concrete box in Tiger Bayou.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storms, Thunderstorms,
Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 38
Proposed Action: Improve Hwy. 365 from Hwy. 69 to Rhodair Gully.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storms, Thunderstorms,
Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Arthur, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 131
Port Arthur (Past Action) – 39
Proposed Action: Decrease floodplain width in North Port Acres Ditch.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storms, Thunderstorms,
Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $300,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Port Arthur Floodplain Management
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 132
Port Neches
Port Neches (Past Action) – 1
Proposed Action: To build a structure or structures (including a dome or domes) in coastal
(or near coastal) jurisdictions that can withstand 200 mile per hour
winds and act as shelters. This is in conjunction with the Texas Safe
Shelter Initiative.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1.6 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County Emergency Management, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Neches (Past Action) – 2
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing structures and/or construct new structures to act as
shelters during and after Hurricanes/Tropical Storms and other severe
weather events.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1 - $2 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: Jefferson County, SETRPC, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 133
Port Neches (Past Action) – 3
Proposed Action: Storm harden/retrofit critical and non-critical facilities throughout Port
Neches. Actions can include but are not limited to window shutters,
roof straps, flood proofing, and roll-up door reinforcement (i.e. for fire
stations).
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-2 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Neches, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMPG, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Neches (Past Action) – 4
Proposed Action: Elevate new and existing flood prone structures and infrastructure
throughout Port Neches.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $20,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Neches, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 134
Port Neches (Past Action) – 5
Proposed Action: Replace and/or upgrade bridges, culverts and other crossings
throughout Port Neches.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Geologic Hazards
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $200,000 - $1 Million
Implementation Schedule: 2-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Neches, Jefferson County, TXDOT
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Neches (Past Action) – 6
Proposed Action: Pursue drainage improvements throughout Port Neches. Actions can
include but are not limited to installing/upgrading culverts and
headwalls as well as enlarging storm water ditches and canals.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storms, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Neches, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 135
Port Neches (Past Action) – 7
Proposed Action: Bury underground, secure or otherwise harden exposed or vulnerable
pipelines.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hazardous Material, Hurricane/Tropical Storm,
Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 3-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Neches, Jefferson County, Entergy
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Neches (Past Action) – 8
Proposed Action: Provide generators/back-up power systems for critical facilities
(including but not limited to lift stations, water plants, police, EMS, Fire
and other first responder facilities) throughout Port Neches.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Neches, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 136
Port Neches (Past Action) – 9
Proposed Action: Mitigate damage to utilities in order to maintain function during and
after a hazard event. Actions can include but are not limited to:
Burying utility lines underground
Provide frangible links/break away connections on utility
poles
Harden utility poles by converting from wood to concrete or
metal utility poles
Increasing the easement area/clearance of utility lines/ poles
from trees lines
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Neches, Jefferson County, Entergy
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 137
Port Neches (Past Action) – 10
Proposed Action: Minimize damage to structures and infrastructure from falling trees.
Actions include but are not limited to the following:
Pursue and coordinate a dangerous tree and limb removal
program to protect infrastructure and critical facilities from
damage. This includes working with private homeowners for
voluntary removal of hazardous trees and limbs on private
property.
Coordinate contracting to remove and/or trim trees that
endanger structures, infrastructure, and vital roadways.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Neches, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: FEMA PA, HMGP, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Neches (Past Action) – 11
Proposed Action: Coordinate public-private partnerships to ensure special needs
population protected from winter weather.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Severe Winter Weather
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-2 years
Coordinating Agency: Port Neches EMC
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 138
Port Neches (Past Action) – 12
Proposed Action: Conduct coastal storm presentations.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storms
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $100 - $5,000
Implementation Schedule: Every 12 months
Coordinating Agency: Port Neches EMC
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets, HMGP, PDM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Neches (Past Action) – 13
Proposed Action: Provide the public with educational brochures for the hazards
identified as part of the 2011 Plan Update.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic Hazard,
Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe Winter
Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorm, Tornado, Tsunami, Water
Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $5,000 - $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Neches, Jefferson County, TDEM, FEMA
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, EMPG
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 139
Port Neches (Past Action) – 14
Proposed Action: Pursue the coordination, construction, expansion and maintenance of
flood control structures/barriers for the purpose of mitigating damage
and protect fresh water resources from storm surge, sea level rise, and
other sources of salt water intrusion.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $1 - $2 Million
Implementation Schedule: 2-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Neches, Jefferson County, USACE, SETRPC, FEMA
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, USACE, Jefferson County, SETRPC
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Neches (Past Action) – 15
Proposed Action: Construct or improve existing detention/retention ponds where
appropriate to collect storm water to reduce flooding.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic, Environmental
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Neches, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 140
Port Neches (Past Action) – 16
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing structures or construct new structures to act as safe
rooms during tornados or other severe weather events.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Tornados, Thunderstorms
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $5,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Neches, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Neches (Past Action) – 17
Proposed Action: Identify and pursue any mitigation activities that would aid/ enhance
evacuations throughout the Port Neches.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm,
Thunderstorm, Tornado, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Neches, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 141
Port Neches (Past Action) – 18
Proposed Action: Acquire flood prone properties (including Repetitive Loss and Severe
Repetitive Loss Properties).
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic, Environmental
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $140,000
Implementation Schedule: 12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Neches, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, FMA, PDM, RFC, SRL
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Neches (Past Action) – 19
Proposed Action: Pursue flood protection measures to protect from surge from
Hurricanes/Tropical Storms. Actions can include but are not limited to
constructing and/or upgrading sea walls, flood barriers, berms and
various wet and dry flood proofing measures.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Water
Contamination
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $3 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Neches, Jefferson County, USACE, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 142
Port Neches (Past Action) – 20
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing structures to act as cooling stations in times of extreme
heat.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Extreme Heat
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Neches, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Port Neches (Past Action) – 21
Proposed Action: Develop areas of defensible space to prevent damage due to wildfires.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Neches, Jefferson County Emergency Management
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, EMPG, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 143
Port Neches (Past Action) – 22
Proposed Action: Develop and enact water conservation or drought management plan,
ordinance or strategies to be used during times of drought.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Drought
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $25,000 - $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: City of Port Neches, Jefferson County
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 144
South East Texas Regional Planning Commission (SETRPC)
SETRPC (Past Action) – 1
Proposed Action: To build a structure or structures (including a dome or domes) in coastal
(or near coastal) jurisdictions that can withstand 200 mile per hour
winds and act as shelters. This is in conjunction with the Texas Safe
Shelter Initiative.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado, Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1 - $2 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
2017 Analysis:
Delete Action.
SETRPC (Past Action) – 2
Proposed Action: Retrofit existing structures and/or construct new structures to act as
shelters during and after Hurricanes/Tropical Storms and other severe
weather events.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado, Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1 - $2 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, TDEM
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Estimate Cost to $1.5 - $5 Million.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 145
SETRPC (Past Action) – 3
Proposed Action: Develop a database of contact information for 1st responders,
volunteers, and vulnerable populations. This also includes a database
of assisted living/nursing homes throughout the region.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Dam Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic
Hazards, Hazardous Materials Incidents, Hurricanes/Tropical
Storms, Severe Winter Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorms,
Tornados, Tsunami, Water Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1,000 - $5,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Harding County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, EMPG, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
SETRPC (Past Action) – 4
Proposed Action: Facilitate use of all mass notification systems including but not limited
to the Southeast Texas Alerting Network (STAN), to notify and educate
the public of impending hazardous events.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Dam Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic
Hazards, Hazardous Materials Incidents, Hurricanes/Tropical
Storms, Severe Winter Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorms,
Tornados, Tsunami, Water Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1,000 - $5,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Harding County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, EMPG, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 146
SETRPC (Past Action) – 5
Proposed Action: Coordinate public/private partnerships to ensure special need
populations are protected from health risks due to extreme weather
conditions. Actions will be targeted toward citizens with physical
limitations and may be unable to reach safety in times of severe
weather. Volunteer groups may be available to assist by visiting special
needs groups to ensure their safety and comfort during severe
temperature extremes.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Dam Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic
Hazards, Hazardous Materials Incidents, Hurricanes/Tropical
Storms, Severe Winter Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorms,
Tornados, Tsunami, Water Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1,000 - $5,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities, hospitals, Councils of Aging
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Estimated Cost to $50,000 - $100,000.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 147
SETRPC (Past Action) – 6
Proposed Action: Coordinate a natural hazard public awareness campaign among the
jurisdictions. Efforts may include tropical storm/hurricane awareness
presentations, shelter-in-place presentations, evacuation maps,
floodplain maps, flood control projects, storm tracking maps, safety
tips flyers, preparedness articles in local newspapers, and other such
information as it relates to natural hazards. Target audiences will
include schools, neighborhood watch groups, various civic groups,
neighborhood associations, community groups, and industry groups.
FEMA publications will also be made available in city hall libraries,
municipal courts, police and fire departments, public works
departments, public access TV channels, city libraries, and on the
SETRPC and jurisdictional websites.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Dam Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic
Hazards, Hazardous Materials Incidents, Hurricanes/Tropical
Storms, Severe Winter Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorms,
Tornados, Tsunami, Water Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1,000 - $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities Emergency Management
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Estimated Cost to $25,000 to $75,000.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 148
SETRPC (Past Action) – 7
Proposed Action: Coordinate Emergency Management plans for coastal
storms/hurricane events. Specific efforts will include encouraging
jurisdictions to install and maintain back-up power at identified
facilities, construct and designate emergency operations centers for
disaster/emergency operations, and solicit participation in Community
Emergency Response Training.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricanes/Tropical Storms
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1,000 - $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, EMPG, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 149
SETRPC (Past Action) – 8
Proposed Action: Identify special needs populations in the region by coordinating with
home health agencies, medical equipment companies, local churches,
and neighborhood associations. Organize strategies for evacuating
special needs populations during a coastal storm, hurricane, or other
such hazard.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Dam Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic
Hazards, Hazardous Materials Incidents, Hurricanes/Tropical
Storms, Severe Winter Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorms,
Tornados, Tsunami, Water Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1,000 - $5,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities, hospitals, Councils of Aging
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 150
SETRPC (Past Action) – 9
Proposed Action: Conduct flood insurance educational seminars for area realtors to
increase their knowledge of the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP) and the benefits to homeowners of securing flood insurance.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flooding, Hurricanes/Tropical Storms, Thunderstorms,
Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1,000 - $5,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities, hospitals, Councils of Aging
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Estimated Cost to $20,000 - $50,000.
SETRPC (Past Action) – 10
Proposed Action: Storm harden/retrofit existing and future critical facilities throughout
the Southeast Texas Region. Actions can include but are not limited to
window shutters, roof, flood proofing, and roll-up door reinforcement
(i.e. fire stations).
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm,
Tornado, Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Political, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $150,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Estimated Cost to $2 Million.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 151
SETRPC (Past Action) – 11
Proposed Action: Elevate and/or upgrade existing flood prone roadways throughout the
Southeast Texas region.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm,
Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $70,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Delete Action.
SETRPC (Past Action) – 12
Proposed Action: Replace and/or upgrade existing bridges throughout the Southeast
Texas region.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flooding, Geologic Hazard, Hurricane/Tropical Storm,
Thunderstorm, Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $1 Million
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, TXDOT
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Delete Action.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 152
SETRPC (Past Action) – 13
Proposed Action: Pursue drainage improvements throughout the region. Actions can
include but are not limited to installing/upgrading culverts and
headwalls as well as enlarging storm water ditches and canals.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm,
Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
SETRPC (Past Action) – 14
Proposed Action: Coordinate with federal, state, and local partners to provide training
opportunities for first responders.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Dam Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic
Hazards, Hazardous Materials Incidents, Hurricanes/Tropical
Storms, Severe Winter Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorms,
Tornados, Tsunami, Water Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Legal, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1,000 - $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities, TDEM, DOJ, DHS
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, EMPG, Homeland Security grants, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 153
SETRPC (Past Action) – 15
Proposed Action: Mitigate damage to utilities in order to maintain function during and
after a hazard event. Actions can include but are not limited to:
Burying utility lines underground
Provide frangible links/break away connections on utility
poles
Harden utility poles by converting from wood to concrete or
metal utility poles
Increasing the easement area/clearance of utility lines/ poles
from trees lines
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe Winter
Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities, TXDOT, Entergy
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Estimated Cost to $150,000 - $600,000.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 154
SETRPC (Past Action) – 16
Proposed Action: Identify and pursue any mitigation activities that would aid/ enhance
evacuations throughout the region.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flood, Hazardous Materials, Hurricane/Tropical Storm,
Severe Winter Storm, Thunderstorm, Tornado, Tsunami, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $500,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities, TXDOT
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
SETRPC (Past Action) – 17
Proposed Action: Coordinate local match/cost-share agreements between the SETRPC,
county and municipal governments.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Dam Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic
Hazards, Hazardous Materials Incidents, Hurricanes/Tropical
Storms, Severe Winter Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorms,
Tornados, Tsunami, Water Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Delete Action.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 155
SETRPC (Past Action) – 18
Proposed Action: Coordinate project application/funding for cross-jurisdictional
mitigation needs.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Dam Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic
Hazards, Hazardous Materials Incidents, Hurricanes/Tropical
Storms, Severe Winter Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorms,
Tornados, Tsunami, Water Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Delete Action.
SETRPC (Past Action) – 19
Proposed Action: Continually review, revise, update, and systematically maintain
floodplain data and maps of flood prone areas throughout the
Southeast Texas Region.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Legal
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $1,000 - $5,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 156
SETRPC (Past Action) – 20
Proposed Action: Pursue the coordination, construction, expansion and maintenance of
flood control structures/barriers for the purpose of mitigating damage
from storm surge and seal level rise and other sources of salt water
intrusion.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Tsunami, Water Contamination
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10 Million
Implementation Schedule: 5 years
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities, TXDOT, USACE
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
SETRPC (Past Action) – 21
Proposed Action: Pursue the coordination, construction, expansion and maintenance of
flood control structures/barriers for the purpose of protecting potable
water sources and agricultural resources from water contamination
and salt water intrusion.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Tsunami, Water Contamination
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $10 Million
Implementation Schedule: 5 years
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities, TXDOT, USACE
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 157
SETRPC (Past Action) – 22
Proposed Action: Pursue the identification and construction of alternate fresh water
sources.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Drought, Water Contamination
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $75,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Estimated Cost to $100,000 - $200,000.
SETRPC (Past Action) – 23
Proposed Action: Construct water retention ponds to collect storm water run-off and use
as an alternate water source for agricultural resources throughout the
Southeast Texas Region.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Drought, Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm,
Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: High
Estimated Cost: $75,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Estimated Cost to $100,000 - $250,000.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 158
SETRPC (Past Action) – 24
Proposed Action: Minimize damage to existing and future structures and infrastructure
from falling trees. Actions include but are not limited to the following:
Pursue and coordinate a dangerous tree and limb removal
program to protect infrastructure and critical facilities from
damage. This includes working with private homeowners for
voluntary removal of hazardous trees and limbs on private
property.
Coordinate contracting to remove and/or trim trees that
endanger structures, infrastructure, and vital roadways.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Severe Winter Weather, Thunderstorm,
Tornado
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Economic
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Implementation Schedule: 6 months – 5 years
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities, TXDOT, Entergy
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 159
SETRPC (Past Action) – 25
Proposed Action: Secure and maintain backup information systems to store critical
information at off-site locations.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Dam Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic
Hazards, Hazardous Materials Incidents, Hurricanes/Tropical
Storms, Severe Winter Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorms,
Tornados, Tsunami, Water Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $50,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, EMPG, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Estimated Cost to $50,000 - $350,000.
SETRPC (Past Action) – 26
Proposed Action: Coordinate with county and municipal governments to allow the
SETRPC to maintain a copy of all local ordinances relevant to mitigation
activities.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Dam Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic
Hazards, Hazardous Materials Incidents, Hurricanes/Tropical
Storms, Severe Winter Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorms,
Tornados, Tsunami, Water Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $1,000 - $5,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Estimated Cost to $1,000 - $15,000.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 160
SETRPC (Past Action) – 27
Proposed Action: Acquire flood prone properties throughout the region.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm,
Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Environmental, Economic
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $90,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Estimated Cost to $90,000 - $10 Million.
SETRPC (Past Action) – 28
Proposed Action: Elevate existing flood prone properties throughout the region.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm,
Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Social, Technical, Administrative, Environmental, Economic
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $90,000 - $200,000
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Defer Action – Will include in the 2017 Plan Update. Revise Estimated Cost to $90,000 - $2 Million.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 161
SETRPC (Past Action) – 29
Proposed Action: Improve quality of local information on vulnerable items (assets and
populations) for the purpose of more accurate risk and damage
assessments. Work with other jurisdictions in region to get data as up
to date and complete as possible.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed:
Dam Failure, Drought, Earthquake, Extreme Heat, Flood, Geologic
Hazards, Hazardous Materials Incidents, Hurricanes/Tropical
Storms, Severe Winter Weather, Terrorism, Thunderstorms,
Tornados, Tsunami, Water Contamination, Wildfire
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative
Priority: Medium
Estimated Cost: $1,000 - $10,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Delete Action.
SETRPC (Past Action) – 30
Proposed Action: Provide educational seminars and brochures regarding the voluntary
Community Rating System (CRS).
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Dam Failure, Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Thunderstorm,
Tsunami
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $1,000 - $10,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Delete Action.
Section 17: Previous Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 162
SETRPC (Past Action) – 31
Proposed Action: Work with local municipalities, county governments, local universities
and other related entities to gather information on previous
occurrences and the extent of Landslide and Riverine Erosion
throughout the region.
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard Addressed: Geologic Hazard
STAPLE-E Summary: Technical, Administrative
Priority: Low
Estimated Cost: $1,000 - $10,000
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Coordinating Agency: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange County, local
municipalities, and local universities
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
2017 Analysis:
Delete Action.
SECTION 18: MITIGATION ACTIONS
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
Summary ....................................................................................................................................................... 1
Jefferson County ........................................................................................................................................... 7
Beaumont .................................................................................................................................................... 42
Bevil Oaks .................................................................................................................................................... 93
China ......................................................................................................................................................... 109
Groves ....................................................................................................................................................... 131
Nederland ................................................................................................................................................. 154
Nome ......................................................................................................................................................... 181
Port Arthur ................................................................................................................................................ 202
Port Neches ............................................................................................................................................... 239
SETRPC ...................................................................................................................................................... 261
Summary
As discussed in Section 2, at the mitigation workshop the planning team and stakeholders met to develop
mitigation actions for each of the natural and human-caused hazards included in the Plan. Each of the
actions in this section were prioritized based on FEMA’s Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal,
Economic and Environmental (STAPLEE) criteria necessary for the implementation of each action. As a
result of this exercise, an overall priority was assigned to each mitigation action.
As part of the economic evaluation of the STAPLEE analysis, jurisdictions analyzed each action in terms of
the overall costs, measuring whether the potential benefit to be gained from the action outweighed costs
associated with it. As a result of this exercise, priority was assigned to each mitigation action by marking
them as High (H), Moderate (M), or Low (L). An action that is ranked as “High” indicates that the action
will be implemented as soon as funding is received. A “Moderate” action is one that may not be
implemented right away depending on the cost and number of citizens served by the action. Actions
ranked as “Low” indicate that they will not be implemented without first seeking grant funding and after
“High” and “Moderate” actions have been completed.
Planning Team Members developed the actions below while also considering the risk reduction benefits
and the effects the proposed action would have on new and existing buildings and infrastructure.
All mitigation actions created by Planning Team members are presented in this section in the form of
Mitigation Action Worksheets. More than one hazard is sometimes listed for an action, if appropriate.
Actions presented in this section represent a comprehensive range of mitigation actions per current State
and FEMA Guidelines, including two actions, per hazard, and of two different types.
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 2
Table 18-1. Jefferson County and Participating Jurisdictions Mitigation Action Matrix
MITIGATION ACTION MATRIX
Actions presented in this matrix represent a comprehensive range and minimum number of required
mitigation actions per current State and FEMA Guidelines, including two actions per hazard, and of two
different types.
JEFFERSON COUNTY: MITIGATION ACTION MATRIX
HAZARDS
Types of Action:
LOCAL PLANS/
REGULATIONS
STRUCTURAL/
INFRASTRUCTURE
NATURAL SYSTEM
PROTECTION
EDUCATION &
AWARENESS
Flood XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XX
Lightning X XXXXX X
Hurricane X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X XX
Extreme Heat XXXXX X
Hail X XXXX X
Thunderstorm Wind X XXXXXXXXXX XX
Tornado X XXXXXXX XX
Drought X XXXX X
Wildfire XXXXX XX
Winter Storm X XXXXX XX
Coastal Erosion X XX X
BEAUMONT: MITIGATION ACTION MATRIX
HAZARDS
Types of Action:
LOCAL PLANS/
REGULATIONS
STRUCTURAL/
INFRASTRUCTURE
NATURAL SYSTEM
PROTECTION
EDUCATION &
AWARENESS
Flood XXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX
Lightning X XXXXXXXXXXX XXXX
Hurricane XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXX
Extreme Heat XXXXXXX XXXX
Hail X XXXXXXXXXXX XXX
Thunderstorm Wind XX XXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX
Tornado XXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX
Drought XX X
Wildfire XX XXXXXXX XXXX
Winter Storm X XXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 3
BEVIL OAKS: MITIGATION ACTION MATRIX
HAZARDS
Types of Action:
LOCAL PLANS/
REGULATIONS
STRUCTURAL/
INFRASTRUCTURE
NATURAL SYSTEM
PROTECTION
EDUCATION &
AWARENESS
Flood X XXXXXXX X
Lightning XX XX X
Hurricane XX XXXXXXXX X
Extreme Heat XXX XX
Hail XX XX X
Thunderstorm Wind XX XXX X
Tornado XX XXX X
Drought X X
Wildfire XXXX X
Winter Storm XX XX X
CHINA: MITIGATION ACTION MATRIX
HAZARDS
Types of Action:
LOCAL PLANS/
REGULATIONS
STRUCTURAL/
INFRASTRUCTURE
NATURAL SYSTEM
PROTECTION
EDUCATION &
AWARENESS
Flood XXXXXXXXXXXX XX
Lightning XXX X
Hurricane XXXXXXXXXXX XX
Extreme Heat XX X
Hail XX X
Thunderstorm Wind XXXXX X
Tornado XXXXXX XX
Drought X XX X
Wildfire XX XX
Winter Storm XXX X
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 4
GROVES: MITIGATION ACTION MATRIX
HAZARDS
Types of Action:
LOCAL PLANS/
REGULATIONS
STRUCTURAL/
INFRASTRUCTURE
NATURAL
SYSTEM
PROTECTION
EDUCATION &
AWARENESS
Flood XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X
Lightning X XXXXXXX X
Hurricane X XXXXXXXXXXXXX X
Extreme Heat XXXXXXX X
Hail X XXXXXXX X
Thunderstorm Wind X XXXXXXXX X
Tornado X XXXXXXXX X
Drought X X X
Wildfire XXXXXXXX X
Winter Storm X XXXXXXX X
NEDERLAND: MITIGATION ACTION MATRIX
HAZARDS
Types of Action:
LOCAL PLANS/
REGULATIONS
STRUCTURAL/
INFRASTRUCTURE
NATURAL
SYSTEM
PROTECTION
EDUCATION &
AWARENESS
Flood XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X
Lightning X XXXXXXXX X
Hurricane X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X
Extreme Heat XXXXXXXX X
Hail X XXXXXXXX X
Thunderstorm Wind X XXXXXXXXXXXX X
Tornado X XXXXXXXXXXX X
Drought X X X
Wildfire XXXXXXXXX X
Winter Storm X XXXXXXXX X
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 5
NOME: MITIGATION ACTION MATRIX
HAZARDS
Types of Action:
LOCAL PLANS/
REGULATIONS
STRUCTURAL/
INFRASTRUCTURE
NATURAL SYSTEM
PROTECTION
EDUCATION &
AWARENESS
Flood XXXXXXXXXX XX
Lightning X XXXX X
Hurricane X XXXXXXXXXXXXXX XX
Extreme Heat XXXX X
Hail X XXXX X
Thunderstorm Wind X XXXXXXXXX XX
Tornado X XXXXXXX XX
Drought X X X
Wildfire XXXX XX
Winter Storm X XXXX XX
PORT ARTHUR: MITIGATION ACTION MATRIX
HAZARDS
Types of Action:
LOCAL PLANS/
REGULATIONS
STRUCTURAL/
INFRASTRUCTURE
NATURAL SYSTEM
PROTECTION
EDUCATION &
AWARENESS
Flood XX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XX
Lightning X XXXX XX
Hurricane XXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXX
Extreme Heat XXX X
Hail X XXXX XX
Thunderstorm Wind X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XX
Tornado X XXXXXXX X
Drought X X X
Wildfire XXXXX X
Winter Storm X XXXX X
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 6
PORT NECHES: MITIGATION ACTION MATRIX
HAZARDS
Types of Action:
LOCAL PLANS/
REGULATIONS
STRUCTURAL/
INFRASTRUCTURE
NATURAL
SYSTEM
PROTECTION
EDUCATION &
AWARENESS
Flood XXXXXXXXXX X
Lightning X XXXX X
Hurricane X XXXXXXXXXXXXX XX
Extreme Heat XXXX XX
Hail X XXXX X
Thunderstorm Wind X XXXXXXX X
Tornado X XXXXXXX X
Drought X X
Wildfire XXXXX X
Winter Storm X XXXX XX
SETRPC: MITIGATION ACTION MATRIX
HAZARDS
Types of Action:
LOCAL PLANS/
REGULATIONS
STRUCTURAL/
INFRASTRUCTURE
NATURAL
SYSTEM
PROTECTION
EDUCATION &
AWARENESS
Flood XXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX
Lightning X XXX XXXXX
Hurricane XXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX
Extreme Heat XX X XXXXX
Hail X XX XXX
Thunderstorm Wind XX XXXXX XXXXXX
Tornado XXX XXXX XXXXXX
Drought XXX XX XXX
Wildfire XX XXX XXXXXX
Winter Storm XXX XXX XXXXXX
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 7
Jefferson County
Jefferson County – Action #1
Proposed Action:
To build a structure or structures (including a dome or
domes) in coastal (or near coastal) jurisdictions that
can withstand 200 mile per hour winds and act as
shelters of last resort. This is in conjunction with the
Texas Safe Shelter Initiative.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in Jefferson County
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in Port Arthur.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $1.6 Million
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Jefferson County Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 8
Jefferson County – Action #2
Proposed Action:
Retrofit existing structures and/or construct new
structures to act as residential shelters during and
after Hurricanes and other severe weather events.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in Jefferson County
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents in Jefferson
County.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $2 Million
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Jefferson County Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 9
Jefferson County – Action #3
Proposed Action:
Public structure strengthening for Jefferson County
Courthouse/S.O./Jail. Actions can include but are not
limited to window shutters, roof straps, flood
proofing, roll-up door reinforcement (i.e. for fire
stations), backup generator power with permanent
hook-ups, hail resistant roofing materials, and surge
protectors.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Jefferson County Courthouse/S.O./Jail
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect structure from damages, protect lives of staff,
inmates and occupants, and ensure continuity of
emergency services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $1,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Jefferson County Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 10
Jefferson County – Action #4
Proposed Action:
Implement flood protection measures to protect from
surge from Hurricanes/Tropical Storms. Actions can
include but are not limited to constructing and/or
upgrading sea walls, flood barriers, berms and various
wet and dry flood proofing measures.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout Jefferson County
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of storm surge damages to structures and
infrastructure.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Coastal Erosion
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $50-$60 Million
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Jefferson County Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Master Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 11
Jefferson County – Action #5
Proposed Action:
Coordinate and implement construction, expansion
and maintenance of flood control structures/barriers
for the purpose of mitigating damage and protect
fresh water resources from storm surge, sea level rise,
and other sources of salt water intrusion.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout Jefferson County
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to structures and infrastructure through
improved flood control measures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Coastal Erosion
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures and infrastructure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $1-$2 Million
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, USACE, SETRPC
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Jefferson County, SETRPC
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Master Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 12
Jefferson County – Action #6
Proposed Action:
Restore sand dunes to protect inland resources during
storm surge events.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Coastal locations throughout Jefferson County
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to structures and infrastructure through
fortified/restored dune system.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Natural System Protection
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Coastal Erosion
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures and infrastructure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $60-$100 Million
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Jefferson County
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Dune Restoration and Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 13
Jefferson County – Action #7
Proposed Action:
Identify and pursue any mitigation activities that
would aid/enhance evacuations throughout the
region.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: County-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Life safety benefits through preparedness.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood, Winter Storm, Tornado,
Thunderstorm Wind, Wildfire
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budget
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Jefferson County Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 14
Jefferson County – Action #8
Proposed Action:
Coordinate and work with the Lower Neches Valley
Authority in order to use an LNVA sand pit as a
potential freshwater reservoir for all areas south of I-
10.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Jefferson County south of I-10
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Lifesaving water alternate source and localized flood
reduction.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought, Flood, Thunderstorm Wind, Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce damages to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $75,000 - $200,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budget, LNVA
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Jefferson County
Implementation Schedule: Within 48 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan, Water Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 15
Jefferson County – Action #9
Proposed Action:
Flood proof the Jefferson County courthouse
elevators by installing a pump system.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Jefferson County Courthouse
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect elevator from flood damages.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Jefferson County Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 48 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 16
Jefferson County – Action #10
Proposed Action:
Retrofit the LNVA pumping system, which includes a
number of pump stations, in order to increase
capacity and allow stand-alone service when the
Neches River is contaminated or a failure of the
primary system occurs.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Jefferson County LNVA pumping system
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Increase capacity and reduce risk of inundation and/ or
contamination. Ensure continuity of services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $3,680,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, LNVA operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Jefferson County Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 17
Jefferson County – Action #11
Proposed Action:
Retrofit the primary diversion point and pumping
system in order for the LNVA to fully control isolation
and selection of the source of the water which flows
into the pumping station and isolate either the Neches
River or Pine Island Bayou should contamination
occur.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Jefferson County LNVA pumping system
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of inundation and/or contamination.
