RD-R155 613 NATIONAL PROGRAM FOR INSPECTION OF NON-FEDERAL DRMS i/iRSHFIELD POND DAM (MA..(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS WALTHRMMA NEN ENGLAND DIV RUG 78
UNCLASSIFIED F/G 13/13 NL
IIIIEIIIEIIIIIBI .flllIIflI/I~lI
L, o.
12.2.
11111 1.0.811111-5 _ I 122.
MIRCP RSLTO TE3 T CHRNAIN LBUEUO STNAD-16A
... . . .. .. Ii [U.,LL AI. i k4#0h* '. ,j,.JN¢i:.,P..... ..-
CONNECTICUT RIVER BASIN* ASHFIELD, MASSACHUSETTS
ASHFIELD POND DAMMA 00523
(0 PHASE 1 INSPECTION REPORTLn NAT IONAL DAM INSPECTION PROGRAM
LfliID
DTIC
J"
0 .DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
NEW ENGLAND DIVISION CORPS OF ENGINEERSWALTHAM. MASS O I 4 ,.
F Approved fmt public elZeam
AUGUST1978-.-..-. 2 5
ASHFIELD POND DAM
MA 00523
CONNECTICUT RIVER BASIN AcsinP ~ 1ASHFIELD, MASSACHUSETTS STIS GRAI
DTIC TASUnannounced fjuustirication
-Distribution/Availability-Codes
- Avail and/or~07i Special
PHASE I INSPECTION REPORTNATIONAL DAM INSPECTION PROGRAM
a 9 qP a ,
REPRODUCED AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE
DISCLAIMER NOTICE
THIS DOCUMENT IS BEST QUALITYPRACTICABLE. THE COPY FURNISHEDTO DTIC CONTAINED A SIGNIFICANTNUMBER OF PAGES WHICH DO NOTREPRODUCE LEGIBLY.
. .* . .
iigi AezTIgEflSECURITY CLASSIFICAJION OF THIS PAGE (When Doi* kniorad)
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE EFRE COMPLETINSOR
1. REPORT NUMBER 2. GOVT ACCESSION NO. 3. RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER
4. TITLE (and Suhiiile) S. TYPE OF REPORT & PERIOD COVERED0
Ashfield Pond Damn INSPECTION REPORT
NATIONAL PROGRAM FOR INSPECTION OF NON-FEDERAL S EFRIGOG EOTNMEDAMS ________________
7. AUTI4ORg.) S. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER(s)
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERSNEW ENGLAND DIVISION
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS t0- PROGRAM ELEMENT. PROJECT. TASKAREA & WORK UN IT NUMBERS
11. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 12. REPORT DAYS
DEPT. OF THE ARMY, CORPS OF ENGINEERS Augunt 197RNEW ENGLAND DIVISION, NEDED 11. NUMBER OF PAGES
424 TRAPELO ROAD, WALTHAM, MA. 02254 A___________,___-I4. MONITORING AGENCY NAME.A ADDRESS(If different inin Confhoinga~ Office) Is. SECURITY "LAs. (of AL~je port)
UNCLASSIFIED -
ts. DECLASSIPICATION/DOWNGRADINGSCHEDULE
16. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of this Roptes
APPROVAL FOR PUBLIC RELEASE: DISTRIBUTION UNLIMITED
17. DIST RIBUTION ST ATEMEN T (of the ostre.i entered to Block 2".#I1 different hum ^4100")
IS. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Cover program reads: Phase I Inspection Report, National Dam Inspection Program;however, the official title of the program is: National Program for Inspection ofNon-Federal Dams; use cover date for date of report.
19. KEY WORDS (Continue an reverse side it noa...amy end Odenil 6Y' INbl ft"0uS90
DAMS, INSPECTION, DAM SAFETY,
Connecticut RiverB~sinAshfield, Massachusetts
20. ABSTRACT (Cefluiinu on reverse aide HI necesayan7d fdofttt# 6Y block NUMbe)
The darn is an earthf ill embankment about 775 ft. long with a maximum height ofabout 15 ft. The inspection of the dam does not indicated conditions which ..
would constitute an immediate hazard to human life or property. The dam is f..small in size having a high hazard potential.
