My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD08791
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
8001-9000
>
FLOOD08791
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2010 7:15:34 PM
Creation date
10/5/2006 3:53:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Statewide
Basin
Statewide
Title
ANCOLD Guidelines on Risk Assessment
Date
8/1/1998
Prepared By
ANCOLD Working Group on Risk Assessment
Floodplain - Doc Type
Educational/Technical/Reference Information
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />. it is apparent that a range of measures should be reported to decision makers to give a comprehensive <br />picture of risk to life. Tabular and graphical presentations of all relevant values in a clear, concise format. <br />is valuable. The updated guidelines will make suggestions on reporting fonnat. "'aiues should be <br />reported by each failure scenario and then correctly combined to give the overall summary values. Each <br />of the failure scenarios is a possible outcome and reporting by scenarios paints a picture of the range of <br />possible outcomes for a decision maker. Equally, the decision maker needs the overall values because it <br />is too difficult to mentally combine all of the scenario values (there may be some tens or even hundreds <br />in a large study) into an overall rating of the risk leveL <br /> <br />DECISION PROCESS <br /> <br />Community Consultation <br /> <br />There is no precedent, that ANCOLD is aware of, for truncated Societal Risk curves, as in Figure 2. This <br />fact reinforces the importance of community consultation, as provided for in Guideline G4 and under "Legal <br />Matters" of Section 6 of the 1994 Guidelines on Risk Assessment. The affected public need to be apprised <br />of the risks and given an opportunity to be heard. A document that is placed on public exhibition, such as an <br />Environmental Impact Statement, is a suitable medium for communicating risks and for inviting <br />submissions. The responses to such an invitation need to be taken into account in decision making. <br /> <br />The Decision Process <br /> <br />Neither calculated risks nor acceptable risk criteria are precise. They should be viewed as a guide to <br />decision making along with the outcomes of the traditional detenninistic assessment procedures. Decisions <br />on dam safety are difficult and involve a range of complex considerations. A decision maker requires a <br />broad understanding of the problem with insights from both risk assessment and the traditional forms of <br />assessment. <br /> <br />Apart from risks to life, a decision maker needs to consider business risks, environmental risks and a range <br />of social and political considerations. In particular cases, these may be a greater influence on the final <br />decision than risks to life. <br /> <br />CONCLUSION <br /> <br />ANCOLD recommends that the criteria and points set out in this statement be cautiously applied in risk <br />assessment practice, pending publication of the updated Guidelines on Risk Assessment. In cases where a <br />final risk management decision, for a specific dam, involves expected loss of life should the dam fail, <br />consultation with the affected public is required as part of the decision process. <br /> <br />The risk assessment methodologies and outcomes are to be considered in conjunction with the traditional <br />deterministic approach and criteria. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.