Section 1: Introduction

Section 1: Introduction [SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012 SEMO Electric Cooperative (SEMOEC) was established in 1938 to provide electric service to the rural areas of southeast Missouri. SEMOEC is headquartered in Sikeston, Missouri with a branch office in Bloomfield, Missouri and provides service to customers in Cape Girardeau, Bollinger, Scott, Stoddard, New Madrid, and Mississippi counties in Missouri. The cooperative is run by a board of twelve directors which approve the company s mission and internally developed business policy: Semo Electric Cooperative through a partnership with our members will provide the safest and most reliable service, for the lowest possible price while adhering to cooperative principles and striving to improve the quality of life for all members through a highly trained, efficient staff. SEMOEC s service boundaries include Scott and Mississippi counties in their entirety as well as the eastern portions of Bollinger, Cape Girardeau, Stoddard and New Madrid Counties. The cooperative owns 2,434.4 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, Semo Electric Cooperative.) Figure 1 40-1

May 18, 2012 [SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] The customer base of SEMOEC currently sits at 15,854 members in the six county area within the state of Missouri. Table 1.1 provides the summary of metered customers by Missouri counties. Table 1.1 Meters by Missouri County County Number of meters Bollinger 141 Cape Girardeau 1343 Scott 4577 Stoddard 6164 Mississippi 2083 New Madrid 1544 The average daily customer usage for SEMOEC is 57 kilowatt-hours (kwh). Annual total usage of SEMOEC customers in 2010 was 328,020,725 kwh of service. Population density for the cooperative service area is depicted in the Figure 2. (Map source: U.S. Census 2010). Figure 2 40-2

Section 2: Planning process [SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012 Through a partnership between the Association of Missouri Electric Cooperatives and the Missouri Association of Councils of Government, the Bootheel Regional Planning Commission was contracted to facilitate a hazard mitigation planning process for SEMO. The initial meeting between the two entities was held on January 19, 2011 as part of a regional kick-off meeting for southeast 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. Two additional planning meetings were held at the SEMOEC offices in Sikeston, Missouri. Table 1.2 summarizes the attendees and topics of each meeting. Meeting minutes are available in the chapter appendix. Table 1.2 SEMOEC Planning Meeting Synopsis Meeting Date Attendees, Title, Organization Topics of discussion January 19, 2011 Larry Kelly, Engineering Manager, SEMOEC Randal Tennison, Accountant, SEMOEC Steve Duke, Executive Director, BRPC Michael Dumey, Regional Planner, BRPC Scott Perry, Transportation Planner, BRPC SEMOEC business structure Customer information Critical facilities information Asset inventory by type and location Data collection assignments February 8, 2011 August 3, 2011 Larry Kelly, Engineering Manager, SEMOEC Randal Tennison, Accountant, SEMOEC Reuben Jean, Executive Director, SEMOEC Steve Duke, Executive Director, BRPC Scott Perry, Transportation Planner, BRPC Michael Dumey, Regional Planner, BRPC Larry Kelly, Engineering Manager, SEMECO Michael Dumey, Regional Planner, BRPC Scott Perry, Transportation Planner, BRPC Data collection review Current mitigation strategies Establishment of goals, actions, and objectives Method of prioritization Prioritization of goals, actions, and objectives Public Involvement As with all public hazard mitigation plans public involvement was encouraged through a variety of methods. SEMOEC 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 SEMOEC letter which was mailed to the appropriate contacts, including: Scott County Commission, Stoddard County Commission, Mississippi County Commission, 40-3

May 18, 2012 [SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] New Madrid County Commission, Bollinger County Commission Cape Girardeau County Commission local emergency management directors, and the local Red Cross chapter. SEMOEC does not provide service to any critical facilities (hospitals, emergency services, etc.), higher education institutions, or large industrial centers. Additionally, SEMOEC s mitigation plan was included in the public comment period for the combined AMEC plan. 40-4

