# 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/tribal%3Aconfederated_colville%3Afc2f85f447b853fd ## Record - **Collection:** Tribal code - **Document type:** Tribal code ## Text 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 8 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 PLAN GOALS & OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................................................9 PLAN ORGANIZATION .................................................................................................................................9 PLAN PURPOSE ...........................................................................................................................................10 HAZARD MITIGATION ................................................................................................................................. 10 SCOPE .........................................................................................................................................................12 AUTHORITIES ..............................................................................................................................................12 CHAPTER 2. PLANNING PROCESS ......................................................................................................................... 14 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 PLANNING PROCESS ...................................................................................................................................14 LOCAL HMP PLANNING SCHEDULE, MEETINGS, & MITIGATION WORKSHOPS ...........................................15 PUBLIC AND STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT ...............................................................................................15 COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES, PARTNERS, AND STAKEHOLDERS ..............................................18 EQUITY CONSIDERATIONS FOR UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES.................................................................19 EXISTING PLANS, STUDIES, REPORTS AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION REVIEWED FOR THE PLAN .............20 CHAPTER 3. COLVILLE RESERVATION PROFILE ...................................................................................................... 23 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 3.10 3.11 3.12 3.13 3.14 3.15 3.16 LOCATION ...................................................................................................................................................23 TOPOGRAPHY & VEGETATION .................................................................................................................... 23 NATURAL RESOURCES ................................................................................................................................ 24 CLIMATE .....................................................................................................................................................25 LAND OWNERSHIP, LAND USE, & FUTURE DEVELOPMENT ......................................................................... 25 HISTORY......................................................................................................................................................26 POPULATION & DEMOGRAPHICS ............................................................................................................... 28 HOUSING ....................................................................................................................................................30 ECONOMY ..................................................................................................................................................31 AGRICULTURE .............................................................................................................................................32 TIMBER INDUSTRY ......................................................................................................................................33 EDUCATION ................................................................................................................................................33 VULNERABLE POPULATIONS BELOW POVERTY LEVEL ................................................................................. 34 UTILITIES .....................................................................................................................................................35 COMMUNICATIONS ...................................................................................................................................37 TRANSPORTATION...................................................................................................................................... 40 CHAPTER 4. HAZARD RISK ASSESSMENT .............................................................................................................. 42 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 IDENTIFIED HAZARDS .................................................................................................................................42 DISASTER DECLARATIONS...........................................................................................................................44 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS & CONSIDERATIONS ...................................................................................... 44 HAZARD PROFILE ........................................................................................................................................46 RISK ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY............................................................................................................46 FEMA NRI RISK SCORES ...............................................................................................................................51 OVERALL RISK SCORES ................................................................................................................................54 CHAPTER 5. DROUGHT ......................................................................................................................................... 56 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 HAZARD DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................................56 HAZARD LOCATION ....................................................................................................................................56 HAZARD EXTENT/INTENSITY .......................................................................................................................56 PROBABILITY AND FREQUENCY .................................................................................................................. 58 PAST EVENTS ..............................................................................................................................................59 VULNERABILITY AND IMPACTS ...................................................................................................................60 FEMA NATIONAL RISK INDEX (NRI) ASSESSMENT........................................................................................ 64 2 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan CHAPTER 6. EARTHQUAKE ................................................................................................................................... 67 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 HAZARD DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................................67 HAZARD LOCATION ....................................................................................................................................68 HAZARD EXTENT/INTENSITY .......................................................................................................................69 PROBABILITY AND FREQUENCY .................................................................................................................. 71 PAST EVENTS ..............................................................................................................................................73 VULNERABILITY AND IMPACTS ...................................................................................................................75 FEMA NATIONAL RISK INDEX (NRI) ASSESSMENT........................................................................................ 77 CHAPTER 7. FLOODING ........................................................................................................................................ 79 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 HAZARD DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................................79 HAZARD LOCATION ....................................................................................................................................82 HAZARD EXTENT/INTENSITY .......................................................................................................................88 PROBABILITY AND FREQUENCY .................................................................................................................. 89 PAST EVENTS ..............................................................................................................................................90 VULNERABILITY AND IMPACTS ...................................................................................................................91 FEMA NATIONAL RISK INDEX (NRI) ASSESSMENT........................................................................................ 95 CHAPTER 8. HIGH HAZARD DAMS AND LEVEES .................................................................................................. ..98 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.7 HAZARD DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................................................. .98 HAZARD LOCATION .................................................................................................................................. 100 HAZARD EXTENT/INTENSITY .....................................................................................................................104 PROBABILITY AND FREQUENCY ................................................................................................................106 PAST EVENTS ............................................................................................................................................106 VULNERABILITY AND IMPACTS ................................................................................................................. 106 FEMA NATIONAL RISK INDEX (NRI) ASSESSMENT......................................................................................110 CHAPTER 9. LANDSLIDE ...................................................................................................................................... 111 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 HAZARD DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................................................. 111 HAZARD LOCATION .................................................................................................................................. 112 HAZARD EXTENT/INTENSITY .....................................................................................................................112 PROBABILITY AND FREQUENCY ................................................................................................................113 PAST EVENTS ............................................................................................................................................113 VULNERABILITY AND IMPACTS ................................................................................................................. 115 FEMA NATIONAL RISK INDEX (NRI) ASSESSMENT......................................................................................120 CHAPTER 10. SEVERE SUMMER WEATHER ......................................................................................................... 123 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4 10.5 10.6 10.7 HAZARD DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................................................. 123 HAZARD LOCATION .................................................................................................................................. 125 HAZARD EXTENT/INTENSITY .....................................................................................................................125 PROBABILITY AND FREQUENCY ................................................................................................................131 PAST EVENTS ............................................................................................................................................133 VULNERABILITY AND IMPACTS ................................................................................................................. 135 FEMA NATIONAL RISK INDEX (NRI) ASSESSMENT......................................................................................146 CHAPTER 11. SEVERE WINTER WEATHER ........................................................................................................... 151 11.1 11.2 11.3 11.4 11.5 11.6 HAZARD DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................................................. 151 HAZARD LOCATION .................................................................................................................................. 151 HAZARD EXTENT/INTENSITY .....................................................................................................................151 PROBABILITY AND FREQUENCY ................................................................................................................154 PAST EVENTS ............................................................................................................................................155 VULNERABILITY AND IMPACTS ................................................................................................................. 156 3 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan 11.7 FEMA NATIONAL RISK INDEX (NRI) ASSESSMENT......................................................................................162 CHAPTER 12. AVALANCHE .................................................................................................................................. 165 12.1 12.2 12.3 12.4 12.5 12.6 12.7 HAZARD DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................................................. 165 HAZARD LOCATION .................................................................................................................................. 