“LNG Security Vulnerability Assessment”

1. “LNG Security Vulnerability Assessment”

2. National Issues • Public concerns terrorism is a major factor in LNG import terminal siting • LNG industry does not have a standard security vulnerability assessment methodology to help analyze and explain these risks consistently.

3. National Issues • Security could be more uniformly assessed and risks more clearly understood and compared. • This paper examines the issues of making security risk decisions in the LNG industry and the requirements and industry methods available.

4. Overall Issue • US does not have a common SVA framework for decision-making by Government and private sector • Lack of common risk terminology • Lack of guidance on threat assumption • Lack of guidance on consequence assumptions/analysis • Lack of consensus on risk assessment/acceptable risk criteria • Note – DHS RAMCAP project and DOE/FERC guidance addressing these issues • In the mean time, companies are encouraged to develop their own guidelines

5. LNG SVA Requirements

6. RAMCAP Concept Development • Purpose: • Develop a common risk-based method for comparing security risk across sectors of US infrastructures and key resources • Determine national, regional vulnerabilities • Determine need for national security upgrades and specific infrastructure upgrades • Allocate Federal and private sector resources based on risk • Limitation: • Not a complete assessment – most critical only

7. Step 1: Assets Characterization Step 2: Threat Assessment Step 3: Vulnerability Analysis Step 4: Risk Assessment Step 5: Countermeasures Analysis API SVA Methodology

8. Example WSA Risk Matrix

9. 33 CFR Part 105 Requirements • The FSA report requirements under § 105.305 (d), include: • On-Scene Survey; • Existing Security Measures; • Vulnerabilities; • Security Measures to Address Vulnerabilities; • Key Facility Operations; and • List of Identified Weaknesses.

10. 33 CFR Part 105 -Security Threats • Damage to or destruction of the facility or of a vessel moored at the facility • Hijacking or seizure of a vessel moored at the facility or of persons on board • Tampering with cargo, essential equipment or systems, or stores of a vessel • Unauthorized access or use • Smuggling dangerous substances and devices • Use of a vessel moored at the facility to carry those intending to cause a security incident • Use of a vessel moored at the facility as a weapon or as a means to cause damage or destruction • Blockage of entrances, locks, and approaches • CBNRE attack;

11. Waterway Suitability Assessment (NVIC 05-05) Scope of WSA: • Address transportation of LNG from LNG tanker’s entrance into U.S. territorial waters, through its transit to/from LNG terminal (receiving) facility, and include operations at vessel/facility interface. • Address navigational safety issues and port security issues. • Identify relevant safety and security issues from broad viewpoint of impact to entire port, • Provide a detailed review of specific points of concern along LNG tanker’s proposed transit route.

12. WSA (cont.) References for WSA: • USCG’s “Risk-Based Decision-Making,” COMDTINST M16010.3 (series). • USCG’s “Risk-Based Decision-Making Guidelines,” 3rd Edition (http://www.uscg.mil/hg/g-m/risk/e-guidelines/RBDMGuide.htm) • Local Area Maritime Security Plan (AMSP). • Sandia National Laboratories Report SAND2004-6258, “Guidance on Risk Analysis and Safety Implications of a Large Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Spill Over Water,” December 2004.

13. Contents of NVIC 05-05 (cont.) Encl. 3: Risk Management Quick-Reference Tool • Contains Sensitive Security Information (SSI), not subject to public disclosure. • Describes suggested attack scenarios and corresponding risk management strategies that are • recommended or • suggested

14. WSA (cont.) Outline of WSA: • Port Characterization • Characterization of LNG Facility and LNG Tanker Route • Risk Assessments (Safety and Security) • Risk Management Strategies • Resource Needs for Safety, Security and Response • Conclusions and Recommendations

15. WSA (cont.) 1. Port Characterization: • Area Maritime Security Plan (AMSP) as basis. • Summary of port environment. • Evaluation of impact of proposed LNG operations on entire port community to assess resources needed to provide a safe and secure environment.

16. WSA (cont.) • Characterization of LNG Facility and LNG Tanker Route: (cont.) • Contents: (cont.) • Proposed LNG tanker characteristics and the frequency of deliveries. • Application of the “Zones of Concern” applied to entire length of transit. • Population density for areas impacted. • Critical infrastructure & key assets list (e.g. from AMSP).

17. WSA (cont.) • Characterization of LNG Facility and LNG Tanker Route: (cont.) • Contents: (cont.) • Density and character of marine traffic along each segment of waterway • Shore-side community demographics and important structures • Maneuvers required to berth LNG vessels and their potential impacts to other traffic in waterway.

