Post on 07-Jun-2020
RISK BASED DAM PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT IN AUSTRALIAThird National Dam Safety ConferenceRoorkee, India, February 2017
Angus SwindonNational Director Power & WaterEntura, Hydro Tasmania
OutlineDam Portfolio Management – Australian ContextHydro Tasmania’s Dam Portfolio Management Introduction to Hydro Tasmania Business Hydro Tasmania’s Dam PortfolioDam Safety Management & the use of Risk Guidelines and Standards which inform the Dam Safety Programme Programme Arrangement Risk Acceptance Criteria & Assessment Risk Mitigation - CAPEX Risk Management - OPEX Program Performance AssessmentExamples of Risk Mitigation ProjectsConclusion
Dam Portfol io Management in AustraliaAustralia experienced a major dam building era in the 1900’s Oldest dams late 1800’s, rapid expansion post WW2 Large portfolio’s predominantly publicly owned Moved towards multiple use recognition New dams / redevelopments commonly using PPP
Current situation characterised by Ageing & deteriorating infrastructure Increasing community expectations & risk awareness New understanding & changing standards Shi ing societal priori es → Reduced public funding Centralised management, fewer diversified skilled resourcesDifficult to continue to manage as historically
→ risk based instead of standards based
Dam Safety Management & RegulationState based oversight – no National LegislationResponsibilities remain with the owner4 states/territ have DS Legislation & Regulation, 3 states/territ don’tPeak body providing leadership and guidance is ANCOLDANCOLD is an active member of the International body ICOLD
Key ANCOLD Guidelines
ContextInternal - Business priorities, Nature of portfolioExternal – Regulation, Public expectations
Dam Management ActivitiesSurveillance – Inspection, Monitoring, ReviewsOperations & maintenanceCapability, Information, Preparedness
Rectification ActivitiesUndertake maintenance, orInvestigate, design & undertake major works
Risk Assessments
IsThere aDeficit?
Is ittolerable?
Yes
Yes
No
No
Basic DS Programme Process
Hydro Tasmania owns, operates and maintains
29 hydropower stations 55 major dams + 150 smaller dams188 headwork gates and valves22 canals19 tunnels43 pipelines58 machines
System configuration2 large inter-annual storages5 seasonal storagesRun-of-river
Australia’s largest clean energy producer Australia’s largest water manager
HYDRO TASMANIA
Hydro Tasmania Group
Owner / Operator
Developer
Retailer Professional Services
The Hydro Tasmania Journey
1914 1940 1960 1980 1989 1994 2005 2008 2011 2014 2017
Our history starts
Multiple projects developed
Major Tasmania industrialisation
Start of external
consulting
Anthony scheme completed (last major)
Internat. consulting expansion
Australian Offices
established
Entura Brand launched
Africa
Entura JV
NEM Entry
Retail (Momentum)
Entura India Opened
23 Earth fill
14 Concrete Gravity
12 Concr Faced Rock Fill
2 Bitumen Faced Rock Fill
2 Gravity Arch
2 Thin Arch
Hydro Tasmania’s 55 Prescribed Dams
11
Cethana Dam – 110m High CFRD
Gordon Dam – 140m High Double Curvature Arch
Population at Risk
Severity of Damage & Loss
Negligible Minor Medium Major
0 142 Very Low 27 Low Significant
1-10 Low 6 Significant 2 High C
11-100 x Significant High C 4 High B
101-1,000 x x 20 High A
>1,000 x x x 3 Extreme
Hydro Tasmania’s Dams
Portfolio by ANCOLD Hazard Category – 204 Dams in total
14
ISO 31000 (f igure 3) Risk Management Process
$150M+ $750M+
Likelihood
Impact (Consequences)
Insignificant1
Minor2
Moderate3
Major4
Extreme5
Catastrophic6
A. Almost Certain L M H E E E
B. Likely L M H E E E
C. Possible L L M H E E
D. Unlikely L L L M H E
E. Rare L L L L M H
F. Extremely Rare L L L L L M
Catastrophic+7
E
E
E
E
E
H
Business Risk Framework
Probable Loss Of Life
0.1 11 10 100 1000
1:106
1:105
1:104
1:103
1:102
High
Extreme
Moderate
Low
ANCOLD Public Safety Risk To Life Criteria
Probable Loss Of Life
0.1 11 10 100 1000
1:106
1:105
1:104
1:103
1:102
High
Extreme
ModerateLow
Prior to Mitigation
Current Assessment
