Docstoc

Hazard Mitigation Plan

Document Sample
Hazard Mitigation Plan Powered By Docstoc
					REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN; that the Undersigned, on behalf of the Essex County Board of Supervisors, will accept sealed proposals until January 13th at 2:00 P.M. for Consulting Services for the preparation of a Pre-Disaster Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. Specifications are available by contacting the Office of the Purchasing Agent, James E. Pierce, Government Center, Elizabethtown, New York 12932 or by calling 518-8733330. Specifications are also available on the Essex County Website at www.co.essex.ny.us. Sealed proposals will be received at the Office of the Purchasing Agent, County Complex, Elizabethtown, New York 12932 until January 13th at 2:00 P.M. All proposals submitted in response to this notice shall be marked “SEALED PROPOSAL—Hazard Mitigation Plan” clearly on the outside of the envelope. In addition to the proposal, the proposer shall submit executed non-collusion bid certificates signed by the proposer or one of its officers as required by the General Municipal Law Sec. 103d. The successful proposer will be notified promptly by letter and must be prepared to enter into a contract to furnish the materials or services. Essex County reserves the right to reject any and all proposals not considered to be in the best interest of Essex County, and to waive any technical or formal defect in the proposals which is considered by Essex County to be merely irregular, immaterial, or unsubstantial. PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that Essex County affirmatively states that in regard to any contract entered into pursuant to this notice, without regard to race, color, sex, religion, age, national origin, disability, sexual preference or Vietnam Era veteran status, disadvantaged and minority or women-owned business enterprises will be afforded equal opportunity to submit bids in response hereto. Dated: December 12, 2008 Linda M. Wolf, CPA Deputy Purchasing Agent Essex County Government Center Elizabethtown, New York 12932 (518) 873-3330

A. General Information The County of Essex is requesting proposals from qualified Consultants to develop the draft Multi-Jurisdictional Pre-Disaster Hazard Mitigation Plan. Proposal submissions must be received no later than January 13th at 2:00 P.M. and should be submitted to: Linda M. Wolf, CPA Deputy Purchasing Agent 7551 Court Street Essex County Government Center Elizabethtown, New York 12932 Three (3) copies of each proposal must be received in a sealed package with the designation “SEALED PROPOSAL Hazard Mitigation Plan” conspicuously marked on the outer envelope. All proposals will be opened and logged in on the above stated date and time. All proposals submitted will be a matter of public record.
—

During the evaluation process, the County reserves the right, where it may serve the County’s best interest, to request additional information or clarifications from proposers, or to allow corrections of errors or omissions. Essex County will not be liable for any costs incurred by firms associated with the development or delivery of proposals. Any questions concerning this Request for Proposals should be directed to Linda M. Wolf, Deputy Purchasing Agent at (518) 873-3330. B. Term of Engagement The contract term will cover the fiscal year ending December 31, 2009 with the option to extend the contract for an additional year. The County reserves the right to terminate the agreement at any time through the initial term (or thereafter) with appropriate notice to the vendor. C. Scope of Work to be Performed The project includes, but is not limited to, updating and completing the

existing draft plan. The plan was estimated at one time to be 97% complete. The respondent shall continue to make all required revisions until FEMA deems the plan “approved pending adoption”. The respondent shall continue to be available for meetings and public hearings for the County and all participating local governments until the plan has been adopted by each. The plan also includes identifying key community residents and representatives, determining appropriate meeting locations and formats, coordinating among multiple communities, community outreach, developing/coordinating meeting materials, meeting facilitation, data compilation and development of plan documents in accordance with State and Local Mitigation Planning How-To-Guide. A copy of the Preliminary Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Review is attached. Please call Wanda Wade at 518-873-3903 for a copy of the existing draft plan. D. TIME REQUIREMENTS Proposal Calendar The following is a list of key dates up to and including the date proposals are due to be submitted; Request for proposals issued Due date for proposals Notification and Contract Dates Selection firm notified Contract Date Completion of Draft Plan Project Completion Deadline Submission of Draft Plan and revisions January 23, 2009 February 1,2009 December 12, 2008 January 13, 2009

July 31, 2009 October 31, 2009

PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

A. General Requirements 1. Inquiries Inquiries concerning the request for proposals and the subject of the request for proposals must be made to:
—

James E. Pierce 7551 Court Street, P.O. Box 217 Elizabethtown NY 12932 518-873-3330 2. Time and Acceptance Each proposal must state that it is a firm proposal that may be accepted within a period of sixty (60) days. Although the contract is expected to be awarded prior to that time, the sixty (60) day period is requested in order to allow for unforeseen delay.
-

3. Safeguarding of “Confidential” Information Any trade secrets or other data which the proposer does not wish disclosed to other than County personnel involved in the evaluation or contract administration will be kept confidential if identified as follows: Each page shall be identified in boldface at the top and bottom as “Confidential”; and any section of the proposal, which is to remain confidential, should, in addition, be so marked in boldface on the title page of that section. Net cost information may not be deemed confidential.
—

4. Cost for proposal preparation Any costs incurred by a proposer in preparing or submitting proposals are the proposer’s sole responsibility. The County will not reimburse any proposer for any costs incurred prior to award.
—

5. Declination to Submit Proposal Any organization which receives a copy of this RFP but which declines to submit a proposal is requested to notify the County by phone or in writing of such declination.
—

6. Exceptions Any exceptions to terms, conditions, or other requirements in any part of the RFP must be clearly pointed out in a
—

distinct section of the appropriate cost proposal or technical proposal. Otherwise, the County will consider that all items proposed are in strict compliance with the RFP, and the successful proposer will be responsible for compliance. 7. Advertising In submitting its proposal, the proposer agrees not to use the results there from as a part of any news release or commercial advertising without written approval of the County.
—

8. Confidentiality of Proposals In submitting a proposal, the proposer agrees not to discuss or otherwise reveal his technical or cost information to any other sources, government or private, until after the award of the contract. Proposers not in compliance with this provision may be disqualified, at the option of the County, from contract award. Only discussions authorized by the County are exempt from this provision.
—

9. Right to Submitted Materials All responses, inquiries, or correspondence relating to or in reference to this RFP, and all other reports, charts, display, schedules, exhibits and other documentation submitted by the proposers, will become the property of the County when received.
—

10. Legal Compliance Under penalty of perjury, the signer of any proposal submitted in response to this RFP thereby certifies that this proposal has not been arrived at collusively nor otherwise in violation of any Federal or State laws, rules or regulations.
—

11. Proposer’s Representatives- Proposers shall submit the name, address, and telephone number of the person(s) with the authority to bind the firm and answer questions or provide clarification concerning the firm’s proposal. 12. Submission of Proposals The following material is required to be received by January 13th at 2:00 PM for a proposing firm to be considered:
-

a. Three (3) copies of the “Technical” proposal to include the following:

(i)

Title Page - Title page showing the request for proposals subject; the firm’s name; the name, address, and telephone number of the contract person; and the date of the proposal.

(ii)

Table of Contents (iii) Transmittal Letter— A signed letter of transmittal briefly stating the proposer’s understanding of the work to be done, the commitment to perform the work within the time period, a statement why the firm believes itself to be best qualified to perform the engagement, and a statement that the proposal is a firm and irrevocable offer. Detailed Proposal— The detailed proposal should follow the order set forth in Section B (Technical Proposal) of this request for proposals.

(iv)

b.

The proposer should send three (3) copies of its “Cost” proposal. Such proposal should contain the estimated dollar cost for the equipment listed in the specification section of the proposal and installation fees and as set forth in Section C (Sealed Dollar Cost Bid) of this request for proposals. Proposer’s should send the completed “Technical” and “Cost” proposals under separate cover to the following address: James E. Pierce, 7551 Court Street, P.O. Box 217 Elizabethtown, NY 12932

c.

B.

Technical Proposal

1. General Requirements -The purpose of the proposal is to demonstrate the qualifications, competence and capacity of the proposers in conformity with the requirements of this request for proposals. As such, the substance of proposals will carry more weight than their form or manner of presentation. The proposal should demonstrate the qualifications of the company. It should also specify a project approach that will meet the request for proposals requirements.

The proposal should address all the points outlined in the request for proposals. The proposal should be prepared simply and economically, providing a straightforward, concise description of the proposer’s capabilities to satisfy the requirements of the request for proposals. While additional data may be presented, the following subjects, item Nos. 2 through 7, must be included. They represent the criteria against which the proposal will be evaluated. 2. Company Overview & Qualifications — The proposer should have extensive experience on projects similar to that proposed. An affirmative statement should be included that the firm and all assigned key professional staff are properly licensed to practice in New York State. 3 . Project Team Staffing -Include biographies and relevant experience of key staff and management personnel. List the personnel who would work on this project along with their qualifications and relevant experience. Describe bonding process and coverage levels of employees. 4. Prior Projects with the County List separately all projects within the last three (3) years for the County by type of engagement. Indicate the scope of work, date and the name and telephone number of the principal client contact. 5. Similar Projects With Other Entities List the most significant engagements (minimum-3) performed in the last five (5) years that are similar to the project described in this request for proposal. Indicate the scope of the project, date and the name and telephone number of the principal client contact. 6. Specific Project Approach Include the method and approach used to manage the overall project. Briefly describe how the engagement proceeds from beginning to end. The proposal should set forth a work plan with time schedule to perform the services required in this request for proposals.
—

7. Deliverables -The proposal should include description and samples of the types of reports used to summarize and provide detailed information on vulnerabilities and the necessary counter measures and recommended corrective actions.

NO DOLLARS SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL C. Sealed Dollar Cost Bid
—

1. Total All-Inclusive Maximum Price The dollar cost bid should contain an all-inclusive maximum price to contain all direct and indirect costs, including all out-of-pocket expenses. The County will not be responsible for expenses incurred in preparing and submitting the technical proposal or the dollar cost bid. Such costs should not be included in the proposal. The first page of the dollar cost bid should include the following information: a. Name of Company. b. Certification that the person signing the proposal is entitled to represent the company, empowered to submit the bid, and authorized to sign a contract with the County. c. A Total All-Inclusive Maximum Price for the project
—

2. Rates for Additional Services The second page of the dollar cost bid should include a cost per hour for additional services by job classification in case it should become necessary for the County to request the company to render any additional services. 3. Manner of Payment Monthly progress payments will be made on the basis of work completed during the course of the project in accordance with the firm’s proposal. If a down payment is required please specify the amount in the proposal.
—

EVALUATION PROCEDURES
A. Review of Proposals The Selection Committee will review qualifications of the proposals. Companies with unacceptably low technical qualifications will be eliminated from further consideration. After the qualifications for each firm has been established, the dollar cost bid will be examined. The County reserves the rights to retain all proposals submitted and use any idea in a proposal regardless of whether that proposal is selected. B. Evaluation Criteria Proposals will be evaluated using three sets of criteria. Firms meeting the mandatory criteria will have their proposals evaluated and scored for both technical qualifications and price. The following represent the principal selection criteria that will be considered during the evaluation process. 1.
• • •

Mandatory Elements
The firm is licensed to practice in New York State. The firm adheres to the instructions in this request for proposal on preparing and submitting the proposal. The firm is able to complete the project under the timeline specified in the request for proposal.