Section 3: Asset inventory [SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012 SEMO Electric Cooperative has a wide variety of assets by type. Real estate owned by the company includes office buildings, warehouses, garages, and other outbuildings throughout the service area. Twelve vehicles provide access to customers and infrastructure. SEMOEC does not own any electric generation or transmission infrastructure. 902 miles of distribution lines are owned and maintained by SEMOEC. Table 1.3 provides information concerning total asset valuation. Table 1.3 Asset Semoec Asset Inventory Valuation Summary Total Cost breakdown Replacement Cost Total Semoec Assets $166,578,363 Buildings and vehicles - $6,675,851 Overhead assets - $131,820,252 Underground assets - $28,082,260 Distribution Lines Supporting Infrastructure $74,343,984 OH $19,997,760 UG $57,476,268 OH $8,084,500 UG Office Buildings $3,759,621 Warehouses $750,000 Vehicles $2,166,230 Source: Internal Semoec Accounting and Insurance records, 2011 OH Single-phase lines $12,259,104 UG Single-phase lines - $4,276,800 OH Three-phase lines - $62,084,880 UG Three-phase lines - $15,720,960 Meters - $3,170,800 Poles - $22,278,400 OH Transformers - $14,455,440 UG Transformers - $8,084,500 Guys/Anchors - $3,613,818 Cross-arms - $2,981,860 Regulators - $2,648,250 SP Oil-Circuit Reclosures - $265,500 3phase Oil-Circuit Reclosures - $7,956,000 Capacitors - $106,200 Ensuring quality distribution to its customers, SEMOEC maintains not only distribution lines, but also the supporting infrastructure as well. Table 1.4 includes a list of asset types, emergency replacement cost per unit or mile, the asset inventory by service per counties, and total infrastructure numbers. 40-5

May 18, 2012 [SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] Table 1.4 Semo Asset Inventory by service county Asset Emergency Replacement Number of units or miles: Number of units or miles: 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: Cost per unit or mile Bollinger Cape Girardeau Stoddard Scott New Madrid Mississippi Meter $200/unit 141 1343 6166 4577 1,544 2083 15,854 Pole $400/unit 550 5020 18,946 14,470 7250 9460 55,696 SP*** distribution line 24 OH 20 OH 321 OH 138 OH 38 OH 70 OH 611 OH TP**** distribution line Transformers $20,064/mile OH** ($3.80/foot OH) $26,400/mile UG*** ($5.00/foot UG) $34,320/mile ($6.50/foot $491,280UG /$7.60OH) $1,020 OH 18 UG 0 OH 0 UG 155 OH 27 UG 198 OH 0 UG 1275 OH 36 UG 502 OH 18 UG 4815 OH 52 UG 491 OH 14 UG 3680 OH 13 UG 277 OH 0 UG 1,843 OH 16 UG 341 OH 0 UG 2404 OH 162 UG 1809 OH $11,500 UG 0 UG 108 UG 216 UG 264 UG 52 UG 63 UG 703 UG Guys/anchors $107/unit 340 3090 11,660 8915 4465 5304 33,774 Cross-arms $118 2,766 7012 6859 3869 4764 25,270 Regulators $8,250 6 45 50 189 31 321 Oil Circuit $1,500 SP 1 SP 12 SP 83 SP 40 SP 11 SP 30 SP 177 SP Reclosures $18,000 TP 0 TP 48 TP 122 TP 105 TP 50 TP 117TP 442 TP Capacitors $1,800/unit 0 2 22 12 7 16 59 Total Replacement $925,716 OH $12,365,858 OH $42,198,470 OH $34,224,319 OH $18,780,379 OH $23,325,510 OH $131,820,252 OH Value by county $475,200 UG $1,954,800 UG $12,277,440 UG $11,286,720 UG $941,200 UG $1,146,900 UG $28,082,260 UG **OH = overhead ***UG = underground ***SP = Single phase ****TP Three phase Source: Internal Semoec Accounting and Maintenance records 32 UG 14,172 OH 40-6

[SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012 Section 4: Identified Hazards and Risk Assessment Methodology Natural hazards in southeast 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 Semo Electric Cooperative: Tornadoes Severe Thunderstorms, Hail, and High Winds Flood and Levee Failure Severe Winter Weather Earthquakes Dam Failure Wildfires 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, volcanic activity, avalanche, and tropical storms. Additionally, a number of hazards may be eliminated specifically for SEMOEC because of asset types and geographic location in the state of Missouri. Those hazards eliminated for the SEMOEC service region include: Drought Heat Wave Severe land subsidence Landslides Although drought can potentially impact southeast Missouri, water availability does not directly impact the delivery of electric service to SEMOEC 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 SEMOEC 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 SEMOEC service region. For the purpose of this risk assessment, the identified hazards for the SEMOEC 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 SEMOEC, hazards with historical data 40-7

