Cuivre River - Missouri Association of Councils of Government

Transcription

[CUIVRE RIVER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012
Section 1: Introduction
Cuivre River Electric Cooperative (CREC) was established in 1941 to provide electric
service to the rural areas of northeast Missouri. A Touchstone Energy Cooperative,
CREC is headquartered in Troy, Missouri, and provides service to customers in Lincoln,
Pike, St. Charles, and Warren counties. The cooperative is run by a board of twelve
directors which approve the company’s mission and internally developed business policy:
“Cuivre River Electric Cooperative is dedicated to provide an adequate,
reliable supply of electrical energy to all who desire it within the service
area of the Cooperative at the lowest cost consistent with sound
economical practices, efficient management, and concern for our
environment.”
The cooperative owns 5,255 miles of service line within these counties. Figure 1 depicts
the geographic boundaries of the cooperative in relation to USGS local quadrangles
within the state of Missouri. (Map sources: www.usgs.gov, Association of Missouri
Electric
Cooperatives,
Cuivre
River
Electric
Cooperative.)
CREC is the largest of
Missouri’s
electric
cooperatives. There are
58,500 member-consumers;
94% are homes and 6% are
businesses and industries.
Based on consumer records
and U.S. Census data,
Cuiver River serves: 24% of
all St. Charles County
homes; 68% of all Lincoln
County homes; 65% of all
Warren County homes; and
15% of all Pike County
homes.
Specific
information
regarding meters by county
was not publicly available.
| 15-1
May 18, 2012 [CUIVRE RIVER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE]
Population density for the cooperative service area is depicted in Figure 2 (Map source:
U.S. Census 2010).
15-2 |
Section 2: Planning process
Through a partnership between the Association of Missouri Electric Cooperatives and the
Missouri Association of Councils of Government, the Boonslick Regional Planning
Commission was contracted to facilitate a hazard mitigation planning process for CREC.
The Boonslick Regional Planning Commission met with CREC’s representative at a
regional kick-off meeting which was held on February 4, 2011. 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.
CREC chose not to participate directly in the planning process. As a result, additional
meetings to collect asset data, review existing and create new mitigation strategies, as
well as prioritizing goals, objectives, and actions were not completed.
Public Involvement
Due to Cuivre River Electric Cooperative’s refusal to participate, public involvement was
determined to be impossible as the chapter includes no mitigation planning.
Section 3: Asset inventory
Creation of a comprehensive asset inventory for Cuivre River Electric Cooperative
requires direct participation from the cooperative. Without their participation, it is
difficult to determine the extent and value of their physical infrastructure. No publicly
accessible information related to cooperative assets was available to complete the asset
inventory.
Section 4: Identified Hazards and Risk Assessment Methodology
Natural hazards in northeast Missouri vary dramatically with regard to intensity,
frequency, and the 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 negative of any natural disaster regardless of onset time. The following
natural hazards have been identified as potential threats for the service region of the
Cuivre River Electric Cooperative:
 Tornadoes
 Severe Thunderstorms, Hail, and High Winds
 Flood and Levee Failure
 Severe Winter Weather
 Earthquakes
 Dam Failure
 Wildfire
Likewise, a number of hazards may be eliminated from consideration in their local plan
due to the state’s geographic location including tsunamis, hurricanes, coastal storms,
| 15-3
volcanic activity, avalanche, and tropical storms. Additionally, a number of hazards may
be eliminated specifically for CREC because of asset types and geographic location in the
state of Missouri. Those hazards eliminated for the CREC service region include:




Drought
Heat Wave
Severe land subsidence
Landslides
Although drought can potentially impact northeast Missouri, water availability does not
directly impact the delivery of electric service to CREC customers. 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 CREC service area may be considered cascading events
rather than damage caused directly by the hazard itself. Land subsidence and landslides
have also been eliminated based upon local soil structure categorization by the USGS.
Limestone, carbonate rock, salt beds, and other naturally dissolving rock which are most
susceptible to the formation of sinkholes do not form the basis of soil in the CREC
service region.
For the purpose of this risk assessment, the identified hazards for the CREC 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. Due to lack of direct participation from the electric cooperative
and lack of public data, the data collected from National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) on the hazard events has been used for the analysis.
Further, the specific events that reported damages of $1,000 or more within the
CREC’s service area have been identified to calculate the probability of damagecausing hazard occurrence for the specific hazard. For CREC, hazards with
historical data include tornadoes, severe thunderstorms/high wind/hail, flood and
levee failure, severe winter weather, and wildfire.
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 CREC, hazards
without historical data include earthquakes and dam failure.
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
15-4 |
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.
Because CREC did not participate and no hazard-specific data is publicly available,
detailed loss estimates for each hazard affecting the cooperative’s service area are not
available.
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 1.1) will be utilized to
identify the potential damage extent and likelihood of occurrence for each natural hazard
type. Without Cuivre River’s cooperation, the asset inventory could not be completed.
As a result, the potential extent of damage cannot be determined without infrastructure
data. In order to account for this insufficiency, a final row was added to the matrix which
addresses the unknown amount of damage.
| 15-5
Table 1.1
Probability of Hazard Occurrence
Sample Cuivre River Electric
Cooperative
Infrastructure
Vulnerability Assessment Matrix
Hazard: _____________
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
Less than 10% of damage
to system
10-25% damage of system
More than 50% damage
of system
Unknown
damage
extent
of
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)
Without Cuivre River’s cooperation, outage information could not be completed. As a
result, the potential extent of damage cannot be determined without infrastructure data.
In order to account for this insufficiency, a final row was added to the matrix which
addresses the unknown amount of damage. Due to the insufficiency of the data, the
percentage values calculated for the probability of hazard occurrence are used for the
probability of damage-causing hazard occurrence too.
15-6 |
Table 1.2
Potential Extent of Impact
Sample Cuivre River Electric
Cooperative Service Interruption
Hazard: _____________
Less
than
10%
of
customers report outages
10-25% of
report outages
customers
26-50% of
report outages
customers
Probability of Damage-causing Hazard Occurrence
Less than
1-10% chance
10- 99%
> Near 100%
1% in any
in any given
chance in any
probability in
given year
year
given year
any given year
More than 50% of
Unknown
Impact
Extent
of
| 15-7
Section 5: Risk Assessment
A) Historical Hazards:
Tornadoes
From 1990-2010, Cuivre River Electric Cooperative’s service area within the state of
Missouri has experienced a total of 35 tornadic events. The probability of a tornadic
event is near 100% (35 events/ 20 years= 175%). However, there are 6 events that
reported damages of $1,000 and more.
Using the previously described methodology, the probability of a damage-causing
tornadic event in the Cuivre River service area in any given year is 17% (6 events / 35
events = 17%) Estimated damages to cooperative infrastructure could not be compiled.
Table 1.3 provides a summary of event dates and EF-scale ratings for the service area.
Table 1.3
Date of event
CREC Tornadic Event Summary
EF Scale rating
Reported damage
$ value
08/03/1990
F1
$250,000
11/27/1990
F2
$25,000,000
04/13/1998
F0
$1,000
02/11/1999
F2
$300,000
04/10/2001
F1
$5,200,000
03/13/2006
F3
$2,500,000
Source: National Climatic Data Center, 2011
Based upon the last twenty years of
historical event records, the average
tornado to affect the cooperative will
include an EF0, EF1, and EF2 rating.
The damage caused by tornadoes could
not be determined without cooperative
records, nor could an average amount of
damage per storm be calculated. In order
to account for this insufficiency, a final
row was added to the matrix which
addresses the unknown amount of
damage. Table 1.4 demonstrates the
probability of occurrence in conjunction
with the potential extent of damage.
Figure
3
provides
a
pictorial
representation of all recorded tornado
touchdown sites and recorded path. (Data
