20 14

Fabio Taucer Arnaud Mignan

WP7 – Dissemination and

stakeholder interaction

STREST – Report on user requirements from potential stakeholders

Report EUR 26946 EN

European Commission

Joint Research Centre

Institute for the Protection and Security of the Citizen

Contact information

Fabio Taucer

Address: Joint Research Centre, Via Enrico Fermi 2749, TP 480, 21027 Ispra (VA), Italy

E-mail: fabio.taucer@jrc.ec.europa.eu

Tel.: +39 0332 78 5886

Fax: +39 0332 78 9049

http://www.jrc.ec.europa.eu/

This publication is a Technical Report by the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission.

Legal Notice

This publication is a Technical Report by the Joint Research Centre, the European Commission’s in-house science

service.

It aims to provide evidence-based scientific support to the European policy-making process. The scientific output

expressed

does not imply a policy position of the European Commission.Neither the European Commission nor any person

acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use which might be made of this publication.

JRC92924

EUR 26946 EN

ISBN 978-92-79-44397-8

ISSN 1831-9424

doi:10.2788/994346

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2014

© European Union, 2014

Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

Printed in Ispra, Italy

D7.4

DELIVERABLE

PROJECT INFORMATION

Project Title: Harmonized approach to stress tests for critical

infrastructures against natural hazards

Acronym: STREST

Project N°: 603389

Call N°: FP7-ENV-2013-two-stage

Project start: 01 October 2013

Duration: 36 months

DELIVERABLE INFORMATION

Deliverable Title: Report on user requirements from potential stakeholders

Date of issue: 19 December 2014

Work Package: WP7 – Dissemination and Stakeholder Interaction

Editor/Author: Fabio Taucer

(Joint Research Centre)

Reviewer: Arnaud Mignan (ETH Zurich)

REVISION: Final

Project Coordinator:

Institution:

e-mail:

fax:

telephone:

Prof. Domenico Giardini

ETH Zürich

giardini@sed.ethz.ch

+ 41 446331065

+ 41 446332610

i

Abstract

The present deliverable reports on the organization of the 1-Year STREST Workshop –

Protection of critical infrastructures against natural hazards and cascading effects: STREST

approach and synergies between FP7 projects, held at the JRC – Ispra, Italy, on 29-31

October 2014, on its achievements and on the conclusions and recommendations proposed

by its participants. Stakeholders were here researchers from other FP7 projects working on

similar and complementary topics.

Keywords: dissemination, foreground, leaflet, newsletter, workshop, conclusions,

recommendations

iii

Acknowledgments

The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Community's

Seventh Framework Programme [FP7/2007-2013] under grant agreement n° 603389

v

Deliverable Contributors

Joint Research Centre (JRC) Fabio Taucer

Arnaud Mignan ETH Zurich

vii

Table of Contents

Abstract ...................................................................................................................................... i

Acknowledgments ................................................................................................................... iii

Deliverable Contributors .......................................................................................................... v

Table of Contents .................................................................................................................... vii

List of Figures .......................................................................................................................... ix

List of Tables ............................................................................................................................ xi

1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1

2 Objectives.......................................................................................................................... 3

3 Program ............................................................................................................................. 5

4 Participants ....................................................................................................................... 9

5 Feedback forms .............................................................................................................. 13

6 Conclusions and recommendations .............................................................................. 15

ix

List of Figures

Fig. 4.1 Venue of the Workshop ......................................................................................... 11

xi

List of Tables

Table 3.1 Detailed program of the 1st Year STREST Workshop (DAY 1, 2 & 3) ................... 5

Table 4.1 List of Participants and corresponding institutions ............................................... 10

Introduction

1

1 Introduction

The 1st Year STREST Workshop was held on 29-31 October 2014 at the Auditorium of the

Joint Research Centre (JRC) in Ispra, Italy. The workshop counted with more than 60

participants from a wide representation of European countries, partners of the STREST

project as well as from other institutions external to the project.

