Hamilton AWEA Safety Conference Presentation


Published on

Community safety is of paramount importance to wind generating facilities. Risk assessment of all significant public exposure should be conducted and plans to reduce / eliminate the exposure must be developed. This presentation outlines the process of developing a public safety program, describes procedures for performing site assessments, and summarizes the major public exposure risks that are related to wind turbines and recommended steps to mitigate those risks.

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Hamilton AWEA Safety Conference Presentation

  1. 1. ENERGYPublic Safety Programs for PowerPlants: What, Why, and How Presented by Bruce Hamilton | Navigant Session Title: Risk Assessment for Public Safety Thursday, January 17th , 10:00-11:30 am©2013 Navigant Consulting, Inc.D I S P U T E S & I N V E S T I G AT I O N S • E C O N O M I C S • F I N A N C I A L A D V I S O RY • M A N A G E M E N T C O N S U LT I N G
  2. 2. Introduction to NavigantNavigant is a global consulting firm providing management consulting,economics, financial advisory and disputes & investigations support. Navigant Consulting Energy Practice Renewable Energy (2,700 Employees) (300 Employees) (60 Employees)• Four business areas: • Power Systems, Professionals management Markets and Pricing • 60 staff, many with over consulting, economics, • Business Planning 25 years experience in RE financial advisory, and and Performance disputes & • Exceptional depth and Improvement breadth of market & investigations • Energy Efficiency technology expertise• Publicly traded since 1996 (NYSE: NCI) • Emerging • Advanced degrees in Technologies and engineering, law, and• 2011 revenues - Renewable Energy business $785 million Global Practice• 35 offices in North Navigant Consulting America, Europe, and named "Best Advisory – • Over 200 RE engagements Asia Renewable Energy" in world wide in last 3 yrs the 9th and 10th Annual • Public and private sector Environmental Finance clients in 10+ countries and Carbon Finance Market Surveys • 25% of clients are non-U.S. 1 ENERGY
  3. 3. PurposeKey questions that will be addressed  What is a Public Safety Program?  Why should power generation companies have a Public Safety Program?  How do you develop a Public Safety Program?  What are typical results for wind plants? 2 ENERGY
  4. 4. Public Safety Programs » Table of ContentsTable of Contents 1 » Reasons for a Public Safety Program 2 » Implementing a Public Safety Program 3 » Typical Results for Wind Plants 3 ENERGY
  5. 5. Public Safety Programs » Table of ContentsTable of Contents » 1 » Reasons for a Public Safety Program 2 » Implementing a Public Safety Program 3 » Typical Results for Wind Plants 4 ENERGY
  6. 6. Reasons for a Public Safety Program » Objectives Public Safety Program Program Goal Mitigate the risk of events involving company assets and operations that could endanger the safety of the general public. Program Objectives  Identify, assess, and prioritize potential public hazards at the company’s facilities  Develop mitigating plans to minimize/eliminate the public exposure to these hazards  Raise awareness with and communicate plans to all employees 5 ENERGY
  7. 7. Reasons for a Public Safety Program » Recent Public Safety Hazards Recent Public Safety Hazard – TVA Ash Pond Spill (click pictures to play videos) On December 22, 2008, an ash dike ruptured at an 84-acre ash disposal area at the Tennessee Valley Authoritys Kingston Fossil Plant in Tennessee. 1.1 billion gallons of coal fly ash slurry was released into the surrounding land and waterways, covering 300 acres with up to six feet of sludge, causing damage to 26 homes, disrupting electrical power, rupturing a natural gas line in a neighborhood adjacent to the plant, and covering a railway and road in the area. The root cause was attributed to the ash pond wall geometry, recent heavy rains, and freezing temperatures, but a post- failure report found that TVA was aware of “red flags” signaling the need for safety modifications to TVA ash ponds since 1985. In addition, TVA’s enterprise risk management program did not adequately address known risks identified as early as 1987. TVA has spent $750 million of an expected $1.1 billion to $1.2 billion total cost for the cleanup. Ratepayers are footing that bill. Every month since October 2009 and for the next 13 years, an additional 69 cents is being tacked onto every TVA power bill. 6 ENERGY
  8. 8. Reasons for a Public Safety Program » Recent Public Safety Hazards Recent Public Safety Hazard – PG&E San Bruno Pipeline (click pictures to play videos) On September 9, 2010, a 30-inch-diameter segment of a natural gas transmission pipeline, owned and operated by the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), ruptured in a residential area in San Bruno, California. The released natural gas ignited, resulting in a fire that destroyed 38 homes and damaged 70. Eight people were killed, many were injured, and many more were evacuated from the area. The cause of the accident was PG&E’s (1) inadequate quality assurance and quality control in 1956, which allowed the installation of a substandard and poorly welded pipe section, causing the pipeline to rupture during a pressure increase stemming from poorly planned electrical work; and (2) inadequate pipeline integrity management program, which failed to detect and repair or remove the defective pipe section. PG&E shares fell 8% on the Friday after the explosion reducing the companys market capital by $1.57 billion. Over 100 plaintiffs, have sued PG&E, in over 70 separate lawsuits. PG&E expects to pay $1.7 billion in pipeline related costs, including over $200 million in fines, as a result. 7 ENERGY