Ensure continuity of services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $562,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, LNVA operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Jefferson County Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 18
Jefferson County – Action #12
Proposed Action:
Convert an existing 56-acre excavated dirt pit into a
localized freshwater storage impoundment which
would be used to support water to municipal water
plants and industrial users in the Nederland, Port
Neches, and Groves area of Jefferson County in the
event of an interruption of canal service to the region.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Jefferson County
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Redundant water source and improved storm water
management.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Drought
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5,468,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, LNVA operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Jefferson County Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 19
Jefferson County – Action #13
Proposed Action:
Enhance existing structures and construct additional
water control features to allow the LNVA to isolate
segments of canals in the event of contamination or
localized bank failures in order to conserve and
protect unaffected waters and continue deliveries to
as many customers as possible while a clean-up or
repair is addressed, rather than having a single event
affect all customers of the entire system.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: LNVA System
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Ensure continuity of critical services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Drought, Hazardous Materials, Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $375,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, LNVA operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Jefferson County Public Works, LNVA
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 20
Jefferson County – Action #14
Proposed Action: Adopt and implement land use restrictions in high risk
coastal erosion areas
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Site and Location: Jefferson County coastal areas
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce erosion and impacts through building
restrictions
Type of Action: (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
Projects, Natural Systems Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Coastal Erosion
Effect on new/existing buildings: Reduce risk to future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $2,000
Potential Funding Sources: Local Funds
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Jefferson County Administration
Implementation Schedule: Within 36-48 months of plan adoption pending
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Local Ordinance
COMMENTS:
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this
action satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 21
Jefferson County County-Wide – Action #15
Proposed Action:
Storm harden/retrofit critical facilities throughout
Jefferson County. Actions can include but are not
limited to window shutters, roof straps, flood
proofing, roll-up door reinforcement (i.e. for fire
stations), backup generator power with permanent
hook-ups, hail resistant roofing materials, and surge
protectors.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Critical facilities in Jefferson County and all jurisdictions
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect critical facilities from damages and ensure
continuity of emergency services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $250,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: County and Local Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 22
Jefferson County County-Wide – Action #16
Proposed Action:
Acquire/demolish flood-prone properties with an
emphasis on Repetitive and Severe Repetitive Loss
properties.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Flood-prone structures in Jefferson County and all
jurisdictions
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Eliminate flood damages to flood-prone structures.
Reduce burden on emergency services during flood
events.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Eliminate risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: County and City Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable =3 ; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 23
Jefferson County County-Wide – Action #17
Proposed Action:
Storm harden/retrofit regional communication sites
and infrastructure throughout Jefferson County.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Regional communication sites and infrastructure in
Jefferson County and all jurisdictions
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect critical communication infrastructure from
damages and ensure continuity of emergency services
and communications.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing infrastructure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $300,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, EMPG
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: County and City Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 24
Jefferson County County-Wide – Action #18
Proposed Action:
Elevate new and existing flood-prone structures and
infrastructure throughout Jefferson County
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Flood-prone structures in Jefferson County and all
jurisdictions
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood damages to flood-prone structures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: County and City Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Local Ordinance, Comprehensive Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 25
Jefferson County County-Wide – Action #19
Proposed Action:
Elevate or upgrade bridges, culverts and other
crossings throughout Jefferson County to reduce
damages to infrastructure and reduce flooding caused
by undersized crossings and culverts.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Undersized bridges and culverts in Jefferson County
and all jurisdictions
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood damages to infrastructure and
surrounding structures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing infrastructure and structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $10,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: County and City Public Works, TXDOT
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 26
Jefferson County County-Wide – Action #20
Proposed Action:
Pursue funding and implement drainage
improvements throughout Jefferson County. Actions
can include but are not limited to installing/upgrading
culverts and headwalls as well as enlarging storm
water ditches and canals.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout Jefferson County and all
jurisdictions
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood damages to infrastructure and
surrounding structures as a result of undersized
drainage.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing infrastructure and structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: County and City Public Works and Engineering,
Drainage District
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 27
Jefferson County County-Wide – Action #21
Proposed Action:
Coordinate with federal, state, and local partners to
provide training opportunities for first responders,
including but not limited to HAXMAT, terrorism,
Flood, Hurricane, Tornado, and other natural hazards
as appropriate.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: County-wide and all jurisdictions
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce loss of life through preparedness.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness - Preparedness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed:
Hurricane, Flood, Tornado, Hail, Lightning, Wildfire,
Extreme Heat, Winter Storm, Thunderstorm Wind,
Hazardous Material, Terrorism
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures through improved
response
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $10,000
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets, HMGP, PDM, TDEM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: County and City Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Response Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 28
Jefferson County County-Wide – Action #22
Proposed Action:
Secure, bury, or otherwise harden exposed or
vulnerable pipelines including water and sewer.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout Jefferson County,
including all jurisdictions
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of pipeline failure through mitigation of
exposed or vulnerable lines.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed:
Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Wildfire, Tornado, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail,
Hazardous Material, Terrorism
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing infrastructure and structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: County and City Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 29
Jefferson County County-Wide – Action #23
Proposed Action:
Purchase and install backup generator power systems
with permanent hook-ups for critical facilities
including lift stations, water plants, police stations,
EMS, fire stations, and other first responder facilities
throughout Jefferson County.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Critical facilities as indicated above in Jefferson County
and all jurisdictions
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect critical facilities from loss of power and ensure
continuity of emergency services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm, Flood, Winter
Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $1-$2 Million
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: County and Local Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 30
Jefferson County County-Wide – Action #24
Proposed Action:
Construct or upgrade existing detention/ retention
ponds where appropriate to collect storm water to
reduce flooding.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various Locations TBD throughout Jefferson County
and all jurisdictions
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to structures and infrastructure through
improved flood control measures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Thunderstorm Wind, Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $1,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: County and City Public Works, Drainage District
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 31
Jefferson County County-Wide – Action #25
Proposed Action:
Retrofit existing structures and/or construct new
structures to act as residential shelters during and
after Hurricanes and other severe weather events.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout Jefferson County and all
jurisdictions
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents in Jefferson
County.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $2-$3 Million
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: County and City Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 32
Jefferson County County-Wide – Action #26
Proposed Action:
Construct water retention ponds to collect storm
water run-off and use as an alternate water source
throughout Jefferson County.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Jefferson County and all jurisdictions
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Lifesaving water alternate source and localized flood
reduction.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought, Flood, Thunderstorm Wind, Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce damages to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $750,000 - $2,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: County and City Public Works, Drainage District
Implementation Schedule: Within 48 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Master Drainage Plan, Water Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 33
Jefferson County County-Wide – Action #27
Proposed Action:
Mitigate damage to utilities in order to maintain
function during and after a hazard event. Actions can
include but are not limited to:
Bury utility lines underground
Provide frangible links/break away
connections on utility poles
Harden utility poles by converting from wood
to concrete or metal utility poles
Increase the easement area/clearance of
utility lines/poles from tree lines
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Utility lines throughout Jefferson County and all
jurisdictions
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of loss of power and ensure continuity of
emergency services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Tornado, Lightning, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $10,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: Utility Fees, Federal Grants
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: County and City Public Works, Entergy
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan, Local Ordinance
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 34
Jefferson County County-Wide – Action #28
Proposed Action:
Develop/construct hardened, joint, multi-
jurisdictional EOC.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Site TBD
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Improve coordinated emergency response and ensure
continuity of emergency services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed:
Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Tornado, Lightning, Hail, Hazardous Materials,
Terrorism
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to new structure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $2 Million
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, EMPG, Homeland Security Grants
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: County and City Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 35
Jefferson County County-Wide – Action #29
Proposed Action:
Provide the public with educational brochures for
mitigating damages, planning ahead for disasters and
reduce the risk of injury during events including:
mitigation measures such as window film, elevated
appliances, surge protectors, insulating pipes, drought
tolerant landscaping. Education on when to take
cover, when to evacuate, locations of local safe
rooms, signs of dehydration, and proper storage of
flammable materials, or other appropriate materials
to mitigate damages and health hazards.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Jefferson County – County-wide and all jurisdictions
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to residents and structures through
education and awareness.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed:
Hurricane, Flood, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Wildfire, Tornado, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail,
Drought
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $50,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, EMGP
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: County and City Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 24 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 36
Jefferson County County-Wide – Action #30
Proposed Action:
Retrofit existing structures to act as cooling stations in
times of extreme heat.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations (TBD) in Jefferson County and all
jurisdictions
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to vulnerable populations during extreme
heat events.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Extreme Heat
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: County and City Administration
Implementation Schedule: Within 24 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 37
Jefferson County County-Wide – Action #31
Proposed Action:
Develop areas of defensible space to prevent damage
due to wildfires.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Wildland Urban Interface of Jefferson County and all
jurisdictions
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of damages to structures in or near the
WUI.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: County and City Fire Department
Implementation Schedule: Within 48 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Community Wildfire Protection Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 38
Jefferson County County-Wide – Action #32
Proposed Action:
Develop and enact water conservation or drought
management plans, ordinances or strategies to be
used during times of drought.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Jefferson County – County-wide and all jurisdictions
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risks associated with drought through
reduction in water usage during times of drought.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $25,000 - $50,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: County and City Administration
Implementation Schedule: Within 24 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Local Ordinances
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal =5 ; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 39
Jefferson County County-Wide – Action #33
Proposed Action:
Minimize damage to structures and infrastructure
from falling trees. Actions include but are not limited
to the following:
Pursue and coordinate a dangerous tree and
limb removal program to protect
infrastructure and critical facilities from
damage. This includes working with private
homeowners for voluntary removal of
hazardous trees and limbs on private
property.
Coordinate contracts to remove and/or trim
trees that endanger structures,
infrastructure, and vital roadways.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Trees near power lines throughout Jefferson County
and all jurisdictions
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of loss of power and potential damages to
structures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Tornado, Lightning, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: County and City Administration
Implementation Schedule: Within 48 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan, Local Ordinance
COMMENTS
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 40
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 41
Jefferson County County-Wide – Action #34
Proposed Action:
Develop and implement a public education program
to educate residents of the risk of dam failure,
actions to reduce risk, and evacuation routes and
procedures for residents downstream of the Sam
Rayburn Dam and the Toleda Bend Dam in the event
of a dam failure.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: County-wide, including all jurisdictions
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce loss of life
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Prevent or minimize flood damage to structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $2,000 - $5,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: County OEM
Implementation Schedule: Within 48 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
For purposes of the HMAP, upstream dam failure would affect part of the communities within Jefferson
County boundaries. However, the impacts associated with these dams are flood related.
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 42
Beaumont
Beaumont – Action #1
Proposed Action:
Enhance GIS capabilities to develop and maintain a
database and identify concentrations of at-risk
structures to track community vulnerability to
flooding.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood risk to structures through understanding
risk and vulnerability.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $50,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Beaumont Floodplain Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 24 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 43
Beaumont – Action #2
Proposed Action:
Acquire GIS hazard mapping online software of flood
prone areas for residents and design professionals.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood risk to structures and residents and
developers through understanding risk and
vulnerability.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $50,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Beaumont Floodplain Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 24 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: N/A
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 44
Beaumont – Action #3
Proposed Action:
Enhance Damage Assessment capabilities to develop
and maintain a database and identify concentrations
of at-risk structures.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of damage to structures through
understanding risk and vulnerability.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Tornado,
Wildfire
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $50,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Beaumont Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 24 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 45
Beaumont – Action #4
Proposed Action:
Enhance Damage Assessment trainings to improve
public outreach, speed recovery, enhance damage
assessments, and reduce risk to first responders and
building inspectors.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury and speed recovery after an event.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Outreach - Response
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Lightning, Hurricane, Hail, Thunderstorm Wind,
Wildfire, Winter Storm
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $50,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Beaumont Building Inspectors
Implementation Schedule: Within 24 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Response Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 46
Beaumont – Action #5
Proposed Action:
Retrofit existing city structures or build new
structure(s) (including a dome or domes) in this
jurisdiction that can withstand 200 mile per hour
winds and act as shelters of last resort. This may be in
conjunction with the Texas Safe Shelter Initiative.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in Beaumont
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in Beaumont.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $2,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM, local
operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 47
Beaumont – Action #6
Proposed Action:
Storm harden/retrofit critical facilities throughout
Beaumont. Actions can include but are not limited to
window shutters, roof straps, flood proofing, roll-up
door reinforcement (i.e. for fire stations, police
headquarters, EMS stations 1 and 2, and other critical
infrastructure facilities), backup generator power
with permanent hook-ups, hail resistant roofing
materials, and surge protectors.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Critical facilities in Beaumont
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect critical facilities from damages and ensure
continuity of emergency services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $7.4 Million
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Beaumont Administration
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 48
Beaumont – Action #7
Proposed Action:
Harden the City of Beaumont Police headquarters at
255 College. Actions include but are not limited to
storm shutters, window film, surge protectors, roof
straps, hail and fire resistant roofing material, etc.
Install generator with permanent hook-ups at the
Emergency Operations Center at 700 Orleans.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: EOC and Police Headquarters
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect critical facilities from damages and ensure
continuity of emergency services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $1 Million
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Beaumont Administration
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 49
Beaumont – Action #8
Proposed Action:
Wind harden the South Radio Tower at 1550 Pine and
Fire Headquarters at 400 Walnut. Actions include but
are not limited to roof retrofits, installing storm
shutters/screens, installing generators with
permanent hook-ups, and hardening of bay doors
(specifically fire stations).
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations as noted above
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect critical facilities from damages and ensure
continuity of emergency services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $3.75 Million
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Beaumont Administration
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 50
Beaumont – Action #9
Proposed Action:
Wind harden Baptist Hospital, at 3080 College, and
Christus St. Elizabeth Hospital at 2830 Calder. Actions
include but are not limited to roof retrofits, installing
storm shutters/screens, installing generators with
permanent hook-ups, and hardening of bay doors
(specifically maintenance and facility areas).
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations as noted above
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect critical facilities from damages and ensure
continuity of emergency services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $8 Million
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, EMPG
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Beaumont Administration
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 51
Beaumont – Action #10
Proposed Action:
At Christus St. Elizabeth Hospital install backup
generators with permanent hook-ups and elevate key
electrical equipment (such as Switchgear and ATS).
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: St. Elizabeth Hospital
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect critical facility from damages and ensure
continuity of emergency services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $3.1 Million
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, EMPG
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Beaumont Administration, St. Elizabeth Hospital
Implementation Schedule: Within 12024 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 52
Beaumont – Action #11
Proposed Action:
Upgrade Christus St. Elizabeth Hospitals and Port of
Beaumont emergency communication systems to
ensure continued communication with outside
sources and first responders.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: St. Elizabeth Hospital and Port of Beaumont
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Ensure communications and continuity of emergency
services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $62,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, EMPG
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Beaumont Administration, St. Elizabeth
Hospital, Port of Beaumont
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Response Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 53
Beaumont – Action #12
Proposed Action:
Install generators and permanent hook-ups for the
Beaumont Independent School District at sites
including but not limited to Westbrook, Police
Building, Administrative Building and the Thomas
Educational Support Center which are used for
sheltering and emergency operation coordination
centers.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Beaumont ISD locations
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Ensure continuity of emergency services and
sheltering.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Flood, Winter Storm
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $650,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Beaumont Administration, ISD
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Response Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 54
Beaumont – Action #13
Proposed Action:
Procure mobile backup generators for the Port of
Beaumont. Install permanent quick connections at
critical locations.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Port of Beaumont
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Ensure continuity of services during and after events.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Flood, Winter Storm
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $60,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Beaumont Administration, Port of Beaumont
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Port of Beaumont SOP
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 55
Beaumont – Action #14
Proposed Action:
Mitigate damage to utilities in order to maintain
function during and after a hazard event. Actions can
include but are not limited to:
Bury utility lines underground
Provide frangible links/break away
connections on utility poles
Harden utility poles by converting from wood
to concrete or metal utility poles
Increase the easement area/clearance of
utility lines/poles from tree lines
Relocate and/or update the data
communications provided to the Wastewater
treatment power supply station to prevent
the interruption of operations
Relocate and/or update the data
communications provided to the Water
treatment plant to prevent the interruption
of operations.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of power loss, associated damages, and line
repairs, and reduce risk of loss of services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood, Winter Storm, Hail Lightning,
Thunderstorm Wind, Tornado
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures and infrastructure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5.5 Million
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, Utility Fees, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Public Works, Entergy
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan
COMMENTS
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 56
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 57
Beaumont – Action #15
Proposed Action:
Hardening Electric Grid and Communications to
prevent damage to electric, phone and cable
infrastructure for major roadways/ thoroughfares or
access routes to critical infrastructure.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of power loss, associated damages, reduce
risk of loss of services, and ensure continuity of
services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood, Winter Storm, Hail, Lightning,
Thunderstorm Wind, Tornado
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures and infrastructure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $10,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, Utility Fees, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Public Works, Entergy
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Response Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 58
Beaumont – Action #16
Proposed Action:
Pursue drainage improvements in the City of
Beaumont. Projects include but are not limited to the
Tyrell Park Project, Caldwood Outfall, Phelan
Boulevard Drainage Project, the Cartwright/Corley
Project, and the Brockman Drainage Project.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations as indicated above
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood damages to structures and infrastructure
due to inadequate drainage.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures and infrastructure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $50,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 59
Beaumont – Action #17
Proposed Action:
Implement drainage improvements in the City of
Beaumont. Projects include, but are not limited to
joint Drainage District 6 and Beaumont projects and
Beaumont individual projects, such as Steve’s Drive
project, and High School Ditch Project (which includes
Seventh Street, North Street, Broadway Box projects).
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations as indicated above
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood damages to structures and infrastructure
due to inadequate drainage.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures and infrastructure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $50,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 60
Beaumont – Action #18
Proposed Action:
Purse drainage improvements throughout the City of
Beaumont. Actions can include but are not limited to
installing/upgrading culverts and headwalls as well as
enlarging storm water ditches and canals.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout the city.
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood damages to structures and infrastructure
due to inadequate drainage.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures and infrastructure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $10,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 61
Beaumont – Action #19
Proposed Action:
Construct water retention ponds to collect storm
water run-off and use as an alternate water source for
storm control throughout the City of Beaumont.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: TBD sites in Beaumont
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Localized flood reduction.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought, Flood, Thunderstorm Wind, Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures and infrastructure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $1,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 62
Beaumont – Action #20
Proposed Action:
Complete bank stabilization project at Riverfront
Park, Phase II.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Riverfront Park
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Localized flood reduction.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures and infrastructure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $3,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 63
Beaumont – Action #21
Proposed Action:
Pursue building a 50 million gallon holding lagoon to
store wastewater in case of power outages and plant
failure, and removal of sludge build-up in the two
lagoons to increase the storage capacity at the
Wastewater Treatment Plant in case of power outages
and plant failure.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Wastewater Treatment Plant
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Increase the storage capacity at the Wastewater
Treatment Plant in case of power outages and plant
failure; reduce risk of contamination.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Hail, Lightning, Winter Storm,
Thunderstorm Wind, Tornado, Extreme Heat
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures and infrastructure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $3,500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Wastewater management plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 64
Beaumont – Action #22
Proposed Action:
Pursue and construct alternate fresh water sources
throughout the City of Beaumont. This include, but is
not limited to increased capacity to maintain water
pressure in case of system failures at the water
treatment plant; installation of a 36” water
transmission line to provide an alternate water
transport method; installation of a raw water pipeline
to replace the existing canal to prevent intention or
natural pollution of the City’s water supply;
installation of new chemical feed facilities and
building to safely store and use chlorine, etc.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout the City
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce loss of potable water or inadequate water
supply.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Long Term Water Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 65
Beaumont – Action #23
Proposed Action:
At Baptist Hospital, install 1) an on-site filtering
system for water well and new pressurized water
supply system, and 2) install a Built-in
Decontamination System (includes shower, curtain
system, hazardous water tank, and drain) in the main
facility.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Baptist Hospital
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury to residents and first responders.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hazardous Materials
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $150,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Administration, Hermann Memorial
Hospital
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Hospital Operations Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 66
Beaumont – Action #24
Proposed Action:
Retrofit the LNVA pumping system at Highway 105 to
upgrade pumping capacity. This will allow the system
to operate at full stand-alone service in times of
contamination of water in the Neches River due to a
hazard event.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Highway 105
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of contamination or loss of service.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hazardous Materials, Terrorism
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $3,680,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Public Works, LNVA
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Master Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 67
Beaumont – Action #25
Proposed Action:
Retrofit the primary LNVA diversion point and
pumping system at 10550 Helbig Rd. to allow the
LNVA to fully control, isolate, and section off the
source of the water that flows into the pumping
station. This would allow the LNVA to isolate either
the Neches River or Pine Island Bayou should one
suffer any form of contamination.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: LNVA diversion point
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of contamination or loss of service.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hazardous Materials, Terrorism
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $562,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Public Works, LNVA
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Master Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 68
Beaumont – Action #26
Proposed Action:
Develop a database of contact information for first
responders, volunteers, and vulnerable populations.