The present document reports on the organization of the workshop, the statistics of the

participants and the conclusions and recommendations drawn at the closure of the

workshop.

Objectives

3

2 Objectives

The main objective of the workshop was to explore synergies between FP7 projects related

to the topic of STREST, in particular in what concerns extreme events and cascades, critical

infrastructure taxonomy, and stress test methods.

This was made in accordance with the European Commission’s plan for inter-project

collaboration, discussed earlier in Brussels in June 2014. The workshop described in the

present report represents the first step in such collaborative work with other FP7 projects of

the Security and Environment sections. As such, researchers of other projects were

considered as stakeholders in this first phase.

The workshop also discussed the STRESS methodology, related to WP3, WP4 and WP5,

and presented and examined the state of advancement of the exploratory applications of

new stress test concepts to critical infrastructure based on the six STREST test sites.

The last part of the workshop was dedicated to the General Assembly.

Program

5

3 Program

The program of the workshop consisted in five sessions distributed in three days (29, 30 and

31 October), for a total of 31 presentations (ranging from 15 to 30 minutes) (Table 3.1).

Discussion sessions were held at the end of each session, stimulating the exchange of ideas

from the participants, and allowing to draw a list of recommendations as presented in

Section 6. A social dinner was organized on the first and second days.

The General Assembly was held at the last part of the third day (31 October). The minutes of

the assembly were distributed by the project coordinator and were posted on the secure

section of the project’s website.

All the presentations have been uploaded in the secured section of the STREST website.

Table 3.1 Detailed program of the 1st Year STREST Workshop (DAY 1, 2 & 3)

DAY 1, Wednesday 29 October 2014

10:00 – 10:05 Opening (A. Pinto & F. Taucer, JRC / D. Giardini, ETHZ)

10:05 – 10:15 STREST Overview (A. Mignan, ETHZ) & Round table

Morning session (Chairman: B. Stojadinovic, ETHZ)

WP5: Designing stress tests for critical infrastructures

10:15 – 10:45 Preliminary definitions (F. Cotton, UJF / I. Iervolino, AMRA / J.

Selva, INGV)

10:45 – 11:00 Lessons learned from existing stress tests for NPPs and non-

nuclear CIs (P. Zwicky)

11:00 – 11:15 SSHAC guidelines (S. Esposito, ETHZ)

11:15 – 12:00 The STREST stress test method (B. Stojadinovic, ETHZ)

12:00 – 13:00 Discussion

13:00 – 14:00 Lunch

Afternoon session (Chairman: I. Iervolino, AMRA)

WP4: Vulnerability models for the performance and consequences assessment

14:00 – 14:30 Task 4.1 – Fact sheet final release review & WP4 general issues

(G. Lanzano, AMRA)

14:30 – 15:00 Task 4.2 – Interdependencies to be accounted for by the

STREST approach (K. Pitilakis & S. Argyroudis, AUTH / E.

Program

6

Salzano, AMRA)

15:00 – 15:30 Task 4.3 – STREST taxonomy final release review (K. Pitilakis &

S. Argyroudis, AUTH)

15:30 – 15:45 Coffee break

15:45 – 16:15 Task 4.4 – Seismic time variant issues in stress tests (I.

Iervolino, AMRA / K. Trevlopoulos, UJF)

16:15 – 16:45 Task 4.5 – Resilience-related quantitative data & fact sheet

template for resilience-related issues (B. Stojadinovic, ETHZ)

16:45 - 18:00 Discussion

Evening Social dinner

DAY 2, Thursday 30 October 2014

Morning session (Chairman: F. Cotton, UJF)

WP3: Integrated low probability-high consequence hazard assessment

9:00 – 9:30 Task 3.1 – Definition of uncertainty treatment within the “back-

bone” STREST methodology (J. Selva, INGV)

9:30 – 10:00 Task 3.2 – Definition of hazard measures & extreme event

scenarios for distributed CIs (S. Akkar, KOERI)

10:00 – 10:30 Task 3.3 – Near-source hazard variability

Characterization of source geometry & seismicity for near-source probabilistic hazard analysis & stress test scenarios (E. Chioccarelli, AMRA)