DD , 147.3 IODITION OP I NOV 65 IS OBSOLETE
PHASE I REPORT
NATIONAL DAM INSPECTION PROGRAM
Inventory No.: MA 00523 -
Name of Dam: ASHFIELD POND DAM
Town Located: ASHFIELD
County Located: FRANKLIN
State Located: COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS 0
Date of Inspection: 3 AUGUST 1978
BRIEF ASSESSMENT
Ashfield Pond Dam is an earth embankment about 775 feet long with.-. a maximum height of about 15 feet. A 30 foot long, 14.5 foot high stone
masonry and concrete stepped spillway is located about 110 feet from theeast abutment. A rectangular concrete low level outlet, 4 feet wide and1.7 feet high is located at the east end of the spillway. Water flows fromthe conduit and spillway Into one of two downstram channels, dependingupon the magnitude of flow. Both channels converge about 1000 feet down- . . .. ..stream to form South River which flows into Deerfield River, a tributary ofthe Connecticut River.
Phase I in,'pection and evaluation of Ashfield Pond Dam does notindicate conditions which would constitute an immediate hazard to human -
life or property. Based on engineering judgment and the performance of- the earth embankment and the outlet works, the project is considered to
be in fair condition. The project has a number of deficiencies which, ifnot remedied, have the potential for developing into hazardous conditions.
Because there are no data on Probable Maximum Floods for a drain-*. age area of 0.99 square miles, it was necessary to synthesize a test flood
A. hydrograph for the contributing area. Because the dam is classified as smallin size, with a high hazard potential, the test flood, in accordance with .n ooCorps of Engineers guidelines, falls between one half the Probable MaximumFlood and the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF). Selection of 1/2 PMF as " '
the test flood, yields an outflow of 1698 cfs (assuming the low level out- ..-. -
* let is closed), which is greater than the maximum spillway discharge capa- -
city of 965 cfs and would result in an overtopping of the dam by about 0.43 -feet. Since the dam will be overtopped by the test flood, it is considered
* .1o-
-'-: '.--.-'': ,' , -.. '.i.'.' ,- -< ,. - -- " - ,. . - . -. - . -,- ,' -V : V . . - , '- , -.- -: , :,:' '- v -, .- , ,
-%- .-. " "-°
-, .- - - -- '-. -- ,--..-.-- 1 ,.uA ...-.,-
that the spillway is inadequate from a hydraulic and hydrologic viewpoint.However, overtopping of the dam with a short duration, small head, would --.
- probably not breach the heavily vegetated slope of the dam. Nevertheless, A.a number of alternatives are recommended, for implementation by the owner
.. within 12 months of receipt of this Phase I Inspection Report, for providing -..,, . :.adequate spillway capacity.
In addition, remedial measures are recommended, for implement-ation by the owner within 12 months of receipt of this Phase I InspectionReport, to improve overall conditions. These measures, in general, are " ..-as follows:
- Programs for observing and monitoring seepage
- Repairs to embankments and appurtenant structures
- Programs for operation, maintenance and inspectionr.. . ....
New ork No. 29823 P .
t~
• .~~~ ~ S ,-,-;,-.
*. S.". . .=
,I•
.'" 7-.79 7- 0.-
%"% % . '.
;-; 22;2:22".;222"-[.;,i.7 6,6-'-;---,: ."--
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .**. . :.- -,
• - -. oO -... .7
[] This Phase I Inspection Report on Ashfield Pond Dam has beenreviewed by the undersigned Review Board members. In our opinion,the reported findings, conclusions, and recommendations are -
consistent with the iey._L~m._Q ].ines for Safety Inspection -.--
of Dams, and with good engineering judgment and practice, and ishereby submitted for approval.
CHARLES G. TIERSCH, Chairman .
Chief, Foundation and Materials BranchEngineering Division
FRED J V.S Jr. , MemberChief, Dell gn BranchEngineering Division
SAUL CO.ER, Mem.Chief, Water Control BranchEngineering Division
i •
*Chief, Engineering Division.....