May 18, 2012 [SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] 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, but the extent of damage will vary considerably. For SEMOEC, hazards without historical data include earthquakes and dam/levee 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 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. 1-10% chance of an event occurrence in any 10-99% chance of an event occurrence in any Near 100% chance of an event occurrence in any 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 SEMOEC 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 Valued at $136,329,873 Overhead infrastructure assets only 40-8

Potential Extent of Damage [SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012 o Used for: Severe Thunderstorm / High Wind / Hail Flood Severe Winter Weather o Valued at $131,820,252 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 1.5and 1.6) will be utilized to identify the potential damage extent and likelihood of occurrence for each natural hazard type. Table 1.5 Probability of Hazard Occurrence Sample Semo Electric Cooperative Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Less than 1% in any 1-10% chance in any given year 10-99% chance in any Near 100% probability in any 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) 40-9

Potential Extent of Impact May 18, 2012 [SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] Table 1.6 Sample Semo Electric Cooperative Service Interruption Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: 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 Probability of Damage-causing Hazard Occurrence Less than 1% in any 1-10% chance in any given year 10-99% chance in any > Near 100% probability in any 40-10

Potential Extent of Damage Section 5: Risk Assessment A) Historical Hazards: Tornadoes [SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012 In the last 54 years, 126 tornadoes have been reported within the Semo Electric Cooperative boundaries. Figure 3 below provides a pictorial representation of all recorded tornado touchdown sites. (Data for map collected from NOAA.) Figure 3 For the purpose of this assessment, the years for which records exist for both data sets have been used. From 1954-2009, Semo Electric s service area within the state of Missouri has experienced a total of 126 tornadic events. Using the previously described methodology, the probability of a tornadic event in the Semo Electric service area in any is 233% (126 events / 54 years = 233%). According to SEMO records, none of the recorded tornadoes resulted in damages to cooperative assets, resulting in a less than 1% probability that any given tornadic event will produce damage. Based on the last 54 years of historical event records, the average tornado to affect the cooperative will include an F1 rating, causing an average damage cost of $0 per event ($0 events / 126 events = $0). This averaged amount accounts for less than 1% of SEMO s total overhead assets and buildings ($0 / $136,329,873 = 0%). Table 1.7 demonstrates the probability of occurrence in conjunction with the potential extent of damage. Table 1.7 Probability of Hazard Occurrence Semo Electric Cooperative Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Tornado Less than 1% in any 1-10% chance in any given year 10-99% chance in any Near 100% probability in any Less than 10% of damage to system 10-25% damage of system 26-50% damage of system More than 50% damage of system 40-11

Potential Extent of Impact May 18, 2012 [SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] None of AHEC s customers reported outages during recorded tornadoes since 1954. When compared with the total number of customers served by SEMO, it can be projected that less than 1% of all customers may report outages during any given tornadic event. Table 1.8 demonstrates the probability of occurrence in conjunction with the potent extent of impact upon local customers. Table 1.8 Semo Electric Cooperative Service Interruption Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Tornado 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 Probability of Damage-causing Hazard Occurrence Less than 1% in any 1-10% chance in any given year 10-99% chance in any > Near 100% probability in any Severe Thunderstorms, High Wind, and Hail From 1957-2010, Semo Electric s service area within the state of Missouri has experienced a total 353 hail events and 356 thunderstorm/high wind events. Therefore, the probability of a hail event in the Semo Electric s service area in any is near to 100% (353 events/53 years = 666%) while the probability of a thunderstorm/high wind event in any is near to 100% (356 events / 53 years = 671%). None of the hail events since 1957 have caused recorded damage to cooperative assets, resulting in a less than 1% probability that any given hail event will cause damage to cooperative infrastructure. Based on historical records, the average hail event to affect the cooperative will cause an average damage cost of $0 ($0 / 353 events = $0). This averaged amount accounts for less than 1% of SEMO s total overhead asset valuation ($0 / $131,820,252 = 0%). One of the 356 thunderstorm/high wind events caused damage to cooperative assets, resulting in a less than 1% probability that any given thunderstorm/high wind occurrence will produce damage (1 / 356 = 0.28%). Table 1.9 SEMOEC Thunderstorm/High Wind Event Summary Event date Damage estimates Outages reported 9-14-2008 $175,000 n/a Data provided based on internal SEMOEC records which reflect cost from the referenced event. Based upon historical records, the average thunderstorm/high wind event to affect the cooperative will cause an average damage cost of $175,000 ($175,000 / 1 event = $175,000). 40-12