Near-source ground-motion prediction models (Y.C. Chen, ENCENTRE/UJF)

10:30 – 10:45 Coffee break

10:45 – 11:15 Task 3.5 – Multi-hazard assessment & cascading effects

Earthquake interactions: intra-events (Mmax) & inter-events (clustering) (A. Mignan, ETHZ)

Hazard cascades at dams (J. Matos, EPFL)

11:15 – 11:30 Updates on Tasks 3.4 – site-specific hazard (P.-Y. Bard, UJF)

and 3.6 – induced seismicity GEM module (G. Weatherill,

EUCENTRE)

11:30 – 12:00 Task 3.7 – Multi-hazard assessment of low-probability hazard &

Program

7

LP-HC events for the 6 application areas

Tsunami hazard (J. Selva, INGV)

Seismic hazard (S. Kotha, UJF)

12:00 – 13:00 Discussion

13:00 - 14:00 Lunch

14:00 – 14:30 Visit to the ELSA Laboratory

Afternoon session (Chairman: F. Taucer, JRC)

Synergies between FP7 projects (extreme events & cascades, critical

infrastructure taxonomy & stress test methods)

14:30 – 14:55 ASTARTE project (J. Selva, INGV)

14:55 – 15:20 INDUSE2 project (O. Bursi, University of Trento)

15:20 – 15:45 INFRARISK project (L. Connolly, ROD)

15:45 – 16:10 INTACT project (P. Petiet, TNO)

16:10 – 16:25 Coffee Break

16:25 – 16:50 PREDICT project (D. Serafin, CEA)

16:50 – 17:15 RAIN project (A. O’Connor, TCD)

17:15 – 18:30 Discussion on possible synergies:

Themes: Extreme events & cascades, CI taxonomy, Stress test methods, etc.

Next steps: joint meetings, joined work, etc.

Evening Social dinner

DAY 3, Friday 31 October 2014

Morning session (Chairman: K. Pitilakis, AUTH)

WP6: Exploratory applications of new stress test concepts to critical

infrastructures

9:00 – 9:15 Introduction (K. Pitilakis, AUTH)

9:15 – 9:30 CI-A1 – Milazzo oil refinery & petrochemical plant (E. Salzano,

AMRA)

Program

8

9:30 – 9:45 CI-A2 – Large dams in Switzerland (J. Matos, EPFL)

9:45 – 10:00 CI-B1 – Major hydrocarbon pipelines, Turkey (E. Uckan, KOERI)

10:00 – 10:15 CI-B2 – Gasunie gas storage & distribution network, Netherlands

(M. Spruijt, TNO)

10:15– 10:30 CI-B3 – Port infrastructure of Thessaloniki, Greece (K. Pitilakis,

AUTH & S. Sismanis, THPA SA)

10:30 – 10:45 CI-C1 – Industrial district, Northern Italy (H. Crowley,

EUCENTRE)

10:45 – 11:00 Coffee Break

11:00 – 12:00 General discussion

Next steps

Comments from the International Advisory Board

12:00 – 12:30 General Assembly (partner representatives only)

Deliverables status

Next meetings

Varia

12:30 – 13:30 Lunch

Participants

9

4 Participants

The workshop was attended by more than 60 participants, grouped as follows:

- Partners from the STREST Project, including the six STREST Test sites

- Representatives from the FP7 related projects

- Members from the International Advisory Board (IAB)

The representatives from FP7 projects were fully reimbursed by the JRC for Travel and

Subsistence. The names and projects for these participants are:

ASTARTE Projects (J. Selca, INGV) * not reimbursed as member of STREST

INDUSE2 Project (O. Bursi, University of Trento)

INFRARISK Project (L. Connolly, Roughan & O' Donovan Innovative Solutions)

INTACT Project (P. Petiet, TNO)

PREDICT Project (D. Serafin, Commissariat Energie Atomique)

RAIN Project (A. O’Connor, Trinity College Dublin)

The members of the IAB were invited and reimbursed for T&S by ETH Zurich:

Prof Dr Thomas H Heaton, Director of the Earthquake Engineering Research

Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, USA

Prof. Dr. Stephen A. Mahin, Professor of Structural Engineering and Director of the

Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research (PEER) Center, University of California

Berkeley, USA

Prof. Dr. Tso-Chien Pan, Executive Director of the Institute of Catastrophe Risk

Management, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore

The complete list of names of participants with their corresponding institution is given in

Table 4.1

The venue of the workshop is shown in Fig. 4.1.

