DSpace at VNU: International small dam safety assurance policy benchmarks to avoid dam failure flood disasters in developing countries

DSpace at VNU: International small dam safety assurance policy benchmarks to avoid dam failure flood disasters in develo...

Accepted Manuscript

International small dam safety assurance policy benchmarks to avoid dam failure

flood disasters in developing countries

John D Pisaniello, Tuyet Thi Dam, Joanne L Tingey-Holyoak

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.09.077

Please cite this article as: Pisaniello, J.D., Dam, T.T., Tingey-Holyoak, J.L., International small dam safety assurance policy benchmarks to avoid dam failure flood disasters in developing countries, Journal of Hydrology (2015), doi:

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.09.077

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication As a service to our customers

we are providing this early version of the manuscript The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

1

International small dam safety assurance policy benchmarks to avoid dam failure flood

disasters in developing countries

Dr John D Pisaniello Sustainable Engineering, Accounting and Law Group

School of Commerce UniSA Business School University of South Australia City West Campus, North Terrace ADELAIDE SA 5000 Tel: +61 8 8302 0031 Fax: +61 8 8302 0992 Email: John.Pisaniello@unisa.edu.au

Ms Tuyet Thi Dam Research group on Natural Resources and Environmental Economics

Faculty of Development Economics University of Economics and Business Vietnam National University

144 Xuan Thuy str., Cau Giay dist., Ha Noi

Tel: (84.4) 37547506 + 309 Fax: (84.4) 37546765 Email: tuyetiet@gmail.com

Dr Joanne L Tingey-Holyoak*

Sustainable Engineering, Accounting and Law Group

School of Commerce UniSA Business School University of South Australia City West Campus, North Terrace ADELAIDE SA 5000 Tel: +61 8 8302 0462 Fax: +61 8 8302 0992 Email: Joanne.Tingey@unisa.edu.au

September 2015

*Corresponding author

2

International small dam safety assurance policy benchmarks to avoid dam failure flood

disasters in developing countries

Abstract

In developing countries small dam failure disasters are common yet research on their dam safety management is lacking This paper reviews available small dam safety assurance policy benchmarks from international literature, synthesises them for applicability in developing countries, and provides example application through a case study of Vietnam Generic models from ‘minimum’ to ‘best’ practice (Pisaniello, 1997) are synthesised with the World Bank’s

‘essential’ and ‘desirable’ elements (Bradlow et al, 2002) leading to novel policy analysis and design criteria for developing countries The case study involved 22 on-site dam surveys finding micro level physical and management inadequacies that indicates macro dam safety management policy performs far below the minimum benchmark in Vietnam Moving assurance policy towards ‘best practice’ is necessary to improve the safety of Vietnam’s considerable number of hazardous dams to acceptable community standards, but firstly achieving ‘minimum practice’ per the developed guidance is essential The policy analysis/design process provides an exemplar for other developing countries to follow for avoiding dam failure flood disasters

Key words – small dam failure disasters, dams management, policy analysis and design,

developing countries, Vietnam case study

96 people were killed, 130 displaced and significant infrastructure and property was lost and damaged (The Associated Press, 2009) The Shimantan and Banquia dams failed in 1975 in Henan province in Central China because of the cumulative failure of 60 small dams in the upstream catchment area Around 230,000 people were killed, more than 1 million hectares of land were inundated and over 100 km of the Beijing-Guangzhou railway line damaged in this disastrous cumulative dam failure (Fu and Qing, 1998; Fuggle and Smith, 2000) Furthermore, these structures not only age but over time, the physical areas of catchments have changed and continue to change significantly due to human activity meaning dam failure disasters that threaten life are set to increase (Jothityangkoon et al., 2013)

In developing countries, growing water resources infrastructure development combined with older infrastructure deterioration and mismanagement has meant organisations around the world are looking for tools and methods for how to improve the situation, including increased data collection, performance measurement and rankings (Berg and Corton, 2007) Amongst these methods, benchmarking methodologies have emerged as a valuable information system for policymakers and managers that pinpoints the areas that should be targeted for future initiatives whilst allowing them to evaluate the impacts of past interventions (Berg and Corton, 2007) Benchmarking is the process of comparing and measuring policy and practice against others to

