FERC DAM SAFETY PROGRAM

Transcription

1 National Hydropower Association Southwest Regional Meeting August 27, 2009 Denver, CO FERC DAM SAFETY PROGRAM

2 FERC Presenter David Capka, PE Supervisor-Dam Safety Engineering Washington Office

3 FERC UPDATE Security--DAMSVR State Dam Safety Coordination DSSMP and DSSMR Risk Assessment Initiatives

4 Revision of DAMSVR (Version 2) whys, effort, time frame, and any training

5 Revision of DAMSVR (Version 2) Previous version (v1): 12/17/2003 Finalized in June 2009 v2 is now in place and being used 2009 DAMSVR s completed prior to June will need to be revisited More detail on value Tables and formula adjusted Less subjectivity More detail of variables for repeatability and consistency Formula altered to give more Risk reduction credit to security upgrades Will be used to inform FERC on new Security Groups Training Offered at the ASDSO Annual Conference (Hollywood, FL) 9/30/09 Will attach to the annual EAP Training course as Day 3 (spring 10)

6 Division of of Dam Safety and and Inspections Notable Revisions Table 1 (Consequence - C) Using Population At Risk (PAR) as more definable than Loss of Life (LL) Economic thresholds increased Decreased overall factors from 5 to 3 Conforms more closely with DHS data calls for Tier 1 and 2 facilities Folds in well with FERC GIS and Time-sensitive EAP initiatives

7 Division of of Dam Safety and and Inspections Table 1 (Consequence - C) Very High: Notable Revisions Consequence Score (10 worst) Descriptor and values to consider Population at Risk 1 Disruption Economic Impact Population at Risk 1 Disruption Economic Impact PAR within 0 3 miles: 2,001+; or PAR within 3 60 miles: 25,501+; or Total PAR > 400, International disruption of essential infrastructure > $10 Billion (USD) PAR within 0 3 miles: 1,001-2,000; or PAR within 3 60 miles: 12,751-25,500; or Total PAR: 200, ,000 9 National disruption of essential infrastructure $5,000,000,001 - $10 Billion (USD)

8 Division of of Dam Safety and and Inspections Notable Revisions Table 1 (Consequence - C) Choosing the maximum C value for each asset: After determination of the consequences of an attack, each dam and asset for a particular scenario is assigned five consequence values: ( CPAR1, CPAR2, CPAR3, CDSR, and CECN ) as shown in Table 1. The largest C value drives the ASR formula.

9 Division of of Dam Safety and and Inspections Notable Revisions Table 2 (Vulnerability - V) Dam-type V remains unchanged Number of Units in Hydropower Plant discarded Classify Building Type to determine overall powerhouse V Made suggestions in text for gate types: Radial Gates / Flashboards (general V of 9 to 10) Drum Gates / Inflatable Gates / Service Stop Logs (general V of 7 to 8) Rectangular Lift Gates (general V of 5 to 6) Mitre Gates (general V of 3 to 4) Uncontrolled Structures (general V of 1 to 2).

10 Division of of Dam Safety and and Inspections Notable Revisions Table 3 (Likelihood of Attack - L) Changed Probability of Loss to Likelihood of Attack Used flow-chart type reasoning, with yes / no responses

11 Division of of Dam Safety and and Inspections Notable Revisions Table 3 (Likelihood of Attack - L) Is it easily seen; well-known; iconic; does it TABLE 3 Flowchart Is the Asset easily identifiable? look like an important infrastructure? Yes No How easy is it to reach: land/water? Is the Asset easily accessible? Is the Asset easily accessible? YES NO YES NO What level of resources are needed to compromise the Asset? What level of resources are needed to compromise the Asset? What level of resources are needed to compromise the Asset? Amount of resources needed to carry out attack? Minimal Moderate Significant Minimal Moderate Significant Minimal Moderate Significant Score 10 Score 9 Score 8 Score 7 Score 6-5 Score 4 Score 3 Score 2 Score 1

12 Division of of Dam Safety and and Inspections Notable Revisions Table 4 (Loss Factor Rating Matrix) Unchanged Table 5 (Target Value) Essentially unchanged, but renamed from Priority Rating to Target Value

13 Division of of Dam Safety and and Inspections Notable Revisions Table 6 (Threat - T) Altered to a series of yes / no responses

14 Division of of Dam Safety and and Inspections Notable Revisions Table 7 (Security Effectiveness - S) Similar to the previous series of yes / no responses, but: Detail in descriptions were added Values reversed because ASR formula is divided by S now