This also includes a database of assisted living/nursing
homes throughout the City of Beaumont or
populations critically dependent on electric service.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to vulnerable populations during extreme
events.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Extreme Heat, Winter Storm,
Tornado, Hail, Lightning, Thunderstorm Wind, Wildfire
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $15,000
Potential Funding Sources: EMPG, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Administration
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Response Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 69
Beaumont – Action #27
Proposed Action:
Public Awareness and Education of Vulnerable
Population through creation of a database and special
group in STAN (Southeast Texas Alerting Network
regional emergency alerting system) to notify and
educate the public of impending hazardous events.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Expedient access to and ability to communicate with
those individuals, nursing homes, assisted living
centers, hospitals, and others who are most at risk
during extreme hazard events.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Extreme Heat, Flood, Hurricane, Winter Storm,
Thunderstorm Wind, Tornado, Wildfire, Lightning, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $25,000
Potential Funding Sources: EMPG, local operating budget
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Operations Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 70
Beaumont – Action #28
Proposed Action:
Plan for the Protection of Vulnerable Populations by
identifying at-risk populations and coordinating with
home health agencies, medical equipment
companies, local churches and neighborhood
associations to assist these populations during
extreme weather events. Organize strategies for
protecting vulnerable populations and develop a plan
to expediently activate strategies when need be.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protection of at-risk populations during extreme
weather events.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Extreme Heat, Flood, Hurricane, Winter Storm,
Thunderstorm Wind, Tornado, Wildfire Lightning
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $10,000
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Response Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 71
Beaumont – Action #29
Proposed Action:
Coordinate a natural hazards public awareness
campaign among agencies and the community.
Efforts may include tropical storm/hurricane
awareness presentations, shelter-in-place
presentations, evacuation maps, floodplain maps,
flood control projects, storm tracking maps, safety
tips flyers, mitigation articles in local newspapers, and
other such information as it relates to natural hazards.
Target audiences will include schools, neighborhood
watch groups, various civic groups, neighborhood
associations, community groups, and industry groups.
FEMA publications will also be made available in city
hall libraries, municipal courts, police and fire
departments, public works departments, public
access TV channels, city libraries, and on the SETRPC
and jurisdictional websites.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk damages as well as life safety benefits to
residents through education and awareness.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed:
Extreme Heat, Flood, Hurricanes, Winter Storm,
Thunderstorm Wind, Tornado, Wildfire, Lightning, Hail,
Drought
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $25,000 - $50,000
Potential Funding Sources: EMPG, local operating budgets, HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 72
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 73
Beaumont – Action #30
Proposed Action:
Coordinate Emergency Management Plans for coastal
storms/hurricane events. Specific efforts will include
encouraging agencies to install and maintain back-up
power at identified facilities, construct and designate
emergency operations centers for disaster/
emergency operations and solicit participation in
Community Emergency Response Training.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Ensure continuity of emergency services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $50,000
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Response Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 74
Beaumont – Action #31
Proposed Action:
Conduct flood insurance educational seminars for
area realtors to increase their knowledge of the
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and the
benefits to homeowners of securing flood insurance.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce potential uninsured flood losses through
education.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $10,000
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets, HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Floodplain Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 75
Beaumont – Action #32
Proposed Action:
Coordinate with federal, state, and local partners to
provide training opportunities for first responders.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce loss of life through education and
preparedness.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness - Preparedness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood, Tornado, Hail, Lightning, Wildfire,
Extreme Heat, Winter Storm, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $15,000
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets, HMGP, PDM, EMPG
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 76
Beaumont – Action #33
Proposed Action:
Relocations of Fire Headquarters, Fire stations 1, 2, 7
and 11 to improve neighborhood coverage in
accordance with the 2005 Pietsch (ISO) study.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce loss of life due to improved neighborhood
coverage.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure - Preparedness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood, Tornado, Hail, Lightning, Wildfire,
Extreme Heat, Winter Storm, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $21,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets, HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 3; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 3; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 77
Beaumont – Action #34
Proposed Action:
Install on-site well and new pressurized water supply
system to support Christus St. Elizabeth Hospital
during loss of potable water.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Christus St. Elizabeth Hospital
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of water contamination and ensure
continuity of services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hazardous Material
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $162,000
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets, HMGP, PDM, EMPG
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Administration, St. Elizabeth Hospital
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Hospital operations plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 78
Beaumont – Action #35
Proposed Action:
Acquire or elevate flood prone structures throughout
the City of Beaumont with an emphasis on current
Repetitive Loss and Severe Repetitive Loss properties.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout city
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce or eliminate flood damages to repetitive loss
structures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $55,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets, HMGP, PDM, RFC
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Administration
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 3; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 79
Beaumont – Action #36
Proposed Action:
Coordinate a consolidated security checkpoint on
entry to Plant Road to access industrial and chemical
production and storage complexes.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Entry to Plant Road
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of terror attack on vulnerable targets.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Terrorism
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $175,000
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets, EMPG, Homeland Security
Grants
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Anti-Terrorism Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 80
Beaumont – Action #37
Proposed Action:
Upgrade security system at the Port of Beaumont for
access control on all exterior doors for all buildings as
well as installing cameras and increased perimeter
surveillance capabilities.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Port of Beaumont
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of terror attack on vulnerable targets.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Terrorism
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $175,000
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets, EMPG, Homeland Security
Grants
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Anti-Terrorism Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 81
Beaumont – Action #38
Proposed Action:
Install security systems at the City of Beaumont water
utility sites, to include but not limited to, security
walls around chemical tanks, water treatment plant
and a river pump station, monitoring stations for
purity testing at various sites throughout the city;
surveillance at six elevated storage tanks and
wastewater plant, etc. for access control on all
exterior doors for all buildings as well as installing
cameras and increased perimeter surveillance
capabilities.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Beaumont Water Utility Sites
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of terror attack on vulnerable targets.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Terrorism
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $4,500,000
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets, EMPG, Homeland Security
Grants
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Anti-Terrorism Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 82
Beaumont – Action #39
Proposed Action:
Upgrade surveillance capabilities at critical
infrastructure sites around the City of Beaumont, to
include, fire stations, police, fire and EMS
headquarters, lift stations, communication towers
and headquarters, etc.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Beaumont Critical Infrastructure Sites
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of terror attack on vulnerable targets.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Terrorism
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $200,000
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets, EMPG, Homeland Security
Grants
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Anti-Terrorism Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 83
Beaumont – Action #40
Proposed Action:
Install generators with permanent hook-ups and
harden roofs at sites at Lamar University. Sites include
but are not limited to the University Police Station and
Soccer Field House which serves as an emergency
operations center.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Lamar University
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Ensure continuity of emergency services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood, Winter Storm, Thunderstorm Wind,
Tornado
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $1,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets, HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Emergency Management, Lamar University
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Operations Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 84
Beaumont – Action #41
Proposed Action:
At Lamar University, replace/upgrade radio
repeater/tower, replace/upgrade emergency
notification siren tower equipment and tower,
cleaning and restoration of tunnel network, and
upgrade safety and security lightning throughout
campus.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Lamar University
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Ensure continuity of emergency services and reduce
risk to students and faculty through early warning.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood, Winter Storm, Thunderstorm Wind,
Tornado, Hail, Lightning
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $2,357,000
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets, HMGP, PDM, EMPG
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Emergency Management, Lamar University
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Operations Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 85
Beaumont – Action #42
Proposed Action:
Elevate flood prone properties/structures and key
infrastructure and electrical equipment throughout
the City of Beaumont.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout the city.
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of flood damages to key structures and
infrastructure.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $1,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets, HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 86
Beaumont – Action #43
Proposed Action:
Minimize damage to structures and infrastructure
from falling trees. Actions include but are not limited
to the following:
Pursue and coordinate a dangerous tree and
limb removal program to protect
infrastructure and critical facilities from
damage. This includes working with private
homeowners for voluntary removal of
hazardous trees and limbs on private
property.
Coordinate contract to remove and/or trip
trees that endanger structures,
infrastructure, and vital roadways.
Removal of dangerous trees and limbs (dead,
leaners, and hangers). Prevent blockage or
damage to infrastructure and/or major
roadways/thoroughfares.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Trees near power lines throughout Beaumont
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of loss of power and potential damages to
structures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Tornado, Lightning, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $1,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, Utility Fees
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan, Local Ordinance
COMMENTS
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 87
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 88
Beaumont – Action #44
Proposed Action:
Secure and maintain backup information systems to
store critical information at off-site locations.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce loss of critical government data and files
through redundant systems.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood, Tornado, Wildfire, Thunderstorm
Wind, Lightning, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $50,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, EMPG, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Administration
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: N/A
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 89
Beaumont – Action #45
Proposed Action:
Improve quality of local information on vulnerable
items (assets and populations) for the purpose of
more accurate risk and damage assessments. Work
with other agencies in city to get data as up-to-date
and complete as possible.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Improve risk and vulnerability assessment.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood, Tornado, Wildfire
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $5,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, EMPG, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Administration
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: N/A
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 90
Beaumont – Action #46
Proposed Action:
Elevate and/or upgrade Marina Drive in the City of
Beaumont.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Marina Drive
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of damages to infrastructure and ensure
emergency access.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $6,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 48 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 91
Beaumont – Action #47
Proposed Action:
Provide educational seminars and brochures
regarding the voluntary Community Rating System
(CRS).
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of flood losses through CRS education and
buy-in.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $15,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Floodplain Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 48 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 92
Beaumont – Action #48
Proposed Action:
Expand and upgrade security systems at St. Elizabeth
Hospital for access control on all exterior doors for all
buildings as well as installing cameras and increased
perimeter surveillance and safety capabilities.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: St. Elizabeth Hospital
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of terror attack on vulnerable targets.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Terrorism
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $350,000
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets, EMGP, Homeland Security
Grants
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Beaumont Emergency Management, St. Elizabeth
Hospital
Implementation Schedule: Within 48 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Hospital Operations Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 93
Bevil Oaks
Bevil Oaks – Action #1
Proposed Action:
Retrofit existing structures and/or construct new
structures to act as residential shelters during and
after Hurricanes and other severe weather events.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in Bevil Oaks
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents in Bevil
Oaks.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $2,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Bevil Oaks City Administration
Implementation Schedule: Within 48 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 94
Bevil Oaks – Action #2
Proposed Action:
Storm harden/retrofit critical facilities throughout
Bevil Oaks. Actions can include but are not limited to
window shutters, roof straps, flood proofing, roll-up
door reinforcements (i.e. for fire stations), backup
generator power with permanent hook-ups, hail
resistant roofing materials, and surge protectors.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Critical facilities in Bevil Oaks
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect critical facilities from damages and ensure
continuity of emergency services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Bevil Oaks, Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 48 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 95
Bevil Oaks – Action #3
Proposed Action:
Acquire/demolish flood-prone properties with an
emphasis on Repetitive and Severe Repetitive Loss
properties.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Flood-prone structures in Bevil Oaks
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Eliminate flood damages to flood-prone structures.
Reduce burden on emergency services during flood
events.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Eliminate risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Bevil Oaks
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan
COMMENTS
The City of Bevil Oaks applied for HMGP funding to acquire 4 repetitive loss structures since the last
planning cycle. This project will implement the first phase if/when the project is funded. This project is
also an extension of the acquisition program to acquire additional structures as they are identified.
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 3; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 96
Bevil Oaks – Action #4
Proposed Action:
Elevate existing flood-prone structures and
infrastructure throughout Bevil Oaks.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Flood-prone structures and infrastructure in Bevil Oaks.
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood damages to flood-prone structures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Bevil Oaks
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Local Ordinance, Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Bevil Oaks updated floodplain ordinance requires new and substantially damaged structures to be
elevated 2’ above base flood elevation. This project would proactively elevate existing flood-prone
structures above the BFE.
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable =4 ; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 97
Bevil Oaks – Action #5
Proposed Action:
Elevate or upgrade bridges, culverts and other
crossings throughout Bevil Oaks to reduce damages to
infrastructure and reduce flooding caused by
undersized crossings and culverts.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Undersized and/or inadequate bridges and culverts in
Bevil Oaks
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood damages to infrastructure and
surrounding structures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing infrastructure and structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $1 Million
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Bevil Oaks Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 98
Bevil Oaks – Action #6
Proposed Action:
Pursue funding and implement drainage
improvements throughout Bevil Oaks. Actions can
include but are not limited to installing/ upgrading
culverts and headwalls as well as enlarging storm
water ditches and canals.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout Bevil Oaks
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood damages to infrastructure and
surrounding structures as a result of undersized
drainage.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing infrastructure and structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Bevil Oaks Works in coordination with Jefferson
County and Drainage District 6
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 99
Bevil Oaks – Action #7
Proposed Action:
Provide generators/back-up power systems with
permanent hook-ups for lift stations and other critical
facilities lacking back-up power throughout Bevil
Oaks.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Lift Stations/Critical Facilities in Bevil Oaks
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect critical facilities from damages and ensure
continuity of services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $200,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Bevil Oaks, Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 48 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 100
Bevil Oaks – Action #8
Proposed Action:
Implement flood protection measures to protect from
surge from Hurricanes/Tropical Storms. Actions can
include but are not limited to constructing and/or
upgrading sea walls, flood barriers, berms and various
wet and dry flood proofing measures.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout Bevil Oaks
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of storm surge flooding to structures and
infrastructure.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $3,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Bevil Oaks in coordination with Jefferson County
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 101
Bevil Oaks – Action #9
Proposed Action:
Identify and pursue any mitigation activities that
would aid/enhance evacuations throughout the Bevil
Oaks.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or fatality through improved
evacuation routes and procedures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Wildfire, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budget
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Bevil Oaks in coordination with Jefferson County
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Evacuation Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 102
Bevil Oaks – Action #10
Proposed Action:
Mitigate damage to utilities in order to maintain
function during and after a hazard event. Actions can
include but are not limited to ordinance requirements
to:
Bury utility lines underground
Provide frangible links/break away
connections on utility poles
Harden utility poles by converting from wood
to concrete or metal utility poles
Increase the easement area/clearance of
utility lines/poles from tree lines.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Utility lines throughout Bevil Oaks
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of loss of power and ensure continuity of
emergency services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Tornado, Lightning, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Bevil Oaks
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan, Local Ordinance
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 103
Bevil Oaks – Action #11
Proposed Action:
Provide the public with educational brochures for
mitigating damages, planning ahead for disasters and
reducing the risk of injury during events including:
Mitigation measures such as window film, elevated
appliances, surge protectors, insulating pipes, drought
tolerant landscaping. Education on when to take
cover, when to evacuate, locations of local safe
rooms, signs of dehydration, and proper storage of
flammable materials, or other appropriate materials
to mitigate damages and health hazards.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to residents and structures through
education and awareness.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed:
Hurricane, Flood, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Wildfire, Tornado, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail,
Drought
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $50,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, EMPG
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Bevil Oaks
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 104
Bevil Oaks – Action #12
Proposed Action:
Retrofit existing structures to act as cooling stations in
times of extreme heat. Educate public on the locations
and availability of cooling centers during times of
extreme heat.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations TBD
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to vulnerable populations during extreme
heat events.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Extreme Heat
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Bevil Oaks
Implementation Schedule: Within 36-48 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 105
Bevil Oaks – Action #13
Proposed Action:
Develop areas of defensible space to prevent damage
due to wildfires.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Wildland Urban Interface
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of damages to structures in or near the
WUI.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Bevil Oaks
Implementation Schedule: Within 48 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Community Wildfire Protection Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 106
Bevil Oaks – Action #14
Proposed Action:
Develop and enact water conservation or drought
management plans, ordinances or strategies to be
used during times of drought.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risks associated with drought through
reduction in water usage during times of drought.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $25,000 - $50,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Bevil Oaks
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Local Ordinances
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 107
Bevil Oaks – Action #15
Proposed Action:
Minimize damage to structures and infrastructure
from falling trees. Actions include but are not limited
to the following:
Pursue and coordinate a tree and limb
removal program to protect infrastructure
and critical facilities from damage. This
includes working with private homeowners
for voluntary removal of hazardous trees and
limbs on private property.
Coordinate contracts to remove and/or trim
trees that endanger structures,
infrastructure, and vital roadways.
Update ordinance to require dead tree
removal and tree trimming as appropriate to
protect structures and infrastructure.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of loss of power and potential damages to
structure and infrastructure.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Tornado, Lightning, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Bevil Oaks
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan, Local Ordinance
COMMENTS
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 108
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 109
China
China – Action #1
Proposed Action:
Build a structure or structures (including a dome or
domes) in coastal (or near coastal) jurisdictions that
can withstand 200 mile per hour winds and act as
shelters of last resort. This is in conjunction with the
Texas Safe Shelter Initiative.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in China
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in China.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $1.6 Million
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of China, Jefferson County Emergency
Management
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan, Jefferson County Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 110
China – Action #2
Proposed Action:
Retrofit existing structures and/or construct new
structures to act as shelters during and after
Hurricanes/Tropical Storms and other severe weather
events.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in China
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in China.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $1 - $2 Million
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of China, Jefferson County Emergency
Management, SETRPC
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 111
China – Action #3
Proposed Action:
Develop and enact water conservation or drought
management plans, ordinances or strategies to be used
during times of drought.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in China
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in China.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $25,000 - $50,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of China, Jefferson County
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Local Ordinances
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 112
China – Action #4
Proposed Action:
Minimize damage to structures and infrastructure from
falling trees. Actions include but are not limited to the
following:
Implement and coordinate a dangerous tree
and limb removal program to protect
infrastructure and critical facilities from
damage. This includes working with private
homeowners for voluntary removal of
hazardous trees and limbs on private property.
Coordinate contracting to remove and/or trim
trees that endanger structures, infrastructure,
and vital roadways.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in China
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in China.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: FEMA PA, HMGP, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of China, Jefferson County
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan, Local Ordinance
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 113
China – Action #5
Proposed Action:
Public structure strengthening for City Hall.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in China
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in China.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of China, Jefferson County
Implementation Schedule: 1-2 years
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 114
China – Action #6
Proposed Action:
Purchase and install generators/back-up power systems
for critical facilities (including but not limited to lift
stations, water plants, police, EMS, Fire and other first
responder facilities) throughout China.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in China
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in China.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $200,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of China, Jefferson County
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 115
China – Action #7
Proposed Action:
Retrofit existing structures or construct new structures
to act as safe rooms during tornados or other severe
weather events.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in China
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in China.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5,000 - $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of China, Jefferson County
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 116
China – Action #8
Proposed Action:
Identify and implement any mitigation activities that
would aid/ enhance evacuations throughout China.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in China
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in China.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Wildfire, Winter Storm
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of China, Jefferson County
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 117
China – Action #9
Proposed Action:
Construct water retention ponds to collect storm water
run-off and use as an alternate water source throughout
China.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in China
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in China.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood, Drought
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $75,000 - $200,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of China, Jefferson County
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 118
China – Action #10
Proposed Action:
Mitigate damage to utilities in order to maintain
function during and after a hazard event. Actions can
include but are not limited to:
Burying utility lines underground
Provide frangible links/break away connections
on utility poles
Harden utility poles by converting from wood
to concrete or metal utility poles
Increasing the easement area/clearance of
utility lines/ poles from trees lines
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in China
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in China.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Lightning, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $200,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of China, Jefferson County
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan, Local Ordinance
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 119
China – Action #11
Proposed Action:
Provide the public with educational brochures for the
hazards identified as part of the 2017 Plan Update.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in China
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in China.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed:
Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail,
Drought
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5,000 - $50,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, EMPG
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of China, Jefferson County
Implementation Schedule: 6-12 months
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 120
China – Action #12
Proposed Action:
Storm harden/retrofit critical facilities throughout
China. Actions can include but are not limited to window
shutters, roof straps, flood proofing, and roll-up door
reinforcement (i.e. for fire stations).
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in China
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in China.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of China, Jefferson County
Implementation Schedule: 1-2 years
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 121
China – Action #13
Proposed Action:
Replace and/or upgrade bridges, culverts and other
crossings throughout China.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in China
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in China.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing infrastructure and structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $200,000 - $1 Million
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of China, Jefferson County
Implementation Schedule: 2-5 years
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 122
China – Action #14
Proposed Action:
Implement drainage improvements throughout China.
Actions can include but are not limited to
installing/upgrading culverts and headwalls as well as
enlarging storm water ditches and canals.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in China
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in China.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of China, Jefferson County
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 123
China – Action #15
Proposed Action:
Implement flood protection measures to protect from
surges from Hurricanes/Tropical Storms. Actions can
include but are not limited to constructing and/or
upgrading sea walls, flood barriers, berms and various
wet and dry flood proofing measures.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in China
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in China.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $3 Million
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of China, Jefferson County
Implementation Schedule: 1-5 years
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Master Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 124
China – Action #16
Proposed Action:
Construct or improve existing detention/retention
ponds where appropriate to collect storm water to
reduce flooding.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in China
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in China.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of China, Jefferson County
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 125
China – Action #17
Proposed Action:
Retrofit existing structures to act as cooling stations in
times of extreme heat.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in China
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in China.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Extreme Heat
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of China, Jefferson County
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 126
China – Action #18
Proposed Action:
Acquire flood prone properties (including Repetitive Loss
and Severe Repetitive Loss Properties).
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in China
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in China.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Eliminate risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $140,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, FMA, PDM, RFC, SRL
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of China, Jefferson County
Implementation Schedule: 12 months
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 127
China – Action #19
Proposed Action:
Elevate new and existing flood prone structures and
infrastructure throughout China.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in China
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in China.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $20,000 - $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA, RFC, SRL
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of China, Jefferson County
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Local Ordinance, Comprehensive Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 128
China – Action #20
Proposed Action:
Bury underground, secure or otherwise harden exposed
or vulnerable pipelines.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in China
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in China.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of China, Jefferson County
Implementation Schedule: 3-5 years
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 129
China – Action #21
Proposed Action:
Coordinate and implement construction, expansion and
maintenance of flood control structures/barriers for the
purpose of mitigating damage and protect fresh water
resources from storm surge, sea level rise, and other
sources of salt water intrusion.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in China
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in China.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures and infrastructure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $1 - $2 Million
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, USACE, Jefferson County, SETRPC
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of China, Jefferson County
Implementation Schedule: 2-5 years
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 130
China – Action #22
Proposed Action:
Develop areas of defensible space to prevent damage
due to wildfires.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in China
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in China.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, EMPG, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of China, Jefferson County
Implementation Schedule: 1-3 years
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Community Wildfire Protection Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 131
Groves
Groves – Action #1
Proposed Action:
Retrofit existing structures and/or construct new
structures to act as residential shelters during and
after Hurricanes and other severe weather events.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in Groves
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents in Groves.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $2 Million
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Groves Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 132
Groves – Action #2
Proposed Action:
Storm harden/retrofit critical facilities throughout
Groves. Actions can include but are not limited to
window shutters, roof straps, flood proofing, roll-up
door reinforcement (i.e. for fire stations), backup
generator power with permanent hook-ups, hail
resistant roofing materials, and surge protectors.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Critical facilities in Groves
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect critical facilities from damages and ensure
continuity of emergency services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Groves Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 133
Groves – Action #3
Proposed Action:
Identify and pursue any mitigation activities that
would aid/enhance evacuations throughout Groves.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or fatality through improved
evacuation routes and procedures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Wildfire, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Groves Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 134
Groves – Action #4
Proposed Action:
Storm harden/retrofit City Hall, Police Station, and
Activity Center Complex.
Actions can include but are not limited to window
shutters, roof straps, flood proofing, roll-up door
reinforcement (i.e. for fire stations), backup generator
power with permanent hook-ups, hail resistant
roofing materials, and surge protectors.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City Hall, Police Station, and Activity Center Complex
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect public facilities from damages and ensure
continuity of services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Groves Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 135
Groves – Action #5
Proposed Action:
Storm harden/retrofit Groves Fire Station.
Actions can include but are not limited to window
shutters, roof straps, flood proofing, roll-up door
reinforcement (i.e. for fire stations), backup generator
power with permanent hook-ups, hail resistant
roofing materials, and surge protectors.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Groves Fire Station
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect facility and fire trucks from damages and
ensure continuity of emergency services. Life Safety
benefits for first responders.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Groves Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 136
Groves – Action #6
Proposed Action:
Storm harden/retrofit Public Works Complex.