4

gain insights into the optimal measures for rapid improvement toward best-practice performance (Bowerman et al., 2002; Yasin, 2002) The process of benchmarking has been used extensively to rank and implement a wide variety of policy management practices and techniques (Yasin, 2002) and is useful for issues such as farm dam safety management (Tingey-Holyoak et al., 2011) In the developed world, benchmarks for dam safety management are receiving increased attention from both academics and practitioners because many small dams are neither constructed nor managed adequately1 (Bradlow et al., 2002; Tingey-Holyoak et al., 2011) However, in developing countries there exists a lack of awareness of the dangers of poor dam safety management practice and impacts (Levitan, 2014; Dam, 2011), policy is often not strong or well-enforced and cumulative dam failure effects are more likely (Levitan, 2014) Therefore, internationally benchmarked dam safety assurance policy guidance is needed to help developing countries design policies (Jha et al., 2012) that will ensure dams are constructed and risk managed

to an acceptable standard, and as cost-effectively as possible, in order to save downstream lives, business, property and the environment that are too often lost as a result of dam failures

Vietnam has one of the largest dam systems in the world The dam network comprises over 750 medium and large dams and thousands of small dams in close proximity (Dao et al., 2000; Silver, 1999; WB, 2004) But at present, the country has no national record of either small dams or their problems, for example location, dam type and size, hazard rating, condition etc There has been

no systematic collection of data on dam failures and there have been no specific approaches to determine associated impacts or economic losses of failure (Nguyen, 2007) Ad hoc evidence suggests that many dam safety problems and notable dam failures have occurred in various provinces in Vietnam but have often been unreported (Nguyen, 2003) These failures have taken

the case of Vietnam in an exemplary way The core research question addressed is “What international dam safety policy benchmarks can assist Vietnam to assure small dams are constructed and managed to an acceptable safety standard?”

The remaining sections of the paper are structured as follows: Section 2 reviews available literature and synthesizes international dam safety policy benchmarks to identify models, guidelines and selection criteria for determining necessary assurance models for developing countries Section 3 provides results of the micro level on-site dam safety surveys in Tan Moc commune, Bac Giang province In Section 4, a descriptive analysis of relevant macro level policy, laws and regulations on small dam safety management in Vietnam is presented and then analysed comparatively against the international benchmarks established Section 5 provides a summary and discussion of the results and the associated implications, Section 6 concludes the paper with the answer to the core research question and with final discussion of the implications for Vietnam

in particular and developing countries in general

2

That is, internationally benchmarked policy elements ranging from minimum to best practice that governments can use to assure the community that dam owners/managers construct and manage dams to an acceptable risk standard.

6

2 Review and synthesis of international benchmarks and guidelines for necessary policy

in any jurisdiction including developing countries

Considerable work on international dam safety policy benchmarks has been done based on comprehensive review and comparative assessment of dam safety management responsibility, accountability and assurance practices in a large number of countries (Bradlow et al., 2002; Pisaniello et al., 2012; Tingey-Holyoak et al., 2011) Underpinning these studies are the three benchmark models initiated by Pisaniello (1997) that are “best practice”, “average practice” and

“minimum practice” These three models are in line with the socio-ecological objective to balance the need for public and environmental protection (Sanchez et al., 2014) with the imposition of restrictive and expensive requirements on builders and owners The models, the criteria necessary

to apply them and their application to Australian jurisdictions have been reported most recently in Pisaniello et al (2012) However, these models were developed primarily based on and for application to developed countries In contrast, the World Bank’s “regulatory frameworks for dam safety” (Bradlow et al., 2002) were derived to include application to developing countries The problem is that the World Bank frameworks are descriptive only (see section 2.1 below) and do not provide for any criteria on how to apply them for varying circumstances as do the Pisaniello (1997) models (see Pisaniello et al., 2012; Tingey-Holyoak et al., 2011) Hence, there is a need to synthesise the Pisaniello (1997) models with the Bradlow et al (2002) frameworks in order to establish updated models and criteria representing minimum to best practice that is applicable to varying circumstances (ie the number of hazardous dams within a jurisdiction and the number that are deficient) for both developed and developing countries In this Section the World Bank models will firstly be described (Section 2.1) and their synthesis with the Pisaniello (1997) models will then follow (Section 2.2)