Potential Extent of Impact Potential Extent of Damage [SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012 This averaged amount accounts for less than 1% of SEMO s overhead asset valuation ($175,000 / $131,820,252 = 0.13%). Table 1.10 demonstrates the probability of occurrence in conjunction with the potential extent of damage for both hail and thunderstorm/high winds events. Table 1.10 Probability of Hazard Occurrence Semo Electric Cooperative Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Thunderstorm/High Wind/Hail Less than 10% of damage to system 10-25% damage of system Less than 1% in any 1-10% chance in any given year 10-99% chance in any Near 100% probability in any 26-50% damage of system More than 50% damage of system No customers reported outages during recorded hail or thunderstorm/high wind events. When compared with the total number of customers served by SEMO, it can be projected that less than 1% of all customers may report outages during any given hail, thunderstorm, or high wind event. Table 1.11 demonstrates the probability of occurrence in conjunction with the potent extent of impact upon local customers. Table 1.11 Semo Electric Cooperative Service Interruption Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Thunderstorms/High Winds/Hail 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 Probability of Damage-causing Hazard Occurrence Less than 1% in any 1-10% chance in any given year 10-99% chance in any > Near 100% probability in any 40-13

May 18, 2012 [SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] Flood and Levee/Dam Failure Flood and levee failure carry perhaps the greatest ongoing potential threat to the existing infrastructure of the Semo Electric Cooperative. In the counties of Bollinger, Stoddard, Scott, Mississippi and New Madrid approximately 50% of the cooperative service area in located in the 100-year floodplain. Approximately 10% Cape Girardeau County service area is located directly within the 100 year floodplain. Figure 4 below depicts the 100 year floodplain in relation to the cooperative s boundaries. (Map sources: FEMA HAZUS-MH; DFIRMS; Missouri Office of Administration, and Association of Missouri Electric Cooperatives.) 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 state and federal levees within the cooperative s boundaries. (Map sources: BRPC.) The Semo Electric Co-operative service area is protected from Mississippi River flooding by a mainline levee along the Mississippi River. The levee borders the entire length of Scott, Mississippi and New Madrid counties. In order to protect locations in Missouri and counties bordering the river from flooding, when the river gauge on the Ohio River in Cairo, Illinois reaches 50 feet, federal law requires the US Army Corps of Engineers to artificially breach the mainline levee. The levee will be breached in Mississippi County which is located just north of New Madrid County. By breaching the levee in Mississippi County and utilizing the Birds Point- New Madrid Floodway pressure will be relieved on levees and dam below the breach. As long as the mainline levee contains the Mississippi River, other counties in the service area will be spared major flooding. Flash flooding tends to be a greater threat to SEMOEC service as is evidenced by loss claims and historical data. A large portion of the service area is located in the 100-year flood zone and subject to flooding of some nature. The flooding tends to rise fast and recede in the same manner as long as river levels allow it to do so. Prolonged periods of elevated river levels can and does slow the movement of water out of the county. As has been indicated, no major dams in the service are pose a major threat. A breach of the mainline levee would be of major concern to SEMOEC service area. Additional study is necessary to determine the specifics of a mainline break. From 1993-2010, Semo Electric s service area has experienced 149 flooding events. 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 is near 100% (149 events / 18 years = 827%). None of the 149 flooding events resulted in damage to cooperative assets, resulting in a less than 1% probability that any given flood occurrence will produce damage (0 / 149 = 0%). Based upon historical records, the average flood / levee failure event will cause an average damage cost of $0 ($0 / 149 events = $0). This averaged amount accounts for less than 1% of SEMO s overhead asset valuation ($0 / $131,820,252 = 0%). Table 1.12 demonstrates the probability of occurrence in conjunction with the potential extent of damage. 40-14