15 Division of of Dam Safety and and Inspections Notable Revisions ASR Formula changed S is divided into C, V, and L so that incremental S changes affect Risk Divide by maximum value to normalize ASR between ~ 0 and 1.0 Previous formula: C * (V + L + T + S) = ASR, ranging from 4 to 400 Existing: {[C * (V + L + T)] S} 300 = ASR, ranging from to 1.0 ASR can now be calculated for each sub-category of C, if desired (High Target) {[ 8 * ( )] 3 } 300 = 8 * If S is improved: =

16 Division of of Dam Safety and and Inspections DAMSVR Analysis Schedule New v2 DAMSVR analysis for all Security Group 1 and 2 Dams for 2009 Every five years thereafter, or The first year a new FERC Engineer is assigned to the project, or Whenever any of the following changes to the project are made: - Physical security - Procedural operations (regarding security, personnel, etc.) - Cyber/SCADA modifications - Addition of new project features, significant project modifications, or changes to downstream conditions - Local/regional/national threat level changes that could affect the project - Current DS Inspection indicates that new information is warranted > (e.g., new owner, new PFMA, etc.)

17 Division of of Dam Safety and and Inspections DAMSVR Analysis Schedule Dam Owners can request copies of the updated DAMSVR security/damsvr-req.asp

18 Division of of Dam Safety and and Inspections Development of New Security Groups The 2002 Security Grouping is still current, and has never officially changed Used DAMSVR in 2007 as a test case to revise Groups Decided not to use it because DAMSVR was being revised Therefore the conclusions may change based on new procedure The 2009 v2 DAMSVR analyses will create the new Groups Licensees/Exemptees to be notified in December 2009 of new Groups

19 State Dam Safety Coordination How is FERC Working With State Dam Safety Agencies?

20 State Dam Safety Coordination FERC Has Been Working With the State Dam Safety Programs for Many Years States are Invited on Every FERC Dam Safety Inspection Most States Do Not Attend Very Busy With Their Own Dams Several States Have State Laws Asserting Jurisdiction on FERC Dams Implementation Varies Across the United States

21 State Dam Safety Coordination Federal Power Act and State Laws The More Eyes on a Dam, The Better Our Policy is to Maintain a Close, Supportive and Productive Relationship With the State Dam Safety Offices Our Goal is to Minimize Having to Answer to 2 Regulators

22 Surveillance and Monitoring Plans Reflects Necessary I&M According to PFMA and Part 12D Group of Owners, Consultants and FERC Developed a Standard Outline Final Guidance Issued and Posted on Website

23 Surveillance and Monitoring Plans Reason for SMP Outline Design SMP to Address Potential Failure Modes Instrumentation Details Often Not Provided No Evaluation of Instrumentation

24 Risk Informed Decision Making The FERC recognizes the value risk informed decision making brings to dam safety The FERC is exploring how Risk Assessment techniques can be best utilized in a regulatory environment Partnering with USBR and USACE

25 Risk Informed Decision Making The FERC recognizes the value risk informed decision making brings to dam safety The FERC is exploring how Risk Assessment techniques can be best utilized in a regulatory environment Partnering with USBR and USACE

26 New Initiatives Ensuring the Effectiveness of EAPs Time Sensitive EAPs

27 New Initiatives Ensuring the Effectiveness of EAPs Time Sensitive EAPs Time of Flood Wave Arrival Compared to Time for Local EMA to Notify and Evacuate if Necessary

28 New Initiatives Ensuring the Effectiveness of EAPs Time Sensitive EAPs Focus on Development Immediately Below the Dam Does the EAP Provide for the Timely Notification or Evacuation if Necessary

29 New Initiatives Ensuring the Effectiveness of EAPs Time Sensitive EAPs Time Required for Activating EAP Varies for specific dams and PFM Detection Verification (Onsite or have to travel to dam?) Contacting Local EMAs

30 New Initiatives Ensuring the Effectiveness of EAPs Time Sensitive EAPs Time for Local EMAs to Contact Homeowners Travel to Neighborhood? Telephone Alert? Time for evacuation?

31 New Initiatives Ensuring the Effectiveness of EAPs Time Sensitive EAPs Flood Wave Arrival Time?

32 New Initiatives Ensuring the Effectiveness of EAPs Time Sensitive EAPs Are Special Alert Measures Required? If so, Dam Owner Works with Local EMA to Establish Necessary Alert Measures

33 New Initiatives Ensuring the Effectiveness of EAPs Time Sensitive EAPs Procedure to Assess Time Sensitive EAPs Dam Owners should check their EAPs

34 Small Hydro Small Hydro Conference at the Commission HQ in Washington, DC December 2, 2009 Open to the Public Discussion on Expediting Small, Low-Impact Project Authorization Check for Information

35 National Hydropower Association Southwest Regional Meeting August 27, 2009 Denver, CO FERC DAM SAFETY PROGRAM Questions?