Participants

10

Table 4.1 List of Participants and corresponding institutions

NAME LAST NAME INSTITUTION CITY COUNTRY

1 DEDE SINAN AKKAR Kandilli Observatory and Earthquake Research Insti Istanbul Turkey

2 SOTIRIS ARGYROUDIS Aristotle University of Thessaloniki THESSALONIKI Greece

3 CLAUDIA ARISTIZABAL Université Joseph Fourier - ISTerre GRENOBLE France

4 ANŽE BABIČ University of Ljubljana LJUBLJANA Slovenia

5 PIERRE-YVES BARD ISTerre / IFSTTAR GRENOBLE France

6 ANNA BASCO AMRA NAPOLI Italy

7 MAXIMLIAN BILLMAIER Basler & Hofmann AG ZURICH Switzerland

8 INANC BULENT

9 ORESTE S. BURSI University of Trento TRENTO Italy

10 YIN CHENG KOERI, Bogazici University ISTANBUL Turkey

11 EUGENIO CHIOCCARELLI AMRA NAPOLI Italy

12 MURAD CILSAL Botaş Int.Ltd. ADANA Turkey

13 LORCAN CONNOLLY Roughan & O' Donovan Innovative Solutions DUBLIN Ireland

14 FABRICE COTTON GFZ POTSDAM Germamy

15 WIM COURAGE TNO DELFT Netherlands

16 HELEN CROWLEY EUCENTRE PAVIA Italy

17 MATJAZ DOLSEK University of Ljubljana LJUBLJANA Slovenia

18 SIMONA ESPOSITO ETHZ ZURICH Switzerland

19 LUCA GALBUSERA Joint Research Centre ISPRA Italy

20 GEORGIOS GIANNOPOULOS Joint Research Centre ISPRA Italy

21 DOMENICO GIARDINI ETHZ ZURICH Switzerland

22 SERKAN GIRGIN Joint Research Centre ISPRA Italy

23 PHILIPPE GUEGUEN Institute of Earth Science ISTerre GRENOBLE CEDEX 9 France

24 THOMAS HEATON Caltech PASADENA United States

25 IUNIO IERVOLINO Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II NAPOLI Italy

26 M SARFRAZ IQBAL INGV Bologna BOLOGNA Italy

27 ALEKSANDAR JOVANOVIC EU-Vri Stuttgart Germamy

28 SREERAM REDDY KOTHA Geoforschungszentrum Potsdam BERLIN Germamy

29 GIOVANNI LANZANO INGV Milano Milano Italy

30 STEPHEN MAHIN University of California BERKELEY United States

31 JOSÉ PEDRO MATOS EPFL LAUSANNE Switzerland

32 ARNAUD MIGNAN ETH Zurich ZURICH Switzerland

33 SIMONA MIRAGLIA TNO-Structural reliability DELFT Netherlands

34 Albert Nieuwenhuijs TNO Den Haag Netherlands

35 STAVROS NTALAMPIRAS Joint Research Centre ISPRA Italy

36 ALAN O'CONNOR Trinity College Dublin DUBLIN Ireland

37 TSO-CHIEN PAN INSTITUTE OF CATASTROPHE RISK MANAGEMENT SINGAPORE singapore

38 KYRIAZIS PITILAKIS ARISTOTLE UNIVERSITY OF THESSALONIKI THESSALONIKI Greece

39 ERNESTO SALZANO Istituto di Ricerche sulla Combustione, CNR NAPOLI Italy

40 ANTON SCHLEISS EPFL LAUSANNE Switzerland

41 JACOPO SELVA Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia BOLOGNA Italy

42 DOMINIQUE SERAFIN CEA - Centre de Gramat Gramat France

43 SAVVAS SISMANIS Thessaloniki Port Authority THESSALONIKI Greece

44 MARK SPRUIJT TNO UTRECHT Netherlands

45 BOZIDAR STOJADINOVIC Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) Zurich ZURICH Switzerland

46 FABIO TAUCER Joint Research Centre ISPRA Italy

47 KONSTANTINOS TREVLOPOULOS ISTerre, UJF Grenoble GRENOBLE France

48 EREN UCKAN KOERI ISTANBUL Turkey

49 GRAEME WEATHERILL EUCENTRE PAVIA Italy

50 PETER ZWICKY Basler & Hofmann AG Zürich Switzerland

51 CHIARA CASOTTO EUCENTRE PAVIA Italy

52 DIMOVA SILVIA Joint Research Centre ISPRA Italy

53 GEORGIOS TSIONIS Joint Research Centre ISPRA Italy

54 BORISLAVA NIKOLOVA Joint Research Centre ISPRA Italy

Participants

11

Fig. 4.1 Venue of the Workshop