2.
• • • •

Firm’s Experience and Background:
The Organization has completed work of a similar type Qualifications of individuals assigned to the project The Firm has the ability to perform the necessary range of services in the time requested and in compliance with our specifications. Sensitivity and responsiveness to County needs and issues. 10 10 10 10

3.
• •

Proposer’s understanding of work to be performed.
This will be determined by the approach to the work and the time estimates to perform each activity. The adequacy of the deliverables detailed in the proposal. 20

15 25

4.

Price

Cost will not be the primary factor in the selection process.
The proposed price will be graded based upon the following formula

Average Bid = % (not to exceed 100%) Your Bid
% X 25 = points earned Maximum Points 100

C. Oral Presentations During the evaluation process, the Selection Committee at their discretion, may request any one or all firms to make oral presentations. Such presentations will provide firms with an opportunity to answer any questions that the Committee may have on a firm’s proposal. Not all firms may be asked to make such oral presentations. D. Final Selection The County will select a firm based upon the recommendation of the Selection Committee. It is anticipated that a firm will be selected by January 23, 2009. Following notification of the firm selected, it is expected that a contract will be executed between both parties by February 1, 2009. E. Right to Reject Proposals Submission of a Proposal indicates acceptance by the firm of the conditions contained in this request for proposal unless clearly and specifically noted in the proposal submitted and confirmed in the contract between the County and the firm selected.

The County reserves the right without prejudice to reject any or all proposals.

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) REGION II, MARCH 17, 2005 – PAGE 1

Local Mitigation Plan Review and Approval Status
Local Requirement Local Plan Submitted to the State by: Title: Date:

State Requirement State Reviewer:

Title:

Date:

FEMA Requirement Contractor Reviewer: 1st Review: Anna Ruepp Contractor QA/QC: 1st Review: Carmen Zayas

Title: Engineer URS Corporation, Wayne, NJ Title: 1st Review: Project Planner URS Corporation, Gaithersburg, MD Principal Urban Planner URS Corporation, Gaithersburg, MD Title: Hazard Mitigation Specialist, FEMA Region 2 Hazard Mitigation Specialist, FEMA Region 2 Title:

Date: 1st Review: November 10, 2003 Date: 1st Review: November 11, 2003 1st Review: November 11, 2003 Date: 2nd Review: March 17, 2005 Date:

Dan Rosen FEMA Reviewers and QA/QC: 2nd Review: Brian Shumon Audrey Massa FEMA QA/QC

Date Received in FEMA Region II August 24, 2004 Plan Not Approved 1st Review: 1st Draft (Sept 2003) not approved 2nd Review: 2nd Draft (Mar 2004) not approved Plan Approved Date Approved

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) REGION II, MARCH 17, 2005 – PAGE 2

Point of Contact: Title: Agency: Phone Number:

Local Plan Reviewed by: Title: NFIP Status (Single Jurisdiction) Participating NO YES NO

Non-Participating

Multi-jurisdiction: YES (If yes, list each jurisdiction below)

N/A*

NFIP Status (for mapped communities) Participating Participating Participating Participating Participating Participating Participating Participating Participating Participating Participating Participating Participating Participating Participating Participating Non-Participating Non-Participating Non-Participating Non-Participating Non-Participating Non-Participating Non-Participating Non-Participating Non-Participating Non-Participating Non-Participating Non-Participating Non-Participating Non-Participating Non-Participating Non-Participating

1. Town of Chesterfield and Village of Keeseville 2. Town of Crown Point 3. Town of Elizabethtown 4. Town of Essex 5. Town of Jay 6. Town of Keene 7. Town of Lewis 8. Town of Minerva 9. Town of Moriah and Village of Port Henry 10. Town of Newcomb 11.Town of North Elba and Villages of Lake Placid and Saranac Lake 12. Town of North Hudson 13. Town of St. Armand 14. Town of Schroon 15. Town of Ticonderoga 16. Town of Westport

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) REGION II, MARCH 17, 2005 – PAGE 3

17. Town of Willsboro 18. Town of Wilmington 19. Essex County

Participating Participating Participating

Non-Participating Non-Participating Non-Participating

* Not applicable for communities not mapped and/or who do not have an identified flood risk.

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) REGION II, MARCH 17, 2005 – PAGE 4
LOCAL MITIG ATION PLAN SUMMARY WORKSHEET
The plan cannot be reviewed if the prerequisite is not met for a single jurisdictional plan, or prerequisites are not met for a multi-jurisdictional plan. All mandatory criteria, except those highlighted in gray, must receive a score of “Satisfactory” or “Outstanding” for the plan to receive FEMA approval. A less than “Satisfactory” score on subsections highlighted in gray will not preclude the plan from passing. Reviewer’s comments must be provided for requirements receiving a “Needs Improvement” score. SCORING SYSTEM Please check one of the following for each requirement. N – Needs Improvement: The plan addresses the criteria, but needs significant improvement. Reviewer’s comments must be provided. S – Satisfactory: The plan meets the minimum criteria. Reviewer’s comments are encouraged, but not required. Prerequisite (s) (Check Applicable Box) Adoption by the Local Governing Body: §201.6(c)(5) OR Multi-jurisdictional Plan Adoption: §201.6(c)(5) AND Multi-jurisdictional Participation: §201.6(a)(3) Planning Process Documentation of the Planning Process: §201.6(c)(1) Risk Assessment Identifying Hazards: §201.6(c)(2)(i) Profiling Hazard Events: §201.6(c)(2)(i) Assessing Vulnerability: Overview: §201.6(c)(2)(ii)(A) Assessing Vulnerability: Identifying Assets: §201.6(c)(2)(ii)(A) Assessing Vulnerability: Estimating Potential Losses: §201.6(c)(2)(ii)(B) Assessing Vulnerability: Analyzing Development Trends: §201.6(c)(2)(ii)(C) Multi-jurisdictional Risk Assessment: §201.6(c)(2)(iii) N S N S NOT MET N/A MET

Mitigation Strategy Local Hazard Mitigation Goals: §201.6(c)(3)(i) Identification and Analysis of Mitigation Measures: §201.6(c)(3)(ii) Implementation of Mitigation Measures: §201.6(c)(3)(iii) Multi-jurisdictional Mitigation Strategy: §201.6(c)(3)(iv) Plan Maintenance Procedures Monitoring, Evaluating, and Updating the Plan: §201.6(c)(4)(i) Implementation Through Existing Programs: §201.6(c)(4)(ii) Continued Public Involvement: §201.6(c)(4)(iii) Additional State Requirements* Insert State Requirement Insert State Requirement Insert State Requirement

N

S

N

S

N N/A N/A N/A

S

LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN APPROVAL STATUS PLAN NOT APPROVED

PLAN APPROVED

*States that have additional requirements can add them in the appropriate sections of the Plan Review Criteria or create a new section. States need then modify this worksheet to record the score for those requirements. See Reviewer’s Comments

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) REGION II, MARCH 17, 2005 – PAGE 5

PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA REFERENCE
(Section Page #)

REQUIREMENT AS TAKEN FROM THE INTERIM FINAL RULE PART 201

LOCATION IN PLAN
(Indicate Section Or Annex And Page #)

SCORE / STATE / FEMA REVIEWER COMMENTS
Scoring System Met/Not Met (For Prerequisite(s) Only) S--Satisfactory N--Needs Improvement

Prerequisite (s) (3-1) Adoption by the Local Governing Body (3-2) Requirement §201.6(c)(5): [The local hazard mitigation plan shall include] documentation that the plan has been formally adopted by the governing body of the jurisdiction requesting approval of the plan (e.g., City Council, County Commissioner, Tribal Council)… Requirement §201.6(c)(5): For multi-jurisdictional plans, each jurisdiction requesting approval of the plan must document that it has been formally adopted. Page 4 N N/A

NOTE: The prerequisite, or prerequisites in the case of multi-jurisdictional plans, must be met before the plan can be approved.

OR Multi-Jurisdictional Plan Adoption (3-3) No documentation of adoption is provided; however, Page 4 seems to suggest that documentation of adoption is planned for inclusion in the Final version (text states that the plan will be formally adopted by both the County and local town boards in January of each year). The plan does not describe how hamlets were addressed. Will they be signing the plan separately? Did they participate with their applicable towns/villages? What are New York State’s requirements for such jurisdictions? Required Revisions: • When the mitigation planning process is completed, all participating jurisdictions must formally adopt the Final all-hazard plan before it is submitted to FEMA for formal review. • • In the main text of the Final plan document when, and by whom, the Final plan was formally adopted. Include a copy of each jurisdiction’s formal resolution as an attachment to the plan.

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) REGION II, MARCH 17, 2005 – PAGE 6

PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA REFERENCE
(Section Page #)

REQUIREMENT AS TAKEN FROM THE INTERIM FINAL RULE PART 201

LOCATION IN PLAN
(Indicate Section Or Annex And Page #)

SCORE / STATE / FEMA REVIEWER COMMENTS
Scoring System Met/Not Met (For Prerequisite(s) Only) S--Satisfactory N--Needs Improvement

2nd Review Comments: • The status of hamlets as political non-entities has been clarified on page 1. • As indicated in the 1st Review, all participating jurisdictions must meet the adoption requirements before the revised Plan receives formal approval from FEMA. Requirement §201.6(a)(3): Multi-jurisdictional plans (e.g., watershed plans) may be accepted, as appropriate, as long as each jurisdiction has participated in the process… Statewide plans will not be accepted as multijurisdictional plans. Pages 1, 10, 22, 28, 35, 41, 48, 54, 61, 66, 71, 77, 83, 91, 97, 103, 110, 118, 124, & 132 N S Documentation is clear that all but one community did participate in the planning process; however, descriptions of this process will need to be expanded upon, as discussed under Requirement 201.6(c)(1). The only community for which this was not explicitly stated in the municipality’s section was the Town of Minerva, for which additional information is required to document their participation. 2nd Review Comments: • Note that the participating jurisdictions (including the County, 18 towns and 4 villages) are listed on pp. 2 and 3 of this Review. • The revised Plan includes documentation for the participation of the Town of Minerva on pages 76-84.

