Dams Sector Consequence-Based Top Screen Methodology

More documents

Recommendations

Info

damage reduction system may include a number of structures and components (spillways, pump stations, etc.) that are essential to the function of the system but are not located within the same local area. In general, a system of multiple assets is spatially distributed across the same watershed or within the same floodplain. The potential consequences associated with failure, significant damage, or prolonged disruption of Dams Sector facilities could be quite severe, and could reach different levels of significance. By using metrics that cover a range or spectrum of potential values, the CTS screening methodology is completely scalable and could be effectively implemented at different portfolio levels (owner, State, regional, and national). Therefore, the CTS process could assist in identifying assets that may be of regional or State significance by adopting consequence thresholds that are appropriate for each case. The information collected through the effective implementation of the CTS methodology is critical for sector-wide impact analyses and prioritizations. Whenever possible, the information collected through this screening process must be: Scope • Generated by the appropriate technical personnel in active collaboration with emergency responders and other relevant stakeholders such as the corresponding State dam safety offices, using a reasonable and practical level of resources, and taking full advantage of previous studies or evaluations. • Consistent, comparable, and collected using similar assumptions. • Sufficiently detailed to allow for consequence-based prioritization. • Updated through periodic self-reviews voluntarily conducted by owners/operators. • Collected in conformance with the appropriate information safeguarding procedures available to owners/operators. The CTS methodology has been developed for voluntary use by Dams Sector stakeholders. This methodology is available to all those who own, operate, or regulate sector assets, or have responsibility for security and protection of those assets. Dams Sector assets include the following types of facilities: • Dam Projects • Flood Damage Reduction Systems • Hurricane and Storm Surge Protection Systems • Mine Tailings Projects The CTS methodology presented in this document covers dam projects including some or all of the following components: water retention structures (i.e., impounding structure - the structural sections that hold back the water); impoundments (i.e., reservoir - the body of water impounded Introduction 3
y the dam); water control structures (i.e., spillway - the structure that passes normal and/or flood flows in a manner that protects the structural integrity of the dam, or outlet works - the combination of structures and equipment required for safe operation and control of water released from a reservoir); hydropower generation facilities (i.e., hydropower plant (conventional plant, run-of-the river plant, or pumped-storage plant) - the structure that houses turbines, generators, and associated control equipment for the production of hydroelectricity); navigation structures (i.e., navigation locks - walled sections of a river or canal, closed by gates at both ends, in which the water level can be raised or lowered by means of valves or sluiceways to match the level in the upper or lower reach, as desired); water conveyance structures (i.e., canal or aqueduct - a constructed channel, usually open, that conveys water by gravity or is used for navigation); and remote operations and control facilities (i.e., remote operation center - off site facility that performs monitoring and control operations). For the purposes of this document, the term “dam” will be used to denote the entire facility (i.e., dam project, which may include some or all of the functional components mentioned above). Due to their special characteristics and functions, other Dams Sector assets such as mine tailings projects, hurricane and storm surge protection systems, and flood damage reduction systems are not addressed by this version of the CTS methodology. Methodology Development The Dams Sector established a Top Screen Workgroup consisting of members of the Dams Sector Coordinating Council and the Dams Government Coordinating Council to oversee the development of the CTS methodology. This workgroup - comprised of experts from private industry, State governments, and Federal agencies - served a key role in the development of the screening methodology. The initial draft of the CTS methodology was tested in 2007 at Bonneville Lock and Dam, Melvin Price Lock and Dam (both projects owned by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers), and Rocky Reach Dam (owned by Chelan County Public Utility District No. 1). The main purpose of these initial tests was to evaluate the practicality and onsite resource requirements of the proposed approach. On the basis of experiences and lessons learned during these tests, the CTS methodology was slightly modified and piloted in 2008. A first pilot was conducted in April 2008 as a way to validate the ranges used to assess consequences, as well as to support the validation of the thresholds used to identify facilities potentially associated with nationally significant consequences. This effort involved 26 projects in the following States: Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington. The set included 20 hydropower projects. Participation in this effort required each project to complete a CTS questionnaire with basic questions regarding project characteristics, infrastructure interdependencies, and potential consequences associated with severe disruption or failure. Participating projects completed this questionnaire using a Web-based password-protected portal. Each respondent’s questionnaire was pre-populated with available National Inventory of Dams (NID) facility-specific information. The portal also provided access to geographic information system (GIS)-based maps to aid in identifying potentially impacted populations and infrastructure. Introduction 4
Page 1: Dams Sector Consequence-Based Top S
Page 4 and 5: List of Figures Figure 1: Consequen
Page 6 and 7: Foreword Homeland Security Presiden
Page 8 and 9: Introduction Purpose Homeland Secur
Page 12 and 13: The questionnaire included a number
Page 14 and 15: the reservoir is drawn down under n
Page 16 and 17: General Facility Information The fi
Page 18 and 19: ecreational facilities (day-use or
Page 20 and 21: are volatile, should not be used fo
Page 22 and 23: e. Navigation: The relative importa
Page 24 and 25: Prioritization Scheme The identific
Page 26 and 27: Rank Date Daily Average Stage Table
Page 28 and 29: Appendix B: Consequence-Based Top S
Page 30 and 31: • Year Completed: Year when the o
Page 32 and 33: • Drainage Area (Square Miles): A
Page 34 and 35: state, and zip code information, in
Page 36 and 37: • If available, provide the estim
Page 44 and 45: Appendix C: Consequence-Based Top S
Page 46: is equal to one. The normalized rel

Dams Sector Consequence-Based Top Screen Methodology

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?