18. WSA (cont.) • Risk Assessment (Safety & Security): • Key assumptions identified and documented • Appropriate risk assessment methodology • Identification of events/conditions that could trigger a release of LNG: • Unintentional or accidental events (e.g. collisions, groundings, spills) for safety risk assessment • Intentional events (e.g. terrorist act, sabotage) for security risk assessment

19. WSA - Route • Characterization of LNG Facility and LNG Tanker Route: • Area Maritime Security Plan (AMSP) as basis. • Focus on entire length of tanker’s route, divided into logical segments. • Consultation with harbor pilots. • Contents: • Information listed in 33 CFR 127.007 & 127.009. • Details of the proposed LNG facility waterfront configuration and physical construction.

20. WSA -Segments Section 2: High Vessel Traffic Section 3: High Population Density Section 4: Positioning to Terminal Section 1: Traffic Separation Scheme Section 5: Offloading at Terminal Inbound Outbound

21. Maritime Safety Hazards

22. Two concentric isotherms 37.5 k W/m2 and 5 kW/m2 Zone 1 - 500 m Zone 2 - 1600 m Illustration of Zones of Concern (Intentional Release)(NVIC 05-05, Enclosure 11)(Not to Scale)

23. Illustration of Zones of Concern (Intentional Release)(NVIC 05-05, Enclosure 11)(Not to Scale) Zone 3 - 3500 m

24. 3500 m 1600 m 500m Illustration of Zones of Concern (Intentional Release)(NVIC 05-05, Enclosure 11)(Not to Scale)

25. WSA (cont.) • Risk Assessment: (cont.) • Analysis of individual safety and security risks of proposed LNG operations, in terms of: • Probabilities • Consequences • Vulnerabilities • Threats • Sensitivity analysis

27. WSA (cont.) • Risk Assessment: (cont.) Security Risk Assessment: (cont.) • Vulnerability Assessment: • Addresses the likelihood that an attack will succeed. • Identify exposures that might be exploited to ensure the success of an attempted terrorist attack or related threat. • Assess vulnerabilities to vessel, facility and port community: • System vulnerabilities • Asset vulnerabilities

28. WSA (cont.) • Risk Assessment: (cont.) Security Risk Assessment: (cont.) • Threat Assessment: • Addresses the likelihood of an attack. • Evaluate ways in which particular people and property (i.e. targets) may be attacked. • Identify specific attack scenarios based on Sandia Report throughout the waterway. • Identify areas in the port (and throughout the waterway from which an attack could be launched.

29. WSA (cont.) • Risk Management Strategies: • Identification of all possible, and evaluation of all appropriate, risk management strategies (measures) for identified areas of risk (using the matrix form the Risk Management Quick-Reference Tool available from the COTP/FMSC as a minimum. • Identification of ways to prevent an identified accident or attack from occurring • Development of measures to mitigate the consequences should a release of LNG occur.

30. WSA (cont.) • Risk Management Strategies: (cont.) • Addresses risk management measures for: • Safety • Security • Response • Consideration of scalable risk management measures to address LNG operations at elevated Maritime Security (MARSEC) levels for both: • Specific threats or causal events • Non-specific threats or causal events

31. WSA (cont.) • Resource Needs for Safety, Security and Response: • Identification and tabulation of options for resources needed to implement all proposed risk management strategies • Identification of resources currently available • Use of “gap analysis” to evaluate new resources and how these might be obtained.

32. WSA (cont.) • Conclusions and Recommendations: • Summary of port safety and security risk implications of introducing LNG operations in the port. • Summary of resource gap analysis to identify key resources needs, new resources required

33. WSA (cont.) • WSA is a useful framework for analyzing navigational, safety, and security issues • It includes involvement of key stakeholders and addresses substantial issues in a risk-based framework • It proved effective in identifying vulnerabilities and in defining resource allocation

34. WSA (cont.) • WSA benefits from a more specific process to make risk-based decisions • The applicant needs to define this process in cooperation with stakeholders sufficient to make necessary risk and resource allocation decisions

35. LNG SVA Needs • The areas needing structure/definition in LNG SVAs include: • More defined risk-based assessment process • Threat definition • Consequence assumptions and definition • Population exposure assumptions • Vulnerability definition • Emergency response and evacuation assumptions • Mitigation and effectiveness assumptions • It is recommended to adopt a standard methodology for all needs for uniformity