165 HAZARD EXTENT/INTENSITY .....................................................................................................................166 PROBABILITY AND FREQUENCY ................................................................................................................168 PAST EVENTS ............................................................................................................................................168 VULNERABILITY AND IMPACTS ................................................................................................................. 168 FEMA NATIONAL RISK INDEX (NRI) ASSESSMENT......................................................................................172 CHAPTER 13. VOLCANIC ERUPTION AND ASH .................................................................................................... 174 13.1 13.2 13.3 13.4 13.5 13.6 13.7 HAZARD DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................................................. 174 HAZARD LOCATION .................................................................................................................................. 174 HAZARD EXTENT/INTENSITY .....................................................................................................................175 PROBABILITY AND FREQUENCY ................................................................................................................177 PAST EVENTS ............................................................................................................................................177 VULNERABILITY AND IMPACTS ................................................................................................................. 178 FEMA NATIONAL RISK INDEX (NRI) ASSESSMENT......................................................................................180 CHAPTER 14. WILDFIRE ...................................................................................................................................... 181 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4 14.5 14.6 14.7 HAZARD DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................................................181 HAZARD LOCATION .................................................................................................................................. 182 HAZARD EXTENT/INTENSITY .....................................................................................................................184 PROBABILITY AND FREQUENCY ................................................................................................................186 PAST EVENTS ............................................................................................................................................187 VULNERABILITY AND IMPACTS ................................................................................................................. 190 FEMA NATIONAL RISK INDEX (NRI) ASSESSMENT......................................................................................192 CHAPTER 15. OTHER HAZARDS OF CONCERN ..................................................................................................... 194 15.1 15.2 15.3 15.4 15.5 15.6 15.7 15.8 15.9 15.10 PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY ...................................................................................................................194 REDUCED AIR QUALITY .............................................................................................................................197 ANIMAL DISEASE ......................................................................................................................................200 PLANT DISEASE .........................................................................................................................................203 WIDESPREAD POWER OUTAGE ................................................................................................................205 HAZARDOUS MATERIAL INCIDENT ........................................................................................................... 209 ACTIVE SHOOTER/ACTIVE ASSAILANT ......................................................................................................213 TERRORISM ..............................................................................................................................................215 CYBER ATTACKS ........................................................................................................................................218 GOVERNMENT AND REGULATORY ISSUES ...........................................................................................220 CHAPTER 16. TRIBAL CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................. 223 16.1 16.2 16.3 16.4 16.5 16.6 16.7 16.8 PLANNING AND REGULATORY CAPABILITIES ............................................................................................223 CODE ADMINISTRATION ...........................................................................................................................224 FINANCIAL CAPABILITIES ..........................................................................................................................226 LEGAL AND REGULATORY CAPABILITIES ...................................................................................................226 ADMINISTRATIVE AND TECHNICAL CAPABILITIES & SUPPORT .................................................................. 227 NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE COMPLIANCE & PARTICIPATION ..............................................................228 WARNING, EDUCATION, AND OUTREACH CAPABILITIES ..........................................................................230 PUBLIC SAFETY & RESPONSE CAPABILITIES ............................................................................................... 230 CHAPTER 17. MITIGATION GOALS & CHANGES IN PRIORITY .............................................................................. 243 17.1 MITIGATION GOALS ..................................................................................................................................243 4 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan 17.2 CHANGES IN PRIORITY .............................................................................................................................. 243 CHAPTER 18. MITIGATION STRATEGIES.............................................................................................................. 244 18.1 18.2 18.3 18.4 18.5 18.6 18.7 18.8 MITIGATION ACTION PLAN .......................................................................................................................247 MITIGATION STRATEGY/ACTION TIMELINE PARAMETERS .......................................................................247 MITIGATION STRATEGY/ACTION BENEFIT PARAMETERS ......................................................................... 247 MITIGATION STRATEGY/ACTION ESTIMATED COST PARAMETERS ...........................................................247 MITIGATION STRATEGY/ACTION PRIORITIZATION PROCESS ....................................................................248 MITIGATION PROJECTS .............................................................................................................................249 NEW MITIGATION PROJECTS .................................................................................................................... 250 CURRENT ONGOING MITIGATION PROJECTS ........................................................................................... 328 CHAPTER 19. PLAN MAINTENANCE .................................................................................................................... 367 19.1 19.2 19.3 19.4 19.5 19.6 19.7 19.8 19.9 CONTINUED PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ......................................................................................................... 367 MONITORING, EVALUATING, & UPDATING THE PLAN ..............................................................................367 THE FIVE-YEAR ACTION PLAN ................................................................................................................... 368 ANNUAL TRIBAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING MEETING...................................................................370 FORMAL REVIEW PROCESS ....................................................................................................................... 370 PLAN EVALUATION ...................................................................................................................................371 REVIEW OF MITIGATION ACTIONS............................................................................................................371 MEETING DOCUMENTATION.................................................................................................................... 371 IMPLEMENTATION THROUGH EXISTING PROGRAMS ...............................................................................371 APPENDIX .......................................................................................................................................................... 373 APPENDIX: GLOSSARY............................................................................................................................................374 APPENDIX: PLAN ADOPTION..................................................................................................................................377 APPENDIX: FEMA PLAN APPROVAL........................................................................................................................ 378 APPENDIX: PLAN PARTICIPATION DOCUMENTATION ........................................................................................... 379 5 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan This page was intentionally left blank. 6 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan PART I: PLANNING PROCESS 7 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION The Colville Confederated Tribes land, the incorporated communities that lie within the reservation boundaries, and outlying reservation trust lands are vulnerable to natural, technological, and man-made hazards that have the possibility of causing serious threats to the health, welfare, and security of its residents. The cost of response to and recovery from potential disasters, in terms of potential loss of life or property, can be lessened when attention is turned to mitigating their impacts and effects before they occur or reoccur. This All-Hazard Mitigation Plan seeks to identify hazards and understand their impact on vulnerable populations, community lifelines, and infrastructure. With that understanding, the plan sets forth solutions that, if implemented, have the potential to significantly reduce threat to life and property. The plan is based on the premise that hazard mitigation works. With increased attention to managing natural, technological, and man-made hazards, communities can reduce the threats to citizens and through proper land use and emergency planning can avoid creating new problems in the future. Many solutions can be implemented at minimal cost and social impact. This is not an emergency response or management plan. Certainly, the plan can be used to identify weaknesses and refocus emergency response planning. Enhanced emergency response planning is an important mitigation strategy. However, the focus of this plan is to support better decisionmaking directed toward avoidance of future risk and the implementation of activities or projects that will eliminate or reduce the risk for those that may already have exposure to a hazard threat. The Colville Confederated Tribes All Hazard Mitigation Plan was created with the goal of substantially and permanently reducing the Reservation’s vulnerability to hazards through sound public policy. By increasing public awareness of potential harm, documenting resources for risk reduction and loss prevention, and identifying activities to guide the development of less vulnerable and more sustainable communities, this plan aims to protect citizens, critical facilities, infrastructure, property, and the natural environment. The Colville Reservation is governed by elected Colville Business Council (CBC), under a Tribal Constitution approved in 1938. There are fourteen members, one of whom is chosen as the Chairman. Politically, the Reservation is divided into four districts; council members are elected by district. Inchelium District, Omak District, Keller District and the Nespelem District are the four districts that make up the Colville Reservation. This designation will be the “planning area” throughout this plan. 8 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 1. Colville Reservation District Map 1.1 PLAN GOALS & OBJECTIVES The goals of the All Hazard Mitigation Plan include coordinating with local governments to develop plans and processes that meet the planning components identified in the FEMA Region X Crosswalk document. The overall objective is risk reduction from natural hazards in the state of Washington through implementing and updating the Colville Confederated Tribes mitigation plan. 1.2 • • • • • PLAN ORGANIZATION Part I of the plan provides a general overview of the plan and its planning process and identifies who was involved in revisions of the plan and the process used to develop this particular revision. Part II contains a community profile of the Colville Reservation. Part III provides a brief definition for each natural and man-made hazard. All hazards identified as affecting the Reservation are analyzed and summarized in a hazard profile. Part IV outlines the Mitigation Strategy and identifies the goals, objectives, and mitigation projects. Part V details the plan maintenance process and provides a tentative timeline for updating the plan in the future. The Appendix contains contact information for the planning team, meetings, public participation, and plan adoption and endorsement forms. 