AND Multi-Jurisdictional Planning Participation (3-4)

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) REGION II, MARCH 17, 2005 – PAGE 7 PLANNING PROCESS (3-5) Documentation of the Planning Process (3-6) Requirement §201.6(c)(1): [The plan must document] the planning process used to develop the plan, including how it was prepared, who was involved in the process, and how the public was involved. Pages 1, 3, 10, 21, 22, 28, 35, 41, 48, 54, 61, 71, 77, 83, 91, 97, 103, 110, 118, 124, 132 N S The County’s current Draft plan begins to address this requirement; however, the current text needs significant improvement to be considered acceptable. The current Draft plan does not provide information as to specific meeting dates, agendas, outcomes, or participants. No reference is made in the plan regarding the role of the consulting firm in the process. The remainder of the plan is broken down into 20 sections: one for the county and 19 for its participating municipalities. Each section has its own discussion of the planning process and committee organization. Most sections identify specific committee members and meeting dates, but some do not. Meeting agendas, participants, and outcomes are not discussed. Relevant discussion for the Town of Minerva is missing. Because the process is discussed in multiple sections of the report, it is difficult to achieve a clear understanding of what the overall process really was, in terms of interrelationships between the various county and local committees. It is also not clear how the various committees worked together to write the document. Public involvement is alluded to, but no specific details are provided. In general, most sections include one or two sentences on who members were, dates of meetings, and a brief statement regarding the process. Collectively, these statements tend to document that events took place, but fail to really describe what happened. The reader should be provided with a full description of who conducted various steps of the process, when these activities were conducted, what the results were, and how the results and/or comments were incorporated into the planning process. Required Revisions: • In Section I of the plan (Overview), provide a detailed discussion of the overall planning process using clear, concise, and descriptive statements. This section should provide, in as much detail as possible, an overview of the overall process, interrelationships between the County Committee and various local committees (including how they worked together, where responsibilities overlapped, how all of the information was pulled together, etc.), and the role of the consultant. This discussion can be supplemented by text in the following sections of the report (specific to the County and local municipalities). This supplemental text should also be expanded upon

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) REGION II, MARCH 17, 2005 – PAGE 8 significantly to provide as many details as possible on the process. • Describe how the Committees developed the plan, including a summary of all Committee activities (including dates of meetings, who attended, the purpose and outcome of the meeting, etc.). Describe how the Committees obtained input or worked with other agencies (State, federal, and local), colleges/universities, and interested groups in the preparation of the plan (including such details as: method of notification, number of meetings held, names and titles of participants, etc.). Describe, in detail, all public involvement activities undertaken to date. Provide dates and purpose of public meetings; discuss how the public was notified of the meetings and who attended. Consider pursuing a range of activities for involving the public during the next phases of the planning process, incorporating public feedback into the decision-making process, and documenting these activities in the new all-hazard plan. While FEMA Interim Guidance does not specify minimum criteria for public involvement, the intent of public involvement in the planning process is to provide the general public with a variety of means to voice concerns or provide input.
nd

•

•

2

Review Comments:

• The revised Plan addresses the 1st Review Required Revisions above. It describes a planning process that includes (a) a County Committee in which Essex County Office of Emergency Services appears to have a major role, (b) Town Committees, (c) technical assistance from an unspecified contractor, and (d) a series of preliminary county-wide meetings followed by individual town meetings. The town meetings were announced and open to the public, and included some discussions of existing information. (Section I-C, pp. 3 and 4). • However, some revisions are recommended for this section. Recommended Revisions: • Describe who was involved on the County Committee (including names, titles, agency or organization, expertise/authority) and how each member contributed to the process (i.e., what was his/her role). Also describe any lead or point of contact for each of the Town Committees. Specify who the contractor was. Indicate who are the Local Floodplain Administrators of NFIPparticipating communities and describe any role they may have had in the planning process. • Identify any existing plans, studies, reports, and technical documents and

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) REGION II, MARCH 17, 2005 – PAGE 9 describe how the community reviewed and integrated information into the Plan from them. RISK ASSESSMENT (3-9) Identifying Hazards (3-10) Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i): [The risk assessment shall include a] description of the type….of all natural hazards that can affect the jurisdiction… Pages 1-3, 7, N S The County’s current Draft plan begins to address this requirement; however, the current text needs significant improvement to be considered acceptable. The County’s Draft plan indicates that the HAZNY software was used to identify hazards. The HAZNY analyses are not provided. Descriptions of 22 of the default hazards included in the program are provided. It is unclear why nearly half of the participating municipalities show their HAZNYs as ‘pending’, yet show hazard identifications and rankings (Page 7). Text on Page 10 refers to meetings held with these municipalities. However, for County, town and village hazard identification, all are different, and there is no documentation or discussion as to the basis for this difference, or how all are tied together on a County-wide level. The current Draft does not explain if the County chose to focus the planning process on the entire list of HAZNY hazards, or only a subset of these hazards. The current Draft states on page one that “over the course of the planning process, the number of hazards examined was modified by the NYSEMO from thirty-four identified to twenty-two”; significant explanation is required here regarding what the outstanding 12 were and why they were eliminated from further consideration. Of the 22 that were identified, the text does explain three that were deemed to be irrelevant, and why. However, for the remaining 19, there is no similar text indicating how or why these particular hazards were identified. The plan also does not describe sources used to identify hazards. The hazard identification is presented separately for each of the communities and for the county, as if each was mutually exclusive. While it is helpful to see how different hazards apply to different municipalities, it is unclear how the county identifications relate – if at all – to the municipalities’ identifications. The plan lacks a discussion on how all of the pieces were tied together, so to speak. There is tremendous variation in hazards identified between individual municipalities, and at the County level, and there is no supporting discussion in the plan to explain the factors contributing to these differences, or the rationale used to generate an overall list of hazards applicable to the County.

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) R E G I O N I I , M A R C H 1 7 , 2 0 0 5 – P A G E 10 Supporting text is lacking for the Town of Minerva. Required Revisions: • List the specific data sources consulted to identify each hazard (state mitigation plan, HAZNY, newspaper articles, web site, agencies, residents, etc.). The text should identify whether the hazards identified are merely documentation of the workgroup’s perceptions regarding hazards that can affect the County, or if it is based on some form of research. • • Include the HAZNY analysis as an appendix, along with a list of workgroup participants. Discuss hazards that were considered but determined to be of low risk. It is important to document hazards that were screened out (and why), in addition to those that were selected (and why). (Note: Evaluation of manmade hazards is encouraged, though not required to meet minimum criteria.) On Page 7, Towns associated with each Village should be specifically cited (i.e. “Village of XYZ – Town of ABC” in the “Municipality” column, with appropriate columns filled in.

•

2nd Review Comments: • The “Hazard Database” table (on page 9) indicates nine natural hazards (avalanche, drought, earthquake, landslide, winter storm, flood, tornado, wildfire, and windstorm) were identified and ranked using the HAZNY software program. These hazards were ranked as having a low, moderately low, moderately high or high hazard for all or all but one of the jurisdictions (except for avalanche which was ranked as a hazard by only seven of the 19 jurisdictions). • These hazards have been evaluated as shown in the Profiling Hazard Summary Table. Note that flooding includes dam failure and windstorm includes hurricane winds. Recommended Revisions: • Clearly identify (and then profile) each of the nine natural hazards on a county-wide basis for a more accurate, comprehensive treatment that will better ensure grant eligibility as described below under Profiling comments. Profiling Hazard Events (3-14) Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i): [The risk assessment shall include a] description of Pages 7, 8, 10-18, 22-24, 26, 28-31, 33, 35-37, N The County’s current Draft plan begins to address this requirement; however, the current text needs improvement to be considered acceptable. It appears as if composite hazard maps for each municipality have been

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) R E G I O N I I , M A R C H 1 7 , 2 0 0 5 – P A G E 11 the…location and extent of all natural hazards that can affect the jurisdiction. The plan shall include information on previous occurrences of hazard events and on the probability of future hazard events. 39, 41-44, 46, 48-50, 52, 54-57, 59, 62-63, 65, 67, 69, 71-73, 75, 77-79, 81, 84-87, 89, 91-93, 95, 97-99, 101, 103-106, 108, 111114, 116, 118-120, 122, 125128, 130, 133-136, and 138. reproduced poorly; i.e., some of the hashed lines tend to just fade away, making it impossible for the reader to know where the limits of each hazard area are. It also raises the question of whether there are some hazard areas mapped by municipalities that aren’t showing up at all in the plan’s photocopies. Improved quality reproductions are required. The plan is lacking discussion on magnitude or severity of the hazard events. Supporting text is lacking for the Town of Minerva. Discussion regarding conditions (such as topography, soil characteristics, meteorological conditions, etc., in various areas that make them prone to hazards) is lacking from the current Draft plan. Statements are made regarding what ‘is’ at risk versus what ‘is not’, but very little supporting documentation or backup rationale are presented to substantiate these conclusions. The plan does a good job of discussing historical events. However, one problem evident throughout the document is that municipalities indicate that a lack of historical occurrence is indicative of no risk. This may or may not be true, depending on specific circumstances in the community that will become evident after conducting a certain level of research and coordinating with other agencies. For example, one community states that “tornados” were deemed “no risk” because of “no documented history in the Town”. The fact that the committee is not aware of a tornado touchdown during their collective memories does not necessarily translate to zero risk. Some communities determined that earthquakes posed no risk at all, merely because they did not suffer any damages during the April 2002 event. Again, the point that lack of historical damages does not necessarily translate into zero risk could not be stressed enough. Another community determined that drought posed no risk because there wasn’t a public water supply in town. Lack of a public water supply does not translate into no risk from drought; what would happen in the municipality in a severe drought situation where many residents found their wells dry? This section for Minerva includes a series of tables, but a lack of any discussion. Global comment: it is difficult to understand how hazard profiles at each municipal government level were combined in the County section. Required Revisions: • For each identified natural hazard, describe the geographic extent (areas in the community that would be affected) of the hazard area in the text of the plan. (Note: Profiling of manmade hazards is encouraged, though not required to meet minimum criteria.) When available, use maps to supplement information provided in the text, for hazards with a recognizable geographic extent. For those hazards not geographically determined,

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) R E G I O N I I , M A R C H 1 7 , 2 0 0 5 – P A G E 12 identify applicable intensities. • For each identified hazard, document information on previous occurrences of hazard events in or near the community in terms of severity and resulting effects. Describe the damages caused by past events. For each identified hazard, evaluate the probability or likelihood of a future event. If the probability of an event is not known, provide a qualitative assessment of its likelihood of occurrence. Include a description of the analysis used to determine the likelihood. If a hazard has a low probability of occurrence or which is determined to be of low risk, state so and indicate that the plan will not provide any further analysis on such a hazard. Where information is not available, identify the data needed and steps to complete the analysis. Identify the collection of these data and steps as action items in the mitigation strategy.

•

•

•

2nd Review Comments: • The revised Plan generally profiles hazards by dividing the County by town boundaries and conducting a HAZNY analysis for each Town. The hazard HAZNY rankings for each town are summarized in the “Hazard Database” on page 9. • The Plan provides various profiling information (a) for the County in Section IIE, “Profiling of Hazard Events” on pages 12-20; and (b) for each of the 18 towns in the Town Section III, # 4 and #5, which include a HAZNY-derived hazard ranking, a discussion of past hazard events, and a map for each town’s top-ranked hazards (”Hazard Map”). • However, as discussed below, the Plan does not appear to provide the best readily available profiling information or to present it in an even and comprehensive way that links Town to Town and all the Towns to the County. • In the Profiling Natural Hazards Summary Table, each natural hazard has been scored “Satisfactory” or “Needs Improvement” according to whether the Plan’s risk assessment has identified and/or provided information on the following three elements: (A) geographic location, (B) previous occurrences, and (C) probability of future events. As indicated in this table, the revised Plan satisfies some, but not all, of the requirements for profiling hazards. Previous Occurrences: • The Plan describes the previous occurrences of the identified natural hazards.

