Capital Planning for Trunk Sewers using the RAMCP J100 Risk Standard Roop Lutchman, Imran Motala

Agenda

• Introduction and project background • Approach to Linear Infrastructure Asset Management • Implementation methodology • Results • Conclusions & Next steps

Introduction and project background

Project background & overview

Caledon

Brampton

Mississauga

The project was established to: • Inform decisions related to allocating

resources for maintenance, renewal and capital interventions.

• Build on network level risk assessments completed by the Region’s Corporate Asset Management.

• Identify high risk pipes with respect to meeting level of service measures.

Project objectives

• Establish a risk profile for the Trunk Sewers

• Integrate risk results into the Region’s capital programming business process

• Develop detailed mitigation plans for all ‘high’ sewer pipes to reduce risk to an acceptable level

• Develop the AM Plan for Trunk Sewers

LOS

COS RISK

Comprehensive Asset Management

right projects, at the right cost, at the right time,

for the right reason

Approach to Linear Infrastructure Asset Management

Delivery

Business Drivers Customer Expectations

Government Goals Regulatory

Requirements Environmental Factors

Services Delivered

Performance Management

Performance Assessment &

Continuous Improvement

Performance Monitoring &

Reporting

Support Services

IS & Data Management

Human Resources

Management

Financial & Administration

Operations & Programs

Asset Lifecycle Management

Planning

Strategic Planning

Tactical Planning

Operational Planning

Acquire

Dispose

Maintain

Rehab

Seek to influence expectations based

on outputs from planning scenarios

Master Planning

Ops Stds & Specs Dev’t

Corp Strategic Planning

Performance (LOS) Planning

Failure Modes & Risk

Assessment

Renewal Planning

Maintenance Planning

Asset Management

Plans

10-Yr Capital Programming

Operating Planning

AM framework sets the stage for AM development

Resourcing Analysis

(Internal & External)

Scheduling of Funded Projects:

CIP

Project Scheduling

Project Prioritization using MCA

Analysis

Prioritized List of

Projects

Project Prioritization

Analyze effectiveness

of existing LOS

Model Future Trends,

Demographics, LOS

Develop Master Plans

by Asset Class

Options Analysis: Projects

Potential Projects

Confidence Level Rating

Analysis

List of Projects for Funding, Scheduling

Master planning – future infrastructure

Determine LOS

Collect Data & Monitor

Performance

Update Risk Framework

Options Analysis: Projects

Renewal planning – current infrastructure

Capital planning process

Procurement Design

Construction O&M Ready

Commissioning Operations

Maintenance Hand Over

CIP Delivery

Risk mapping and mitigation

PoF

P10 Certain

P7 Almost certain or very likely

P4 Likely

P2 Possible

P1 Rare

Insignificant Minor Moderate Major Catastrophic

C1 C2 C4 C7 C10

CoF

Risk = PoF x CoF Catastrophic Immediate action to prevent

impact to LOS, safety, and environment

Extreme Gearing up for immediate action

High Monitoring regime, response plan in place

Moderate Management responsibility specified

Low Manage using routine procedures

Asset Criticality

Determine Business Risk (“Criticality”)

Optimize O&M

Investment

Optimize Capital

Investment

Determine Funding Strategy

Build AM Plan

Develop asset registry

Assess conditions

failure modes

Determine residual

life

Determine life cycle and

replacement costs

Set target Levels of

Service (LoS)

Root cause analysis Reliability centered and Predictive maintenance

Optimized decision-making

Confidence level rating Strategic validation Optimized decision

making

System layout Data hierarchy

Standards inventory

Demand analysis Balanced scorecard Performance metrice

Valuation, life cycle costing

Expected life tables,

decay curves

Condition assessment Protocol

Rating methodologies

Failure mode and effects analysis Business risk

Exposure Delphi technique

Renewal annuity

Asset management plan

Policies and strategies Annual budget

Asset management plan development 1. What is the current state of my assets? 2. What is the required LoS?

3. Which assets are critical? 4. Best O&M and CIP strategy 5. Best funding strategy

Implementation methodology

ISO 31000:2009 Risk Management Framework

Risk management approach

Risk = Likelihood x Consequence

(Likelihood x Vulnerability) x (Consequence x Resilience)

AWWA RAMCAP J100 Std:

Communication & Consultation

Risk assessment

Risk identification

Risk analysis

Risk evaluation

Risk treatment

Monitoring & Review

Establishing the context

Seven-step AWWA RAMCAP J100 Process

1 Asset Characterization Define level of service (LOS) objectives Define & characterize critical assets (size, flow rate, location, etc.)