................
• -..- -,'-'"",'-'.'*---. " - ..".-i",'L Z. .........-..-.............. L.."........."...........--.........,."..
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY F-NEW ENGLAND DIVISION. CORPS OF ENGINEERS
424 TRAPELO ROAD
WALTHAM. MASSACHUSE rS 02154
! REPLY TO --ATTENTION OF:
NEDED 2.DEC 2 2 1978
Honorable Michael S. DukakisGovernor of the Commonwealth of 0Massachusetts
State HouseBoston, Massachusetts 02133
Dear Governor Dukakis: 0
I am forwarding to you a copy of the Ashfield Pond Dam Phase IInspection Report, which was prepared under the National Program forInspection of Non-Federal Dams. This report is presented for your useand is based upon a visual inspection, a review of the past performanceand a brief hydrological study of the dam. A brief assessment is in-cluded at the beginning of the report. I have approved the report andsupport the findings and recommendations described in Section 7 and askthat you keep me informed of the actions taken to implement them. Thisfollow-up action is a vitally important part of this program.
A copy of this report has been forwarded to the Department of Environ-mental Quality Engineering, the cooperating agency for the Commonwealthof Massachusetts. In addition, a copy of the report has also been fur-nished the owner, Town of Ashfield, Board of Selectmen, Ashfield,
Massachusetts 01330.
Copies of this report will be made available to the public, upon re-quest, by this office under the Freedom of Information Act. In the caseof this report the release date will be thirty days from the date ofthis letter.
I wish to take this opportunity to thank you and the Department ofEnvironmental Quality Engineering for your cooperation in carrying out
this program.
Sincerely yours,
As stated lonel, Corps of Engineers
iv ... . . . .
'=-ivision Engineer
• . • .. ," .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .•.,
- , - 7- '-7- -7-......... . .--.....-- ..... , . . . ........ •
' " - --5 " -- -'1',..' ,,.' ,,,.'_,,-'-2' ' _" ._- ._- .,,.- _.- - . ._. ,_ . .- .- . .- ... , ... . ., ... ... ... . " " -" -. . .' ." -'. . .. , . . . . • * . - . " .
PREFACE
This report is prepared under guidance contained in the Recommended 0Guidelines for Safety Inspection of Dams, for Phase I Investigations. Copiesof these guidelines may be obtained from the Office of Chief of Engineers,Washington, D.C. 20314. The purpose of a Phase I Investigation is toidentify expeditiously those dams which may pose hazards to human life orproperty. The assessment of the general condition of the dam is based uponavailable data and visual inspections. Detailed investigation, and analysesinvolving topographic mapping, subsurface investigations, testing, and de-tailed computational evaluations are beyond the scope of a Phase I investiga-tion; however, the investigation is intended to identify any need for suchstudies.
In reviewing this report, it should be realized that the reported con-dition of the dam is based on observations of field conditions at the time ofinspection along with data available to the inspection team. In cases wherethe reservoir was lowered or drained prior to inspection, such action, whileimproving the stability and safety of the dam, removes the normal load on the 0 .structure and may obscure certain conditions which might otherwise be detect-able if inspected under the normal operating environment of the structure.
It is important to note that the condition of a dam depends onnumerous and constantly changing internal and external conditions, and is 0 0evolutionary in nature. It would be incorrect to assume that the present con-dition of the dam will continue to represent the condition of the dam at somepoint in the future. Only through continued care and inspection can there beany chance that unsafe conditions be detected.
Phase I inspections are not intended to provide detailed hydrologicand hydraulic analyses. In accordance with the established Guidelines, theSpillway Test flood is based on the estimated "Probable Maximum Flood" forthe region (greatest reasonably possible storm runoff), or fractions thereof.Because of the magnitude and rarity of such a storm event, a finding that aspillway will not pass the test flood should not be interpreted as necessarily -posing a highly inadequate condition. The test flood provides a measure ofrelative spillway capacity and serves as an aide in determining the need formore detailed hydrologic and hydraulic studies, considering the size of thedam, its general condition and the downstream damage potential.
