Dam Safety Policy for Spillway Design Floods
Publication: Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice
Volume 122, Issue 4
Abstract
Dam safety risks are abhorred by the public due to the high impact of dam failures and the subjective way that people perceive risk. Therefore dam safety policies are extremely conservative, often ignoring the cost-benefit question. Unnecessary expenditures made consequent to this are unknown, but would seem to be significant. Cost-benefit issues need a more thorough airing, from both a professional and public perspective. This paper examines different approaches to selection of the spillway design flood (SDF). Opinions concerning dam safety issues were solicited from the heads of the dam safety units in the 50 states. It was found that most states pattern their SDF requirements after the Corps of Engineers guidelines developed pursuant to the National Dam Inspection Act of 1972. Dam safety professionals generally do not believe that the probable maximum flood (PMF) is unreasonably conservative, nor do they believe that existing spillway criteria are too conservative. Further, even though ASCE and the National Research Council endorse the risk analysis concept, it is not popular and is little-used.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
ASCE Committee on Surface Water Hydrology and Task Committee on Spillway Design Flood Selection. (1988). “Evaluation procedures for hydrologic safety of dams.”Rep., ASCE, New York, N.Y.
2.
Association of State Dam Safety Officials (ASDSO). (1990). 1989 report on review of state non-federal dam safety programs (FEMA-188), Lexington, Ky.
3.
Association of State Dam Safety Officials. (1992). 1991 supplement to the 1989 report on review of state non-federal dam safety programs (FEMA-231), Lexington, Ky.
4.
Association of State Dam Safety Officials. (1995). 1994 update report on review of state non-federal dam safety programs (draft), Lexington, Ky.
5.
Banks, H. O.(1964). “Hydrology of spillway design: introduction.”J. Hydr. Div., ASCE, 90(3), 235–237.
6.
Bowles, D. S. (1990). “Risk assessment in dam safety decisionmaking.”Risk-Based Decision Making in Water Resour.: Proc., 4th Conf. sponsored by the Engrg. Found., Y. Y. Haimes and E. Z. Stakhiv, eds., ASCE, New York, N.Y., 254–283.
7.
Bradford, H., and Powers, M. B.(1995). “Federal risk analysis criticized.”ENR, 234(17), 9.
8.
Buehler, B.(1975). “Monetary values of life and health.”J. Hydr. Div., ASCE, 101(1), 29–47.
9.
Chow, V. T., ed. (1964). Handbook of applied hydrology . McGraw-Hill, New York, N.Y.
10.
Cudworth, A. G. Jr. (1989). Flood hydrology manual . U.S. Government Printing Office, Denver, Colo.
11.
Dawdy, D. R., and Lettenmaier, D. P.(1987). “Initiative for risk-based flood design.”J. Hydr. Engrg., 113(8), 1041–1051.
12.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). (1979). Federal guidelines for dam safety (FEMA 93) . The Ad Hoc Interagency Com. on Dam Safety of the Fed. Coordinating Council for Sci. Engrg., and Technol. Washington, D.C.
13.
Graham, J. D., and Vaupel, J. W.(1981). “Value of a life: what difference does it make?”Risk Anal., 1(1), 89–95.
14.
Hohenemser, C. (1983). “Summary panel discussion and commentary on: `Automobile accidents: the problem of passenger restraints.”' The analysis of actual versus perceived risks, V. T. Cavello et al., eds., Plenum Press, New York, N.Y.
15.
Krouse, M. R. (1986). “Workshop report—engineering standards versus risk analysis.”Risk-Based Decision Making in Water Resour.: Proc., Engrg. Found. Conf., ASCE, New York, N.Y., Y. Y. Haimes and E. Z. Stakhiv, eds.
16.
Lave, L. B. (1981). The strategy of social regulation: decision frameworks for policy . The Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C.
17.
Lave, L. B., Resendiz-Carrillo, D., and McMichael, F. C.(1990). “Safety goals for high-hazard dams: are dams too safe?”Water Resour. Res., 26(7), 1383–1391.
18.
National Research Council (NRC). (1983). Safety of existing dams: evaluation and improvement . The National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
19.
National Research Council. (1985). Safety of dams: flood and earthquake criteria . The National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
20.
National Safety Council. (1994). Accident Facts . Itasca, Ill.
21.
“News briefs.” (1995). Civ. Engrg., 65(4), 10.
22.
Prakash, A. (1989). “Probabilities of hydrologic extremes and risk analysis.”Proc., the 1989 Nat. Conf. on Hydr. Engrg., M. A. Ports, ed., ASCE, New York, N.Y.
23.
Responsibility and Reliability of Public and Private Interests on Dams: Proc. (1976). ASCE, New York, N.Y.
24.
Schnitter, N. J. (1994). A history of dams—the useful pyramids . A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
25.
Smith, N. (1971). A History of Dams . Peter Davies, London, England.
26.
Snyder, F. F.(1964). “Hydrology of spillway design: large structures-adequate data.”J. Hydr. Div., ASCE, 90(3), 239–259.
27.
Stedinger, J., and Gryger, J. (1985). “Risk-cost analysis and spillway design.”Proc., Conf. Comp. Applications in Water Resour., H. C. Torno, ed., ASCE, New York, N.Y.
28.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. (1975). National program of inspection of dams . Volume 1 (of V), Vicksburg, Miss.
29.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. (1979). “Recommended guidelines for safety inspection of dams.”Engrg. Regulation No. 1110-2-106, appendix A, Vicksburg, Miss.
30.
Wium, D. J. W.(1988). “Perception and acceptability of risk in engineering projects.”The Civ. Engrg. in South Africa, Marshalltown, South Africa, 30(12), 545.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice
Volume 122 • Issue 4 • October 1996
Pages: 163 - 169
Copyright
Copyright © 1996 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Published online: Oct 1, 1996
Published in print: Oct 1996
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.