F ADA099 089 GAI CONSULTANTS INC MONROEVILLE PA F/6 13/13NATIONAL DAM INSPECTION PROGRAM. BEAVER POND DAM (NOI I.D. NUMB--ETClUl

MAR Al B M MIHALCIN 0ACW31-BI -0G15UNCLASSIFIED NLE IIIEQIIIIIEIIIIIIIIIIIIIIflfflfIEIIEEEEEEIIEEIIIEEEEEEEIIEIIEIIIIIIEEEE

qW.,ANN- -amp

DELAWARE RIVER BASINf[)1NGMANS CREEK, PIKE COUNTY

c~) PENNSYLVANIA

r ::.BEAVER POND DAMNDI I.D. NO. PA-00408

;4 PENNDER I.D. NO. 52-13

--EtKMAN LUMBER COMPANY -

___ PHASEI INSPECTION REPORT-v-'NATINALPAM- INSPECTION PROGRAM.

PREPARED FOR4

'4R TI'ARTMENT OF IE RVYBaltimore District, Corps of Engineers I~~

Baltimore, MIurylund 212039

PREPARED BY* 1 J 'GAI CONSULTANTS, INC.i

L0 570 BEATTY ROADMONROEVILLE, PENNSYLVANIA 15146 0.4I

M A 1i i

10m, will be III bclk and c.

wh~tem81 5 18 038

PREFACE

This report is prepared under guidance contained in the RecommendedGuidelines for Safety Inspection of Dams for Phase I Investiga-tions. Copies of these guidelines may be obtained from the Officeof Chief of Engineers, Washington, D.C. 20314. The purpose of aPhase I investigation is to identify expeditiously those dams whichmay pose hazards to human life or property. The assessment of thegeneral condition of the dam is based upon available data andvisual inspections. Detailed investigation and analyses involvingtopographic mapping, subsurface investigations, testing, and de-tailed computational evaluations are beyond the scope of a Phase Iinvestigation; however, the investigation is intended to identifyany need for such studies.

In reviewing this report, it should be realized that the reportedcondition of the dam is based on observations of field conditionsat the time of inspection along with data available to the in-spection team.

It is important to note that the condition of a dam depends onnumerous and constantly changing internal and external conditions,and is evolutionary in nature. It would be incorrect to assumethat the present condition of the dam will continue to representthe condition of the dam at some point in the future. Only throughfrequent inspections can unsafe conditions be detected and onlythrough continued care and maintenance can these conditions beprevented or corrected.

Phase I inspections are not intended to provide detailed hydrologicand hydraulic analyses. In accordance with the established guide-lines, the Spillway Design Flood is based on the estimated ProbableMaximum Flood (greatest reasonably possible storm runoff) for theregion, or fractions thereof. The Spillway Design Flood provides ameasure of relative spillway capacity and serves as an aid indetermining the need for more detailed hydrologic and hydraulicstudies, considering the size of the dam, its general condition,and the downstream damage potential.

Breach analyses are performed, when necessary, to provide datato assess the potential for downstream damage and possible loss oflife. The results are based on specific theoretical scenariospeculiar to the analysis of a particular dam and are not applicableto other related studies such as those conducted under the FeFlood Insurance Program. Ace;;on -or.

V UTINSATFM AS Appr'v,,0! t ub it r.l2 a,.

Diditr .. n U "Lited

ii

PHASE I INSPECTION REPORTNATIONAL DAM INSPECTION PROGRAM

ABSTRACT

Beaver Pond Dam: NDI I. D. No. PA-00408

Owner: Eckman Lumber Company

State Located: Pennsylvania (PennDER I.D. No. 52-13)

County Located: Pike

Stream: Dingmans Creek

Inspection Date: 13 November 1980

Inspection Team: GAI Consultants, Inc.570 Beatty RoadMonroeville, Pennsylvania 15146

ased on a visual inspection, operational history, and hydrologic/hydraulic analysis, the dam is considered to be in good condition.

The size classification of the facility is small and the hazardclassification is considered to be high. In accordance with therecommended guidelines, the Spillway Design Flood (SDF) rangesbetween the 1/2 PMF (Probable Maximum Flood) and the PMF. Sincethe facility is classified near the lower bounds of the smallcategory, the SDF is considered to be the 1/2 PMF. Results ofhydrologic and hydraulic analyses indicate the facility will passand/or store approximately 40 percent of the PMF prior to embank-ment overtopping at the low area in the embankment crest (elevation1177.4). Breach analysis indicates that failure under less than1/2 PMF conditions could lead to increased downstream damage andpotential for loss of life. Thus, based on screening criteriaprovided by the recommended guidelines, the spillway is consideredto be seriously inadequate and the facility unsafe, non-emergency.

It is recommended that the owner immediately:

a. Develop a formal emergency warning system to notifydownstream residents should hazardous embankment conditionsdevelop. Included in the plan should be provisions for around-the-clock surveillance of the facility during periods of unusuallyheavy precipitation.

b. Retain the services of a registered professional engineerexperienced in the hydraulics and hydrology of dams to more accu-rately assess the adequacy of the spillway and prepare recommenda-tions for remedial measures deemed necessary to make the facilityhydraulically adequate.

A.

- P

iii

Beaver Pond Dam: NDI I.D. No. PA-00408

c. Have the embankment and adjacent abutment areas accurate-ly surveyed and infill any low areas to restore the crest to thedesign elevation of 1177.5 feet.

d. Repair all areas of deterioration in the concrete sur-faces of the spillway and spillway apron, and rearrange any dis-placed riprap in the discharge channel.

e. Remove the potentially obstructing debris lodged in thespillway forebay.

f. Remove all the trees, their root systems, and brush fromthe crest, upstream and downstream embankment slopes. This opera-tion should be conducted under the guidance of a soils engineerexperienced in the design and construction of earth dams.

g. Develop formal manuals of operation and maintenance toensure the future proper care of the facility.

GAI Consultants, Inc. Ap d b:

Bernard M. ihain, P.E. JAMFS W. PECK

JColonel, Corps of Engineers

District Engineer

0 REGISTERED 0

LiJ PRTS OJAI

BERNARD M. MIHALCIN( NGINLEiR

DNQA Date

-,Date 3pt1u \a\ Date / FA i/

- ...

a0

I-

~14

0

iv

- I.. ~ 4* -

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

PREFACE .............. ........................... i

ABSTRACT ............. .......................... ii

OVERVIEW PHOTOGRAPH ........ ..................... .. iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS ........... ...................... v

SECTION 1 - GENERAL INFORMATION ..... ................ 1

1.0 Authority .... ............. .............. 11.1 Purpose ........... ...................... 11.2 Description of Project ....... .............. 11.3 Pertinent Data ......... .................. 2

SECTION 2 - ENGINEERING DATA ....... ................ 5

2.1 Design ........ ...................... 52.2 Construction Records ....... ............... 62.3 Operational Records ........ ................ 62.4 Other Investigations ....... ............... 62.5 Evaluation .......... .................... 6

SECTION 3 - VISUAL INSPECTION ........ ................ 7

3.1 Observations ......... ................... 73.2 Evaluation .......... .................... 8

SECTION 4 - OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES ...... ............. 9

4.1 Normal Operating Procedure ...... ............ 94.2 Maintenance of Dam ....... ................ 94.3 Maintenance of Operating Facilities .... ........ 94.4 Warning System ......... .................. 94.5 Evaluation .......... .................... 9

SECTION 5 - HYDROLOGIC/HYDRAULIC EVALUATION .... ......... 10

5.1 Design Data .......... .................... 105.2 Experience Data ......... .................. 105.3 Visual Observations ........ ................ 105.4 Method of Analysis .............................. 105.5 Summary of Analysis ........ ................ 105.6 Spillway Adequacy ...... ................. . 13

SECTION 6 - EVALUATION OF STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY ........ .. 14

6.1 Visual Observations ...... ................ . 146.2 Design and Construction Techniques .... ........ 146.3 Past Performance . .................. 146.4 Seismic Stability ...... ................ 15

SECTION 7 - ASSESSMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS FORREMEDIAL MEASURES ...... ................ . 16

7.1 Dam Assessment ....... .................. . 167.2 Recommendations/Remedial Measures ........... ... 16

= . = ,- , .. . -. . - , _

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

APPENDIX A - VISUAL INSPECTION CHECKLIST AND FIELD SKETCHES

APPENDIX B - ENGINEERING DATA CHECKLIST

APPENDIX C - PHOTOGRAPHS

APPENDIX D - HYDROLOGIC AND HYDRAULIC ANALYSES

APPENDIX E - FIGURES

APPENDIX F - GEOLOGY

L.

1

PHASE I INSPECTION REPORTNATIONAL DAM INSPECTION PROGRAM

BEAVER POND DAMNDI # PA-00408, PENNDER # 52-13

SECTION IGENERAL INFORMATION

1.0 Authority.

The Dam Inspection Act, Public Law 92-367, authorized theSecretary of the Army, through the Corps of Engineers, to initiatea program of inspection of dams throughout the United States.

1:1 Purpose.

The purpose is to determine if the dam constitutes a hazard tohuman life or property.

1.2 Description of Project.

a. Dam and Appurtenances. Beaver Pond Dam is an earthembankment approximately 14 feet high and 395 feet long, includingspillway. The facility is provided with an uncontrolled, rectangu-lar shaped, concrete chute channel spillway located at the rightabutment. The spillway is equipped with an ogee-type weir, 110feet in length. The outlet works consist of a 36-inch diameterreinforced concrete pipe that discharges at the downstream embank-ment toe near the left sidewall of the spillway. Flow through thepipe is manually controlled by a 36-inch diameter sluice gatelocated at the inlet.

b. Location. Beaver Pond Dam is located on Dingmans Creekin Delaware Township, Pike County, Pennsylvania. The facility islocated approximately two miles east of the community of Edgemere,Pennsylvania, and less than three miles northwest of the town ofHoly Trinity (off Legislative Route 51006). The dam reservoir andwatershed are contained within the Edgemere and Lake Maskenozha,Pennsylvania-New Jersey, 7.5 minute U.S.G.S. topographic quad-rangles (see Figure 1, Appendix E). The coordinates of the dam are

1 * N410 15.1' and W740 56.9'.

C. Size Classification. Small (14 feet high, approximately

150 acre-feet storage capacity at the top of dam).

d. Hazard Classification. High (see Section 3.l.e).

e. Ownership. Eckman Lumber CompanyR. D. #3Lehighton, Pennsylvania 18235

Attention: John Eckman, President

na

2

f. Purpose. Recreation.

g. Historical Data. Detailed correspondence from PennDERfiles indicate that Beaver Pond Dam was originally constructedprior to 1913 and was used for water power. The original dam wasan earth and rock structure 10 feet high and only 70 feet long. By1950, remedial measures to control seepage and correct damage fromovertopping had resulted in a facility with a concrete spillway andan embankment length of about 200 feet. During the flood of August1955, however, the dam was once again severely damaged and it wasdecided by the owner to reconstruct the entire facility.