7

2.1 A summary of World Bank’s Regulatory Frameworks for Dam Safety (Bradlow et al., 2002)

The Bradlow et al., (2002) study involved a detailed comparative assessment of dam safety regulatory frameworks in 22 countries3 including developing countries such as China and India The study provides information to policy makers and technical experts in countries that are planning to develop new or to modify existing regulatory frameworks for dam safety It highlights the main similarities and differences in the approaches adopted by the 22 countries, enabling general precedents to be set for both “Essential” and “Desirable” elements of a dam safety regulatory scheme The essential elements include those that any regulatory scheme needs if it is

to be capable of performing the most essential functions with regard to dam safety, such as assuring that dams satisfy minimum international safety standards The desirable elements are simply additional ones that can be adopted by regulators for providing a higher level of dam safety assurance This subsection reviews the principal part of Regulatory Frameworks for Dam Safety by Bradlow et al (2002): ‘Part 3: Essential and Desirable Elements for Dam Safety’ 2.1.1 Essential elements of a regulatory scheme

Bradlow et al., (2002, p.72) found from the international comparative analysis of the 22 countries that the common general principles underlying dam safety are that (i) the owner4 is responsible for making the dam safe and for its safe operation and maintenance and (ii) the regulator is responsible for protecting the public by establishing dam safety standards and monitoring compliance by the owners5 Hence the four essential elements discussed below are intended to

3

The counties were selected based on the availability of information about their dam safety regulatory frameworks and comprised Argentina, Australia, Austria, Brazil, Canada, China, Finland, France, India, Ireland, Latvia, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Romania, the Russian Federation, South Africa, Spain, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States

4

“Owner” here is intended to be used broadly as it can include private owners as well as other forms of ownership, eg public dams owned by government on behalf of the public or any other person/s or entity that is/are legally responsible for the dam under any applicable law of a country

5

This is also in line with ANCOLD (2003, p.3) which follows international standards set by the International Committee on Large Dams (ICOLD), stating that “A role of Government is to enact legislation to protect the community Legislation should establish regulatory authorities that ensure dam owners, and authorities that ensure dam owners, are taking appropriate actions in regard to dam safety” Furthermore, Bradlow et al., (2002, p.2) found from its international comparative study that “A failure to pay attention to dam safety can cause a country to violate its obligations under existing international treaties and conventions, such as

8

satisfy these principles by (i) clarifying that the dam owner is responsible for dam safety and that regulators are responsible for monitoring performance in this regard, (ii) specifying that owners have operational and maintenance responsibilities, and (iii) explaining the ways in which the regulatory authority can perform its monitoring functions, which can include inspections and penalisation of non-complying owners (Bradlow et al., 2002, p.73)

1 Clearly articulated laws

The regulatory structure comprises documents that are publicly available and stipulate in clear terms the aforementioned responsibilities The forms of these differ widely across the world It is the authors’ opinion that a national scheme with national guidelines that a provincial government administers is the best arrangement—not as in Australia where each state has different laws (see Pisaniello, 2011) which has led to non-uniform dam safety legislation across Australia: residents

in one state, for instance, may be exposed to a different hazard and standard of care because the state has not paid attention to the issue

2 Clear identification of regulatory agencies involved, and clear power and funding to enforce the regulations

The essential element relates to separation of the regulatory agency from those who make decisions about whether to build dams and from those who own and/or operate them This separation of powers has been a fundamental tenet of Australian water law and administration since the COAG reforms of 1994 An adequate budget for the exercise of laws is essential or else they become meaningless

3 Powers of the regulatory authority

These include the power to: (i) identify and enforce national norms; (ii) comment on the issue of permits; (iii) monitor inspection by others and approve the inspector selected by the owner; (iv) conduct its own inspections; (v) maintain a register of regulated dams; (vi) advise dam owners

those relating to transboundary watercourses and the environment It can also have an adverse impact on the state’s ability to perform its international financial obligations, thereby undermining its overall development strategy”

9

and other interested parties, such as affected communities, on dam safety issues; (vii) issue public reports on dam safety; and (viii) enforce the dam safety framework (Bradlow et al., 2002, p.75)