2 Threat Characterization Define risk scenarios that are a threat to LOS objectives (breaks, pressure, time, etc.)

3 Consequence Analysis Define risk scenarios that are a threat to LOS objectives (breaks, pressure, demand, time, etc.) Carry out model simulations (2015 & 2035 Scenarios)

4 Vulnerability Analysis

5 Threat Assessment

Define vulnerability category rankings (discount factor) Define / assign likelihood (judgement, historical data, etc.)

6 Risk Assessment Develop risk profile(s) Define risk categories and classifications

7 Risk Management Develop Mitigation Plans & Strategies Map to Corporate Asset Management & Planning Processes Residual Risk

Defining threats

Internal

External

Defining probability

Defining consequence

Social

Environment

Infrastructure

Defining resilience

Hydraulic

Detectability

Defining vulnerability

Spatial location

Pipe attribution

Translating to GIS

Spatial queries

Attribute queries

Model development

Mapping the outcome

Collaborative workshops GIS

Risk development workshops and modelling

Likelihood (PoF) matrix and descriptors

Likelihood Descriptor Score

Rare An occurrence /situation is not likely to occur within 20 years 1

Unlikely An occurrence / situation is not likely to occur within 10 years but possibly within 20 years 2

Possible An occurrence / situation might occur within 10 years 3

Likely An occurrence / situation might occur within 2 years 4

Almost Certain An occurrence / situation that is happening or imminent and / or will probably occur within 1 year 5

Likelihood ratings (27 threat events) Threat event Threat description Score

1 If hydrogen sulfide release occurs, then there is risk of concrete loss which can lead to structural pipe failure 5

2 If a chemical spills occurs, then there is risk of concrete loss which can lead to structural pipe failure 2

3 If a discharge occurs, then there is risk of concrete loss which can lead to structural pipe failure 2

4 If a third party breaches the pipe, then there is risk of structural pipe failure 1

5 If foreign materials (including grease) enter pipe / illegal dumping occurs, then there is risk of blockage 2

6 If bedding is installed inadequately, then there is risk of structural pipe failure 1

7 If there are poor geotechnical conditions (unknown geotechnical conditions), then there is risk of pipe failure 1

8 If there is poor inline jointing, then there is risk of structural pipe failure 2

9 If there are poor jointing at manholes, then there is risk of structural pipe failure 2

10 If there are poor lateral installations, then there is risk of structural pipe failures 2

Consequence criteria – corporate image

Considers the Organization’s image and reputation from an external or public perspective

1 (Negligible)

2 (Low)

3 (Moderate)

4 (Severe)

5 (Catastrophic)

No media exposure.

Minor or no media exposure.

Moderate local Media exposure lasting for several days.

Intense local media exposure lasting several weeks and / or GTA wide exposure.

Significant national exposure lasting several days or weeks.

Consequence criteria – environment

Considers direct impacts to the natural environment.

1 (Negligible)

2 (Low)

3 (Moderate)

4 (Severe)

5 (Catastrophic)

Very negligible impact. Reversible within 1 week.

Material damage / improvements of local importance. Minor, short term (within 6 months) very isolated damage / improvements to the environment.

Significant short term (less than 1 year) local damage / improvements to the environment.

Significant long term (greater than 1 year) widespread damage / improvements to the environment. GTA importance.

Major long term (greater than 5 years) or permanent widespread damage / improvements to the environment. Some Provincial importance.

1 (Negligible)

2 (Low)

3 (Moderate)

4 (Severe)

5 (Catastrophic)

Restoration less than $5,000.

Restoration $5000 to $100,000.

Restoration $100,000 to $250,000.

Restoration $250,000 to $1,000,000.

Restoration impossible or greater than $1,000,000.

Consequence criteria – health & safety

Considers impacts to Public & Employee health & safety.

1 (Negligible)

2 (Low)

3 (Moderate)

4 (Severe)

5 (Catastrophic)

No obvious potential for injury or affects to health.

Potential for minor injury or affects to health of an individual. Full recovery is expected; or Minor medical attention may be required.

Potential for serious injury or affects to health. May affect many individuals and / or result in short term disability; or Hospitalization may be required for a short period of time.

Potential for serious injury or affects to health of one or more individuals with a possibility of loss of a life and the certainty of long term disability; or Emergency hospitalization required for one or more individuals.

Potential for death or multiple death with probable permanent damage; or Emergency and long term hospitalization required for several individuals.

Consequence criteria – 3rd party losses / damages

Considers damages and losses incurred by the Public and external agencies including those employed on

behalf of the Corporation’s interests.

1 (Negligible)

2 (Low)

3 (Moderate)

4 (Severe)

5 (Catastrophic)

Incur / reduce minor damages / penalties greater than $10,000; or No prosecution potential; or No insurance claims.

Incur / reduce minor damages / penalties from $10,000 to $100,000; or Prosecution by an individual possible; or Potential for some insurance claims.

