[HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012
| 19-1
Section 1: Introduction
Howard Electric Cooperative (HEC) was established in 1936 to provide electric service
to the rural areas of central Missouri. A Touchstone Energy Cooperative, HEC is
headquartered in Fayette, Missouri, and provides service to members in Boone, Chariton,
Howard, and Randolph counties. In addition to supplying electric to cooperative
members, HEC also provides propane and internet. The cooperative is run by a board of
nine directors who approve the company’s mission and internally developed business
policy:
“Howard Electric Co-op has remained committed to providing its
members with quality and affordable energy services that both meet and
exceed their expectations. It is with great pride that we celebrate 75 years
of cooperative success.”
HEC’s service boundary includes Howard County in its entirety as well as southern
Randolph County, portions of southeastern Chariton County, and a small portion of
northwestern Boone County. The cooperative owns 900 miles of distribution lines within
these counties. Figure 1 depicts the geographic boundaries of the cooperative in relation
to USGS local quadrangles. (Map sources: www.usgs.gov, Howard Electric
Cooperative.)
Figure 1
May 18, 2012 [HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE]
19-2 |
The member base of HEC is currently 3,400 with 97% residential and non-residential
making up the remaining 3%. Table 1.1 provides the summary of meters by county.
Please note that some members may have multiple meters.
Table 1.1 Meters by County
County Number of meters
Howard 2414
Boone 68
Chariton 102
Randolph 816
The average monthly member usage for HEC is 1,192 kilowatt-hours (kWh). Annual
total usage of HEC members in 2010 was 48,651,674 kWh of service. Population density
for the cooperative service area is depicted in Figure 2 (Map source: U.S. Census 2010).
Figure 2
[HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012
| 19-3
Section 2: Planning process
Through a partnership between the Association of Missouri Electric Cooperatives and the
Missouri Association of Councils of Government, the Mid-Missouri Regional Planning
Commission was contracted to facilitate a hazard mitigation planning process for HEC.
The initial meeting between the two entities was held on February 9, 2011 as part of a
regional kick-off meeting for central Missouri. This informational meeting provided the
basic responsibilities for each agency and allowed for initial discussion concerning the
project timelines, data collection and other pertinent topics. The template for this process
was created by the Northwest Regional Council of Governments (NWRCOG),
Association of Missouri Electric Cooperatives (AMEC), and the Atchison-Holt Electric
Cooperative (AHEC). The template for the planning process was approved by FEMA an
SEMA prior to the meetings held with Howard Electric Cooperative.
Three additional planning meetings were held at the HEC offices in Fayette, Missouri
throughout the month of September. Table 1.2 summarizes the attendees and topics of
each meeting. Meeting summaries and attendance sheets are available in the chapter
appendix.
Table 1.2 HEC Planning Meeting Synopsis
Meeting Date Attendees, Title, Organization Topics of discussion
September 6, 2011
Richard Fowler, CEO, HEC Don Lough, Line Supt., HEC Mardell Wies, Office Manager, HEC Chad Westhues, Lineman, HEC Richard Colvin, Lineman, HEC Doug Asbury, Lineman, HEC Jesse Swanson, Lineman, HEC Brandon Lightfoot, Lineman, HEC Susan Galeota, Regional Planner, Mid-Mo RPC Katrina Thomas, Regional Planner, Mid-Mo RPC
HEC business structure Member information Critical facilities information Asset inventory by type and location Data collection assignments
September 19, 2011
Richard Fowler, CEO, HEC Don Lough, Line Supt., HEC Susan Galeota, Regional Planner, Mid-Mo RPC Katrina Thomas, Regional Planner, Mid-Mo RPC
Data collection review Current mitigation strategies Establishment of goals, actions, and objectives
September 27, 2011
Richard Fowler, CEO, HEC Don Lough, Line Supt., HEC Susan Galeota, Regional Planner, Mid-Mo RPC Katrina Thomas, Regional Planner, Mid-Mo RPC
Method of prioritization Prioritization of goals, actions, and objectives Implementation and Maintenance
Public Involvement
HEC posted their local chapter on the company’s website, inviting both cooperative
members and the general public to provide comment. Print copies of the chapter were
also made available upon request through the local office. Comments from neighboring
jurisdictions were also solicited using the standardized AMEC letter which was mailed to
the appropriate contacts, including:
May 18, 2012 [HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE]
19-4 |
Boone County Commission
Chariton County Commission
Howard County Commission
Randolph County Commission
local emergency management directors, and
the local Red Cross chapter
HEC provides service to several critical facilities/infrastructure. Critical facilities for the
purpose of this planning process include cellular towers, public health and safety
facilities, water towers, and other power suppliers that HEC works with. These facilities
were also sent a standardized AMEC letter asking for comment on the chapter draft.
Additionally, HEC’s mitigation plan was included in the public comment period for the
combined AMEC plan. The following facilities/districts were sent the AMEC letter:
Maplelawn Residential Care Facility
Howard County Ambulance (Tower)
Howard County 911
Howard County Fire District
Howard County Public Water Supply District No. 1
Howard County Public Water Supply District No. 2
Thomas Hill Public Water Supply District No. 1
Central Electric Power Co-op
Kansas City Power and Light (KCPL)
Verizon Wireless
Cingular Wireless
Chariton Valley Wireless
RFM Facilities Management
Chariton Valley Telephone
Southwestern Bell/AT&T Services
[HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012
| 19-5
Section 3: Asset inventory
Howard Electric Cooperative has a wide variety of assets by type. Real estate owned by
the company includes an office building, warehouse, pole yard, and transmitter building.
Twelve vehicles provide access to members and infrastructure. HEC does not own any
electric generation or transmission infrastructure. 900 miles of distribution lines are
owned and maintained by HEC. HEC also provides high speed internet and propane
service. The valuation of these assets is not available because they offer these services in
coordination with other companies and that data is proprietary to those corporations.
Table 1.3 provides information concerning total asset valuation.
Table 1.3 Howard Asset Inventory Valuation Summary
Asset Total Replacement Cost
Cost breakdown
Total HEC Assets $56,480,900
Buildings and vehicles - $1,835,000 Overhead assets - $48,424,900 Underground assets - $6,221,000
Distribution Lines $29,573,750 OH $6,000,000 UG
OH Single-phase lines - $21,345,000 UG Single-phase lines - $6,000,000 OH Three-phase lines - $8,228,750
Supporting Infrastructure
$12,630,150 OH $221,000 UG
Meters - $425,000 Poles - $6,147,050 OH Transformers - $3,230,000 UG Transformers - $221,000 Guys/Anchors - $1,689,750 Cross-arms - $577,500 Regulators - $314,500 Single-phase Oil-Circuit Reclosures - $222,750 Three-phase Oil-Circuit Reclosures - $36,000 Capacitors - $23,600
Office Building $855,000 $580,000 Building, $275,000 personal prop.
Warehouses $505,000 $230,000 Building, $275,000 personal prop.
Vehicles $800,000
Source: Internal HEC Accounting and Insurance records, 2011
Ensuring quality distribution to its members, HEC maintains not only distribution lines,
but also the supporting infrastructure as well. Table 1.4 includes a list of asset types,
replacement costs, quantities by county, and total infrastructure numbers.