for map collected from NOAA).
15-8 |
Table 1.4
Cuivre River Electric Cooperative
Infrastructure Vulnerability
Assessment Matrix
Hazard: Tornado
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
to system
More than 50% damage of
system
Unknown extent of
damage
Of the 35 tornadic events, 6 reportedly caused damage throughout the counties in
CREC’s service area. As with infrastructure damage estimates, outage information for
tornadoes was not publically accessible. As a result, average outages per storm cannot be
calculated. Table 1.5 demonstrates the probability of a damage-causing hazard
occurrence in conjunction with the potent extent of impact upon local customers.
Table 1.5
Service Interruption Vulnerability
Assessment Matrix
Hazard: Tornado
Less
than
10%
of
10-25% of
report outages
customers
26-50% of
report outages
customers
Less than
1-10% chance
10- 99%
Near 100%
1% in any
in any given
chance in any
probability in
given year
year
given year
any given year
More than 50% of
Unknown extent of impact
| 15-9
Severe Thunderstorms, High Wind, and Hail
From 1990-2010, Cuivre River’s service area within the state of Missouri has
experienced a total 298 hail events and 411 thunderstorm/high wind events. The
probability of occurrence of in any given year is near 100% (298 events / 20 years=
1,490% and 411 events/ 20 years= 2,055%). Table 1.6 provides a summary of event dates
and reported damages for the service area. 26 of these events reported damages of
$1,000 or more.
Therefore, the probability of damage-causing hail event in the Cuivre River service area
in any given year is near to 25% (26 events / 298 occurrences = 8.72%) while the
probability of damage-causing thunderstorm/high wind event in any given year is 5.1%
(21 events / 411 occurrences = 5.1%).
Table 1.7 demonstrates the probability of occurrence in conjunction with the potential
extent of damage for both hail and thunderstorm/high wind events. Averaged damage
costs could not be determined without cooperative participation. The potential extent of
Reported
damage as well as the potential extent of impact are Table 1.6
Event date
damage
unknown.
(Hail)
$ value
04/24/1993
$5,000
05/10/1993
$1,000
04/26/1994
$50,000
04/10/2001
$100,000,000
02/16/2006
$5,000
Event date
Reported
(Thunderstorms, damage
high winds)
$ value
05/10/1993
$6,000
09/22/1993
$1,000
04/15/1994
$5,000
04/26/1994
$10,000
06/22/1994
$1,000
11/20/1994
$1,000
11/21/1994
$4,000
04/10/1995
$1,000
06/08/1995
$4,000
07/25/1995
$2,000
01/18/1996
$200,000
05/25/1996
$5,000
04/18/1997
$100,000
06/20/2000
$2,000
08/10/2001
$5,000
10/24/2001
$250,000
05/07/2002
$1,800,000
08/18/2006
$20,000
07/17/2007
$5,000
06/10/2009
$3,000
08/10/2010
$200,000
Source: National Climatic Data Center,
2011
15-10 |
Table 1.7
Assessment Matrix
Hazard: Thunderstorm/High
Wind/Hail
to system
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
system
Unknown extent of
damage
Outage information for severe thunderstorms, high winds and hail events was not
publically accessible. As a result, average outages per storm cannot be calculated. Table
1.8 demonstrates the probability of occurrence in conjunction with the potential extent of
impact upon local customers.
Table 1.8
Assessment Matrix
Hazard:
Thunderstorm/High
Wind/Hail
Less
than
10%
of
10-25% of
report outages
customers
26-50% of
report outages
customers
Less than
1-10% chance
10- 99%
> Near 100%
1% in any
in any given
chance in any
probability in
given year
year
given year
any given year
More than 50% of
Unknown potential extent
of impact
| 15-11
Flood and Levee Failure
Flood and levee failure carry, perhaps, the greatest ongoing potential threat to the existing
infrastructure of the Cuivre River Electric Cooperative. Figure 3 below depicts the 100
year floodplain in relation to the cooperative’s boundaries. (Map sources: FEMA
HAZUS-MH; DFIRM).
Currently, inundation data for levee failure is lacking due to issues surrounding mapping,
appropriate models, and its close association with flooding events. Figure 4 below
provides the location of known state and federal levees within the cooperative’s
boundaries. (Map sources: MSDIS, County Emergency Management Agency)
From 1993-2010, Cuivre River’s service area has experienced 123 flooding events. The
probability of occurrence is near 100% (123 events/20 years= 615%). However, there are
5 events that reported a damage of $1,000 or more. Currently, no data concerning levee
failure damage can be separated from flood damage data. Therefore, the probability of
damage-causing flood/levee failure event affecting the cooperative assets in any given
year is 4.1% (5 events / 123 occurrences = 4.1%).
Table 1.9
Flood and levee failure events vary widely based
upon numerous factors including, but not limited
to, annual precipitation and extent of levee
damage. Neither damage estimates nor outage
information are publicly available and as such
cannot be utilized to create damage or impact
estimates. Tables 1.10 and 1.11 demonstrate the
probability of occurrence in conjunction with the
unknown potential extent of damage and impact.
15-12 |
CREC Flood Event Summary
Event date
Reported damage
$ value
1993
7M
1994
15M
1995
70K
2007
2K
2008
5M