Actions can include but are not limited to window
shutters, roof straps, flood proofing, roll-up door
reinforcement (i.e. for fire stations), backup generator
power with permanent hook-ups, hail resistant
roofing materials, and surge protectors.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Groves Public Works Complex
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect public works facilities from damages and
ensure continuity of emergency services. Life Safety
benefits for first responders.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Groves Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 137
Groves – Action #7
Proposed Action:
Storm harden/retrofit Wastewater Treatment Plant.
Actions can include but are not limited to window
shutters, roof straps, flood proofing, roll-up door
reinforcement (i.e. for fire stations), backup generator
power with permanent hook-ups, hail resistant
roofing materials, and surge protectors.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Groves Wastewater Treatment Plant
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect critical facility from damages and ensure
continuity of services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Groves Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 138
Groves – Action #8
Proposed Action:
Provide the public with educational brochures for
mitigating damages, planning ahead for disasters and
reducing the risk of injury during events including:
Mitigation measures such as window film, elevated
appliances, surge protectors, insulating pipes, drought
tolerant landscaping. Education on when to take
cover, when to evacuate, locations of local safe
rooms, signs of dehydration, and proper storage of
flammable materials, or other appropriate materials
to mitigate damages and health hazards.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to residents and structures through
education and awareness.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed:
Hurricane, Flood, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Wildfire, Tornado, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail,
Drought
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $50,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, EMPG
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Groves Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 139
Groves – Action #9
Proposed Action:
Elevate or upgrade bridges, culverts and other
crossings throughout Groves to reduce damages to
infrastructure and reduce flooding caused by
undersized crossings and culverts.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Undersized bridges and culverts in Groves
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood damages to infrastructure and
surrounding structures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing infrastructure and structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $1 Million
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Groves Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 140
Groves – Action #10
Proposed Action:
Pursue funding and implement drainage
improvements throughout Groves. Actions can
include but are not limited to installing/upgrading
culverts and headwalls as well as enlarging storm
water ditches and canals.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout Groves
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood damages to infrastructure and
surrounding structures as a result of undersized
drainage.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing infrastructure and structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Groves Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 141
Groves – Action #11
Proposed Action:
Implement flood protection measures to protect from
surge from Hurricanes/Tropical Storms. Actions can
include but are not limited to constructing and/or
upgrading sea walls, flood barriers, berms and various
wet and dry flood proofing measures.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout Groves
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of storm surge flooding to structures and
infrastructure.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $3,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Groves Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 142
Groves – Action #12
Proposed Action:
Coordinate and implement construction, expansion
and maintenance of flood control structures/barriers
for the purpose of mitigating damage and protect
fresh water resources from storm surge, sea level rise
and other sources of salt water intrusion.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to structures and infrastructure through
improved flood control measures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $2,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, USACE, SETRPC
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Groves Public Works, SETRPC
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 143
Groves – Action #13
Proposed Action:
Develop and enact water conservation or drought
management plans, ordinances or strategies to be
used during times of drought.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risks associated with drought through
reduction in water usage during times of drought.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $25,000 - $50,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Groves Administration
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Local Ordinances
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 144
Groves – Action #14
Proposed Action:
Construct or upgrade existing detention/retention
ponds where appropriate to collect storm water to
reduce flooding and for use as an alternate water
source throughout Groves.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various Locations TBD
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to structures and infrastructure through
improved flood control measures. Water resource for
irrigation use during drought.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Drought
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Groves Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 145
Groves – Action #15
Proposed Action:
Mitigate damage to utilities in order to maintain
function during and after a hazard event. Actions can
include but are not limited to:
Bury utility lines underground
Provide frangible links/break away
connections on utility poles
Harden utility poles by converting from wood
to concrete or metal utility poles
Increase the easement area/clearance of
utility lines/poles from tree lines
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Utility lines throughout Groves
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of loss of power and ensure continuity of
emergency services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Tornado, Lightning, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $200,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Groves Public Works, Entergy
Implementation Schedule: Within 48-60 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan, Local Ordinance
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 146
Groves – Action #16
Proposed Action:
Retrofit existing structures to act as cooling stations in
times of extreme heat.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations TBD
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to vulnerable populations during extreme
heat events.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Extreme Heat
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Groves Administration
Implementation Schedule: Within 48 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 147
Groves – Action #17
Proposed Action:
Develop areas of defensible space to prevent damage
due to wildfires.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Wildland Urban Interface
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of damages to structures in or near the
WUI.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Groves Fire Department
Implementation Schedule: Within 48 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Community Wildfire Protection Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 148
Groves – Action #18
Proposed Action:
Minimize damage to structures and infrastructure
from falling trees. Actions include but are not limited
to the following:
Pursue and coordinate a dangerous tree and
limb removal program to protect
infrastructure and critical facilities from
damage. This includes working with private
homeowners for voluntary removal of
hazardous trees and limbs on private
property.
Coordinate contracts to remove and/or trim
trees that endanger structures,
infrastructure, and vital roadways.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Trees near power lines throughout Groves.
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of loss of power and potential damages to
structures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Tornado, Lightning, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Groves Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 48 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan, Local Ordinances
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 149
Groves – Action #19
Proposed Action:
Upgrade drainage system to reduce flooding on Van
Buren from Wilson to Grant.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Van Buren from Wilson to Grant
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of flood damages to structures and
infrastructure due to inadequate drainage.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures and infrastructure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Groves Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 48 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 150
Groves – Action #20
Proposed Action:
Upgrade drainage system to reduce flooding issues on
34th Street and the south end of Franklin Street.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: 34th Street and the south end of Franklin Street
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of flood damages to structures and
infrastructure due to inadequate drainage.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures and infrastructure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Groves Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 48 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 151
Groves – Action #21
Proposed Action:
Acquire and demolish or relocate flood-prone
properties with an emphasis on Repetitive and Severe
Repetitive Loss Properties.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Flood-prone structures in Groves
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Eliminate flood damages to flood-prone structures.
Reduce burden on emergency services during flood
events.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Eliminate risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $5,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Groves Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 48-60 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 3; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 152
Groves – Action #22
Proposed Action:
Elevate new and existing flood-prone structures and
infrastructure throughout Groves.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Flood-prone structures and infrastructure in Groves
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood damages to flood-prone structures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $5,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Groves Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 48-60 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Local Ordinance, Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 153
Groves – Action #23
Proposed Action:
Secure, bury or otherwise harden exposed or
vulnerable pipelines including water, sewer, liquid
petroleum, and natural gas.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout Groves
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of pipeline failure through mitigation of
exposed or vulnerable lines.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed:
Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Wildfire, Tornado, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail,
Pipeline Failure, Hazardous Materials
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing infrastructure and structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Groves Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 48 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 154
Nederland
Nederland – Action #1
Proposed Action:
Build a structure or structures (including a dome or
domes) in coastal (or near coastal) jurisdictions that
can withstand 200 miles per hour winds and act as
shelters of last resort. This is in conjunction with the
Texas Safe Shelter Initiative.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in Nederland
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in Nederland.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $1.6 Million
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nederland Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 155
Nederland – Action #2
Proposed Action:
Retrofit existing structures and/or construct new
structures to act as residential shelters during and
after Hurricanes and other severe weather events.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in Nederland
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents in
Nederland.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $2 Million
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nederland Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 156
Nederland – Action #3
Proposed Action:
Storm harden/retrofit critical facilities throughout
Nederland. Actions can include but are not limited to
window shutters, roof straps, flood proofing, roll-up
door reinforcement (i.e. for fire stations), backup
generator power with permanent hook-ups, hail
resistant roofing materials, and surge protectors.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Critical facilities in Nederland
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect critical facilities from damages and ensure
continuity of emergency services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nederland Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 157
Nederland – Action #4
Proposed Action:
Acquire and demolish or relocate flood-prone
properties with an emphasis on Repetitive and Severe
Repetitive Loss properties.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Flood-prone structures in Nederland
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Eliminate flood damages to flood-prone structures.
Reduce burden on emergency services during flood
events.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Eliminate risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nederland Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 3; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 158
Nederland – Action #5
Proposed Action:
Elevate new and existing flood-prone structures and
infrastructure throughout Nederland.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Flood-prone structures and infrastructure in Nederland
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood damages to flood-prone structures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nederland Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Local Ordinance, Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 159
Nederland – Action #6
Proposed Action:
Elevate or upgrade bridges, culverts and other
crossings throughout Nederland to reduce damages to
infrastructure and reduce flooding caused by
undersized crossings and culverts.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Undersized bridges and culverts in Nederland
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood damages to infrastructure and
surrounding structures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing infrastructure and structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $1 Million
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nederland Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 160
Nederland – Action #7
Proposed Action:
Pursue funding and implement drainage
improvements throughout Nederland. Actions can
include but are not limited to installing/ upgrading
culverts and headwalls as well as enlarging storm
water ditches and canals.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout Nederland
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood damages to infrastructure and
surrounding structures as a result of undersized
drainage.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing infrastructure and structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nederland Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 161
Nederland – Action #8
Proposed Action:
Secure, bury or otherwise harden exposed or
vulnerable pipelines including water, sewer, liquid
petroleum, and natural gas.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout Nederland
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of pipeline failure through mitigation of
exposed or vulnerable lines.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Wildfire, Tornado, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing infrastructure and structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nederland Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 162
Nederland – Action #9
Proposed Action:
Implement flood protection measures to protect from
surge from Hurricanes/Tropical Storms. Actions can
include but are not limited to constructing and/or
upgrading sea walls, flood barriers, berms and various
wet and dry flood proofing measures.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout Nederland
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of storm surge flooding to structures and
infrastructure.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $3,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nederland Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Master Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 163
Nederland – Action #10
Proposed Action:
Coordinate and implement construction, expansion
and maintenance of flood control structures/barriers
for the purpose of mitigating damage and protect
fresh water resources from storm surge, sea level rise
and other sources of salt water intrusion.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to structures and infrastructure through
improved flood control measures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $2,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, USACE, SETRPC
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nederland Public Works, SETRPC
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 164
Nederland – Action #11
Proposed Action:
Construct or upgrade existing detention/ retention
ponds where appropriate to collect storm water to
reduce flooding.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various Locations TBD
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to structures and infrastructure through
improved flood control measures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nederland Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 165
Nederland – Action #12
Proposed Action:
Retrofit existing structures or construct new
structures to act as residential safe rooms during
tornados or other severe weather events.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various Locations TBD
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5,000 per site
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nederland Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan, Local Ordinance
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 166
Nederland – Action #13
Proposed Action:
Identify and pursue any mitigation activities that
would aid/enhance evacuations throughout
Nederland.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or fatality through improved
evacuation routes and procedures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Wildfire, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nederland Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 167
Nederland – Action #14
Proposed Action:
Construct water retention ponds to collect storm
water run-off, reduce flooding and use as an alternate
water source throughout Nederland.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: TBD site in Nederland
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Lifesaving water alternate source and localized flood
reduction.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought, Flood, Thunderstorm Wind, Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce damages to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $200,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, SETRPC
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nederland Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Master Drainage Plan, Water Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 168
Nederland – Action #15
Proposed Action:
Mitigate damage to utilities in order to maintain
function during and after a hazard event. Actions can
include but are not limited to:
Bury utility lines underground
Provide frangible links/break away
connections on utility poles
Harden utility poles by converting from wood
to concrete or metal utility poles
Increase the easement area/clearance of
utility lines/poles from tree lines
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Utility lines throughout Nederland
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of loss of power and ensure continuity of
emergency services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Tornado, Lightning, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $200,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nederland Public Works, Entergy
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan, Local Ordinance
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 169
Nederland – Action #16
Proposed Action:
Storm harden/retrofit Nederland Water Treatment
Plant.
Actions can include but are not limited to window
shutters, roof straps, flood proofing, roll-up door
reinforcement (i.e. for fire stations), backup generator
power with permanent hookups, hail resistant roofing
materials, and surge protectors.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Nederland Water Treatment Plant
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect critical facility from damages and ensure
continuity of services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nederland Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 170
Nederland – Action #17
Proposed Action:
Storm harden/retrofit Nederland Service Center.
Actions can include but are not limited to window
shutters, roof straps, flood proofing, roll-up door
reinforcement (i.e. for fire stations), backup generator
power with permanent hookups, hail resistant roofing
materials, and surge protectors.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Nederland Service Center
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect critical facility from damages and ensure
continuity of services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nederland Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 171
Nederland – Action #18
Proposed Action:
Storm harden/retrofit Wastewater Treatment Plant.
Actions can include but are not limited to window
shutters, roof straps, flood proofing, roll-up door
reinforcement (i.e. for fire stations), backup generator
power with permanent hookups, hail resistant roofing
materials, and surge protectors.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Wastewater Treatment Plant at 515 Hardy Avenue
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect critical facility from damages and ensure
continuity of services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nederland Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 172
Nederland – Action #19
Q Proposed Action:
Storm harden/retrofit Hughes Library.
Actions can include but are not limited to window
shutters, roof straps, flood proofing, roll-up door
reinforcement (i.e. for fire stations), backup generator
power with permanent hookups, hail resistant roofing
materials, and surge protectors.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Hughes Library
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect critical facility from damages and ensure
continuity of services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nederland Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 173
Nederland – Action #20
Proposed Action:
Provide the public with educational brochures for
mitigating damages, planning ahead for disasters and
reducing the risk of injury during events including:
Mitigation measures such as window film, elevated
appliances, surge protectors, insulating pipes, drought
tolerant landscaping. Education on when to take
cover, when to evacuate, locations of local safe
rooms, signs of dehydration, and proper storage of
flammable materials, or other appropriate materials
to mitigate damages and health hazards.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to residents and structures through
education and awareness.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed:
Hurricane, Flood, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Wildfire, Tornado, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail,
Drought
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $50,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, EMPG
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nederland Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 174
Nederland – Action #21
Proposed Action:
Retrofit existing structures to act as cooling stations in
times of extreme heat.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations TBD
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to vulnerable populations during extreme
heat events.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Extreme Heat
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nederland Administration
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 175
Nederland – Action #22
Proposed Action:
Develop areas of defensible space to prevent damage
due to wildfires
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Wildland Urban Interface
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of damages to structures in or near the
WUI.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Nederland Fire Department
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Community Wildfire Protection Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 176
Nederland – Action #23
Proposed Action:
Develop and enact water conservation or drought
management plans, ordinances or strategies to be
used during times of drought.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risks associated with drought through
reduction in water usage during times of drought.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $25,00 - $50,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nederland Administration
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Local Ordinances
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 177
Nederland – Action #24
Proposed Action:
Minimize damage to structures and infrastructure
from falling trees. Actions include but are not limited
to the following:
Pursue and coordinate a dangerous tree and
limb removal program to protect
infrastructure and critical facilities from
damage. This includes working with private
homeowners for voluntary removal of
hazardous trees and limbs on private
property.
Coordinate contracts to remove and/or trim
trees that endanger structures,
infrastructure, and vital roadways.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Trees near power lines throughout Nederland
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of loss of power and potential damages to
structures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Tornado, Lightning, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nederland Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan, Local Ordinance
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 178
Nederland – Action #25
Proposed Action:
Public structure strengthening by replacing drainage
tile main feeders.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Drainage main and feeders
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of flood damages to structures and
infrastructure due to inadequate drainage.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures and
infrastructure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nederland Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Master Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 179
Nederland – Action #26
Proposed Action:
Storm harden/retrofit D. Bob Henson Building.
Actions can include but are not limited to window
shutters, roof straps, flood proofing, roll-up door
reinforcement (i.e. for fire stations), backup generator
power with permanent hookups, hail resistant roofing
materials, and surge protectors.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: D. Bob Henson Building
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect critical facility from damages and ensure
continuity of services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nederland Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 180
Nederland – Action #27
Proposed Action:
Improve underground storm sewer culvert size on
Detroit Avenue.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Detroit Avenue
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of flood damages to structures and
infrastructure due to inadequate drainage.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures and
infrastructure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $3,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nederland Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 48 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Master Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 181
Nome
Nome – Action #1
Proposed Action:
Build a structure or structures (including a dome or
domes) in coastal (or near coastal) jurisdictions that
can withstand 200 mile per hour winds and act as
shelters of last resort. This is in conjunction with the
Texas Safe Shelter Initiative.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in Nome
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in Nome.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $1.6 Million
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nome
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan, Jefferson County Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 182
Nome – Action #2
Proposed Action:
Retrofit existing structures and/or construct new
structures to act as residential shelters during and
after Hurricanes and other severe weather events.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in Nome
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents in Nome.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $2 Million
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nome
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 183
Nome – Action #3
Proposed Action:
Storm harden/retrofit critical facilities throughout
Nome. Actions can include but are not limited to
window shutters, roof straps, flood proofing, roll-up
door reinforcement (i.e. for fire stations), backup
generator power with permanent hook-ups, hail
resistant roofing materials, and surge protectors.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Critical facilities in Nome
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect critical facilities from damages and ensure
continuity of emergency services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $3,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nome Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 184
Nome – Action #4
Proposed Action:
Acquire/demolish flood-prone properties with an
emphasis on Repetitive and Severe Repetitive Loss
properties.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Flood-prone structures in Nome
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Eliminate flood damages to flood-prone structures.
Reduce burden on emergency services during flood
events.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Eliminate risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nome
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable =3 ; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 185
Nome – Action #5
Proposed Action:
Elevate new and existing flood-prone structures and
infrastructure throughout Nome.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Flood-prone structures in Nome
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood damages to flood-prone structures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nome
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Local Ordinance, Comprehensive Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 186
Nome – Action #6
Proposed Action:
Elevate or upgrade bridges, culverts and other
crossings throughout Nome to reduce damages to
infrastructure and reduce flooding caused by
undersized crossings and culverts.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Undersized bridges and culverts in Nome
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood damages to infrastructure and
surrounding structures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing infrastructure and structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $10,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nome
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 187
Nome – Action #7
Proposed Action:
Pursue funding and implement drainage
improvements throughout Nome. Actions can include
but are not limited to installing/upgrading culverts
and headwalls as well as enlarging storm water
ditches and canals.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout Nome
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood damages to infrastructure and
surrounding structures as a result of undersized
drainage.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing infrastructure and structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nome
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 188
Nome – Action #8
Proposed Action:
Secure, bury, or otherwise harden exposed or
vulnerable pipelines including water and sewer.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout Nome
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of pipeline failure through mitigation of
exposed or vulnerable lines.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed:
Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Wildfire, Tornado, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail,
Hazardous Material, Terrorism
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing infrastructure and structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nome
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 189
Nome – Action #9
Proposed Action:
Purchase and install backup generator power systems
with permanent hook-ups for critical facilities
including lift stations, water plants, police stations,
EMS, fire stations, and other first responder facilities
throughout Nome.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Critical facilities as indicated above in Nome
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect critical facilities from loss of power and ensure
continuity of emergency services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm, Flood, Winter
Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $1-$2 Million
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nome
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 190
Nome – Action #10
Proposed Action:
Implement flood protection measures to protect from
surge from Hurricanes/Tropical Storms. Actions can
include but are not limited to constructing and/or
upgrading sea walls, flood barriers, berms and various
wet and dry flood proofing measures.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout Nome
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of storm surge damages to structures and
infrastructure.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $3 Million
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nome
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Master Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 191
Nome – Action #11
Proposed Action:
Coordinate and implement construction, expansion
and maintenance of flood control structures/barriers
for the purpose of mitigating damage and protect
fresh water resources from storm surge, sea level rise,
and other sources of salt water intrusion.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout Nome
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to structures and infrastructure through
improved flood control measures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures and infrastructure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $1-$2 Million
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, USACE, SETRPC
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nome
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Master Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 192
Nome – Action #12
Proposed Action:
Construct or upgrade existing detention/ retention
ponds where appropriate to collect storm water to
reduce flooding.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various Locations TBD throughout Nome
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to structures and infrastructure through
improved flood control measures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Thunderstorm Wind, Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nome
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 193
Nome – Action #13
Proposed Action:
Retrofit existing structures and/or construct new
structures to act as residential shelters during and
after Hurricanes and other severe weather events.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations TBD
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5,000 - $100,000 per site
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nome
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 194
Nome – Action #14
Proposed Action:
Identify and pursue any mitigation activities that
would aid/enhance evacuations throughout Nome.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Life safety benefits through preparedness.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood, Winter Storm, Tornado,
Thunderstorm Wind, Wildfire
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budget
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nome in coordination with Jefferson County
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-60 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 195
Nome – Action #15
Proposed Action:
Construct water retention ponds to collect storm
water run-off and use as an alternate water source
throughout Nome.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: TBD site in Nome
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Lifesaving water alternate source and localized flood
reduction.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought, Flood, Thunderstorm Wind, Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce damages to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $200,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nome
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Master Drainage Plan, Water Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 196
Nome – Action #16
Proposed Action:
Mitigate damage to utilities in order to maintain
function during and after a hazard event. Actions can
include but are not limited to:
Bury utility lines underground
Provide frangible links/break away
connections on utility poles
Harden utility poles by converting from wood
to concrete or metal utility poles
Increase the easement area/clearance of
utility lines/poles from tree lines
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Utility lines throughout Nome
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of loss of power and ensure continuity of
emergency services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Tornado, Lightning, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $20,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: Utility Fees, Federal Grants
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nome, Entergy
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan, Local Ordinance
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 197
Nome – Action #17
Proposed Action:
Provide the public with educational brochures for
mitigating damages, planning ahead for disasters and
reduce the risk of injury during events including:
mitigation measures such as window film, elevated
appliances, surge protectors, insulating pipes, drought
tolerant landscaping. Education on when to take
cover, when to evacuate, locations of local safe
rooms, signs of dehydration, and proper storage of
flammable materials, or other appropriate materials
to mitigate damages and health hazards.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to residents and structures through
education and awareness.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed:
Hurricane, Flood, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Wildfire, Tornado, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail,
Drought
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $50,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, EMGP
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: County and City Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 24 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 198
Nome – Action #18
Proposed Action:
Retrofit existing structures to act as cooling stations in
times of extreme heat.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations (TBD) in Nome
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to vulnerable populations during extreme
heat events.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Extreme Heat
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nome
Implementation Schedule: Within 24 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 199
Nome – Action #19
Proposed Action:
Develop areas of defensible space to prevent damage
due to wildfires.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Wildland Urban Interface of Nome
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of damages to structures in or near the
WUI.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nome
Implementation Schedule: Within 48 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Community Wildfire Protection Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 200
Nome – Action #20
Proposed Action:
Develop and enact water conservation or drought
management plans, ordinances or strategies to be
used during times of drought.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risks associated with drought through
reduction in water usage during times of drought.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $25,000 - $50,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nome
Implementation Schedule: Within 24 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Local Ordinances
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal =5 ; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 201
Nome – Action #21
Proposed Action:
Minimize damage to structures and infrastructure
from falling trees. Actions include but are not limited
to the following:
Pursue and coordinate a dangerous tree and
limb removal program to protect
infrastructure and critical facilities from
damage. This includes working with private
homeowners for voluntary removal of
hazardous trees and limbs on private
property.
Coordinate contracts to remove and/or trim
trees that endanger structures,
infrastructure, and vital roadways.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Trees near power lines throughout Nome
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of loss of power and potential damages to
structures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Tornado, Lightning, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Nome
Implementation Schedule: Within 48 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan, Local Ordinance
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 202
Port Arthur
Port Arthur – Action #1
Proposed Action:
Build a structure or structures (including a dome or
domes) in coastal (or near coastal) jurisdictions that
can withstand 200 mile per hour winds and act as
shelters of last resort. This is in conjunction with the
Texas Safe Shelter Initiative.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in Port Arthur
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in Port Arthur.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $1.6 Million
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan, Jefferson County Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 203
Port Arthur – Action #2
Proposed Action:
Retrofit existing structures and/or construct new
structures to act as residential shelters during and
after Hurricanes and other severe weather events.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in Port Arthur
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents in Port
Arthur.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $2 Million
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 204
Port Arthur – Action #3
Proposed Action:
Storm harden/retrofit critical facilities throughout
Port Arthur. Actions can include but are not limited to
window shutters, roof straps, flood proofing, roll-up
door reinforcement (i.e. for fire stations), backup
generator power with permanent hookups, hail
resistant roofing materials, and surge protectors.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Critical facilities in Port Arthur
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect critical facilities from damages and ensure
continuity of emergency services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 205
Port Arthur – Action #4
Proposed Action:
Acquire/demolish flood-prone properties with an
emphasis on Repetitive and Severe Repetitive Loss
properties.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Flood-prone structures in Port Arthur
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Eliminate flood damages to flood-prone structures.