Feedback forms

13

5 Feedback forms

A questionnaire was distributed at the workshop in order to gain feedback from the

organization of the workshop, content and possible recommendations for the project. The

questions included in the feedback forms were graded by the participants between 5

(strongly agree) and 1 (strongly disagree). The results are given below for a total of 15 filled

questionnaires (in terms of percentage, given in brackets from grade 5 to 1):

Agenda:

The agenda (duration, structure, discussion vs. speaker) was appropriate to the

event? [60, 27, 7, 7, 0]

Speakers:

Speakers were professional and their knowledge of the subject was appropriate [67,

27, 0, 7, 0]

Presentation style was suitable for the event [73, 20, 7, 0, 0]

Speakers covered all expected topics [47, 47, 7, 0, 0]

Time for questions and discussion was sufficient [47, 27, 7, 13, 7]

Documentation:

Material covered all topics [33, 40, 27, 0, 0]

Structure and layout was appropriate (easy to read, understandable) [47, 13, 40, 0, 0]

Facilities:

Presentation aids and room equipment was appropriate [60, 33, 7, 0, 0]

Facilities were functional to the purpose [73, 20, 0, 7, 0]

Technical support staff was available [60, 33, 0, 0, 0]

Before the event:

Necessary information and enough support were available [73, 13, 13, 0, 0]

Overall outcome of the event:

My expectations about the event were met [69, 33, 0, 0, 7]

In general the level of satisfaction is high, with a compounded percentage of 86% for levels 5

and 4. The lowest levels of satisfaction corresponded to the following questions:

- Speakers covered all expected topics

- Time for questions and discussion was sufficient

- Material covered all topics

- Structure and layout was appropriate (easy to read, understandable)

These results may be explained as follows:

Feedback forms

14

- Not all WPs were covered at the workshop. WP2 was not presented as this WP was

completed and the focus of the workshop was to discuss ways forward for the

advancement of the remaining packages

- On the first two days there were delays with the transportation system, so that the

time for questions at the end of presentations had to be limited in order to close the

day on schedule. Nevertheless, the time devoted for discussion at the end of the two

days was sufficient.

- There was no specific material prepared for the workshop, as the project was nor yet

mature in terms of project results

- Since the project yet needs to better define the advancement of WPs 3, 4 and 5, the

structure of presentations may had not offered a very clear picture to outsiders to the

project. This situation will be certainly resolved for the Final Workshop.

Conclusions and recommendations

15

6 Conclusions and recommendations

The workshop included a half-day session on possible synergies with other FP7 projects on

the topic of critical infrastructure protection against natural hazards. Projects represented

other than STREST were:

ASTARTE, represented by J. Selva;

INDUSE2, represented by O. Bursi;

INFRARISK, represented by L. Connolly;

INTACT, represented by A. Nieuwenhuijs;

PREDICT, represented by D. Serafin;

RAIN, represented by A. O’Connor.