-W ___W W- -.W V
-- .- -- - - w w w w- . 0
~-.'. -'. -..-...-.-.. -
CONNECTICUT RIVER BASINASHFIEID POND DAM
INVENTORY NO. MA 00523 S
PHASE I INSPECTION REPORT
9 ON TENTS
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
BRIEF ASSESSMENT * S
OVERVIEW PHOTOGRAPHii
VICINITiY MAP i
r TOPOGRAPHIC MAP VS
* 1 PROJECT INFORMATION -
g 1.1 GENERAL -
a. Authority 3-
b . purpose1-
1.2 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT1-
a. Description of Dam and Appurtenances 1-1
*b. Location 1-3
C. Ownership 1-3
d . Purpose of Dam 1-3
e. Design and Construction History 1-3
f. Normal Operating Procedures 1-3
g. Size Classification 1-3
h. Hazard Classification 1-3
i. Operator 1-4
1.3 PERTINENT DATA 1-4
a. Drainage Area 1-4
b. Discharges at Damsite 1-4
C. Elevation 1-4
d. Reservoir 1-5
e. Storage 1-5
jf. Reservoir Surface 1-5
g. Dam 1-5
h. Diversion and Regulating Tunnel 1-6 5
Spillway 1-6
j. Regulating Outlets 1-6
4! W
Z ... . . 7
-- -\ ----.------.-.-.--- • E.
Pane No.
- 2 ENGINEERING DATA 2-1
2.1 DESIGN 2-1
2.2 CONSTRUCTION RECORDS 2-1 0 0
2.3 OPERATING RECORDS 2-1
1.4 EVALUATION OF DATA 2-1
r" a. Availability 2-1 0 Sb. Adequacy 2-1c. Validity 2-1
3 VISUAL INSPECTION 3-1
3.1 FINDINGS 3-1a. General 3-1b. Embankment 3-1c. Appurtenant Structures 3-1d. Abutments 3-2e. Downstream Channel 3-2 : 0f. Reservoir Area 3-2
3.2 EVALUATION OF OBSERVATIONS 3-3
4 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES 4-1
4.1 PROCEDURES 4-1
4.2 MAINTENANCE OF DAM 4-1 -
4.3 MAINTENANCE OF OPERATING FACILITIES 4-1 *-
4.4 WARNIT. . SYSTEMS IN EFFECT 4-1
4.5 EVALUATION 4-1
5 HYD RAU LIC/ HYDROLOGIC 5-1
5.1 DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS 5-1
5.2 SPILLWAY CAPACITY 5-1 .
5.3 RESERVOIR CAPACITY 5-1
5.4 FLOODS OF RECORD 5-1
1P e
Page No.
5.5 DESI N FLOOD 5-1
5.6 OVERTOPPING POTENTIAL 5-2 . .
• 5.7 EVALUATION 5-2
6 STRUCTURAL. STABILITY 6-1
6.1 EVALUATION OF STRUCTURAL STABILITY 6-1
a. Visual Observations 6-1b. Design and Construction Data 6-1c. Operating Records 6-1
d. Post-construction Changes 6-1 S S
e. Seismic Stability 6-1
7 ASSESSMENT, RECOMMENDATIONS & REMEDIALMEASURES 7-1
7.1 DAM ASSESSMENT 7-1a. Condition 7-1b. Adequacy of Information 7-1
c. Urgency 7-2
d. Necessity for Additional Investigations 7-2.........-
7.2 RECOMMENDATIONS 7-2
7.3 REMEDIAL MEASURES 7-2 " -
a. Alternatives 7-2b. Operating & Maintenance Procedures 7-2 5
APPENDICES
A. VISUAL INSPECTION CHECKLIST*
B. DRAWINGS AND INSPECTION REPORTS1. Aihfield Pond Dam, Plan and Section2. Ashfield Pond Dam, Spillway Plan and Section3. Ashfield Pond Dam, Low Level Outlet, Plan and Sections
C. PHOTOGRAPHS
D. HYDROLOGIC DATA AND COMPUTATIONS
E. INFORMATION AS CONTAINED IN THE NATIONALINVENTORY OF DAMS
- , - -" - . " - " a "
* 3
UU
0~~ CSetd
{j
'C Y) ~ ~ N ____
-74 .j * ~ iV IAI~{1c__________
''4 . -- -f
+ 2,
57 .- FOR( S,( (
A-D-
Kr""' 5 -.