May 18, 2012 [HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE]
19-6 |
Table 1.4 Howard Asset Inventory by service county
Asset Replacement Cost per unit
or mile
Number of units or miles:
Number of units or miles:
Number of units or miles:
Number of units or miles: Total number
of units or miles:
BOONE CHARITON HOWARD RANDOLPH
Meter $125/unit 68 102 2414 816 3,400
Pole $350/unit 351 527 12470 4215 17,563
SP*** distribution line
$30,000/mile OH
15 OH** 22.5 OH 510 OH 164 OH 711.5 OH ($5.68/foot
OH)
$80,000/mile UG
1.5 UG*** 2.5 UG 53 UG 18 UG 75 UG ($15.15/foot
UG)
TP**** distribution line (OH only)
$72,500/mile
0 OH 2.5 OH 75 OH 36 OH 113.5 OH
($13.73/foot)
Transformers $1,000 OH 65 OH 95 OH 2295 OH 775 OH 3,230 OH
$1,300 UG 15 UG 10 UG 35 UG 110 UG 170 UG
Guys/anchors $150/unit 225 340 8,000 2,700 11,265
Cross-arms $150/unit 75 120 2,730 925 3,850
Regulators $8,500/unit 0 0 26 11 37
Oil Circuit Reclosures
$750 SP 0 SP 6 SP 145 SP 145 SP 296
$18,000 TP 0
Capacitors $400/unit 0 1 38 20 59
Total Replacement Value by county
$691,350 OH
$1,222,350 OH
$29,653,200 OH
$10,636,250 OH
$42,203,150 OH
$139,500 UG
$213,000 UG
$4,285,500 UG
$1,583,000 UG
$6,221,000 UG
**OH = overhead ***UG = underground ***SP = Single phase ****TP – Three phase
Source: Internal Howard Electric Cooperative Accounting and Maintenance records
[HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012
| 19-7
Section 4: Identified Hazards and Risk Assessment Methodology
Natural hazards in central Missouri vary dramatically with regard to intensity, frequency,
and scope of impact. Some hazards, like earthquakes, happen without warning and do not
provide any opportunity to prepare for the threat. Other hazards, such as tornadoes,
flooding, or severe winter storms, provide a period of warning which allows for public
preparation prior to their occurrence. Regardless, hazard mitigation planning can lessen
the impact of any natural disaster regardless of onset time. The following natural hazards
have been identified as potential threats for the HEC service area:
Tornadoes
Severe Thunderstorms, Hail, and High Winds
Flood and Levee Failure
Severe Winter Weather
Wildfire
Earthquakes
Dam Failure
Severe land subsidence
Likewise, a number of hazards may be eliminated from consideration due to Missouri’s
geographic location, including tsunamis, hurricanes, coastal storms, volcanic activity,
avalanche, and tropical storms. Additionally, a number of hazards may be eliminated
specifically for HEC because of asset types and geographic location. Those hazards
eliminated for the HEC service area include:
Drought
Landslides
Heat Wave
Although drought can impact Mid-Missouri, water availability does not directly impact
the delivery of electric service to HEC members. Similarly, heat wave has been
eliminated. Though it may result in additional usage and potentially tax the system, heat
waves do not usually cause infrastructure damage to cooperative assets. The results of a
heat wave in the service area may be considered cascading events rather than damage
caused directly by the hazard itself. Landslides have also been eliminated based upon
local soil structure categorization by the USGS and the evaluation by HEC staff.
For the purpose of this risk assessment, the identified hazards for the HEC service area
have been divided into two categories: historical and non-historical hazards.
Historical Hazards are those hazards with a measurable previous impact upon
the service area. Damage costs per event and a chronology of occurrences are
available. The associated vulnerability assessments utilize the number of events
and cost of each event to establish an average cost per incident. For HEC,
hazards with historical data include tornadoes, severe thunderstorms/high
wind/hail, flood and levee failure, severe winter weather, and wildfire.
May 18, 2012 [HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE]
19-8 |
Non-historical Hazards are hazards with no previous record of impact upon the
local service area. As such, the associated vulnerability assessments for each of
these hazards will have an occurrence probability of less than 1% in any given
year, but the extent of damage will vary considerably. For HEC, hazards without
historical data include earthquakes, dam failure, and severe land subsidence.
Probability of Occurrence
In determining the potential frequency of occurrences, a simple formula was used. For
historical events, the number of recorded events for the service area was divided by the
number of years of record. This number was then multiplied by 100 to provide a
percentage. This formula was used to determine future probability for each hazard. For
events that have not occurred, a probability of less than 1% was automatically assigned as
the hazard cannot be excluded from the possibility of occurrence. Likewise, when
discussing the probable risk of each hazard based upon historical occurrences, the
following scale was utilized:
Less than 1% chance of an event occurrence in any given year.
1-10% chance of an event occurrence in any given year
10-99% chance of an event occurrence in any given year
Near 100% chance of an event occurrence in any given year
The number of occurrences was further refined to focus on damage-causing events.
Those occasions which had reported damages were divided by the total number of
recorded events to obtain a percentage of total storms which result in infrastructure
damage. (Formula: Number of damage-causing events / total number of events =
Percentage of occurrences which cause damage.)
Potential Extent of Damage
Vulnerability Assessment matrices for each hazard are included on the following pages.
These worksheets detail loss estimates for each hazard affecting the cooperative’s service
area. Loss estimates were calculated using the asset summary created by internal
accounting records. Each hazard has a unique impact upon the service area, requiring
each hazard to utilize a different valuation amount depending upon the level of impact.
Non-historical hazards assume damage to all general assets. For Historical Hazards,
assets were divided into two groups based upon historical impact which were utilized in
the hazard damage analysis:
Overhead infrastructure assets and buildings
o Used for Tornado damage assessments
o Valued at $50,259,900
Overhead infrastructure assets only
o Used for:
Severe Thunderstorm / High Wind / Hail
Flood and Levee Failure
[HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012
| 19-9
Severe Winter Weather
Wildfire
o Valued at $48,424,900
In addition, historical hazards with recorded damages were used to identify an average
cost per event. (Formula: Total cost of damages / total number of events = Average
damage cost per event.) When discussing the extent of potential damages for all hazards,
the following scale was utilized:
Less than 10% potential damages to total cooperative infrastructure
10-25% potential damages to total cooperative infrastructure
25-50% potential damages to total cooperative infrastructure
More than 50% potential damages to total cooperative infrastructure
Regardless of hazard categorization, the following matrix (Table 1.5) will be utilized to
identify the potential damage extent and likelihood of occurrence for each natural hazard
type.
Table 1.5 Howard Electric Cooperative Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: _____________
Probability of Hazard Occurrence
Less than
1% in any
given year
1-10% chance
in any given
year
10- 99%
chance in any
given year
Near 100%
probability in
any given year
Po
ten
tial
Ext
ent
of
Dam
age
Less than 10% of damage
to system
10-25% damage of system
26-50% damage of system
More than 50% damage of
system
In many instances, natural hazard events occur without causing significant damage to the
cooperative’s infrastructure. The more significant impact of natural hazard episodes
comes in the form of reported customer outages. The infrastructure may not be
significantly harmed by an ice storm, but may result in prolonged and widespread outages
in the cooperative’s service area. In considering the potential impact of a hazard, loss of
function provides a more concise picture for comparison of events and geographic
regions of the state. In addition to system damage, each hazard will be evaluated on the
average number of reported or estimated outages per event occurrence. (Formula:
Average number of outages reported / Total number of customers = Average percentage
of outages reported per event)
May 18, 2012 [HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE]
19-10 |
Table 1.6 Howard Electric Cooperative Service Interruption Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: _____________
Probability of Damage-causing Hazard Occurrence
Less than
1% in any
given year
1-10% chance
in any given
year
10- 99%
chance in any
given year
> Near 100%
probability in
any given year
Po
ten
tial
Ext
ent
of
Imp
act Less than 10% of
customers report outages
10-25% of customers
report outages
26-50% of customers
report outages
More than 50% of
customers report outages
[HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012
| 19-11
Section 5: Risk Assessment
A) Historical Hazards:
Tornadoes
In the last 52 years, 6 tornadoes have
been reported within the HEC
cooperative boundaries. Figure 3
represents all recorded tornado
touchdown sites and tracks. (Data for
map collected from NOAA.)
A data insufficiency exists, however,
between 1958 and 2006 in records
concerning damage estimates. For the
purpose of this assessment, the years for
which records exist for both data sets
have been used. From 2006 to 2011,
the HEC service area has experienced
three tornadic events. Using the
previously described methodology, the
probability of a tornadic event in the
HEC service area in any given year is
near 60% (3 events /5 years = 60%).
Estimated cooperative material
damages associated with each of these events were compiled by HEC staff. Two of the
three occurrences caused damage to cooperative assets, resulting in a 66.66% probability
that any given tornadic occurrence will produce damage. Table 1.7 provides a summary
of event dates, EF-scale ratings, damage cost estimates and outages reported.