9 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan 1.3 PLAN PURPOSE This plan exists to identify natural and man-made hazards and threats to the Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT), prepare mitigation management strategies to address those threats, develop shortterm and long-term goals and objectives for mitigation planning, and to fulfill federal, state, and tribal hazard mitigation planning obligations. The intention of this plan is to enhance awareness of and provide mitigation strategies for elected officials, agencies, and the public and develop actions which will minimize negative outcomes to Colville Reservation’s community members, the economy, and the environment due to potential natural and man-made hazards and threats. The well-being of the Colville Reservation rests on reducing risks to life and property in the event of an emergency/disaster. PUBLIC DEFINITION FOR THE COLVILLE CONFEDERATED TRIBES ALL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN For the purposes of this plan, public, as defined by the Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) for this specific planning initiative, includes residents, businesses, and organizations directly associated with the CCT, and specifically those tribal citizens living on tribal land or coming onto tribal lands to work or visit. 1.4 HAZARD MITIGATION Hazard mitigation is defined as cost-effective actions that have the effect of reducing, limiting, or preventing the vulnerability of people, culture, property, and the environment to potentially damaging, harmful, or costly hazards. Hazard mitigation measures, which can be used to eliminate or minimize the risk to life, culture, and property, fall into three categories: 1. Those that keep the hazard away from people, property, and structures. 2. Those that keep people, property, or structures away from the hazard; and 3. Those that reduce the impact of the hazard on victims, e.g., insurance. Hazard mitigation measures must be practical, cost effective, and culturally, environmentally, and politically acceptable. Actions taken to limit the vulnerability of society to hazards must not, in themselves, be costlier than the anticipated damages. Hazard mitigation planning must be based on vulnerabilities and its primary focus must be on the point where capital investment and land use decisions are made. The placement of capital investments, whether for homes, roads, public utilities, pipelines, or public works, determine to a large extent, the nature and degree of a community’s hazard vulnerability. Once a capital facility is in place, there is little opportunity to reduce hazard vulnerability through correction of errors in location or construction. It is for this reason that often the most effective mitigation tools are zoning and other ordinances that manage development in high vulnerability areas and building codes that ensure new buildings are constructed to withstand the damaging forces of anticipated hazards. 10 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan Because disaster events are generally infrequent, the nature and magnitude of the threat is often ignored or poorly understood. Thus, the priority to implement mitigation measures is low and implementation is slowed. Mitigation success can be achieved, however, if accurate information is portrayed through complete hazard identification and impact studies, followed by effective mitigation management. The hazards analyzed in this plan include the following: Natural Hazards • • • • • • • • Severe Summer Weather o Extreme Heat o Lightning o Hail o Tornado o Straight-line Wind Severe Winter Weather o Extreme Cold o Winter Storm/Blizzard/Heavy Snow Avalanche Wildfire Flood o River or Stream Flood o Flash Flood High Hazard Dams and Levees Drought Volcanic Eruption and Ash Geological Hazards • • Earthquake Landslide Other Hazards of Concern Although non-natural hazards are not required by FEMA for inclusion in a hazard mitigation plan, the Colville Reservation wishes to rank and mitigate against a comprehensive list of hazard events that could impact the Reservation. Due to both the nature of non-natural hazards and the discretionary status regarding their inclusion, the following hazards of interest have been briefly and qualitatively assessed for the sake of public education and informing their inclusion within the hazard ranking and mitigation process. Biological Hazards • • • • Public Health Emergency Air Quality Animal Disease Plant Disease 11 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan Technological (Man-made) Hazards • • • • • • Hazardous Material Incident Terrorism Active Assailant Incident Government and Regulatory Issues Widespread Power Outage Cyber-Security Incident Per FEMA’s mandate to address all natural hazards, the following natural hazards were not included because these hazards do not directly impact the Colville Reservation due to geographic location: • Hurricane Sea Level Rise Storm Surge Tsunami 1.5 SCOPE • • • The plan provides comprehensive hazard identification, risk assessment, vulnerability and impact analyses, mitigation actions, and an implementation schedule. 1.6 AUTHORITIES FEDERAL Public Law 93-288, as amended, established the basis for federal hazard mitigation activity in 1974. A section of this Act requires—as prerequisite for state receipt of future disaster assistance outlays—the identification, evaluation, and mitigation of hazards. Since 1974, many additional programs, regulations, and laws have expanded on the original legislation to establish hazard mitigation as a priority at all levels of government. Several additional provisions were also included when PL 93-288 was amended by the Stafford Act that provide for the availability of significant mitigation measures in the aftermath of a presidentially declared disaster. Civil Preparedness Guide 1-3, Chapter 6—Hazard Mitigation Assistance Programs places emphasis on hazard mitigation planning directed toward hazards with a high impact and threat potential. The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) was signed into Law on October 30, 2000, by President Bill Clinton. Section 322 defines mitigation planning requirements for state, local, and tribal governments. Under Section 322, if states submit a mitigation plan (a summary of local/regional mitigation plans) identifying natural hazards, risks, vulnerabilities, and proposed actions to reduce those risks and vulnerabilities, the state is eligible for an increase in the federal share of hazard mitigation. 12 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan Source: H.R.707 - Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 https://www.congress.gov/bill/106th-congress/house-bill/707 TRIBAL AUTHORITY Tribal governments play an essential role in implementing effective mitigation. For the purposes of this plan, tribal governments include not only communities and reservations but also special service districts with elected boards. The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) (P.L. 106-390) provides an opportunity for states, tribes, and local governments to take a new and revitalized approach to mitigation planning. DMA 2000 amended the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (the Act) by repealing the previous Mitigation Planning section (409) and replacing it with a new Mitigation Planning section (322). This new section emphasizes the need for state, tribal, and local entities to closely coordinate mitigation planning and implementation efforts. To implement the DMA 2000 planning requirements, FEMA published an Interim Final Rule in the Federal Register on February 26, 2002. This rule (44 CFR Part 201) established the mitigation planning requirements for states, tribes, and local communities. The Colville Confederated Tribes All Hazard Mitigation Plan has been developed pursuant to the requirements in the Interim Final Rule for hazard mitigation planning and the guidance in the State and Local Plan Interim Criteria under DMA 2000, the Tribal Multi-Hazard Planning Guidance and its associated Tribal Multi-Hazard Plan review crosswalk. The Colville Business Council has adopted the All Hazard Mitigation Plan. This governing body has the authority to promote sound public policy regarding natural and man-made hazards on the reservation. The resolution adopting the plan includes assurances that the CCT will comply with all applicable federal statutes and regulations in effect with respect to the periods for which it received grant funding in compliance with 44 CFR 13.11c. The All Hazard Mitigation Plan will be amended whenever necessary to reflect changes in tribal or federal laws and statutes as required in 44 CFR 13.11d. The CCT will be responsible for submitting the adopted Hazard Mitigation Plan and will gain eligibility for mitigation project grants and post-disaster hazard mitigation grant projects. The Tribe, as a sovereign government, possesses the following law, regulatory, or policy assets: • A Constitution, adopted in 1938 • A Tribal code known as the Law and Order Code • Duly authorized Resolutions (law) passed by the Governing body to protect Tribal members and other residents, to protect natural resources, and to protect the cultural legacy and continued cultural existence of the twelve constituent Tribes that make up the Confederated Tribes of Colville Reservation. 13 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan CHAPTER 2. PLANNING PROCESS 2.1 PLANNING PROCESS Table 1. Plan Participation Colville Confederated Tribes Planning Process Table Jurisdiction Attended at least one meeting Met with Core Planning Team Yes Yes Colville Confederated Tribes Completed Risk Assessment Submitted at least One New Mitigation Action Reviewed Past Mitigation Actions Yes Yes Yes COLVILLE CONFEDERATED TRIBES (CCT) PLANNING TEAM The following individuals are either members of the original planning team or are significant stakeholders in the plan. contributed data, involved in postings for informational meetings, or were reviewers of the Plan. Name Taressa Marchand Chance Cruger Steve Brown Cody Desautel Doug Marconi Jr. Joe Peone Rodney Cawston Table 2. Colville Tribes Hazard Mitigation Planning Team Amanda Chiles Manager Tiffany Circle Chief Information Officer Department/Organization Emergency Management EMS Colville Tribal Police Administration Planning Tribal Fish & Wildlife Environmental Trust Tribal Occupational Safety and Health (TOSHA) IT Department Robert Sloma Archeologist History & Archeology Ron Toulou Supervisor Public Works / Tribal Water and Sewage BIA - Range Environmental Trust / Air Quality Colville Indian Housing Authority Geographic Information Systems Brandton Harvey Title Coordinator Fire Chief Police Chief Executive Director Grants Writer Director Director Range Conservationist Kathy Moses Communication Specialist / PIO Doug Marconi Sr. Director Alexander Besemann Specialist Chance Garver Public Affairs / PIO Administration Richard Palmer Ron Garrow Linda McLean Director Government Liaison Director/4-H/ANR/FRTEP Educator Department of Transportation American Red Cross WSU Extension Office 14 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan Name Sam Jenkins Effie Dean Ed Forseman Scott Meredith Lex Lindquist Title Ham Radio Team and CERT Member Ferry Superintendent Engineering Technician Team Lead Sergeant Department/Organization Ham Radio Team and CERT Nespelem School District Okanogan County PUD Avista Washington State Patrol 2.2 LOCAL HMP PLANNING SCHEDULE, MEETINGS, & MITIGATION WORKSHOPS The mitigation plan update process commenced in August of 2023. Public meetings in all four districts were conducted as follows: • • • • • Keller District on September 20, 2023 at the Keller Community Center at 6 pm Inchelium District on October 18, 2023 at the Senior Meal site at 6 pm Omak District on September 21, 2023 at the 12 Tribes Resort and Casino at 6 pm Nespelem District on October 4, 2023 at the LCGB at 6 pm Keller General Membership Meeting on October 7, 2023. An information table was provided. During the update in 2023/2024, the heads of tribal departments were contacted and encouraged to participate. Every effort to include the public was made though emails, school flyers, community posters, informational tables, personal meetings, phone calls, info sessions, surveys, community outreach through other community entities, and community meetings. Colville Reservation Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Planning Meeting The Core Planning Team held a Hazard Mitigation Plan Update meeting with the Hazard Mitigation Planning Team on April 8, 2024. 2.3 PUBLIC AND STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT Broad public participation in the planning process helps ensure that diverse points of view about the planning area’s needs are considered and addressed. The public must have opportunities to comment on disaster mitigation plans during the drafting stages and prior to plan approval (44 CFR, Section 201.6(b)(1)). The following section details the public outreach strategy, including a combination of in-person and virtual methods. For the purposes of this plan, public, as defined by the CCT, includes residents, businesses, and organizations associated with the CCT, and specifically those tribal citizens living on tribal land. 15 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan PUBLIC SURVEY The survey was comprised of 19 questions which were primarily multiple-choice questions. The questions were clear and direct thereby minimizing the chance errors in the survey results. The respondents were given the opportunity to provide additional input via some open-ended questions that required individual evaluation; questions such as concerns about specific hazards and locations they are aware of. There was a total of 61 surveys returned by the community. All four of the Districts as well as Off-Reservation Trust Lands are represented in the survey results. Table 3. Public Participation and Survey Survey Participation Respondent Residency Count Inchelium District Keller District Nespelem District Omak District Off-Reservation 11 14 24 7 5 Public/Stakeholder Results and Hazard Risk Rankings A critical element in the public survey is the respondents were asked to rank their risk concerns. Wildland Fire and Severe Weather were the top two concerns. Earthquake and Volcanic Eruption were ranked as the least concerning to the respondents. The following chart represents the results of the tribal survey answers collected by the mitigation planning team. Figure 2. Stakeholder Hazard Risk Rankings 16 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan The survey was not intended to be a scientific sampling of member and resident knowledge of hazards relevant to mitigation planning. It will create a base line for which the CCT can start to implement plans to mitigate deficiencies within the community. This exercise has created a foundation for a more robust plan and training opportunities for the whole community. That information included the following about this group’s experiences on the Reservation: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 22 do not have fire insurance (Comments: It’s hard to get fire insurance on the reservation) 41 do not have flood insurance, 10 do not know 47 do have smoke detectors 40 have experienced wildfires 31 have experienced a power failure lasting more than 24 hours 35 have experienced severe weather 8 have experienced household fires 15 are not at all prepared Almost everyone gets their information from a government source, personal experience, or local news. There are also a good number of people that have taken great strides in making preparations, such as keeping fire extinguishers, smoke detectors, storing supplies, and taken classes. 