4 Content of the scheme

The international community points to these as widely followed standards (Bradlow et al., 2002, p.79): (i) establish clear criteria with which to determine dams requiring regulation (based on size and the nature of the hazards); (ii) address dam safety in a life-cycle approach; (iii) clarify that the owner is primarily responsible but that the operator can be deemed the owner; (iv) stipulate standards, international, such as ICOLD, or locally based; (v) demand that owners supply regulators with periodic reports, the frequency of which may reflect characteristics such as life stage and size; (vi) insist that the owner maintain complete records at a convenient location; (vii) require that all dams have an operations maintenance manual and an adequate budget; (viii) impose fees that cover the cost of the dam safety activities of the regulatory authority; and (ix) require an emergency plan for high hazard dams6

2.1.2 Desirable attributes of a regulatory scheme

This list covers items in addition to those above; many are aspirational (see Bradlow et al., 2002,

pp 86−88): (i) the exclusive devotion of the dam safety agency to dam safety; (ii) a dam safety advisory committee skill base of technical experts and representatives of affected communities; (iii) overarching coordination roles for the dam safety agency; (iv) the granting of power to the dam safety agency to inspect periodically all high hazard dams, and technical archives of the dam

to be made available to it; (v) dam licences that require a failure impact assessment with regard to communities, property and the environment; (vi) the development of broad-based benchmarks, including structural, environmental, social, health and economic factors, to gauge dam safety at all dams; (vii) a periodic review by the owners of all dams to test compliance with the stipulations of

6

These 9 elements are also in line with ANCOLD (2003) which is guided by the International Committee on Large Dams

(ICOLD).

of the World Bank frameworks Key elements of international benchmarks that incorporate Pisaniello’s (1997) three benchmark models and synthesize the World Bank frameworks, thereby advancing current dam safety assurance benchmarks are presented in Table 1

11

The Pisaniello (1997) benchmarked models are linked to selection guidelines and criteria as described in Pisaniello et al (2012, see also Tingey-Holyoak et al., 2011) The criteria were developed firstly on the basis that in any jurisdiction where a considerable number of hazardous small dams exist, there is a need for at least minimum practice dam safety assurance policy that satisfies basic human rights in regard to dam safety risk awareness and preparedness Then for a Government to determine the extent of any higher level of assurance policy that is necessary for its particular jurisdiction (i.e selecting one or a mix of the three models presented in Table 1) it requires an indication of the scope of the local dam safety problem Pisaniello (1997) identified two main indicators that have been used by international practices for this purpose:

 Level 1 Indicator - Density of potentially hazardous reservoirs

 Level 2 Indicator - Density of deficient potentially hazardous reservoirs

An extensive range of selected practices from eight developed countries were analysed by Pisaniello (1997) with regard to: (i) the extent of the private dam safety problem in the area based

on Level 1 indicator and if available, also Level 2 indicator, and (ii) the level of assurance policy which has been implemented in order to accommodate it The level of assurance policy was quantified as a proportion of the model of “best practice”, depending on the number of key elements of best practice that are common From this analysis precedents could be established for limiting indicator criteria, that is limiting values which would necessitate differing levels of policy Table 2 presents these criteria/guidelines updated for use with Table 1 As illustrated in Figure 1 the guidelines have been developed and applied in various settings including the Australian case (Pisaniello et al., 2012; Tingey-Holyoak et al., 2011) However, there have been calls for application of such benchmarks to developing countries where issues of water infrastructure policy are critical (Jha et al., 2012) But it is important to note that developing countries will have different circumstances (to developed countries) in terms of safety assurance

12

policy affordability, governance structures and risk tolerance culture meaning that any policy model above minimum practice may not always be looked upon favourably As such, in this paper, the synthesised international benchmarks and guidelines established (Tables 1 and 2) are used as criteria for assessing the adequacy of a Vietnamese dam safety assurance policy case study at both local micro (on-site practices and policy application) and central macro (overall assurance policy regulated through laws and regulations) levels to demonstrate how they can be used by developing countries for initial guidance The guidelines importantly take basic human rights into account in the minimum level benchmark – this should therefore apply to any country, developing or developed – but then it is up to each particular developing jurisdiction/government/culture to decide how far they are willing/can afford to climb to a higher benchmark per Tables 1 and 2