Table 1.7 HEC Tornadic Event Summary
Date of event EF Scale rating Damage Estimates Outages Reported
3/12/2006 0 $24,061 573
4/4/2010 0 $13,509 474
Data provided by NOAA and internal HEC records
Based upon the 5 years of HEC records, the average tornado to affect the cooperative will
include an EF0 rating, causing an average damage cost of $18,785 per event ($37,570/2
events = $18,785). This averaged amount accounts for less than 1% of HEC’s total
overhead assets and building valuation ($18,785/ $50,259,900= 0.037%). Table 1.8
demonstrates the probability of occurrence in conjunction with the potential extent of
damage.
Figure 3
May 18, 2012 [HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE]
19-12 |
Table 1.8 Howard Electric Cooperative Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Tornado
Probability of Hazard Occurrence
Less than
1% in any
given year
1-10% chance
in any given
year
10- 99%
chance in any
given year
Near 100%
probability in
any given year
Po
ten
tial
Ext
ent
of
Dam
age
Less than 10% of damage
to system
10-25% damage of system
26-50% damage of system
More than 50% damage of
system
An average of 523 members reported outages during recorded tornadoes since 2006.
When compared with the total number of members served by HEC, it can be projected
that 21.8% of all members may report outages during any given tornadic event. Table 1.9
demonstrates the probability of occurrence in conjunction with the potent extent of
impact upon members.
Table 1.9 Howard Electric Cooperative Service Interruption Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Tornado
Probability of Damage-causing Hazard Occurrence
Less than
1% in any
given year
1-10% chance
in any given
year
10- 99%
chance in any
given year
> Near 100%
probability in
any given year
Po
ten
tial
Ext
ent
of
Imp
act Less than 10% of
customers report outages
10-25% of customers
report outages
26-50% of customers
report outages
More than 50% of
customers report outages
[HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012
| 19-13
Severe Thunderstorms, High Wind, and Hail
From 1958-2011, HEC’s service area has experienced a total 126 hail events and 86
thunderstorm/high wind events. Therefore, the probability of either event in any given
year is greater than 100% (126 events / 53 years = 237% for Hail and 86 events / 53 years
= 162% for thunderstorm/high wind).
A data insufficiency exists, however, between 1958 and 2007 in records concerning
damage estimates. For the purpose of this assessment, the years for which records exist
for both data sets have been used. From 2007-2011, HEC’s service area has experienced
no damage-causing Hail events and a total of nine thunderstorm / high wind events.
Estimated material damages associated with each of these events were compiled by HEC
staff. Table 1.10 provides a summary of those thunderstorm/high wind events which
caused damage to cooperative infrastructure by date, cost estimate of damage, and
reported outages. None of the 126 hail event occurrences caused damage to cooperative
assets, resulting in a less than 1% probability that any given hail occurrence will produce
damage. (0/126=0%). Based upon historical records, the average hail event to affect the
cooperative will cause an average damage cost of $0 ($0 / 0 events = $0). This accounts
for less than 1% of HEC’s total overhead asset valuation.
Nine of the 86 thunderstorm / high wind occurrences caused damage to cooperative
assets, resulting in a 10.4% probability that any given thunderstorm/high wind occurrence
will produce damage (9 / 86 = 10.4%).
Based upon historical records, the average thunderstorm/high wind event to affect the
cooperative will cause an average damage cost of $8,880 ($79,922 / 9 events = $8,880).
This averaged amount accounts for less than 1% of HEC’s overhead asset valuation
($8,880/ $48,424,900= 0.018%). Tables 1.11 demonstrates the probability of occurrence
in conjunction with the potential extent of damage for both hail and thunderstorm/high
wind events.
Table 1.10 HEC Severe Thunderstorms, High Wind Event Damage Summary
Event date Damage estimates Outages reported
8/12/2007 $8,376 326
3/31/2008 $6,526 590
6/24/2008 $14,143 661
6/26/2008 $14,143 147
8/28/2008 $2,398 370
6/13/2010 $11,128 9
6/19/2010 $11,128 814
7/18/2010 $11,128 121
4/3/2011 $952 249
Totals $79,922 3,287
Data provided based on internal HEC records which reflect cost from the referenced event year.
May 18, 2012 [HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE]
19-14 |
Table 1.11 Howard Electric Cooperative Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Thunderstorm/High Wind/Hail
Probability of Hazard Occurrence
Less than
1% in any
given year
1-10% chance
in any given
year
10- 99%
chance in any
given year
Near 100%
probability in
any given year
Po
ten
tial
Ext
ent
of
Dam
age
Less than 10% of damage
to system
10-25% damage of system
26-50% damage of system
More than 50% damage of
system
An average of 365 customers reported outages during recorded hail, thunderstorm, and
high wind events since 2007. When compared with the total number of customers served
by HEC, it can be projected that 15% of all customers may report outages during any
given hail, thunderstorm, or high wind event. Table 1.12 demonstrates the probability of
occurrence in conjunction with the potent extent of impact upon members.
Table 1.12 Howard Electric Cooperative Service Interruption Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Severe Thunderstorms, High Wind, and Hail
Probability of Damage-causing Hazard Occurrence
Less than
1% in any
given year
1-10% chance
in any given
year
10- 99%
chance in any
given year
> Near 100%
probability in
any given year
Po
ten
tial
Ext
ent
of
Imp
act Less than 10% of
customers report outages
10-25% of customers
report outages
26-50% of customers
report outages
More than 50% of
customers report outages
[HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012
| 19-15
Flood and Levee Failure
In Howard County, approximately 12% of the cooperative service area is located directly
within the 100 year floodplain. Less than 3% of Randolph County and Chariton County
lies within the 100 year floodplain. Figure 4 below depicts the 100 year floodplain in
relation to the cooperative’s boundaries. (Map sources: FEMA Map Services Center)
Currently, inundation data for levee failure is lacking due to issues surrounding mapping,
appropriate models, and its close association with flooding events. Figure 5 below
provides the location of known non-federal levees within the cooperative’s region. A
detailed map of levee locations is not available at this time. This map is part of a larger
map book that was produced by the US Army Corps of Engineers in 2011. (Map sources:
US Army Corps of Engineers)
Figure 4
May 18, 2012 [HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE]
19-16 |
From 1994-2008, HEC’s service area has experienced a flooding event almost every year,
with the exception of the year 2000 which was an exceptionally dry summer. Currently,
no data concerning levee failure damage can be separated from flood damage data.
Therefore, the probability of a flood/levee failure event affecting the cooperative assets in
any given year is more than 90% (13 annual flooding events / 14 years = 92%).
Estimated material damages associated with each of these events were not available.
Fig
ure
5
[HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012
| 19-17
Flood and levee failure events vary widely based upon numerous factors including, but
not limited to, annual precipitation and extent of levee damage. Not all events, however,
are extensive. Of the 14 flooding events, none have instances of recorded damages in
cooperative records, resulting in a less than 1% probability that any given flooding event
will cause damage to cooperative assets (0 events / 14 instances = 0%). Using the hazard
worksheet that is provided in the appendix, the HEC staff categorized the impact of a
future flood event/levee failure as having a negligible impact (less than 10% of damage to
system). Using the methodology from Section 4 a Flood event could potentially result in
damage costing an estimated $4,824,290 or less (10% of $48,424,900).
There were no reported outages in the HEC service area due to flooding or levee failure
from 1994-2008. Therefore it can be projected that less than 1% of all customers may
report outages during any given flooding event. Table 1.13 demonstrates the probability
of occurrence in conjunction with the potent extent of impact upon members.
Table 1.13 Howard Electric Cooperative Service Interruption Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Flood
Probability of Damage-causing Hazard Occurrence
Less than
1% in any
given year
1-10% chance
in any given
year
10- 99%
chance in any
given year
> Near 100%
probability in
any given year
Po
ten
tial
Ext
ent
of
Imp
act Less than 10% of
customers report outages
10-25% of customers
report outages
26-50% of customers
report outages
More than 50% of
customers report outages
May 18, 2012 [HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE]
19-18 |
Severe Winter Weather
From 1994-2011, HEC’s service area has experienced a total of 25 Severe Winter
Weather events, including significant snowfall and ice storms. Therefore, the probability
of a severe winter weather event in the HEC service area in any given year is near 100%
(25 events / 17 years = 147%). Estimated material damages associated with each of these
events were compiled by HEC staff, but damage estimates are available for a single event
in 2011 only. Table 1.14 provides a summary of the event date, type, associated damage
estimate, and reported outages. Only one of the 25 occurrences caused damage to
cooperative assets, resulting in a 4% probability that any given severe winter weather
occurrence will produce damage. (1 / 25 = 4%)
Based upon these historical records, the average severe winter weather event to affect the
cooperative will cause an average damage cost of $8,702 ($8,702 / 1 event = $8,702).
