US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Overview of Risk Approach to Manage USACE Dam and...

US Army Corps of Engineers

BUILDING STRONG®

Overview of Risk Approach to Manage USACE Dam and Levee Safety ProgramThe Reality of Risk: Dam Safety in the 21st Century Session

Douglas Boyer, PE, CEG

Chief, Western Division

Risk Management Center

Institute for Water Resources

February 19, 2013

BUILDING STRONG®

Corps Dam Safety Portfolio Corps owns 704 dams, Nationwide and in P.R.

► embankment = 86 %► concrete = 7 %► combination = 7 %

Project purposes include: flood control, navigation, hydropower, water supply, fish & wildlife conservation, recreation

Median height: 93 feet Mean height: 112 feet Average age: 53 years High Hazard dams: 77 % Total storage capacity: 331 Million Ac-ft

BUILDING STRONG®

Traditional Dam Safety Approach

Standard engineering analyses Conservative inputs Factor of safety “check the box” Standard design criteria

►Probable Maximum Flood (PMF)►Maximum Credible Earthquake (MCE)

Expensive designs and repairs

3

BUILDING STRONG®

Investment Comparison

BUILDING STRONG®

Given

Dams needing repair – approx. 300

Annual budget - $500 M Public trust

responsibility, accountability, and transparency

Range of project benefits and value

5

BUILDING STRONG®

The Question

Which dams to work on first?

6

BUILDING STRONG®

Risk Analysis

Provides a systematic approach to decision-making that enhances the scientific basis of USACE decisions and comprises three tasks:

Risk assessment Risk management Risk communication

7

BUILDING STRONG®

Risk Assessment

What can go wrong? How can it happen? What is the likelihood? What are the consequences?

8

BUILDING STRONG®

Risk Management

What is the problem? What can be done to reduce the likelihood

or severity of the risk described? What are the tradeoffs in terms of costs,

benefits, and risks among the available options both now and in the future?

What is the best way to address the described risk?

9

BUILDING STRONG®

Risk Communication

Why are we communicating? Who is our audience? What do we want to learn from our audience? What do they want to know? What do we want to get across? How will we communicate? How will we listen? How will we respond?

10

BUILDING STRONG®

Answers Other Questions

Urgency of modification What to modify Extent/magnitude of modification

11

BUILDING STRONG®

Risk

Identification of potential failure modes Decomposition of failure process Qualitative or quantitative estimates of

likelihood of events Comparison of result to a standard

12

BUILDING STRONG®

Internal Erosion PFM Event Tree

13

BUILDING STRONG®

1.E-08

1.E-07

1.E-06

1.E-05

1.E-04

1.E-03

1.E-02

1.E-01

1.E+00

1.E-08

1.E-07

1.E-06

1.E-05

1.E-04

1.E-03

1.E-02

1.E-01

1.E+00

0 1 10 100 1,000 10,000 100,000

An

nu

al F

ailu

re P

rob

abili

ty, f

Loss of Life, N

Annualized Probability of Life Loss and Annual Probabiilty of Failure for Dam XYZ

Ɣ Sum of the mean risk estimates for all failure modesŶ f-N pairs

BUILDING STRONG®

Risk Reduction

Loss of Life, N

An

nu

al F

ailu

re P

rob

ab

ilit

y, f

Pre Remediation Post Remediation

BUILDING STRONG®

Cumulative Risk Reduction

BUILDING STRONG®

Traditional Process Risk InformedProcess

Em

ph

asis

of

Dam

Saf

ety

Pro

gra

m

SeepageSeismicSpillway Adequacy

Change in Dam Safety Focus

17

BUILDING STRONG®

Traditional Process Risk InformedProcess

Em

ph

asis

of

Dam

Saf

ety

Pro

gra

m

SeepageSeismicSpillway Adequacy

Change in Dam Safety Focus

18

BUILDING STRONG®

Principles of Risk Informed Approaches

No simple numerical solutions – decisions are informed, not based, on risk

Risk compliments, does not replace, traditional engineering standards or experience

Credible way to treat uncertainty Periodic and Continuing Risk is integral, not “bolt on”, to our profession

BUILDING STRONG®

Benefits of PFMA/Risk Approach

Multidisciplinary Team►Civil Engineers►Other Engineers►Geologists►O&M personnel

20

Wow, I never thoughtabout it that way before!

BUILDING STRONG®

Benefits of PFMA/Risk Approach

Instills a culture of creative thinking

Why is this important?

21

BUILDING STRONG®

Benefits of Risk-InformedDecision-Making

Better Understanding of Potential Failure Modes Identifying Previously Unidentified Potential

Failure Modes Considering the Probability of Failure &

Consequences Comparing the Risk of Different Dams Understanding the Uncertainty in Analyses Comparing the Contribution of All Failure Modes

to the Overall Risk

22

BUILDING STRONG®

Challenges Same/similar engineering

knowledge – just a different approach and focus

Training in risk concepts and principles

A tendency to focus on the “number” rather than ‘building the case’

Lack of risk experience23

BUILDING STRONG®Photograph from inundated area downstream of Teton Dam, Idaho (1976)