Reduce burden on emergency services during flood
events.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Eliminate risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 3; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 206
Port Arthur – Action #5
Proposed Action:
Elevate new and existing flood-prone structures and
infrastructure throughout Port Arthur.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Flood-prone structures and infrastructure in Port
Arthur
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood damages to flood-prone structures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Local Ordinance, Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 207
Port Arthur – Action #6
Proposed Action:
Elevate or upgrade bridges, culverts and other
crossings throughout Port Arthur to reduce damages
to infrastructure and reduce flooding caused by
undersized crossings and culverts.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Undersized bridges and culverts in Port Arthur
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood damages to infrastructure and
surrounding structures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing infrastructure and structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $1 Million
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-60 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 208
Port Arthur – Action #7
Proposed Action:
Pursue funding and implement drainage
improvements throughout Port Arthur. Actions can
include but are not limited to installing/ upgrading
culverts and headwalls as well as enlarging storm
water ditches and canals.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout Port Arthur
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood damages to infrastructure and
surrounding structures as a result of undersized
drainage.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing infrastructure and structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 209
Port Arthur – Action #8
Proposed Action:
Secure, bury or otherwise harden exposed or
vulnerable pipelines.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout Port Arthur
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of pipeline failure through mitigation of
exposed lines.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Wildfire, Tornado, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing infrastructure and structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-60 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 210
Port Arthur – Action #9
Proposed Action:
Implement flood protection measures to protect from
surge from Hurricanes/Tropical Storms. Actions can
include but are not limited to constructing and/or
upgrading sea walls, flood barriers, berms and various
wet and dry flood proofing measures.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout Port Arthur
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of storm surge flooding to structures and
infrastructure
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $3,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM,
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-60 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Master Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 211
Port Arthur – Action #10
Proposed Action:
Coordinate and implement construction, expansion
and maintenance of flood control structures/barriers
for the purpose of mitigating damage and protect
fresh water resources from storm surge, sea level rise,
and other sources of salt water intrusion.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to structures and infrastructure through
improved flood control measures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $2,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, USACE, SETRPC
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Public Works, SETRPC
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-60 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 212
Port Arthur – Action #11
Proposed Action:
Construct or upgrade existing detention/ retention
ponds where appropriate to collect storm water to
reduce flooding.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations TBD
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to structures and infrastructure through
improved flood control measures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budget
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 213
Port Arthur – Action #12
Proposed Action:
Retrofit existing structures or construct new
structures to act as residential safe rooms during
tornados or other severe weather events.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various Locations TBD
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5,000 - $100,000 per site
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-60 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan, Local Ordinance
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 214
Port Arthur – Action #13
Proposed Action:
Identify and pursue any mitigation activities that
would aid/enhance evacuations throughout Port
Arthur.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or fatality through improved
evacuation routes and procedures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Wildfire, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur in coordination with Jefferson
County
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-60 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 215
Port Arthur – Action #14
Proposed Action:
Construct water retention ponds to collect storm
water run-off, reduce flooding and use as an alternate
water source throughout Port Arthur.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: TBD site in Port Arthur
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Lifesaving water alternate source and localized flood
reduction.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought, Flood, Thunderstorm Wind, Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce damages to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $200,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, SETRPC
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Port Arthur Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Master Drainage Plan, Water Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 216
Port Arthur – Action #15
Proposed Action:
Mitigate damage to utilities in order to maintain
function during and after a hazard event. Actions can
include but are not limited to:
Bury utility lines underground
Provide frangible links/break away
connections on utility poles
Harden utility poles by converting from wood
to concrete or metal utility poles
Increase the easement area/clearance of
utility lines/poles from tree lines
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Utility lines throughout Port Arthur
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of loss of power and ensure continuity of
emergency services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Tornado, Lightning, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $200,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Public Works, Entergy
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-60 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan, Local Ordinance
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 217
Port Arthur – Action #16
Proposed Action:
Provide the public with educational brochures for
mitigating damages, planning ahead for disasters and
reducing the risk of injury during events including:
Mitigation measures such as window film, elevated
appliances, surge protectors, insulating pipes, drought
tolerant landscaping. Education on when to take
cover, when to evacuate, locations of local safe
rooms, signs of dehydration, and proper storage of
flammable materials, or other appropriate materials
to mitigate damages and health hazards.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to residents and structures through
education and awareness.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed:
Hurricane, Flood, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Wildfire, Tornado, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail,
Drought
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $50,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, EMPG
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 218
Port Arthur – Action #17
Proposed Action:
Retrofit existing structures to act as cooling stations in
times of extreme heat.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations TBD
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to vulnerable populations during extreme
heat events.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Extreme Heat
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 219
Port Arthur – Action #18
Proposed Action:
Develop areas of defensible space to prevent damage
due to wildfires.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Wildland Urban Interface
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of damages to structures in or near the
WUI.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Fire Department
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Community Wildfire Protection Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 220
Port Arthur – Action #19
Proposed Action:
Develop and enact water conservation or drought
management plans, ordinances or strategies to be
used during times of drought.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risks associated with drought through
reduction in water usage during times of drought.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $25,000 - $50,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Local Ordinances
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 221
Port Arthur – Action #20
Proposed Action:
Minimize damage to structures and infrastructure
from falling trees. Actions include but are not limited
to the following:
Pursue and coordinate a dangerous tree and
limb removal program to protect
infrastructure and critical facilities from
damage. This includes working with private
homeowners for voluntary removal of
hazardous trees and limbs on private
property.
Coordinate contracts to remove and/or trim
trees that endanger structures,
infrastructure, and vital roadways.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Trees near power lines throughout Port Arthur
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of loss of power and potential damages to
structures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Tornado, Lightning, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan, Local Ordinance
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 222
Port Arthur – Action #21
Proposed Action:
Increase channel capacity and improve multiple
culvert crossings of Drainage Channel Main B.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Drainage Channel Main B
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of flood damages to structures and
infrastructure due to inadequate channel capacity and
undersized culverts.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures and
infrastructure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Master Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 223
Port Arthur – Action #22
Proposed Action:
Improve channel capacity and crossings in Lateral 3 of
the Drainage Channel Main A system.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Drainage Channel Main A
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of flood damages to structures and
infrastructure due to inadequate channel capacity and
undersized crossings.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Public Works, and Drainage District
#7
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Master Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 224
Port Arthur – Action #23
Proposed Action:
Improve culvert crossings in the Lakeview Drainage
system.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Culvert crossings in Lakeview Drainage system
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of flood damages to structures and
infrastructure due to inadequate undersized culvert
crossings.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Master Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 225
Port Arthur – Action #24
Proposed Action:
Increase drainage capacity to reduce flooding on
Westside.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Port Arthur Westside
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of flood damages to structures and
infrastructure due to inadequate drainage capacity.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Master Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 226
Port Arthur – Action #25
Proposed Action:
Upgrade concrete lining of the El Vista Pump Station.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: El Vista Pump Station
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of flood damages to pump station and
channel.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures and infrastructure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Master Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 227
Port Arthur – Action #26
Proposed Action:
Upgrade existing storm sewer in the Port Acres area
and along Procter Street.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Port Acres area and along Procter Street
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of flood damages to structures and
infrastructure due to inadequate storm sewer capacity.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures and infrastructure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Master Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 228
Port Arthur – Action #27
Proposed Action:
Develop/implement shelter-in-place presentations.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of death or injury to residents through
education.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Lightning, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Response Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 229
Port Arthur – Action #28
Proposed Action:
Develop/implement emergency first responder teams
with Sabine Neches Chief’s Association.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Regional
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of damages, death or injury through
improved emergency response.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations – Emergency Response
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Lightning, Hail,
Winter Storm, Tornado
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $10,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Response Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 230
Port Arthur – Action #29
Proposed Action:
Develop/implement coastal storm presentations to
public, groups, schools, etc. Educate residents on risk
mitigation techniques, early mitigation strategies,
emergency kits, evacuation routes, and other
appropriate materials.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of damages and death or injury to residents
through education and awareness.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 231
Port Arthur – Action #30
Proposed Action:
Adopt additional freeboard in the local floodplain
ordinance. Require all new construction to
meet/exceed minimum established flood elevations.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of damages to new structures through
higher elevation requirements.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $30,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Floodplain Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Floodplain Ordinance
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 232
Port Arthur – Action #31
Proposed Action:
Receive maximum credit for the NFIP CRS.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of damages to new structures through
higher construction standards and restrictions on
floodplain development.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $30,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Floodplain Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Floodplain Ordinance
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 233
Port Arthur – Action #32
Proposed Action:
Develop/implement bus transportation for hurricane
evacuations.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to residents through coordinated
evacuation assistance.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations – Emergency Response
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $300,000
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Response Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 234
Port Arthur – Action #33
Proposed Action:
Develop/implement transportation plan for special
needs populations.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to special needs populations through
coordinated evacuation assistance.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations – Emergency Response
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Tornado, Winter Storm
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $300,000
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Response Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 235
Port Arthur – Action #34
Proposed Action:
Assist in implementation of 211 TX Linkage Access
Service.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to residents through Texas Health and
Services information access.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations – Preparedness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: Local operating budgets, HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 236
Port Arthur – Action #35
Proposed Action:
Improve storm water runoff by installing upgraded 8-
foot by 7-foot concrete box in Tiger Bayou.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Tiger Bayou
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of flooding through improved drainage.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures and infrastructure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Master Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 237
Port Arthur – Action #36
Proposed Action:
Improve Hwy. 365 from Hwy. 69 to Rhodair Gully for
improved emergency access.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Hwy. 365 from Hwy. 69 to Rhodair Gully
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Improve emergency access through road
improvement.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Hail, Wildfire,
Lightning, Winter Storm, Tornado
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Capital Improvement Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 238
Port Arthur – Action #37
Proposed Action:
Decrease floodplain width in North Port Acres Ditch
through improved drainage.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: North Port Acres Ditch
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood risk to structures and infrastructure
through improved drainage and reduction of the
floodplain.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $300,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: City of Port Arthur Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Master Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 239
Port Neches
Port Neches – Action #1
Proposed Action:
Build a structure or structures (including a dome or
domes) in coastal (or near coastal) jurisdictions that
can withstand 200 mile per hour winds and act as
shelters of last resort. This is in conjunction with the
Texas Safe Shelter Initiative.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in Port Neches
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents and first
responders in Port Neches.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $1.6 Million
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Port Neches Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 240
Port Neches – Action #2
Proposed Action:
Retrofit existing structures and/or construct new
structures to act as residential shelters during and
after Hurricanes and other severe weather events.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations in Port Neches
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents in Port
Neches.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $2 Million
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Port Neches Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 241
Port Neches – Action #3
Proposed Action:
Storm harden/retrofit critical facilities throughout
Port Neches. Actions can include but are not limited
to window shutters, roof straps, flood proofing, roll-
up door reinforcement (i.e. for fire stations), backup
generator power with permanent hook-ups, hail
resistant roofing materials, and surge protectors.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Critical facilities in Port Neches
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protect critical facilities from damages and ensure
continuity of emergency services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Flood,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Port Neches Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 242
Port Neches – Action #4
Proposed Action:
Elevate new and existing flood-prone structures and
infrastructure throughout Port Neches.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Flood-prone structures and infrastructure in Port
Neches
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood damages to flood-prone structures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and future structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Port Neches Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Local Ordinance, Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 243
Port Neches – Action #5
Proposed Action:
Elevate or upgrade bridges, culverts and other
crossings throughout Port Neches to reduce damages
to infrastructure and reduce flooding caused by
undersized crossings and culverts.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Undersized bridges and culverts in Port Neches
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood damages to infrastructure and
surrounding structures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing infrastructure and structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $1 Million
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Port Neches Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 244
Port Neches – Action #6
Proposed Action:
Pursue finding and implement drainage
improvements throughout Port Neches. Actions can
include but are not limited to installing/ upgrading
culverts and headwalls as well as enlarging storm
water ditches and canals.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout Port Neches
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood damages to infrastructure and
surrounding structures as a result of undersized
drainage.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing infrastructure and structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Port Neches Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 245
Port Neches – Action #7
Proposed Action:
Secure, bury or otherwise harden exposed or
vulnerable pipelines.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout Port Neches
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of pipeline failure through mitigation of
exposed lines.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Wildfire, Tornado, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing infrastructure and structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Port Neches Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 246
Port Neches – Action #8
Proposed Action:
Provide generators/back-up power systems with
permanent hook-ups for critical facilities (including
but not limited to lift stations, water plants, police,
EMS, fire and other first responder facilities)
throughout Port Neches.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations throughout Port Neches
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of loss of power and ensure continuity of
emergency services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Wildfire, Tornado, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing infrastructure and structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $200,000 per site
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Port Neches Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 247
Port Neches – Action #9
Proposed Action:
Mitigate damage to utilities in order to maintain
function during and after a hazard event. Actions can
include but are not limited to:
Bury utility lines underground
Provide frangible links/break away
connections on utility poles
Harden utility poles by converting from wood
to concrete or metal utility poles
Increase the easement area/clearance of
utility lines/poles from tree lines
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Utility lines throughout Port Neches
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of loss of power and ensure continuity of
emergency services.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Tornado, Lightning, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $200,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMPG, PDM, local operating budgets, TDEM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Port Neches Emergency Management, Entergy
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan, Local Ordinance
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 248
Port Neches – Action #10
Proposed Action:
Minimize damage to structures and infrastructure
from falling trees. Actions include but are not limited
to the following:
Pursue and coordinate a dangerous tree and
limb removal program to protect
infrastructure and critical facilities from
damage. This includes working with private
homeowners for voluntary removal of
hazardous trees and limbs on private
property.
Coordinate contracts to remove and/or trim
trees that endanger structures,
infrastructure, and vital roadways.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Trees near power lines throughout Port Neches
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of loss of power and potential damages to
structures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Tornado, Lightning, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Port Neches Public Works, Entergy
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan, Local Ordinance
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 249
Port Neches – Action #11
Proposed Action:
Coordinate public-private partnerships to ensure
special needs population are protected from extreme
temperatures by establishing and promoting
accessible heating or cooling centers in the
community.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Local business and identified public facilities
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to vulnerable populations during extreme
temperatures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Winter Storm, Extreme Heat
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $50,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, local business
partners
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Port Neches Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 250
Port Neches – Action #12
Proposed Action:
Conduct coastal storm presentations to educate the
public on evacuation procedures, mitigation
techniques, and risk associated with coastal storms.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to residents and structures through
education and awareness.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Port Neches Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 251
Port Neches – Action #13
Proposed Action:
Provide the public with educational brochures for
mitigating damages, planning ahead for disasters and
reducing the risk of injury during events including:
Mitigation measures such as window film, elevated
appliances, surge protectors, insulating pipes, drought
tolerant landscaping, education on when to take
cover, when to evacuate, locations of local safe
rooms, signs of dehydration, and proper storage of
flammable materials, or other appropriate materials
to mitigate damages and health hazards.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to residents and structures through
education and awareness.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed:
Hurricane, Flood, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm,
Wildfire, Tornado, Lightning, Extreme Heat, Hail,
Drought
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $50,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, EMPG
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Port Neches Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 252
Port Neches – Action #14
Proposed Action:
Coordinate and implement construction, expansion
and maintenance of flood control structures/barriers
for the purpose of mitigating damage and protect
fresh water resources from storm surge, sea level rise
and other sources of salt water intrusion.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to structures and infrastructure through
improved flood control measures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $2,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, USACE, SETRPC
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Port Neches Public Works, SETRPC
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 253
Port Neches – Action #15
Proposed Action:
Construct or upgrade existing detention/ retention
ponds where appropriate to collect storm water to
reduce flooding.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations TBD
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to structures and infrastructure through
improved flood control measures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budget
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Port Neches Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 254
Port Neches – Action #16
Proposed Action:
Retrofit existing structures or construct new
structures to act as residential safe rooms during
tornados or other severe weather events.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations TBD
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or death for residents.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Port Neches Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan, Local Ordinance
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 255
Port Neches – Action #17
Proposed Action:
Identify and pursue any mitigation activities that
would aid/enhance evacuations throughout Port
Neches.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of injury or fatality through improved
evacuation routes and procedures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Wildfire, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Port Neches Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 256
Port Neches – Action #18
Proposed Action:
Acquire/demolish flood-prone properties with an
emphasis on Repetitive and Severe Repetitive Loss
properties.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Flood-prone structures in Port Neches
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Eliminate flood damages to flood-prone structures.
Reduce burden on emergency services during flood
events.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Eliminate risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Port Neches Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 3; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 257
Port Neches – Action #19
Proposed Action:
Pursue flood protection measures to protect from
surge from Hurricanes. Actions can include but are
not limited to constructing and/ or upgrading sea
walls, flood barriers, berms and various wet and dry
flood proofing measures.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to structures and infrastructure through
improved flood control measures.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $3,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, USACE, SETRPC
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Port Neches Public Works
Implementation Schedule: Within 48 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 4; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 4
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 258
Port Neches – Action #20
Proposed Action:
Retrofit existing structures to act as cooling stations in
times of extreme heat.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Various locations TBD
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk to vulnerable populations during extreme
heat events.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Extreme Heat
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Port Neches Administration
Implementation Schedule: Within 48 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 4; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 259
Port Neches – Action #21
Proposed Action:
Develop areas of defensible space to prevent damage
due to wildfires.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Wildland Urban Interface
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of damages to structures in or near the
WUI.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets, EMPG
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Port Neches Fire Department
Implementation Schedule: Within 48 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Community Wildfire Protection Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 4; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 260
Port Neches – Action #22
Proposed Action:
Develop and enact water conservation or drought
management plans, ordinances or strategies to be
used during times of drought.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: City-wide
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risks associated with drought through
reduction in water usage during times of drought.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Low
Estimated Cost: $25,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: Port Neches Administration
Implementation Schedule: Within 48 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Local Ordinances
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 4; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 4;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 261
SETRPC
SETRPC – Action #1
Proposed Action:
Plan for the Protection of Vulnerable Populations by
identifying at-risk populations and coordinating with
home health agencies, medical equipment
companies, local churches and neighborhood
associations to assist these populations during
extreme weather events. Organize strategies for
protecting vulnerable populations and develop a plan
to expediently activate strategies when need be.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Southeast Texas Region of Hardin, Jefferson and
Orange Counties
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Protection of at-risk populations during extreme
weather events.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Extreme Heat, Flood, Hurricane, Winter Storm,
Thunderstorm Wind, Tornado, Wildfire, Lightning
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $25,000 - $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: SETRPC, Jefferson County Emergency Management
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 262
SETRPC – Action #2
Proposed Action:
Public Awareness and Education of Vulnerable
Population through creation of a database and special
group in STAN (Southeast Texas Alerting Network
regional emergency alerting system) whereby public
information protection actions can be disseminated.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Southeast Texas Region of Hardin, Jefferson and
Orange Counties
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Expedient access to and ability to communicate with
those individuals, nursing homes, assisted living
centers, hospitals and others who are most at risk
during extreme hazard events.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Extreme Heat, Flood, Hurricane, Winter Storm,
Thunderstorm Wind, Tornado, Wildfire, Lightning, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: Area Agency on Aging and Disabilities, PDM, HMGP
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: SETRPC
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Operations Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 263
SETRPC – Action #3
Proposed Action:
Plan for future drought in the Southeast Texas region
of Hardin, Jefferson, and Orange Counties by
developing a drought emergency plan, developing
criteria or triggers for drought-related actions, enact
water conservation measures during drought
conditions, and develop a drought communication
plan and early warning system to facilitate timely
communication of relevant information.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Southeast Texas Region of Hardin, Jefferson and
Orange Counties
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduction of risk due to drought for residents in the
Southeast Texas region.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $75,000 - $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local operating budgets
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: SETRPC
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Local water plans and ordinances
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 264
SETRPC – Action #4
Proposed Action:
Pursue the identification and construction of
alternate fresh water resources.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Southeast Texas Region of Hardin, Jefferson and
Orange Counties
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce health risks associated with a lack of clean,
uncontaminated water available to local residents.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $200,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: SETRPC
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Local Water Management Plans
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 3; Technically Feasible = 3; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 3;
Legal = 3; Economically Sound = 3; and Environmentally Sound = 3
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 265
SETRPC – Action #5
Proposed Action:
Facilitate use of all mass notification systems
including but not limited to the Southeast Texas
Alerting Network (STAN), to notify and educate the
public of impending hazardous events.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Southeast Texas Region of Hardin, Jefferson and
Orange Counties
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce the loss of life and property as a result of a
drought, extreme heat, flood, hurricane, lightning,
thunderstorm wind, tornado, winter storm, or wildfire.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought, Extreme Heat, Flood, Hurricane, Tornado,
Wildfire, Thunderstorm Wind, Winter Storm, Lightning
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: PSGP, PDM, HMGP
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: SETRPC
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: EOPs
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 266
SETRPC – Action #6
Proposed Action:
Retrofit existing structures and/or construct new
structures to act as shelters during and after
Hurricanes, Floods and other severe weather events.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Inland at strategic points outside the floodplain
throughout the Southeast Texas Region of Hardin,
Jefferson and Orange Counties
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce loss of life as a result of a natural disaster by
providing a safe structure in which residents can
temporarily be housed.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Flood, Thunderstorm Wind
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce damages to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $1.5 - $5 Million
Potential Funding Sources: Texas Safe Shelter Initiative, HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: SETRPC, Hardin County, Jefferson County, Orange
County
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 3;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 3; and Environmentally Sound = 3
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 267
SETRPC – Action #7
Proposed Action:
Retrofit/harden SETRPC building that serves as an
alternate 911 Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP)
site for local jurisdictions within the Southeast Texas
region during times of natural disaster.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: 2210 Eastex Freeway
Beaumont, Texas 77703
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduction of the loss of life and property through the
continuity of operations of Public Safety Answering
Points (PSAP) in the Southeast Texas region in the event
a natural disaster necessitates PSAP relocation from
the primary local jurisdiction site.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane, Winter Storm, Thunderstorm Wind,
Tornado, Wildfire, Lightning
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing facility
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $2,500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM,
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: SETRPC
Implementation Schedule: Within 24-36 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Operations Plans/Local PSAP Standard
Operating Procedures
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 268
SETRPC – Action #8
Proposed Action:
Coordinate Emergency Management Plans for coastal
storm/hurricane events. Specific efforts include
encouraging jurisdictions to install and maintain back
up power at identified facilities, construct and
designate emergency operations centers for
disaster/emergency operations, and solicit
participation in Community Emergency Response
training.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Southeast Texas Region of Hardin, Jefferson and
Orange Counties
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Continuity of emergency operations which saves lives
and property.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $5,000 - $50,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, EMPG
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: SETRPC, Hardin, Jefferson and Orange Counties/ Cities
within
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Response Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 269
SETRPC – Action #9
Proposed Action:
Conduct flood insurance educational seminars for
area realtors to increase their knowledge of National
Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and the benefits to
homeowners in security flood insurance.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Southeast Texas Region of Hardin, Jefferson and
Orange Counties
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
All homeowners in the Southeast Texas region could
benefit from owning flood insurance. Through
education with realtors, who homeowners often turn
to first for advice when purchasing a home, this
important message could be conveyed and the public
educated on the importance of flood insurance;
whether or not a home is in the floodplain.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $20,000 - $50,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: SETRPC, Hardin Jefferson and Orange Counties/ Cities
within
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: N/A
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 270
SETRPC – Action #10
Proposed Action:
Coordinate public/private partnerships to ensure
special needs populations are protected from health
risks due to extreme weather conditions. Actions will
be targeted toward citizens with physical limitations
and others who may be unable to reach safety in times
of severe weather. Volunteer groups may be available
to assist by visiting special needs groups to ensure
their safety and comfort during extreme weather
events or assist when evacuations are necessary.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Southeast Texas Region of Hardin, Jefferson and
Orange Counties
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce loss of life to most vulnerable populations.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed:
Drought, Extreme Heat, Flood, Hurricane, Winter
Storm, Thunderstorm Wind, Tornado, Wildfire,
Earthquake, Geologic Hazards, Tsunami, Water
Contamination
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: SETRPC, Hardin Jefferson and Orange Counties/ Cities
within
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Response Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 271
SETRPC – Action #11
Proposed Action:
Coordinate and implement a natural hazards public
awareness campaign among the jurisdictions. Efforts
may include tropical storm/ hurricane awareness
presentations, shelter-in-place presentations,
evacuation maps, floodplain maps, mitigation
damages, flood control projects, storm tracking maps,
health and safety tips flyers, mitigation articles in local
newspapers, and other such information as it relates
to natural hazards. Target audiences will include
schools, neighborhood watch groups, various civic
groups, neighborhood associations, community
groups, and industry groups. FEMA publications will
also be made available in city hall libraries, municipal
courts, police and fire departments, public works
departments, public access TV channels, city libraries
and on the SETRPC and jurisdictional websites.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Southeast Texas Region of Hardin, Jefferson and
Orange Counties
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce damages to structures through mitigation
education. Reduce risk of injury or loss of life to area
residents.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 272
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed:
Drought, Extreme Heat, Hail, Flood, Hurricane, Winter
Storm, Thunderstorm Wind, Tornado, Lightning,
Wildfire
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures through mitigation
education and early preparation
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $25,000 - $75,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: SETRPC, Hardin Jefferson and Orange Counties/ Cities
within
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 273
SETRPC – Action #12
Proposed Action:
Construct water retention ponds to collect storm
water run-off and use as an alternate water source for
agricultural resources throughout the Southeast
Texas region.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Southeast Texas Region of Hardin, Jefferson and
Orange Counties
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Lifesaving water alternate source and localized flood
reduction.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Drought, Flood, Thunderstorm Wind, Hurricane
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce damages to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $250,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: SETRPC, Hardin Jefferson and Orange Counties/ Cities
within
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Master Drainage Plan, Water Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 274
SETRPC – Action #13
Proposed Action:
Minimize damage to structures and infrastructure
from falling trees. Actions include but are not limited
to the following:
Pursue and coordinate a dangerous tree and
limb removal program to protect
infrastructure and critical facilities from
damage. This includes working with private
homeowners for voluntary removal of
hazardous trees and limbs on private
property.