41 are interested in taking preparedness classes The household sizes range from 1-8 people and many have pets or livestock 10 households do not know if they live in a floodplain 40 people said their address is clear from the street The reliability of cell phone and internet are divided In the update of this plan, the CCT included a “Self-Identifying Survey” to increase awareness of people with health issues, disabilities and special needs, English Language Proficiency (ELP), and the elderly community. People can self-elect to give their contact information to be put on a confidential list for emergency services which will be held for one year. This list will give the CCT a better understanding of the demographics in each disaster zone and provide extra assistance as needed. ALL HAZARD MITIGATION PUBLIC REVIEW After the draft plan was completed, a link to the plan was placed on the CCT official website and promoted via Facebook. The draft plan remained on the website and Facebook until the FEMAapproved and formally adopted Plan was made available. Upon formal adoption of the Plan, the public engagement strategy shifted toward continual engagement of the public by soliciting and offering the public an opportunity and forum to provide input regarding known hazards and risks, and implementation of identified mitigation strategies. Throughout the plan development process, public and stakeholder input was incorporated into the Plan. 17 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan Future comments on the All-Hazard Mitigation Plan should be addressed to: Taressa Marchand, Emergency Management Coordinator Colville Confederated Tribes P.O. Box 150 Nespelem, Washington 99155 Work (509) 634-2134 taressa.marchand.psd@colvilletribes.com HOW PUBLIC INPUT WAS INCORPORATED INTO THE PLAN This information helped to validate and confirm the risk assessment findings. Open-ended responses by the public offered greater insight to the damages experienced while residing on the Colville Reservation. These, and related findings, helped the planning team determine meaningful mitigation projects. For example, based on the survey results, it was evident that many on the reservation have concerns about wildfire and severe weather. These findings informed the inclusion of new mitigation strategies. 2.4 COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES, PARTNERS, AND STAKEHOLDERS The planning process was initiated by preparing a stakeholders list of individuals whose input was needed to help prepare the All Hazard Mitigation Plan. Planning partners on the stakeholders list received a variety of information during the planning process, including meeting notices, documents for review, and the draft mitigation plan. On the tribal level, project stakeholders (other than those on the planning team) included CCT Council members and personnel from various tribal departments. Most of the tribal stakeholders participated by providing key data and/or offering comments on the draft plan. Table 4. Stakeholders Additional Contributors Name Amanda Chiles Robert Sloma Doug Marconi Jr. Tiffany Circle Kathy Moses Chance Garver Nanette Vaughn Ron Toulou Chance Cruger Joe Peone and Kirk Truscot Rodney Cawston Brandton Harvey Title Manager, TOSHA Archeologist, History and Archeology Previous Watershed Program Manager Chief Information Officer, IT Communication Specialist, Environmental Trust Public Affairs, Administration CCT Website Supervisor, Public Works / Water and Sewage Fire Chief, EMS Director, Tribal Fish and Wildlife Director, Environmental Trust Conservationist, BIA Range 18 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan Additional Contributors Name Steve Brown Alexander Besemann Joseph Halford William Marchand Randy August Title Police Chief, Tribal Police Department Specialist, GIS Manager BIA Forestry Manager, Planning Department Previous author of this plan and Emergency Manager Additionally, many of the hazards described in this mitigation plan also affect counties adjacent to the Colville Reservation. The draft of this plan was sent to each of these neighboring counties, and their input was considered and implemented. The adjacent counties are listed below: Submitted For Comment County Okanogan Ferry Chelan County Seat Okanogan Republic Wenatchee Relationship Occupied Occupied Adjacent Trust Lands 2.5 EQUITY CONSIDERATIONS FOR UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES Some disasters occur on larger scales and are more impacted by built environments and most likely to continually impact those most at risk because of existing health conditions, lack of resources, being underserved by past mitigation planning work, facing historical disinvestment in their communities, or other factors. In this case, people in widely different locations can be the most harmed by repeating disaster cycles, so mitigation strategies should also work to break cycles of loss caused by social and economic disparities. Hazard mitigation strategies can reduce existing risk by, for example, relocating a building out of an area that frequently floods. In each case, an attempt has been made to lessen the harm of a future flood before the event happens. Strategies may also seek to make future development less vulnerable to hazards at the time it is built. Examples would be requiring new structures to be elevated above predicted flood levels or by building structures to better withstand future hazards. Hazard mitigation plans are designed to involve the input of stakeholders from different perspectives to ensure plans use the best available data, are aligned with the needs of the entire community, and are in alignment with other plans, such as comprehensive plans, capital improvement plans, and climate action plans. This Hazard Mitigation Plan continues to recognize that all members of the community are not impacted in the same way by natural disasters. Some community members are at more risk, for several possible reasons. A mitigation strategy that uses a “one size fits all” approach and does not recognize different levels of risk will not adequately or efficiently support historically underserved populations and can make inequalities worse after a disaster. 19 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan Equitable mitigation success should be measured by assessing who was most impacted in loss of life or financial harm by past and future disasters, quantifiable reductions of vulnerability to those most at risk, and increasing engagement with historically underserved populations and community organizations to better understand how plans and processes and natural hazard events are affecting different communities. The Reservation has responsibility to ensure equitable outcomes in the implementation of this plan and to ensure that action is taken to reduce vulnerabilities to disasters experienced disproportionately by marginalized populations. The Climate & Economic Screening Tool provided by the U.S. Council on Environmental Quality analyzes the three 2010 census tracts on the Colville Reservation for disadvantaged communities. Tribal areas are defined as Disadvantaged Communities per the screening tool. Source: Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool https://screeningtool.geoplatform.gov Additionally, the public survey specifically included questions to determine how the Colville Tribes could better support functional and access needs populations and under served groups in the Reservation. 2.6 EXISTING PLANS, STUDIES, REPORTS AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION REVIEWED FOR THE PLAN Chapter 16: Tribal Capability Assessment provides a review of key studies, plans, laws, and ordinances in effect within the planning area that can affect hazard mitigation actions. All these documents were reviewed and incorporated into this plan as part of the update process. Table 5. Existing Plans, Studies, and Reports Existing Plans, Studies, Reports, and Technical Information How this document contributed to the 2024 Mitigation Plan Update Hazards, risk analysis, past mitigation actions Tribal profile, demographic information, transportation, key tribal priorities Housing trends Residential statistics and population trends Future construction and identification of deficiencies Document 2023 mitigation plan draft 2020-2040 Comprehensive Plan 2020 Housing Strategy Comprehensive Housing Plan 2020-2040 2018-2023 Capital Facilities Plan Mount Tolman Fire Center Wildland Fire Prevention Plan Wildland Fire Management Plan (Mt. Tolman) Forest Management Plan (BIA) Range Management Plan (Range) dated 2015, updated in 2021 Wildfire Hazard Profile Wildfire Hazard Profile Wildfire Hazard Profile Wildfire Hazard Profile 20 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan Existing Plans, Studies, Reports, and Technical Information How this document contributed to the 2024 Mitigation Plan Update Community Profile and demographic information Document Community Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) Dam Emergency Action Plans for Owhi and Twin Rivers Dams Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) (EM) Long Term Transportation Plan (CCDOT) Natural Resources Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment FEMA Tribal Mitigation Planning Handbook FEMA NRI 2024 Data Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy 2017-2021 Climate Mapping for Resilience & Adaptation FEMA Geospatial Resource Center FEMA Resilience Analysis and Planning Tool (RAPT) NOAA - Climate at a Glance High Hazard Dam Profile Risk Assessment and Tribal Capabilities Community Profile and Changes in Development Climate Change projections Tribal planning guidelines Itemization of Risks for CCT Increased risk due to development. Utility information. Climate change data Mapping data Hazard risk and vulnerability data Climate data Underserved populations vulnerable to climate change and disasters Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool 21 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan PART II: COMMUNITY PROFILE 22 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan CHAPTER 3. COLVILLE RESERVATION PROFILE 3.1 LOCATION The Colville Reservation is bound on the south and east by the Columbia River, on the west by the Okanogan River, and on the north by an arbitrary line drawn at the northern boundary of Township 34 of the public lands survey system. Geographically, most of the Reservation is part of the Okanogan Highlands; the remainder is part of the Okanogan Valley. The Inchelium and Keller districts are located within Ferry County; the Nespelem and Omak districts are within Okanogan County. The Reservation is bisected by the boundary between Ferry County (on the east) and Okanogan County (on the west). There are two incorporated towns entirely within the reservation: Elmer City and Nespelem. There are 4 incorporated cities or towns located partially within the Reservation: Coulee Dam, Okanogan, and Omak. There are four additional “Census Designated Places” (CDPs) used for gathering census data: Disautel, Inchelium, Keller, and Malott. Within the Reservation boundary, in addition to privately-owned fee lands, the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), and Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) own land. a For the construction of both dams, trust lands were taken by the federal government up to specified elevation level; in the case of Grand Coulee Dam and Lake Roosevelt, all trust lands up to the 1310-foot elevation line became BOR land. Some private land parcels that extended both above and below that elevation line, however, were bought out in their entirety. Under the terms of the 1990 Lake Roosevelt Management Agreement, the Tribe manages the BOR lands within the “Reservation zone” defined in that agreement. This includes most BOR-owned lands within the Reservation boundary upstream from the immediate area of the dam. “Management” rights, however, do not authorize the Tribes to exercise general law enforcement authority on those lands except when violations are committed by Tribal members. Because of the risk of landslide due to slope undermining by the newly impounded waters behind Chief Joseph Dam—which also happened after the filling of Grand Coulee Dam—the ACOE appropriated easements across trust lands within the Reservation. Although the ACOE did not acquire fee simple ownership of those lands, the easements it required limit the uses to which affected lands can be put into use. 3.2 TOPOGRAPHY & VEGETATION Elevation levels range from a low of approximately 780 feet in the southwest corner of the Reservation, to over 6700 feet at the summit of Moses Mountain; the average is above 3,000 feet. Elevation generally increases from south to north and from west to east. The predominant terrain features were carved by glacial erosion. The Sanpoil River drains much of the eastern interior of the Reservation south to the Columbia River. The Nespelem River basin and many additional creeks drain into the Columbia River, and additional creeks drain into the Okanogan 23 River. 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 3. Topographic Map – Excerpt from the CCT Comprehensive Plan The populated area along the eastern edge of the Reservation is separated by two mountain ranges from the Tribal and BIA administration at the Colville Agency. During winter the roads across those two ranges can sometimes be traversed only with difficulty. 3.3 NATURAL RESOURCES The Colville Agency Integrated Resource Management Plan (IRMP) states the intent to cut 78 mmbf per year. This can be incorporated with fire management, but also requires reforestation to avoid negative environmental impacts. Colville Reservation is countering this potential by establishing a nursery of approximately 1.5 million trees. A unique resource on Colville Reservation is wild horses. The tribe is required to maintain a stipulated population and provide the necessary habitat for the protected animals. This is important for the species, but management of rangeland may conflict with tribal development encroaching upon it, specifically that of wildfire. 