According to the guidelines (Table 2), the extent of dam safety assurance policy necessary for a particular jurisdiction is determined based on an indication of the scope of a jurisdiction’s dam safety problems per the two indicators described above The first level indicator requires the least effort and resources to apply The implication of this indicator is that all local dams are evaluated from aerial photography, and then assigned a hazard rating in line with standard dams engineering practice (eg ANCOLD, 2003; 2012) The second level indicator requires much more effort and resources, but provides a more accurate indication of the local dam safety problem This accurate indication is the result of expert safety assessment that is conducted for every dam, but as this can require significant government resources7, a more cost-effective alternative is to base this indication on a representative sample of dams in the jurisdiction (per Note C in Table 2)

7 A dam engineer would need to visit the dam and make a detailed safety assessment along the lines of that undertaken in the Vietnamese case study described in Section 3 This can involve up to 3-4 days of work per dam, so if the dams number in the thousands the costs can becomes significant

13

In order to answer the core research question “What international dam safety policy benchmarks can assist Vietnam to assure small dams are constructed and managed to an acceptable safety standard?”, according to the guidelines above, there is a need to advance the current research to

define the scope of dam safety problems at the micro level as well as at the macro level in Vietnam (Figure 1) Hence, Section 3 provides results of on-site dam safety surveys (the scope of dam safety problems at the micro level) A comparison of Vietnam’s dam safety management assurance policy against available international benchmarks (the scope of dam safety problems at the macro level) is presented in Section 4

3 A case study of on-site dam safety surveys in Tan Moc commune in Vietnam

The scope of dam safety problems at the micro level is determined and demonstrated through a case study of on-site dam safety surveys in Tan Moc commune, Luc Ngan district, Bac Giang province in Vietnam Twenty-two dams in Tan Moc commune were purposively selected for safety examination and inspection All dams selected for on-site surveys in the fieldwork had to satisfy the following two criteria: (1) dams of less than 15m in height and with a storage capacity

of less than 3000 ML (small dams) (GVN, 2007); (2) ‘Significant’ or ‘High’ hazard dams based

on an initial assessment of the dam size, living activities and economic development in the downstream inundation area (ANCOLD, 1994, 2003) Each on-site dam survey was based on a dam inspection checklist developed from two key publications, DSE (2007) and MELP (1998) which consistently describe current international guidelines for small earthen dam review and inspection (Pisaniello et al., 2012) The dam surveys were undertaken continuously from 28th September to 2nd October 2010 The physical characteristics of the dams are summarised in Table

3

Results from the on-site dam surveys (Table 3) demonstrate that all twenty-two dams surveyed in Tan Moc commune, Luc Ngan district in Bac Giang province are seriously degraded and poorly maintained All of the dams surveyed are highly hazardous and, hence, have the potential to fail

14

with disastrous consequences The current condition and associated maintenance levels of the sample dams are extremely poor and unacceptable All twenty-two dams surveyed are in critical need of repair and maintenance

As part of the dam surveys it was also discovered that there is no official statistics and accurate data about the total number of dams and about safety conditions of existing dams in Tan Moc commune Nevertheless, it is evidenced that 100% of the twenty-two dams surveyed are deficient (Table 3) and on that basis alone, the Level 1 and Level 2 indicators in Table 2 point towards an Average practice model being necessary in Tan Moc commune But the Tan Moc commune is but

a small micro representative sample of Vietnam since there is knowledge that the dam network in Vietnam comprises over 750 medium and large dams and thousands of small dams in close proximity (Dao et al., 2000; Silver, 1999; WB, 2004) Hence, at the macro level it is reasonable to assume very conservatively8 that there are at least 70 hazardous small to medium dams in Vietnam for the purposes of the Level 1 indicator in Table 2 Then just based on the results of the Level 2 indicator for Tan Moc commune (ie 22 deficient dams, without even having to translate the sample result of 100% deficiency to the entire dam population of Vietnam) the best practice model may be necessary at the macro level to provide an adequate level of dam safety assurance

in Vietnam How far away Vietnam is from providing such policy will be tested in the following section