  9. 9. Reasons for a Public Safety Program » Examples in Other IndustriesDuPont Global Product Strategy Initiative  DuPont aims to meet its responsibilities under its company’s safety, health, and environment commitment (The DuPont Commitment), the American Chemistry Council’s Responsible Care® initiative and the International Council of Chemical Association’s (ICCA) voluntary initiative called the Global Product Strategy (GPS).  DuPont joined the GPS initiative when it was launched in 2006. The goal of the GPS is to ensure that society will continue to enjoy the value and benefits of chemistry, while industry and its partners continuously improve efforts to protect public safety, health, and the environment.  Commitment to produce Product Safety Summaries to provide a general overview of chemical substances. Product Stewardship Assessments  DuPont is performing Product Stewardship Assessments to evaluate further the safety of the current uses of its chemicals.  As the first step in the assessment process, DuPont analyzed its chemical inventory against the following prioritization criteria: (1) Impact on the supply chain by volume; (2) Exposure potential to the users - including potential impacts on selected population; (3) Stakeholder feedback; and (4) Business Relevance.  DuPont is evaluating the high-priority chemicals using a screening level risk assessment approach. This approach uses hazard, use, and exposure information to determine the safety of these chemicals for current uses throughout the chain of commerce. 8 ENERGY
  10. 10. Reasons for a Public Safety Program » Examples in Other IndustriesDow Advocating for strong security and manufacturing safety standards and practices. Demonstrating our commitment through the global implementation of the Responsible Care Security Code. Working closely with communities and local responders so that we can all successfully respond to every type of risk. Participating in joint industry-community drills to test and constantly improve our communication and response capabilities. Enlisting the expertise of security professionals and engineers who understand how our products are made to conduct rigorous, externally-recognized, risk-based assessments of the vulnerability of all Dow manufacturing facilities worldwide. Expanding our comprehensive risk assessment programs to evaluate security for the transportation of raw materials and products. Integrating cyber security and information protection into our overall security efforts. 9 ENERGY
  11. 11. Reasons for a Public Safety Program » Examples in Other IndustriesXcel Energy Direct mail to thousands of customers offering free safety materials (workplace posters, visor cards, DVDs, etc.) through fulfillment outreach programs. Online safety resources, including e-SMART for elementary educators, students and their parents and another e-SMART site for third-party workers. Online training of local emergency responders. Advertise safety information throughout communities and on social media sites. Provide safety messages in the newsletter that is distributed with customer bills. Twice annually, provide a dedicated bill insert about gas pipeline safety that includes a scratch- and-sniff sample of mercaptan, the odorant added to natural gas to help people recognize the smell of a potential gas leak. Active leadership role in industry organizations that focus on utility public safety awareness, including several national and state pipeline safety associations for public awareness. Electricity safety demonstrations at several large events, community fairs and in classrooms. 10 ENERGY
  12. 12. Reasons for a Public Safety Program » Examples in Other IndustriesBP Community health impacts  Works to minimize the potential for community health impacts arising from BP projects and operations.  Conducted two health impact assessment courses in 2011 to train BP’s health professionals around the world in scoping and screening new projects to set the parameters for their health impact assessments.  Completed 34 health impact assessments in 2011. Wind  Most of the common concerns about wind farms can be addressed through impact studies, careful design and community consultation.  Noise: use appropriate distances from nearby residences and comply with conditions recommended by the local authorities .  Shadow flicker: factor this effect into our plans for new wind generation facilities, using precise calculations to determine where any flickering shadow would fall and for how many hours during the year.  Interference with communications signals: conduct studies to determine whether any impacts on communication signals are anticipated. If so, put appropriate mitigation measures into place. 11 ENERGY