In 1955, Edward C. Hess Associates, Inc., civil engineersof Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania, designed the present facility. Thenew dam was designed as a 350-foot long earth embankment (fieldmeasured at 395 feet) with a 110-foot concrete spillway. Thisfacility was completed in 1956-1957 and has since functioned with-out any significant problems.

1.3 Pertinent Data.

a. Drainage Area (square miles). 7.0

b. Discharge at Dam Site

Discharge Capacity of Outlet Conduit - Discharge curvesare not available.

Discharge Capacity of Spillway at Maximum Pool = 5100 cfs(see Appendix D, Sheet 10).

c. Elevations (feet above mean sea Level). The followingelevations were obtained from available drawings and through fieldmeasurements based on the elevation of normal pool at approximately1172.0 feet as indicated in Figure 1 (see Appendix D, Sheet 1).

Top of Dam 1177.5 (design).1177.4 (field).

Maximum Design Pool Not known.Maximum Pool of Record Not known.Normal Pool 1172.0 (assumed datum).Spillway Crest 1172.0.Upstream Inlet Invert 1165.0 (design).Downstream Outlet Invert 1164.6 (design).Downstream Outlet Invert 1163.1 (field).Streambed at Dam Centerline 1164.6 (estimated).Maximum Tailwater Not known.

d. Reservoir Length (feet).

Top of Dam 2650Normal Pool 2500

" '..

3

e. Storage (acre-feet).

Top of Dam 150

Normal Pool 61

f. Reservoir Surface (acres).

Top of Dam 20Normal Pool 13

g. Dam.

Type Earth.

Length 285 feet (excluding spill-way).

Height 14 feet (field measured;embankment crest to down-stream embankment toe).

Top Width Varies; two feet minimum atleft abutment to 10 feetmaximum near spillway.

Upstream Slope 2H:lV.

Downstream Slope Varies; 6.5H:lV minimum to3H:lV maximum.

Zoning Homogeneous earth embank-ment with a rock coveredupstream slope (see Fig-ure 3).

Impervious Core Homogeneous earth section.

Cutoff Impervious cutoff as shownin Figure 3.

Grout Curtain Not known.

h. Diversion Canal andRegulating Tunnels. None.

i. Outlet Works.

Type Concrete intake tower withRodney Hunt Series 208rising stem operator and36-inch diameter sluice-gate.

-- * F

4

Outlet Conduit 36-inch diameter reinforcedconcrete pipe encased inconcrete.

Conduit Length 55 feet, slaice gate to

outlet endwall.

j. Spillway.

Type Uncontrolled, rectangularshaped, concrete chutechannel with an ogee-typeweir.

Crest Elevation 1172.0 feet.

Crest Length 110 feet.

Closure and RegulatingFacilities Manually controlled up-

stream of embankment cen-terline via 36-inch dia-meter sluice gate locatedat the inlet. The gate ishoused at the base of areinforced concrete risersituated along the upstreamembankment toe.

Access The riser is not accessibleby foot from the embankmentcrest.

.".. i " . .. .

5

SECTION 2

ENGINEERING DATA

2.1 Design.

a. Design Data Availability and Sources. No formal designreports or calculations are available. No information pertainingto the design of the original dam is available in the PennDERfiles; but, information about the present facility is contained inthe above files in the form of two drawings, dated 1955 (see Fig-ures 2 and 3, Appendix E). In addition, these files contain the.state construction permit application reports, dated 1955 and 1956,which contain brief descriptions of the design aspects of thepresent facility.

b. Design Features.

1. Embankment. Details of the basic embankment designare presented in Figures 2 and 3. As indicated, the present facil-ity was constructed atop the existing earth embankment (see Fig-ure 3, Section E-E). Specific design features are obscure sincemuch of the embankment, as viewed by the inspection team, differedsomewhat, in dimension and cross-section from that shown in Fig-ure 3. The renovated embankment constructed in 1956, was designedwith 2H:lV upstream and downstream slopes and an eight-foot minimumembankment crest width. The embankment crest, observed by theinspection team, varied in width from ten feet near the left spill-way sidewall to two feet near the left abutment. The downstreamface has an irregular slope varying from 6.5H:lV to 3H:lV. Thesteepest downstream embankment slope coincides with the broadestsection of the embankment crest near the left sidewall of thespillway. An impervious clay cutoff is apparent in the availabledrawings and is discussed in the state permit reports.

2. Appurtenant Structures.

a) Spillway. Design features of the spillway arepresented in Figures 2 and 3. As indicated, the spillway is anuncontrolled, rectangular shaped, concrete chute channel with anogee-type weir located at the right abutment. The length of thespillway crest is 110 feet. The structure is tied into the embank-ment on both sides with 18-inch thick concrete key walls that arereportedly carried to impervious foundation material. The spillwaywas designed to discharge over a 12-inch thick grouted stone apron.At the end of the apron, an 18-inch thick curtain wall is carrieddown to a suitable impervious foundation material. The dischargechannel downstream of the curtain wall was to be protected withrandomly dumped stone.

b) Outlet Conduit. Design features of the outletconduit are presented in Figure 3. As indicated, the outlet con-duit is a 36-inch diameter reinforced concrete pipe with the inlet

6

located at the base of the reinforced concrete riser and the outletat the downstream toe of the embankment immediately adjacent theleft sidewall of the spillway. The concrete riser is situated onthe upstream side of the embankment adjacent to the spillway. Flowthrough the outlet is controlled by means of a 36-inch diametersluice gate located at the inlet. The gate is manually operatedfrom atop the riser structure.

c. Specific Design Data and Criteria. Available design datais limited primarily to the information contained in the 1955 and1956 state permit application reports and provided in Figures 2 and3. No information relative to specific design procedures or appliedconstruction techniques was obtained.

2.2 Construction Records.

No formal construction records are available for the originalfacility built prior to 1913, or for the present facility built in1956-1957. PennDER files contain photographs and correspondenceaccumulated during the years of construction; however, there is noinformation pertaining to specific construction aspects or tech-niques such as compaction procedures.

2.3 Operational Records.

No records of the day-to-day operation of this facility areavailable.

2.4 Other Investigations

Formal state inspection reports for both the original and thepresent facilities are contained in PennDER files for the years1919, 1950, 1960, and 1965.

2.5 Evaluation.

The available data, coupled with the information obtainedduring the visual inspection, are considered adequate to make areasonable Phase I assessment of the facility.

w.I

• ' ,@

7

SECTION 3

VISUAL INSPECTION

3.1 Observations.

a. General. The general appearance of the facility suggestsit to be in good condition.

b. Embankment. Observations made during the visual inspec-tion indicate the embankment is in good condition. No seepagethrough the downstream face of the dam or indications of embankmentinstability were noted during the field inspection. Some minordeficiencies were observed which will require the remedial atten-tion. These include:

1. Low area in the right abutment (1.1-foot below thedesign top of the dam) beyond the apparent end of the embankment.

2. Low area in the left abutment (0.4-foot).

3. The entire upstream embankment face is heavilyovergrown with weeds, brush, and trees up to six inches in dia-meter.

4. The downstream embankment face in the vicinity ofthe spillway is covered with brush and small trees.

c. Appurtenant Structures.

1. Spillway. The condition of the spillway is con-sidered to be good (see Photographs 8, 9, and 11). A large stumpand a section of a boat dock were observed lodged in the spillwayforebay. Moderate scaling and a few minor spalls were observedover the ogee crest. The spillway sidewalls exhibit only tinorcracking. An apron is constructed downstream of the spillway withan approximate 15 percent grade. The apron shows signs of distressand requires remedial attention to protect it from further deter-ioration (see Photograph 11). Water action has displaced some ofthe random rock dumped adjacent to the curtain wall.

2. Outlet Works. The visible parts of the outlet works(intake structure and discharge structure) were found to be in goodcondition. The concrete intake structure is located approximately25 feet upstream of the crest of the dam and was inaccessible byfoot at the time of inspection (see Photographs 5 and 6). Thecontrol valve mechanism was not operated during the inspection;however, the owner stated that the gate was operated about twoyears ago.

d. Reservoir Area. The general area surrounding the reser-voir is comprised of moderate to steep slopes that are heavilyforested (see Photographs 1 and 2). No signs of slope distresswere observed.

• -

8

e. Downstream Channel. The spillway discharges intoDingmans Creek, a steeply sloped braided stream set in a narrowvalley between steep, heavily wooded side slopes. The potentialhazard area is located approximately 500 feet downstream of the damwhere Dingmans Creek parallels Legislative Route 51006. Severalsmall business establishments are located along the left bank ofthe stream. Many residences are located along both banks ofDingmans Creek for the next mile. Due to their close proximity tothe streambed, approximately 15 homes and as many as 50 personscould be affected in this area by the floodwaters associated withan embankment breach. Consequently, the hazard classification isconsidered to be high.

3.2 Evaluation.

The overall condition of the facility is considered to begood. Low areas were noted at or near both embankment-abutmentjunctions. These levels should be verified by an accurate surveyand remedial measures implemented. The operability of the sluicegate should be verified. Efforts should also be made to clearembankment overgrowth from both the upstream and downstream slopes.Some concrete deterioration is evident in the spillway and spillwayapron which should be repaired along with the rearrangement ofdisplaced riprap observed in the discharge channel. In addition,potential obstructions to free spillway discharge such as the largestump and boat dock section observed in the spillway forebay shouldbe removed.

L"

. . .~ ~ ~ *. C" , i t i : '- .t ':)-

9

SECTION 4

OPERATIONAL PROCLDURES

4.1 Normal Operating Procedure.

The facility is essentially self-regulating. That is, excessinflow discharges automatically over the spillway and is directeddownstream. Normally, the outlet conduit is closed. No formaloperations manual is available.

4.2 Maintenance of Dam.

No formal maintenance program exists for the dam. The ownerstated that responsibility for maintenance of the facility wastransferred to Pocono Mountain Lake Estates in exchange for shore-line property and use of the lake.

4.3 Maintenance of Operating Facilities.

The only operable appurtenance associated with the facility isthe manually controlled sluice gate at the inlet of the outletconduit. Regular maintenance is not performed and no maintenancemanual is available.

4.4 Warning System.

There is no formal warning system for the facility.

4.5 Evaluation.

No formal operations or maintenance manuals are available forthe facility, but are recommended to ensure proper future care andoperation. In addition, a formal warning system should be develop-ed and incorporated into any such manuals.

10

SECTION 5

HYDROLOGIC/HYDRAULIC EVALUATION

5.1 Design Data.

No formal design reports or calculations are available. Astate permit application report for the reconstruction of the dam,dated 1955, indicates that the spillway was designed with a dis-charge capacity of about 5,370 cfs, based on a spillway opening 110feet long and 5.5 feet deep (as-built), using 3.78 as the coeffi-cient of discharge. The design capacity exceeded 1955 state re-quirements and was subsequently approved.

5.2 Experience Data.

Records of reservoir levels and/or spillway discharges are notavailable.

5.3 Visual Observations.

On the date of inspection, no conditions were observed thatwould indicate the spillway could not function satisfactorilyduring a flood event, within the limits of its design capacity.