This averaged amount accounts for less than 1% of HEC’s total overhead asset valuation
($8,702 / $48,424,900= 0.0179%). Table 1.15 demonstrates the probability of occurrence
in conjunction with the potential extent of damage.
Table 1.15 Howard Electric Cooperative Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Severe Winter Weather
Probability of Hazard Occurrence
Less than
1% in any
given year
1-10% chance
in any given
year
10- 99%
chance in any
given year
Near 100%
probability in
any given year
Po
ten
tial
Ext
ent
of
Dam
age
Less than 10% of damage
to system
10-25% damage of system
26-50% damage of system
More than 50% damage of
system
An average of 19 members reported outages during the 2011 event. When compared
with the total number of members served by HEC, it can be projected that less than 1% of
all members may report outages during any given severe winter weather event. Table
1.16 demonstrates the probability of occurrence in conjunction with the potential extent
of impact upon members.
Table 1.14 HEC Severe Winter Weather Event Summary
Event date Event type Damage Estimates Outages Reported
1/10/2011 Winter Weather $8,702 19
Data Source: Internal HEC Records
[HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012
| 19-19
Table 1.16 Howard Electric Cooperative Service Interruption Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Severe Winter Weather
Probability of Damage-causing Hazard Occurrence
Less than
1% in any
given year
1-10% chance
in any given
year
10- 99%
chance in any
given year
> Near 100%
probability in
any given year
Po
ten
tial
Ext
ent
of
Imp
act Less than 10% of
customers report outages
10-25% of customers
report outages
26-50% of customers
report outages
More than 50% of
customers report outages
Wildfire
The incidence of wildfire in the HEC service area presents a unique risk assessment.
Wildfire events have occurred in each of the four counties. According to the Missouri
Department of Conservation, Boone, Chariton, Howard, and Randolph counties have
experienced wildfires between 2004 and 2008. Table 1.17 summarizes the incidences of
wildfire within the four counties. Therefore, the probability of a wildfire event in the
HEC service area in any given year is near 100% (242 events / 4 years = 6,050%).
Table 1.17 Wildfire summary by county
County # of
Wildfires, 2004-08
Average Annual #
of Wildfires
Acres Burned
Average Annual Acres
Burned
Total Buildings Damaged
Boone 1 0.2 0.1 0 0
Chariton 87 17.4 953.5 191 2
Howard 10 2 347.0 69 0
Randolph 144 28.8 1192.5 239 2
Totals 242 48.4 2493.1 499 4
Source: Missouri State Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2010
The potential extent of damage caused by wildfire is difficult to determine. To date, 242
fires have burned a total of 2,493.1 acres, for an average of 10.3 acres affected per event.
HEC retains no damage information related to wildfires in its service area during this
time period. Cooperative assets are located throughout the service area rather than being
located at a single central site. With an average of 10 acres per fire in the service area, it
is unlikely that infrastructure damage would exceed 25% based upon asset location and
unlikeliness of an uncontrollable wildfire. This initial assessment assumes a limited
impact upon electric distribution infrastructure of less than 10% (Table 1.18). Further
study will be required to create a model for damage assessments related to wildfire.
May 18, 2012 [HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE]
19-20 |
Table 1.18 Howard Electric Cooperative Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Wildfire
Probability of Hazard Occurrence
Less than
1% in any
given year
1-10% chance
in any given
year
10- 99%
chance in any
given year
Near 100%
probability in
any given year
Po
ten
tial
Ext
ent
of
Dam
age
Less than 10% of damage
to system
10-25% damage of system
26-50% damage of system
More than 50% damage of
system
No members have reported outages during recorded wildfires between 2004 and 2008.
When compared with the total number of members served by HEC, it can be projected
that less than 10% of all members may report outages during any given wildfire event.
Table 1.19 demonstrates the probability of occurrence in conjunction with the potent
extent of impact upon local customers.
Table 1.19 Howard Electric Cooperative Service Interruption Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Wildfire
Probability of Damage-causing Hazard Occurrence
Less than
1% in any
given year
1-10% chance
in any given
year
10- 99%
chance in any
given year
> Near 100%
probability in
any given year
Po
ten
tial
Ext
ent
of
Imp
act Less than 10% of
customers report outages
10-25% of customers
report outages
26-50% of customers
report outages
More than 50% of
customers report outages
[HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012
| 19-21
B. Non-historical Hazards
Earthquakes
The closest source of earthquake risk in central Missouri is the South Central Illinois
Seismic Zone or the New Madrid Seismic Zone. The seismic areas or located in eastern
and southeastern Missouri respectively. The following excerpts were taken from the
2010 Boone County Hazard Mitigation Plan profiling the threat of earthquake in the
region:
“Missouri and much of the Midwest can feel earthquakes from very far away because the
geology of the area is more amenable to ground shaking than the California geology.
New Madrid earthquakes can cover up to twenty times the area of typical California
earthquakes because of this differing geology. Historical quakes along the New Madrid
Seismic Zone in southeastern Missouri have been some of the largest in U.S. history since
European settlement. The Great New Madrid Earthquake of 1811-1812 was a series of
over 2000 quakes which caused destruction over a very large area. According to
information from Missouri, SEMA’s Earthquake Program, some of the quakes measured
at least 7.6 in magnitude and five of them measured 8.0 or more.
The 1811-1812 quakes changed the course of the Mississippi River. Some of the shocks
were felt as far away as Washington D.C. and Boston.”
According to the USGS, the entire HEC service area would be severely impacted by a 7.6
magnitude earthquake with an epicenter on or near the New Madrid Seismic Zone. Areas
close to the Missouri River may be particularly vulnerable, which includes most of
Howard County. The soil, or alluvium, along river channels is especially vulnerable to
liquefaction from earthquake waves; river alluvium also tends to amplify the waves.
Scientists from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the Center for Earthquake
Research and Information (CERI) at the University of Memphis have estimated the
probability of a magnitude 6.0 or greater earthquake from the New Madrid Fault is 25-40
percent through the year 2053. The projected earthquake intensity ratings for the
cooperative region changes based upon the Modified Mercalli Scale. Given a New
Madrid earthquake with a 6.7 magnitude, the region would experience Level VI intensity
characteristics. In the event of an earthquake with a 7.6 magnitude, the region would
experiences Level VII intensity characteristic while an earthquake with an 8.6 magnitude
would most likely cause Level VIII intensity characteristics.
In the event of an earthquake with a 7.6 magnitude, the HEC service area would most
likely experience the following characteristics:
Difficult to stand; furniture broken; damage negligible in building of good design and
construction; slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures; considerable damage
in poorly built or badly designed structures; some chimneys broken. Noticed by people
driving motor cars. (Source: Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale)
May 18, 2012 [HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE]
19-22 |
Distribution lines overhead and underground could become disconnected or severed, and
transformers could be damaged. According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) the
following expectations for earthquakes in the New Madrid Seismic Zone in the next 50
years are as follows:
25-40% percent chance of a magnitude 6.0 and greater earthquake.
7 -10% chance of a magnitude 7.5 - 8.0 quake (magnitudes similar to those in
1811-1812)
Though the probability of occurrence is small, the potential extent of damage could
significantly impact both the cooperative and its members as demonstrated in Table 1.20.
Table 1.20 Howard Electric Cooperative Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Earthquake
Probability of Hazard Occurrence
Less than
1% in any
given year
1-10% chance
in any given
year
10- 99%
chance in any
given year
Near 100%
probability in
any given year
Po
ten
tial
Ext
ent
of
Dam
age
Less than 10% of damage
to system
10-25% damage of system
26-50% damage of system
More than 50% damage of
system
Based upon information from CERI, FEMA, and SEMA and using the standardized scale
for Missouri REC’s, it may be estimated that up to 20%, or 680 customers, could report
outages related to an earthquake event of 7.6 magnitude. Table 1.21 demonstrates the
probability of occurrence in conjunction with the potent extent of impact upon local
members.