  13. 13. Public Safety Programs » Table of ContentsTable of Contents 1 » Reasons for a Public Safety Program » 2 » Implementing a Public Safety Program 3 » Typical Results for Wind Plants 12 ENERGY
  14. 14. Implementing a Public Safety Program » Public Safety Overview Case Study for a Major IPP with Coal, Gas, and Wind Assets: Public Safety Program Definition and Boundaries Definition of Public Safety  Mitigating the risk of events involving company assets and operations that could endanger the safety of the general public.  Examples: explosion or equipment failure near site boundary, uncontrolled chemical release, transportation accident to/from site Background  Public Safety is a Corporate Goal  While site personnel are generally aware of public safety issues, a comprehensive, structured process has not yet been fully established Boundaries  Includes hazards that originate on a company site but surpass the site’s geographic boundaries to potentially contact the general public  Depending on the contract, can include hazards related to transportation of materials, equipment, fuel, and waste into or out of a company site  Includes hazards within a company site that could impact a visitor (non-company employee or contractor) or trespasser  Does not include hazards within company sites that impact employees or contractors (these are already covered by the company’s core safety program) 13 ENERGY
  15. 15. Implementing a Public Safety Program » Deliverables Public Safety Program Deliverables  A comprehensive list of all public hazards, risk assessment and mitigation plans  Criteria for evaluating public exposure  Process to identify and manage future public hazards  Communication plans for all company employees 14 ENERGY
  16. 16. Implementing a Public Safety Program » Hazard Categories Public Safety Overview – Example Hazard Categories  Explosion / Equipment Failure  Hydrogen Trailer Fire  Wind Turbine Blade Failure  High Voltage Line Failure  Steam Pipe Rupture  Gas Pipe Failure  Uncontrolled Release  Fly Ash from on-site storage  Ammonia  Wastewater  Runoff  Fuel, Chemicals, etc. (e.g., mercury leak within plant, transported by shoes outside of plant)  Wind farm snow throw  Transportation To/From Plant (depending on contract)  Fly ash  Equipment 15 ENERGY
  17. 17. Implementing a Public Safety Program » Public Safety Process Public Safety Process – Major Steps Senior Fleet Risk Mitigation Project Kickoff Site Visits Management Prioritization Planning Presentations Roles/  Site hazard  Core team  Detailed  Steering Team Responsibilities identification calibration of site description for  Managing Industry examples  Initial site identification & highest priority Committee prioritization prioritization public safety Team planning & hazards  Corporate break-out sessions  Site walk-down of  Status Operating high priority presentation to  Mitigation Committee Dry run of site Steering Team and alternatives visits hazards CEO  Scope, schedule,  Post-visit research and finalization resource requirements 16 ENERGY
  18. 18. Implementing a Public Safety Program » Public Safety Team Public Safety Team Organization Structure Managing Committee Steering Team Support/SMEs (Communications) Project Manager (Construction Projects) (Procurement) (Legal) (Corporate Public Safety) Coal Gas Wind Core Team Sub-Team Core Team Sub-Team Core Team Sub-TeamSiteLiaisons 17 ENERGY
  19. 19. Implementing a Public Safety Program » Public Safety Team Team Roles and Responsibilities Team Role Responsibilities Managing  Overall approval for Public Safety Initiative Recommendations Committee  Ultimate resource allocation for recommended projects or other changes Steering Team  Provide input and feedback on project direction and interim results  Remove barriers and allocate available resources within each of their respective organizations Project  Day-to-day management of overall project scope, schedule and budget Manager  Issue resolution  Coordination of all formal communications to Steering Team and EMG Managing Committee Support/SMEs  Provide input to Core teams on areas of your expertise as needed  Assist in development of mitigation plans  Assist in communications/roll-out activities Core Teams  Spend 60-70% of time on Public Safety initiative  Arrange and conduct site visits  Lead risk assessment (hazard identification and prioritization)  Lead risk mitigation planning for assigned fleet (coal, gas, wind) Sub-Teams  Become familiar with public safety issues in assigned areas  Provide “challenge” to core team findings  Validate core team’s risk assessment and mitigation plans Site Liaisons  Arrange and coordinate site visits  Provide input to hazard prioritization and risk mitigation plans  Lead implementation of recommendations at site-level 18 ENERGY