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) R E G I O N I I , M A R C H 1 7 , 2 0 0 5 – P A G E 13 However, some recommendations for additional information are made below. Geographic Location and Probability of Future Events: • The geographic location of certain hazards (severe winter storm, drought, tornado, and windstorm) covers the entire County, so the location requirement for these hazards has been met. • The locations of the other five hazards (floods, earthquakes, landslides, wildfire, and avalanche) vary across the County. However, the 18 individual Town Hazard Maps, which presumably indicate hazard-prone areas (i.e., location and/or probability information), are problematic. First, no explanation or documentation was found for the different methodologies used to map the detailed location and probability within the town of each hazard, so it is not clear what specifically they represent or whether the best, readily available information was used for them. Second, each Town Hazard Map only shows that town’s top-ranked hazards as determined by a HAZNY-based ranking process. However, the HAZNY ranking process produced great and unexplained variations from one town to the next. In addition, a review of HAZNY output shows that it does not provide the best, readily available, documented, scientific, and detailed information on the geographic location of hazards, past occurrences and probability of future events. Third, profiling information typically does not follow political boundaries and more detailed and better documented information is readily available that describes hazard locations (and in some cases, the probability of future occurrence) through county-wide maps for each natural hazard. For instance, USGS maps and guidance in FEMA 386-2 indicate an earthquake hazard risk for all of Essex County. However, only three of the 18 Town Hazard Maps indicate any earthquake hazard, and more detailed information and trends (such as the increasing risk towards the northeastern portion of the county) are not reflected in these 18 separate maps. • The Plan states that Essex County “reviewed all hazards, but based on limited resources focused on those higher ranked hazards” (page 12). It is good that the County is being pragmatic and taking its limited resources into account. However, the County’s risk should be assessed and mitigation actions evaluated to the best extent practicable so that the County can use its limited resources to implement actions in more cost-effective way. In addition, as the above earthquake example demonstrates, it is not clear that each municipality has profiled each natural hazard for which it is at risk.

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) R E G I O N I I , M A R C H 1 7 , 2 0 0 5 – P A G E 14 Furthermore, certain Town Hazard Maps (such as for Moriah, North Hudson and Schroon) do not show any natural hazard and others only show wildfire (such as Lewis, Ticonderoga, Willsboro, and Minerva). This is of additional concern because consistency with this Plan is an eligibility requirement for funding various FEMA grant programs (e.g., if a hazard is not identified in a municipality, it may not be eligible for funding projects to reduce the risk of that hazard in that municipality). Required Revisions: • For each hazard with a “Needs Improvement” Score on the Profiling Hazards Table, describe the hazard’s location and/or probability of future occurrence with the best, readily available information. Recommended Revisions: • Meet the outstanding Required Revisions for best available information by profiling each of the nine natural hazards on a comprehensive, county-wide basis and documenting information sources. Replace the 18 separate town all-hazard maps with county-wide maps for each natural hazard for which the risk varies throughout the county (floods, earthquakes, landslides, wildfire, and avalanche). Include a statement specifying the hazards which have equal risk throughout the County (winter storm, drought, tornado and windstorm). • Meet the outstanding Required Revisions above by including and discussing the following hazard-specific information and how it applies to Essex County. Earthquake (location and probability): USGS map of peak ground acceleration (pga) with 10% probability of exceedance in 50 years (see FEMA 386-2, pages 1-7 and 2-15 and http://geohazards.cr.usgs.gov/eq/pubmaps/US.pga.050.map.gif or Fig. 3-30 in the NYS Mitigation Plan). Landslides (location and probability): the NYS Mitigation Plan includes an excellent map combining US and NYS Geological Survey susceptibility and incidence (Fig. 3-37, p. 3-132). Note that much of this material can also be obtained from the U.S. Geological Survey’s susceptibility/ incidence information and map (see FEMA 386-2, pages 1-11 and 2-27) and USGS National Landslide Map (see map and note that high resolution image and GIS files of this map and accompanying text information can be downloaded at http://landslides.usgs.gov/html_files/landslides/nationalmap/national.html ). • Flood (location and probability): Meet the outstanding Required Revisions for

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) R E G I O N I I , M A R C H 1 7 , 2 0 0 5 – P A G E 15 flooding by: (a) including Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) in the Plan (available online in digital format at www.fema.gov, under Flood Map Store and FEMA 386-2, page 2-10ff) and a brief discussion of V, A, or B flood zones; and (b) noting whether any FISes were done in the County and if so, indicating their date (see www.fema.gov, under Flood Map Store). • Wildfire and Avalanche (location and probability): map the general location of areas susceptible to (a) wildfire (such as forested areas), and (b) avalanche (such as with county-wide maps showing areas with greater elevation, annual snowfall, or slope). • Earthquake (previous occurrences): Incorporate the following from the NYS Mitigation Plan: (a) information on the 1983 magnitude 5.1 earthquake in Essex County (noted in Table 3-48 on p. 3-116), and (b) the map of historical earthquake epicenters that shows past occurrences in the northeastern portion of the State (Fig. 3-31, p. 3-114).

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) R E G I O N I I , M A R C H 1 7 , 2 0 0 5 – P A G E 16

Profiling Natural Hazards Summary Table for Local Communities
Note that this table is included to assist FEMA and the State in scoring each hazard. Local communities may find it useful to ensure that its plan addresses each requirement. Hazard Type Identified Hazards of Concern Yes Avalanche Coastal Erosion Drought Earthquake Expansive Soils Extreme Heat Flood – Riverine (1) Flood – Coastal Hailstorm Land Subsidence Landslide Severe Winter Storm (4) Tornado Tsunami Volcanic Hazards Wildfire Windstorm Other Other Other
(1)
(3) (2) (3) (3)

A. Geographic Location N S

B. Previous Occurrences N S

C. Probability of Future Events N S

Riverine flooding may include overflow from a river channel, flash floods, alluvial fan floods, mudflows and debris flows, ice-jam floods, local drainage or high groundwater levels, and fluctuating lake levels. (2) Coastal flooding includes storm surge and wave action. (3) Tropical and extratropical storms (such as hurricanes, northeasters and thunderstorms) are evaluated under their effects - winds, coastal flooding, and coastal erosion. (4) Severe winter storm may include extreme cold.

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) R E G I O N I I , M A R C H 1 7 , 2 0 0 5 – P A G E 17

Assessing Vulnerability: Overview (3-18)

Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(ii)(A): [The risk assessment shall include a] description of the jurisdiction’s vulnerability to the hazards described in paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section. This description shall include an overall summary of each hazard and its impact on the community.

Pages 7, 8, 10-18, 22-24, 28-31, 35-37, 41-44, 46, 48-50, 54-57, 62-63, 67, 71-73, 77-79, 84-87, 91-93, 97-99, 103106, 111114, 118120, 125128, and 133-136.

N

The County’s current Draft plan begins to address this requirement; however, the current text needs significant improvement to be considered acceptable. It is difficult to understand how vulnerability assessments at each municipal government level were combined in the County section. Certain inconsistencies exist between what is identified as a vulnerability in the County section versus the municipal sections, and no explanation or discussion is provided. The plan does little to evaluate the County’s vulnerability to each hazard or describe impacts on the community. HAZNY rankings are identified, but not supported by any text describing how and why they were ranked as such. This evaluation is important because the mere existence of a hazard in a community does not mean that vulnerabilities exist. (For example, some communities may have an extensive floodplain; but, if buildings and infrastructure are not located in this floodplain, then this community’s vulnerability to the flood hazard is likely to be minimal.) For the Town of Minerva, summary tables are provided but there is no supporting text. Required Revisions: • Expand upon the existing text to include an overview of the County’s vulnerability to each identified hazard. One approach for assessing a community’s vulnerability and potential impacts to identified hazards would be to: (1) estimate the total number of community assets (houses, stores, churches, police and fire stations, critical facilities, historic resources, etc.) within each of the identified hazard area boundaries; (2) compare the total number of community assets to the number of these assets located in each hazard area; (3) determine the percent of assets located within each hazard area; then (4) use these percentages to evaluate the anticipated potential impact of each hazard on the community. Document all steps in the new plan. • It would be helpful to see rankings on Page 7 of the Draft plan included in the associated text for each municipality as each hazard is discussed (i.e., after ‘Floods’ are discussed, include

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) R E G I O N I I , M A R C H 1 7 , 2 0 0 5 – P A G E 18 “Ranking = 3 (Moderately Low Hazard) based on….” and then identify the basis for the ranking. • The plan needs improvement in presenting a better overview of County-wide hazards, and how discussions in each of the municipality sections contributed to the overall County assessment. Where information is not available, identify the data needed and steps to complete the analysis. Identify the collection of these data and steps as action items in the mitigation strategy.

•

2nd Review Comments: • The revised Plan includes “Vulnerability Estimates” tables for each of the Towns. Each table lists the total number of structures (estimated from population data), their assessed total value, and the percent of these affected by hazard for the jurisdiction’s topranked HAZNY hazards. These tables also list by hazard the dollar losses of structures, content, and function. • However, the description in the Planning Section (p. 4) for how these tables were developed is limited. For example, how was the “% Affected” determined for each hazard? For earthquakes, it seems as if an equal risk was assumed for the whole county, and 25% structural loss applied. For flooding, a 30% structural loss was applied, but it is not clear if (or how) a percent of structures in a flood hazard area was determined. It is also not clear how the dollar losses for structures were calculated. • In addition, these Town Vulnerability Tables (like the Town Hazard Maps) only provide estimates for the top-ranked hazards according to HAZNY rather than for all the identified hazards. • Furthermore, no text was included explaining the findings of this vulnerability assessment and no other text was found that provides an overall summary of each hazard‘s impact on the community. Required Revisions: • Include, by hazard, a general description of the type of buildings and infrastructure affected by each of the nine identified natural hazards.

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) R E G I O N I I , M A R C H 1 7 , 2 0 0 5 – P A G E 19 Recommended Revisions: • Meet the outstanding Required Revisions by doing the following. (a) Describe the methodologies used in developing the Vulnerability Tables in more detail; (b) Include each of the nine identified hazards in the Town Vulnerability tables; and (c) Explain the findings of the vulnerability estimates. • Provide the data on which the vulnerability estimates are based, such as the Town population data. Assessing Vulnerability: Identifying Assets (3-18) Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(ii)(A): The plan should describe vulnerability in terms of: The types and numbers of existing and future buildings, infrastructure, and critical facilities located in the identified hazard areas… Pages 21, 27-27, 34-35, 40-41, 47-48, 53-54, 60-61, 66, 70-71, 76-77, 82-83, 90-91, 96-97, 102-103, 109-110, 117-118, 123-124, and 131-132. N Note: A less than “Satisfactory” score on this requirement will not preclude the plan from passing. The County’s current Draft plan begins to address this requirement; however, the current text needs significant improvement to be considered acceptable. The County’s current Draft plan identifies existing facilities in each municipality, but not County-wide, and not with regard to particular hazard area (or expected future conditions. The Draft plan does not identify types or numbers of existing buildings and infrastructure in the various hazard areas or for expected future buildings and infrastructure. The existing asset inventory does not address residential structures. Recommended Revisions: • For each identified hazard area, identify asset characteristics within each hazard area, to the greatest extent practicable using the best, readily-available data. This would include the number and type of existing and expected future assets within each hazard area. Assets can include residential, commercial, industrial, and municipal buildings; critical facilities, such as shelters and hospitals; and infrastructure, such as roadways, water, utilities, and communications systems. • Where information is not available, identify the data needed and steps to complete the analysis. Identify the collection of these data and steps as action items in the mitigation strategy.
nd

2

Review Comments:

• As described above, the Vulnerability Table in each Town section

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) R E G I O N I I , M A R C H 1 7 , 2 0 0 5 – P A G E 20 of the revised Plan does estimate the number of structures in some hazard areas. • However, these tables do not describe the types of buildings (residential, commercial, etc) – even though p. 4 of the Plan suggests that county-wide data was available and used to develop the Vulnerability Estimate Tables. • In addition, no additional text was found in the revised Plan addressing the 1st Review Comments and Revisions for providing a description of critical facilities, infrastructure, and future assets within each hazard area. Recommended Revisions: • Include an action step in the County’s mitigation strategy to identify the critical facilities, infrastructure, and future development within each identified hazard area. • Include available average county-wide data for building types (such as residential, commercial, and government). Assessing Vulnerability: Estimating Potential Losses (3-22) Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(ii)(B): [The plan should describe vulnerability in terms of an] estimate of the potential dollar losses to vulnerable structures identified in paragraph (c)(2)(i)(A) of this section and a description of the methodology used to prepare the estimate… N Note: A less than “Satisfactory” score on this requirement will not preclude the plan from passing. The County’s current Draft plan does not address this requirement. Recommended Revisions: • While calculating losses for all scenarios for all hazards may not be possible, select the most likely event for each prevalent hazard. Selecting one event for each hazard and assessing the losses within the associated hazard area boundary would be one way to identify parts of the County that could suffer the greatest losses. • Where information is not available, identify the data needed and steps to complete the analysis. Identify the collection of these data and steps as action items in the mitigation strategy.