Incur / reduce moderate damages / penalties from $100,000 to $1,000,000; or Possible prosecution by public groups or Agencies; or Many insurance claims likely.

Incur / reduce significant damages / penalties from $1,000,000 to $5,000,000; or Probable prosecution by interest groups or Agencies. Impact reversible within 5 years; or Agencies; or Potential for 100 or more insurance claims.

Incur / reduce major damages / penalties greater than $5,000,000; or Definite prosecution by interest groups or Agencies with irreversible impacts; or Potential for several hundred insurance claims.

Consequence criteria – operational

Considers losses, improvements or interruptions to internal operations and services provided both

internally and externally.

1 (Negligible)

2 (Low)

3 (Moderate)

4 (Severe)

5 (Catastrophic)

Less than $250,000 $250,000 to $1,000,000 $1,000,000 to $5,000,000

$5,000,000 to $15,000,000

Greater than $15,000.000

1 (Negligible)

2 (Low)

3 (Moderate)

4 (Severe)

5 (Catastrophic)

Small number of customer experiencing disruption / impact (less than 100 people or up to a few hours)

Localized service disruption / impact (100 to 1,000 people or up to 1 day)

Significant localized disruption / impact (1,000 to 10,000 people or less than 1 week)

Major service disruption / impact (10,000 to 50,000 people or for more than a week)

Region wide service disruption / impact (greater than 50,000 people or permanent loss of services)

Consequence approach (full size example)

Vulnerability analysis (done for each threat)

Threat Description Vulnerability Criteria Weights

If hydrogen sulfide release occurs, then there is risk of concrete loss

Non Concrete 0.1

Lined Concrete (CIPP) 0.25

Lined Pipe (Spray) 0.50

Concrete with Additive 0.75

Untreated Concrete (Pre 1996), Corrugated Steel 1.0

Threat Description Vulnerability Criteria Weights

If chemical spills / discharge occurs, then there is risk of concrete loss

Deep Depth ( > 5m), Bedrock, Pipe Liner 0.1

Urbanized Area 0.25

Non-Urban Area 0.50 Shallow Depth (< 5m), Permeable Soil (Porosity), Proximity to

Industrial (further than 500 m) 0.75

Shallow Depth (< 5m), Permeable Soil (Porosity), Proximity to Industrial (within 500 m) 1.0

Geo-processing model

Likelihood

Geo-processing model

Vulnerability

Geo-processing model

Resilience

Like

lihoo

d

P10 Certain

P7 Almost certain or very likely

P4 Likely

P2 Possible

P1 Rare

Insignificant Minor Moderate Major Catastrophic

C1 C2 C4 C7 C10

Consequence

Risk = PoF x CoF Catastrophic Immediate action to prevent

impact to LOS, safety, and environment

Extreme Gearing up for immediate action

High Monitoring regime, response plan in place

Moderate Management responsibility specified

Low Manage using routine procedures

Risk mitigation

Status Quo - Ongoing

Address in intermediate term (5-10 years)

Address in short term (0-5

years)

Monitor Frequently

Results

Risk map

Long term investment profile

Optimized Maintenance and Renewal & Replacement Planning Process Helps Smooth

Investment Curve

Projects from Renewal Replacement Planning

Projects from Deterioration

Curves Modelling

Trunk sewer mains Asset Management Plan (AMP)

Section 4 - AM Plan Improvement & Monitoring

Executive Summary

Section 1 - Introduction

Section 2 - State of Local Infrastructure

Section 3 - Levels of Service

Section 5 - Financing Strategy

Appendix A - AM Plan Improvement & Monitoring

Asset Risk Management

Asset Lifecycle Analysis

Asset Lifecycle Strategies

Creation/ Augmentation Plan

Routine Maintenance Plan

Renewal/ Replacement Plan

Disposal Plan

Overview of AM Strategy Development

Conclusions and next steps

Conclusions

1. Established a leading practice Capability for Renewal Planning using Risk management

2. Leveraged core technology tools (GIS, CMMS) and existing data

3. Developed a Risk Tool 4. Developed a risk profile and associated risk mitigation 5. The Region can now continue to Execute and roll this

approach out to other asset classes 6. Decision making is now transparent

We are confident we are doing the right projects, at the right cost,

at the right time, for the right reason

Road ahead

1. Address information and data gaps to improve quality of future risk assessment results

2. Execute mitigation strategies, projects and related initiatives identified as part of this project

3. Develop risk profiles for other assets: 1. linear Water Distribution and Collection assets 2. (Wastewater System / Distribution System /

Reservoirs / Wells / Pumping Stations) 4. Update the Asset Management Plans

Questions? roop.lutchman@ghd.com Imran.motala@peelregion.ca