On behalf of the City of Manassas I am providing comments concerning the proposed Virginia Dam Safety Regulations which were published for public comment on August 20, 2007.  I would like to first acknowledge the efforts by the Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) to improve Virginia Dam safety by undertaking this effort to revise the dam safety regulations.

It is understood that many of the changes that are proposed reflect changes in the industry at both the State and federal level that will better identify the risks inherently associated with dam construction.  The requirements to put into place emergency action plan development and clarification of terminology along with the requirement to perform dam break analysis and notify persons and property located within potential dam break inundation zones are much needed enhancements to the regulations. 

The City is concerned primarily on two aspects of the new regulations; first the removal of flexibility of the new regulations in regard to dam classification and, secondly on the implementation strategy of the new regulations.  The current regulations rely on the judgment of competent and experienced professional engineers to evaluate the dam classification in the context of various factors that apply to each dam design, including risk that should weigh heavily into dam safety evaluations.  The revised Table 1 takes this discretionary aspect out of the process which will not allow the flexibility that has been used in the past successfully throughout the Commonwealth.

The Second issue in reference to the implementation strategy is concerning from a cost standpoint and does not mirror similar initiatives in other areas of infrastructure improvement.  The State regulates building construction under the Uniform Statewide Building Code USBC which requires an owner to maintain a building in conformance to the Code that existed at the time of permit issuance.  The owner does not have to update to current codes until such time that he performs new work on the structure. This is to protect the owner from costly upgrades every time the Code changes. 

Another public example is when roads are reconstructed they have to meet the Code in existence at the time.  Every road can not be updated to new standards every time a new design criteria is placed into effect because this would be cost prohibitive. 

It must be recognized that funding is usually a factor which must be considered alongside risk when making decisions concerning rehabilitation of the nation’s infrastructure.  Upgrading dams to meet current design standards can often be cost prohibitive and in some cases unwarranted if a significant improvement in public safety is not achieved. In the case of the City of Manassas T. Nelson Elliot Dam project we are being requested to spend almost $10 million dollars in funds to achieve a full PMF storm design.  This will result in higher water rates for our residents and businesses.   

The City would like to see a distinction in the regulations for new dams and existing dams and to see the current regulations stay in place under Section 130 that provides for exemptions for dams that were constructed prior to July 1, 1982 that do not pose an unreasonable hazard to life and property. 

In recent meetings with Virginia Department of Conservation Recreation Staff (DCR) it was noted that there are 594 state regulated dams throughout the state.  It is anticipated this list will grow to well over 1,000 with the new regulations that will go into effect this summer.  The City’s Dam is one of only  nineteen (19) Class 1 risk dams in the state whose sole purpose is to operate as a water supply reservoir.  If the dam regulations are not changed to provide relief to the City it is requested that the Board works closely with the Legislature and Governor on a funding strategy to assist localities that are impacted adversely by adhering to the new regulations.