24 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan 3.4 CLIMATE Overall temperatures are steadily becoming warmer during the four seasons. This change impacts the dryer seasons by increasing the frequency of drought while winter becomes wetter rather than snow. The wetter winters result in precipitation making its way to the streams rather than being held in snow and icepacks for release during the warmer growing seasons. This shift changes the moisture content of the earth during the summer months. National Environmental Modeling and Analysis Center (NEMAC) has developed historical and future climate models. Source: Top Climate Concerns: The Climate Explorer: https://crt-climate-explorer.nemac.org 3.5 LAND OWNERSHIP, LAND USE, & FUTURE DEVELOPMENT The CCT Comprehensive Plan incorporates detailed components for managed land use and development. The following information is excerpts from the CCT Comprehensive Plan: • • The reservation is primarily rural. The reservation consists of 1.4 million acres of land; of this, the areas of greatest population density are in and around the areas of Nespelem and Omak. The Colville Reservations land is comprised of both Trust Land and Fee Land. Trust Land is possessed as part of the Reservation ground. Fee Land ownership has a title held by the individual owner. The two means of ownership present their own use and regulatory requirements. Figure 4. Colville Reservation Land Use by Parcel 25 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 5. Colville Reservation Rural Land Use 3.6 HISTORY Much of the Reservation boundary, as it exists today, was established in 1872 by an executive order issued by President Grant. At that time the Reservation covered approximately 2.9 million acres. Members of twelve different tribal groups were either already present within, or later moved onto, the Reservation. In 1892, by act of Congress the Colville Reservation was cut approximately in half; the current Reservation is the southern portion of the original Reservation. The “North Half” was opened to homesteading, mining, and to other public lands uses. The Tribe retained hunting, fishing, and gathering rights on the federal lands within the north half. Some lands in the north half had already been allotted to individuals and remained in tribal trust status. The Tribe has been purchasing lands in the North Half when funds and land availability allow and is returning these purchased lands to trust status. One of the larger pieces of land returned to tribal ownership includes the Chopaka Crossing, a former railroad border crossing located directly upon the U.S.- Canada border. Beginning in 1916, the south half of the Reservation was opened to “settlement” under the public land laws. Lands within the Reservation not already allotted to Tribal members were open to mining claims and patents, homesteading, and even to cash purchases. Large areas of the Reservation, particularly in the southwest, passed out of trust status and into private non-member ownership. The map below shows the approximate extent of trust (blue) versus private 26 and 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan government ownership (yellow). Government ownership on the reservation includes federal lands owned by the Bureau of Reclamation and the Army Corps of Engineers; state lands managed by Washington State Parks, as well as highway maintenance sites; and county or other local government lands, including fairgrounds and lands used for road maintenance. Figure 6. 2023 Map of Tribal Trust lands in Blue and Non Tribal Trust in Yellow, courtesy of Tribal GIS Program The Reservation was withdrawn from entry under the public lands laws in 1934; there were no more mining, homestead, or cash purchase entries within the Reservation after that year. The last of the legacy mining claims established during the public lands era on the Reservation lapsed in 1993. However, even after 1934 fee lands, allotted trust lands and tribally owned lands within the Reservation were taken by the federal government for the construction and operation of Grand Coulee and Chief Joseph Dams. As with the north half areas, when land is available and funding permits, the Tribe purchases land within the Reservation boundary and returns it to trust status. In addition to lands within the reservation boundary and the North Half, there are other parcels of trust lands located in several counties. These include such lands as the Mill Bay Casino in Chelan County, a former USFS site in Okanogan County, and others. The Tribe has continued to lose access to lands in the North Half due to federal government actions. For example, during the 25-year period from 1983 to 2008, the Bureau of Land Management 27 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan transferred 3,868 acres of north half lands within Ferry County out of federal ownership. This action effectively eliminated Tribal hunting, fishing, and gathering rights on those lands. 3.7 POPULATION & DEMOGRAPHICS Colville Reservation is primarily rural with small pockets of concentrated population. The following are the major population areas of the Reservation per the 2020 Decennial Census: Table 6. Colville Tribes Major Populations Centers COLVILLE TRIBES – MAJOR POPULATIONS CENTERS Community Omak Okanogan Nespelem Elmer City Coulee Dam Keller Inchelium United States Census Bureau: https://data.census.gov Population 4,860 2,379 180 239 1,211 - Status Incorporated Incorporated Incorporated Incorporated Incorporated Unincorporated Unincorporated ON-RESERVATION AND OFF-RESERVATION POPULATION The population of the Colville Reservation is approximately 7,063 per My Tribal Area, a division of the United States Census Bureau. 2,358 for with 33% of the population being over the age of 55 years old. The median household income is $52,199. The poverty level on the Reservation is 24.4% which is about double the rate in the United States at 12.6%. The current census for 2023 will not be published until 2024. My Tribal Area: https://www.census.gov/tribal Many enrolled members reside just outside of the Reservation boundaries in communities such as Grand Coulee, Wilbur, Okanogan, and Omak. The total enrolled membership does not include a substantial population of descendants who, although not members, have both a familial and cultural affiliation to the Tribe and receive some services from both the Tribe and IHS. It also does not include non-members who are married to members. There are a substantial number of people visiting the Reservation for recreation every summer. Within the Reservation there are: resorts at Twin Lakes; people with summer homes; campgrounds; and boating users and beach campers along the Tribe’s Columbia River shoreline. The National Park Service figures for Lake Roosevelt indicated that, on average, more than 6,000 people visited the park each day during June through August of 2022. 28 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 7. Colville Tribes Population by Age Group COLVILLE TRIBES - POPULATION BY AGE GROUP Age Range Population Under 5 years 398 5 to 9 years 354 10 to 14 years 363 15 to 19 years 424 20 to 24 years 593 25 to 34 years 1,024 35 to 44 years 610 45 to 54 years 949 55 to 59 years 408 60 to 64 years 383 65 to 74 years 948 75 to 84 years 466 85 years and over 153 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) Population by Age Group Source: My Tribal Area (2023) https://www.census.gov/tribal VARIABLE POPULATION The Tribal experience during the 2015 fires showed there were residents who lost homes that had not even been mapped under the 911 addressing system. It wasn’t known by the Tribe, or by Okanogan County, that the homes even existed until after they had burned down, and the residents displaced. Further, in any widespread natural or other disaster, members and descendants from adjacent communities may also need assistance. Although the Tribe is not responsible for disaster relief services outside the reservation (except when they involve off-Reservation trust lands), as a practical matter those Tribal members may work within the Reservation. If their homes outside the Reservation are damaged, they may temporarily reside with relatives within the Reservation whose homes are intact. Finally, there are three state highways (SR17, SR21 and SR155) and one U.S. Highway (US 97) traversing the Reservation. All of them serve as trucking corridors; US 97 in particular is used for international trade with Canada. Each highway has significant daily traffic across the Reservation. The Inchelium-Gifford Ferry connects the Reservation with SR25, which runs north-south along the eastern shoreline of Lake Roosevelt. The Inchelium Highway, which runs north from Inchelium towards the off-Reservation river crossing at Kettle Falls, is a county road but serves the same function locally as a state highway. For these reasons, the census data does not adequately reflect the population that may need to be served in the event of a natural or other disaster. For planning purposes, the population within the Reservation on any given day is considered to exceed 10,000 people. 29 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan POPULATION TRENDS The Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) Comprehensive Housing Plan 2020-2040 performed a historical analysis of the local population. The population of the Colville Reservation has been rising though it is not necessarily at a rapid rate. To see that the population is not receding is encouraging and illustrates aggressive planning and mitigation efforts are worthwhile for the community. Figure 7. CCT Population Growth 1990-2017 and CCT Population Projects 2040 3.8 HOUSING The Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) Comprehensive Housing Plan 2020-2040 was developed to identify current housing issues and potential solutions. The plan, while not developed with hazard analysis as part of its scope, also reveals issues that complicate resiliency and mitigation opportunities of the existing structures. The study indicates there are 3,619 housing units on the Reservation at the time of its drafting. Major issues with the housing stock are twofold; one its makeup and the other being its age. The following charts are from the Comprehensive Housing Plan 2020-2040: Figure 8. CCT Housing Types and CTCR Estimated Year Home Was Built 30 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan HOUSING TYPES The study indicates 23% of the housing stock is comprised of mobile homes. These fabricated structures are typically made of inferior wood construction and sheet metal cladding; they are essentially a an “elevated design” of a travel trailer in regard to disaster resiliency. Two examples of critical concerns are though codes have mandated tiedown requirements they offer inadequate shelter during high wind events and for extreme heat/cold concerns cooling/heating is inadequate in terms of equipment and insulation. HOUSING AGE The study shows an overwhelming share of the housing was built prior to the year 2000. This, coupled with the discussion of housing type, adds to the problematic nature of resiliency and mitigation. The older housing stock will not have been built to as stringent of codes as what the International Building Code (IBC) requires today. The study indicates that roughly 400 of the housing units were built under more stringent code requirements, making them less susceptible to damage. This leaves approximately 3,200 housing units more vulnerable to damage due to their construction under older, less rigorous codes. The sheer number of structural, thermal, and cladding inadequacies in older housing stock leaves them vulnerable to disasters and it is oftentimes cost prohibitive to mitigate them. 3.9 ECONOMY GOVERNMENT EMPLOYMENT Government employment within the reservation, both Tribal and BIA, are critical to the local economy. The five different school districts within the reservation also constitute a significant employment source. Both Grand Coulee and Chief Joseph Dams are partially located within the reservation, and their employees should also be considered as part of the government employment sector. At the Tribal membership meeting held in October 2018, it was reported that approximately 1,500 persons work for the Tribal government or its business operations. In October 2023 during the previous planning session the group reported government employment to be approximately 1,250 people, which is significantly down from 2018. Current U.S. Census data, as provided by the My Tribal Area portal, illustrates the importance of Government Employment to the estimated 3,145 employed residents. 31 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 9. Employment Classification 3.10 AGRICULTURE Agriculture, in the form of orchards and forage crops as well as livestock production, is a significant contributor to the local economy. At one time the Nespelem area was extensively farmed, but the former irrigation works (including diversion dams and weirs) have been largely abandoned. Large orchards exist along the Columbia and Okanogan rivers in the southwest portion of the Reservation; as of 2012, they covered 12,040 acres within the Reservation. These attract seasonal labor force for harvests and have resulted in the construction of temporary housing for seasonal workers. State and county authorities allow such temporary housing to be constructed without requiring sprinkler systems or other fire protection measures (such as hydrants or fire standpipes). Based upon current data, it is difficult to tell the scope and extent of private sector employment within the Reservation. Gebbers Farms is a major employer but has not responded to a request for information about the scope of their activities on the Reservation. Because they have orchards and other agricultural interests both on and off the Reservation, sometimes within a few miles of each other, it may be difficult to separate their data between the two. In addition to orchards, other documented crop production includes corn (920 acres); other forage crops (11,296 acres); and wheat (13,367 acres). There is one privately-operated aquaculture operation: raising farmed salmon within multiple netted pens in the Columbia River (Rufus Woods Lake). According to BIA statistics from 2011, between 7,000 and 8,000 cattle are grazed on range units within the reservation each year. (A cow-calf unit is considered one head of cattle for grazing purposes, so the actual number of animals is higher.) Sheep were not permitted while on the Reservation, and 200 horses were. One horse grazed under permit is considered to consume the same forage as 1.5 cow-calf units. In 2022 there were 2882 cow calf pairs permitted on range and 70 horses permitted on range. In 2023 the numbers were slightly higher with 2,964 cow calf pairs and bulls and 35 horses. 