Table 1.10
Cuivre River Electric
Cooperative Infrastructure
Hazard: Flood
1-10% chance
in any given
year
10- 99%
chance in any
given year
Near 100%
probability in
any given year
to system
system
Unknown extent of
damage
Table 1.11
Assessment Matrix
Hazard: Flood
Less
than
10%
of
Less than
1% in any
given year
10-25% of
report outages
customers
26-50% of
report outages
customers
Less than
1-10% chance
10- 99%
> Near 100%
1% in any
in any given
chance in any
probability in
given year
year
given year
any given year
More than 50% of
| 15-13
Severe Winter Weather
From 1994-2010, Cuivre River’s service area has experienced a total of 155 severe winter
weather events, including significant snowfall and ice storms. The probability of
occurrence is near 100% (155 events/ 17 years= 911%). 3 events resulted in reported
damages of $1,000 or more.
Table 1.12 CREC Severe Winter Weather
Event Summary
Event date
Event type
04/05/1994
Winter storm
01/06/1995
Ice storm
01/18/1195
Snow
The probability of damage-causing occurrence of
a severe winter weather event in the Cuivre River
service area in any given year is 1.9% (3 events /
155 occurrences = 1.9%). Neither damage
estimates nor outage information is publicly
available and as such cannot be utilized to create damage or impact estimates.
Tables 1.13 and 1.14 demonstrate the probability of occurrence in conjunction with the
potential extent of damage and impact.
Table 1.13
Potential Extent of
Damage
Assessment Matrix
Hazard: Severe Winter Weather
1-10% chance
in any given
year
10- 99%
chance in any
given year
Near 100%
probability in
any given year
to system
system
Unknown extent of
damage
Table 1.14
Assessment Matrix
Hazard: Severe Winter Weather
Less
than
10%
of
Less than
1% in any
given year
10-25% of
report outages
customers
26-50% of
report outages
customers
More than 50% of
15-14 |
Less than
1-10% chance
10- 99%
> Near 100%
1% in any
in any given
chance in any
probability in
given year
year
given year
any given year
Wildfire
Wildfire events have occurred in each of the four counties. According to the Missouri
Department of Conservation, Lincoln, Pike, St. Charles and Warren counties have
experienced wildfires between 2004 and 2008. Table 1.15 summarizes the incidences of
wildfire within the four counties. The probability of a wildfire event in the Cuivre River
service area in any given year is near 100% (203 events / 5 years = 4,060%).
Table 1.15 Wildfire summary by county
Average
# of
Annual #
Wildfires,
of
Acres
County
2004-08
Wildfires
Burned
Lincoln
64
12.8
246.45
Pike
50
10
413.70
St. Charles 64
12.8
276.48
Warren
25
5
114.51
Totals
203
40.6
1051.14
Source: Missouri State Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2010
Average
Annual
Acres
Burned
49
83
55
23
210
Total
Buildings
Damaged
5
1
1
0
7
The potential extent of damage caused by wildfire is difficult to determine. Like
earthquakes and dam failure, wildfires have had no measurable impact upon the CREC
service area counties. To date, 203 fires have burned a total of 1051.14 acres, for an
average of 5.17 acres affected per event. Cooperative assets are located throughout the
service area rather than being located at a single central site. With an average of 5 acres
per fire in the service area, it is unlikely that infrastructure damage would exceed 5%
based upon asset location and unlikeliness of an uncontrollable wildfire. Neither damage
estimates nor outage information is publicly available and as such cannot be utilized to
create damage or impact estimates. Further study will be required to create a model for
damage assessments related to wildfire. Tables 1.16 and 1.17 demonstrate the probability
of occurrence in conjunction with potential extent of damage and impact.
Due to the
insufficiency of the data, the percentage values calculated for the probability of hazard
occurrence are used for the probability of damage-causing hazard occurrence too.
Table 1.16
Potential Extent of
Damage
Assessment Matrix
Hazard: Wildfire
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
to system
system
Unknown extent of
damage
| 15-15
Table 1.17
Assessment Matrix
Hazard: Wildfire
Less
than
10%
of
10-25% of
report outages
customers
26-50% of
report outages
customers
More than 50% of
15-16 |
Less than
1-10% chance
10- 99%
> Near 100%
1% in any
in any given
chance in any
probability in
given year
year
given year
any given year
B. Non-historical Hazards
Earthquakes
The closest source of earthquake risk in CREC service area include the New Madrid
Fault Zone, the Wabash Valley Fault Zone, Big River Fault Zone, St. Genevieve Fault
Zone and the Illinois Basin .
Between 1811 and 1812, four earthquakes, with magnitude estimates greater than 7.0,
occurred during a three month period. Hundreds of aftershocks followed over a period of
several years. The largest earthquakes to have occurred since then were on January 4,
1843 and October 31, 1895 with magnitude estimates of 6.0 and 6.2 respectively. In
addition to these events, seven events of magnitude 5.0 and greater have occurred in the
area. Instruments were installed in and around this area in 1974 to closely monitor
seismic activity. Since then, more than 4,000 earthquakes have been located, most of
