Electromagnetic Pulse (29 page)

Individual infrastructure systems have many similar electronically based control and monitoring functions. The primary features of EMP attack mitigation in each infrastructure include elements of protection of critical functions, identifying where damage within the system is located, dispatch/allocation of resources to allow for timely restoration and development of operational procedures including simulation of both individual and interacting infrastructures, training, testing, and governance. This requires test and evaluation of both existing and future systems to identify weak spots subject to EMP damage and focus mitigation activities accordingly. EMP protection thus has a substantial aspect focused on individual functioning units within each system that contains electronic components, although not necessarily on the individual electronic subcomponents of these units themselves. These units include distributed Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) modules, mobile communicators, radios, embedded control computers, etc. New units can be EMP-hardened for a very small fraction of the cost of the non-hardened item, e.g., 1% to 3% of cost, if hardening is done at the time the unit is designed and manufactured. In contrast, retrofitting existing functional components is potentially an order of magnitude more expensive and should be done only for critical system units. It is important to note, however, that for protection to remain functional, it must be tested and maintained in its operational mode with rigor and discipline.

TRAINING, EVALUATING, RED TEAMING, AND PERIODICALLY REPORTING TO THE CONGRESS

Identifying an EMP attack, understanding the state of the system after attack, developing and implementing plans for system restoration, and having operators and others in positions of authority and responsibility trained to recognize and respond effectively are elements of strategy that are common to managing the effects of EMP for each of the Nation’s critical infrastructure components. Conducting and evaluating the results of training, simulations, tests, and Red Team activities, and periodically reporting the results to senior executive branch leaders, the Congress, and the public are important elements of being well-prepared for EMP attack, which in turn will sharply reduce the incentives for conduct of such an attack.

DEFINING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSIBILITY AND AUTHORITY TO ACT

Governance of the critical infrastructures such as electrical power systems and communications is presently distributed among statutory governmental entities at the federal, state, regional, and municipal levels, as well as among a variety of non-governmental entities. A multiplicity of statutory bodies, private companies, associations, and individual owners also participate in determining decisions and actions. Nevertheless, the process is coordinated, albeit loosely, to produce normal efficient, reliable, and high quality service that is the envy of the world—in a peacetime environment.

A terrorist threat—let alone a terrorist attack—is outside the ambit of normal governance of the key national infrastructures. In dealing with such threats, the Department of Homeland Security has the unique and sole responsibility and authority to govern the specific actions and involved parties within the US, including requesting enabling Congressional funding as appropriate and necessary. DHS must interact with other governmental institutions and the private sector in defining liability, responsibility and funding in order to enable private and government facilities, such as independent power plants, to contribute their capability in a time of national need, yet not interfere with market creation and operation to the maximum extent practical.

Industry associations, system owners/providers, private consultants, and universities all will be able to contribute useful levels of knowledge and skills. DHS is responsible for making the prudent trade-offs within each mitigation activity between performance, risk, schedule, and cost in relation to consequent system protection and then-expected risk in order to achieve maximum protection. For example, some actions taken to protect a system from an EMP attack may diminish the reliability or quality of that system’s normal commercial performance, while other actions may improve the performance.

As an example of resources readily available to DHS with respect to the electric system, the North American Reliability Counsel (NERC) and the Electric Power Research Institute are well-positioned to provide much of the support needed in regard to the EMP threat. Working closely with industry and these institutions, the DHS should provide for the necessary capability to control the national bulk electricity supply system in order to protect critical services, minimize its self-destruction in the event of an EMP attack, and recover its normal capabilities as rapidly and effectively as possible thereafter.

RECOGNIZING THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR SHARED BENEFITS

Most of the following initiatives and actions the Commission recommends militate against more than an EMP attack. The protection and/or rapid restoration of critical infrastructures in the civilian sector from an EMP attack also will be effective against other types of infrastructure disruptions, such as attacks aimed at directly damaging or destroying key components of the electrical system, and natural or accidental large-scale disruptions are also significantly mitigated by these same initiatives. Some of these steps also enhance reliability and quality of critical infrastructures, which is a major direct benefit to the US economy and to our way of life.

CONDUCTING RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Very little research and development addressing EMP-related system response protection and recovery issues has been done for more than a decade. Conducting research to better understand infrastructure system effects and developing cost-effective solutions to manage these effects will be important to understanding the implications of the rapid evolution of electronics and electrical systems, and their growing role in controlling and operating modern critical infrastructure.

ELECTRIC POWER INFRASTRUCTURE

NATURE OF THE PROBLEM

Electric power is integral to the functioning of electronic components. For highly reliable systems such as commercial and military telecommunications, electric power usually comes from batteries (in the short term), local emergency power supplies (generally over time-intervals of less then 72 hours), and electricity delivered through the local electrical utility (“power” lines in the home, office and factory). Local emergency power supplies are limited by supplies of stored fuel. Increasingly, locally stored fuel in buildings and cities is being reduced for fire safety and environmental pollution reasons, so that the emergency generation availability without refueling is limited.