Table 1.21 Howard Electric Cooperative Service Interruption Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Earthquake
Probability of Damage-causing Hazard Occurrence
Less than
1% in any
given year
1-10% chance
in any given
year
10- 99%
chance in any
given year
> Near 100%
probability in
any given year
Po
ten
tial
Ext
ent
of
Imp
act Less than 10% of
customers report outages
10-25% of customers
report outages
26-50% of customers
report outages
More than 50% of
customers report outages
[HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012
| 19-23
Dam Failure
Dam failures have had no measurable impact upon electric infrastructure in the HEC
service area to date. According to Missouri DNR’s Dam Safety Division, 94 dams
currently exist within the cooperative boundary: 71 in Howard County and 23 in
Randolph County. There are no dams in the Chariton County or Boone County portions
of the service area. Of these dams,
six in Howard County and two in
Randolph County are regulated by
the state due to the fact that they
exceed 35 feet in height. Figure 6
shows the locations of all known
dams located within HEC’s service
area. (Map sources:
www.msdis.missouri.edu;
www.dnr.mo.gov/env/wrc.)
26 dam failures have occurred
within the state of Missouri over the
past 100 years. However, no such
event has occurred within or near
the cooperative’s boundaries.
However, for the purposes of this
assessment, dam failure and its
associated impacts cannot be
eliminated from the realm of
possibility. In order to allow for a
risk assessment, the probability of
this event has been included as less
than 1% as shown in Table 1.22.
Table 1.22 Howard Electric Cooperative Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Dam Failure
Probability of Hazard Occurrence
Less than
1% in any
given year
1-10% chance
in any given
year
10- 99%
chance in any
given year
Near 100%
probability in
any given year
Po
ten
tial
Ext
ent
of
Dam
age
Less than 10% of damage
to system
10-25% damage of system
26-50% damage of system
More than 50% damage of
system
Figure 6
May 18, 2012 [HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE]
19-24 |
Determining the potential extent of dam failure is currently impossible due to a lack of
data concerning inundation zones. Further study concerning existing dams and their
impact is required to make a more comprehensive assessment of potential damages. This
initial assessment assumes a limited impact upon downstream electric distribution
infrastructure of less than 10% for both infrastructure damage and service interruption as
shown in Table 1.23.
Table 1.23 Howard Electric Cooperative Service Interruption Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Dam Failure
Probability of Damage-causing Hazard Occurrence
Less than
1% in any
given year
1-10% chance
in any given
year
10- 99%
chance in any
given year
> Near 100%
probability in
any given year
Po
ten
tial
Ext
ent
of
Imp
act Less than 10% of
customers report outages
10-25% of customers
report outages
26-50% of customers
report outages
More than 50% of
customers report outages
[HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012
| 19-25
Severe Land subsidence
Severe Land subsidence or
“sinkholes”, as they are known
locally, have had no measurable
impact upon electric infrastructure in
the HEC service area to date.
According to the Missouri
Department of Natural Resources,
12 known sinkholes have been
identified within the cooperative
boundary. Figure 7 shows the
locations of all known sinkholes
located within HEC’s service area.
(Map sources:
www.msdis.missouri.edu;
www.dnr.mo.gov)
Although portions of southern
Missouri have had incidences of
severe land subsidence causing
damage to property, central
Missouri, and specifically the HEC
service area, has had no damage
reported. However, for the purposes
of this assessment, severe land subsidence and its associated impacts cannot be
eliminated from the realm of possibility. In order to allow for a risk assessment, the
probability of this event has been included as less than 1% as shown in Table 1.24.
Table 1.24 Howard Electric Cooperative Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Severe Land subsidence
Probability of Hazard Occurrence
Less than
1% in any
given year
1-10% chance
in any given
year
10- 99%
chance in any
given year
Near 100%
probability in
any given year
Po
ten
tial
Ext
ent
of
Dam
age
Less than 10% of damage
to system
10-25% damage of system
26-50% damage of system
More than 50% damage of
system
There were no reported outages in the HEC service area due to severe land subsidence.
Therefore it can be projected that less than 1% of all members may report outages during
any given severe land subsidence event. Table 1.25 demonstrates the probability of
occurrence in conjunction with the potent extent of impact upon local members.
Figure 7
May 18, 2012 [HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE]
19-26 |
Table 1.25 Howard Electric Cooperative Service Interruption Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Severe Land subsidence
Probability of Damage-causing Hazard Occurrence
Less than
1% in any
given year
1-10% chance
in any given
year
10- 99%
chance in any
given year
> Near 100%
probability in
any given year
Po
ten
tial
Ext
ent
of
Imp
act Less than 10% of
customers report outages
10-25% of customers
report outages
26-50% of customers
report outages
More than 50% of
customers report outages
[HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012
| 19-27
Section 6: Mitigation strategies
For organizations like HEC, mitigation is considered to be part of prudent business
operations. In order to ensure the delivery of a quality product and minimize service
interruptions, a number of mitigation strategies are continually utilized. Routine
maintenance and upgrades to existing equipment are completed as part of daily tasks.
Vegetation management is utilized to limit the cascading effects of natural hazards.
Safety and reporting information are disseminated to the public through various types of
media. Mutual aid agreements and partnerships create relationships which provide for
future support in the event of a natural disaster.
Additionally, mitigation is considered prior to any expansion of service into special
hazard areas. Before any service is built, it is first “staked out” in coordination with local
builders and property owners. This process, completed by the Line Superintendent and
contracted engineers, identifies and addresses foreseeable hazards and safety issues
before any new service lines area constructed. USDA-RUS specifications regarding
operation and safety are utilized in every step of the process. Steps are taken to
practically minimize the exposure of equipment to loss due to foreseeable hazards.
Existing and potential resources
As stated above, mitigation is a key component of good business practices. Howard
Electric Cooperative includes mitigation strategies as part of regular work activities to
ensure service with minimal interruptions. Funding for these activities is provided
through the cooperative’s normal budgetary process for maintenance.
In order to expand mitigation efforts beyond normal maintenance, it is likely that HEC
will need to seek outside funding sources. These may include private, state, or federal
programs which provide grant and loan funding. Upon passage of this plan, HEC will be
eligible for funding through FEMA in the following categories:
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
Flood Mitigation Assistance Program
Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program
406 Stafford Act
Development of goals, objectives, and actions
Establishing mitigation goals, objectives, and actions for a business entity requires a
slightly different approach than public agencies. Certainly, a number of similarities exist;
both entities must consider which hazards most commonly occur and have the greatest
potential for causing disruption to members or residents. They must also consider which
types of actions will maximize benefits and minimize costs, how mitigation strategies
will be implemented, who will enforce implementation, and how the overall plan will be
maintained and updated.
May 18, 2012 [HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE]
19-28 |
The HEC mitigation planning committee, with assistance from Mid-Mo RPC staff,
worked to identify goals, actions, and objectives which addressed hazard mitigation
issues. The committee first identified ongoing mitigation strategies as well as potential
strategies which seek to improve service and limit disruptions resulting from natural
hazards. Action items were then analyzed for common characteristics and summarized to
create four objectives. Likewise, these four objectives were grouped into similar
categories and used as the basis for the two overarching goals. Table 1.26 provides a
simple synopsis of the goals and objectives before prioritization.
Traditionally, the STAPLEE (Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal,
Environmental, and Economic) method is used to prioritize mitigation actions. These
categories, however, do not necessarily align with the private sector in the same way they
are applicable to governmental agencies. A number of action items could be included
with multiple goals and objectives, for example. As a result, the committee chose to use
a different method to prioritize their mitigation strategy.
Table 1.26 HEC goals and objectives
Identified Goals Identified Objectives
Goal 1: Harden Howard Electric Cooperative’s system so future major events will be less likely to cause disruption.
Objective 1: Harden Howard Electric Cooperative’s system so future major events will be less likely to cause disruption.
Goal 2: Provide excellent service to cooperative members during periods of outages while maintaining a safe work environment for cooperative employees.