Potential Extent of Impact Potential Extent of Damage [SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012 Table 1.12 Probability of Hazard Occurrence Semo Electric Cooperative Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Flood Less than 1% in any 1-10% chance in any given year 10-99% chance in any Near 100% probability in any Less than 10% of damage to system 10-25% damage of system 26-50% damage of system More than 50% damage of system No SEMO customers reported outages during recorded flooding events since 1993. When compared with the total number of customers served by SEMO, it can be projected that less than 1% of all customers may report outages during any given flood event. Table 1.13 demonstrates the probability of occurrence in conjunction with the potent extent of impact upon local customers. Table 1.13 Semo Electric Cooperative Service Interruption Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Flood 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 Probability of Damage-causing Hazard Occurrence Less than 1% in any 1-10% chance in any given year 10-99% chance in any > Near 100% probability in any 40-15

May 18, 2012 [SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] Figure 4 SEMO 100 100 Year Floodplain SEMO Service Area Levees SEMO Electric Region Dam Network SEMO Service Area Levees 40-16

[SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012 Figure 5 Semo Service Area Leeves 40-17

Potential Extent of Damage May 18, 2012 [SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] Severe Winter Weather (snow/ice) From 1994-2010, Semo Electric s service area has experienced a total of 257 severe winter weather events, including significant snowfall and ice storms. Therefore, the probability of a severe winter weather event in the Semo Electric service area in any is near 100% (30 events / 17 years = 1511%). Estimated material damages associated with each of these events were not compiled by SEMOEC staff with the exception of the events listed below. Outage information for these events was not available. Table 1.14 provides a summary of event dates, types, and associated damage estimates. Two of the 257 events caused damage to cooperative assets, resulting in a less than 1% probability that any given severe winter weather occurrence will produce damage (2 / 254 = 0.77%). Table 1.14 SEMOEC Severe Winter Weather Event Summary Event date Event type Damage estimates Outages reported 2-11-08 Ice $600,000 n/a 1-26-09 Ice $20,000,000 n/a Data provided based on internal SEMOEC records which reflect cost from the referenced event Based upon these historical records, the average severe winter weather event to affect the cooperative will cause an average damage cost of $10,300,000 ($20,600,000 / 2 events = $10,300,000). This averaged amount accounts for 7.8% of SEMO s total overhead asset valuation ($10,300,000 / $131,820,252 = 7.8%. Table 1.15 demonstrates the probability of occurrence in conjunction with the potential extent of damage. Table 1.15 Probability of Hazard Occurrence Semo Electric Cooperative Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Severe Winter Weather Less than 1% in any 1-10% chance in any given year 10-99% chance in any Near 100% probability in any Less than 10% of damage to system 10-25% damage of system 26-50% damage of system More than 50% damage of system Outage information for these severe winter weather events was not available, but the committee estimated that less than 10% of customers 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 local customers. 40-18

Potential Extent of Impact [SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012 Table 1.16 Semo Electric Cooperative Service Interruption Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Severe Winter Weather 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 Probability of Damage-causing Hazard Occurrence Less than 1% in any 1-10% chance in any given year 10-99% chance in any > Near 100% probability in any Wildfires The incidence of wildfires in the SEMOEC service area presents a unique risk assessment. Wildfire events have occurred in each of the counties with the exception of Mississippi County. According to the Missouri Department of Conservation, Scott, Bollinger, Cape Girardeau, Stoddard, and New Madrid County have experienced wildfires between 2004 and 2008. Table 1.20 summarizes the incidences of wildfire within the six counties. Therefore, the probability of a wildfire event in the SEMOEC service area in any is near 100% (236 events / 4= 630%) However, for the purposes of this assessment, wildfires and its associated impacts cannot be eliminated from the realm of possibility. Table 1.17 Wildfire summary by county County # of Wildfires, 2004-2008 Average Annual # Of Acres burned Average Annual Acres Burned Wildfires Scott 30 6 3090.47 618 4 Mississippi 0 0 0 0 0 Bollinger* 28 5 259.13 51.8 0 Cape* 54 10.8 120.2 24 0 Girardeau Stoddard* 98 19.6 688.6 137.7 2 New 26 5 38.2 7.6 1 Madrid* Totals 236 46.4 4193.60 839.10 7 Source: Missouri State Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2010 *estimated amount of wildfires in SEMOEC service area Total Buildings Burned 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 SEMOEC service area. To date, 236 fires have burned approximately 4193.6 acres, for an average of 42.7 acres affected per event. SEMOEC sustained no damage 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 42 acres per fire in the service area, it is unlikely that 40-19