Coordinate contracts to remove and/or trim
trees that endanger structures,
infrastructure, and vital roadways.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Trees near power lines throughout Southeast Texas
Region of Hardin, Jefferson and Orange Counties
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce loss of life and property due to substantial
damage from falling trees resulting in failing structures
and reduce risk of power outages.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Tornado, Thunderstorm Wind, Hail,
Lightning, Winter Storm
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, local Utility Fees
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: SETRPC, Hardin Jefferson and Orange Counties/ Cities
within
Implementation Schedule: Within 24 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Public Works SOP
COMMENTS
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 275
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 276
SETRPC – Action #14
Proposed Action:
Secure and maintain backup information systems to
store critical information at off-site locations.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Southeast Texas Region of Hardin, Jefferson and
Orange Counties
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce loss of critical government data and files
through redundant systems.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood, Tornado, Wildfire
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $350,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: SETRPC, Hardin Jefferson and Orange Counties/ Cities
within
Implementation Schedule: Within 24 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: N/A
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound =
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 277
SETRPC – Action #15
Proposed Action:
Coordinate with county and municipal governments
to allow the SETRPC to maintain a copy of all local
ordinances relevant to mitigation activities.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Southeast Texas Region of Hardin, Jefferson and
Orange Counties
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce loss of local ordinances through redundant
systems.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood, Drought, Extreme Heat, Tornado,
Winter Storm, Wildfire
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $1,000 - $15,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: SETRPC, Hardin Jefferson and Orange Counties/ Cities
within
Implementation Schedule: Within 24 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: N/A
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 278
SETRPC – Action #16
Proposed Action:
Acquire flood-prone properties throughout the region
with a focus on Repetitive and Severe Repetitive Loss
properties.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Southeast Texas Region of Hardin, Jefferson and
Orange Counties
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduction in repetitive loss payments from FEMA for
structures known to have flooded on more than one
occasion.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Eliminate risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $90,000 - $10,000,000 (cost varies per structure)
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, FMA
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: SETRPC, Hardin Jefferson and Orange Counties/ Cities
within
Implementation Schedule: Within 24 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 279
SETRPC – Action #17
Proposed Action:
Elevate flood-prone properties throughout the region.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Southeast Texas Region of Hardin, Jefferson and
Orange Counties
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduction in repetitive loss payments from FEMA for
structures known to lie in a floodplain or that have
flooded.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): Moderate
Estimated Cost: $90,000 - $2,000,000 (cost varies per structure)
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: SETRPC, Hardin Jefferson and Orange Counties/ Cities
within
Implementation Schedule: Within 24 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 280
SETRPC – Action #18
Proposed Action:
Storm harden/retrofit critical facilities throughout the
Southeast Texas Region. Actions can include but are
not limited to window shutters, roof straps, hail
resistant roofing, flood proofing, roll-up door
reinforcement (i.e. fire stations), emergency
backup/generator power with permanent hook-ups,
fire resistant construction materials, window film, and
surge protectors.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Southeast Texas Region of Hardin, Jefferson and
Orange Counties
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Avoid loss of property and, due to the critical nature of
the facilities included in this action, potential loss of
life.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood, Thunderstorm Wind, Hail, Lightning,
Winter Storm, Wildfire, Extreme Heat
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $10,000 - $2,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: SETRPC, Hardin Jefferson and Orange Counties/ Cities
within
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 281
SETRPC – Action #19
Proposed Action:
Pursue drainage improvements throughout the
regions. Actions can include but are not limited to
installing/upgrading culverts and headwalls as well as
enlarging storm water ditches and canals.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Southeast Texas Region of Hardin, Jefferson and
Orange Counties
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduction in property losses/repetitive loss buy outs
and infrastructure damage.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $100,000 - $5,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: SETRPC, Hardin Jefferson and Orange Counties/ Cities
within
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Drainage Plans
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 282
SETRPC – Action #20
Proposed Action:
Mitigate damage to utilities in order to maintain
function during and after a hazard event. Actions can
include but are not limited to:
Bury utility lines underground
Provide frangible links/break away
connections on utility poles
Harden utility poles by converting from wood
to concrete or metal utility poles
Increase the easement area/clearance of
utility lines/poles from tree lines
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Southeast Texas Region of Hardin, Jefferson and
Orange Counties
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce risk of power loss, associated damages, and line
repairs.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood, Winter Storm, Hail, Lightning,
Thunderstorm Wind, Tornado
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing structures and infrastructure
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $150,000 - $600,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM, Utility Fees
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: SETRPC, Hardin Jefferson and Orange Counties/ Cities
within
Implementation Schedule: Within 12-24 months of plan adoption pending
available funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Comprehensive Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 283
SETRPC – Action #21
Proposed Action:
Coordinate with federal, state and local partners to
provide all hazards, ICS, and specialized training that
may enhance preparedness for first responders.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Southeast Texas Region of Hardin, Jefferson and
Orange Counties
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Increase in public safety knowledge base through
education and awareness.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness - Preparedness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed:
Hurricane, Flood, Drought, Extreme Heat, Winter
Storm, Tornado, Lightning, Thunderstorm Wind,
Wildfire, Hail
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $1,000 - $50,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: SETRPC, Hardin Jefferson and Orange Counties/ Cities
within
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Operations Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 284
SETRPC – Action #22
Proposed Action:
Identify and pursue any mitigation activities that
would aid/enhance evacuations throughout the
region.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Southeast Texas Region of Hardin, Jefferson and
Orange Counties
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Life safety benefits through education and awareness.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Education and Awareness
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood, Winter Storm, Tornado,
Thunderstorm Wind, Wildfire
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $50,000 - $500,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: SETRPC, Hardin Jefferson and Orange Counties/ Cities
within
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Emergency Management Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 285
SETRPC – Action #23
Proposed Action:
Continually review, revise, update, and systematically
maintain floodplain data and maps of flood prone
areas throughout the Southeast Texas Region.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Southeast Texas Region of Hardin, Jefferson and
Orange Counties
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce flood risk to structures through understanding
risk and vulnerability.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Local Plans and Regulations
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $1,000 - $5,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: SETRPC, Hardin Jefferson and Orange Counties/ Cities
within
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Floodplain Ordinance
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 286
SETRPC – Action #24
Proposed Action:
Pursue the coordination, construction, expansion and
maintenance of flood control structures/barriers for
the purpose of mitigating damage from storm surge
and sea level rise and other sources of salt water
intrusion.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Southeast Texas Region of Hardin, Jefferson and
Orange Counties
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce damages to structures and infrastructure from
storm surge and flooding.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: Reduce risk to existing and new structures
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $10,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: SETRPC, Hardin Jefferson and Orange Counties/ Cities
within
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Master Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
Section 18: Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 287
SETRPC – Action #25
Proposed Action:
Pursue the coordination, construction, expansion, and
maintenance of flood control structures/barriers for
the purpose of protecting potable water sources and
agricultural resources from water contamination and
salt water intrusion.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Jurisdiction/Location: Southeast Texas Region of Hardin, Jefferson and
Orange Counties
Risk Reduction Benefit (Current
Cost/Losses Avoided):
Reduce loss of potable water or inadequate water
supply.
Type of Action (Local Plans and
Regulations, Structure and Infrastructure
projects, Natural System Protection, or
Education and Awareness)
Structure and Infrastructure
MITIGATION ACTION DETAILS
Hazard(s) Addressed: Hurricane, Flood
Effect on New/Existing Buildings: N/A
Priority (High, Moderate, Low): High
Estimated Cost: $10,000,000
Potential Funding Sources: HMGP, PDM
Lead Agency/Department Responsible: SETRPC, Hardin Jefferson and Orange Counties/ Cities
within
Implementation Schedule: Within 12 months of plan adoption pending available
funding
Incorporation into Existing Plans: Master Drainage Plan
COMMENTS
Additional Considerations:
The following STAPLEE criteria were evaluated on a scale of 1 to 5 indicating the extent to which this action
satisfies each consideration. (1= Does Not Satisfy 3 = Moderately Satisfies 5 = Strongly Satisfies)
Socially Acceptable = 5; Technically Feasible = 5; Administratively Possible = 5; Politically Acceptable = 5;
Legal = 5; Economically Sound = 5; and Environmentally Sound = 5
SECTION 19: PLAN MAINTENANCE
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
Plan Maintenance Procedures ...................................................................................................................... 1
Incorporation ................................................................................................................................................ 1
Process of Incorporation ........................................................................................................................... 1
Monitoring and Evaluation ........................................................................................................................... 5
Monitoring ................................................................................................................................................ 5
Evaluation.................................................................................................................................................. 6
Updating ........................................................................................................................................................ 6
Plan Amendments ..................................................................................................................................... 6
Five (5) Year Review .................................................................................................................................. 6
Continued Public Involvement ...................................................................................................................... 7
Plan Maintenance Procedures
The following is an explanation of how Jefferson County, participating jurisdictions, and the general public
will be involved in implementing, evaluating, and enhancing the Plan over time. The sustained hazard
mitigation planning process consists of four main parts:
Incorporation
Monitoring and Evaluation
Updating
Continued Public Involvement
Incorporation
Jefferson County and participating jurisdictions will be responsible for further development and
implementation of mitigation actions. Each action has been assigned to a specific department within the
County and participating jurisdictions. The following describes the process by which Jefferson County will
incorporate elements of the mitigation plan into other planning mechanisms.
Process of Incorporation
Once the Plan is adopted, Jefferson County, SETRPC and participating jurisdictions will implement actions
based on priority and the availability of funding. The County currently implements policies and programs
to reduce loss to life and property from hazards. The mitigation actions developed for this Plan Update
enhance this ongoing effort and will be implemented through other program mechanisms where possible.
The potential funding sources listed for each identified action may be used when the jurisdiction seeks
funds to implement actions. An implementation time period or a specific implementation date has been
Section 19: Plan Maintenance
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 2
assigned to each action as an incentive for completing each task and gauging whether actions are
implemented in a timely manner.
Jefferson County and participating jurisdictions will integrate implementation of their mitigation actions
with other plans and policies such as construction standards and emergency management plans, and
ensure that these actions, or proposed projects, are reflected in other planning efforts. Coordinating and
integrating components of other plans and policies into goals and objectives of the Plan will further
maximize funding and provide possible cost-sharing of key projects, thereby reducing loss of lives and
property, and mitigating hazards affecting the area.
Upon formal adoption of the Plan Update, planning team members from each participating jurisdiction
will work to integrate the hazard mitigation strategies into other plans and codes, as they are developed.
Participating team members will conduct periodic review of plans and policies, once per year at a
minimum, and analyze the need for amendments in light of the approved Plan Update. The planning team
will review all comprehensive land use plans, capital improvement plans, annual budget reviews,
emergency operations or management plans, transportation plans, and any building codes to guide and
control development. Participating jurisdictions will ensure that capital improvement planning in the
future will also contribute to the goals of this hazard mitigation Plan Update to reduce the long-term risk
to life and property from all hazards. Within one year of formal adoption of the hazard mitigation Plan
Update, existing planning mechanisms will be reviewed by each jurisdiction.
Jefferson County is committed to supporting the cities, communities, and participating jurisdictions as
they implement their mitigation actions. Jefferson County and participating planning team members will
review and revise, as necessary, the long-range goals and objectives in strategic plan and budgets to
ensure that they are consistent with this mitigation action plan. Additionally, the County will work to
advance the goals of this hazard mitigation plan through its routine, ongoing, long-range planning,
budgeting, and work processes.
Table 19-1. Methods of Incorporation of the Plan
Planning
Mechanism Department/Title Responsible Incorporation of Plan
Grant
Applications
Jefferson County: Emergency
Management Coordinator
Beaumont: Emergency Management
Coordinator
Bevil Oaks: Mayor
China: Mayor
Groves: Emergency Management
Coordinator
The Plan Update will be evaluated by
Jefferson County and participating
jurisdictions when grant funding is sought
for mitigation projects. If a project is not
in the Plan Update, an amendment may
be necessary to include the action in the
Plan Update.
Section 19: Plan Maintenance
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 3
Planning
Mechanism Department/Title Responsible Incorporation of Plan
Nederland: Emergency Management
Coordinator
Nome: Mayor
Port Arthur: Senior Planner
Port Neches: Emergency Management
Coordinator
SETRPC: Regional Emergency Planner
Annual Budget
Review
Jefferson County: Emergency
Management Coordinator
Beaumont: Emergency Management
Coordinator
Bevil Oaks: Mayor
China: Mayor
Groves: Emergency Management
Coordinator
Nederland: Emergency Management
Coordinator
Nome: Mayor
Port Arthur: Senior Planner
Port Neches: Emergency Management
Coordinator
SETRPC: Regional Emergency Planner
Various departments and key personnel
that participated in the planning process
for Jefferson County and participating
jurisdictions will review the Plan Update
and mitigation actions therein when
conducting their annual budget review.
Allowances will be made in accordance
with grant applications sought, and
mitigation actions that will be undertaken,
according to the implementation schedule
of the specific action.
Regulatory Plans
Jefferson County: Emergency
Management Coordinator
Beaumont: Emergency Management
Coordinator
Bevil Oaks: Mayor
China: Mayor
Groves: Emergency Management
Coordinator
Currently, Jefferson County and
participating jurisdictions have regulatory
plans in place, such as Emergency
Management Plans, Continuity of
Operations Plans, Economic
Development, and Evacuation Plans. The
Plan Update will be consulted when
County and City departments review or
revise their current regulatory planning
mechanisms, or in the development of
Section 19: Plan Maintenance
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 4
Planning
Mechanism Department/Title Responsible Incorporation of Plan
Nederland: Emergency Management
Coordinator
Nome: Mayor
Port Arthur: Senior Planner
Port Neches: Emergency Management
Coordinator
SETRPC: Regional Emergency Planner
regulatory plans that are not currently in
place.
Capital
Improvement
Plans
Jefferson County: Emergency
Management Coordinator
Beaumont: Emergency Management
Coordinator
Bevil Oaks: Mayor
China: Mayor
Groves: Emergency Management
Coordinator
Nederland: Emergency Management
Coordinator
Nome: Mayor
Port Arthur: Senior Planner
Port Neches: Emergency Management
Coordinator
SETRPC: Regional Emergency Planner
Jefferson County and participating
jurisdictions have a Capital Improvement
Plan (CIP) in place. Prior to any revisions
to the CIP, County and City departments
will review the risk assessment and
mitigation strategy sections of the HMAP,
as limiting public spending in hazardous
zones is one of the most effective long-
term mitigation actions available to local
governments.
Floodplain
Management
Plans
Jefferson County: Floodplain Manager
Beaumont: Floodplain Manager
Bevil Oaks: Floodplain Manager
China: Mayor
Groves: Floodplain Manager
Nederland: Floodplain Manager
Nome: Mayor
Port Arthur: Floodplain Manager
Floodplain management plans include
preventative and corrective actions to
address the flood hazard. Therefore, the
actions for flooding, and information
found in Section 5 of this Plan Update
discussing the people and property at risk
to flood, will be reviewed and revised
when Jefferson County updates their
management plans or develops new
plans.
Section 19: Plan Maintenance
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 5
Planning
Mechanism Department/Title Responsible Incorporation of Plan
Port Neches: Floodplain Manager
SETRPC: Floodplain Manager
Monitoring and Evaluation
Periodic revisions of the Plan Update are required to ensure that goals, objectives, and mitigation actions
are kept current. Revisions may be required to ensure the Plan Update is in compliance with federal and
state statutes and regulations. This section outlines the procedures for completing Plan revisions,
updates, and review. Table 19-2 indicates the department and title of the party responsible for Plan
monitoring, updating, and review of the Plan.
Table 19-2. Team Members Responsible for Plan Monitoring, Evaluating, Reviewing and Updating of
the Plan
JURISDICTION TITLE
Jefferson County Emergency Management Coordinator
Beaumont Emergency Management Coordinator
Bevil Oaks Mayor
China Mayor
Groves Emergency Management Coordinator
Nederland Emergency Management Coordinator
Nome Mayor
Port Arthur Senior Planner
Port Neches Emergency Management Coordinator
SETRPC Regional Emergency Planner
Monitoring
Designated Planning Team members are responsible for monitoring, updating, and reviewing the Plan
Update, as shown in Table 19-2. Individuals holding the title listed in Table 19-2 will be responsible for
monitoring the Plan Update on an annual basis. Plan monitoring, includes reviewing and incorporation
into the Plan other existing planning mechanisms that relate or support goals and objectives of the Plan;
monitoring the incorporation of the Plan into future updates of other existing planning mechanisms as
appropriate; reviewing mitigation actions submitted and coordinating with various County and City
departments to determine if mitigation actions need to be re-evaluated and updated; evaluating and
updating the Plan as necessary; and monitoring plan maintenance to ensure that the process described is
being followed, on an annual basis, throughout the planning process. The Planning Team will develop a
Section 19: Plan Maintenance
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 6
brief report that identifies if changes to the Plan Update are needed, such as recommending an action for
funding. A summary of meeting notes will report the particulars involved in developing an action into a
project.
Evaluation
As part of the evaluation process, the Planning Team will assess changes in risk; determine whether the
implementation of mitigation actions is on schedule; determine whether there are any implementation
problems, such as technical, political, legal, or coordination issues; and identify changes in land
development or programs that affect mitigation priorities for each respective department or organization.
The Planning Team will meet on an annual basis to evaluate the Plan and identify any needed changes.
The annual evaluation process will help to determine if any changes are necessary.
Updating
Plan Amendments
At any time, minor technical changes may be made to update the Jefferson County Hazard Mitigation Plan
Update. Material changes to mitigation actions or major changes in the overall direction of the Plan
Update or the policies contained within it, must be subject to formal adoption by the County and
participating jurisdictions.
The County will review proposed amendments and vote to accept, reject, or amend the proposed change.
Upon ratification, the amendment will be transmitted to TDEM.
In determining whether to recommend approval or denial of a Plan Update amendment request, the
County will consider the following factors:
Errors or omissions made in the identification of issues or needs during the preparation of the
Plan Update;
New issues or needs that were not adequately addressed in the Plan Update; and
Changes in information, data, or assumptions from those on which the Plan Update was based.
Five (5) Year Review
The Plan will be thoroughly reviewed by the Planning Team at the end of three years from the approval
date, to determine whether there have been significant changes in the planning area that necessitate
changes in the types of mitigation actions proposed. Factors that may affect the content of the Plan
include new development in identified hazard areas, increased exposure to hazards, disaster declarations,
increase or decrease in capability to address hazards, and changes to federal or state legislation.
The Plan review process provides the County and participating jurisdictions an opportunity to evaluate
mitigation actions that have been successful, identify losses avoided due to the implementation of specific
mitigation measures, and address mitigation actions that may not have been successfully implemented
as assigned.
Section 19: Plan Maintenance
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 7
It is recommended that the full Advisory Planning Team (Section 2, Table 2-2) meet to review the Plan at
the end of three years because grant funds may be necessary for the development of a five-year update.
Reviewing planning grant options in advance of the five-year Plan update deadline is recommended
considering the timelines for grant and planning cycles can be in excess of a year.
Following the Plan review, any revisions deemed necessary will be summarized and implemented
according to the reporting procedures and Plan amendment process outlined herein. Upon completion
of the review, update, and amendment process the revised Plan will be submitted to TDEM for final review
and approval in coordination with FEMA.
Continued Public Involvement
Public input was an integral part of the preparation of this Plan and will continue to be essential for Plan
updates. The Public will be directly involved in the annual review and cyclical updates. Changes or
suggestions to improve or update the Plan will provide opportunities for additional public input.
The public can review the Plan Update on Jefferson County’s website where officials and the public are
invited to provide ongoing feedback, via email to the County’s Assistant Emergency Management
Coordinator at mwhite@co.jefferson.tx.us. Additionally, hard copies will be kept at the SETRPC’s office
and the County’s Engineering Office.
The Planning Team may also designate voluntary citizens from the County, or willing stakeholder members
from the private sector businesses that were involved in the Plan's development to provide feedback on
an annual basis. It is important that stakeholders and the immediate community maintain a vested
interest in preserving the functionality of the planning area as it pertains to the overall goals of the
mitigation plan. The Planning team is responsible for notifying stakeholders and community members on
an annual basis, and maintaining the Plan.
Media, including local newspaper and radio stations, will be used to notify the public of any maintenance
or periodic review activities during the implementation, monitoring, and evaluation phases. Additionally,
local news media will be contacted to cover information regarding Plan updates, status of grant
applications, and project implementation. Local and social media outlets, such as Facebook and Twitter,
will keep the public and stakeholders apprised of potential opportunities to fund and implement
mitigation projects identified in the Plan Update.
APPENDIX A: LOW RISK AND MANMADE
HAZARDS
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
Overview ....................................................................................................................................................... 1
Study Area Definition ................................................................................................................................ 1
Hazard Profiles, Vulnerability, and Impact ................................................................................................... 3
Geologic Hazard ........................................................................................................................................ 3
Tsunami ..................................................................................................................................................... 4
Earthquake ................................................................................................................................................ 5
Water Contamination ............................................................................................................................... 6
Dam Failure ............................................................................................................................................... 8
Hazardous Materials Incident (Fixed and Mobile) .................................................................................. 11
Terrorism ................................................................................................................................................. 16
Overview
During the early stages of the planning process the team analyzed several natural hazards that were
considered low risk. These hazards include Earthquake, Tsunami, and Geologic Hazards, and Dam Failure.
In addition, the team reviewed technological hazards including Hazardous Material Incidents, Terrorism,
and Water Contamination. A description of the hazard and Jefferson County’s overall vulnerability to that
hazard was developed. Annualized loss data is provided where available and impact is addressed looking
at the warning time or potential speed of onset of the hazard.
None of these hazards have had reported damages to any of the critical facilities for the Jefferson County
planning area, therefore the planning area has not had any impact due to these hazards nor do they pose
a risk to the critical services provided. In the intent of 44 CFR 201.6(c)(2)(i) & 44 CRF 201.6(c)(2)(iii) the
intent is to, “To understand the potential and chronic hazards affecting the planning area in order to
identify which hazard risks are most significant (…),”. Based on the intent, it is the participating
jurisdictions belief that earthquakes, tsunamis, geologic hazards, and dam failure are not hazards that are
most significant to the jurisdiction. During public outreach none of these hazards were a concern of the
public population.
Study Area Definition
All areas of Jefferson County and participating jurisdictions and entities are included. Figure A-1 shows
the study area for the Jefferson County HMAP Update 2017.
Appendix A: Low Risk and Manmade Hazards
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 2
Figure A-1. Jefferson County Study Area
Appendix A: Low Risk and Manmade Hazards
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 3
Hazard Profiles, Vulnerability, and Impact
Each low risk natural hazard includes a description of the hazard and a summary of the planning area’s
risk. For each of the three technological hazards, a description of the hazard and Jefferson County’s overall
vulnerability to that hazard was developed. Impact is addressed looking at the warning time or potential
speed of onset of the hazard. Impact statements are defined in Table A-1 below.
Table A-1. Impact Statements
POTENTIAL
SEVERITY DESCRIPTION
Substantial
Multiple deaths. Complete shutdown of facilities for 30 days or
more. More than 50 percent of property destroyed or with
major damage.
Major
Injuries and illnesses resulting in permanent disability. Complete
shutdown of critical facilities for at least two weeks. More than
25 percent of property destroyed or with major damage.
Minor
Injuries and illnesses do not result in permanent disability.
Complete shutdown of critical facilities for more than one week.
More than 10 percent of property destroyed or with major
damage.
Limited
Injuries and illnesses are treatable with first aid. Shutdown of
critical facilities and services for 24 hours or less. Less than 10
percent of property destroyed or with major damage.
Technological hazards refers to the origins of incidents that can arise from human activities, such as the
construction and maintenance of dams. Technological hazards are distinct from natural hazards primarily
because they originate from human activity. Whereas the risks presented by natural hazards may be
increased or decreased as a result of human activity, they are not inherently human-induced. Therefore,
dam failure is classified as a quasi-technological hazard.
For the purposes of this risk assessment, technological hazards are events or incidents associated with the
use of gas and oil pipeline and their manufacture, transportation, and storage. Water contamination, acts
of terrorism, and the use of hazardous materials across all industries are also considered technological
hazards.
The scope of this risk assessment assumes that hazardous material incidents and water contamination
events addressed in this section would be accidental in nature and that their consequences are unplanned
and unintended.
Geologic Hazard
A geologic hazard is a natural geologic event that can endanger human lives and threaten property and
infrastructure. While geologic hazards are by definition a natural event, they can be caused or exacerbated
by human activities. For the purpose of this hazard mitigation action plan update for Jefferson County,
included in this hazard type are riverine erosion, landslides, and land subsidence (sinkholes). The U.S.
Geological Survey (USGS) serves as the primary data and forecasting source for geologic hazards.
