September 2012
Pre-Disaster Mitigation Planning for UNC Pembroke
Summary Report
The University of North Carolina System, using funds from the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA), has been working since October 2007 to develop a PreDisaster Mitigation (PDM) Planning Process for the UNC System as a whole, and on
each of the campuses. This effort is the first FEMA-funded PDM planning project that
targets a complete system of universities. Accordingly, a team led by faculty and staff
from UNC Charlotte with support from UNC Chapel Hill, East Carolina, UNC
Wilmington, and NC State University, has worked with the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) Regional Office in Atlanta, the State Division of
Emergency Management (NCEM), and UNC General Administration to initiate this PreDisaster Mitigation (PDM) Planning Process. Our team also includes an engineering
consultant firm, Zapata Engineering of North Carolina, Inc.
This PDM Planning process is being coordinated and combined on a campus-by-campus
basis with other on-going PDM efforts on each campus that may be underway. For
example, many campuses have implemented emergency communication systems; most
are engaged in business continuity planning; perhaps all have participated in pandemic
flu planning.
In some cases, this project may be the initial effort to develop a
comprehensive, repeatable process for identifying long-range mitigative actions that will
aid campuses in protecting their most important assets from the effects of natural hazards.
Early in calendar year 2010, campuses from the eastern part of the state agreed to
participate in this project: East Carolina University, Fayetteville State University, UNC
Pembroke, Elizabeth City State University, NC State University, NC Central University,
and NC School of Science and Math. Campuses in the western part of the state have
FEMA approved plans as of fall 2011: UNC Charlotte, UNC Greensboro, NC A & T
University, Winston-Salem State University, NC School of the Arts, Appalachian State
University, UNC Asheville, and Western Carolina University. UNC Chapel Hill’s PDM
Plan was approved by FEMA in the spring of 2011 and UNC Wilmington has been
officially recognized (in 2009) as a “Disaster Resilient University” (DRU) as a result of
their previous PDM plan development.
Ultimately, all seventeen campuses will be included as a coordinated planning process,
under the overall guidance of Mr. Brent Herron, Assistant Vice President for Campus
Safety and Emergency Operations at UNC General Administration. In developing this
statewide, all-campus planning process, the FEMA project is under the direction of Dr.
Edd Hauser, Professor in Civil Engineering at UNC Charlotte and Director of the Center
for Disaster Management.
4-1
PDM Planning Process Summary Report – UNC Pembroke, pg. 2
From the outset of the project, UNC Pembroke has been a very aggressive and involved
campus in the mitigation planning process. Over the course of the work on the UNC
Pembroke campus, key personnel have included (among others): Glen Burnette, VC for
University and Community Relations; Diane Jones, VC for Student Affairs; Larry
Freeman, Director of Physical Plant; Arthur Herns, EHS Professional/Police & Public
Safety; Maureen Windmeyer, Director of IT Planning and Budgeting; Bob Orr, AVC for
Information Resources and Chief Information Officer; Preston Swiney, Director of
Housing and Residence Life; Steve Martin, AVC for Facility Management/Facility
Planning & Construction; Travis Bryant, AVC for Safety & Emergency Management;
and Neil Hawk, VC for Business Affairs/CFO. These individuals constituted the “Core
Committee” for developing the PDM plan for UNC Pembroke.
UNC Pembroke core committee meetings were held in 2010 beginning with an
introductory meeting and overview of the PDM Planning process on June 24. Preinspection requirements for critical buildings were provided and UNC Pembroke, using
the UFIS template selected 10 buildings. A kickoff inspection meeting was held on
September 21, 2010. On-site building inspections were conducted on September 21-23,
with a number of additional people from Facilities Management working with the
UNCC/Zapata Structural Engineering Team members. A meeting to review the detailed
building reports was conducted with core team members on November 12, 2010. In
addition to these meetings UNC Pembroke representatives attended two PDM Workshops
helf in Charlotte in June, 2011 and April 2012. Notes from the meetings on campus at
UNC Pembroke and PDM Workshops are contained in the Appendix of this planning
document.
This project will not only guide campuses towards greater disaster resilience, but is
recommended to become part of on-going efforts to create more sustainable university
communities. This PDM planning process is being prepared to meet FEMA requirements
[Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 and its implementing regulations]. Each campus will
have their own specific plan that recognizes priority facilities and systems that exist on
their campus. Based on guidance from FEMA documents and from ASCE publication
#5-07, a standard for carrying out facility assessments was made. Vertical infrastructures
included in this plan and listed by the NC Commission on Higher Education Facilities
(NCCHEF) provided the start of a database. New facilities still under construction and
not on the NCCHEF list including utility systems, roadways, etc. were also included.
Factors used to assess the importance of buildings and other vertical facilities) were:







Facility occupancy
Emergency function
Impact of facility loss (insured cost, or cost of replacement)
Impact of contents loss
Relevance to business continuity
Interconnectivity between facility and adjacent facilities
Value of research or administrative data and Vivarium/research animals
4-2

Historic or cultural value
PDM Planning Process Summary Report – UNC Pembroke, pg. 3
We developed a spreadsheet computer model, “University Facilities Importance
Spreadsheet” (UFIS) to evaluate all campus buildings in terms of importance based on
the eight evaluation factors. The list resulted from rating factors generated by the
computer model, and input from the UNC Pembroke Core Committee working with the
Study Team.
Due to budget restrictions, only ten buildings on this campus were
subjected to an engineering inspection by at least one Professional Engineer.
There are a number of facilities that based on other criteria, may be considered important
to the resilience of the UNC Pembroke campus. However, those facilities that received
the highest “importance rating” based on criteria recommended by ASCE Standard #507, and resulting from the calculations generated from the UFIS model output, were
identified as most important, as explained in the Infrastructure Survey Section of this
planning document.
Most Critical Physical Facilities, UNC Pembroke campus
Facilities listed are not necessarily in order of importance.










Chavis University Center and Annex
Pinchbeck Maintenance Complex
Mary Livermore Library
Student Health Services
Jones Athletic Center
Oxendine Science
Lumbee Hall
Oak Hall
Pine Hall
Old Main
Facilities were inspected September 21-23, 2010
The facilities listed above were subjected to an extensive, on-site engineering inspection.
Each floor including basements, storage and utility rooms, and the roof of each of these
10 facilities was inspected. A detailed list of 92 questions was used to assess the
following facility components:
the building site, exterior envelope, structural
components, interior contents, and utilities. The RISK of each of nine hazards (see page
4) damaging each building was calculated by a second spreadsheet-based model called
“University Facilities Risk Assessment Spreadsheet” (UFRAS).
Facilities were evaluated for their vulnerability to nine separate natural hazards, ranging
from hurricane force winds to flooding. The nine hazards that are being considered in this
project are:
4-3
PDM Planning Process Summary Report – UNC Pembroke, pg. 4









High wind (straight line and hurricane)
Tornado
Seismic
Ice storm
Snow
Driving rain
Flood
Wildfire or building fire
Landslide
The inspection process consisted of a team of two structural engineers working together
with representatives from the Physical Plant that were usually the building
representatives, each with detailed knowledge of the facility and various problems that
should receive attention during the inspection tour. An average time to complete each
on-site inspection was approximately four hours. Converting the output of the UFRAS
computer model added approximately two days for each building.
In the Infrastructure Survey section of this planning document, a summary report on each
of the ten facilities included in the on-site assessment is shown. This is the summary
page condensed from a five to six page report that was prepared on each facility. Using
data describing the facility, a list of vulnerabilities and risks were followed by a
suggested list of mitigation measures that could be designed to address each vulnerable
component. The range of cost to implement each mitigation project was estimated to be
in one of four cost categories:
A - Less than $5,000
B - $5,000 to $25,000
C - $25,000 to $100,000
D - More than $100,000
Categories A and B were assessed to be able to be rectified by maintenance and repair
budgets available to the campus, whereas Categories C and D were more likely to be
eligible for FEMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance. Such grants are funded from FEMA
through the North Carolina Emergency Management Division on a 75 percent Federal to
25 percent local basis. Information on applying for FEMA Mitigation Grants is
contained in the Appendices.
4-4