Potential Extent of Damage Potential Extent of Damage May 18, 2012 [SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] infrastructure damage would exceed 5% 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. Table 1.18 Probability of Hazard Occurrence Semo Electric Cooperative Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Wildfire Less than 1% in any 1-10% chance in any given year 10-99% chance in any Near 100% probability in any Less than 10% of damage to system 10-25% damage of system 26-50% damage of system More than 50% damage of system No customers have reported outages during recorded wildfires between 2004 and 2008. When compared with the total number of customers served by SEMO, it can be projected that less than 1% of all customers may report outages during any given wildfire event. Table 1.19 demonstrates the probability of occurrence in conjunction with the potential extent of impact upon local customers. Table 1.19 Probability of Damage-causing Hazard Occurrence Semo Electric Cooperative Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Wildfire Less than 1% in any 1-10% chance in any given year 10-99% chance in any Near 100% probability in any Less than 10% of damage to system 10-25% damage of system 26-50% damage of system More than 50% damage of system 40-20

Potential Extent of Damage B. Non-historical Hazards Earthquakes [SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012 The New Madrid Fault is still an active fault. In the Bootheel alone, between April and July of 2010, twenty-four earthquakes ranging from 1.6 to 2.3 magnitude occurred. Scientists from the U.S. Geological Survey and the Center for Earthquake Research and Information at the University of Memphis have updated their expectations for earthquakes in the New Madrid Seismic Zone. The new forecasts estimate a 7 to 10 percent chance, in the next 50 years, of a repeat of a major earthquake like those that occurred in 1811-1812. There is a 25 to 40 percent chance, in a 50 year time span, of a magnitude 6.0 or greater earthquake. Based upon those projections and risk factors, the counties served by SEMOEC could experience the following damage (Table 1.20): Table 1.20 Counties Served by SEMOEC Bollinger County Modified Mercalli Levels VIII (6.0+) Cape Girardeau County Modified Mercalli Levels VIII (6.0+) Scott County Modified Mercalli Levels IX(6.7-7.6) Stoddard County Modified Mercalli Levels IX (6.7-7.7) Mississippi County Modified Mercalli Levels X (8.0+) New Madrid County Modified Mercalli Levels X (8.0+) In the event of an earthquake with a magnitude of 7.0 or greater, the SEMOEC service area is most likely to experience significant damage especially in New Madrid and Mississippi counties due to liquefaction. Damage to a lesser degree might occur in the other counties due to differences in soil and bedrock. Nevertheless, distribution lines overhead and underground, transformers, substations, and office and maintenance facilities could receive moderate to major damage. Power outages throughout the area could occur and require extensive time and expense to repair. Table 1.21 Probability of Hazard Occurrence Semo Electric Cooperative Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Earthquake Less than 1% in any 1-10% chance in any given year 10-99% chance in any Near 100% probability in any 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, it may be estimated that more than 7,927 customers could report outages related to an earthquake event. When compared with the 40-21

Potential Extent of Impact May 18, 2012 [SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] total number of customers served by SEMOEC, it can be projected that more than 50% of all customers may report outages during any given seismic event. Table 1.22 demonstrates the probability of occurrence in conjunction with the potent extent of impact upon local customers. Table 1.22 Semo Electric Cooperative Service Interruption Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Earthquake 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 Probability of Damage-causing Hazard Occurrence Less than 1% in any 1-10% chance in any given year 10-99% chance in any > Near 100% probability in any 40-22