5.4 Method of Analysis.

The facility has been analyzed in accordance with the pro-cedures and guidelines established by the U. S. Army, Corps ofEngineers, Baltimore District, for Phase I hydrologic and hydraulicevaluations. The analysis has been performed utilizing a modifiedversion of the HEC-l program developed by the U. S. Army, Corps ofEngineers, Hydrologic Engineering Center, Davis, California.Analytical capabilities of the program are briefly outlined in thepreface contained in Appendix D.

5.5 Summary of Analysis.

a. Spillway Design Flood (SDF?. In accordance with theprocedures and guidelines contained in the National Guidelines forSafety Inspection of Dams for Phase I Investigations, the SpillwayDesign Flood (SDF) for Beaver Pond Dam ranges between the 1/2 PMF(Probable Maximum Flood) and the PMF. This classification is basedon the relative size of the dam (small) and the potential hazard ofdam failure to downstream developments (high). Since the facilityis classified near the lower bounds of the small category, the SDFis considered to be the 1/2 PMF.

I : " 1 ' i '

: ' '

b. Results of Analysis. Beaver Pond Dam was evaluated undernormal operating conditions. That is, the reservoir was initiallyat its normal pool or spillway elevation of approximately 1172.0feet, with the spillway weir discharging freely. The outlet con-duit was assumed to be non-functional for the purpose of analysis,since the flow capacity of this conduit is not such that it wouldsignificantly increase the total discharge capabilities of the damand reservoir. The spillway consists of an uncontrolled, rectan-gular shaped, concrete chute channel with discharges regulated by aconcrete ogee-type weir.

Lake Rene Dam and Marcel Lake Dam, located upstream of BeaverPond Dam, were considered in this analysis to determine theireffects on Beaver Pond Dam. They also were evaluated under normaloperating conditions. That is, the reservoirs were initially atnormal pool; the spillways were assumed to be discharging freely;and, the outlet conduits were assumed to be closed. The outflowfrom Lake Rene Dam was routed directly into Marcel Lake, and thetotal outflow from Marcel Lake Dam was routed directly into BeaverPond. All pertinent engineering calculations relative to theevaluation of Beaver Pond Dam, including those pertaining to theupstream facilities, are included in Appendix D.

Overtopping analysis (using the modified HEC-1 computer pro-gram) indcated that the discharge/storage capacity of Beaver PondDam can accommodate only about 40 percent of the PMF prior toovertopping of the low area in the embankment crest (elevation1177.4). It is also noted that under events of 0.3 PMF magnitudeor greater, discharge would occur around the right abutment, andunder events of 0.37 PMF magnitude or greater, discharge wouldoccur around both the left and right abutments (Appendix D,Sheet 13; Summary Input/ Output Sheets, Sheet K; Appendix A, "Pro-file of Dam Crest from Field Survey"). The upstream facilities,Lake Rene Dam and Marcel Lake Dam, can accommodate about 70 percentand 38 percent of the PMF, respectively, prior to embankment over-topping. Under 1/2 PMF (SDF) conditions,the Beaver Pond Dam embank-ment would be inundated for about 3.0 hours, by depths of up to 0.7feet above the low area in the embankment crest (Summary Input/Out-put Sheets, Sheets J and K). Since the SDF for Beaver Pond Dam isthe 1/2 PMF, it can be concluded that the dam has a high potentialfor overtopping, and thus, for breaching under floods of 1/2 PMFmagnitude or less.

As Beaver Pond Dam cannot safely accommodate a flood of atleast 1/2 PMF magnitude, the possibility of embankment failureunder floods of 1/2 PMF intensity or less was investigated (inaccordance with Corps directive ETL-lll0-2-234). Several possiblealternatives were examined, since it is difficult, if not impos-sible, to determine exactly how or if a specific dam will 'fail.The major concern of the breaching analysis is with the impact ofthe various breach discharges on increasing downstream water sur-face elevations above those to be expected if breaching did notoccur.

12

The modified HEC-i computer program was used for the breachinganalysis, with the assumption that the breaching of an earth damwould commence once the low area in the embankment crest was over-topped. (It was assumed that the discharge around the left andright abutments alone, which would occur prior to the overtoppingof the main embankment, would not ultimately lead to the failure ofthe dam.) Also, in routing the outflows downstream, the channelbed was assumed to be initially dry.

Five breach models were analyzed for Beaver Pond Dam. Twosets of breach geometry were evaluated for each of two failuretimes (Appendix D, Sheet 18). The two sets of breach sectionschosen were considered to be the minimum and maximum probablefailure sections. The two failure times (total time for eachbreach section to reach its final dimensions) under which the twobreach sections were investigated were assumed to be a rapid time(0.5 hours) and a prolonged time (3.0 hours), so that a range ofthis most sensitive variable might be examined. In addition, anaverage possible set of breach conditions was analyzed, with afailure time of 1.0 hours.

The peak breach outflows (resulting from 0.43 PMF conditions)at Beaver Pond Dam ranged from about 5,570 cfs for the minimumsection - maximum fail time scheme to about 8,700 cfs for themaximum section - minimum fail time scheme. The peak outflowresulting from the average breach scheme was about 6,170 cfs,compared to the non-breach 0.43 PMF peak outflow of approximately5,540 cfs (Appendix D, Sheet 20).

The principal center of damage investigated is at Section 1(see Figure 1), approximately 500 feet downstream from Beaver PondDam, where several small businesses and residences are located.Within this reach, the 0.43 PMF non-breach outflows resulted in apeak water surface elevation of about 2.1 feet above the damagelevel of the structures. However, the water surface elevationsresulting from the breach models were as much as 3.0 feet above thedamage level of the structures, representing increases of up to 0.9feet (Appendix D, Sheet 20).

The consequences of dam failure can better be envisioned ifnot only the increase in the height of the floodwave is considered,but, also the great increase in momentum of the larger and probablyswifter moving volume of water. In addition, there is the possi-bility of a failure section larger than those analyzed, which couldresult from a total or partial failure of the spillway weir itself,which could result in even higher downstream water surface eleva-tions.

From this analysis, it is concluded that the failure of BeaverPond Dam is quite possible, and would most likely lead to increasedproperty damage and possibly to loss of life in the downstreamregion.

13

5.6 Spillway Adequacy.

As presented previously, Beaver Pond Dam can accommodate onlyabout 40 percent of the PMF prior to embankment overtopping.Should an event of this magnitude or greater occur, the dam wouldbe overtopped and could possibly fail, endangering downstreamresidents and increasing the potential for loss of life in thedownstream regions. Therefore, the spillway is considered to beseriously inadequate.

14

SECTION 6

EVALUATION OF STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY

6.1 Visual Observations.

a. Embankment. Based on visual observations, the embankmentappeared to be in good condition. A few minor deficiencies werenoted at the time of inspection which will require remedial atten-tion. They are:

1. Low areas approximately one-foot below the designcrest elevation occur in both the left and right abutments. Anaccurate survey is recommended and the areas should be regradedconsistent with the design top of dam elevation.

2. The roots of trees growing on the dam may increasethe seepage potential through the embankment and uprooting of thetrees by high winds could cause substantial volume of the embank-ment material to be displaced. Hence, the trees and their rootsystems should be removed.

b. Appurtenant Structures.

1. Spillway. The spillway is in good condition withonly minor spalling and cracking being observed on the ogee struc-ture and sidewalls. Minor deterioration of the spillway apron wasevident which will require patching or grouting. Displaced riprapobserved in the discharge channel should be rearranged to providefor maximum erosion protection.

2. Outlet Works. The outlet works appears to be in goodcondition. No concrete deterioration or corrosion of the valveoperator was evident.

6.2 Design and Construction Techniques.

No design or construction records are available with theexception of construction drawings and a few dated photographscontained in PennDER files. A state inspection report, dated July1956, indicated that construction had been completed in accordancewith the plans and specifications.

6.3 Past Performance.

No formal records of past performance are available from theowner; however, information contained in PennDER files suggest thatthe reconstructed facility has performed satisfactorily since itscompletion.

a. I*

15

6.4 Seismic Stability.

The dam is located in Seismic Zone No. 1 and thus, may besubject to minor earthquake induced dynamic forces. As the Qverallstatic stability of the embankment appears adequate, it is believedthat the facility can withstand minor earthquake induced dynamicforcs. However, no calculations and/or investigations were per-formed to confirm this opinion.

16

SECTION 7 1

ASSESSMENT AND RECOMMENDATION FOR REMEDIAL MEASURES

7.1 Dam Assessment.

a. Safety. The results of this evaluation indicate thefacility is in good condition.

The size classification of the facility is small and itshazard classification is considered to be high. In accordance withthe recommended guidelines, the Spillway Design Flood for thefacility ranges between the 1/2 PMF (Probable Maximum Flood) to thePMF. This classification is based on the relative size of thefacility (small) and the potential hazard of dam failure to down-stream developments (high). Since the facility is classified nearthe lower bounds of the small category, the SDF is considered to bethe 1/2 PMF. Hydraulic and hydrologic analyses indicate the facil-ity will pass and/or store approximately 40 percent of the PMFprior to embankment overtopping at the low area in the embankmentcrest (elevation 1177.4). Breach analysis indicates that failureunder less than 1/2 PMF conditions could lead to increased down-stream damage and potential for loss of life. Thus, based onscreening criteria provided in the recommended guidelines, thespillway is considered to be seriously inadequate and the facilityunsafe, non-emergency.

b. Adequacy of Information. The available information isconsidered adequate to make an accurate Phase I assessment of thefacility.

c. Urgency. The recommendations listed below should beimplemented immediately.

d. Necessity for Additional Investigations. Additionalinvestigations are currently deemed necessary to more accuratelyassess the adequacy of the spillway.

7.2 Recommendations/Remedial Measures.

a. Develop a formal emergency warning system to notifydownstream residents should hazardous embankment conditions develop.Included in the plan should be provisions for around-the-clocksurveillance of the facility during periods of unusually heavyprecipitation.

b. Retain the services of a registered professional engineerexperienced in the hydraulics and hydrology of dams to more accur-ately assess the adequacy of the spillway and prepare recommendationsfor remedial measures deemed necessary to make the facility hydrau-lically adequate.

9W^_

17

c. Have the embankment and immediate abutment areas accur-ately surveyed and infill any low areas to restore the crest to thedesign elevation of 1177.5 feet.

d. Repair all areas of deterioration in the concrete sur-faces of the spillway and spillway apron, and rearrange any dis-placed riprap in the discharge channel.

e. Remove the potentially obstructing debris lodged in thespillway forebay.

f. Remove all the trees, their root systems, and brush fromthe crest, upstream and downstream embankment slopes. This opera-tion should be conducted under the guidance of a soils engineerexperienced in the design and construction of earth dams.

g. Develop formal manuals of operation and maintenance toensure the future proper care of the facility.

"-

APPENDIX A

VISUAL INSPECTION CHECKLIST AND FIELD SKETCHES

A

0 LL0

00

00

Ow 0w

-44

0 Lr)0 4r. WL

9 z r- ula) ft w

-4 = -4 I

cia <

z

00 0 0

NU Z

zzc. 0 CL

0 z 0 j 0

4 za) a LL> C) CC,

IC CL) a'

0 C) Cn ci

L U2 W J0c

< 0

U.

00

-44

4 41 aoo 0

0 4.

'-4 tt~ 0

ID 0 9

V -- 0

.4 4J a~

.o c4) >0 ft a. a).0 Ha)~.0a

41 001.Ij ' c

a >)-4 (n :33"41-4 0 r4 00-

0 W -4 a)

U~ " ~-4.4 tp.

LU -4N w-. U). 4

lu U u- aU U)41 (Y.i ) a) 0 :

7- 2 a -S

2) .4 V" 4 L

LU z c(daco (a >, '44 4 q)QA(a) N-.

> 541

LU -'a) 0 c .U) V)~

0 a U U) 1-~.4 En C >u (a .0 0 .0

0 50 0 0) Oe:s

a) U)U )U"4 41 a41

z zwU7 wZ 0 u c

:e2w 0 w <ul ~ g <.j-

> 0 0 <

x- -k

0 '

z LL

- -.0

C.

ww

w 0

'41

4caz

04 4

0.020 41

0 'V

4$

02

0 00

0 0'0

LU 0jL z0 0 - <

0 U< 44

4J 0.(n*

4L LU=

- _ _

o0 40

(U 2-4 LAO)C0 0 -

44 4.)4 -23) .144J-

r_0. - 04 .041 0 $44141a

0 -aa(0 00 > (

0 0V 04 -404 -40 w4 0'4tp* 04 U) U

Q)~ r. U0 03V) -4 (230 41 4

a) 0 m0 -4 0 0 )C

-4o 044 41(20=j CUO 04 VJ0'4H

Z 4 w 1 V () .12 -4g U2C: .,4. Z4 f) 4-1 0

(20 Q 04 U2 V 0D 00' M .. 0

.) 04 -4a0 04.(co it4. -44 .04 04) aV (JO -4-

U) 00CULL 404 00 .0 0

41 0 m 4 0 4a.V) 00 %D V23 4J

0 CU *4 m1 V40-U) 1-4 41V0 rV ~ .~~ >.*. Ent 1 1 4 1

1.- 0 .0 .0 M.0--i4 $ 0qc EU a) 04- 4) 0 00rAq C.

U)f. *.0 4) 0 -4-40Vz 4 JO u. C:- 0)C0

o U ra 04 -00 4

C1 0 00 041 004J ) 4)U0 9:0

LU 0J '0 .- 4 CU40

0 -4 04 .04 000)34)4) 4j3 -U 10o - 01 0.~ -42(40(d 000 4). U)CUZ 1 C 4-4 3

U -43 0 0j .

HZw 0-4 UU Z

LU W

LL zL

0 z aW W 0 J I--

_j -LU

S.~~ - lZn

LL0hoI"

>10

o 04 -4

01 >. 0

0 ( ' 0D)

- 00 0

.00 d)4 044

10 00 a 0

.0 (d) 0 1

LW C (0 -4 ro0) (n 0 Q)4(

z 0 0 > Vo 4 $4 - 040 )4 4- 4.4(M

.4. m (UU r. 0 .,4 U (4 (a

u. AS . 0 Ow

z ): (U) E-4LU 4 M

4-) -4 0).-

-4 0 C) W4j

0 0 -0 $.40 *-.4 44.U

=U -00..~ U 4 Q En 0

040 0 0 0s (04(U ' d) 0 a) 4Jq0

04 01U -0 04 0o 0 (U 04

(zE (15 14-4 UQ 4J Z- 0 4

(U0 w( C0 44000 -A 4-) )

W - ) 0 (4 W 1) 0r0) 4- .0 ~ -4 Q) ~ -0

LU sz -4 C:.)oA 0O 0 0a 0a t0 U4

u 4.0 M- :1.-i 4.LU q0 (U) u4 00 0 ('-

> wO 00 0) -,44 04.0.-. )(-

w -4 04 '4

us 4 '-W (U - r-4 En .JUw a4r (1) .(U r-~J 0

4 *) 0 r0U Q04 > ~ - c.44 U) -4(UU

0 0 0 'A .- O Q) -40

W000.-4 040( 0030fl'a) 3: 1fl$4 r-

4 -40 L0

oL -Jz W oz MUz zz zJ

Lu Zzj >-a04 < 4 -

0 5 z 00L u-Jz0m

ui w

0 . co4

0 0IV 4<

0 CL

0

A.

z

4cz

0

LU

a.)LU

(A P

0

0

NNN Nz

z ui02u LUz Mz

z z000

QC LU

CL 0.0CL 0 U)

U.

co0 C

0

(az

0,

z0

z0

z

a 2

U,

zz 64 $4

di di i d

o 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 u

z z

UUzz2U W U,

C 0>N 0cc !9

z uwCCL

U.

co 0

0 (d 4 J

41' L (d

U) W 4-)

.0'a 0

-4 4) V

U)>1 a 0 U)(d'al

z $(

w 2 'a - )0 4.0

0 EW 002 4

z 04 00(aL r-4 '44 'a4 M W.

0U 00 r

$4- t)) m'0~4 'a)'

cc is 0 4-4 . t0z ' a(z =-4

44 z4 4j 'a 444J 0a' 0 (a(14 4 .0 -40-

LU 0 o 0 -m4>' .0 4 Q)I E -

'a )14 $ 0 . 4J U)0 'a 04'1U 0 )a

(1) 4.1 02 O'a $4' Za 'a -4

w 'a 02 '

>) (1) 04 4.J' .' > J

uw 0 3 1 ) 3'a 'a 0 'a h4 VI~

cis 0 >a wH0 (aa

cc0 00 ~ 4) it~ ' -4

ZZ 410u

z <20 -J

zJ~ 0Z0

P________ C________ Z z

0 .1

z w4> z ,i.(

RIPRAPRA

LAKE

WOODED

ARFA

ROAD

HOUSE S

BEAVER POND DAMGENERAL PLAN-FIELD INSPECTION NOTES

. ................. ..

... . . .... ...

. . . .. . . . . . . . .

....... . ...... .....

..........

. . .. . . ...

. . .. . . .. .

. . . . . . .. ... . . . . . .. ..

.q . ...

Mii

APPENDIX B

ENGINEERING DATA CHECKLIST

aa* S*

4 U)

00

00

o "44Qou

0044

~4)

04 0

.0

4-)4

SU)

En 4J 444JU .1 0

o 19 -4w-4- a)w75Zcc t 5V .)-a4

U) (3) 0 " .-

LA -Il a. 44 )4X

x- 0 a)-40~ Ql 00

z) IUU)4.) Xd(1 Ln 4j1- 6104 L) .4 -4 001 1

0 -4 col (0 En-OA r

-- ~'0 '0IC) 00 >oc tn~

-c 0 Q1

:2 a) V (a ro )w r. $4 -

0 (4 a: 0' r

-40 1) 0 Q)a) ~0 ~ V) m)

'0

a.-w - z

(7) -U C

M 0 j0 j L0 J Z (0 -j ()U

- n - o-me

11 0

U

co0

Z -

L U L U a .z

4: 4z 04

a) Q)

a) a) 0 0

z n

a) a) (n- ( a)

a) z) U) 0L (n 0

C,, CfL -z c

(nF-2 w CL > m w

CL0 0U z 0 U

06,

U.0

00

'- 0

a U)LJI Z uj

zw a

04

9 0

00 000

00

o 0 0000

z0 U,

cnZiU, C.) zoU w U) Z C

1.- CJWW 0 ~ z

cc 0 0 0

0. CL A-

.mom

00

o)4J 0X

'00

0) 0000

4 4

0

0 (a

0 -4

a) 4

-4 4

0j '0 =.q(0

0 U)(1

'0z J 0 F -

4 co-4 4

00

u 0 (a:aLAi

OUw 0).

C -4 00

-4 0 00 00

0 .z

0 0

0X <0 <.4- p0z0 MoC-

E5 0 ) z 0) = =0

w0 CLCL) 'U

GAI CONSULTANTS, INC.

CHECK LIST ND ID # PA-00408HYDROLOGIC AND HYDRAULIC PENNOER ID# S2--

ENGINEERING DATA

SIZE OF DRAiNAGE AREA: 7.0 square miles.

ELEVATION TOP NORMAL POOL 1172.0 STORAGE CAPACITY: 61 acre-feet.

ELEVATION TOP FLOOD CONTROL POOL: - STORAGE CAPACITY:

ELEVATION MAXIMUM DESIGN POOL. STORAGE CAPACITY:-

ELEVATION TOPODAM: 1177.4 STORAGE CAPACITY: 150 acre-feet.

SPILLWAY DATA

CREST ELEVATION: 1172.0 feet.

TYPE. Uncontrolled, rectangular shaped, concrete chute channel withogee-type weir.

CREST LENGTH- 110 feet

CHANNEL LENGTH: N/A_

SPILLOVER LOCATION: Right abutment.

NUMBER AND TYPE OF GATES: None.

OUTLET WORKS

TYPE: Rodney Hunt 36-inch diameter sluice gate.

LOCATION: Upstrea1 m toe at left sidewall of spillway.

ENTRANCE INVERTS., 1165. 0 feet (design).

EXIT INVERTS: 11A"A-1 fee- (field).

EMERGENCY DRAWDOWN FACILITIES: 36-inch diameter sluice gate.

HYDROMETEOROLOGICAL GAGES

TYPE: None.

LOCATION:__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

RECORDS: __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

MAXIMUM NON-DAMAGING DISCHARGE: Unknown.

PAGE 5 OF 5

F-.

APPENDIX C

PHOTOGRAPHS

CRESr AN SLOE 5RLOWN

AREA

RIRA INAE10 RP

LOWAREA

LAKE

ROAD

HOUSES

BEAVER POND DAMPHOTOGRAPH KEY MAP

A.A

4A,*

A*1 z

C7

40

co

m4

k.

A,

a a -

4-

k.

a.

V

"4

3%~ ~ ~I

"/1/- . /,.Yf~e~#I~* "

/ .14ALl

I,,,

~f' I:L

APPENDIX D

HYDROLOGIC AND HYDRAULIC ANALYSES

D- 1

PREFACE

The modified HEC-i program is capable of performing twobasic types of hydrologic analyses: 1) the evaluation of theovertopping potential of the dam; and 2) the estimation of thedownstream hydrologic-hydraulic consequences resulting fromassumed structural failures of the dam. Briefly, the computationalprocedures typically used in the dam overtopping analysis are asfollows:

a. Development of an inflow hydrograph(s) to the reservoir.

b. Routing of the inflow hydrograph(s) through the reser-voir to determine if the event(s) analyzed would overtop the dam.

c. Routing of the outflow hydrograph(s) from the reservoirto desired downstream locations. The results provide the peakdischarge(s), time(s) of occurrence the peak discharge(s), andthe maximum stage(s) of each routed hydrograph at the downstreamend of each reach.

The evaluation of the hydrologic-hydraulic consequencesresulting from an assumed structural failure (breach) of the damis typically performed as shown below.

a. Development of an inflow hydrograph(s) to the reser-voir.

b. Routing of the inflow hydrograph(s) through the reser-voir.

c. Development of a failure hydrograph(s) based on speci-fied breach criteria and normal reservoir outflow.

d. Routing of the failure hydrograph(s) to desired down-stream locations. The results provide estimates of the peak dis-charge(s), time(s) to peak and maximum water surface elevation(s)of failure hydrograph(s) for each location.

. I I .. . .. "

HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC ANALYSISDATA BASE

NAME OF DAM: BEAVER POND DAM

PROBABLE MAXIMUM PRECIPITATION (PMP) - 22.0 INCHES/24 HOURS

STATION 1 2 3

STATION DESCRIPTION LAKE RENE DAM MARCEL LAKE BEAVER POND

DAM DAM

DRAINAGE AREA (SQUARE MILES) 1.6 2.7 2 .7

CUMULATIVE DRAINAGE AREA 1.6 4.3 7.0(SQUARE MILES)

ADJUSTMENT OF PMF FOR Zone 1 Zone 1 Zone 1DRAINAGE AREA LOCATION (%)

6 HOURS iil l11 iii12 HOURS 123 123 12324 HOURS 133 133 13348 HOURS 142 142 14272 HOURS - -

SNYDER HYDROGRAPH PARAMETERS

ZONE (21 1 1 1Cp C3) 0.45 0.45 0.45

Ct (3) 1.23 1.23 1.23

L (MILES) (4) 2.5 2.7 3.3Lca (MILES) (4) 1.2 1.2 1.4

tp = Ct (L.Lca)0o3 (HOURS) 1.71 1.75 1.95

SPILLWAY DATA (5)

CREST LENGTH (FEET) 55 60 110FREEBOARD (FEET) 5.0 5.5 5.4

(1) HYDROMETEOROLOGICAL REPORT 33, U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, 1956.(2) HYDROLOGIC ZONE DEFINED BY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, BALTIMORE DISTRICT, FOR

DETERMINATION OF SNYDER COEFFICIENTS (Cp AND Ct).(3) SNYDER COEFFICIENTS(4) L - LENGTH OF LONGEST WATERCOURSE FROM DAM TO BASIN DIVIDE

Lca = LENGTH OF LONGEST WATERCOURSE FROM DAM TO POINT OPPOSITE BASIN CENTROID.

(5) SPILLWAY DATA RELATING TO LAKE RENE DAM AND MARCEL LAKE DAM OBTAINED FROMPHASE I INSPECTION REPORT, MARCEL LAKE DAM (SEE NOTE 3, SHEET 14 OF 20).

4

D- 2

'A&

SUSJECT DAM 4TI hS~T~2 FA\1 IF E %fbnT DAMI

my Z. DATE PROJ. NO. ,'3.!#7 - 109CONSULTANTS. INC.CHKO BYDATE 3 ' R1SHEE NO OFEngineers - Geologists - PlannrersCHO(. ~ DAT 3 8/ HEE NO OF....~2....... Environmental Specialists

DA,&!M 57TIST~TICS/

Avuzr.-1w 4- "q~ I47 'IA 2quAJ OV-. 0 ~~L4'r C~47-1oj

,1fjA,0m'uA01 ' Gi,.9e- Ci4wtCTV 3A

(IfA-jAG.- AJCP9

4C 72 L- Z.49 JJI"4 4JA:

/k1u6L' Q--VC J"o4 e-A4-A

7a rA4 e -7,0 J'q61Aae7,'4tzCX

afCtSSk 7..S'743QX-

j~7OeV I, ?r 0 ,jor

10'A4 ;%(- -Z~ ,kD //;? 0

'f 4'1C4.4Wi '~// 1707. e (4JWL)Z -P.1 ~apS7MM14~JL / , eI

2" C*-.IZd14*-

SUBJECTr 5k5-\~ ETY TN-SPECTrioMRgkVEPL Pomnr DA

B3Y DATE PROJ. NO k3__-_;?-a __-_ ___ CONSULTANTS. INC

CHKO. BY j DATE 3 - l -A t SHjEET NO of; .. A.2... rnetpSea~

/V07 2 ooty,, -P

/0 7' C-7; Z 0~ AbW V ~ VVA-,,P - 4 ,(Svz

JO4 4MA 1A-P1,4eV% OA/6 0.0AvOc 2cdau 0~. j- ~~As~'42

Ab 4va6Tm 4.hD . rM / C. r.v /P'lll 4(yZ .L4 - 7-49a- 3

Y~4 ~Q~~~wM ~~ 4A '/ g

SUBJECT AATYT\PC oNR jp, R.-; Pomn T)AtI1

BY , DATE /-±-&L PROJ. NO. I_______ CONSULTANTS, INC.Engineers - Geologists - PlannersCHKD. BY -. DATE y 'iR/ SHEET NO. OF , Environmental Specialists

= - Co.6 , .r2

KSER'vO P CAPA.xCITY/

S1a i

SUBJECT C7Am' skyrETY MASPlCTlQN

=11.fL..... DATE /-.L.... PROJ. NO. '-/O COSLTNSICEngineers *Geologists *Planners

CHICO. BY Dt- DATE 3 - --p/ SHEET NO. 4/...2..... 0 F ,?C - Environmental Specialists

70P ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C ax "re /7./ 4?2N

llrv~vw'lrd 14Vlrj 7W6 A5z44MOSMj A

,6 A 0 *A7~.7 Qlt,, /A A/a 4

4LI MI /JC554M A149W 6,.A.J VI 2

C-4 -4- V,10_

E-LEA-rO A,,

(Fr (A'

1146,570

2$3

11 IFa

SUBJECT DI&AIMT T~~C\ng-AytzQ Potwe UAr'-

BY DATE PROJ.NO. ________CONSULTANTS, INC.

CHKD BY Z) a DAT SHET N. O >nEngineers * Geologists * PlannersCHKDBY~ ATE 3"'~-P/ HEE NO.~ ~Environmental Specialists

PMP CN.LCUL 4 NTMQNS

/9PMX1,0I,97- /1J/KAVL IAIV:r = V 0 /A)Ck.-5

'~-~4-Z1-0~. 4ou I147I 2 .

4sUO,- ZJ~r Cb--rIV6AJ 7-0 q IC- ~ -~~~~

/13

12A- /--ACM? JAWr4.)r ,-O 6,qA1~) U "4 4/JZ4 04V'A9JC4 447 __ 4VZLs .8

SUBJECT flA)tA Sp ETY TINS?ECTIO~NL J

By _J L DATE /-a? 1 L. PROJ. NO. _________ -D? 187-JCONSULTANTS, INC.

CHKD BYDAT 3 ,1 -P/ HEE NO OFEngineers a Geologists * PlannersCHKD ~ ATE - SHET N. ~ OF ~----- Environmental Specialists

CROS5-SECTION -00OKING OPJ)~eAM-

- & & j.. /07 7. /

7 7.,r

ArA

19,1

- ,or ro SCA -

,j*r,'fr a4Se'M A 7Z p

C Vlzz&,9jr COujJA7- S ~ 4 CW~C/a97 CAE CAL4AAA&Ze

W17 iMACA)Ce-O77' CecrIWC- -400814i' Y A /.

SUBJECT D)AM~ SA,!ErTY INSPECTION\F

BY~Z DATE Lz~. PROJ. NO. go -)345 - CONSULTATS, INC.Engineers *Geologists *Planners

CHKO. BY -IL DATE ?--iSHEET NO. 0...L.... OF Z7(5... Environmental Specialists

V1MAAr CAM X _ 4-$7A'J97LZ' 6'y 7y. -qC*9770AJ

S 9 1ic~4~.A) A

C:: COa9;V-YU7 0- ZVAOX

a' / 4 , : F 471, t s r/ 0 I

~ 3r/-4. ~~tW - A9j ~ ,~~-%5~J~,~, O?

;P-- AwA-s 4', Azr of?' -J3 rmrt~ ~

,4PPVAC/4 -IiC9A)V Jt7 /O

Aowu~e &X X//O 0t

- / r4q Arft1. 147A22- 0,-o~rH4rC

SUBJECT M~A SFFTS' 7INspecTION4

BDA EPROJ. NO. 0 -0,19 CONSULTA TS, INC.__________DATE_____/__e SHEET NO F ,Engineers e Geologists e PlannersCNKO B V ~ - L....... Environmental Specialists

V2a - _

AZ0"WG7;y,*7rA&-qU90 CM~kl Zi U c CC-Iass =7 L-7h ps 3-79)

4--A . ck A 0 A q f 16~~4~ 4 . C F ? r

0)c (IT 0) /60) o 49J '~

-7 W ((.iho-ars 1Mr-r Z: ".F1/J09.0-7

5'.%

ra-44VM-/eAS 00 0-00

SUBJECT M~AM zAxFyTY TNSFX1TnCN

By DATE 1________ PROJ. NO. ~o*R- SULTANTS, INC.

CHKO BY PLA5 DAT 3-1-AlSHET NO 0 20Engineers 0 Geologists - PlannersCHKO BY .D'- DAE 3fAI HEE NO. '~ F ~Environmental Specialists

XAe A16A 0-V-k- 7;44U &Vj" 4W-59D ) 7NZC ,qVARWW C-qJ~e

40;C W4 ?-4SII- 70 Zr AbIVXV&44 ra A' ZO-Z4

Ar Z6Yi)A~~

'~'~ /) ,10Z' 41 cOig4 - qS, ,AJ-7

ac /FO or196? 7W~9A~ rJ IC

IN9-- 11,450~ 0.) 7Ae IA//&41A)I. V/JrAt - IS

c35e z-A9RAtRLe770IJ72 euY i AAJ)- 7-90 CLt ' R041ACZ 4A) 0r7-

a WZZ-V7V- ~n 4A Ie6VV 41A;T-)-

CC)24-, 0V 4-11J-eOkX- ,.47 a

v'x.4 h-- amwS-7mpca 'mae-71 7

7W4-L)- IX6A.V/C/r tP.CZ-7

SUBJECT TM kFEY P TCA

BY - DATE /-,32--,L PROJ. NO. ,0-;a."'-. __ CONSULTANTS, INC.Engineers * Geologists * Planners

CHKD. BY .. 415 DATE 3 - " f1 SHEET NO. - OF Environmental Specialists

,5PILLWVJA RATING CURVE:

A 4 a -&A rtrY7&' Q

0 0 . . .. 0

/1 .O./S 0. 3. P .it Q.090 ,350,. .0 3(, 0.99 3314 0.03 I.J7 /o

J.0 L.,9.S Q. 93 3.,". 0" q ;. 6& /?701/76.0 .0 0.73 0. ? . 63 .06 3.9'1 3120/177.0 so ., 99 3,7' 0.07 '1/9311)7-1 SY L-97 /.00 3.79 0.08 . 3P 5700

T7. A00 /00 3973 0.08 'f. Y;2 %-gO

/7.0 / ?.O // 3 o.09 ,T' ?/ 60q0

/ -1. "7.0 /,L7 /03 3.3 0./0 . 0 7760

8O.O 1?.o ,5 /, ot" 3.97 0.,2 738 9660//3/.0 90.0 16/ 1,07 ,VV9. 0,/"3 ?.F7 //,, 7"/

/ig .o /00 /. e.? /.o7 0-/ s. 13,A7S1

0 1-. 00 /.07 A/. 0 ./t /o'- /T e0

/ 0 .o 0 AI1 /.07 'y'q 0./1 11.81 1080//Y,5, 0 130 19.3 , 1 o 7 'y.,0 '/ V./9 l V. l 87,Po,3 1?0

i~~- He- //6

Q. C/ '.?s

c. a7 - .78 X5"'-C -20

SUBJECT 7)Pk.t SNEETY TN$SPECTION

By /a DATE 2zL..PROJ.NO. _______ LATICEngineers * Geologists-* Planners

CHICO. BY 2..... DATE 3 -- 91 SHEET NO. L.....OF Environmental Specialists

EMANKMENT RATIN1G CUR1E_

aq-~ ~,ezr ,swfdFj ouzz-Ar,4W~ei 1-4 --7

- C&U4W,;P~h 7?- 4rle 7AS?1. IMN

/00

//77' .7110~ Q~P5~ AJ~

//7 C780'7QC 0~&~

~v.47oA A'J607

-c) ( IM

(r )//goo 939 4=~rl, .AV M

//,r7 1#

SUBJECT F4A~AT NPC~k

BY -Zl DATE ~ d . PROJ. NO. 4 OSLATS. INC.

CHKD 13 -D-6 ATE 3 -ly At HEE NO OFEngineers *Geologists *Planners

CHKO BY ~ DTE 3 '~-Al SHEE NO ~ F .2..-... Environmental Specialists

IA) CATU- a-Q70A ZOWJ .4.Z'zV .4AJ- IW q~l AZ90 Cb- A

C4) tj AZ7A-Z9'F M"I " / 4 #/V -7, 4,& 2, =- M a,-

~ ~1~4',4M~197- AIIAW~ -ZV7rVA)J, - ZC47V~" 07- Zocaw

E7M-1E3.AtKMF74T IRATIMG T^h3L:

&-ze~ni d ziAow"iz- 4-0

,y2r /00 ro 0.1 3 3 0.33 00:3 3.00 60

//777 2,70 /0 02 33 66.-09 670O,7 ;.99 //0

11?&0 17X ;~ 0 ./ 130 /,/7 a.Y 0a O..Y 02 300

/270 J-70 340 0,J 47 /1 0-/I/ 3.0y/ /?60

// YO. 390O 370 /0 390f IY0 a 3 3.05 q,/ FO

li/v/0 w// 390 /0 'Y'00 /.79 3.1 OJ/ 3O0 010O

I ; I '13 11/0 /0 "V010 1700 Y, 0 09,0 3.0? /0,630

®,-O~ LO 0-/L)

SUBJECT pAmr SAFErY TWNSPFCTIOr4

B 7..... DATE ~zzL PRO J. NO. M____9_13_-go_8 CONSULTANTS, INC.

Engineers * Geologtsts * Planners

CHKD. 6Yk*_. DATE ..- q9-AI SHEET NO. /3L~.... OF 6; Environmental Specialists

TOTA FLCLITY PAiNG TP&.1LE/

ZZ-2-WL4744 qz.Wu44Vi3 Qror4w~r

7J. ~0 jS0 6'SyO

1190 /O /0 0

117T0 19?0 1 970

/16.0 13100 -73/00

7-,ac) 1177 ~ J7,00 MS j~

//77. ?sg g3030b-1

7"?0 609/0 300/ 3Y?00 9L100 -7900

/1190 9660 '1/90 ?60

7A1 20 el/ /b So

//PO 1 ,7A/ 0,630 P/30

0 2A1fA /0.

01(mw .4 Aw- 4 niA ,f&7NA-wry /AcZ4e ,z 6-edVj4niu ACV,,,-~ 1176.Y1.

SUBJECT D)AM' skg'ET' 3NSP E1TorM

BY DATE -3PROJ. NO. 211-;,s- CONSULTATS, INC.CK.Y D 6 DATE . &I-ASETN. 1 OFEngineers *Geologists * Planners

___________ SHET NO L...OF...~d.L... Environmental Specialists

UR5TREAtM Dt&.MS~

1.) LAKE: RemE- Dc-.rvA

- &'S'w (lUjr hp 'PR0L

- -l~ c2"zro o rrP ~ 3

PICO. 0 (-%V-

/V6/ /

)9470 ;37

1,'0 (');091066.6 Y7A C,%1I719'670 7 3

-7.AX5-rAJ Aae; 4d /AArm 4kwr DO-. ,VDZ - 00 V90 2 R ,~-zm Jd I'l1979t,

SUBJECT D~N"1 SM7ETY TENSPCTC Mh

By DATE L919 PROJ. NO. 30-93 -goX COSUTATS, INC.CHKD BY-DL DAT -3q -Q/ SEETNO.0 FEngineers * Geologists-* PlannersCHKDBY2~ DTE -g~/ SHET N. ~Environmental Specialists

2.) MAPCEL Lch-sE D.&j,

Cr

-Co,'iP07M ,AIpZe14r hAU 7We-/ Av;70eq.i 109 CW1JC .Vk7~aD,

/%M;7 GA 7Wh' AkU.OgaAJ6 fU1CA-rA 41M-4 zWM 60~5r :3):

C 22

- o o.-- V~ =--z--u4,7o4j 1936...F Cs-e Xw)r-3)

1 -------- --------

SUBJECT MNMd SAS7ETh' TNSPECTIONGepJ'ANER PcnrA jAj

By DATE PROJ. NO. 90 - 8 08 CONSULTANTS, INC.

CHKD BY-DL13 ATE HEE NO OFEngineers - Geoiogists * PlarrersCHKD BY~.&.... DTE &L....... HEE NO ~ F ...~2......,. Environmental SPecialists

M,-PCEL L £ srE

193'10

b; 3

- --- --------

41, __1_2_Y-

......... - 4--------__ ---- ---- ~--.--.-~ - ___---f-- --- _

.. . . . . w1

SUBJECT pt&rA -SkFFTY INSPECTION£PSE0:,AVfP. PoqnI DAM-

By OXLY. DATE .7-27-J/ PROJ. NO. S~O R38E?- go 8 CONSULTANTS, INC.Engineers * Geologists - Planners

CHKD. BY .I.&- DATE 3 - -8 SHEET NO. I....S... O F ;0 Environmental Specialists

BREJNCN ASSUrMWTION!S

TYPICA.L 3REk.CIA .SFCTON:

,04C C trIOA)

:! Iqe-&ey Coi7ay £sJP7W

A9EC-1- BRPEACHING ANAL Y,5I5 INPUT:

Z7A'F4cov 4br,-4 /a4x a&eewcA J2R7X') 12eA knc 4we

/OA, A41 77AfC-/77

eZ5ACA Q-MJ, 11 /0: 1 1

49&J~ 77AJ.S

G) 114, VIWVCtAJ 10/1 //:1017'

SUBJECT DAt6 -SAEVTY INSPECTI ONI

BY MI- DATE ;P,7-Y PROJ. NO. 4109 CONSULTANTS, INC.

CHKD Y~a) DTE 7-11 R/SHET NO OF y-OEngineers - Geologists - Planners

cHKDaY.A~a...... ATE "~R SHET N. ~Environmental Specialists

4741-9 OA. 7WZ- ~ JU6CZ-,fZr -1 09AAQ )

- ,W-AfA- VIXMIC7 4A070.V 6),J zrel RV TC

- JaFP)W 0..ir g2,5-* /MJG rd77ZJ AA,-M' '/~o- 7V

~ ~ /Q Al / i 90AJ ASJ7

LjP4.&~ Cllr'7:J //0oC dA.G MAI4461 ZI~ 5 07^

SUBJECT MkMA .A~T ~iP~~O.

By ~L.. DATE -7 - 'yi~' PROJ. NO. 4C~h-v~ OSLATS, INC.Engineers *Geologists *Planners

CHKO. BY Z)4 DATE 3 -- AI SHEET NO. . Q.,. OF X3 Environmental Specialists

HEC-1 D,&NM 2PRENCRNG AXNALYSIS ouTP~uT

9.=A V.=A V2AM D47-A (6"-V~ 0'. .1, 5,' C10oJr/o1AS)

-VAAVJ 77--e4 ,aLAJ 7?d 'd~ l r 77oe a-~

/0 -YV / 7 6/730 I/. 7 1 79 Y;)./7 -,11'

1/ T74 j-76T76 d.. Y4

/0 ,/61./ ,.7

x___ w//7: 1,' L1.2 U173 ,IV. 6 /3,I17 W4

- .',7 /-FP4 ourzo- c'sx)

ou-O~ &P f--CV70A vs~A~i -A-0-7 , z i- Z

A/C : ~ I~z~~- 4s?~Y J~uclJ'&.S ~7AJ I /16 4W

-V S S

•SUJECT DAM SPF__T'Y TIN.PE"CTIONI I

BY 2 .. DATE , '-r' PROJ. NO. fl- tiS- L/O3 L_.CONSULTANTS, INC.A Engineers * Geologists * PlannersCH-KO. BY .z ' DATE ?' - /,,' - /i SHEET NO. / OF ,--. Environmental Specialists

.SL3u'MARY INPUT/OUTPUT .SNEETS

- -= . - - ...*

* I-

* ..30

-23 4 ..- -3 ,4 - -

4 . ..2 .

4 .d 43 -'4.A." 4- .,

a2 . ., " " :+ n I + I ' ' " I '

i , , - . . .

SUBJECT DAM -SLEFTY TN-PE-CTION

BY Z DATE -. PROJ. NO. 41 - .- 4CONSULTANTS

CHICO. BY _ DATE j SHEET NO. OF ~Engineers * Geologists * Plan

Environmental Specialists

0 . C (L L L*-g I "- - "

.. .. La.. - _ -u') 9

0 2

• • C .

49P

u0.0 4, 0 - 0

CL

=j MKL. 0,

2.i0

3 *.

0 O 0 *~ C O C O 4 t~.o..

-j, *. C - C 21. L-4

u 0. -C.4

C .. 0- *.

SUBJECT DAM SkArTY TN-SPFCT1ON

BY DATE ?-e-l PROJ. NO. _n - - - 8 CONSULTANTS, IN

Engineers - Geologists * PlannersCHKO. BY , DATE a,-A" SHEET NO. OF Environmental Specialists

t oI- ,. N "

u-[.20

(. . .ZW--•-

LK z 6

0.43N, £CNC4 • q* .~ ZC N 3 3 C ' •

3- - - - -=4 1

0 0 •

,c 00 t ."4 :-

4r•0. - .0

- I- - , -. - - ° :

* . *'C .. - -:3

.. =-- **=** -..- -o *0

Z, V Z- u 1. Wt 0'a

3

0 0

30. 0 3 . . ** ZA40 5 Z A* 3 0 .

SUBJECT flAM SkFTY~TNPC2TlN 4'N5

my D ATE ~ PROJ. NO. jAOZfj- A/08 . OSLATS. INCHKO 13__ZA DTE g-i)-A SHETN. EginersGeologists *Plannersif~~~AI~ SHE O F Environmental Specialists

LL. .

0 0a

14 h- -3

2 2 .a0

a. za N . g 02* 0.

Z.. oi z Ax c.

* ..b1-.0:d'!

4 .. .. .-11 K 0 0w " ,~

.2 Q6

- of LAI2.

. .

-- 4to

SUBJECT rlAm sm=TY 7rNh PEcTmnM

By D ATE . 2 L PROJ. NO. #-dn - Z.1 'j0 COSLATS, INCEnginee s * Geologists *Planners

CHICO.BY_: . DATE A 6 SHEET NO. 5- OF ... 2.... Environmental Specialists

L. LA&

Co Ir MILA 13 0 0

rb j4

* £ O N ~~ 4 £ 1--T

a .J.. 34.

* ~ * . - 3 .000 0* .*

t.;.: jg-

ft In I-

C a6 N

I- 9- 96

03 *4. x.. 1.2xP16 A i * * ONx. N . a = * =

zi*

N - ~ ' * N4--

43 I-

4d *".. a.i

a * N t .3 * t O 4 * W N C O * * ~ N N *

0 * r O . .Z N ~ Th *- - ~ ON N d N ON 42

*j Cy CC.

U? C U

SUBJECT DAXM -SAFTTY INSPEFCT101 FF

BDAEPROJ. NO. 'it) /0 CONSULTANTS, INC.

Engineers 9 Geologists 9 PlannersCHKO. BY .24-6.. DATE 3 LQ.-l.... SHEET NO. OF A....Z.... Environmental Specialists

m8 U.ILL U.

0- CL

*V &dI

a. C; 4r N

*0 In 20w'0 00

4~~~4 a, - -

w W. 0 0P

*; ;. .. 9.. = -, - .0 ,o 4-, ~ ~ ~ ~ M 411 9=. * = N N W 34 N .

2 Z.39 N~. 0 -0~ ..

W3 X.. a z 'ai.) e0 L j1. 2 a6 aIn 2 N2

z~~~I a g N ~ . . ~ * ..

N~~' C i0* "' g 0 9 ''

a.C Ct At - 4* 4 05402. a4 4 ~0 0 ~ -

* I - 1~ K.

SUBJECT AM '5ArF-TY TNPECTIONIryg Iw IA I --

By -DATE Z.PROJ. NO. -1 - CO NSLTANTS, INC.

). E-8 SHEET NO. OFEngineers * Geologists * PlannersCHICO. Y ,.,I DATE ?-I(,. F Environmental Specialists

LI.

•.......-...-.4- U.. o Q

A0% Zn

- -o 2. =, 0 p - , o - n I . i

* - -- :- . .

G 4. 4

Z -C z .c . . ..... ..... .. __ _2 * ° ' %wii *"03 * a.

. . .0. .-- - -...O N , ,. : . ' U . . . . . . . ; -. . .. A . . .

"2 0,1 - 33_N

£ V N O -; , -

- 2. - .4

IIL

**- - iifl ' 0 4 A N - -

.0.

L0 22 3 N2 '

CL 0r.-

2 * 0 ~ A .

SUBJECT EJ. .A~Y -t-h3PFCTIQM

By_ __ DATE PROINS ____ ___ INC._

Engmnee~s v Geologists *Planners

CHI(D. 1Y P. L 6 DATE 6 SHEET NO. 4-. OF Environmental Specialists

U.LLaL

0-. 0.

0 6

0-0

NMa

* a h~Ra *l

* .4 . a~C.*N 0

0-.,4a150 ~~

* W-~VZ4 ~4 *~N~.-6

0 z

-~ V -

-Nt =' *O

x

C ~~ 04 44

*~V 0,JI2

SUBJECT I)AM SA,5:IETY TNh3P~r-INB

By D1M DATE .-- = PROJ. NO. Af- i1- q08 CONSULTANTS, INC.

CHKO. DATE 3 -10-01 SHEET NO. -r OF Engineers * Geologists * PlannersCHKD BY _ L DAT 3 -0 -/ SHET O. 1 OF 11 Environmental Specialists

0 3

0 0 i

...

uo ' = -. (

; ) - a.

: 0' - d 0-0 -- . i

I 1. 0 x A I

.. ... . ,. .....-.

4 -iO 2 00 00 U 1

. .. ... . .. .. i* . g .J..oi -. N . • 03 *.OeOl * *N * • •

z w . 0. 3 . 0

' ° .. . * -= -

oz .z -

I - 0

* 00 0 - ~

0 3C 30 C j

0 z0 .20 3.0 *. .. ;. x 3.~ i

* ~ ~~ ~ C. C C .I* ~ ~ ~ ~ - A O .* . .

C. go0 0 0..p

SUBJECT DAIM ~~'T3ETC

By .2L... DATE PROJ. NO. an - n- L/8CONSULTANTS, INC.

CHKO 13 -/-A/ SHEE NO 77 OFEngineers * Geologists * PlannersCHK. ~DATE 3 HE O. ~ O Environmental Specialists

0

i,4

M0 1000

j 4=

ti-.

z- ~V50 f. 00 . ~ . 00 O 0 C

41.. rs r- U1 * N .A 0

00 0 4.. N* N* S 3 *4..Z- ~ ~~~~~~ 05 O 5 6tN N 4

~~9 x%0 0 C A C 0 .. . 0~~

a. - N 4. 4. a-

suJcr DAM 5ANETY TN3SPECTION

By _D.. OATE , PROJ.NO. _ o-( - "08. CONSULTANTS, INC.

CH KO. 1Y OL DATE Z? -/0-9/ SHEET NO. 2. OF Environmental Specialists

c ° v, l, * e q

C , V. =. -

. a0

W2

- =- . '

wx'

101

-0-0 0

A a x

t - 00!

I-x- WC;:

W0 to=

J.

SsJECT DAM ,,TY "h3PE CTION

BY L". DATE PROJ. NO. 10 CONSULTANTS, INC.

F DSEngineers 9 Geologists * Planners

CHKo By ,.ATE SHEET NO. Environmental Specialists

41 '0-

--- 0

x"- c." : "0.f

* W - =0'' ..

3 53

) 0 ... ,*

L x W IV

-6 z TrP. N

9 (

*2 z *

w 4(

-j *j -

SUBJECT DA~M -,Sm:S1Y IN5PE-cTiON

By D DATE 3-9 -'/ PROJ. NO. 40 - Z,- q/03 CONSULTANTS,Engineers - Geologis:s - Planne

CHKD. BY .-_-. _ DATE 3 - °/ SHEET NO. OF , Environmental Specialists

oa

0, . -N I

K 4 ICT

Z 0

0 -o h.6 W

* . . -

.. . .. = . *. I. -. .

4 4 . •

9, W -- T. "

a..--..r Z4 . .. n,.. *C=Co -: 4f - =C .o N=C-. fl-. 440 = 2 =

.. .. a, a : ; - * 0 ,

Zj..

* -. 4.

* -jn J "-4 , *- - 4 4 =

:* -=

* = 93 r.J 03 "e. e

uj L > LLz

coN

* - 4 r. -o

SUBJECT DA.M SPXFSTTy T5E

BY 7,Xf DATE -- &9-,./ PROJ. NO. '-102 LO8 CONSULTANTS, INC.

Engineers * Geologists * PlannersCHKD. BY -8 DATE 3 - 0-8 / SHEET NO. U. OF Z-. Environmental Specialists

af z 30

-- =

A .

• .I C ,I

. * . - .- ..

z

• , 0

"- 2

U . = 3. - .-

01."3 ._

® ® zo

3 I I a+ a " ':I " "+ I: + oa

SUSJCTDAM SLEETY INhSPECTION

B zF DATE . L... PtROJ. NO. In_____,18_____

Engineers * Geologists *Planners

CHKD. 13 ZL DATE .3-161-S SHEET NO. 0 OF.......... Environmental Specialists

w WI

I.-

4 . =I .. . . . . . .

-Z t .........

. .4 .

3j 1.L 2 .

Sy DATE __ -__-,____ PROJ. NO. ( - " - '/08 CONSULTANTS. IN'En *e~ Geologists ,, Planners

CHKO. BYJ L DATE . -/- . SHEET NO. p CF ---- Environmentai Specialists

2 .•

hi ''"

•I 3 . ,. i

3 = , . . ..

. . ..- 32'S *1.

" r"

= 0 * t

0 3 . 3

S * ( .3

-%9-

SUBJECT DlAM 5A&VF"TY TNS5PFC TIONH

BY O.DATE .-. & .,.. PROJ. NO. . ,08 CONSULTANTS, INC.

CHK. BY 2ATE 3 -0-1 SHEET NO. OF IEngineers * Geologists * PlannersD. --- OF .-.2 ---- Environmental Specialists

ad

DD4 00

-a*.00 6

<]

.. i 4I l 0461

4.. -- 0

.0a .

0 N i 0-600 -

*; * 4 4.00 441

401,.€, 00 o6

z I L

- 00v, -- 00

4 4 no 00•0 0

. ,. o c[... . . .. .

• '2, ' 2 -' I i-... . . :

SUBJECT DAM SMM'TY 'rLSPFCTICN

BY :7)17S DATE _ -_-_ _ PROJ. NO. a ! -z.18- '/08 CONSULTANTS, INC.Engineers * Geologists * PlannersCHKD. BY .D4,A DATE 3 0/ IN SHEET NO. t OF _ EniomtaS:ecass-'s---- .------ Environmental Sp~ecialists

w

ww w

"Lo 0 xJOI~VI

LosWO(

Z14

.. h. 4

0 3

0 K

I4- -l :1 I - •

4" Q44N z a IL

I- Q0 z,

* I. a - 0!0

X 3B- 4I - . .I=4. -,i- 0® -B -

i~ ~ ~~i o,,. :.o

- .24 -It W a o ;

" . .. , . . ...

- 24 1

.. X* - 44l.. 4- .

4 0. a .24 4 6U

K 400 40*. 44 .

K * I 4.e 40..t1

LIST OF REFERENCES

1. "Recommended Guidelines for Safety Inspection of Dams," pre-pared by Department of the Army, Office of the Chief of Engi-neers, Washington, D. C. (Appendix D).

2. "Unit Hydrograph Concepts and Calculations," by the U. S.Army, Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District (L-519).

3. "Seasonal Variation of Probable Maximum Precipitation East ofthe 105th Meridian for Areas from 10 to 1,000 Square Miles andDurations of 6, 12, 24, and 48 Hours," HydrometeorologicalReport No. 33, prepared by J. T. Reidel, J. F. Appleby andR. W. Schloemer, Hydrologic Service Division, Hydrometeoro-logical Section, U. S. Army, Corps of Engineers, Washington,D. C., April 1956.

4. Design of Small Dams, U. S. Department of the Interior, Bureauof Reclamation, Washington, D. C., 1973.

5. Handbook of Hydraulics, H. W. King, and E. F. Brater, McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, 1963.

6. Standard Handbook for Civil Engineers, F. S. Merritt, McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, 1963.

7. Open-Channel Hydraulics, V. T. Chow, McGraw-Hill, Inc., NewYork, 1959.

8. Weir Experiments, Coefficients, and Formulas, R. E. Horton,Water Supply and Irrigation Paper No. 200, Department of theInterior, United States Geological Survey, Washington, D. C.,1907.

9. "Probable Maximum Precipitation, Susquehanna River DrainageAbove Harrisburg, Pennsylvania," Hydrometerological ReportNo. 40, prepared by H. V. Goodyear and J. T. Riedel, Hydro-meteorological Branch Office of Hydrology, U. S. WeatherBureau, U. S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D. C., May,1965.

10. Flood Hydrograph Package (HEC- 1) Dam Safety Version, Hydro-logic Engineering Center, U. S. Army, Corps of Engineers,Davis, California, July 1978.

11. "Simulation of Flow Through Broad Crest Navigation Dams withRadial Gates," R. W. Schmitt, U. S. Army, Corps of Engineers,Pittsburgh District.

12. "Hydraulics of Bridge Waterways," BPR, 1970, Discharge Coef-ficient Based on Criteria for Embankment Shaped Weirs, Figure24, page 46.

13. Applied Hydraulics in Engineering, H. M. Morris and J. N.Wiggert, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University,2nd Edition, The Ronald Press Company, New York, 1972.

14. Standard Mathematical Tables, 21st Edition, The ChemicalRubber Company, 1973, page 15.

15. Engineering Field Manual, U. S. Department of Agriculture,Soil Conservation Service, 2nd Edition, Washington, D. C.,1969.

16. Water Resources Engineering, R. K. Linsley and J. B. Franzini,McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, 1972.

17. Engineering for Dams, Volume 2, W. P. Creager, J. D. Justin,J. Hinds, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1964.

18. Roughness Characteristics of Natural Channels, H. H.Barnes, Jr., Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1849,Department of the Interior, United States Geological Survey,Arlington, Virginia, 1967.

19. "Hydraulic Charts for the Selection of Highway Culverts,"Hydraulic Engineering Circular No. 5, Bureau of PublicRoads, Washington, D. C., 1965.

-* * a

APPENDIX E

FIGURES

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Description/Title

1 Regional Vicinity and Watershed Boundary Map

2 General Plan and Profile

3 Details of Proposed Repairs

iA~i- MS.KENOZHA. PA. N.( %. 4 t' N. A N i I Y I t

1954 ~AYS3 606E I!: N\ SEFSE V831 r \

-7:7

TU)ARCEL LAKE DAY 1-6-

E 'R

BAV EDAM'

----- LONGEST WATERC

CENTROID OFD

-j~

I CDI-7 - FIGURE 1

00 REGIONAL VIC INITY~ I~ MO

0

ANDfWATERSHED BOUNDARY .AP A 9

* ~-- Vatershed Boundar y - ------- ---- _3* ---

-. -4j

/,

EDEM.E PA.

-~4 0.~*%N4111'

S. ./ OURS

-. 7

/.-., '. - : .,

.- ,. . , .- H i "

-t. - I A-. ' ",

: . .- ,"t '-I. l/ '

" " > . .' :"I

,.' . ' ' ,-.- , i .,,z, , . / ,

..:. .,.: L! / i " ."/ ." ""

....... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ f ... . -.....9'.' ; :" " ' """

'kf/-. "". i i ' " --- '> " i '" -"' / "'9"

• 't ; .- .--.: -_ : - i " ... '

i , ' " !.a /,

* . -,I • ? $ '9a

- A--

...........

COSLATl-C

LILA, .SOL.

.. J... ...

IL- 9

AD0A099 089 GAI CONSULTANTS INC MONROEVILLE PA FIG 13/1

NAT IONAL DAM INSPECTION PROGRAM BEAVER POND DAM (NDI 1.0. NUMB--ETC(U)

MAR 81 a M MIHALCIN D ACW3 -81-C-0I1S

UNCLASSIFIED NL

I i i i.ii

-

----

-

-. .4 .

i ' . - " .. . /-, ...

. .

7' -

jag --

"..,.

-_.4-- -- '-S-'4 - .. .-..

._ I,_ ... .... .....- - :, -

..P .

: -_.l

C0

-

4 ."

.. _ ,, - ......

.....-4

----.-I '-- .T' " -

..

. .

-.. *..... . . ....-

i -'- "

', /

* ~*CONSULTANTS, IC

FIGURE3

APPENDIX F

GEOLOGY

Geology

Beaver Pond Dam is located in the glaciated Low Plateaussection of the Appalachian Plateaus physiographic province ofeastern Pennsylvania. In this area, the Appalachian Plateausprovince is characterized topographically by flat-topped, hum-mocky hills formed as a result of glaciation and subsequentstream dissection of nearly flat-lying strata. The Devonian agesedimentary rock strata in Pike County regionally strike N35*Eand dip gently to the northwest. The Delaware River is the majordrainage basin in the area. Major tributary streams intersectthe Delaware River at right angles; whereas, smaller streamsdisplay a slightly more random tributary pattern. Both major andminor tributary stream systems are joint controlled and exhibitmodified rectangular and trellis-type drainage patterns.

Structurally, the area containing Pike County lies on thesouth flank of a broad, asymmetrical synclinorium that plunges tothe southwest. Superimposed on this broad structural basin arenumerous anticlinal and synclinal folds characterized by planarlimbs and narrow hinges. Due to prior glaciation, low relief andsurficial soil cover, fold axes are difficult to trace.

The sedimentary rock sequences in the vicinity of the damand reservoir are probably members of the Susquehanna Group ofUpper Devonian age (see Geology Map). The sedimentologicalchanges observed in the Catskill Formation indicate that the rateof sedimentation exceeded the rate of basin subsidence resultingin a facies change from marine to non-marine strata. On theaccompanying geology map the delineation between the Middle andUpper Devonian age sedimentary rock sequences represents theAllegheny Front which separates the Valley and Ridge physio-graphic province from the Appalachian Plateaus physiographicprovince.

Approximately half of Pike County, including the dam site,is covered by a blanket of Wisconsin age (most recent) glacialdrift which, based on the degree of weathering, was probablydeposited during the Woodfordian stage. Valley bottoms aretypically covered by recent alluvium and Woodfordian outwash ofvariable thickness, but typically less than 10 feet. Thesedeposits are characteristically unconsolidated stratified sandand gravel usually with more gravel than sand and some smallboulders. The direction of the Wisconsin ice advance, was fromthe northeast over the Catskill Mountains and from the north overthe Appalachian Plateau. The terminal moraine resulting from thesouthern most advance of the Wisconsin ice sheet in this area islocated in the southern portion of Monroe County which bordersPike County to the South.

VA_ ! w-

References:

1. Fletcher, F. W., Woodrow, D. L., "Geology and EconomicResources of the Pennsylvania Portion of the Milford andPort Jervis 15 minute U.S.G.S. Topographic Quadrangles,"Pennsylvania Geological Survey, Fourth Series, Harrisburg,Atlas 223, 1970.

2. Sevon, W. D., Berg, T. M., "Geology and Mineral Resources ofthe Skytop Quadrangle, Monroe and Pike Counties, Pennsylvania",Pennsylvania Geological Survey, Fourth Series, Harrisburg,Atlas 214A., 1978.

3. Sevon, W., Personal Communication, Commonwealth of PennsylvaniaDepartment of Environmental Resources, Harrisburg, December 3,1980.

tp

17150

WOD0

MOYNRE CO. CrWeV

WIILE PLEISTOCEN AGEWICONSI

ILLCOMPSED F S NS PRAVELSAND SILTYL CLAY OFANE$BLTHICKNESS1 REISONLLS7d

&ItfLEGEDCa~~~~~L N kil oml INOn (h oaMmhritrhll.l t '-ist 14 ,, .4ro" -0 :9qrnh

01 'iFd ~O ,m'I'F7. toi nt:., t,.- .: ~tF h l .:l i,, ornr oin -qiy omoium.uSAWr on?

p F.,,. ':i I:. l .'a,,l t np ~ pt'~hni.,n 1, lo,'F'fl~ p~ti.WIO . Pd. o'. i Fc OF, t~j'L OIL ,,'.

A19lii.:l~ lnt':nto Ini ,,,~11ola:.'. M.),461 ~ n ',O 1U 'dI.a i F i :, ''n. o''"n O'F4 ,' Fhno. .- '..'in t,. c lo i m'" hn ' ((t ." Ft i'I L,,o o,:ti i ,'daF 'F L m iMAN.''

MOREzOofU Fg ftit' o n!o h ?dF1: oAa,,, : C .,lmF o b.I tm'tn.f'k-rtil *

4 utU ~~i,10. Fi, i~ ~tln~unot,?inIt-olo~l baInin,: o i. 0 h, hd, ' h,,'rinD-OnFFnmA:n ' t

I OF, , Fi tiF''F't fn. ot. i nj nndnf POP.Eb it A inh f nt ol . n p o o t ip.''P,,ni:n' 1 o''NOTE:' TH inDOC SURFAC10E,, Ihom. bFirn .i' 7:.IS'tinIn, nrCOVERED h'?:n f1.,'. u.l1,

C aatk nll Format ion - t1 porp M.,mho:' int,i,, - 1 f?-nw ,Fil t,-k'n h--itn.tintojctmiltt"Fn il tj n rF. I to m " -,i'.F' i t neit fiido tw ?PillA in,) i rhaIor tm fn.1 ?Far r m omt'oF' in 1'''41~~~fomI o -

j iiv vm' ,jVIr 'n~ o, 'ir t,,:-~ -i, o sill ~~o gnrw lyn,MOOL DEVONIAN Or ',h Mal.' ni ft - -lt~i dioner.11 tago momjwr. nit ian ib,100a f~ot f 4-i vd.Ioi'Foot n

't~~~~~~t*F~~~~~~F~~~~f'~. 1U'i 14F'. I m,..r.rtin v' n A? 'n ,.d ~ ,ig nn r i t ?p-ino r. o ql'' Pin en f~z-fwth foot Fhi'Le . F''F. Afm'O'FF in mnt th"i.Fi'a I.rf rfti-. , ro fa 'i.g vntoa nii.p~ -

U. I

SLY'A:I FFO. F NRNAL e AFIr.1 DATEDrup 1932.iat' SCAL COSULANSICP-4." MlI l,. If nlla t rrwha r- !ad t w r'gsy.z-A 71

On 11-1znn iiIfnl. ebritaot31 ,, lok o ro evti rIlto,1