32 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan Every five years, the U.S. Department of Agriculture conducts a “Census of Agriculture.” The most recent one was conducted in 2023 and the results will be released in 2024. So, for this plan it relies on the 2017 census. That census showed an inventory of 10,476 cattle and calves, as well as 392 horses. These numbers don’t always match up with the BIA count due to the way they are tallied by cow-calf pair rather than by animal. Since 2011, resource damage from wild and feral horses has become more acute. As of March 2018, the Tribe’s natural resource manager estimated that there were approximately 2,000 of these horses on the reservation. A roundup in 2015 resulted in the capture of 423 horses, although Tribal land managers wanted to remove 1,000. In 2020 there were approximately 174 horses removed, in 2021 there were approximately 253 horses removed, and in 2023 there were approximately 110 horses removed to date. Essentially, the number of horses removed each year is approximately the same number of offspring produced each year. The current estimate of 2,000 horses across the Reservation translates into the consumption of enough forage to support 3,000 head of cattle. Both the livestock industry and crop production on the Reservation are susceptible to drought, wildland fire, and disease. Livestock grazing is heavily impacted by fires. In addition to the loss of cattle in fires, leased Tribal range lands have to be rested to allow recovery following the fires. This reduces the grazing land available for three years post fire. Although the fire season for 2022 and 2023 was light relative to other seasons, some of these areas are still recovering. 3.11 TIMBER INDUSTRY Historically timber production has been a major economic resource within the Reservation, but the last sawmill operating within the Reservation shut down in 2017 after little more than three years of operation. Both tribally owned timber mills (the Omak Wood Products Mill and the former Colville Indian Precision Pine plant, also near Omak) shut down in the wake of the Great Recession that began in 2008. The Omak mill later reopened but shut its doors again in 2017. There is significant timber production from within the Reservation, but logs are now transported to outside mills for processing. The 2015 fires devastated the timber industry, burning an estimated 22% of the marketable timber within the Reservation. This amounted to approximately 800 million board feet of timber burned, about ten years’ worth of full production. Although there was a short-term increase in the amount of logging, as salvage logging took place to bring damaged but still usable trees to market, that timber was saleable only at reduced prices. 3.12 EDUCATION The following information is excerpts from the CCT Comprehensive Plan:  The CCT Comprehensive Plan collected the following educational statistics: 33 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 10. Colville Educational Attainment 3.13 VULNERABLE POPULATIONS BELOW POVERTY LEVEL Figure 11. Populations Below Poverty Level Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 34 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan 3.14 UTILITIES ELECTRICITY Electrical power on the reservation comes from four different providers: 1. Okanogan County Public Utility District (PUD) #1, along the western reservation including eastward along SR155 from Omak to the Paschal Sherman/Mission area. 2. Nespelem Valley Electric Cooperative, which provides power along the SR155 corridor to the Paschal Sherman/Mission area as well. 3. Ferry County PUD, primarily in the Sanpoil Valley but also to several small areas on the reservation where power lines come from the north. 4. Avista Energy, for the eastern reservation including Inchelium and Twin Lakes. Figure 12. Colville Utilities (Electrical, Copper, and Communication Lines) Map 35 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan WATER All public utilities on the Reservation are highly dependent upon uninterrupted electrical power; none have a backup generator or are pre-wired to accept an emergency generator. Every water system on the Reservation is dependent upon electrical power to operate wells. When power fails, the water system fails when water pumped into storage tanks is used up. Estimates of the time before water tanks empty, under normal demand, range from one day (Nespelem) to three days (Keller). Outside the areas covered by these systems, residents rely on electrically-powered well pumps for individual residential water supplies. In the case of water systems, it is not just electrical power failure that could have significant adverse effects. During the 2015 fires the fire hydrants for the Town of Nespelem failed due to age-related water main damage. Tribal firefighters in 2015 were faced with the task of defending a town, without working fire hydrants, in the face of forecasted 40 MPH winds driving the North Star Fire toward town. The maintenance cycle for the hydrants is every April and October for the following 7 groups by Public Works. • • • • • • • Twin Lakes HUD Keller Community Seatons Grove Nespelem Agency Campus Omak HUD Moccasin Flats, Lone Pine, and Eagle Nest Rocky River Road HUD Malott HUD Inchelium’s water and sewer is managed by an independent water district. Water is provided by the following systems: 1. Colville Indian Housing Authority (CIHA) owned and operated systems for the Nespelem Agency area, Mt. Tolman Fire Center, Keller community, and HUD housing communities 2. Municipal systems in Coulee Dam-Elmer City, Okanogan, Omak, and Nespelem 3. Privately-operated water system for homes in the Twin Lakes area 4. Privately-operated local water district for the Inchelium area. 5. Private wells WASTEWATER TREATMENT Wastewater treatment is provided by five treatment plants. There are numerous private sewage disposal structures such as septic tanks, including: 1. 2. 3. 4. Coulee Dam-Elmer City, operated by the Town of Coulee Dam Nespelem and Agency campus areas, operated by the Tribe City of Omak City of Okanogan 36 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan 5. A privately-operated water and sewage district in the Inchelium area 6. Private disposal Everywhere else on the Reservation on-site septic systems are in use, including some of the larger operations (such as the Twin Lakes Resort, the Paschal Sherman Indian School and the Mission campus). None of the water or sewage systems on the Reservation have emergency power capability. If power fails, the systems will shut down until either line power is restored or an emergency generator is located and installed. In the case of a sewage system, a power failure can have significant environmental impacts. The system built in the 1970s for the Nespelem and Agency Campus areas includes five sewage lift stations; none of them has an emergency generator. If a power outage occurs, the sewage lift stations in the Nespelem and Agency campus areas cannot pump sewage uphill to the sewage lagoons for treatment. A power outage of as little as one hour, during peak daytime use of the system, may cause sewage to begin backing up. One of the lift stations is automatically set to drain into former sewage ponds. If a septic pump truck is available, the full-time use of that truck to pump from other lift stations and transport to the sewage lagoon has been able to keep up with the sewage flow. If no pump truck is available, it may be necessary to open valves to dump raw sewage into the Nespelem River drainage to avoid sewage flow into residential areas. This is still an ongoing issue but efforts have been made with the combined efforts of the Tribal Public Works Division and Spokane District IHS to procure a generator. 3.15 COMMUNICATIONS Even where there are buried telephone lines, many people do not have land-line telephones. There is no longer a network of pay phones within the Reservation, even in places such as the Sanpoil Valley where they would constitute the only reliable emergency communications infrastructure for the public. Parts of the telephone network on the Reservation are still installed on above- ground poles vulnerable to windstorms, winter storms, and wildland fire in the same manner as electrical lines. Much of the telephone network off-Reservation is also above ground, and failures outside of the reservation impact the Reservation’s phone network as well. In 2014 during the Carlton Complex series of wildland fires, the Okanogan County 911 system failed due to widely separated system damage at two different locations. Cellular telephone coverage is unreliably inconsistent. Two providers--AT&T and Verizon-- have towers on the Reservation. Their reliable coverage is limited to the Okanogan Valley along the river, some of the Nespelem area, and some of the Inchelium area. Everywhere else, including along the SR 155 corridor, cellular telephone coverage can best be described as sporadic. Text messages often go through when cellular phone calls do not. An often-neglected impact of communications failures is the impact upon commerce. During the 2014 and 2015 fires when above-ground communication lines burned, they took with them the ability to use credit cards and to withdraw cash from automated teller machines. Gas stations and grocery stores have to be connected via internet or telephone lines in order to verify that credit 37 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan cards/debit cards are valid. Many affected people were unable to buy either fuel or food with their credit/debit cards and could not obtain cash from ATMs. In 2023, there were three more communications towers put up on the reservation with COVID funds, but it is still not enough. There still remain several areas where communication access is not possible. These towers are utilized by broadband equipment to the communities of Nespelem, Elmer City, McGinnis/Buffalo Lake Kartar Valley and Rufus Woods along the Columbia River Road. They currently support 300+ end users with wireless service using 2.5 GhZ spectrum throughout the communities of Keller, Inchelium, Nespelem and Omak. The Reservation does have more towers being constructed throughout the Colville Reservation with a priority for internet capability to both the home and business. There is a potential depending on the tower size for wireless vendors and the Colville Tribe to co-locate equipment. Figure 13. Communication Outage A credit union just outside the Reservation in Brewster, WA had electricity but without communications. Sign displays “ATM OUT OF SERVICE”. July 2014, Carlton Complex fires Much of the Columbia River Road and SR 155 corridors (Coulee Dam and Nespelem to Omak), the Peter Dan/Manila Creek Road and the Cache Creek Road (Sanpoil Valley to points west), the entire Sanpoil Valley including much of Keller, and much or even most of the Silver Creek and Bridge Creek roads (Sanpoil Valley to Inchelium and points east) are without cellular phone coverage. Cellular telephone systems, while they may have battery or generator backup, cannot run indefinitely without line electrical power. The 2015 fires, particularly where the Moses Mountain communications site was involved, showed that. When power lines to that site were destroyed by fire, the emergency generators powering the AT&T cell tower and powering the Tribal microwave backbone needed to be refueled regularly. Refueling small-capacity fuel tanks in an active fire area can be challenging, as demonstrated by this recent fire. At least once, the refueling team had to evacuate for their safety and leave a disabled vehicle behind. Had these refueling missions failed, the only working cell tower for a large area of the Reservation (and for Okanogan County), as well as, the Tribal government’s internet connection would have been lost. In many jurisdictions, emergency responders can use their agency radios to communicate in the absence of telephones. That isn’t always true on the Reservation. Much of the northern Sanpoil 38 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan Valley, for example, is a radio dead zone. During a 2014 petroleum tanker accident in the northern Sanpoil Valley, fire and police responders had to leave the scene to be able to reach a radio repeater to send and receive radio messages. This delayed the response and may have increased the extent of the pollution from spilled fuel. The problem with radio communications has multiple facets. The switch from wideband to narrowband required new radios and repeater equipment; at the same time, radiocommunications nationally have been moving from analog to digital radio. The “reach” of broadcasts from digital radio equipment (the area in which voice transmissions can be understood) is generally better than with analog transmissions. However, digital signals reflected from multiple terrain features can appear to a receiving radio to be corrupted and indecipherable. This appears to be a significant issue in the mountainous environment of the Colville Reservation. There are currently thirteen mountaintop radio repeater sites on the Reservation, used by Tribal government entities, as well as, by the BIA. An analysis of radio signal propagation on the Reservation determined that when the Tribe does convert to digital public safety radios, it will need to substantially increase the number of communication sites. Contributing to this problem is the Reservation’s location near the border with Canada. Part of the Reservation is north of the Federal Communication Commission’s (FCC) “A Line” within which broadcast power is more tightly restricted to avoid interference with Canadian users. Although each of these problems can be solved with the application of enough funding, the switch to narrowband radio was an unfunded mandate imposed upon the Tribal government. Even now, more than five years after the FCC’s mandatory deadline, portions of the public safety infrastructure are still wideband. Significant infrastructure investment is needed to bring the Reservation into the modern communications era using digital public safety radios. It is already difficult to purchase replacement radios for use on the still-wideband portions of the Tribe’s public safety radio network. Tribal broadband internet access is threatened by the fact that it must connect to off-site transmission systems of varying quality. For example, one crucial stream crossing off-Reservation consists of a single bundle of fiber optic cable that, as of summer 2018, was still exposed to the elements and to casual vandalism. Elsewhere, as with telephone lines, fiber is strung on wooden power poles that can be damaged by ice storms, windstorms, or wildland fire. Although the Tribe can—and is—putting its own fiber underground, it still has to connect to off-Reservation systems. AT&T has a FirstNet program. FirstNet is a nationwide cellphone-based network that gives first responders priority access to the available cellular bandwidth, so first responder calls will be given a higher priority than all other callers. AT&T has completed construction of FIRSTNET towers at Elmer City and Moon Mt., Inchelium. All other sites including Keller Butte, Nespelem, Omak have FirstNet equipment for use. 39 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan 3.16 TRANSPORTATION RAILROADS Colville Reservation recognizes railroads are an essential part of commerce, but they present hazards. There is currently only one railroad operational within Colville Reservation. Cascade-Columbia Railroad Table 8. Railroads Railroads PUBLIC TRANSIT Colville Reservation is served by multiple public transit authorities. Table 9. Transit Authorities Transit Authority Colville Tribal Transit Okanogan County Transportation and Nutrition (OCTN) Okanogan County Transit Authority (TRANGO) 40 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan PART III: RISK ASSESSMENT 41 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan CHAPTER 4. HAZARD RISK ASSESSMENT Risk assessment is the process of measuring the potential loss of life, personal injury, economic injury, and property damage resulting from natural hazards. It allows emergency management personnel to establish early response priorities by identifying potential hazards and vulnerable assets. The process focuses on the following elements: • • • Hazard identification—Use all available information to determine what types of disasters may affect a jurisdiction, how often they can occur, and their potential severity. Vulnerability identification—Determine the impact of natural hazard events on the people, property, environment, economy, and lands of the region. Cost evaluation—Estimate the cost of potential damage or cost that can be avoided by mitigation. The risk assessment for this hazard mitigation plan update evaluates the risk of natural hazards prevalent in the planning area and meets requirements of the DMA (44 CFR, Section 201.6(c)(2)). 