Geomagnetic storms, a natural phenomenon driven by the solar wind, may, by a different physical mechanism, produce ground-induced currents (GIC) that can affect the electrical system in a manner similar to the E3 component of EMP. Disruptions caused by geomagnetic storms, such as the collapse of Quebec Hydro grid during the geomagnetic storm of 1989, have occurred many times

Depending on the explosive yield of the nuclear weapon used, EMP-induced GIC may be several times larger than that produced by the average geomagnetic storm, and may even be comparable to those expected to arise in the largest geomagnetic storm ever observed. It may also occur over an area not normally affected by historic geomagnetic storms.

The North American economy and the functioning of the society as a whole are critically dependent on the availability of electricity, as needed, where and when needed. The electric power system in the US and interconnected areas of Canada and Mexico is outstanding in terms of its ability to meet load demands with high quality and reliable electricity at reasonable cost. However, over the last decade or two, there has been relatively little large-capacity electric transmission constructed and the generation additions that have been made, while barely adequate, have been increasingly located considerable distances from load for environmental, political, and economic reasons. As a result, the existing National electrical system not infrequently operates at or very near local limits on its physical capacity to move power from generation to load. Therefore, the slightest insult or upset to the system can cause functional collapse affecting significant numbers of people, businesses, and manufacturing. It is not surprising that a single EMP attack may well encompass and degrade at least 70% of the Nation’s electrical service, all in one instant.

The impact of such EMP is different and far more catastrophic than that effected by historic blackouts, in three primary respects:

1. The EMP impact is virtually instantaneous and occurs simultaneously over a much larger geographic area. Generally, there are neither precursors nor warning, and no opportunity for human-initiated protective action. The early-time EMP component is the “electromagnetic shock” that disrupts or damages electronics-based control systems and sensors, communication systems, protective systems, and control computers, all of which are used to control and bring electricity from generation sites to customer loads in the quantity and quality needed. The E1 pulse also causes some insulator flashovers in the lower-voltage electricity distribution systems (those found in suburban neighborhoods, in rural areas and inside cities), resulting in immediate broad-scale loss-of-load. Functional collapse of the power system is almost definite over the entire affected region, and may cascade into adjacent geographic areas.

2. The middle-time EMP component is similar to lightning in its time-dependence but is far more widespread in its character although of lower amplitude—essentially a great many lightning-type insults over a large geographic area which might obviate protection. The late-time EMP component couples very efficiently to long electrical transmission lines and forces large direct electrical currents to flow in them, although they are designed to carry only alternating currents. The energy levels thereby concentrated at the ends of these long lines can become large enough to damage major electrical power system components. The most significant risk is synergistic, because the middle and late-time pulses follow after the early-time pulse, which can impair or destroy protective and control features of the power grid. Then the energies associated with the middle and late-time EMP thus may pass into major system components and damage them. It may also pass electrical surges or fault currents into the loads connected to the system, creating damage in national assets that are not normally considered part of the infrastructure per se. Net result is recovery times of months to years, instead of days to weeks.

3. Proper functioning of the electrical power system requires communication systems, financial systems, transportation systems, and—for much of the generation—continuous or nearly continuous supply of various fuels. However, the fuel-supply, communications, transportation, and financial infrastructures would be simultaneously disabled or degraded in an EMP attack and are dependent upon electricity for proper functioning. For electrical system recovery and restoration of service, the availability of these other infrastructures is essential. The longer the outage, the more problematic, and uncertainty-fraught the recovery will be.

The recent cascading outage of August 14, 2003, is an example of a single failure compounded by system weaknesses and human mistakes. It also provides an example of the effectiveness of protective equipment. However, with EMP there are multiple insults coupled with the disabling of protective devices simultaneously over an extremely broad region—damage to the system is likely and recovery slow.

RECOMMENDED MITIGATION AND RESPONSIBILITY

The electrical system is designed to break into “islands” of roughly matching generation and load when a portion of the system receives a severe electrical insult. This serves both to protect electricity supply in the non-impacted regions and to allow for the stable island-systems to be used to “restart” the island(s) that have lost functionality. With EMP, the magnitude, speed, and multi-faceted nature of the insult, its broad geographic reach, along with the number of simultaneous insults, and the adverse synergies all are likely to result in a situation where the islanding scheme will fail to perform as effectively as intended, if at all. Since the impacted geographic area is large, restoring the system from the still-functioning perimeter regions would take a great deal of time, possibly weeks to months at best. Indeed, the only practical way to restart much of the impacted electrical system may be with generation that can be started without an external power source. This is called “black start” generation and primarily includes hydroelectric (including pumped storage), geothermal, and independent diesel generators of modest capacity.

The recommended actions will substantially improve service and recovery during “normal” large-scale blackouts, and will critically enable recovery under EMP circumstances.

PROTECTION

It is impractical to protect the entire electrical power system from damage by an EMP attack. There are too many components of too many different types, manufacturers, designs, and vulnerabilities within too many jurisdictional entities, and the cost to retrofit is too great. Widespread functional collapse of the electrical power system in the area affected by EMP is possible in the face of a geographically broad EMP attack, with even a relatively few unprotected components in place. However, it is practical to reduce to low levels the probability of widespread damage to major power system components that require long times to replace. This will enable significantly improved recovery times, since it avoids the loss of long lead-time and critical components. It is important to protect the ability of the system to fragment gracefully into islands, to the extent practical in the particular EMP circumstance. This approach is cost-efficient and can leverage efforts to improve reliability of bulk electricity supply and enhance its security against the broader range of threats.