Dam safety |
Safety in the spotlight
Independent assessment, improved communication and investment initiatives are hitting the headlines in the dam safety sector.
THE WAY THE US operates its dams across three federal agencies is “appropriate and sound” but can benefit from some areas of improvement, according to a year-long independent study to assess the use of risk-informed dam safety practices. Triggered by broad industry concerns about dam safety following the 2017 spillway failure at California’s Oroville Dam, the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), alongside the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the Bureau of Reclamation, contracted a panel of external dam experts to review their practices at the direction of US congress. “Many agencies including USACE took a much closer look at how we have been evaluating safety at our dams. Congress was also interested in what the Oroville incident meant for the nation and for federal dams specifically. They asked USACE to coordinate an independent review of the risk policies and methods used to assess risk across the three major federal agencies that own, operate, or regulate dams in the US. It was congress’ intent to inform improvements broadly in national dam safety practices,” explained Nate Snorteland, Risk Management Centre’s Director whose work falls under USACE’s Institute for Water Resources. The panel included a broad range of experience
22 | August 2023 |
www.waterpowermagazine.com
and expertise, encompassed individuals from the US, the Netherlands, and Australia, and included academics and private sector consultants. In addition to evaluating agencies’ use of risk in dam safety and regulation, the panel also considered how dam safety practices are affected by human factors, as well as how risk-informed analysis in other industries may be applicable to dam safety practices. Overall, the review showed that the programmes for dam safety in the three agencies are appropriate and sound. Additionally, the agencies’ implementation of risk-informed decision-making are consistent with federal guidance despite differing levels of dam safety programme development between them. The panel felt the level of cooperation between agencies and progress made by the agencies over the last ten years was important and had improved safety overall. The report also highlighted issues that warrant further attention. Specifically, it was recommended that the agencies incorporate practices used in other industries more fully, such as incorporating human factors into risk methods. The team also recommended agencies fully calibrate models used in risk analyses and employ expert judgments to support safety assessments. Other recommendations of note
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53