Objective 1: Use the latest technology to enhance outage restoration and improve safety for cooperative employees and public.
Objective 2: Provide for continued service to people with medical support needs.
Objective 3: Provide for safety of employees and allow for continued work on the system.
After identifying ongoing and potential action items, the committee created three priority
tiers:
First tier actions focus on physical infrastructure protection and improvements
which ensure continued, quality service and seek to reduce power outages. These
types of actions are the highest priority of HEC.
Second tier actions create and maintain working relationships to reduce and
prevent the impact of power outages. These include improvements to safety and
reporting information, mutual aid agreements, and other efforts which seek to
expand and improve both member service and disaster planning.
Third tier actions identify potential projects for other system improvements.
These include mapping efforts, technological improvements, and research related
to the expansion of mitigation efforts.
[HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012
| 19-29
Actions within each tier may be funded through regular budgetary methods or identified
outside sources. Tables 1.27, 1.28, and 1.29 provide lists of action items by tier as well
as the goals and objectives identified with each.
Table 1.27 Prioritized Mitigation Actions for Howard Electric Cooperative – Tier 1
Tier 1
Action item: Goal/Objective Timeframe for completion Cost-benefit score
Convert older copper wire to ACSR
(steel-reinforced aluminum). Goal 1 / Objective 1 Ongoing effort
High cost
High benefit
Score: 7
Put in higher class of poles. Goal 1 / Objective 1 Ongoing effort
High cost
High benefit
Score: 7
Space poles closer together. Goal 1 / Objective 1
Ongoing effort; Completed as funding/work plan allows.
High cost
High benefit
Score: 7
Build tie lines to provide for loop feed
service. Goal 1 / Objective 1
Contained in work plan, additional loops dependent on funding.
High cost
Medium benefit
Score: 4
Upgrade conductor size. Goal 1 / Objective 1 Ongoing effort
High cost
High benefit
Score: 7
Convert overhead lines to underground
lines or vice versa in troubled areas
based on vulnerability.
Goal 1 / Objective 1 Dependent upon funding, where need is identified.
High cost
High benefit
Score: 7
Table 1.28 Prioritized Mitigation Actions for Howard Electric Cooperative – Tier 2
Tier 2
Action item: Goal/Objective Timeframe for completion Cost-benefit score
Maintain existing mutual aid agreements and partnerships with local agencies and other cooperatives.
Goal 2 / Objective 1 Ongoing effort
Low cost
High benefit
Score: 9
May 18, 2012 [HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE]
19-30 |
Table 1.29 Prioritized Mitigation Actions for Howard Electric Cooperative – Tier 3
Tier 3
Action item: Goal/Objective Timeframe for completion Cost-benefit score
Implement new electronic reclosures. Goal 2 / Objective 1 As needed after a severe event.
High cost
High benefit
Score: 7
Implement IVR (Interactive Voice
Response) system to improve outage
reporting.
Goal 2 / Objective 1 2013-2014 or as funding becomes available.
High cost
Medium benefit
Score: 4
Improve outage management using
GPS and GIS technology. Goal 2 / Objective 1
Only if funding were made available
High cost
High benefit
Score: 7
Increase holding of generators owned
for use in disastrous events. Goal 2 / Objective 2
Only if funding were made available
High cost
Medium benefit
Score: 4
Include a tornado safe room when
rebuilding cooperative offices. Goal 2 / Objective 3
Dependent upon funding. Implementation would only occur after destruction of facility.
High cost
High benefit
Score: 7
Use an earthquake-proof design when
rebuilding cooperative offices. Goal 2 / Objective 3
Dependent upon funding. Implementation would only occur after destruction of facility.
High cost
High benefit
Score: 7
Monitor developments in data availability concerning the impact of dam failure, land subsidence, and wildfire upon the Howard Electric service area through local, state, and federal agencies.
Goal 1 / Objective 1
Goal 2 / Objective 1 Ongoing effort.
Low cost Low benefit Score: 3
[HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012
| 19-31
Section 7: Plan Implementation and Maintenance
Plan incorporation
The goals, objectives, and actions of the previous section identify both ongoing efforts at
mitigation and potential methods for expanding efforts. The plan has been reviewed and
adopted by the Board of Directors as part of the company’s operations policy. This
mitigation plan necessitates involvement from several HEC employment levels as the
organization strives to ensure quality service to their members.
Other Local Planning Mechanisms
Some internal planning mechanisms do exist at HEC. The Hazard Mitigation Plan can be
considered and/or incorporated into regular budgetary planning, the four-year
construction work plan, and the 20-year long term plan designed by consulting engineers.
The counties of Boone, Chariton, and Randolph each have a FEMA-approved Natural
Hazard Mitigation Plan in place. The Howard County is in the process of being updated
and should be approved by mid-2012 or sooner. County emergency management
directors have Local Emergency Operations Plans which seek to mitigate the same
hazards for residents. HEC’s Hazard Mitigation plan can be easily incorporated into
these local plans and allow for coordination across agencies in the event of an
emergency.
Plan Maintenance
Howard Electric Cooperative will conform to the requirements established by the
Association of Missouri Electric Cooperatives (AMEC) for monitoring, evaluating, and
updating the plan.
Continued Public Involvement Opportunities
Howard Electric Cooperative will conform to the requirements established by the
Association of Missouri Electric Cooperatives (AMEC) for continued public
involvement. Opportunities for public comment will continue to be offered through the
cooperative’s website and the physical office of HEC.
May 18, 2012 [HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE]
19-32 |
This page intentionally left blank.
[HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012
| 19-33
Chapter Appendix:
Documentation of Participation
Contents:
19-34 : 19-48 Meeting documentation
19-49 Public Comment letter
19-50 Press Release and Newspaper List
May 18, 2012 [HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE]
19-34 |
[HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012
| 19-35
Meeting #1 August 6th, 2011, 8:00 am Howard Electric Cooperative, Fayette, MO
Welcome and Introductions
Overview of the Hazard Mitigation Plan
o Planners from Mid-Mo RPC gave an overview of the upcoming
process, meetings, and public involvement that would occur or be
needed.
Business Structure and Members
o HEC staff provided basic information on the cooperative structure
and services.
Asset Inventory – Data Sheets
o Data inventory sheets were given to HEC staff to collect information
on assets by type and cost.
Hazards and Historic Occurrences
o Mid-Mo RPC planners went through all hazards and HEC staff
decided which hazards impacted that service area and how they
effected the service area
In-kind Match
May 18, 2012 [HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE]
19-36 |
o HEC staff were reminded of the match requirements and given
reporting forms for hours.
Next Meeting was scheduled.
[HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012
| 19-37
Association of Missouri Electric Cooperatives
Howard Electric Cooperative Data Collection & Asset Inventory
Critical Assets
Pole Yard 400000
transmitter building5000 / 5000 howard 205 highway 5 north 1
Generator15000 howard 205 highway 5 north 1
radio tower50000 howard 205 highway 5 north 1
$35,573,750.00
$800,000.00
638 218 27.5 900
0 12 0 0 12
Address (location)
Emergency
Replacement Cost per
unit or mile
howard 205 highway 5 north
howard 205 highway 5 north
580000/ pp 275000
230000/ pp 275000
205 highway 5 north
Transmission Lines
(miles)
Vehicles
Generation Facility
Number of units
or miles:
Boone
Number of units
or miles:
Howard
Number of units
or miles:
Randolph
1
1
16.5
Substations
Distribution Lines
(miles)
Office Buildings
Emergency
Replacement Cost County
Number of units
or miles:
Chariton
Owned by Central Electric Power Cooperative
Quantity
Warehouses
Supporting
Infrastructure
Critical Assets
May 18, 2012 [HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE]
19-38 |
Table of Assets
$350.00351 12470 4215 527Poles
0 0 0 0
2.5
65 2295 775 95
68 2414 816 102
0 0 0
15 510 164 22.5
0 75 36
6
0 0 0 0
0 38 20 1
340
75 2730 925 120
0 26 11 0
$18,000.00
$400.00
N.A.
225 8000 2700
1 145 145
0
N.A.