Themes discussed were:

Critical infrastructures;

Extreme events and cascades;

Stress tests;

Test sites.

This session was proposed as a follow-up of the “clustering meeting” of 25 June 2014 in

Brussels, organized by the European Commission.

The discussions between the different projects represented led to the following conclusions:

1) Areas where common work would be beneficial:

Common approach to uncertainty estimation;

Review of “good practice” in risk analysis;

Harmonization of hazard indicators and risk metrics;

Wider involvement of stakeholders.

2) A panel of experts (selected from the participating projects) could help making sure that

the methods developed in different projects are compatible (e.g. similar hazard indicators

and risk metrics) and identify if they can be transposed to other projects for tests on

additional exploratory applications (e.g. same risk analyses in different test sites being

part of a same critical infrastructure taxonomy). The panel could investigate the causes of

possible discrepancies between the results of different projects.

3) While interactions between the different projects are already planned to continue

(participation to different project meetings; collaborations on specific tasks), it was

concluded that a coordinated support action from the European Commission would be

needed to achieve results at inter-project level, such as a harmonized taxonomy across

projects of critical infrastructures (e.g. combining energy networks and transportation

Conclusions and recommendations

16

networks) or a common method for cascade modelling (e.g. applied to both geological

and hydrological hazards).

Next Steps

During the organization of the workshop the JRC dedicated considerable effort to invite

Critical Infrastructure Operators and Regulators. In all, the JRC sent out more than 40

invitations covering electricity, gas, petrochemical / oil pipeline, distributed infrastructures,

dams and ports CIs. Of these, very few (only two) accepted the invitation to attend the

workshop.

The reasons for the low acceptance are two-fold: first, the project was not yet mature

enough to provide results that would attract the interest of operators and regulators, and

second, many of the operators are from the private industry, who may not want to be

exposed, and openly discuss possible deficiencies in their capacity of addressing stress

tests (note that one of the conditions for their participation was to collect and integrate the

user requirements concerning safety assessment and stress tests of CIs).

The list of addresses used for approaching operators and regulators will be retained for the

Final Workshop. At this time it is foreseen that users will have a stake in participating, as

concrete results, including guidelines for stress test methodologies, will be presented, and

users will see this as an advantage to them. Users should not be asked to expose their

current state or approach to stress tests in their infrastructures.

The FP7 projects that were invited at the 1st Workshop will also be invited to the Final

Workshop, with the objective of presenting the results and outcomes of interactions with

STREST. Some of these FP7 projects also plan stakeholder workshops, to which members

of the STREST consortium will also participate.

Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union

Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11

(*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow access to 00 800 numbers or these calls may be billed.

A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet.

It can be accessed through the Europa server http://europa.eu/.

How to obtain EU publications

Our priced publications are available from EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu),

where you can place an order with the sales agent of your choice.

The Publications Office has a worldwide network of sales agents.

You can obtain their contact details by sending a fax to (352) 29 29-42758.

European Commission

EUR 26946 EN – Joint Research Centre – Institute for the Protection and Security of the Citizen

Title: STREST – Report on user requirements from potential stakeholders

Authors: Fabio Taucer and Arnaud Mignan

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union

2014 – 30 pp. – 21.0 x 29.7 cm

EUR – Scientific and Technical Research series – ISSN 1831-9424

ISBN 978-92-79-44397-8

doi:10.2788/994346

Abstract

The present deliverable reports on the organization of the 1-Year STREST Workshop – Protection of critical

infrastructures against natural hazards and cascading effects: STREST approach and synergies between FP7 projects,

held at the JRC – Ispra, Italy, on 29-31 October 2014, on its achievements and on the conclusions and recommendations

proposed by its participants. Stakeholders were here researchers from other FP7 projects working on similar and

complementary topics.

ISBN 978-92-79-44397-8

LB

-NA

-26

94

6-E

N-N