which are too small to be felt. The most recent earthquake event was on June 6, 2003.
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 probability of an earthquake increases with each
passing day.
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 V intensity characteristics. In the event of an earthquake
with a 7.6 magnitude, the region would experiences Level VI intensity characteristic
while an earthquake with an 8.6 magnitude would most likely cause Level VII intensity
characteristics.
In the event of an earthquake with a 7.6 magnitude, the CREC service area would most
likely experience minor building damage as well as damage to the electrical distribution
system. This damage, however, would most likely be relatively minimal and localized.
Distribution lines overhead and underground could become disconnected or severed, and
transformers could be damaged. Though the probability of occurrence is very small, the
potential extent of damage could significantly impact both the cooperative and its
customers as demonstrated in Table 1.18.
| 15-17
Table 1.18
Potential Extent of
Damage
Assessment Matrix
Hazard: Earthquake
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
to system
system
Neither damage estimates nor outage information is publicly available and as such cannot
be utilized to create damage or impact estimates. Based upon information from CERI,
FEMA, and SEMA, it may be estimated that customers could report outages related to an
earthquake event with damages that would be expected to be localized and minimal.
When compared with the total number of customers served by CREC, it can be projected
that up to 10% of all customers may report outages during any given seismic event.
Table 1.19 demonstrates the probability of occurrence in conjunction with the potent
extent of impact upon local customers.
Table 1.19
Assessment Matrix
Hazard: Earthquake
Less
than
10%
of
10-25% of
report outages
customers
26-50% of
report outages
customers
More than 50% of
15-18 |
Less than
1-10% chance
10- 99%
> Near 100%
1% in any
in any given
chance in any
probability in
given year
year
given year
any given year
Dam Failure
Like earthquakes, dam failures
have had no measurable impact
upon the CREC service area to
date. According to Missouri
DNR’s Dam Safety Division,
367 dams currently exist within
the cooperative boundaries: 68
in Lincoln County, 49 in Pike
County, 119 in St. Charles
County and 131 in Warren
County. Of these dams, nine in
Lincoln County, nine in Pike
County, 27 in St. Charles County
and 42 in Warren County are
regulated by the state due to the
fact that they are nonagricultural, non-federal dams
which exceed 35 feet in height.
Figure 6 shows the locations of
all known dams located within
Cuivre River’s service area.
(Map
sources:
www.msdis.missouri.edu; www.dnr.mo.gov/env/wrc.)
Figure 6
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. 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%.
Table 1.20
Potential Extent of
Damage
Cuivre River Electric
Cooperative Infrastructure
Hazard: Dam Failure
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
to system
system
| 15-19
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. .
Table 1.21
Assessment Matrix
Hazard: Dam Failure
Less
than
10%
of
10-25% of
report outages
customers
26-50% of
report outages
customers
More than 50% of
15-20 |
Less than
1-10% chance
10- 99%
> Near 100%
1% in any
in any given
chance in any
probability in
given year
year
given year
any given year
Section 6: Mitigation strategies
Previous efforts at mitigation
Cuivre River Electric Cooperative chose not to participate in the planning process for
their hazard mitigation chapter to be included in the statewide plan. As such, no
information concerning previous efforts at mitigation is available.
Development of goals, objectives, and actions
Without the participation of the cooperative, mitigation goals, objectives, and actions
cannot be developed or implemented at this time.
Section 7: Plan Implementation and Maintenance
Plan incorporation
This plan will not be incorporated by the Cuivre River Electric Cooperative.
Other Local Planning Mechanisms
Other local planning mechanisms, including regional transportation plans, comprehensive
plans, emergency management agencies, could benefit from the development of a local
rural electrical cooperative hazard mitigation plan. Without participation, however,
Cuivre River has not created a final hazard mitigation plan.
Plan Maintenance
A completed plan has not been created for Cuivre River due to their lack of participation.
Maintenance will not be necessary.
Continued Public Involvement Opportunities
Public involvement cannot be encouraged or solicited without the aid of the Cuivre River
Electric Cooperative.
| 15-21
This page intentionally left blank.
15-22 |

Cuivre River - Missouri Association of Councils of Government

Transcription

Similar documents

August - Marias River Electric Cooperative

(MSDS) Kukui Nut Oil RBDW

English - monitor ii

IMPORTANT WARNING - Withlacoochee River Electric Cooperative

Chemical Name: All Natural Laundry Detergent Manufacturer: Ecos

Cuivre River Electric Cooperative

Advance - NuwayCoop.com

Ruth Bauer

2012 State of Telcom