$150.00
$150.00
$8,500.00
$750.00
Capacitors
Other Special
Equipment
Overhead Assets
Guys/Anchors
Cross-Arms
Single phase Oil-
Circuit Reclosures
Three-phase Oil-
Circuit Reclosures
Transmission Lines
(miles)
Single Phase
distribution line
Three-phase
distribution line
Transformers (each)
Meters
Protective Devices
Emergency
Replacement Cost
per unit or mile
Number of units or
miles:
Boone
Number of units or
miles:
Howard
Number of units or
miles:
Randolph
Number of units or
miles:
Chariton
Regulators
$30,000.00
$72,500.00
$1,000.00
$125.00
Meters
Protective Devices
Number of units or
miles:
Boone
Number of units or
miles:
Howard
Number of units or
miles:
Randolph
Number of units or
miles:
Chariton
Single Phase
distribution line
Three-phase
distribution line
Transformers (each)
1.5
Underground Assets
Emergency
Replacement Cost
per unit or mile
53 18
110 35 10
15
15
80000/mi
$1,300.00
$125.00
2.5
110 35 10
[HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012
| 19-39
PART 1: POTENTIAL MAGNITUDE. In the chart below, please indicate, in your opinion, the potential magnitude of the next event for each of the nine listed natural hazards. The categories are: Negligible: Less than 10% of Howard Electric Cooperative (HEC) infrastructure will be affected by the next event. Limited: 10% to 25% of HEC infrastructure will be affected by the next event. Critical: 25% to 50% of HEC infrastructure will be affected by the next event. Catastrophic: More than 50% of HEC infrastructure will be affected by the next event.
Tornado ___ Negligible _X_ Limited ___ Critical ___ Catastrophic Severe Thunderstorm* ___ Negligible _X_ Limited ___ Critical ___ Catastrophic Flood and Levee Failure_ X_ Negligible ___ Limited ___ Critical ___ Catastrophic Severe Winter Weather**___ Negligible___ Limited ___ Critical _X_ Catastrophic Wildfire/Brush Fire ___ Negligible _X_ Limited ___ Critical ___ Catastrophic Earthquake ___ Negligible ___ Limited ___ Critical _X_ Catastrophic Dam Failure _X_ Negligible ___ Limited ___ Critical ___ Catastrophic Severe Land subsidence _X_ Negligible ___ Limited ___ Critical ___ Catastrophic * Severe Thunderstorm includes hail and high wind
**Severe Winter Weather includes heavy snow, ice event, extreme cold, and blizzard
PART 2: FREQUENCY OF OCCUENCE. In the chart below, please indicate, in your opinion, the probability of each of the nine natural hazard events occurring in the future, using the following scale: Unlikely: Less than 1% probability of occurrence in next 100 years Possible: Between 1% and 10% probability in the next year, or at least one chance in the next 100 years Likely: Between 10% and 100% probability in the next year, or at least one chance in the next 10 years Highly Likely: Near 100% probability of occurrence in the next year
Tornado ___ Unlikely ___ Possible ___ Likely _X_ Highly Likely
Severe Thunderstorm ___ Unlikely ___ Possible ___ Likely _X_ Highly Likely
Flood and Levee Failure ___ Unlikely _X_ Possible ___ Likely ___ Highly Likely
Severe Winter Weather ___ Unlikely ___ Possible ___ Likely _X_ Highly Likely
Wildfire/Brush Fire ___ Unlikely _X_ Possible ___ Likely ___ Highly Likely Earthquake ___ Unlikely _X_ Possible ___ Likely ___ Highly Likely Dam Failure _X_ Unlikely ___ Possible ___ Likely ___ Highly Likely
Severe Land subsidence _X_ Unlikely ___ Possible ___ Likely ___ Highly Likely
May 18, 2012 [HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE]
19-40 |
PART 3: SPEED OF ONSET. In the chart below, please indicate, in your opinion, the probable amount of warning time for each of the nine natural hazards. The categories are: - Minimal (or no) warning - 6 to 12 hours warning - 12 to 24 hours warning - More than 24 hours warning
Tornado _X_ Minimal ___ 6-12 Hours ___12-24 Hours ___ More than 24 Hours
Severe Thunderstorm _X_ Minimal ___ 6-12 Hours ___12-24 Hours ___ More than 24 Hours
Flood ___ Minimal _X_ 6-12 Hours ___12-24 Hours ___ More than 24 Hours
Severe Winter Weather ___ Minimal _X_ 6-12 Hours ___12-24 Hours ___ More than 24 Hours
Wildfire/Brush Fire _X_ Minimal ___ 6-12 Hours ___12-24 Hours ___ More than 24 Hours
Earthquake _X_ Minimal ___ 6-12 Hours ___12-24 Hours ___ More than 24 Hours
Dam Failure ___ Minimal _X_ 6-12 Hours ___12-24 Hours ___ More than 24 Hours
Severe Land subsidence _X_ Minimal ___ 6-12 Hours ___12-24 Hours ___ More than 24 Hours
PART 4: HAZARD IMPACTS. In the chart below, mark which negative impacts will likely be caused by each natural hazard (i.e., if a flood is more than 50% likely to disrupt transportation, mark that category). Mark all that apply.
Hazards Impacts
Dam
aged
lines
Dam
aged
pole
s
Dam
aged
me
ters
Dam
aged
Tra
nsfo
rme
rs
Dam
aged
OC
Rs
Dam
aged
Regula
tors
Dam
aged
guys/
anchors
Dam
aged
cro
ss a
rms
Dam
aged
capacitors
Loss o
r In
terr
uptio
n o
f
Serv
ice
Tornado X X X X X X X X X X
Severe Storm
X X X X X X X X X X
Flood X X X X X X X X X X
Severe Winter
X X X X X X X X X X
Wild/Brush Fire
X X X X X X X X X X
Earthquake X X X X X X X X X X
Dam Failure
X X X X X X X X X X
Severe Land subsidence
X X X X X X X X X X
[HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012
| 19-41
May 18, 2012 [HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE]
19-42 |
Meeting #2
August 19th
, 2011, 8:00 am
Howard Electric Cooperative, Fayette, MO
Review of Data Collection
Mid-Mo RPC staff collected and reviewed asset information provided by
HEC
Current Mitigation Strategies
Current strategies were reviewed for incorporation into the plan chapter
Establishment of Goals, Objectives, and Actions (See following list)
Goal 1: Harden Howard Electric Cooperative’s system so future major events will be
less likely to cause disruption.
Objective 1: Harden Howard Electric Cooperative’s system so future major events will be
less likely to cause disruption.
Convert older copper wire to ACSR (steel-reinforced aluminum).
Put in higher class of poles.
Space poles closer together.
Build tie lines to provide for loop feed service.
Upgrade conductor size.
Convert overhead lines to underground lines or vice versa in troubled areas based on
vulnerability.
Goal 2: Provide excellent service to cooperative members during periods of outages
while maintaining a safe work environment for cooperative employees.
Objective 1: Use the latest technology to enhance outage restoration and improve safety
for cooperative employees and public.
Implement new electronic reclosures.
Implement IVR (Interactive Voice Response) system to improve outage reporting.
Improve outage management using GPS and GIS technology.
[HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012
| 19-43
Maintain existing mutual aid agreements and partnerships with local agencies and
other cooperatives
Objective 2: Provide for continued service to people with medical support needs.
Increase holding of generators owned for use in disastrous events.
Objective 3: Provide for safety of employees and allow for continued work on the system.
Include a tornado saferoom when rebuilding cooperative offices.
Use an earthquake-proof design when rebuilding cooperative offices.
May 18, 2012 [HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE]
19-44 |
[HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012
| 19-45
Meeting #3
September 27th
, 2011
Howard Electric Cooperative, Fayette, MO
Prioritization of Goals, Objectives, and Actions
Methods in prioritizing (See following charts)
Organization of Actions (See following charts)
Plan Implementation and Maintenance
HEC staff agreed to maintain and implement the plan according to AMEC
guidelines.
Goals and Objectives:
Goal 1: Harden Howard Electric Cooperative’s system so future major events will be
less likely to cause disruption.
Objective 1: Harden Howard Electric Cooperative’s system so future major events will be
less likely to cause disruption.