2nd Review Comments: • The previously mentioned Vulnerability Estimates tables contain estimates of dollar losses to vulnerable structures in potential hazard areas. • However, as discussed above, it does not include a description of

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) R E G I O N I I , M A R C H 1 7 , 2 0 0 5 – P A G E 21 the methodology used to prepare the estimates. • For a step-by-step method for estimating losses, see Understanding Your Risks (FEMA 386-2), Step 4. Recommended Revisions: • Describe the methodology used to prepare the dollar loss estimates. Assessing Vulnerability: Analyzing Development Trends (3-24) Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(ii)(C): [The plan should describe vulnerability in terms of] providing a general description of land uses and development trends within the community so that mitigation options can be considered in future land use decisions. Pages 19, 25, 33, 38, 45, 51, 58, 64, 68, 74, 80, 88, 94, 100, 107, 115, 121, 129, and 137 N Note: A less than “Satisfactory” score on this requirement will not preclude the plan from passing. This criterion has not been adequately addressed in the County’s current Draft plan. While land use maps are provided for the County and each of the participating municipalities, no discussion is provided regarding development trends or land use in relation to hazard areas. This is important because development in hazard areas would put more assets at risk and, in turn, could work to increase potential disaster damages when the mitigation plan’s purpose is to reduce potential disaster damages. Recommended Revisions: • Describe land uses and development trends occurring or expected to occur in the community, with an eye to any planned (or potentially anticipated) changes in or near the hazard areas. • Where information is not available, identify the data needed and steps to complete the analysis. Identify the collection of these data and steps as action items in the mitigation strategy.
nd

2

Review Comments:

• No revisions were found addressing the 1st Review comments and Recommended Revisions. Recommended Revisions: • See 1st Review Recommended Revisions.

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) R E G I O N I I , M A R C H 1 7 , 2 0 0 5 – P A G E 22 Multi-Jurisdictional Risk Assessment (3-26) Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(iii): For multi-jurisdictional plans, the risk assessment section must assess each jurisdiction’s risks where they vary from the risks facing the entire planning area Pages 20138 S The plan does a good job of meeting this criteria. Discussions are presented for each of the participating municipalities.

MITIGATION STRATEGY

Note: Any changes made in the risk assessment, to address previous unsatisfactory or needs improvement scores, will need to be reflected in the Mitigation Strategy section to gain final approval of the plan. Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(i): [The hazard mitigation strategy shall include: a] description of mitigation goals to reduce or avoid long-term vulnerabilities to the identified hazards. Pages 4, 18, 22, 36, 43, 49, 55, 61, and 72. N The County’s current Draft plan begins to address this requirement; however, the current text needs significant improvement to be considered acceptable. The County’s current Draft plan identifies a series of four goals. The plan states that goals were developed by the County and its 22 municipalities in formal meetings, phone calls, and informal discussions, but does not describe how they were developed or through what methodology or rationale. It is unclear to the reviewer how goals are intended to address identified needs within the County. Each community also has separate sections entitled “Objectives and the Steps to Accomplish Them,” but there is no link between goals and objectives, or identified risks. In addition, many of the “objectives” are really “actions.” It is unclear how HAZNY rankings impacted selection of goals/objectives/actions in each municipality, and it is also unclear how these were pulled together at the County level. Finally, it is unclear to the reader why some hazards have “Objectives and Steps to Accomplish Them” while others do not (this is particularly confusing because in some communities, hazards are listed in order of risk, yet objectives and actions are identified for hazards of varying degrees of risk). A discussion of goals and objectives is missing for roughly half of the municipalities. The plan implies that goals presented on page 4 apply to all jurisdictions, but this should be clarified. In addition, a discussion of objectives is required. There is no apparent tie between goals and objectives, and subsequent actions.

Local Hazard Mitigation Goals (3-30)

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) R E G I O N I I , M A R C H 1 7 , 2 0 0 5 – P A G E 23 Required Revisions: • Review the results of the hazard identification and risk assessment process to gain an understanding of the County’s vulnerabilities to each of the prevalent hazards. Next, develop general goal statements that capture the collective opinion of what the Committee and the public hope to achieve in terms of mitigating damages from various hazards. • Describe in the text of the plan how these goals and objectives were developed by the Committee and how they relate to the risk assessment.

Recommended Revisions: • Explain the rationale/basis/methodology behind development of the selected four goals. • • Develop objectives, tied to each goal, and based on the results of the risk assessment. Consider restructuring the report. Goals and objectives are presented in one section of the report, mitigation actions in another. It is unclear how goals, objectives, and actions relate to one another, or to the identified needs and risks in the County. Compiling all goals, objectives, and actions into the same section of the report would help clarify the “bigger picture.” This can be done as a supplement to the community-specific discussions. However, in both cases, goals should clearly be linked to risks, and objectives should be identified for each goal.
nd

2

Review Comments:

• The revised Plan includes the same 4 goals (reduce risk to lives and property, reduce costs, ensure safe new development, and increase public involvement) for the County and municipalities. It describes how these goals were developed in the Planning section (p. 5). • It also includes a separate mitigation strategy table for each town (except Minerva) that includes a hierarchy of goals, objectives and actions. However, the overall strategy is unclear. The 17 separate town tables have many of the same actions. Each individual town table repeats the 4 goals for each hazard.

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) R E G I O N I I , M A R C H 1 7 , 2 0 0 5 – P A G E 24 Furthermore, the mitigation strategy for the County uses a different scheme. It is just lists goals and actions. There are no objectives or any other link between the goals and actions. • As with the individual Town profiling and vulnerability assessments (discussed above), the Town strategy tables only include the topranked HAZNY hazards, and do not appear to address all the hazards they should. • The revised Plan states on page 5 that public education efforts and building code enforcement are ongoing strategies to reduce vulnerability for natural hazards, such as earthquakes, tornadoes and winter storms. However, these actions are only referred to in very general terms. It is recommended that these actions be described in more detail and included as actions in the mitigation strategy as they could go a long way to satisfying the requirements for including the consideration of actions that address each appropriate natural hazard. Required Revisions: • After revising the risk assessment portion of the Plan as required, use the findings to refine the mitigation strategy, including all the appropriate hazards. • Clarify the mitigation strategy, including the connections between the actions of the County and each of the individual municipalities. Recommended Revisions: • Establish a single hierarchy for both county and municipalities of goals, objectives, and mitigation actions in which there are (a) objectives for each goal, and (b) mitigation actions for each objective. Number all the goals, objectives, and actions so the hierarchy is clear. The State of Washington’s approved plan (posted on the web at www.emd.wa.gov/3-map/mit/mit-pubs-forms/hazmit-plan/hazmitplan-idx.htm) provides an excellent example for the above recommendation. For instance, this plan has five separate goals (protect life, protect property, promote a sustainable economy, protect the environment, and increase public preparedness). Under Goal 5 (increase public preparedness) is Objective 5.3 (improve public knowledge of hazards and protective measures so individuals respond appropriately during hazard events), and under this objective is Action 5.3.2 (develop and implement a

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) R E G I O N I I , M A R C H 1 7 , 2 0 0 5 – P A G E 25 coordinated all-hazard public education strategy, including programs and materials). • Include ongoing, community public education efforts and building code enforcement as actions in the mitigation strategy. Identification and Analysis of Mitigation Measures (3-34) Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(ii): [The mitigation strategy shall include a] section that identifies and analyzes a comprehensive range of specific mitigation actions and projects being considered to reduce the effects of each hazard, with particular emphasis on new and existing buildings and infrastructure. Pages 5, 18, 23-24, 29-31, 36-37, 43-44, 49-50, 55-57, 62-63, 72-73, 78-79, 85-87, 92-93, 98-99, 105-106, 112-114, 119-120, 126-128, and 134-136. N The County’s current Draft plan begins to address this requirement; however, the current text needs significant improvement to be considered acceptable. While the plan identifies a range of specific mitigation actions, it fails to present an analysis of these actions. It is also unclear how actions relate to identified goals and objectives. In addition, many action items are lacking project descriptions, implementation time lines, implementation costs, and identification of responsible parties. Each municipality has an “Action Plan” section; however, this section does very little to describe to the reader what the plan of action really is. It is unclear how the seven mitigation projects identified on Page 5 were developed, or how they relate to discussions in the municipality sections. Significant clarification is required. “Actions” are identified in multiple places in the report, and it is unclear what the County and its municipalities really intend to move forward with, A discussion of mitigation actions is missing for the Town of Minerva. While not all of the mitigation actions evaluated may ultimately be part of the mitigation strategy due to prohibitive costs, scale, low benefit/cost ratios, or other concerns, it is important to describe the process by which particular mitigation actions were selected (and why), or rejected (and why). Required Revisions: • Describe the approach used by the County and its participating municipalities to developing the identified actions, and how they relate to their goals and objectives. • Describe the approach used by the County and its participating municipalities to evaluate these actions and select those that achieve the community’s goals and objectives. Describe the process by which the County and its participating

•

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) R E G I O N I I , M A R C H 1 7 , 2 0 0 5 – P A G E 26 municipalities selected particular mitigation actions. • • Discuss who participated in the process (County and participating municipalities). One way to meet this requirement would be to start by identifying and evaluating potential loss-reduction actions for each objective. Then, narrow down this list of potential actions to include only those actions that have been deemed to be the most feasible, after consideration of a range of factors, such as costs, benefits, expected degree of public support, local capabilities, and potential environmental impacts. Clearly describe the evaluation process, identifying action items that were screened out (and why), as well as those that were selected (and why).