Potential Extent of Impact [SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012 Dam Failure Like earthquakes, dam failures have had no measurable impact upon the SEMOEC service area to date. According to Missouri DNR s Dam Safety Division, 55 dams currently exist within the cooperative boundaries: 9 in Bollinger County, 17 in Scott County, 3 in Mississippi County, 13 in Stoddard, 12 in Cape Girardeau and 1 in New Madrid County. Of these dams, three in Scott County are regulated by the state due to the fact that they are non-agricultural, non-federal dams which exceed 35 feet in height. Figure 7 shows the location of all known dams located within Semo Electric s service area. (Map sources: www.msdis.missouri.edu; www.dnr.mo.gov/env/wrc.) Figure 7 SEMO Electric Region Dam Network Twenty-six 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%. Table 1.23 Semo Electric Cooperative Service Interruption Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Dam Failure 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 Probability of Hazard Occurrence Less than 1% in any 1-10% chance in any given year 10-99% chance in any > Near 100% probability in any 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 40-23

Potential Extent of Impact May 18, 2012 [SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] assessment assumes a limited impact upon downstream electric distribution infrastructure of less than 10% for both infrastructure damage and service interruption. (Tables 1.23 and 1.24). Table 1.24 Semo Electric Cooperative Service Interruption Vulnerability Assessment Matrix Hazard: Dam Failure 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 Probability of Damage-causing Hazard Occurrence Less than 1% in any 1-10% chance in any given year 10-99% chance in any > Near 100% probability in any 40-24

Section 6: Mitigation strategies Previous efforts at mitigation [SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012 For organizations like SEMOEC, 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 build, 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, particularly flooding. Customers who reside in the floodplain are not charged for repairs or losses associated with flooding unless they purposefully destroy or restrict the cooperative from protecting their distribution system assets. Existing and potential resources As stated above, mitigation is a key component of good business practices. Semo 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 SEMOEC 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, SEMOEC 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 40-25

May 18, 2012 [SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] 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. The SEMOEC mitigation planning committee, with assistance from BRPC 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 nine objectives. Likewise, these nine objectives were grouped into similar categories and used as the basis for the four overarching goals. Table 1.25 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 1.25 Identified Goals Goal 1: Protect the health and safety of the community. Goal 2: Reduce future losses due to natural hazard events. Goal 3: Improve emergency management capabilities and enhance local partnerships. Goal 4: Continue to promote public awareness and education. SEMOEC goals and objectives Identified Objectives Objective 1: Prevent injury, loss of life, and damage to property. Objective 2: Reduce outage time to critical facilities. Objective 1: Protect and maintain existing infrastructure. Objective 2: Research and develop plans for future infrastructure improvements, seeking implementation where feasible. Objective 3: Research and develop plans for future communication and data collection improvements where feasible. Objective 1: Improve assessment of outages and reduce response time. Objective 2: Create or maintain partnerships with outside agencies. Objective 1: Utilize media resources to promote public education. Objective 2: Continue interaction with local schools and civic groups. 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 SEMOEC. 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 customer service and disaster planning. 40-26

[SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012 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. Actions within each tier may be funded through regular budgetary methods or identified outside sources. Tables 1.26, 1.27, and 1.28 provide lists of action items by tier as well as the goals and objectives identified with each. Table 1.26 Prioritized Mitigation Actions for Semo Electric Cooperative Tier 1 Action item: Perform routine maintenance and utilize upgraded equipment where possible to ensure quality of system. Tasks may include part replacement and/or upgrades. Identified work includes, but is not limited to: Addition of lightning arresters, electronic reclosures, conductors, guidewires. Replacement or repair on poles, cross-arms, lines. Raising padmount transformers in flood prone areas. Upgrade to concrete or steel poles where possible. Use vegetation management to prevent interference with delivery of power. Complete annual inspections of lines and poles. Add alternate source wiring to eliminate or reduce time of outages. Tier 1 Goal/Objective Goal 1 / Objective 1 Goal 2 / Objective 1 Goal 1 / Objective 1 Goal 1 / Objective 2 Goal 2 / Objective 1 Goal 2 / Objective 2 Goal 1 / Objective 1 Goal 2 / Objective 1 Goal 1 / Objective 1 Goal 2 / Objective 1 Goal 1 / Objective 1 Goal 1 / Objective 2 Goal 2 / Objective 2 Timeframe for completion Ongoing effort Dependent upon additional funding. Ongoing effort Completed annually. Ongoing effort; Completed as funding allows. Cost-benefit score Low cost High benefit Score: 9 High cost High benefit Score: 7 Low cost Medium benefit Score: 6 Low cost Medium benefit Score: 6 Medium cost High benefit Score: 4 Convert overhead lines to underground lines or vice versa in troubled areas based on vulnerability. Goal 1 / Objective 1 Goal 1 / Objective 2 Goal 2 / Objective 1 Goal 2 / Objective 2 Ongoing effort; Dependent upon funding. Medium cost High benefit Score: 4 40-27

