The role of judgement in risk assessments as applied in dam safety management has been the source of considerable debate in recent years. With regard to risk analysis of dams, and while there is general agreement that judgement is an essential element of the process, essentially two schools of thought have emerged. One view holds that, in the assignment of probabilities, reliance can be based on collective engineering judgement that is anchored to a knowledge base. The second view holds that judgement should be based on the knowledge that is revealed by an appropriate amount of analysis. The paper, written from the perspective of the latter view, explores some of the underlying issues in this debate.
The role of judgement in risk evaluation, the process of judging the significance of risk, is considered to be equally important. However, the process of making value judgements and statements of principles is complex and often beyond the sphere of engineering. The third issue addressed in the paper concerns the search for answers to the question, “How good is the assessment?”
Peter Allen, Don Cock, Garry Grant and John Ruffini
The paper examines the performance of the Brisbane River and Pine River real time flood management system for the operation of Somerset Dam, Wivenhoe Dam and North Pine Dam during the 1999 flood event.
The February flood event, which was about 80% of the magnitude of the disastrous 1974 flood event upstream of Wivenhoe Dam, was the first major flood event to be managed by the system and it performed very creditably. The overall flood management system comprises:-
A network of 125 ALERT type rainfall and river height stations throughout the catchment; A data management system to facilitate data collection and data validation;
The paper describes the system and gives details of the performance of the system during the February event. It details the performance of the dams during the event and how this was optimised to maximise the safety of the dams and minimise impacts on those downstream.
Among the major energy options, Large Hydro Power is considered to be the front ranking and renewable. But, in most of the developing countries including India, the large multipurpose dam
projects are shrouded in controversies.
This paper, while dealing with positive and negative impacts of large multipurpose dam projects, Jocuses on Social Impact Assessment’ and its mitigatory measures, for the success of the project. The Environment cost as well the Human cost of such projects should be judiciously integrated in the project cycle from its conception to its post implementation stage, for sustainable development of this
Javad Tabatabaei! and Christopher Zoppou
Cotter Dam was constructed in 1912 to 19m and was raised to 31m in 1949. Due to its close proximity to a popular recreational resort, it is considered as a high hazard dam. It forms a storage with a capacity of only 4500ML and receives flows from a catchment area of 482km?. Concern about the ageing and structural integrity of Cotter Dam was expressed as early as 1967. There has also been a major revision of the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) and new earthquake requirements for the dam. All these factors have contributed to the decision to undertake remedial works on the dam. The remedial work could be interrupted by flows over the spillway. This would increase the cost of the works because the construction equipment must be removed and reinstated (de/remobilisation) when there are flows over the spillway. Additional costs are also incurred for each day the construction equipment remains idle (standby). The total tender price therefore includes the cost associated with the remedial work as well as any standby and de/remobolisations. Risk analysis was used to establish the frequency the reservoir water level exceeds the spillway level. The risk analysis was used to select the successful remedial works tender.
Kumara Arachchi and Kelvin J Lambkin
Wetlands by their very nature act as storages of pollutants and nutrients in systems subject to environmental stresses. Wingecarribee Swamp acted in this manner and enhanced the quality of catchment runoff flowing into the Wingecarribee Reservoir until the structural failure of early August 1998 in which 6000 megalitres of peat and sedimentary material were moved into the Reservoir. Protection of the Swamp’s functions and values is directly related to Sydney Catchment Authority’s core objectives of protecting the environment and protecting public health by supplying drinking water of acceptable quality. Due to the catastrophic failure, water quality in the reservoir and the ecological integrity of the Swamp have been compromised. The incident has also resulted in significant dam safety issues.
This paper describes the dam safety, catchment management and water quality response to the failure of a major peatland which covered 8% of the catchment of Wingecarribee Reservoir in the Southern Highlands of New South Wales.
Garry Meinck, Chris Elliott and Tony Moulds
This paper describes the experiences of a former state statutory authority in the almost four years since it became corporatised to form a water utility with a fully commercial orientation and with a new board of management with a clear awareness of the responsibilities of corporate governance.
The need to commit to major remedial work at one of the principal dams focussed the Board’s attention on the safety status of all of the Corporation’s 56 referable dams.
In the absence of external dam safety regulation the Corporation has moved to satisfy its corporate governance responsibilities by adopting current best practice in dam safety. Key elements in this process were: