Abstract: Virginia Senate Bill 276 was proposed in February 2010 to revise a dam safety regulation requirement to allow the emergency action plan (EAP) in place of a dam remediation as required. This article distinguishes the essential differences between remediation and EAP, although both are required for public safety. Fundamentally, a dam remediation defends its safety at the front line while an EAP increases the depth of public safety defense in case of a dam failure. This article also describes the cause for the referenced legislative action and the lessons learned for improving dam regulator’s enforcement strategy to gain cooperation with the dam owner. The views solely expressed here by the author, from the standpoint of a Virginia resident and professional engineer, do not necessarily represent the views/practices of any federal governmental agency of the U.S.A.

Key words: dam safety, public safety, dam safety regulator, dam owner, remediation, EAP, politics, profession

摘要： 美国维州参议院2010 年2月提出276号法案修改水坝安全监管法条，容许以应急行动计划（EAP）替代水坝修缮。尽管两者都是为了公共安全，但有本质上的不同。基本上，水坝修缮是维护水坝安全的第一线作业，而EAP则是为增加公共安全的防御纵深而预备，以防万一。本文还介绍了该立法行动的动机以及坝安监管单位要从中吸取教训，改进执法策略，使能获得水坝业主的合作。本文是笔者从维州居民及坝安专业观点提出的个人见解和评论，与美国联邦政府的政策及施政方针无涉。

关键词: 水坝安全, 公共安全, 坝安监管单位, 水坝业主, 水坝修缮, 应急行动计划, 政治, 专业