4.1 IDENTIFIED HAZARDS There are countless hazards that pose a threat to human life, health, and well-being, and no attempt is made here to compile an exhaustive list. Those that are addressed in disaster planning are generally categorized as “natural” or “technological” (sometimes “manmade”). The FEMA website contains a thorough discussion and list of hazards in the section entitled “National Risk Index for Natural Hazards” (FEMA, 2022). Some hazards are a threat to all geographic areas while others (e.g., flooding) are more limited in their extent. Studies were conducted to determine which hazards are of concern on Colville Reservation. Colville Reservation hazards were identified, and their frequency of occurrence evaluated using a number of resources, including: • • • • 2018 Colville Reservation Pre-Disaster Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard planning documents developed by state, federal, and private agencies. NOAA weather data from the past 72 years Data from the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Hazards that have been identified as significant for Colville Reservation that will be considered in this plan are listed below. Natural Hazards • Severe Summer Weather o Extreme Heat o Lightning 42 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan • • • • • • • o Hail o Tornado o Straight-line Wind Severe Winter Weather o Extreme Cold o Winter Storm/Blizzard/Heavy Snow Avalanche Wildfire Flood o River or Stream Flood o Flash Flood High Hazard Dams and Levees Drought Volcanic Eruption and Ash Geological Hazards • • Earthquake Landslide Other Hazards of Concern Although non-natural hazards are not required by FEMA for inclusion in a hazard mitigation plan, Colville Reservation wishes to rank and mitigate against a comprehensive list of hazard events that could impact the Reservation. Due to both the nature of non-natural hazards and the discretionary status regarding their inclusion, the following hazards of interest have been briefly and qualitatively assessed for the sake of public education and informing their inclusion within the hazard ranking and mitigation process. Biological Hazards • • • • Public Health Emergency Air Quality Animal Disease Plant Disease Technological (Manmade) Hazards • • • • • • Hazardous Material Incident Terrorism Active Assailant Incident Government and Regulatory Issues Widespread Power Outage Cybersecurity Incident Per FEMA’s mandate to address all natural hazards, the following natural hazards were not included because these hazards do not directly impact Colville Reservation due to geographic location: 43 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan • • • • Hurricane Sea Level Rise Storm Surge Tsunami 4.2 DISASTER DECLARATIONS 2020 2021 Table 10. CCT Disaster Declarations Declaration Type Declaration Title Severe Storm Severe Storm, Straightline Winds, and Flooding Wildfire Carlton Complex Fire Wildfire North Star Fire Flood Flooding Biological COVID-19 Pandemic Wildfire Cold Springs/Pearl Hill Fire Wildfire Chuweah Creek Fire Wildfire Cold Springs Fire 2024 Severe Storm Year of Declaration 2012 2014 2015 2018 2020 2020 Severe Winter Storms, Straight-line Winds, Flooding, Landslides, and Mudslides Source: https://www.fema.gov/data-visualization/disaster-declarations-tribal-nations Disaster Number 4083 4188 4243 4384 4481 5351 4631 4584 4775 4.3 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS & CONSIDERATIONS One of the most significant issues relating to climate change is documenting that something has changed. Anecdotal information, and stories, may be useful to help identify what needs to be examined, but they are not the same as hard data documenting that a change is underway or has occurred. The various climate change reports utilized in this plan clearly indicate that climate change is occurring, but they neither identify nor quantify all of the consequential changes that occur along with climate change. For the purposes of this plan, climate change has been addressed for each natural hazard. Impacts are addressed if data is available. Although projections can—and have been—made about future temperatures and rainfall changes, further and continued studies are needed to determine the following impacts that affect the CCT directly: • Changing climate could cause changes in plant succession, in both disturbed areas and in natural environments. 44 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan • • • • • • • Culturally significant species of plants, both food and medicinal, could decrease their range and be less common. Insect pests may proliferate with higher mortality for trees, changing the mix of forest species. These could include pine and other tree-killing beetles, spruce budworm, Douglas fir needle midge, etc. Plant diseases could spread due to warmer winter temperatures. These could include blister rusts, root rot, and the spread of parasitic plants such as dwarf mistletoe. If there is more winter precipitation and runoff, it may increase sedimentation. This could affect fish spawning, require culvert replacement with large culverts, cause damage to roads as well as to private improvements, damage buried utility lines, and more. Drought and dry soils may increase erosion, which will end up in streams and culverts. Soils may also be lost through dust storms. Lower water levels in streams and rivers, and higher water temperatures, may increase fish mortality during spawning runs. They may also increase the mortality of nonmigrating fish. There may be more wildland fires. There may be additional expense to keep cheat grass and other noxious weeds from taking over newly damaged and opened lands before trees and other native species can be replanted. As a general observation, the Tribe is heavily dependent upon revenue from Tribal forests. Various climate change reports acknowledge that increasing wildfires, insect outbreaks, and tree diseases will result in increased “forest mortality” and a long-term change in “forest landscapes” (Snover, 2013, page ES-6). Climate change with Tribal forests may affect not just Tribal government revenues, but private sector employment in the logging and timber industry as well. The socioeconomic impacts of such a change could be significant. Unanswered questions, which need answers in order to be able to craft a coherent climate change adaptation strategy, include: • • • • • • What will invasive species and noxious weeds do to the fire regime? Will they contribute to more fires that will limit or destroy the availability of traditional cultural, medicinal, or food plants? To what extent will plant succession change with climate change? Will medicinal or cultural plants remain available, or will hotter and dryer summers reduce their numbers and range? Has there been a change in the distribution or availability of traditional food plants, such as roots and berries? Will vegetation (biomass) be lost due to dryer and hotter summers? Will habitat for rare, threatened, and endangered species be disrupted and become no longer suitable for those species? 45 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan 4.4 HAZARD PROFILE The risk assessments in the following chapters describe the risks associated with each identified hazard of concern. The following sections were used to describe each hazard and communicate each respective level of risk: • • • • • • • Hazard Description—Each hazard profile contains a description of the general definition and causes of the hazard. It may also include background information for understanding the context of the hazard within Colville Reservation. Location—The location or region in Colville Reservation where each hazard may occur is described. Historical Frequency & Probability of Future Occurrence—This section identifies past hazard events of note that have occurred in Colville Reservation. It also includes the likelihood of each hazard occurring again if available. Extent—The strength or magnitude of each hazard is defined, usually through a form of measurement, such as a formula, scale, chart, or graph. Impacts & Loss Estimates—The potential impacts of each hazard on the county are discussed. This section also outlines the potential economic/monetary loss from a hazard event, in addition to loss of property, structures, facilities, systems, livestock, and life. FEMA NRI Score—The hazard-specific FEMA National Risk Index scores for each natural hazard is included. Related Hazards—The hazard profiles that fall under a greater hazard category can be found within this section. 4.5 RISK ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY Each hazard included in this plan was assessed and ranked based on a pre-defined hazard risk methodology consistent with FEMA’s mitigation plan requirements. Information from the hazard profiles and input from subject matter experts were used to inform the hazard risk assessment process. The following is a description of the key factors. PROBABILITY/LIKELIHOOD OF OCCURRENCE The probability of occurrence of a hazard is indicated by a probability factor based on the likelihood of annual occurrence: • • • • High—Significant hazard event is likely to occur annually (Probability Factor = 3) Medium—Significant hazard event is likely to occur within 25 years (Probability Factor = 2) Low—Significant hazard event is likely to occur within 100 years (Probability Factor = 1) Unlikely—There is little to no probability of significant occurrence, or the recurrence interval is greater than every 100 years (Probability Factor = 0) The assessment of hazard frequency is generally based on past hazard events in the area. 46 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan EXTENT Extent was assessed in two categories: extent/intensity and catastrophic potential of the hazard. Numerical impact factors were assigned as follows: Extent/Intensity—Extent is defined as the range of anticipated intensities of the identified hazards. Extent is most commonly expressed using various scientific scales, such as the Enhanced Fujita scale. • • • • High—Historical and/or probabilistic models/studies for this hazard indicate the possibility of a high-intensity incident (Extent Factor = 3) Medium—Historical and/or probabilistic models/studies for this hazard indicate the possibility of a medium-intensity incident (Extent Factor = 2) Low—Historical and/or probabilistic models/studies for this hazard indicate the possibility of a low-intensity incident (Extent Factor = 1) Unlikely—Historical and/or probabilistic models/studies for this hazard indicate the possibility of little to no intensity (Extent Factor = 0) Catastrophic—The potential that an occurrence of this hazard could be catastrophic. • • • • High—High potential that this hazard could be catastrophic (Extent Factor = 3) Medium—Medium potential that this hazard could be catastrophic (Extent Factor = 2) Low—Low potential that this hazard could be catastrophic (Extent Factor = 1) Unlikely—Virtually no potential that this hazard could be catastrophic (Extent Factor = 0) Each category was assigned a weighting factor to reflect its significance, consistent with those typically used for measuring the benefits of hazard mitigation actions: a weighting factor of 3 was assigned for Extent/Intensity and its potential to be Catastrophic. VULNERABILITY Vulnerabilities were assessed in three categories: population exposure, property exposure, and exposure based on changes in development. Numerical impact factors were assigned as follows: People—Values were assigned based on the percentage of the total population exposed to the hazard event. • High—30% or more of the population is exposed to this hazard (Vulnerability Factor = 3) • Medium—15% to 29% of the population is exposed to this hazard (Vulnerability Factor = 2) Low—14% or less of the population is exposed to this hazard (Vulnerability Factor = 1) No Vulnerability—None of the population is exposed to this hazard (Vulnerability Factor = 0) • • Property Exposed—Values were assigned based on the percentage of the total property value exposed to the hazard event. 