NC Division of Emergency Management

1. NC Division of Emergency Management University Hazard Mitigation Planning Ryan Wiedenman Hazard Mitigation Planner

2. Why Plan? • More than just lip service… • 1) To force us to think about the risks we face as a jurisdiction, university, etc. • 2) To have real, substantive projects that we can implement when the opportunity for mitigation opportunities arise

3. Current UNC System Plan Alignment • Individual Campus Plans: • UNC-CH and UNC-W • Western Campuses: • WCU, UNCA, ASU, UNCC, WSSU, UNCSA, UNCG, NCA&T • Eastern Campuses: • ECU, ECSU, FSU, UNCP, NCCU, NCSU • Community Colleges: • ACC, ABTCC, BCCC, BCC, BRCC, BCC, CCCTI, CFCC, CCC, CVCC, CCCC, CPCC, CCC, CCCC, CoA, CCC, DCCC, CTCC, ECC, FTCC, FTCC, GC, GTCC, HCC, HCC, ICC, JSCC, JCC, LCC, MCC, MCC, MCTC, MCC, MCC, NCC, PCC, PCC, PCC, RCC, RCC, RCCC, RCC, RCC, RCCC, SCC, SCC, SPCC, SCC, SCC, SCC, SCC, TCCC, VGCC, WTCC, WCC, WPCC, WCC, WCC

4. Current UNC System Plan Alignment C Alleghany u r r Northampton C i t Gates a Ashe Surry u P c Person m Caswell Stokes Rockingham k Vance a d Warren s e q Granville P n u Hertford e o r t q a u Halifax n i Watauga k m Wilkes a C n Yadkin h s o Forsyth w Bertie M a Franklin Guilford Orange n i Alamance Avery t c h Durham e l l Alexander Caldwell Nash Davie Yancey Edgecombe Madison Martin Washington Davidson Wake Iredell Tyrrell Dare Burke Chatham Wilson Randolph McDowell Catawba Pitt Buncombe Rowan Beaufort Haywood Hyde Swain Johnston Lee Lincoln Greene Rutherford Cabarrus Henderson Graham Harnett Moore Jackson Stanly Wayne Gaston Polk Cleveland a Montgomery i n Lenoir a Craven Mecklenburg v Macon l y s Cherokee n a r T Pamlico Cumberland Clay Sampson Richmond Jones Hoke Union Anson Duplin Scotland Onslow Carteret Bladen Robeson Pender UNC-CH UNC Western Campuses New Columbus Hanover UNC Eastern Campuses Brunswick UNC-W UNC Community Colleges

5. Organization of University Plans • Based on assessment of individual facilities: • Describes facility • Assesses Risks and Vulnerabilities • Identifies specific actions that can be taken to address those Risks and Vulnerabilities

6. Facility Description (Western)

7. Facility Description (Western)

8. Risk and Vulnerability (Western) • · Unreinforced clay masonry piers and/or shear walls support the center of the building and utilities. In a seismic event these unreinforced piers and/or shear walls can fail and cause building collapse or damage to utilities. (Photos 1 and 2) • · Insufficient concrete cover over reinforcing steel has led to corrosion in reinforced masonry and concrete components. (Photos 3 and 4) • · Paling on patio on NE side of facility is being forced off the patio (Photos 5 and 6) • · Back-up generator is not capable of sustaining normal operations in the event of a power loss Photo 2. Unreinforced clay masonry piers supporting utility lines. Photo 5.Paling being forced off of patio

9. Mitigation Actions (Western) • Mitigation Measures • A: <$5,000 B: $5,000-$25,000 C: $25,000-$100,000 D: >$100,000 • Foundation piers and/or shear walls should be retrofitted to enhance seismic performance. D (High Wind/Tornado, Winter Weather) • All areas of insufficient concrete cover should be inspected and properly repaired to provide cover for reinforcing steel and prevent further deterioration and compromising of structural integrity. B (High Wind/Tornado, Winter Weather) • Retrofit the paling and patio drainage/flashing as needed to remediate damage and prevent further deterioration C (High Wind/Tornado, Winter Weather) • Provide back-up generator power sufficient to maintain a food supply and business continuity in the event of an extended power loss D (High Wind/Tornado, Winter Weather)

10. Mitigation Actions UNC-CH UNC-CH CoGen Plant