2nd Review Comments: • See 2nd Review Comments and Revisions on developing a mitigation strategy above (under Goals). Implementation of Mitigation Measures (3-36) Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(iii): [The mitigation strategy section shall include] an action plan describing how the actions identified in section (c)(3)(ii) will be prioritized, implemented, and administered by the local jurisdiction. Prioritization shall include a special emphasis on the extent to which benefits are maximized according to a cost benefit review of the proposed projects and their associated costs. Pages 5, 18, 23-24, 29-31, 36-37, 43-44, 49-50, 55-57, 62-63, 72-73, 78-79, 85-87, 92-93, 98-99, 105-106, 112-114, 119-120, 126-128, and 134-136. N The County’s current Draft plan begins to address this requirement; however, the current text needs significant improvement to be considered acceptable. The City’s current Draft plan does not indicate how or why the actions were selected. It is unclear whether all of the actions identified throughout the document will be implemented, or only those actions identified in the summary table on Page 5. After the rationale behind selecting and prioritizing actions, the plan requires estimated costs, implementation time lines, funding sources, responsible parties, and implementation methods for each selected project/action. While this is done in the table presented on Page 5, it is not done as actions are identified throughout the remainder of the document. Required Revisions: • Devise a strategy for prioritizing, implementing, and administering only the selected actions (not all that were evaluated). Describe how and by whom the strategy was developed.

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) R E G I O N I I , M A R C H 1 7 , 2 0 0 5 – P A G E 27 • Use this strategy to prioritize the selected actions. Describe how the selected action items were prioritized, and how they will be implemented and administered by the Village. The prioritization strategy should be based on a cost-benefit review of the proposed actions and their associated costs, to the greatest extent practicable using best available data. If cost and benefit data are missing, an order of magnitude estimate will suffice for planning purposes. Ensure that priority mitigation actions are described, and that cost estimates, funding sources, responsible parties, implementation time lines, and implementation methods are identified.

•

2nd Review Comments: • The revised Plan includes additional narrative on p. 5 that describes the planning team’s prioritization process that pragmatically emphasizes costs because of the County’s limited resources. • Although the prioritized actions are described repeatedly in County and individual Town strategy tables, they are described each time only briefly. • The Essex County Project List on p. 6 and the individual Town mitigation strategy tables include some, but not all, of the required implementation information. For instance, the Town tables do not include cost estimates, funding sources, and implementation time lines. Required Revisions: • Describe the priority actions in more detail. • Ensure implementation information (including responsible parties, cost estimate, potential funding sources, and time line) are identified for each priority action. Recommended Revisions: • Include a single, unified implementation table covering the County and all municipalities.

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) R E G I O N I I , M A R C H 1 7 , 2 0 0 5 – P A G E 28 Multi-jurisdictional Mitigation Strategy (3-40) Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(iv): For multi-jurisdictional plans, there must be identifiable action items specific to the jurisdiction requesting FEMA approval or credit of the plan. Pages 5, 18, 23-24, 29-31, 36-37, 43-44, 49-50, 55-57, 62-63, 72-73, 78-79, 85-87, 92-93, 98-99, 105-106, 112-114, 119-120, 126-128, and 134-136. N The County’s current Draft plan begins to address this requirement; however, the current text needs significant improvement to be considered acceptable. It is unclear whether all of the actions identified throughout the document (for individual jurisdictions) will be implemented, or only those actions identified in the summary table on Page 5. 2
nd

Review Comments:

• The revised Plan does have a list of mitigation actions specific for the top-rated hazards of each town. However, certain towns (such as Schroon, North Hudson, and Moriah) have not identified any natural hazards as their highest priority, and accordingly have not listed an identifiable action items addressing any natural hazard. Required Revisions: • Ensure that each jurisdiction includes an action item addressing one or more natural hazards. Recommended Revisions: • Consider revisions described above for including county-wide actions in which all jurisdictions participate and that address one or more natural hazards, such as a public education project for flooding, earthquakes and/or other hazards.

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) R E G I O N I I , M A R C H 1 7 , 2 0 0 5 – P A G E 29 PLAN MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES Monitoring, Evaluating, and Updating the Plan (3-44) Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(i): [The plan maintenance process shall include a section describing the] method and schedule of monitoring, evaluating, and updating the mitigation plan within a five-year cycle. Page 4 N The County’s current Draft plan begins to address this requirement; however, the current text needs significant improvement to be considered acceptable. The plan states that various County and municipal officials, emergency personnel, committee members, and community members will review and evaluate the plan throughout the year as objectives are met. The plan also states that each year in January, it will be reviewed and passed by local jurisdiction resolutions for the coming year, and that any updates will be recorded at that time and on a five year cycle. The plan needs to include the following items: a specific schedule or timeline for the review and evaluation; identification of particular responsible parties and their roles; criteria and methodology for review and evaluation; what will trigger and update and the process for such. Required Revisions: Clearly present the methods that will be used to perform evaluations of the Plan. Examples can include an assessment of goals and in relation to current conditions; a change in the nature or magnitude of risks; the ability of current resources to implement the plan; and whether or not other agencies/partners have participated as proposed. • Describe specific plan update procedures, including who will update the document and when the update will occur. 2nd Review Comments: • Section E (Monitoring, Evaluating, and Adoption Procedures, p.6) of the Plan Overview does describe the schedule for maintaining the Plan; it indicates that the Plan will be reviewed, evaluated and updated annually. • The Plan also states that it will be adopted annually. However, it should be noted that this effort is not required by FEMA and it may not provide any benefit to the County. • The Plan describes in very general terms that the emergency committee, county and town boards, and emergency management

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) R E G I O N I I , M A R C H 1 7 , 2 0 0 5 – P A G E 30 agencies will participate in the annual review. • However, no text was found addressing the 1st Review requirements to clearly describe the method for evaluating and updating the Plan. Recommended Revisions: • Meet the outstanding 1st Review requirements by specifying (a) the particular parties responsible for evaluating and updating the Plan, and (b) the criteria to be used in evaluating the Plan. Implementation Through Existing Programs (3-48) Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(ii): [The plan shall include a] process by which local governments incorporate the requirements of the mitigation plan into other planning mechanisms such as comprehensive or capital improvement plans, when appropriate… Not found N The County’s current Draft plan does not address this requirement. Required Revisions: • Describe how mitigation recommendations will be integrated into job descriptions, comprehensive plans, capital improvement plans, zoning and building codes, site reviews, permitting, and other planning tools, where such tools are the appropriate vehicles for implementation. 2
nd

Review Comments:

• The Revised Plan still has no text that addresses this requirement. • For more information on integrating hazard mitigation activities in other initiatives, see Bringing the Plan to Life (FEMA 386-4), Step 2, Task B on pp. 2-6 to 2-9. Note that you can access this and other Mitigation Planning How-to guides on the web: http://www.fema.gov/fima/planresource.shtm or by contacting the FEMA Publication Warehouse: 1-800-480-2520. Required Revisions: • Identify other local planning mechanisms available for incorporating
the requirements of the mitigation plan and describe the process by which the local government will incorporate the requirements in other plans, when appropriate.

Recommended Revisions: • For communities that do not have a comprehensive plan or other similar planning mechanisms, explain how the mitigation recommendations would be implemented. Continued Public Involvement (3-50) Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(iii): [The plan maintenance process Page 4 N The County’s current Draft plan begins to address this requirement; however, the current text needs significant improvement to be

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) R E G I O N I I , M A R C H 1 7 , 2 0 0 5 – P A G E 31 shall include a] discussion on how the community will continue public participation in the plan maintenance process. considered acceptable. Text on Page 4 does allude to the fact that members of the community will have some role in the plan maintenance process, but no details are provided such as how and when public feedback will be solicited, or how this feedback will be incorporated into the process. Required Revisions: • Identify and explore a broad range of opportunities not only to inform the public of the plan’s annual review, but to invite real public participation and involvement in the stages of the plan maintenance process. Examples include notices in the local newspaper, a public meeting or mailing, a Web site article, etc. • 2
nd

Describe how the public feedback will be incorporated into the process. Review Comments:

• No mention was found in the revised Plan for continued public participation. • However, this requirement could be met by continuing the public outreach measures begun during Plan development (announcing and holding meetings open to the public as described on p. 4). Required Revisions: • Describe continuing participation opportunities for the public. Recommended Revisions: • Meet the outstanding requirement by including continuing announced public meetings. • Consider including additional measures (such as posting proposed changes to the plan on the Web, and having the proposed plan changes available for review and comment at public libraries). ADDITIONAL STATE REQUIREMENTS States that have additional requirements can add them in the appropriate sections of the Plan Review Criteria or create a new section. States need then modify this worksheet to record the score for those requirements. Insert State Requirement (s)

PRELIMINARY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW – ESSEX COUNTY, NY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (VERSION 2ND DRAFT) R E G I O N I I , M A R C H 1 7 , 2 0 0 5 – P A G E 32

APPENDIX C INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS - PROFESSIONAL SERVICE PROVIDERS
I. The Contractor shall procure and maintain during the entire term of the contract the following required insurance: = Workers’ Compensation Statutory Workers’ Compensation and Employers’ Liability Insurance for all employees, except that in the event the Contractor has no employees and is exempt by law from having such insurance coverage the Contractor may provide an exemption statement. = Professional Liability Insurance $1,000,000 per occurrence / $2,000,000 aggregate for the negligent or wrongful professional acts of the Contractor. = Commercial General Liability Insurance $1,000,000 per occurrence/ $2,000,000 aggregate. II. Notwithstanding any terms, conditions or provisions, in any other writing between the parties, the Contractor hereby agrees (except as to workers’ compensation insurance coverage) to either effectuate (a) the naming of the County as an “additional insured as funding source for contract services” on the contractor's insurance policies, or (b) the inclusion of a contractual liability endorsement covering the Contractor’s contract with the County. III. The policy/policies of insurance furnished by the Contractor shall: = be from an A.M. Best rated “A” New York State licensed insurer; = contain a 30-day notice of cancellation;

IV. In the event that the Contractor is unable to furnish professional liability insurance other than on a “claims made” basis, the Contractor shall procure and maintain a separate “tail” policy of such insurance providing the required coverage, or furnish proof of continuous coverage under the existing policy, for a period of one year and ninety days following the termination date of this contract. V. The contractor agrees to indemnify the County for any applicable deductibles.

VI. Contractor acknowledges that failure to obtain such insurance on behalf of the County constitutes a material breach of contract and subjects it to liability for damages, indemnification and all other legal remedies available to the County. Prior to the commencement of work or use of facilities the Contractor shall provide to the County proof that such requirements have been met by furnishing certificate(s) of such insurance and the declarations pages from the policies of such insurance. The failure of the County to object to the contents of the certificate(s) and/or declarations pages, or the absence of same, shall not be deemed a waiver of any and all rights held by the County. VI. All certificates of insurance will provide 30 days notice to the county of cancellation or non-renewal. VII. Contractor and subcontractor waives all rights of subrogation against the owner and will have the General Liability, Umbrella Liability Workers’ Compensation policies endorsed setting forth this Waiver of Subrogation.