May 18, 2012 [SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] Table 1.27 Prioritized Mitigation Actions for Semo Electric Cooperative Tier 2 Action item: Provide safety and reporting information to the general public through varying methods: Company website Social media sites Local newspapers Presentations Publications Increase number of generators owned for use in critical asset outages Maintain mutual aid agreements with other rural electric cooperatives. Partner with county emergency management agencies to ensure power for local shelters, fuel stations, and public safety. Cooperate with local law enforcement and government officials to reduce the impact of power outages. Improve data collection related to natural hazard events. Tier 2 Goal/Objective Goal 1 / Objective 1 Goal 4 / Objective 1 Goal 1 / Objective 1 Goal 1 / Objective 2 Goal 2 / Objective 2 Timeframe for completion Ongoing effort Dependent upon additional funding. Cost-benefit Score Low cost Medium benefit Score: 6 Medium cost High benefit Score: 4 Goal 3 / Objective 2 Ongoing effort. Low cost Low benefit Score: 3 Goal 1 / Objective 1 Goal 1 / Objective 2 Goal 3 / Objective 2 Goal 1 / Objective 1 Goal 3 / Objective 2 Goal 1/ Objective 1 Goal 3/ Objective 2 Ongoing effort. Ongoing effort. Ongoing effort. Low cost High benefit Score: 1 Low cost High benefit Score: 1 Low cost High benefit Score: 1 Table 1.28 Prioritized Mitigation Actions for Semo Electric Cooperative Tier 3 Action item: Research methods for waterproofing meters in flood-prone areas. Collect GPS data for all existing infrastructure. Utilize GIS technology to reduce site identification and response time. Consider implementation of automated voice response systems to improve outage reporting. Monitor developments in data availability concerning the impact of dam failure and wildfire upon the SEMOEC service area through local, state, and federal agencies. Tier 3 Goal/Objective Timeframe for Cost-benefit completion Goal 2 / Objective 2 Ongoing effort. Low cost High benefit Score: 9 Goal 2 / Objective 1 Dependent upon High cost Goal 2 / Objective 3 additional funding. High benefit Goal 3 / Objective 1 Score: 7 Goal 2 / Objective 2 Goal 2 / Objective 3 Goal 3 / Objective 1 Goal 1 / Objective 2 Goal 3 / Objective 1 Goal 1 / Objective 1 Goal 2 / Objective 1 Dependent upon additional funding. Dependent upon additional funding. Ongoing effort. Medium cost Medium benefit Score: 5 High cost Medium benefit Score: 4 Low cost Low benefit Score: 3 40-28

[SEMO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE] May 18, 2012 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 every SEMOEC employment level as the organization strives to ensure quality service to their customers. Other Local Planning Mechanisms Some internal planning mechanisms do exist at SEMOEC. The Hazard Mitigation Plan can be considered and/or incorporated into short and long term budgetary planning as well as the fouryear work plan which includes capital improvements. Beyond the SEMOEC plan, few planning mechanisms exist at the local level. The Missouri counties of Scott, Mississippi, New Madrid, Stoddard, Bollinger and Cape Girardeau each have a FEMA-approved Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan in place. County emergency management directors have Local Emergency Operations Plans which seek to mitigate the same hazards for residents. These same counties are also included in the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) as well as a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS). SEMOEC s plan can be easily incorporated into these local plans and allow for coordination across agencies in the event of an emergency. SEMOEC is located within the rural portions of third-class counties which are prohibited from enforcing building codes and zoning by the state of Missouri. They do not provide service to any municipality within these counties. Comprehensive plans and Capital Improvement plans do not exist inside of the SEMOEC service areas. Plan Maintenance Semo 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 Semo 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 various media outlets, the cooperative s website, and the physical office of SEMOEC. 40-29