  20. 20. Implementing a Public Safety Program » Hazard Identification Hazard Identification/Prioritization at Site Visits “Identification of Public Hazards” tableA B C D E F G H I J K What are What are we Risk What is the doing already Conse- Proba- Risk Assumptions Additional MitigationID the specific Who is to manage quence bility Assess- Considered for Mitigation Steps Plan Needed# hazard? risks? exposed? the risk? Analysis Analysis ment Risk Assessment Recommended (Y/N)1. Envision a “generic” plant for your fleet type. If all of you are familiar with a particular plant, you may want to use it as a basis.2. Use Column B to identify potential public safety hazards that could exist at this type of plant.  BE CREATIVE! Think of the types of questions you would ask the site representatives to get them to think “outside the box” 19 ENERGY
  21. 21. Implementing a Public Safety Program » Hazard Identification Hazard Identification/Prioritization at Site Visits 3. For each hazard identified, move across columns C, D, and E to fill in the following:  What are the specific risks? (describe how the hazard could lead to public harm)  Who is exposed?  What are we already doing to mitigate? 4. Using the Risk Assessment Matrix (next page), complete columns F, G, H, and I for each hazard identified.  Consequence: I-Catastrophic, II-Critical, III-Marginal, or IV-Negligible  Probability: Frequent, Probable, Occasional, Remote, or Improbable  Risk Assessment: High, Serious, Medium, Low (determined by matrix) 5. Identify and list recommended mitigation steps in column J.  For any hazards with an assessment of “high” or “serious”, a formal risk mitigation plan will be needed.  Other identified risks will require risk mitigation steps to be identified and tracked at the site level. 20 ENERGY
  22. 22. Implementing a Public Safety Program » Hazard Prioritization Hazard Identification/Prioritization at Site Visits Risk Assessment Matrix Consequence Categories CONSEQUENCE Consequence II II II III III IV IV Public Impact Interpretation Likelihood of CATASTROPHIC CRITICAL MARGINAL NEGLIGIBLE Consideration OCCURANCE or Death or Acute/Chronic Minor Exposure EXPOUSRE Permanent Injury I Significant Public • Evacuation of large scale Disability required Disruption, Extended National • Extended nation news coverage MEDIUM or International SERIOUS Take Remedial • Event may impact largerP Media Coverage community Frequent HIGH HIGH High Priority Action atR Likely to Occur Operation not Operation not Remedial Appropriate • Closure longer than 24 hoursO Repeatedly permissible permissible Action Time of a major roadB MEDIUM II Small Public • Evacuation of smaller scaleA SERIOUS Take Remedial Disruption, One requiredB Probable HIGH HIGH High Priority Action at Likely to Occur Operation not Operation not Remedial Appropriate Time Nation or • Local news coverageI Several Times permissible permissible Action Time • Event may impact a mediumL Extended Local sized community MEDIUM LOW Media CoverageI SERIOUS Take Remedial Risk Acceptable • Less than 24 hour closure of aT Occasional HIGH High Priority Action at : Remedial secondary roadwayY Likely to Occur Operation not Remedial Appropriate Action Sometime permissible Action Time Discretionary III Public Complaints, • Event may impact a small One Time Local community MEDIUM MEDIUM LOW Media Coverage • less than 24 hour closure of a SERIOUS Take Remedial Take Remedial Risk Acceptable secondary roadway Remote High Priority Action at Action at : Remedial Not Likely to Remedial Appropriate Appropriate Action • Temporary, e.g. less than 1 Occur Action Time Time Discretionary hour closure of public transportation Improbable MEDIUM LOW LOW LOW Very Unlikely- Take Remedial Risk Acceptable Risk Acceptable Risk Acceptable IV Public Complaint; • Minor inconvenience to a few may assume Action at : Remedial : Remedial : Remedial people exposure will Appropriate Action Action Action No Media Coverage not happen Time Discretionary Discretionary Discretionary • Temporary side road closing 21 ENERGY
  23. 23. Implementing a Public Safety Program » Mitigation Plan Highlights Highlights of Mitigation Plans/Action Items  Coal  Option 1: Develop inspect plans for Plant A’s stacks  Option 2: Demolish stack partially or completely  Complete piping integrity testing on the gas pipe  Gas  Revise the Partnership Management of Change (MOC) procedure  Revise the DOT Gas Pipeline Procedure Manual to incorporate Public Awareness Effectiveness Evaluation Program  Wind  Modify turbine logic to prevent auto restarts during freezing weather where possible  Increase public awareness including additional signage and prepare generic brochure describing all public hazards 22 ENERGY
  24. 24. Implementing a Public Safety Program » Risk Assessment MethodologyIntegration of ERM/ORM Risk Assessment Methodology Event with Potential B to Affect Objectives S r p o r k a e i n Make New Supply n S Shoelaces Trip and Wrist Pads e h Available Fall d o e W l r a i c e s Risk Treatments/Controls t Mitigation Plan Underlying Risk Factors Outcomes/ and Conditions Impacts on Objectives • The risk factor was the broken shoelace. • The risk event was the trip and subsequent fall. • The consequence was the sprained wrist. 23 ENERGY