8

Reasonable because the surface area of Tan Moc which is located in Luc Ngan District no more than 10% of that of Luc Ngan district which covers an area of about 1000 km2 (Dam, 2011) Therefore Tan Moc surface area is no more than 100 km2 As the surface area of Vietnam is around 331,000 km2, the 22 dams in Tan Moc may be translated to estimate around 72,000 hazardous dams in Vietnam This estimate provides a “ball park” measure from which it is also reasonable to assume conservatively that there are at least 70 hazardous small to medium dams located throughout Vietnam, ie only 0.001% of the translated estimate

This section determines the scope of any necessary dam safety assurance policy reform at the macro level in Vietnam by comparing the current dam safety policy that involves the above three laws and regulations against the established international benchmarks (Table 1), bearing in mind that the best practice model has been determined in Section 3 to be appropriate

4.1 Dam owner/manager education and guidance (element 1)

Article 23 (Clause 9) of Decree No.72 and Article 29 (Clause 6) are the only provisions which provide requirements for enhancing capacity of dam managers Both of these Articles simply stipulate that State management of irrigation works includes information dissemination, education and training for staff and dam managers who are involved in the operation and management of irrigations works Hence education and training for staff and dam managers is simply mentioned

16

as a task of State management, with no guideline publications actually produced or disseminated,

so element 1 of the international benchmarks (Table 1) is unsatisfied

4.2 Registration and classification of dams (element 2)

Decree No.72 is the only document that specifies the need for dam registration (Article 4) and dam classification in terms of size (Article 2) Dam managers must register their dams with State competent agencies under Article 4 Article 2 defines small dams as “all dams of less than 15 m in height and with a storage capacity of less than 3000 ML” But in practice such a register does not exist which means there is a lack of detailed provision for dam registration Also, there is no provision for classifying dams according to their hazard potential so that a risk-based approach can be applied to ensure their design, construction, and management meet acceptable community standards – such that the higher the hazard rating the higher the standard In effect, hazard classification which is a critical element in dam safety management (MELP, 1998; FMAF, 1997; ANCOLD, 2000, 2003; 2012) is not regulated in any of the three laws and regulations Thus, element 2 of the international benchmarks is unsatisfied

4.3 Community education and preparedness (element 3)

Article 22 of Decree No.72 stipulates community preparedness at a limited level Clause 1 requires that dam managers must send notices to the local community in advance if they discharge water from their dams to the downstream area during flood season Clause 2 requires dam managers to develop flood control and mitigation plans for the downstream area These plans must help downstream communities to cope with emergency situations associated with flood discharge from dams and/or dam failure But community education about dam safety is not stipulated in any provisions Also in practice no such plans existed for any of the case study dams (Section 3) Therefore, element 3 of the international benchmarks is not satisfied

17

4.4 Legislative purposiveness (element 4)

Dam safety in Vietnam is dealt with either through specific regulations such as Decree No.72 or

as part of general regulatory schemes such as the LWR and the Ordinance All three laws and regulations reviewed contain general provisions without giving detailed guidelines, standards and procedures For example, the LWR provides general provisions that “all organisations and individuals have the responsibility to protect water conservancy works” (Clause 1 of Article 48) and “organisations and individuals who manage and exploit water conservancy works must work out the plan to protect it” (Clause 1 of Article 49) Universal statements on principles of dam safety management are listed in Article 3 of Decree No.72 and include (1) “responsibility of dam managers, ministries, agencies and the people’s committees in dam safety management must be specified”; (2) the involvement of the local community is appreciated in dam safety management; and (3) “relevant organisations and individuals must be proactive in dam safety management” Article 11 of the Ordinance states broad criteria for assigning organisations and individuals to the operation and management of irrigation works That is “the Government shall regulate the regime and policies for, as well as rights and obligations of, organisations and individuals managing the exploitation and protection of irrigation works based on this Ordinance and relevant legislation” Hence element 4 of the international benchmarks is only partly satisfied because Vietnam has developed an array of legal instruments ranging from laws, decrees, and ordinances to subsidiary legal documents that have provided a legal foundation to ensure legislative intervention at both the central and local levels But element 4 is mostly unsatisfied because the dam safety policy, laws and regulations reviewed only provide general provisions and broad criteria That is they are adequate in form but lacking substance as there are no detailed guidelines, procedures and standards established for implementation of dam safety management

