Scho1209brpt e e
Scho1209brpt e e
Scho1209brpt e e
of reservoirs
Report: SC070087/R1
The British Dam Society aspires to be a forum for Current research projects are being carried out by the
professionals involved with dams to meet and exchange Environment Agency and Defra following a review of
ideas and to be a body of people with authority and/or research priorities and direction by the Reservoir
interest on dam-related issues. It monitors and Safety Advisory Group (RSAG) of the Institution of
contributes to the agenda on the provision of technical Civil Engineers (ICE).
guidance and wider research on dams for the UK and
also promotes best practice in all aspects of the
planning, development, maintenance and operation of
dams and reservoirs.
The views and statements expressed in this report are Research Contractor:
those of the author alone. The views or statements W S Atkins, Epson, Surrey.
expressed in this publication do not necessarily
represent the views of the Environment Agency and the Environment Agency’s Project Manager:
Environment Agency cannot accept any responsibility for Gary Tustin, Evidence Directorate
such views or statements.
Collaborator(s):
This report is printed on Cyclus Print, a 100% recycled Atkins, David Bowles, HR Wallingford
stock, which is 100% post consumer waste and is totally
chlorine free. Water used is treated and in most cases Project Number:
returned to source in better condition than removed. SC070087
Miranda Kavanagh
Director of Evidence
2 Introduction 2
2.1 Background 2
3 Terms of reference 5
4 The scope 6
5 Target audience 7
References 31
Figure 8.1 The UK Government’s recommended framework for a tiered approach to environmental risk assessment
and management 15
Figure 8.2 Source–Pathway–Receptor framework for the assessment of dams 16
Figure 8.3 Progressively reducing uncertainty in dam performance through tiered assessment 16
Figure 8.4 Possible high level framework 17
Figure 9.1 Interrelationship between components of risk assessment and risk management 18
Figure 9.2 Illustration of a qualitative approach to risk assessment and risk management 21
Figure 9.3 Framework for reservoir safety risk assessment 22
Figure 9.4 Risk control options 24
Figure 10.1 Overview of project links and outputs 29
Figure 10.2 Programme showing main links and outputs 30
6.3 Legislation
The Pitt Review helped advance the development and likely implementation during
2010/11 of new legislation regarding flood risk management. The Floods and Water
iii. Limited data is often cited as a reason for not adopting probabilistic
descriptions of performance:
Action – Develop and demonstrate risk-based characterisations of
performance capable of using available evidence (e.g. fragility curves
used to describe asset condition based on observational evidence).
However, it is also noted here that many dams are better studied and
understood than flood risk management assets, and hence more direct
measures of performance may be available.
The level of detail and approach adopted to assess each of the SPR components
can vary, based upon the complexity of the dam and the risk posed, reflecting the
potential downstream consequences. Table 8.1 shows a tiered approach
Regardless of the level of detail and data used, the generic steps within the analysis
remain the same. For example, consider the ‘Pathway’ component. A dam’s
performance under load can be expressed in terms of a fragility curve (Figure 8.3).
Uncertainty
Risk Assessment
Decision Recommendation
Risk
Control
Risk Analysis Risk
- Structural
Evaluation
Risk - Recurrent
Failure Estimation activities
Modes
Identification - Periodic
Reassessment
A risk assessment commences with a clear definition of its purpose. This includes an
identification of the decisions that it is intended to use the results of the risk
assessment to inform, including all decision bases and the desired level of
confidence as determined by the reservoir owner and other stakeholders. Consistent
with the UK flood risk management framework (Environment Agency 2004b), it also
includes an identification of the drivers and pressures affecting reservoir safety
decision-making. Examples of some of the purposes for reservoir safety risk
assessment have included the following:
• To systematically identify and better understand potential failure modes.
1
HSE (2001) refers to the implementation of the ALARP principle as requiring a ‘gross
disproportion’ test applied to individual risks and societal concerns, including societal risks.
The gross proportion is between the cost of an additional risk reduction measure and the
estimated amount of the risk reduction.
Risk Assessment
Decision Recommendation
Risk
Control
Risk Analysis Risk
- Structural
Evaluation
Risk - Recurrent
Failure Estimation activities
Modes
Identification - Periodic
Reassessment
No
Step 3.
Tolerable
Risk
Risk?
Evaluation
Yes
Figure 9.3 Framework for reservoir safety risk assessment (Bowles 1998).
Figure 9.4 Risk control options (adapted from Bruce et al. 1995).