APPENDIX D - STANDARD CLAUSES FOR ESSEX COUNTY CONTRACTS Independent Contractor Status The parties each acknowledge, covenant and agree that the relationship of the Contractor to the County shall be that of an independent contractor. The Contractor, in accordance with its status as an independent contractor, further covenants and agrees that it: (a) will conduct itself in accordance with its status as an independent contractor; (b) will neither hold itself out as nor claim to be an officer or employee of the County; and (c) will not make any claim, demand or application for any right or privilege applicable to an officer or employee of the County, including but not limited to workers' compensation benefits, unemployment insurance benefits, social security coverage or retirement membership or credits. 2. Contractor To Comply With Laws/Regulations The Contractor shall at all times comply with all applicable state and federal laws, rules and regulations governing the performance and rendition of the services to be furnished under this agreement. 3. Licenses, Permits, Etc. The Contractor shall, during the term of this agreement, obtain and keep in full force and effect any and all licenses, permits and certificates required by any governmental authority having jurisdiction over the rendition and performance of the services to be furnished by the Contractor under this agreement. 4. Termination This agreement may be terminated without cause by either party upon 30 days prior written notice, and upon such termination neither party shall have any claim or cause of action against the other except for services actually performed and mileage expenses actually incurred prior to such termination. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this agreement may be immediately terminated by the County: (a) for the Contractor's breach of this agreement, by serving written notice of such termination stating the nature of the breach upon the Contractor by personal delivery or by certified mail, return receipt requested, and upon such termination either party shall have such rights and remedies against the other as provided by law; or (b) upon the reduction or discontinuance of funding by the State or Federal governments to be used in furnishing some or all of the work, labor and/or services provided for under this agreement, and upon such termination neither party shall have any claim or cause of action against the other except for services actually performed and expenses (if the same are to be paid under this agreement) actually incurred prior to such termination. 1.

Defense & Indemnification The Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the County to the fullest extent allowed by law from and against any and all liability, suits, judgments, orders, causes of action, and claims, including but not limited to those for bodily injury, property damage, death, and reasonable attorney's fees, arising out of or in connection with the Contractor's negligence and/or its performance or failure to perform this agreement 6. Discrimination Prohibited The services to be furnished and rendered under this agreement by the Contractor shall be available to any and all residents of Essex County without regard to race, color, creed, sex, religion, national or ethnic origin, handicap, or source of payment; and under no circumstances shall a resident's financial ability to pay for the services provided be considered unless such consideration is allowed by State and/or Federal law, rule or regulation. 7. Non-Discrimination In Employment The Contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, creed, color, sex, national origin, age, disability or marital status. In the event that this is a contract to be performed in whole or in part within the State of New York for (a) the construction, alteration or repair of any public building or public work, (b) for the manufacture, sale or distribution of materials, equipment or supplies, (c) for building service, the Contractor agrees that neither it nor its subcontractors shall, by reason of race, creed, color, disability, sex or national origin: (1) discriminate in hiring against any citizen who is qualified and available to perform the work; or (2) discriminate against or intimidate any employee hired for the performance of work under this contract. The Contractor agrees to be subject to fines of $50.00 per person per day for any violation of this paragraph, as well as to possible termination of this contract or forfeiture of all moneys due hereunder for a second or subsequent violation. Damage/Injury To Persons & Property The Contractor shall promptly advise the County of all damages to property of the County or of others, or of injuries incurred by persons other than employees of the Contractor, in any manner relating, either directly or indirectly, to the performance of this agreement. Records The Contractor shall establish and maintain complete and accurate books, records, documents, accounts and other evidence directly pertinent to performance under this contract (hereinafter collectively "the Records") in accordance with the following requirements: (a) the Records must be kept for the balance of the calendar year in which they were made and for six (6) additional years thereafter; 9. 8.

5.

(b)

the County Auditor, State Comptroller, the Attorney General or any other person or entity authorized to conduct an examination, as well as the agency or agencies involved in this contract, shall have access to the Records during normal business hours at an office of the Contractor within the State of New York, or, if no such office is available, at a mutually agreeable and reasonable venue within the State, for the term specified above for the purposes of inspection, auditing and copying.

The County shall take reasonable steps to protect from public disclosure any of the records which are exempt from disclosure under Section 87 of the Public Officers Law (the "Statute") provided that: (i) the Contractor shall timely inform an appropriate County official, in writing, that said records should not be disclosed; and (ii) said records shall be sufficiently identified and designation of said records as exempt under the statute is reasonable. Nothing contained herein shall diminish, or in any way adversely affect, the County's right to discovery in any pending or future litigation. 10. Claims For Payment All invoices or claims for which payment is sought from the County must be submitted in accordance with the following: (a) each claim for payment must include (1) an invoice detailing the claim, (2) copies of all documentation supporting the claim, (3) a properly completed County standard voucher, which includes (i) the County contract number under which payment is being claimed, AND (ii) the payee's Federal employer identification number or Federal social security number, or both such numbers when the payee has both such numbers. [Failure to include this number or numbers will prevent and preclude payment by the County; except that where the payee does not have such number or numbers, the payee, on the invoice or County voucher, must give the reason or reasons why the payee does not have such number or numbers and such reasons constitute a valid excuse under law.] (b) Unless otherwise provided in this agreement, each claim for payment must be submitted to the County no later than 30 days after the work, labor, materials, and/or services for which payment is claimed were rendered or furnished. (c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this agreement, no claim for payment shall be valid, and the County shall not be liable for payment thereof, unless it is submitted to the County within 30 days of the close of the calendar year in which the work, labor, materials, and/or services for which payment is claimed were rendered or furnished. (d) Unless otherwise provided in this agreement, the requirements of this paragraph 10, and/or of any other provisions of this agreement which supersede the same, shall constitute conditions precedent to the County’s payment obligation, and failure to comply with any or all of said requirements shall entitle the County to deny payment.

Consent In the event that State or Federal law requires the recipient of services to be furnished and rendered under this agreement to give his/her prior consent thereto, the contractor shall obtain such person's consent and furnish proof thereof to the County. 12. Executory Clause The County shall have no liability under this contract to the Contractor or to anyone else beyond the funds appropriated and available for this contract. 13. Public Work & Building Service Contract Requirements If this is a public work contract covered by Article 8 of the Labor Law or a building service contract covered by Article 9 thereof: (a) neither the Contractor's employees nor the employees of its subcontractors may be required or permitted to work more than the number of hours or days stated in said statutes, except as otherwise provided in the Labor Law and as set forth in prevailing wage and supplement schedules issued by the State Labor Department; and (b) the Contractor and its subcontractors must pay at least the prevailing wage rate and pay or provide the prevailing supplements, including the premium rates for overtime pay, as determined by the State Labor Department in accordance with the Labor Law. 14. (a) (b) Public Work Contracts – Hazardous Substances If this is a contract for public work, the Contractor agrees as follows: the Contractor acknowledges that the County uses and/or produces various substances which may be classified as hazardous under OSHA’s Hazard Communication Standard; the Contractor recognizes the use of said substances by the County and acknowledges that the County has provided, or upon request will provide, the Contractor with a description of such substances which may be present in the area of the County’s facility/facilities to which the Contractor may have accessed during the performance of this contract; the Contractor acknowledges that the County has provided, or upon request will provide, suggestions for appropriate protective measures which should be observed when the Contractor is in the area of any such hazardous substances; the Contractor agrees to be solely responsible for providing training and information to its employees regarding any such hazardous substances, as well as of any protective measures suggested by the County; the Contractor agrees to be solely responsible to ensure that the Contractor’s employees observe protective measures during the performance of their duties in the performance of the contract, and that all such protective measures will be at least as stringent as those suggested or which would have been suggested by the County; in the event that the Contractor’s performance of the work under this contract requires the use of any hazardous substances, the Contractor shall notify the

11.

(c) (d) (e)

(f)

(g)

County in advance of bringing in and/or using such substances in or upon County property and suggest to the County appropriate measures to be observed by the County, its officers and employees, and/or the public; and in the event the Contractor fails in whole or in part to comply with the terms of this paragraph, the County shall have the right to interrupt the Contractor’s work and/or terminate this contract, and the Contractor shall be prohibited from renewing such work until all applicable safety and health procedures and practices are implemented by the Contractor.

15.

Disputes Disputes involving this contract, including the breach or alleged breach thereof, may not be submitted to binding arbitration, but must, instead, by heard in a court of competent jurisdiction within the State of New York. Non-Assignment This agreement may not be assigned, subcontracted, transferred, conveyed, sublet or otherwise disposed of in whole or in part, by the Contractor, without the prior written consent of the County, and any attempts to assign the contract without the County's written consent are null and void. 17. No Collusion If this contract was awarded based upon the submission of bids, the Contractor warrants, under penalty of perjury, that: (a) its bid was arrived at independently and without collusion aimed at restricting competition; and (b) at the time Contractor submitted its bid, an authorized and responsible person executed and delivered to the County a non-collusive bidding certification on Contractor's behalf. 18. International Boycott In accordance with Section 220-f of the Labor Law, if this contract exceeds $5,000.00, the Contractor agrees, as a material condition of the contract, that neither the Contractor nor any substantially owned or affiliated person, firm, partnership or corporation, has participated, is participating, or shall participate in an International boycott in violation of the federal Export Administration Act of 1979, or regulations thereunder. If such contractor, or any of the aforesaid affiliates of Contractor, is convicted, or is otherwise found to have violated said laws or regulations upon the final determination of the United States Commerce Department or any other appropriate agency of the United States subsequent to the contract's execution, such contract, amendment or modification thereto shall be rendered forfeit and void. The Contractor shall so notify the County Manager within five (5) business days of such conviction, determination or disposition of appeal. 19. County’s Rights of Set-Off The County shall have all of its common law, equitable and statutory rights of setoff. These rights shall include, but not be limited to, the County's option to withhold for 16.

the purposes of set-off any moneys due to the Contractor under this agreement up to any amounts due and owing to the County with regard to this contract, any other contract with any County department or agency, including any contract for a term commencing prior to the term of this contract, plus any amounts due and owing to the County for any other reason, including, without limitation, tax delinquencies, fee delinquencies or monetary penalties relative thereto. The County shall exercise its setoff rights in accordance with normal County practices, including, in cases of set-off pursuant to an audit, the acceptance of such audit by the County Board of Supervisors or its designated representative. Contractor Defined Whenever the term "Contractor" is used in this agreement, such term shall include and apply to all employees, all officers, directors and agents, if any, of the Contractor. 21. Amendment This agreement may not be amended, modified or renewed except by written agreement signed by the Contractor and the County. 22. Ownership Of Work Products All final and written or tangible work products completed by the Contractor shall belong to the County. In the event of premature discontinuance of performance, the Contractor agrees to deliver all existing products and data files to the County. Executive Order Debarment/Suspension In the event that this contract involves the Contractor furnishing goods and services in excess of $100,000.00, or constitutes a subaward to subrecipients, under any Federal program, grant or other funding source, then by executing this agreement the Contractor certifies that neither it nor any of its principals are suspended or debarred within the scope or meaning of Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, any Federal or State regulation implementing or codifying the same, or any other Federal or State law, rule or regulation. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) In the event that this contract involves the use or disclosure of protected health information within the meaning or application of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), and the regulations thereunder, the following provisions of this paragraph shall apply. (a) Definitions. The terms used, but not otherwise defined, in this Agreement shall have the same meaning as given such terms in 45 CFR §160.103 and §164.501, as the same may be amended from time to time, including but not limited to the following. (1) "Business Associate" shall mean the Contractor, its officers, employees, agents and subcontractors. (2) "Covered Entity" shall mean Essex County (the “County”), its departments, 24. 23. 20.