18

4.5 Administrative authority and empowerment (element5)

Institutional arrangements for water conservancy works management and/or dam safety management in Vietnam are regulated by Article 48 of the LWR, Article 24 of Decree No.72 and Article 30 of the Ordinance Accordingly, Vietnam has a number of regulatory agencies ranging from the central to the local levels as illustrated in Figure 2

At the central level, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD) is the standing agency which implements the State management function with respect to water conservancy works management and/or dam safety management The General Department of Water Resources (GDWR) is authorised by the MARD to take responsibility for the national dam safety program This responsibility includes developing the national strategy framework for irrigation and drainage management, issuing by-law documents, consulting for the central government, and supervising and instructing local dam safety management organisations In addition to the GDWR, three irrigation management companies established under the MARD are operating and managing certain dams and reservoirs

At the local level, the general structure of dam safety management of districts and communes resembles that of provinces Provincial People’s Committees have the highest level of statutory powers in dam safety management at the local level Departments of Agricultural and Rural Development are authorised by Provincial People's Committees to implement the strategic and legal management of dam safety In addition, a number of irrigation management companies are established to operate and manage certain dams and reservoirs in a direct way An exception is made at the commune level where agricultural cooperatives and water user associations are established, instead of irrigation management companies, to provide direct operation and management of dams and reservoirs in the commune area

19

Statutory powers and responsibilities of the three agencies - the MARD, Ministry of Industry and Provincial People's Committees, are provided in Article 24 of Decree No.72 and Article 30 of the Ordinance Both of these Articles stipulate that the Government exercises unified management of dam safety Within the Government, the MARD take the highest level of statutory powers and responsibilities including: (1) developing legal documents, plans, policies and standards in dam safety management; (2) checking and taking over water conservancy works and/or dams; (3) ratifying operation and management manuals of reservoirs that are managed by the Ministry and reservoirs that supply water resources for two provinces or more; (4) cooperating with the Ministry of Police, Ministry of Defence and Provincial People's Committees to develop operation and management guidelines for “important dams”; (5) ratifying flood control and mitigation plans; and (6) inspecting and supervising the operation and management of dams

In addition, the Government has delegated the Ministry of Industry and Provincial People's Committees to take coordinating responsibilities in line with the MARD The Ministry of Industry takes responsibility for the operation and management of hydropower dams Provincial People's Committees take responsibility for dams that are located in the province and/or dams that are operated and managed by organisations in the province Responsibility includes (1) developing by-law documents and supervising the implementation of these documents; (2) conducting review, inspection and surveillance; (3) inspecting dams with a storage capacity less than 10 million m3 located in the province; (4) ratifying dam safety management plans and flood control and mitigation plans; (5) determining emergency actions plans and other plans in case dam failures occur in the province; (6) issuing necessary permits and procedures; and (7) conducting research on and applying advanced technology to all stages of dam safety management as well as flood control and mitigation

Overall element 5 of the international benchmarks is partly satisfied because Vietnam has its own dam safety legislation with a number of management organisations ranging from the central level

4.6 Surveillance, inspection and safety reviews (element 6)

Articles 13, 14, 15 and 17 of Decree No.72 specify requirements for dam review, remedial actions, safety upgrades and maintenance Article 13 regulates that (1) dam managers must have specific maintenance plans for each component of dams and (2) “maintenance must be undertaken periodically, regularly as regulated in laws and regulations in order to identify warning signals and conduct preventative activities” According to Articles 14 and 17, dam review includes the following tasks: (1) regular examination through analysis and evaluation of monitoring data over technical parameters of dams; (2) inspecting dams before and after heavy rain and flood seasons; (3) inspecting dams after natural extremes such as floods and earthquakes; (4) inspecting dams and developing dam reports in detail and (5) periodic (less than 10 years) and comprehensive review must be conducted with dams that have a storage capacity of 10,000 ML or more Remedial actions and safety upgrades must be undertaken under Article 15 in the following cases: (1) dams appear unsafe; (2) spillway cannot function at its designed capacity and (3) dams cannot