html5-img
1 / 30

Columbia River Lock Users Meeting

US Army Corps of Engineers. Portland District. Columbia River Lock Users Meeting. Portland District Corps of Engineers August 14, 2007. Critical Infrastructure Ranking Model. For the Columbia – Snake River Waterways Transportation System Laura Hicks, Chief Planning Branch

soren
Télécharger la présentation

Columbia River Lock Users Meeting

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. US Army Corps of Engineers Portland District Columbia River Lock Users Meeting Portland District Corps of Engineers August 14, 2007

  2. Critical Infrastructure Ranking Model For the Columbia – Snake River Waterways Transportation System Laura Hicks, Chief Planning Branch August 14, 2007

  3. Three Major Rehab Studies UnderwayColumbia/Snake System • MCR Jetties • 1,800 feet lost on North Jetty and • 5,000 feet lost on South Jetty John Day Horizontal cracking on monolith bases Lower Monumental Downstream lift gate

  4. Our Navigation System • Uniqueness of the system and national metrics • OMBill Metric of $/tons • Multipurpose projects • Number 1 national export system for grain • System reliability is critical to users • Transportation of juvenile salmon

  5. Budgeting Concerns • MVD ranking system’s main performance measures are commercial tonnage and outage time –metrics not very applicable to Columbia-Snake River System

  6. Logic DiagramColumbia/Snake System

  7. Logic Diagram ProcessColumbia/Snake System • Four broad ranking categories relate roughly to 4 FY08 funding increments and similar to other river system approach • Decision points evolved from discussions with the Operating Projects as well as internal team discussions • Safety and Reliability were determined to be the most critical when evaluating a budget item • Some adverse results not immediate (i.e., eventual dredging shutdowns to due loss of disposal site because of environmental non-compliance) • Found need to add ‘Essential Information Requirement’ to address items considered critical but ranked lower than critical in original diagram – MCR jetty monitoring, Dam Safety monitoring, hydrographic condition surveys all moved to ‘Urgent & Compelling’ based on results of applying updated logic diagram

  8. Columbia/Snake System Results • FY08 rankings compared to FY09 logic diagram results • Mostly consistent • Rehab reports ranked higher • Some (mostly smaller $) maintenance items ranked lower • Urgent and Compelling • Fairly Consistent with EC guidance for level 1 funding

  9. NAVIGATION Columbia/Snake

  10. Urgent and Compelling • Channel River Channel Improvements Project FY08, and FY09 • Lower Monumental Downstream Gate - interim repairs FY08, and FY09 • Lower Monumental Major Rehab FY08, FY09, and FY10

  11. Critical • MCR Major Rehab 08, 09, 10, 11, 12 • Bonneville Dam • Swing Bridge Bearing Replacement 08, 09, 10, 11, 12 • Tainter Valve Repair 08, 09, 10, 11, 12 • Remove Upstream Debris 08, 09, 10, 11, 12 • Navlock Chamber #1 Decommissioning 08, 09, 10, 11, 12 • The Dalles Dam • North Downstream Gates Pintel Bearing Replacement 08 • Upstream Gate Cables 08 • Miter Gate Gear Boxes 09, 10 • Tainter Valve Repairs 09, 10, 11 • Valve Repair 09, 10, 11, 12

  12. Critical • John Day Dam • E&D for Monolith Structural Repair 08, 09, 10, 11, 12 • John DayMajor Rehab 08, 09, 10, 11, 12 • Interim Tainter Valve Repairs 09, 10 • Tainter Valve Repair 10, 11, 12 • McNary Dam • HHS Inspections 08, 09, 10, 11, 12 • Ice Harbor Dam • PSMP 08, 09, 10, 11, 12 • HHS Inspections 08, 09, 10, 11, 12

  13. Critical • Little Goose Dam • PSMP 08, 09, 10, 11, 12 • HHS Inspections 08, 09, 10, 11, 12 • Lower Monumental Dam • PSMP 08, 09, 10, 11, 12 • HHS Inspections 08, 09, 10, 11, 12 • Lower Granite Dam • PSMP 08, 09, 10, 11, 12

  14. US Army Corps of Engineers Portland District The Dalles Navigation LockMiter Gate Pintle Repair Pintle Lance A. Helwig, P.E. Project Manager

  15. What’s the problem? • March 07 lock outage (14 d) • Cracks in both miter gates near pintle, north gate worse • Lower 30’ not mitering • Undesirable load path • Performed temporary weld repairs • May 07 – current • Vibrations & shock loading • Monitoring situation (visual) • Did cracks reopen? Propagated? • Did bolts shear off again (2005)? • Lower Granite (NWW)

  16. What needs to be done now? • Visual inspection of pintle area (diving/submersible won’t work) • Install instruments, strain gages & accelerometers • Lock outage • 25 Oct (12 hr), sweep sills • 29 Oct – 5 Nov (7d) • Objectives • Possible minor repairs • Collect data for interim repair in Mar 08 • Ensure gate safe for continued use • Develop contingency plans (as appropriate)

  17. What’s the overall plan?

  18. On-going Challenges • Currently blind (underwater), need instruments • Funding: new problem, not part of 08 budget • Unscheduled outages  impacts to river users • Commo Plan, need to work w/ industry & stakeholders (periodic updates) • Upstream lock gate • Vibrating • Investigating problem

  19. US Army Corps of Engineers Portland District The Dalles Navigation LockMiter Gate Pintle Repair

  20. US Army Corps of Engineers Portland District Bay 6/7 Wall Bay 8/9 Wall The Dalles DamSpillwall Extension Update

  21. TDA Spillwall ExtensionUpdate • Mar 07: invited river users to ERDC • Reps from Shaver, Tidewater and Foss • Bay 6/7 wall – no navigation impacts • Jul 07: wall moved to Bay 8/9  reduced gas • Sep/Oct 07: model 8/9 wall • ERDC (H. Parks) run model tug • Expects no impacts to navigation • Corps will send out model results to river users • Determine if river user trip is necessary • Spillwall schedule: • Complete P&S: May 08 • Award contract: Jul 08 • Complete construction: Apr 09

  22. John Day Major Rehabilitation Mark Dasso, Project Manager Doug Clarke, Chief, Progams and Project Management

  23. Movement During Lockage 0.5” 0.7” Movement During Lockage Monolith Cracks

  24. North Wall Monolith Cracking M27 M29 Leaking lift lines

  25. 2003 Emergency Upstream Gate Repair, $4M

  26. 2004 Emergency Lock Repair, $16M

  27. 2007 Downstream Gate Wire Rope Replacement, $1 M

  28. Future Tainter Valve Replacement

  29. SPRA RecommendationsJohn Day Lock and Dam • Perform a Major Rehab Study asap • 3-5 Years, $6M Study • Design / P&S, 1-3 Years • Implement Repairs, 3-5 Years • Funding from the Dam Safety “Wedge” • Scoping to begin in 4th qtr FY07 • $1M Funding in $FY08

  30. FY 07 & 08 Federal Budget Justifications • Commercial Waterborne traffic (tonnage & system ton-miles)Coos Bay, Columbia – Snake System • Risk & Reliability of System • Avg. O&M $ per Ton • Other Considerations: Refuge & Safety, Subsistence, National security, Commercial Fishing.All the rest • Remaining Items – R&D, waterborne performance data • Remarks, Purpose, Consequences Key Factors in Navigation O&M Budget Ranking

More Related