Public Safety - High Risk Since PRA Completed
Probable Loss Of Life
0.1 11 10 100 1000
1:106
1:105
1:104
1:103
1:102
High
Extreme
ModerateLow
Dam5
Dam2
Dam6
Dam9
Dam3
Dam7
Dam4
Dam10
Dam1
Prior to Mitigation
Current Assessment
Dam8
Public Safety - High Risk Since PRA Completed
Probable Loss Of Life
0.1 11 10 100 1000
1:106
1:105
1:104
1:103
1:102
High
Extreme
ModerateLow
Dam2
Current High Risks
Public Safety - High Risk Since PRA Completed
$21m $11m $16m $12m $16m $11mSummary Cost Estimate for FYE
AnalysisDesign & Contract Prep
Risk Mitigation Activity
& Bus. Case Approval
Possible early start / pipeline
20152010 2011 2012 2013 20142009
Dam 4
Dam 3 $40m
Dam 6
Dam 9
Dam 8
Dam 10
$3m
$5m
$25m
Dam 5
Risk Mitigation Schedule mid Programme - 2010
$6m
$38m
Program 1 $5-6m pa
$3m
$5m
Interim Measures being investigated - Structural works 2017
$1m
$7m Dam 1
$13mDam 2
Life safety Risk vs Time (2000-2020 and beyond)
0.00E+00
1.00E-02
2.00E-02
3.00E-02
4.00E-02
5.00E-02
6.00E-02
7.00E-02
8.00E-02
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
Year (with tick mark at June)
Life
Saf
ety
Risk
(liv
es/y
ear)
10 Year Plan Previous Plan
Past 10 years plan (complete)
10 Year Plan Period Future years
Potential range of risk variance over 10 year plan periodR
isk
Yr 0 Yr 10 (now) Yr 20 Yr 30
Time
Hypothetical Risk Reduction Pathways Over Time
Alternative #2 –defer program
Quick WinsComplete
Dam #1 complete
Dam #2 complete
Dam #3 complete
Dam #4 imminent
Alternative #1 –defer program
Original Program
Alternative #1Alternative #2
DAM PORTFOLIO RISK REDUCTION PATHWAYS
Reece Dam – 122m High CFRD
Catagunya Dam – 49m High Post Tensioned Concr
Rowallan Dam – 43m High Earth & Rockfil l
0.000001
0.00001
0.0001
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000Financial Loss ($M)
Annu
al P
roba
bilit
y of
Fai
lure
$10M$1M$100k$10k
High
Extreme
Moderate
Low
What drives action here?
Hydro Tasmania Financial Risk Criteria
26
Dam Sustainability RatingVery Low Low Significant High C High B High A Extreme
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
5 2 1 1 H H E E
4 3 2 2 1 1 H H
3 5 4 3 3 2 2 1
2 6 6 5 4 4 4 3
1 7 7 7 6 6 6 6
Sustain Score
DSRdb Consequence Rating
Ancold Hazard Category
Deficiency Category
Sustain Rating System Within IBRM - Dams
Surveil.O&MDeficiencies
High Risk HeightenedAwareness
DS Risk Management “Balancing Act”
Risks
Increased Scrutiny- Monitoring- Investigation- Reporting- Priority works
Increased focus on• routine inspections• monitoring installations• quick wins• addressing outstanding issues• flood warning system• emergency preparedness• use of contractors• training of field staff
Major Intervention
Response
DS Program Performance Assessment Example
Compliance - Current Status Previous Report Status
Issue Compliance Management Compliance Status
Management Status
Dam Surveillance B B
Dam Operations and Maintenance B B
Regular Reporting A A
Audits and Reviews A A
Performance of Dams with Heightened Safety Awareness A A
Investigation and Resolution of Dam Safety Deficiencies A B
Emergency Preparedness A B
Maintaining Personnel Capability & Access to Key Technical Information A A
Communication with External Stakeholders A A
Echo Dam Fi lter Upgrade
Echo Dam Fi lter Upgrade
EmbankmentCore
Zone 2ASand Filter
Zone 2CDrainage
Zone 3Rockfill
31
Cethana Dam – Spil lway Upgrade
32
Cethana Dam – Spil lway Upgrade
Catagunya Dam Restoration
34
Catagunya Dam Restoration
Rowallan Dam Embankment Upgrade
EmbankmentReconstructionStrengthen
Walls
InvestigateFoundation
Monitor SpillwayErosion
Rowallan Dam Embankment Upgrade
ConclusionsEstablish the context of portfolio management – this is critical Regulatory environment External stakeholders Shareholder demands & risk appetite Business capacity & priorities Establish goals, objectives & measures Financial Risk Program delivery & performanceReview and monitor performance of the above, incl changesReport outcomes, identify areas for improvement and reset targets
Questions
Follow ENTURA Online For Insights