Appendix A: Low Risk and Manmade Hazards
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 4
Riverine erosion is defined as downstream flow, shifting, or removal of sediment from a watershed. Caving
river and stream banks are common associations with the migration of river channel alignment, and can
threaten structures, undermine bridge foundations, and pose public safety risk.
Landslide is a general term used to describe the process of movement of material (i.e., soil, rock, mud,
etc.) down a slope by falling, sliding or flowing under the force of gravity. The major causes of landslides
are earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, or extreme rain events. Landslides are commonly associated with
areas of steep slopes, but can also occur in relatively level topography on un-retained constructed slopes
and dirt embankments. Sloughing fill material can cause property and infrastructure damage, and
indirectly threaten public safety.
Land Subsidence can occur either gradually or dramatically (as in sinkhole occurrence), and refers to the
loss of surface elevation due to remove of subsurface support. Land subsidence can be caused by crustal
deformation; sediment compaction; withdrawal of groundwater, hydrocarbons (crude oil and natural
gas), geothermal fluids or minerals (Sulphur); or increased surface load associated with high-rise buildings.
All three geologic hazards were researched for previous occurrences. Impacts of geologic hazards in
Jefferson County are not widespread, and historically have been limited to minor land loss along
waterways, Sabine Lake and the banks of the Gulf Inter-Coastal Water Way. Probability of future events
is considered unlikely. Due to relatively isolated occurrence of impacts and no recorded occurrence of
damages, injuries or fatalities, the hazard is considered to have a negligible impact on the planning area
and is therefore considered a nuisance.
Tsunami
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) describes a tsunami as a series of ocean
waves generated by sudden displacements in the sea floor, landslides, volcanic activity or other large,
abrupt disturbance of the sea-surface. Tsunamis have reached heights of more than 100 feet. As the waves
approach shallow coastal waters, they appear normal and the speed decreases. If the disturbance is close
to the coastline, tsunamis can demolish coastal communities within minutes, and a large disturbance can
cause inundation and destruction thousands of miles away from its epicenter.
The USGS monitors earthquakes through network of seismic detectors. This information is critical to
understand when a tsunami wave might be generated. The USGS and NOAA’s National Ocean Service has
the responsibilities for providing ocean bathymetry, coastlines and topography. The information is critical
to understand how and where a tsunami wave will come ashore. NOAA research develops models that
forecast tsunami impacts and create inundation maps of modeled events. NOAA research provides the
forecast models to the NOAA’s Weather Service forecasters and the inundation models and maps to state
and national planner and emergency managers. NOAA monitors sea height through a network of buoys
and tide gauges. This information is critical to understand the height a tsunami wave may be when it
comes ashore. NOAA completed the original 6-buoy operational array in 2001 and expanded to a full
network of 30 stations in March 2008 which includes the Gulf of Mexico.
According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), since 1900, over 200 tsunami
events have affected the coasts of the United States and its territories, causing more than 500 deaths.
Tsunami events are well documented in the Pacific Ocean Basin. Tsunamis have also occurred in the Gulf
of Mexico. In 1991, a magnitude 7.6 earthquake in Costa Rica produced a six foot high tsunami that
flooded nearly 1,000 feet inland on the Caribbean side of the country. The Caribbean also has a number
Appendix A: Low Risk and Manmade Hazards
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 5
of active submarine volcanoes and fault systems that are capable of producing large earthquakes like that
in Haiti, which could generate a tsunami. There are no recorded occurrences of tsunami impacts in
Jefferson County.
The National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program produced an assessment in August 2008 that assigned
a “very low” hazard classification for the U.S. Gulf Coast based on previous frequency and local earthquake
probability. Probability of future events is considered unlikely. Overall vulnerability to tsunami is
considered very low based on the remote potential for causal.
Earthquake
An earthquake is a sudden motion or trembling of the earth caused by an abrupt release of stored energy
in the rocks beneath the earth’s surface. The energy released results in vibrations known as seismic waves
that are responsible for the trembling and shaking of the ground during an earthquake. Ground motion is
expressed as peak ground acceleration (PGA). PGA is expressed as a percent of gravity or “g”.
Earthquakes are typically described in terms of magnitude and intensity. The traditional measurement of
amplitude of the seismic wave through the assignment of a single number to quantify the amount of
seismic energy released by an earthquake is the Richter scale. The intensity of how strong the shock was
felt at a particular location is the Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) scale. The scale quantifies the effects
of an earthquake on the Earth’s surface, humans, objects of nature and man-made structures. Table A-2
below is a combined earthquake magnitude and intensity comparison from the United States Geological
Survey.
Table A-2. Earthquake Magnitude/Intensity Comparison1
PGA
(% g)
Magnitude
(Richter)
Intensity
(MMI) Description
<0.17 1.0 - 3.0 I I. Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable
conditions.
0.17 - 1.4 3.0 - 3.9 II - III
II. Felt only by a few persons at rest, especially on upper
floors of buildings.
III. Felt quite noticeably by persons indoors, especially on
upper floors of buildings. Many people do not recognize
it as an earthquake. Standing motor cars may rock
slightly. Vibrations similar to the passing of a truck.
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 motor cars rocked
noticeably.
V. Felt by nearly everyone; many awakened. Some dishes,
windows broken. Unstable objects overturned. Pendulum
clocks may stop.
1 Source: Wald, D., et al., 1999, “Relationship between Peak Ground Acceleration, Peak Ground Motion, and Modified Mercalli
Intensity in California,” Earthquake Spectra, v. 15, p. 557 – 564.
USGS Magnitude/Intensity Comparison http://earthquake.usgs.gov/learn/topics/mag_vs_int.php
Appendix A: Low Risk and Manmade Hazards
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 6
PGA
(% g)
Magnitude
(Richter)
Intensity
(MMI) Description
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 and
construction; slight to moderate in well-built ordinary
structures; considerable damage in poorly built or badly
designed structures; some chimneys broken.
34 - 124 6.0 - 6.9 VII - IX
VIII. Damage slight in specially designed structures;
considerable damage in ordinary substantial buildings
with partial collapse. Damage great in poorly built
structures. Fall of chimneys, factory stacks, columns,
monuments, walls. Heavy furniture overturned.
IX. Damage considerable in specially designed structures;
well-designed frame structures thrown out of plumb.
Damage great in substantial buildings, with partial
collapse. Buildings shifted off foundations.
>124 7.0 and
higher
VIII or
higher
X. Some well-built wooden structures destroyed; most
masonry and frame structures destroyed with
foundations. Rails bent.
XI. Few, if any (masonry) structures remain standing.
Bridges destroyed. Rails bent greatly
XII. Damage total. Lines of sight and level are distorted.
Objects thrown into the air.
There are no recorded earthquakes with epicenters in Jefferson County, and the planning area is roughly
250 miles from the region of recent (minor) seismic activity in Northeast Texas. The annual probability for
earthquakes capable of structural damage in the planning area is considered very low. The magnitude or
intensity of a potential earthquake in the planning area based on historical data is an Intensity level of I
or II (Table A-2). Based on the probability of future occurrences and magnitude/severity the overall
vulnerability is considered low and the hazard is considered to have a negligible impact on the planning
area.
Water Contamination
Hazard Profile
Water Contamination is the introduction of point and non-point source pollutants into public ground
and/or surface water supplies. Microbiological and chemical contaminants can enter water supplies.
Chemicals can leach through soils from leaking underground storage tanks, feedlots and waste disposal
sites. Human wastes and pesticides can also be carried into surface waters during high water events.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is the federal agency authorized to protect the environment
and public health. Congress writes the laws and the President signs them into law. The EPA is a regulatory
agency with the duty to prepare administrative rules and procedures on how these laws and Presidential
Executive Orders will be implemented and enforced.
The Clean Water Act establishes the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into the waters
of the United States and regulating quality standards for surface waters. Under the Clean Water Act, the
Appendix A: Low Risk and Manmade Hazards
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 7
EPA has implemented pollution control programs. The Clean Water Act made it unlawful to discharge any
pollutant from a point source into navigable waters, unless a permit was obtained. The EPA’s National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program controls discharges.
Further, the EPA is the federal authority to protect drinking water. The Safe Water Drinking Act was
established to protect the quality of drinking water in the U.S. The law focuses on all water actually or
potentially designed for drinking use, whether from above ground or underground sources. The Act
authorizes the EPA to establish minimum standards to protect tap water and requires all owners or
operators of public water systems to comply with these primary health related standards2.
States must adopt rules that are at least as restrictive as the Clean Water Act and the Safe Water Drinking
Act standards. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality establishes State rules and regulations
for public water systems and also specifies construction and operational standards for public water supply
systems.
Disasters such as hurricanes and floods can disrupt drinking water supply and wastewater disposal
systems. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality provides guidance on remediation of public
water supply systems after potential contamination due to natural disasters. Further, the Jefferson County
Emergency Management Plan provides guidance regarding emergency water supplies after a disaster.
Location
Potential and ongoing water contamination is present along all waterways and in the groundwater supply.
Per a 1990 report by the Texas Water Development Board, surface water supplies the majority of
municipal and industrial demands, which make up the largest portion of total water use in the planning
area. Ground-water needs, including all municipal requirements in Jefferson County, were met almost
entirely from the lower Chicot Aquifer.
Extent
In general, levels of water contamination can influence community health when considered severe.
Accordingly, magnitude and severity of water contamination is considered Critical by the Team, with
potential public safety risks present and the potential for extended loss of function for water processing
facilities. The high concentration of hazardous materials processing and shipping facilities in the planning
area, low topographic gradient influencing river discharge rates and levels of dissolved oxygen, and
relatively high total maximum daily load readings (TMDLs) in monitored surface water, all contribute to
the magnitude and severity assessment by the Team.
Previous Occurrences
According to the Evaluation of Water Resources of Orange and Eastern Jefferson Counties (Texas Water
Development Board, 1990), the main ground-water quality problem is elevated chloride concentrations
caused by saline-water encroachment in areas of concentrated pumpage, although from the late 1970's
to 1988, chloride concentrations have not changed significantly due to decreased ground-water
withdrawals.
2 Source: EPA
Appendix A: Low Risk and Manmade Hazards
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 8
Probability of Future Events
Considering ongoing problems and previous water quality monitoring results, probability of future
occurrence is considered highly likely.
Vulnerability and Impact
Water contamination can have a “substantial” impact. Overall vulnerability for the planning area could
result in multiple deaths during extreme contamination events.
Dam Failure
Hazard Profile
Dams are water storage, control, or diversion structures that impound water upstream in reservoirs. Dam
failure can take several forms, including a collapse of or breach in the structure. While most dams have
storage volumes small enough that failures have few or no repercussions, dams storing large amounts can
cause significant flooding downstream. Dam failures can result from any one or a combination of the
following causes:
Prolonged periods of rainfall and flooding, which cause most failures;
Inadequate spillway capacity, resulting in excess overtopping of the embankment;
Internal erosion caused by embankment or foundation leakage or piping;
Improper maintenance, including failure to remove trees, repair internal seepage problems, or
maintain gates, valves, and other operational components;
Improper design or use of improper construction materials;
Failure of upstream dams in the same drainage basin;
Landslides into reservoirs, which cause surges that result in overtopping;
High winds, which can cause significant wave action and result in substantial erosion;
Destructive acts of terrorism; and,
Earthquakes, which typically cause longitudinal cracks at the tops of the embankments, leading
to structural failure.
Benefits provided by dams include water supplies for drinking, irrigation and industrial uses, flood control,
hydroelectric power, recreation, and navigation. At the same time, dams also represent a risk to public
safety. Dams require ongoing maintenance, monitoring, safety inspections, and sometimes even
rehabilitation to continue safe service.
Location
For dams in Jefferson County, location, volume, elevation, condition, and classification information were
factored into the risk ranking in Figure A-2, which illustrates general locations for each dam in the area.
Currently, there are 3 dams located in Jefferson County and all 3 are classified as “low-hazard” dams. The
dams are listed in Table A-3, along with regulation information.
Appendix A: Low Risk and Manmade Hazards
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 9
Figure A-2. Dam Locations in Jefferson County
Appendix A: Low Risk and Manmade Hazards
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 10
Table A-3. Jefferson County Dam Survey
JURISDICTION DAM NAME HEIGHT
(ft.)
STORAGE
(Acre ft.)
POTENTIAL
HAZARD
CLASSIFICATION
EXTENT
Port Arthur Port Arthur Raw Water Reservoir
Levee 14 300 Low No Impact
Jefferson County McBride Lake Levee 7 450 Low No Impact
Jefferson County Spindletop Weir Saltwater Barrier 12 375 Low No Impact
Extent
The extent or magnitude of a dam failure event is described in terms of the classification of damages that
could result from a dam’s failure, not the probability of failure. Table A-4 represents the average extent
or magnitude of a dam failure event that could be expected for the Jefferson County planning area,
including all participating jurisdictions. The “Extent Classification” column was determined by taking the
average of dams in the jurisdiction and weighing low hazard dams as a 1, significant hazard dams as a 2,
and high hazard dams as a 3 based on the potential severity, warning time, and duration.
Table A-4. Extent by Jurisdiction
JURISDICTION DAMS &
CLASSIFICATION
EXTENT
CLASSIFICATION LEVEL OF INTENSITY TO MITIGATE
Jefferson County 2 – Low None
The county has 2 low hazard dams with
limited storage capacity. Loss of life is
not expected and any economic loss
would be negligible.
Beaumont None None There are no dams or inundation areas
located within the city limits.
Bevil Oaks None None There are no dams or inundation areas
located within the city limits.
China None None There are no dams or inundation areas
located within the city limits.
Groves None None There are no dams or inundation areas
located within the city limits.
Nederland None None There are no dams or inundation areas
located within the city limits.
Nome None None There are no dams or inundation areas
located within the city limits.
Port Arthur 1 – Low None
The city has 1 low hazard dam with
limited storage capacity. Loss of life is
not expected and any economic loss
would be negligible.
Port Neches None None There are no dams or inundation areas
located within the city limits.
Appendix A: Low Risk and Manmade Hazards
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 11
Historical Occurrences
The State of Texas has not experienced loss of life or extensive economic damage due to a dam failure
since the first half of the 20th century. However, there may be many incidents that are not reported and,
therefore, the actual number of incidents is likely to be greater.
There has not been a recorded dam failure event for the entire Jefferson County planning area, including
all participating jurisdictions.
Probability of Future Events
No historical events of dam failure have been recorded in the Jefferson County planning area, though the
risk of dam failure is monitored closely. Due to the lack of historical occurrences, the probability of a future
event is unlikely, meaning an event is possible in the next 10 years.
Vulnerability and Impact
There are 3 dams in the Jefferson County planning area, and all 3 dams are considered low hazard dams.
Low hazard dams are those at which failure or mis-operation probably would not result in loss of human
life and cause limited economic and/or environmental losses. Damage to agriculture and structures near
both dams is considered negligible due to the small size and limited capacity of each dam.
The potential severity of a dam failure in the planning area, including the SETRPC and all participating
jurisdictions, would be “Limited.” As a result, a dam breach could result in injuries that are treatable with
first aid, with facilities being shut down for 24 hours or less, and less than 10 percent of property destroyed
or damaged.
Hazardous Materials Incident (Fixed and Mobile)
Hazard Profile
In a hazardous materials incident, solid, liquid, and/or gaseous contaminants may be released from fixed
or mobile containers, although this profile focuses on fixed sites. Weather conditions will directly affect
how the hazard develops.
The location of the most concentrated and potentially hazardous materials in the planning area are: fixed
industrial facilities including oil and gas wells and storage facilities, pipelines, large and small industrial
complexes that use or process chemicals or petroleum products, highways, and railroads. Numerous other
sources are also present across the planning area, including storage areas for insecticides, herbicides, and
fertilizers, wrecking yards, retail fueling stations, and abandoned industrial facilities. Within regard to
pipeline locations, roughly one third (1/3) of the 367,000 linear miles of pipelines transporting hazardous
materials in the State of Texas are located in the southeast region of the state. This concentration of
pipelines in the region that includes Jefferson County relates to a corresponding high probability of
hazardous material transport accidents.
The Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) is a publicly available database from the federal Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) that contains information on toxic chemical releases and other waste
management activities reported annually by certain covered industry groups, as well as federal facilities.
This inventory was established under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986
(EPCRA) and expanded by the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990. Each year, facilities that meet certain
activity thresholds must report their releases and other waste management activities for listed toxic
Appendix A: Low Risk and Manmade Hazards
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 12
chemicals to EPA and to their state or tribal entity. A facility must report if it meets the following three
criteria:
The facility falls within one of the following industrial categories: manufacturing; metal mining;
coal mining; electric generating facilities that combust coal and/or oil; chemical wholesale
distributors; petroleum terminals and bulk storage facilities; RCRA Subtitle C treatment, storage
and disposal (TSD) facilities; and solvent recovery services.
Have 10 or more full-time employee equivalents.
Manufactures or processes more than 25,000 pounds or otherwise uses more than 10,000 pounds
of any listed chemical during the calendar year. Persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT)
chemicals are subject to different thresholds of 10 pounds, 100 pounds or 0.1 grams, depending
on the chemical.
Tier 2 data is a publicly available database from the Texas Department of State Health Services Tier 2
Chemical Reporting Program. Under the community right-to-know program laws upheld at the state and
federal level, all facilities which store significant quantities of hazardous chemicals must share this
information with state and local emergency responders and planners. Facilities in Texas share this
information by filing annual hazardous chemical inventories with the state, with Local Emergency Planning
Committees (LEPCs) and with local fire departments. The Texas Tier 2 Reports contain facility
identification information and detailed chemical data about hazardous chemicals stored at the facility.
A facility must report if it meets the following criteria:
Any company using chemicals that could present a physical or health hazard must report them,
according to Tier 2 requirements.
If an industry has an OSHA deemed hazardous chemical that exceeds the appropriate threshold
at a certain point in time, that chemical must be reported. These chemicals may be on the list of
356 Extremely Hazardous Substances (EHS) or could be one of the 650,000 reportable hazardous
substances (not on the EHS list). This reporting format is for a "snapshot in time." EHS chemicals
have to be reported if the quantity is either greater than 500 pounds, or if the Threshold
Planning Quantity (TPQ) amount is less than 500 pounds.
Location
The locations of available TRI and Tier 2 toxic sites in the Jefferson County planning area are shown below
in Table A-5.
Table A-5. Toxic Sites in Jefferson County3
JURISDICTION FACILITY NAME ADDRESS NUMBER OF
CHEMICALS
JEFFERSON COUNTY CHEMTREAT INC 4200 TWIN CITY HWY 2
JEFFERSON COUNTY CHEMOURS BEAUMONT PLANT 5470 N TWIN CITY HWY 14
JEFFERSON COUNTY LUCITE INTERNATIONAL INC 6350 N TWIN CITY HWY 11
3 Source: EPA Toxic Release Inventory
Appendix A: Low Risk and Manmade Hazards
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 13
JURISDICTION FACILITY NAME ADDRESS NUMBER OF
CHEMICALS
JEFFERSON COUNTY SASOL CHEMICALS (USA) LLC HWY 124 & ROLLINS RD 2
JEFFERSON COUNTY PHILLIPS 66 PIPELINE LLC-
BEAUMONT TERMINAL
HWY 366 1/2 MILE E OF
INTERSECTION W HWY 347 14
BEAUMONT MARTIN OPERATING PTNR-NECHES 1 GULF STATES RD 4
BEAUMONT MARTIN OPERATING PTNR-
STANOLIND 10 SULFUR PLANT RD 4
BEAUMONT EASTHAM FORGE INC. 1050 NECHES ST. 5
BEAUMONT GE WATER & PROCESS
TECHNOLOGIES BEAUMONT FACILITY 10658 HWY 90 12
BEAUMONT GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO 11241 INTERSTATE HWY 10 18
BEAUMONT MOBIL CHEMICAL CO BEAUMONT
POLYETHYLENE PLANT 11440 HWY 90 8
BEAUMONT
TOTAL PETROCHEMICALS &
REFINING USA INC-BEAUMONT
PLANT
11455 INTERSTATE HWY 10 2
BEAUMONT TXI OPERATIONS LP-SOUTH READY
MIX PLANT 1250 E FLORIDA ST 1
BEAUMONT CHEMTRADE REFINERY SERVICES INC 1400 OLIN RD 2
BEAUMONT BASF CORP - BEAUMONT 14385 W PORT ARTHUR RD 17
BEAUMONT COLONIAL TANK FARM 14713 W PORT ARTHUR RD 9
BEAUMONT GERDAU AMERISTEEL US INC-
BEAUMONT WIRE OPERATIONS 220 AVE A 1
BEAUMONT TXI OPERATIONS LP-DOLLINGER
READY MIX PLANT 2525 DOLLINGER 1
BEAUMONT DRAGON WESPINE FACILITY 2609 WESPINE RD 1
BEAUMONT LNVA-NORTH REGIONAL TREATMENT
PLANT 2655 GULF STATES RD 24
BEAUMONT EXXONMOBIL OIL CORP BEAUMONT
CHEMICAL PLANT 2775 GULF STATES RD 43
BEAUMONT ARKEMA INC 2810 GULF STATE RD 11
BEAUMONT AZZ GALVANIZING SERVICES-
BEAUMONT 500 INDUSTRIAL RD 2
BEAUMONT FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL COMPLEX 5430 KNAUTH RD 1
BEAUMONT NOV XL SYSTEMS BEAUMONT 5780 HAGNER RD 2
BEAUMONT COASTAL CHEMICAL CO LLC 6534 INDUSTRIAL ROAD 5
BEAUMONT GULFCO FORGE & MACHINE 6817 INDUSTRIAL RD 3
BEAUMONT CB&I-BEAUMONT 850 PINE ST 7
Appendix A: Low Risk and Manmade Hazards
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 14
JURISDICTION FACILITY NAME ADDRESS NUMBER OF
CHEMICALS
BEAUMONT OHMSTEDE LTD 895 N MAIN ST 4
BEAUMONT EXXONMOBIL OIL BEAUMONT
REFINERY E END OF BURT ST 43
PORT ARTHUR AIR PRODUCTS LLC 1801 S GULFWAY DR 43
PORT ARTHUR TXI PORT ARTHUR READY MIX 2.36 M FROM THE INTERX OF
GULFWAY DR & HWY 82 1
PORT ARTHUR CHEVRON PHILLIPS CHEMICAL CO 2001 S GULFWAY DR 21
PORT ARTHUR STANDARD ALLOYS INC (PORT
ARTHUR) 201 W LAKESHORE DR 2
PORT ARTHUR KMTEX LLC 2450 S GULFWAY DR 16
PORT ARTHUR MOTIVA-PORT ARTHUR REFINERY 2555 SAVANNAH AVE 31
PORT ARTHUR OXBOW CALCINING LLC 3901 COKE DOCK RD 7
PORT ARTHUR MOTIVA-PORT ARTHUR TERMINAL 3901 TEXACO ISLAND RD 11
PORT ARTHUR FLINT HILLS RESOURCES PORT
ARTHUR LLC 4241 SAVANNAH AVE 18
PORT ARTHUR TEAM FABRICATORS 650 MAIN AVENUE 1
PORT ARTHUR
TOTAL PETROCHEMICALS &
REFINING USA INC-PORT ARTHUR
REFI
7600 32ND ST 24
PORT ARTHUR VEOLIA ES TECHNICAL SOLUTIONS
LLC PORT ARTHUR FACILITY
HWY 73, 3.5 MILES W OF
TAYLOR BAYOU 207
PORT ARTHUR BASF TOTAL PETROCHEMICALS LLC NE OF INTERSECTION OF
HWY 73 & HWY 366 24
PORT NECHES LION ELASTOMERS LLC 1615 MAIN ST 5
PORT NECHES TPC GROUP 2102 SPUR 136 14
PORT NECHES AIR LIQUIDE LARGE INDUSTRIES US
LP PORT NECHES 2121 PARK ST 1
PORT NECHES CALABRIAN CORP 5500 HWY 366 1
PORT NECHES HUNTSMAN PETROCHEMICAL LLC
PORT NECHES FACILITY 6001 HWY 366 35
PORT NECHES MOTIVA PORT NECHES TERMINAL CORNER SPUR 136 &
GRIGSBY DR 7
Extent
From a hazardous materials incident, the micro-meteorological effects of the buildings and terrain can
alter travel and duration of agents. Shielding in the form of sheltering-in-place can protect people and
property from harmful effects. Non-compliance with fire and building codes, as well as failure to maintain
existing fire and containment features can substantially increase the damage from a hazardous materials
Appendix A: Low Risk and Manmade Hazards
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 15
release. The duration of a hazardous materials incident can range from hours to days. Warning time for
hazardous materials incidents is minimal to none.
Previous Occurrences
Hazardous materials are substances which if released or misused can cause death, serious injury, long-
lasting health effects, and damage to structure and other properties as well as to the environment. Many
products containing hazardous chemicals are used and stored in homes routinely. These products are also
shipped daily on the nation’s highways, railroads, waterways, and pipelines.
A total of 126 transportation incidents have been reported in the Jefferson County planning area over the
last 67 years. The data collected is from 1950 to 2016 and identifies the hazardous materials
transportation incidents as in-transit, loading, and unloading of transport vehicles. A summary of reported
events are listed in Table A-6 below by jurisdiction.