  25. 25. Implementing a Public Safety Program » Action Plan Action Plan  Execution of Action Items  Provide initial site assessment to all sites  Track action items monthly during Ops Committee Meeting  Public Safety Integration  Incorporate public safety assessment in ERM and business planning processes  Incorporate public safety assessment for new projects in development  Develop communication plan for all employees  Raise employee awareness  Educate site personnel on risk assessment methodology 24 ENERGY
  26. 26. Implementing a Public Safety Program » Plant Walk-Through Public Safety Integration  Completed Public Risk Evaluation to all sites to be used as a basis for subsequent annual assessment  Modify Project Justification and Management of Change forms  Create safety committee task for annual site assessment  Modify current business planning process to include public safety  Develop lesson plan and train relevant employees on public risk assessment and mitigation  Develop communication plan for all employees 25 ENERGY
  27. 27. Public Safety Programs » Table of ContentsTable of Contents 1 » Reasons for a Public Safety Program 2 » Implementing a Public Safety Program » 3 » Typical Results for Wind Plants 26 ENERGY
  28. 28. Typical Results for Wind Plants » Public Risk Assessment 20 separate and unique public risks were identified and assessed across the wind fleet (560 total risks).  Two (2) High public risks  Lattice tower access – meteorological towers and turbine towers  Temporary meteorological tower supports (guy wires)  Two (2) Serious public risks  Ice throw  Turbine equipment failure  Other common risks include:  Public access  BOP equipment failures  Crane use 27 ENERGY
  29. 29. Typical Results for Wind Plants » Public Risk Assessment Public risks include lattice tower access, met towers guy wires, ice throw, and turbine failure. Easy Access to Tower Hard to see Guy Wires Ice Build Up on Blade Proximity to public roads 28 ENERGY
  30. 30. Typical Results for Wind Plants » Hazards and Mitigation PlansHazards and mitigation plans Hazard Mitigation Plan  Modify turbine logic to prevent auto restarts during freezing weather Formation of ice on turbine  Install warning signs where possible to 1 blades alert public about potential ice throw  Ensure weather alert is available to site O&M managers and instrumentation techs  Install visible sleeves on the guy wires on Permanent and temporary met 2 temporary met towers. Remove met tower tower access if possible  Add barriers to prevent public access to lattice towers 3 Lattice turbine tower access.  Install warning signs on the lattice towers to alert general public about the hazards  Develop met tower (permanent and 4 Temporary met tower collapse temporary) maintenance and inspection guidelines  Public education 5 Blade failure  Inspection program Risk assessment ratings: High Serious Medium Low 29 ENERGY
  31. 31. Typical Results for Wind Plants » Hazards and Mitigation PlansHazards and mitigation plans (cont.) Hazard Mitigation Plan  Educate the OEM 6 Spinner hatch detachment  Inspection program Gen-tie and overhead line failure  Inspection program; dependent on 7 and inadvertent contact. location Padmount and main transformer  Install warning flag poles on padmount 8 failure transformers or barriers  Install warning signs for authorized entry Turbines in close proximity to 9 on string roads and/or gates on roads public roads. leading to towers Underground collection system  Install additional signage of buried 10 (excavations by landowners). collection system Delivery to wind site of heavy  Contract should specify FOB site, placing 11 equipment during construction. risk on supplier or transporter Risk assessment ratings: High Serious Medium Low 30 ENERGY
  32. 32. Typical Results for Wind Plants » Hazards and Mitigation PlansHazards and mitigation plans (cont.) Mitigation Plan – General Items Prepare generic brochure describing all public hazards at wind sites and distribute them during community events or local public places Review and revise "Wind Turbine Specifications" to incorporate mitigation plans for the public hazards identified during the initiative Each wind site establish communication protocol with local emergency responders and educate them on hazards Create safety committee tasks for each wind sites for annual public safety risk assessment 31 ENERGY
  33. 33. SummarySummary  Power generation facilities present a wide range of risks that could affect the public in many ways, sometimes catastrophic  Public safety programs and initiatives are a means for owners and operators of power plants to identify the hazards and mitigate the risks in a systematic process  Defining of roles and responsibilities  Research and planning  Site visits to identify hazards  Calibration and prioritization of hazards  Development of mitigation plans  Wind plants have a variety of risks, mostly predictable  Typical high risks include lattice tower access, met towers guy wires  Typical serious risks include ice throw, and turbine failure 32 ENERGY
  34. 34. KeyCONTACTS Bruce Hamilton| Director | Energy Navigant +1.503.476.2711 bruce.hamilton@navigant.com©2010 Navigant Consulting, Inc.©2013 33Confidential and proprietary. Do not distribute or copy. ENERGY