Goal 2: Provide excellent service to cooperative members during periods of outages
while maintaining a safe work environment for cooperative employees.
Objective 1: Use the latest technology to enhance outage restoration and improve safety
for cooperative employees and public.
Objective 2: Provide for continued service to people with medical support needs.
Objective 3: Provide for safety of employees and allow for continued work on the system.
Method of prioritization:
Mitigation goals and objectives were identified by representatives of the electric
cooperative using a simple criterion as the baseline: reducing the impact of power
outages due to natural hazards. Each established goal and objective adheres to this
criterion by addressing the most important aspects of impact reduction: protection of the
service area and infrastructure.
Building from the goals and objectives, three mitigation action groups were identified:
Group A - Ongoing mitigation actions,
Group B - Pre-disaster planning and/or immediate response to natural hazard events
Group C - Potential actions given additional funding.
Group A includes actions which continue regardless of outside funding sources. Pre-
disaster planning and/or immediate response to natural hazard events includes
preventative actions as well as the establishment of working relationships with outside
agencies to reduce the impact of natural hazard events. Group B includes public
education campaigns and mutual aid agreements with outside agencies. Potential actions
given additional funding help to identify areas of growth for the cooperative. Group C
May 18, 2012 [HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE]
19-46 |
includes infrastructure and other system improvements as well as research into new
technology. The chart below provides the actions selected for each mitigation group.
Howard Electric Cooperative
Mitigation Action Groups
Group A Group B Group C
Ongoing Mitigation Actions Pre-disaster planning and
immediate response Potential Actions
Convert older copper wire to
ACSR (steel-reinforced
aluminum).
Convert older copper wire to
ACSR (steel-reinforced
aluminum).
Convert older copper wire to
ACSR (steel-reinforced
aluminum).
Put in higher class of poles. Put in higher class of poles. Put in higher class of poles.
Upgrade conductor size. Space poles closer together. Space poles closer together.
Implement new electronic
reclosures.
Build tie lines to provide for loop
feed service.
Build tie lines to provide for loop
feed service.
Implement IVR (Interactive
Voice Response) system to
improve outage reporting.
Upgrade conductor size. Upgrade conductor size.
Maintain existing mutual
aid agreements and partnerships
with local agencies and other
cooperatives
Convert overhead lines to
underground lines or vice versa
in troubled areas based on
vulnerability.
Convert overhead lines to
underground lines or vice versa
in troubled areas based on
vulnerability.
Implement IVR (Interactive
Voice Response) system to
improve outage reporting.
Implement new electronic
reclosures.
Improve outage management
using GPS and GIS technology.
Improve outage management
using GPS and GIS technology.
Increase holding of generators
owned for use in disastrous
events.
Increase holding of generators
owned for use in disastrous
events.
Include a tornado safe room
when rebuilding cooperative
offices.
Include a tornado safe room
when rebuilding cooperative
offices.
Use an earthquake-proof design
when rebuilding cooperative
offices.
Use an earthquake-proof design
when rebuilding cooperative
offices.
Maintain existing mutual aid
agreements and partnerships with
local agencies and other
cooperatives
The committee used the prioritization process that was created by the Northwest Regional
Council of Governments when writing the FEMA approved draft template which divided
potential actions in all groups into three additional tiers:
[HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012
| 19-47
Howard Electric Cooperative
Mitigation Priority Tiers
Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
actions focus on physical
infrastructure protection and
improvements which ensure
continued, quality service and
seek to reduce power outages.
These types of actions are the
highest priority of HEC.
actions create and maintain
working relationships to reduce
and prevent the impact of power
outages. These include
improvements to safety and
reporting information, mutual aid
agreements, and other efforts
which seek to expand and
improve both customer service
and disaster planning.
actions identify potential projects
for other system improvements.
These include mapping efforts,
technological improvements, and
research related to the expansion
of mitigation efforts.
Convert older copper wire to
ACSR (steel-reinforced
aluminum).
Maintain existing mutual aid
agreements and partnerships with
local agencies and other
cooperatives
Implement new electronic
reclosures.
Put in higher class of poles.
Implement IVR (Interactive
Voice Response) system to
improve outage reporting.
Space poles closer together. Improve outage management
using GPS and GIS technology.
Build tie lines to provide for loop
feed service.
Increase holding of generators
owned for use in disastrous
events.
Upgrade conductor size. Include a tornado saferoom when
rebuilding cooperative offices.
Convert overhead lines to
underground lines or vice versa
in troubled areas based on
vulnerability.
Use an earthquake-proof design
when rebuilding cooperative
offices.
May 18, 2012 [HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE]
19-48 |
Howard Electric Cooperative
Mitigation Actions Summary
Action Goal/
Objective Group Tier
Convert older copper wire to ACSR (steel-reinforced aluminum). G1/O1 A,B,C 1
Put in higher class of poles. G1/O1 A,B,C 1
Space poles closer together. G1/O1 B,C 1
Build tie lines to provide for loop feed service. G1/O1 B,C 1
Upgrade conductor size. G1/O1 A,B,C 1
Convert overhead lines to underground lines or vice versa in troubled areas
based on vulnerability. G1/O1 B,C 1
Implement new electronic reclosures. G2/O1 A,C 3
Implement IVR (Interactive Voice Response) system to improve outage
reporting. G2/O1 A,B 3
Improve outage management using GPS and GIS technology. G2/O1 B,C 3
Maintain existing mutual aid agreements and partnerships with local agencies
and other cooperatives G2/O1 A,B 2
Increase holding of generators owned for use in disastrous events. G2/O2 B,C 3
Include a tornado saferoom when rebuilding cooperative offices. G2/O2 B,C 3
Use an earthquake-proof design when rebuilding cooperative offices. G2/O2 B,C 3
[HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012
| 19-49
May 18, 2012 [HOWARD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE]
19-50 | AMEC Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
206 E. Broadway PO Box 140
Ashland, Missouri 65010 573-657-9779
Fax: 573-657-2829 www.mmrpc.org
October 21, 2011
«Name»
«mailing_address»
«city_state_zip»
RE: Howard Electric Cooperative Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan
Since 1993, the State of Missouri has received thirty-two Presidential Declarations for d isaster related
assistance. This assistance, as set forth in the Stafford Act, is comprised of three basic programs: 1)
ind ividual assistance; 2) public assistance; and 3) Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HGMP). This letter
pertains to HGMP funding. Effective November 1, 2003, any county in Missouri that is declared a federal
d isaster area must have an approved Hazard Mitigation Plan in place to be eligible for HGMP funding.
Hazard mitigation, as defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), is any action taken to
eliminate or reduce the loss of life or property as the result of a disaster event. HMGP funds may be used to fund
projects that will reduce or eliminate the losses from future d isasters as well as provide a long term solution
to a problem. Many types of projects can be funded through the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
includ ing retrofitting structures and facilities to minimize damage from na tural hazards (i.e. utility pole
upgrades, burying electrical lines, etc.).
County governments have participated in this process since its inception. School d istricts were included as
separate entities beginning in 2008. In 2010, the Association of Missouri Electric Cooperatives elected to
create a statewide plan for all rural electric cooperatives (RECs). As a statewide plan, certain elements have
been standard ized , but each ind ividual REC worked with the local regional planning commission to create
their own mitigation strategies. With their participation, each REC is eligible to apply for HMGP funding
towards potential mitigation projects. The Howard Electric Cooperative has been actively working towards
this goal with the Mid -Missouri Regional Planning Commission since February 2011.
All hazard mitigation planning efforts require public notification and an opportunity for public
involvement. As a local jurisd iction, critical facility, or business entity, Howard Electric Cooperative invites
you to provide comments and input on their portion of the statewide plan. Copies of their local chapter
may be accessed through their website (http:/ / www.howardelectric.com ) or at their Fayette office.
Additionally, a copy may be secured by email request to Katrina Thomas at the Mid -Missouri Regional
Planning Commission ([email protected] ).
Thank you for your consideration in this matter. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to
contact us d irectly using the information above.
Sincerely,
Katrina Thomas
Regional Planner/ GIS Specialist
Newspaper List:
Fayette Democrat Leader
Boonville Daily News & Record
Top Related