agencies, officers and employees. (3) "Individual" shall have the same meaning as given such term in 45 CFR §164.501 and shall also include a person who qualifies as a personal representative in accordance with 45 CFR §164.502(g). (4) "Privacy Rule" shall mean the Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information at 45 CFR Part 160 and Part 164, subparts A and E. (5) "Protected Health Information" shall have the same meaning as given such term in 45 CFR §164.501, limited to the information created or received by Contractor from or on behalf of the County. (6) "Required by law" shall have the same meaning as given such term in 45 CFR §164.501. (7) "Secretary" shall mean the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services or his/her designee. (b) Obligations and Activities of Contractor. Contractor agrees to: (1) not use or disclose Protected Health Information other than as permitted or required by this Agreement or as required by law; (2) use appropriate safeguards to prevent use or disclosure of the Protected Health Information other than as provided for by this Agreement; (3) mitigate, to the extent practicable, any harmful effect that is known, should have been known, and/or discovered to/by Contractor of a use or disclosure of Protected Health Information by Contractor in violation of the requirements of this Agreement; (4) report to the County any use or disclosure of the Protected Health Information not provided for by this Agreement of which it becomes aware; (5) ensure that any agent, including a subcontractor, to whom it provides Protected Health Information received from, or created or received by Contractor on behalf of the County agrees to the same restrictions and conditions that apply through this Agreement to Contractor with respect to such information; (6) provide access, at the request of the County, and in the time and manner designated by the County or the Secretary, to Protected Health Information in a Designated Record Set, to the County or, as directed by the County, to an Individual in order to meet the requirements under 45 CFR §164.524; (7) make any amendment(s) to Protected Health Information in a Designated Record Set that the County directs or agrees to pursuant to 45 CFR §164.526 at the request of the County or an Individual, and in the time and manner designated by the County or the Secretary; (8) make internal practices, books, and records, including policies and procedures and Protected Health Information, relating to the use and disclosure of Protected Health Information received from, or created or received by Contractor on behalf of, the County available to the County, and/or to the Secretary, in a time and manner designated by the County or by the Secretary, for purposes of the Secretary determining the County's compliance with the Privacy Rule;

(9) document such disclosures of Protected Health Information and information related to such disclosures as would be required for the County to respond to a request by an Individual for an accounting of disclosures of Protected Health Information in accordance with 45 CFR §164.528; (10) provide to the County or an Individual, in time and manner designated by the County or the Secretary, information collected in accordance with the above subparagraph (b)(9) of this Agreement, to permit the County to respond to a request by an Individual for an accounting of disclosures of Protected Health Information in accordance with 45 CFR §164.528. (c) Permitted Uses and Disclosures by Contractor. Except as otherwise limited in this Agreement, Contractor may use or disclose Protected Health Information on behalf of, or to provide services to, the persons entitled to services under this Agreement: (1) solely for the purposes of performing Contractor’s obligations under this Agreement, if such use or disclosure of Protected Health Information would not violate the Privacy Rule if done by the County or the minimum necessary policies and procedures of the County; or (2) provided that such use or disclosures are required by law; or (3) Contractor (A) obtains written authorization(s) from the individual to which the information pertains permitting the specific uses or disclosures of such information to third persons, (B) represents and agrees in writing with such individual that the information to be used and/or disclosed will remain confidential and used or further disclosed only as required by law or for the purposes specified in the written authorization(s), and (C) such third persons agree in writing to notify the County as soon as practicable and in writing of any instances of which such third person(s) is/are aware in which the confidentiality of the information has been breached; or (4) provide Data Aggregation services to the County as permitted by 42 CFR §164.504(e)(2)(i)(B); or (5) report violations of law to appropriate Federal and State authorities, consistent with §164.502(j)(1). (d) County To Inform Contractor of Privacy Practices and Restrictions. The County agrees to notify the Contractor of any (1) limitation(s) in its notice of privacy practices of the County in accordance with 45 CFR §164.520, to the extent that such limitation may affect the Contractor's use or disclosure of Protected Health Information; (2) changes in, or revocation of, permission by Individual to use or disclose Protected Health Information, to the extent that such changes may affect the Contractor's use or disclosure of Protected Health Information; and/or (3) restriction to the use or disclosure of Protected Health Information that the County has agreed to in accordance with 45 CFR §164.522, to the extent that

such restriction may affect Contractor's use or disclosure of Protected Health Information. Permissible Requests by County. The County shall not request Contractor to use or disclose Protected Health Information in any manner that would not be permissible under the Privacy Rule if done by the County; except that in the event that the services to be furnished by the Contractor under this Agreement requires data aggregation by the Contractor, the Contractor may use or disclose protected health information for such data aggregation or management and administrative activities of Contractor. (f) Survival of Provisions. The obligations of the Contractor under this paragraph 24 shall survive the expiration of the term of this Agreement and/or the termination of this Agreement, and said obligations shall remain effective and shall not terminate until all of the Protected Health Information provided by the County to Contractor, or created or received by Contractor on behalf of the County, is destroyed or returned to the County, or, if it is infeasible to return or destroy Protected Health Information, protections are extended to such information, in accordance with the termination provisions in subparagraph (g) below. (g) Return or Destruction of Protected Health Information. Except as otherwise provided below, upon termination of this Agreement for any reason, Contractor shall return or destroy all Protected Health Information received from the County, or created or received by Contractor on behalf of the County. This provision shall apply to Protected Health Information that is in the possession of subcontractors or agents of Contractor. Contractor shall retain no copies of the Protected Health Information. In the event that Contractor determines that returning or destroying the Protected Health Information is infeasible, Contractor shall provide to the County notification of the conditions that make return or destruction infeasible. Upon determination by the County that return or destruction of Protected Health Information is infeasible, Contractor shall extend the protections of this Agreement to such Protected Health Information and limit further uses and disclosures of such Protected Health Information to those purposes that make the return or destruction infeasible, for so long as Contractor maintains such Protected Health Information. (h) (e)

Termination for Cause. Upon the County's knowledge of a material breach of this paragraph by Contractor, the County shall: (1) either: (A) provide an opportunity for Contractor to cure the breach or end the violation and terminate this Agreement within the time specified by the County, or (B) immediately terminate this Agreement if cure is not possible; and (2) report the violation to the Secretary.

(I)

Miscellaneous. (1) Regulatory References. A reference in this Agreement to a section in the Privacy Rule means the section as in effect or as amended. (2) Amendment. The Parties agree to take such action as is necessary to amend this Agreement from time to time as is necessary for the County to comply with the requirements of the Privacy Rule and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-191. (3) Survival. The respective rights and obligations of Contractor under this paragraph 24 of this Agreement shall survive the termination of this Agreement. (4) Interpretation. Any ambiguity in this Agreement shall be resolved to permit the County to comply with the Privacy Rule.

25.

Severability If any term or provision of this agreement or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall to any extent be held invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this agreement or the application of such term or provision to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected thereby and every other term and provision of this agreement shall be valid and be enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law. 26.

Entire Agreement This agreement is the entire agreement between the parties, and the same shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of New York.

NON-COLLUSIVE BIDDING CERTIFICATION
1. By submission of this bid, the undersigned bidder and each person signing on behalf of such bidder certifies – and in the case of a joint bid each party thereto certifies as to its own organization – UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY, that to the best of the undersigned’s knowledge and belief: (a) The prices in this bid have been arrived at independently without collusion, consultation, communication, or agreement, for the purpose of restricting competition, as to any matter relating to such prices with any other bidder or with any competitor; (b) Unless otherwise required by law, the prices which have been quoted in this bid have not been knowingly disclosed by the bidder and will not knowingly be disclosed by the bidder prior to opening, directly or indirectly, to any other bidder or to any competitor; and (c) No attempt has been made or will be made by the bidder to induce any other person, partnership or corporation to submit or not to submit a bid for the purpose of restricting competition. 2. The undersigned acknowledges and agrees that a bid shall not be considered for award nor shall any award be made where any of the above have not been complied with; provided however, that if in any case the bidder cannot make the foregoing certification, the bidder shall so state and shall furnish with the bid a signed statement which sets forth in detail the reasons therefor. Where one or more of the above has/have not been complied with, the bid shall not be considered for award nor shall any award be made unless the political subdivision, public department, agency or official thereof to which the bid is made, or his designee, determines that such disclosure was not made for the purpose of restricting competition. 3. The undersigned also acknowledges and agrees that the fact that a bidder (a) has published price lists, rates, or tariffs covering items being procured, (b) has informed prospective customers of proposed or pending publication of new or revised price lists for such items, or (c) has sold the same items to other customers at the same prices being bid, does not constitute, without more, a disclosure within the meaning of paragraph 1 above. 4. The undersigned further acknowledges and agrees that any bid hereafter made to any political subdivision of the state or any public department, agency or official thereof by a bidder which is a corporation or a limited liability company for work or services performed or to be performed or goods sold or to be sold, where competitive bidding is required by statute, rule, regulation, or local law, and where such bid contains the certification referred to in paragraph 1 of this certificate, shall be deemed to have been authorized by the board of directors of the bidder, and such authorization shall be deemed to include the signing and submission of the bid and the inclusion therein of the certificate as to non-collusion as the act and deed of the corporation or limited liability company.

Name of Bidder: _______________________________________ (print full legal name) Date Signed: ____________________

Signature: _______________________________________

Name of Person Signing Certificate: _______________________________________ (print full legal name of signer) Bidder is (check one): an individual a limited liability partnership a limited liability company other entity (specify): _____________________________

CONTRACTOR’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT (If a Corporation) STATE OF NEW YORK ) COUNTY OF ) On this day of , 20 , before me personally came to me known, and known to me to be the of , the Corporation described in and which executed the within instrument, who being duly sworn by me and did depose and say that the said resides at and that he is the of said corporation; that the seal affixed to the within instrument is such corporate seal and that it was so affixed by order of the Board of Directors of said Corporation, and that he signed his name hereto by like order. Notary Public CONTRACTOR’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT (If an Individual) STATE OF NEW YORK ) COUNTY OF ) day of , 20 , before my personally came to me known, and known to me to be the same person described in and who executed the within instrument and he duly acknowledged to me that he executed the same for the purpose herein mentioned and, if operating under any trade name, that the certificate required by the New York State Penal Law, Section 440 and 440-b has been filed with the County Clerk of Essex County. On this Notary Public CONTRACTOR’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT (If a Co-Partnership) STATE OF NEW YORK ) COUNTY OF ) On this day of , 20 , before me personally came to me known, and known to me to be a member of the firm of and the person described in, and who executed the within instrument on behalf of said firm, and he acknowledged to me that he executed the same on behalf of, and as the act of said firm for the purposes herein mentioned and that the certificate required by the New York State Penal Law, Section 440 and 440b has been filed with the County Clerk of Essex County. Notary Public


				
DOCUMENT INFO