47 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan • • • • High—25% or more of the total assessed property value is exposed to the hazard (Vulnerability Factor = 3) Medium—10% to 24% of the total assessed property value is exposed to the hazard (Vulnerability Factor = 2) Low—9% or less of the total assessed property value is exposed to the hazard (Vulnerability Factor = 1) No Vulnerability—None of the total assessed property value is exposed to the hazard (Vulnerability Factor = 0) Changes in Development—Changes in development since the previous plan was approved have increased or decreased the community’s vulnerability/exposure to this hazard. • • • • High—Changes in development have significantly increased the vulnerability/exposure of the community to this hazard (Vulnerability Factor = 3) Medium—Changes in development have increased the vulnerability/exposure of the community to this hazard, but not significantly (Vulnerability Factor = 2) Low—Changes in development have minimally increased the vulnerability/exposure of the community to this hazard (Vulnerability Factor = 1) No Vulnerability—Changes in development have had no effect and/or have decreased the vulnerability/exposure of the community to this hazard (Vulnerability Factor = 0) Each category was assigned a weighting factor to reflect its significance, consistent with those typically used for measuring the benefits of hazard mitigation actions: a weighting factor of 3 was assigned for People, and a weighting factor of 1 was assigned for Property Exposed and Changes in Development. IMPACT Hazard impacts were assessed in eight categories: population and life/safety, underserved/equity, property damages, economic, environmental, essential operations, future development, and climate change. Numerical impact factors were assigned as follows: Population and Life/Safety: Values were assigned based on (1) best available historical and probabilistic data for individuals who are vulnerable to the hazard event and (2) the likelihood to experience adverse impacts in the event of its occurrence. • • • • High: Populations exposed to this hazard are likely to experience significant adverse impacts (Impact Factor = 3) Medium: Populations exposed to this hazard are likely to experience some adverse impacts (Impact Factor = 2) Low: Populations exposed to this hazard are likely to experience minimal adverse impacts (Impact Factor = 1) No impact: Populations exposed to this hazard are not likely to experience significant adverse impacts (Impact Factor = 0) 48 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan Underserved/Equity—Values were (1) assigned based on best available data for underserved populations vulnerable to the hazard event and (2) are likely to experience adverse/disproportionate impacts from the hazard incident resulting in greater disparity in equity. • High—Underserved populations exposed to this hazard are likely to experience significant adverse/disproportionate impacts (Impact Factor = 3) • Medium—Underserved populations exposed to this hazard are likely to experience some adverse/disproportionate impacts (Impact Factor = 2) • Low—Underserved populations exposed to this hazard are likely to experience minimal adverse/disproportionate impacts (Impact Factor = 1) • No impact—Underserved populations exposed to this hazard are not likely to experience significant adverse/disproportionate impacts (Impact Factor = 0) Property Damages—Values were assigned based on the expected total property damages incurred from a hazard incident. It is important to note that values represent estimates of the loss from a major incident based on historical data or probabilistic models/studies. • High—More than $5,000,000 in property damages is expected from a single major hazard event, or damages are expected to occur to 15% or more of the property value within the jurisdiction (Impact Factor = 3) • Medium—More than $500,000 but less than $5,000,000 in property damages is expected from a single major hazard event, or expected damages are expected to more than 5%, but less than 15% of the property value within the jurisdiction (Impact Factor = 2) • Low—Less than $500,000 in property damages is expected from a single major hazard event, or less than 5% of the property value within the jurisdiction (Impact Factor = 1) • No impact—Little to no property damage is expected from a single major hazard event (Impact Factor = 0) Economic—An estimation of the impact, expressed in terms of dollars, on the local economy is based on a loss of business revenue, crops, worker wages, and local tax revenues or on the impact on the local gross domestic product (GDP). • High—Total economic impact is likely to be greater than $10,000,000 (Impact Factor = 3) • Medium—Total economic impact is likely to be greater than $100,000 but less than or equal to $10,000,000 (Impact Factor = 2) • Low—Total economic impact is not likely to be greater than $100,000 (Impact Factor = 1) • No Impact—Virtually no significant economic impact (Impact Factor = 0) Environmental Factor: Environmental impact from a major hazard event requiring outside resources and support; and/or repair, clean-up, restoration, and/or preservation work. • • • High: Environmental impact from a single major hazard event is likely to be significant, requiring extensive outside resources and support; and/or repair, clean-up, restoration, and/or preservation work (Impact Factor = 3) Medium: Environmental impact from a single major hazard event is likely to be localized, requiring some outside resources and support; and/or repair, clean-up, restoration, or preservation work (Impact Factor = 2) Low: Environmental impact from a single major hazard event is likely to be minimal, requiring little to no outside resources and support, and/or minimal repair, clean-up, restoration, or preservation work (Impact Factor = 1) 49 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan • No impact: No environmental impacts from a single major hazard event is likely (Impact Factor = 0) Essential Operations Factor: Impact on the ability of the jurisdiction to meet the essential dayto-day operational demands and needs of the community from a single major hazard event. • • • • High: Significant impact on the ability of the jurisdiction to meet the essential day-to-day operational demands and needs of the community from a single major hazard event (Impact Factor = 3) Medium: Some impact on the ability of the jurisdiction to meet the essential day-to-day operational demands and needs of the community from a single major hazard event (Impact Factor = 2) Low: Minimal impact on the ability of the jurisdiction to meet the essential day-to-day operational demands and needs of the community from a single major hazard event (Impact Factor = 1) No Impact: No impact on the ability of the jurisdiction to meet the essential day-to-day operational demands and needs of the community from a single major hazard event (Impact Factor = 0) Future Development—The potential that future development will have on increasing or decreasing the impact/consequence of this hazard. • • • • High—Future development trends will significantly increase the impact/consequence of this hazard (Impact Factor = 3) Medium—Future development trends will increase the impact/consequence of this hazard, but not significantly (Impact Factor = 2) Low—Future development trends will minimally increase impact/consequence of this hazard (Impact Factor = 1) No Impact—Future development trends will not increase the impact/consequence of this hazard and/or may even decrease the impact/consequence of this hazard (Impact Factor = 0) Climate Change—The potential that climate change will increase the risk of this hazard (e.g., type, location, and range of anticipated intensities of the identified hazard and impacts). • High—Climate change trends will significantly increase the risk of this hazard and its impacts (Impact Factor = 3) • Medium—Climate change trends will increase the risk of this hazard and its impacts, but not significantly (Impact Factor = 2) • Low—Climate change trends will minimally increase the risk of this hazard and its impacts (Impact Factor = 1) • No Impact—Climate change trends will not increase the risk of this hazard and its impacts (Impact Factor = 0) Each category was assigned a weighting factor to reflect its significance, consistent with those typically used for measuring the benefits of hazard mitigation actions: a weighting factor of 3 was assigned for Population and Life Safety and Underserved/Equity, and a weighting factor of 2 was 50 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan assigned for Property Damages. In addition, a weighting factor of 1 was assigned for Economic, Environmental, Essential Operations, Future Development, and Climate Change. 4.6 FEMA NRI RISK SCORES The National Risk Index (NRI) is a dataset and online tool to help illustrate communities that are most at risk for 18 natural hazards: Avalanche, Coastal Flooding, Cold Wave, Drought, Earthquake, Hail, Heat Wave, Hurricane, Ice Storm, Landslide, Lightning, Riverine Flooding, Strong Wind, Tornado, Tsunami, Volcanic Activity, Wildfire, and Winter Weather. Because not all hazards are applicable to the Colville Reservation, only those hazards with a defined risk to the Reservation are included. The National Risk Index leverages available source data for Expected Annual Loss due to these 18 hazard types, Social Vulnerability, and Community Resilience to develop a baseline relative risk measurement for each United States county and census tract. These measurements are calculated using average past conditions, but they cannot be used to predict future outcomes for a community. The National Risk Index is intended to fill gaps in available data and analyses to better inform federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial decision makers as they develop risk reduction strategies. The Colville Reservation encompasses three distinct census tracts, each with unique geographic and demographic characteristics: • • • Census Tract 9400: This tract represents the Ferry County side of the Colville Reservation. It is characterized by its rugged terrain and significant forested areas. The region is known for its natural beauty and is less densely populated, with communities relying heavily on natural resources and forestry. Census Tract 9401: Located on the east side of the Colville Reservation within Okanogan County, this tract includes a mix of residential areas and agricultural lands. It is more developed compared to Census Tract 9400, with several small towns and infrastructure supporting agricultural activities. Census Tract 9402: This tract covers the west side of the Colville Reservation, also within Okanogan County. Similar to Census Tract 9401, it includes a blend of residential zones and agricultural fields. However, it also encompasses areas more prone to flooding due to its proximity to the Okanogan River. FEMA NATIONAL RISK INDEX SCORE Table 11. Overall FEMA NRI Score COLVILLE CONFEDERATED TRIBES FEMA OVERALL NRI SCORE Census Tract FEMA Overall NRI Score FEMA Overall NRI Rating 9400 93.2 / 100 Relatively High 9401 83.3 / 100 Relatively Moderate 51 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan 9402 94.2 / 100 Relatively High Risk Index Scores are calculated using an equation that combines scores for Expected Annual Loss due to natural hazards, Social Vulnerability and Community Resilience. (Expected Annual Loss X Social Vulnerability / Community Resilience = Risk Index). Source: https://hazards.fema.gov/nri/map SOCIAL VULNERABILITY Social Vulnerability measures the susceptibility of social groups to the adverse impacts of natural hazards, including disproportionate death, injury, loss, or disruption of livelihood. The "Social Vulnerability Score” and “Rating” represent the relative level of a community’s social vulnerability compared to all other communities at the same level. A community’s Social Vulnerability Score is also proportional to a community’s risk. A higher Social Vulnerability Score results in a higher Risk Index Score (FEMA, 2023). Social vulnerability is one of five components included in the formulation of the “National Risk Index Score” in addition to community resilience, estimated annual loss (EAL) based on exposure, annualized frequency, and Historic Loss Ratio (HLR) factors (FEMA, 2023). Table 12. Overall FEMA NRI Score COLVILLE CONFEDERATED TRIBES Census Tract 9400 9401 9402 FEMA NRI SOCIAL VULNERABILITY SCORE Social Social Vulnerability Rating Vulnerability Score 79.9 / 100 Relatively High 88.9 / 100 97.3 / 100 Very High Very High Social Vulnerability is measured using the Social Vulnerability Index (SoVI) published by the University of South Carolina's Hazards and Vulnerability Research Institute (HVRI). Source: hazards.fema.gov/nri/social-vulnerability COMMUNITY RESILIENCE Community Resilience measures a community’s ability to prepare for anticipated natural hazards, adapt to changing conditions, and withstand and recover rapidly from disruptions. Table 13. Community Resilience FEMA NRI Score COLVILLE CONFEDERATED TRIBES FEMA NRI COMMUNITY RESILIENCE SCORE Census Tract Community Resilience Score Community Resilience Rating 9400 2.2 / 100 Very Low 9401 15.5 / 100 Very Low 52 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan 9402 15.5 / 100 Very Low Community Resilience is measured using the Baseline Resilience Indicators for Communities (HVRI BRIC) published by the University of South Carolina's Hazards and Vulnerability Research Institute (HVRI). Source: hazards.fema.gov/nri/community-resilience EXPECTED ANNUAL LOSS Expected Annual Loss (EAL) represents the expected economic damage likely to occur yearly due to hazard events. Table 14. Expected Annual Loss FEMA NRI Score (All Natural Hazards) COLVILLE CONFEDERATED TRIBES FEMA NRI EXPECTED ANNUAL LOSS SCORE Census Tract Expected Annual Loss Score Expected Annual Loss Rating 9400 89.3 / 100 Relatively High 9401 74.3 / 100 Relatively Moderate 9402 87.9 / 100 Relatively Moderate Expected Annual Loss scores are calculated using an equation that combines values for exposure, annualized frequency, and historic loss ratios (Expected Annual Loss = Exposure × Annualized Frequency × Historic Loss Ratio). Source: hazards.fema.gov/nri/expected-annual-loss TRIBAL HAZARD RANKING EXERCISE Prior to hiring a consultant to update the All Hazard Mitigation Plan, the CCT conducted a hazard ranking process based on the following criteria: Location/Distribution, Maximum Probable Extent, Probability of Future Events. These results were considered as part of the final Risk Ranking. Table 15. Preliminary Tribal Hazard Ranking Exercise Hazard Location/ Distribution (Reservation Wide) Maximum Probable Extent (Magnitude/ Strength) Probability of Future Events Overall Risk Significance Ranking Communications Failure Significant Severe Likely Medium Climate Change Significant Moderate Likely Medium Chief Joseph Significant Extreme Unlikely Low Grand Coulee Significant Extreme Unlikely Low Owhi Lake Negligible (<10%) Low Possible Low Twin Lakes Negligible (<10%) Weak Possible Low Upriver Dams Significant Moderate to Extreme 53 Unlikely Low Dam Failure: 2024 Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) All Hazard Mitigation Plan Disease, Animal Extensive Low Possible Low Drought Extensive Moderate Likely Medium Earthquake Extensive Extreme Unlikely Low Extreme Heat Significant Low Likely Low Flood Limited (<25%) Moderate Likely Medium Landslide Limited (<25%) Moderate Likely Medium Significant Moderate Likely Medium Wind Significant Severe Likely High Rain Significant Severe Likely High Tornado Negli [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/tribal%3Aconfederated_colville%3Afc2f85f447b853fd. Public record. Not legal advice.