Table A-6. Jefferson County Hazardous Material Incident Events by Jurisdiction4
JURISDICTION NUMBER OF
INCIDENTS INJURIES FATALITIES PROPERTY AND
CROP DAMAGE
Beaumont 1 0 0 $0
Bevil Oaks 0 0 0 $0
China 1 0 0 $440
Groves 0 0 0 $0
Nederland 18 0 0 $99
Nome 2 0 0 $70,585
Port Arthur 169 23 0 $372,529
Port Neches 21 9 1 $7,612
Jefferson County 11 0 0 $135,270
TOTAL LOSSES 223 32 1 $586,535
Probability of Future Events
Based on the historic incident records, the frequency of occurrence is highly likely and an event is probable
in the next year in the Jefferson County planning area.
Vulnerability and Impact
Hazardous materials or toxic releases can have a “substantial” impact. Such events can cause multiple
deaths, completely shut down facilities for 30 days or more, and cause more than 50 percent of affected
properties to be destroyed or suffer major damage.
4 Damages reported in 2016 dollars.
Appendix A: Low Risk and Manmade Hazards
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 16
Terrorism
Hazard Profile
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) categorizes terrorism in the United States as one of two types—
domestic terrorism or international terrorism. Domestic terrorism involves groups or individuals whose
terrorist activities are directed at elements of our government or population without foreign direction.
International terrorism involves groups or individuals whose terrorist activities are foreign-based and/or
directed by countries or groups outside of the United States, or whose activities transcend their national
boundaries.
A terrorist attack can take several forms, depending on the technological means available to the terrorist,
the nature of issue motivating the attack, and the points of weakness of the terrorist’s target. Bombings
are the most frequently used terrorist method in the United States. A terrorist using a chemical or
biological weapon is of particular concern to officials. Special training and equipment is needed in order
to safely manage a Weapons of Mass Destruction incident.
Biological agents are infectious microbes or toxins used to produce illness or death in people, animals or
plants. Biological agents can be dispersed as aerosols or airborne particles. Terrorists may use biological
agents to contaminate food or water, as they are extremely difficult to detect.
Chemical agents kill or incapacitate people, destroy livestock, or ravage crops. Some chemical agents are
odorless and tasteless and are therefore difficult to detect. These chemical agents can have an immediate
effect (a few seconds to a few minutes) or a delayed effect (several hours to several days).
The Department of Defense estimates that as many as 26 nations may possess chemical agents and/or
weapons, and an additional 12 may be seeking to develop them. The Central Intelligence Agency reports
that at least 10 countries are believed to possess or are currently conducting research on biological agents
for weaponization.
Terrorist incidents – as with other natural and technological disasters – involve the application of one or
more modes of harmful force to the built environment. These modes include contamination (as in the
case of chemical, biological radiological or nuclear hazards), energy (explosives, arson, and even
electromagnetic waves), or denial of service (sabotage, infrastructure breakdown, and transportation
service disruption).
Location
There is no distinct geographic boundary to the threat of terrorism. An event is possible throughout the
Jefferson County planning area.
Extent
The Homeland Security Advisory System, issued by the U. S. Department of Homeland Security, previously
used a color-coded terrorism warning system that identified five threat levels. In 2011, the Department
of Homeland Security (DHS) replaced the color-coded alerts of the Homeland Security Advisory System
(HSAS) with the National Terrorism Advisory System (NTAS), designed to more effectively communicate
information about terrorist threats by providing timely, detailed information to the American public.
NTAS now consists of two types of advisories: Bulletins and Alerts. DHS has added Bulletins to the advisory
system to be able to communicate current developments or general trends regarding threats of terrorism.
Appendix A: Low Risk and Manmade Hazards
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 17
NTAS Bulletins permit the Secretary to communicate critical terrorism information that, while not
necessarily indicative of a specific threat against the United States, can reach homeland security partners
or the public quickly, thereby allowing recipients to implement necessary protective measures. Because
DHS may issue NTAS Bulletins in circumstances not warranting a more specific warning, NTAS Bulletins
provide the Secretary with greater flexibility to provide timely information to stakeholders and members
of the public.
When there is specific, credible information about a terrorist threat against the United States, DHS will
share an NTAS Alert with the American public when circumstances warrant doing so. The Alert may
include specific information, if available, about the nature of the threat, including the geographic region,
mode of transportation, or critical infrastructure potentially affected by the threat, as well as steps that
individuals and communities can take to protect themselves and help prevent, mitigate or respond to the
threat. The Alert may take one of two forms: Elevated, if there is credible
threat information, but only general information about timing and target such
that it is reasonable to recommend implementation of protective measures
to thwart or mitigate against an attack; or Imminent, if the threat is believed
credible, specific, and impending in the very near term. Terrorism Advisory
System Alerts are described in Figure A-3.5
The Red Cross also issues Advisory System Recommendations for individuals,
families, neighborhoods, schools and businesses for each alert level. These
may be found at: www.redcross.org.
Heightened periods for terrorism risk are based on intelligence and other
information. A potential terrorist event could devastate the community
physically, economically and psychologically for many years to come. Warning
time for terrorism is minimal to none.
Previous Occurrences
The history of terrorism on United States soil includes the attacks of September
11, 2001, on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in
Washington, D.C. and the ensuing anthrax attacks; the 1995 bombing of the
Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City; and the bombing of the World Trade
Center in 1993.
Jefferson County has not experienced a terrorist act. While complete
prevention of an attack may not be attainable, the County can lessen the
likelihood and/or the potential effects of an incident. The County continues to
improve its readiness to respond to a terrorist incident through participation in
state and federal programs that provide training and equipment for agencies
that would respond to a local terrorist incident, and in exercises that help to
improve agency coordination and test local response plans.
5 Source: Department of Homeland Security, https://www.dhs.gov/national-terrorism-advisory-system
Figure A-3. National
Terrorism Advisory System
Appendix A: Low Risk and Manmade Hazards
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 18
Probability of Future Events
The types, frequencies, and locations of many natural hazards are identifiable and, even in some cases,
predictable, as the laws of physics and nature govern them. Malevolence, however, cannot be forecast
with any accuracy. There is, therefore, some potential for most, if not all, types of intentional terrorist
acts to occur anywhere and at any time.
Vulnerability and Impact
There is no defined geographic boundary for a terrorist event. All of the population, buildings, critical
facilities, infrastructure and lifelines and hazardous materials facilities are considered exposed to the
hazards of terrorism and could potentially be affected.
There are no past local events. Therefore, all assets and facilities are potentially at risk to damages that
may, for the most part, be secondary.
Terrorist events can have a “substantial” severity of impact. They can cause multiple deaths, completely
shut down facilities for 30 days or more, and cause more than 50 percent of affected properties to be
destroyed or suffer major damage.
APPENDIX B: PLANNING TEAM
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
Planning Team Members .............................................................................................................................. 1
Stakeholders ................................................................................................................................................. 2
Planning Team Members
The Jefferson County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 (Plan or Plan Update), was organized using a
direct representative model. An Executive Planning Team from Jefferson County and participating
jurisdictions, shown in Table B-1, was formed to coordinate planning efforts and request input and
participation in the planning process. Table B-2 reflects the Advisory Planning Team, consisting of
representatives from area organizations and departments of the jurisdictions that participated
throughout the planning process. Table B-3 is comprised of member Stakeholders who were invited to
attend meetings to provide Plan Update input. The public were also invited to participate throughout the
planning process. Public outreach efforts and meeting documentation is provided in Appendix E.
Table B-1. Executive Planning Team
ORGANIZATION/JURISDICTION TITLE
Jefferson County Emergency Management Coordinator
City of Beaumont Emergency Management Coordinator
City of Bevil Oaks Mayor/ Floodplain Manager
City of China Mayor
City of Groves Emergency Management Coordinator
City of Nederland Emergency Management Coordinator
City of Nome Mayor
City of Port Arthur Senior Planner
City of Port Neches Emergency Management Coordinator
SETRPC Homeland Security and Emergency Management
Planning Director
Table B-2. Advisory Planning Team
ORGANIZATION/JURISDICTION TITLE
City of Beaumont Community Manager
City of Beaumont Emergency Management Assistant
Appendix B: Planning Team
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 2
ORGANIZATION/JURISDICTION TITLE
City of Beaumont Emergency Specialist
City of Beaumont Police Department Assistant Chief
City of China City Secretary
City of Nederland Police Department Assistant Chief
City of Nome City Secretary
City of Port Arthur Senior Planner
City of Port Arthur Development Services Director
City of Port Arthur Fire Department Emergency Management Coordinator
City of Port Arthur Police Department Emergency Management Coordinator
City of Port Neches Fire Department Emergency Management Coordinator
City of Taylor Landing Mayor
Jefferson County Assistant Emergency Management Coordinator
SETRPC Regional Emergency Planner
Stakeholders
The following groups listed in Table B-3 represent a list of Jefferson County organizations who attended
meetings, public meetings and workshops throughout the planning process. Invited organizations and
stakeholders participated and were integral to providing comments and data for the Plan Update. For a
list of attendees at meetings, please see Appendix F1.
Table B-3. Stakeholders
AGENCY/ORGANIZATION TITLE
Colonial Pipeline Manager
Lamar University Assistant Professor
Local Emergency Planning Committee Chairperson
Jefferson County Drainage District 7 Graduate Engineer
Jefferson County Drainage District 7 Supervisor
RPS Senior Consulting Engineer
1 Information contained in Appendix F is exempt from public release under the Freedom of Information1 Act (FOIA).
Appendix B: Planning Team
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 3
AGENCY/ORGANIZATION TITLE
South East Texas Disaster Recovery Group Executive Director
Texas House of Representatives Texas US Representative
Texas State Senate Texas State Senator
United Way Executive Director
City of Kountze Emergency Management Coordinator
City of Lumberton City Manager
City of Rose Hill Acres Mayor
City of Silsbee Emergency Management Coordinator
City of Silsbee Assistant Emergency Management
Coordinator
City of Sour Lake City Manager
City of Sour Lake Police Chief
Hardin County Emergency Management Coordinator
Hardin County Floodplain Administrator
South East Texas Regional Planning
Commission
Homeland Security and Emergency
Management Planning Director
City of Bridge City Emergency Management Coordinator
City of Orange Deputy Chief/Emergency
Management Coordinator
City of Pinehurst Emergency Management Coordinator
City of Pine Forest Emergency Management Coordinator
City of Rose City City Secretary
City of Vidor Police Department Emergency Management Coordinator
City of West Orange Emergency Management Coordinator
Orange County Tax Assessor-Collector
Orange County Office of Emergency
Management
Deputy Emergency Management
Coordinator
Orange County Office of Emergency
Management Emergency Management Coordinator
APPENDIX C: PUBLIC SURVEY RESULTS
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
Overview ....................................................................................................................................................... 1
Public Survey Results .................................................................................................................................... 2
Overview
Jefferson County prepared a public survey that requested public opinion on a wide range of questions
relating to natural hazards. The survey was made available on websites including the Jefferson County
Office of Emergency Management Facebook page as well as the SETRPC webpage. This survey link was
also distributed at public meetings throughout the planning process.
A total of 69 surveys were collected, the results of which are analyzed in Appendix C. The purpose of the
survey was twofold: 1) to solicit public input during the planning process, and 2) to help the jurisdictions
identify any potential actions or problem areas.
The following survey results depict the percentage of responses for each answer. Similar responses have
been summarized for questions that did not provide a multiple-choice answer or that required an
explanation.
Appendix C: Public Survey Results
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 2
Public Survey Results
1. Please state the jurisdiction (city and community) where you reside.
2. A. Have you ever experienced or been impacted by a disaster?
55%
2%2%
6%
4%0%
4%
7%
20%
Beaumont
Bevil Oaks
China
Groves
Nederland
Nome (0)
Port Arthur
Port Neches
Jefferson County
90%
10%
Yes
No
Appendix C: Public Survey Results
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 3
2. B. If “Yes”, please explain:
3. How concerned are you about the possibility of your community being impacted by a disaster?
100%
Hurricane
54%
46%Extremely Concerned
Somewhat Concerned
Appendix C: Public Survey Results
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 4
4. Please select the one hazard you think is the highest threat to your neighborhood:
5. Please select the one hazard you think is the second highest threat to your neighborhood:
2%
4%
35%
52%
1%
3%3%
Dam Failure
Drought (0)
Extreme Heat
Flood
Hail (0)
Hurricane
Lightning
Thunderstorm Wind
Tornado
Wildfire (0)
Winter Storm (0)
4%
2%
4%
32%
0%
37%
5%
11%
4%
1%
Dam Failure
Drought
Extreme Heat
Flood
Hail
Hurricane
Lightning
Thunderstorm Wind
Tornado
Wildfire
Winter Storm
Appendix C: Public Survey Results
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 5
6. A. Are there hazards not listed above that you think is a wide-scale threat to your
neighborhood?
6. B. If “Yes”, please explain:
17%
33%33%
17%
Terrorism
Chemical Explosion
Riots/Crime
Mosquitoes
10%
90%
Yes
No
Appendix C: Public Survey Results
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 6
7. Is your home located in a floodplain?
8. Do you have flood insurance?
33%
67%
Yes
No
55%
39%
6%
Yes
No
I don't know
Appendix C: Public Survey Results
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 7
9. If you do not have flood insurance, why not?
10. A. Have you taken any actions to make your home or neighborhood more resistant to hazards?
38%
35%
10%
10%
7%
Not located in a floodplain
Too expensive
Not necessary because it never
floods
Not necessary because I'm elevated
or otherwise protected
Never really considered it
52%
48%Yes
No
Appendix C: Public Survey Results
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 8
10. B. What have you done?
11. Are you interested in making your home or neighborhood more resistant to hazards?
36%
32%
29%
3%
Home Improvements
Improve Drainage, Elevation of
Structure, Land
Debris, Brush, Litter, Tree Clearance
Carry Insurance
90%
10%
Yes
No
Appendix C: Public Survey Results
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 9
12. A. What is the most effective way for you to receive information about how to make your home
and neighborhood more resistant to hazards?
12. B. If other, please specify.
8
23
14
42
28
11 11
7
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
60%20%
20%
Email
Text
Facebook
Appendix C: Public Survey Results
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 10
13. In your opinion, what are some steps your local government could take to reduce or eliminate
the risk of future hazard damages in your neighborhood?
14. Are there any other issues regarding the reduction of risk and loss associated with hazards or
disasters in the community that you think are important?
45%
7%
32%
13%
3%
Levee/Drainage Improvement
Flood Ordinance Enforcement
Planning/Public Education/
Outreach
Tree Trimming
Evacuation Route/Plans
12%
12%
25%
13%
38%
Contingency planning
Prevention/awareness
Evacuation planning
Dishonest post-disaster
contractors
Chemical spills/explosions
Appendix C: Public Survey Results
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 11
15. A number of community-wide activities can reduce our risk from hazards. In general, these
activities fall into one of the following six broad categories. Please tell us how important you
think each one is for your community to consider pursuing.
Prevention / Local Plans & Regulations - Administrative or regulatory actions that influence the way land
is developed and buildings are built. Examples include planning and zoning, building codes, open space
preservation, and floodplain regulations.
Property Protection - Actions that involve the modification of existing buildings to protect them from a
hazard or removal from the hazard area. Examples include acquisition, relocation, elevation, structural
retrofits, and storm shutters.
Natural Resource Protection - Actions that in addition to minimizing hazard losses also preserve or restore
the functions of natural systems. Examples include: floodplain protection, habitat preservation, slope
stabilization, riparian buffers, and forest management.
Structural Projects - Actions intended to lessen the impact of a hazard by modifying the natural
progression of the hazard. Examples include dams, levees, seawalls detention / retention basins, channel
modification, retaining walls and storm sewers.
Emergency Services - Actions that protect people and property during and immediately after a hazard
event. Examples include warning systems, evacuation planning, emergency response training, and
protection of critical facilities or systems.
Public Education and Awareness - Actions to inform citizens about hazards and techniques they can use
to protect themselves and their property. Examples include outreach projects, school education
programs, library materials and demonstration events.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Prevention Property
Protection
Natural
Resource
Protection
Structural
Projects
Emergency
Services
Public
Education
and
Awareness
Very Important
Somewhat Important
Not Important
APPENDIX D: CRITICAL FACILITIES
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
Overview ....................................................................................................................................................... 1
Critical Facilities ............................................................................................................................................ 2
Overview
This Appendix is For Official Use Only (FOUO) and may be exempt from public release under Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA). Figures D-1 through D-9 locates all critical facilities that were included in the risk
assessment. Mapped facilities were provided by Jefferson County Planning Team members. Table D-1
notes the critical facilities by type.
Appendix D: Critical Facilities
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 2
Critical Facilities
Figure D-1. Critical Facilities in Jefferson County
Appendix D: Critical Facilities
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 3
Table D-1. Critical Facilities by Type in Jefferson County
TYPE NUMBER
Fire Stations 10
Police Stations 6
Hospitals 9
Schools 68
Port/Authority 4
SETRPC 1
Airports 1
Appendix D: Critical Facilities
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 4
Figure D-2. Critical Facilities in City of Beaumont
Appendix D: Critical Facilities
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 5
Figure D-3. Critical Facilities in City of Bevil Oaks
Appendix D: Critical Facilities
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 6
Figure D-4. Critical Facilities in City of China
Appendix D: Critical Facilities
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 7
Figure D-5. Critical Facilities in Groves
Appendix D: Critical Facilities
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 8
Figure D-6. Critical Facilities in City of Nederland
Appendix D: Critical Facilities
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 9
Figure D-7. Critical Facilities in Nome
Appendix D: Critical Facilities
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 10
Figure D-8. Critical Facilities in City of Port Arthur
Appendix D: Critical Facilities
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 11
Figure D-9. Critical Facilities in City of Port Neches
APPENDIX E: DAM LOCATIONS
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
Overview ....................................................................................................................................................... 1
Dam Locations ............................................................................................................................................... 1
Overview
Appendix E is For Official Use Only (FOUO) and may be exempt from public release under the Freedom
of Information Act (FOIA).
Table E-1 below reflects all dams that are located in Jefferson County. This list includes High, Significant,
and Low Hazard Dams.
Dam Locations
Table E-1. Listing of Jefferson County Dam Locations and Storage Capacities
JURISDICTION LATITUDE LONGITUDE HEIGHT (Ft.) STORAGE (Acre
Feet)
Jefferson County 29.90444 -93.96833 14 300
Jefferson County 29.67051 -94.34415 7 450
Jefferson County 29.7146 -94.31468 12 375
APPENDIX F: MEETING DOCUMENTATION
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
Workshop Documentation ............................................................................................................................ 1
Public Meeting Documentation .................................................................................................................... 8
Public Notices ................................................................................................................................................ 9
Workshop Documentation
Appendix F is For Official Use Only (FOUO) and may be exempt from public release under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA).
Jefferson County held a series of Planning Team workshops: a Kickoff Workshop on March 30, 2016, a Risk
Assessment Workshop on June 1, 2016, and a Mitigation Workshop on August 24, 2016. At each of these
workshops members of the Planning Team were informed of the planning process, expressed opinions,
and volunteered information. SETPRC hosted three public meetings (one following each workshop). The
sign-in sheets for each workshop and public meeting are included below. For more details on the
workshops and planning process, see Section 2.
Appendix F: Meeting Documentation
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 2
Figure F-1. SETPRC Kickoff Workshop, 03.30.16
Appendix F: Meeting Documentation
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 3
Appendix F: Meeting Documentation
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 4
Figure F-2. SETPRC Risk Assessment Workshop, 06.01.16
Appendix F: Meeting Documentation
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 5
Appendix F: Meeting Documentation
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 6
Figure F-3. SETPRC Mitigation Actions Workshop, 08.24.16
Appendix F: Meeting Documentation
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 7
Appendix F: Meeting Documentation
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 8
Public Meeting Documentation
As discussed in Section 2, a series of three public meetings were held in conjunction with each of the
SETRPC workshops. Documentation in the form of sign-in sheets for each of the meetings follows.
Figure F-4. SETPRC Public Kickoff Workshop, 03.30.16
Figure F-5. SETPRC Public Risk Assessment Workshop, 06.01.16
Appendix F: Meeting Documentation
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 9
Figure F-6. SETPRC Public Mitigation Actions Workshop, 08.24.16
Public Notices
Invitations to take the public survey and public notices to announce Jefferson County's participation in
the Plan Update development process were posted on various websites and on Facebook as shown in
Figures F-7 through F-12.
Appendix F: Meeting Documentation
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 10
Figure F-7. Public Notice, Jefferson County Drainage District No. 7 Web Page, HMAP Update
Appendix F: Meeting Documentation
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 11
Figure F-8. Public Notice, Jefferson County Office of Emergency Management Facebook Page, Survey
Posting
Appendix F: Meeting Documentation
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 12
Figure F-9. Public Notice, South East Texas Regional Planning Commission Web Page,
03.30.16 Public Meeting
Appendix F: Meeting Documentation
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 13
Figure F-10. Public Notice, South East Texas Regional Planning Commission Calendar Posting, 06.01.16
Public Meeting and Survey Invitations
Appendix F: Meeting Documentation
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 14
Appendix F: Meeting Documentation
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 15
Figure F-11. Public Notice, South East Texas Regional Planning Commission Web Page,
06.01.16 Public Meeting and Survey Invitations
Appendix F: Meeting Documentation
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 16
Figure F-12. Public Notice, SETRPC Webpage Posting, 08.24.16 Public Meeting and Survey Invitations
APPENDIX G: CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT
MAINTAINING A SAFE, SECURE, AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY
Overview ....................................................................................................................................................... 1
Jefferson County Multi-Jurisdictional Capability Assessment ...................................................................... 2
Overview
The Planning Team completed a Capability Assessment Survey at the beginning of the planning process.
The completed Capability Assessment Checklist, included in Appendix G, provides information on existing
policies, plans, and regulations for Jefferson County and the participating jurisdictions.
A Capability Assessment is an integral component of the Plan Update development process. The
Capability Assessment serves to evaluate a community’s existing planning and regulatory capabilities to
support implementation of the Plan’s Mitigation Strategy Objectives.
Each community has a unique set of capabilities including policies, programs, staff, funding, and other
resources available to accomplish hazard mitigation objectives and reduce long-term vulnerability. The
Planning Team identified existing capabilities in each jurisdiction that currently reduce disaster losses or
could be used to reduce losses in the future, and capabilities that inadvertently increase risks in the
community.
Appendix G: Capability Assessment
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 2
Jefferson County Multi-Jurisdictional Capability Assessment
CAPABILITY CHECKLIST
Je
f
f
e
r
s
o
n
C
o
u
n
t
y
Ci
t
y
o
f
B
e
a
u
m
o
n
t
Ci
t
y
o
f
B
e
v
i
l
O
a
k
s
Ci
t
y
o
f
C
h
i
n
a
Ci
t
y
o
f
G
r
o
v
e
s
Ci
t
y
o
f
N
e
d
e
r
l
a
n
d
Ci
t
y
o
f
N
o
m
e
Ci
t
y
o
f
P
o
r
t
A
r
t
h
u
r
Ci
t
y
o
f
P
o
r
t
N
e
c
h
e
s
SE
T
R
P
C
Planning/Regulatory Tool
Hazard Mitigation Plan X X X X X X X X X X
Comprehensive Land Use Plan X X X X X
Stormwater Management Plan/Ordinance X X X X X X X
Emergency Operations Plan X X X X X X X
Capital Improvements Plan X X X X X X
Floodplain Management Plan X X X X X X X X
Flood Response Plan X X X X X
Historic Preservation Plan X X X
Continuity of Operations Plan X X X X X X
Evacuation Plan X X X X X X X
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) X X X X X X X X X
NFIP Community Rating System X X X
NFIP Floodplain Ordinance X X X X X X X X X
Building Code X X X X X X X X
Fire Code X X X X X X X
Other Plans
Administrative and Technical Capability
Planners X X X X
Appendix G: Capability Assessment
Jefferson County | Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017 | Page 3
CAPABILITY CHECKLIST
Je
f
f
e
r
s
o
n
C
o
u
n
t
y
Ci
t
y
o
f
B
e
a
u
m
o
n
t
Ci
t
y
o
f
B
e
v
i
l
O
a
k
s
Ci
t
y
o
f
C
h
i
n
a
Ci
t
y
o
f
G
r
o
v
e
s
Ci
t
y
o
f
N
e
d
e
r
l
a
n
d
Ci
t
y
o
f
N
o
m
e
Ci
t
y
o
f
P
o
r
t
A
r
t
h
u
r
Ci
t
y
o
f
P
o
r
t
N
e
c
h
e
s
SE
T
R
P
C
Engineers X X X X X X
Emergency Manager X X X X X X X
Floodplain Manager X X X X X X X
Personnel skilled in Geographic
Information Systems (GIS) X X X X
Resource development staff or grant
writers X X X X
Financial Resources
Capital Improvement Programming X X X
Community Development Block Grants
(CDBG) X X X X X X
Stormwater Utility Fees X
Development Impact Fees
Partnering Agreements or
Intergovernmental Agreements X X X
Other