It’s All About the Risk: Planning for Trunk Sewers Using the RAMCAP J100 Risk Standards

1. David J. Kerr | GHD It’s All About the Risk: Planning for Trunk Sewers Using the RAMCAPJ100 Risk Standards

2. Introduction • Risk taking is part of everyday life both work and personal: • When we make decisions we consider the possibility of what could happen and the potential consequences • Sometimes we do robust evaluations of both, but • Most of the time we just wing it!

3. Background: Trunk Sewer System • Peel’s Infrastructure Challenges • 2.5 Million residential and commercial customers • Major airport • 286 KM (178 miles) Trunk Sewers (>750 mm or 30 inches) • 12.5 KM (7.8 miles) Force Mains • Growth • Limited redundancy in the system • Limited funds for rehabilitation/maintenance Image placeholder

4. Corporate Asset Management Planning • Initiative supported by CAO and Regional Council • Conducted a risk assessment of all Regional assets and defined Level of Service to customers • Provide recommendations for funding for asset management at a department level • Goal: Improve planning and prioritization of infrastructure across the organization Image placeholder

5. AWWAJ100-10 Risk Management Approach • Project Objectives: • Characterize risk associated with trunk sewers and force mains • Develop risk management plans for high risk/critical assets • Develop a long-term capital plan to reduce overall risk • Develop a risk tool to repeat and update risk assessment 1 2 3 4 • AWWAJ100-10 Standard • Risk Analysis and Management for Critical Asset Protection (RAMCAP) • For Risk and Resilience Management of Water and Wastewater Systems

6. Risk Management – AWWAJ100-10

7. Risk Management – ISO 31000

8. Asset Characterization • Simplify system in to segments • Assign identifiers to each segment • Maps of segmentation and identifiers by sewer shed • Rationale • Appropriate size to create meaningful risk profile • Commensurate with Budgets and Capital Programs • Existing data and information platforms • Hydraulic model • CMMS • GIS • How the Region may use risk profiles • Planning • Capital budgets and delivery • Operations and Maintenance

9. Threat Characterization • Threat events considered based on: • Events identified by the Region – RFP • GHD Supplemented (Design, Construction, Operations, Geotechnical, Structural) Risk = Likelihood (or Probability) xConsequence or Risk= (Likelihood x Vulnerability) x (Consequence x Resilience)

10. Threat Categories Threat Events • Natural Disasters • Third Party Damage • Proximity to Dangerous Sites • Operational • Pipe Breakage / Physical • Design / Construction

11. Threat Category & Events

12. Likelihood Threat Matrix

13. Threat Likelihood Ratings

14. Threat Vulnerability

15. Consequence Matrix

16. Consequence Financial

17. Modeling Methodology • InfoWorks • Utilized model previously developed • Simulated 25 year return storm • Current System • Used model output to asessprobability of failure • d/D • Velocity • Flow Rate • Froude Number • Capacity • Number of customers upstream

18. Total Risk Results

19. Total Risk Results • Why? • Installed prior to 1996 • Shallow cover • Under a stream (no protection) • Low velocity • Reduced conveyance capacity • Hard to maintain (no CCTV) • Subject to root intrusion • Surcharged • HGL at surface during 25 year storm.

20. Risk Assessment – 2017 Risk Results

21. Mitigation Strategies – Network Level Programs • Replace / extend life (Twinning) • Close Monitoring • Select Contingency Planning • Run to failure – gear up for quick response • Select emergency plans in place • Update SOPs (as required) • Design / Construct • Operational (cross / inter zone connections) • Maintenance (inspections, signage, CA) • Select contingency planning • Select emergency planning (Stakeholder Communications) • Status Quo • Select emergency plans in place • Review maintenance plans

22. Mitigation Options and CBA Master Plan

23. Risk Assessment – Overview • Resilience • Operational • Maintenance • D & C $

24. Program Planning Capital Works Team Approach for the Application of RAMCAP Benefits Challenges • Endorsement from Senior Management • Knowledge sharing between Program Planning, Operations and Capital Works • Understanding and buy-in with the scope and the deliverables • Clarity on process • Different priorities needed to be focused to a common goal • Understanding that high consequences does not necessarily mean high risk. Operations

25. Data Approach: Top Down and Bottom Up Benefits Challenges • Calibrated hydraulic model to evaluate hydraulic consequences of failure • GIS database with system characteristics to feed into vulnerability analysis • A lot of unknowns in terms of condition • Data gaps and inconsistencies

26. Next Steps 1 Risk mitigation planning 2 Incorporate outputs into the asset management planning and budget process 3 Ongoing QA/QC of data in GIS 4 Regular updates of risk assessment using risk tool 5 Risk assessment of other asset classes

27. Take-Aways • Analysis is scalable to small and large utilities • Can be done incrementally over time • Risk without modeling • Hydraulic modeling • With & without GIS • Key step towards a full asset management plan • Defendable and repeatable • Emphasizes the need for good data • Can help unify different groups within your organization

28. David J. Kerr | david.kerr@ghd.com Q&A