scal ofmie
.- '~~IINT MAP- ~~**( / \ \ -a
ASFEL.ON A
NA IMP " wot2lpU .REP,. IMP "
ASHFIELD QUADRANGLEMASSACHUSETTS
SCALE: 1" 2000 FT.
On-
gC
(k AHFIED POD DA
w lS
.
PHASE I INSPECTION REPORTNATIONAL DAM INSPECTION PROGRAM :'.
CONNECTICUT RIVER BASININVENTORY NO. MA 00523
ASHFIELD POND DAMTOWN OF ASHFIELD
FRANKLIN COUNTY, COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS -' --
SECTION I - PROJECT INFORMATION . -
1.1 GENERAL
a. Authority . .Public Law 92-367, August 8, 1972, authorized the Secretary
of the Army, through the Corps of Engineers, to initiate a national programof dam inspection throughout the United States. The New England Divisionof the Corps of Engineers has been assigned the responsibility of super-vising the inspection of dams within the New England Region. Tippetts-Abbett-McCarthy-Stratton has been retained by the New England Divisionto inspect and report on selected dams in the State of Massachusetts.Authorization and notice to proceed was issued to Tippetts-Abbett-McCarthy-Stratton under a letter of May 3, 1978, from Mr. Ralph T. Garver, Colonel,Corps of Engineers. Contract No. DACW 33-78-C-0298 has been assignedby the Corps of Engineers for this work.
b. Purpose(1) Perform technical inspection and evaluation of non-Fed-
eral dams to identify conditions which threaten the pub-lic safety and thus permit correction in a timely mannerby non-Federal interests.
(2) Encourage and prepare the States to initiate quickly effect-ive dam safety programs for non-Federal dams.
(3) To update, verify and complete the National Inventory ofDams.
1.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROTECT
a. Description of Dam and AppurtenancesAshfield Pond Dam is an earth dam approximately 775 feet
long with a maximum height of about 15 feet and a crest width varying from ,.'.'-.v..,9 to 13 feet. The horizontal alignment of the crest (El 1254.5), which trendseast to west, is multi-curved. The upstream slope of the embankment varies .
-- ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .
from I(V): 2(H) to I(V): 3(H) with generally I(V): 2.5(H) the average. Thedownstream slope varies from I (V): 1. 1(H) to I (V): 3(H) with generally1V): 2 (H) the average. The upstream slope is protected with riprap to with-in 6 to 9 feet of the crest. .. '.
A 30 feet long, 14.5 feet high stone masonry and concretespillway structure is located about 110 feet from the east abutment. As -
shown on an available drawing the spillway is founded on wood planks. 4The downstream face of the spillway is stepped. The steps are of stonemasonry, 3, 3.5 and 4 feet high, each set back 2 feet. The sill consistsof concrete. The spillway crest (El 1250) is 8 feet wide; 3 feet horizontal and5 feet at a slopeof I(V): 5(H). The crest is notched for the provision of flashboards. The upstream face of the spillway is sloped at an unknown angle.
* S
Flanking the spillway are 2-foot wide stone masonry trainingwalls, 35 feet long, with a maximum height above the spillway crest of4.5 feet. The lower three feet of the downstream walls are concrete. Thewest wall is straight; the east wall is "dog-legged" five feet from thebottom step, resulting in a decrease of the width between the training walls , 6
to 21 feet. The upstream end of the training walls is located about 16 feetfrom the downstream edge of the spillway sill. The downstream channelfloor has been concreted within the limits of the training walls and on top " - "of the wooden plank foundation. There is a steel and wood pedestrianbridge over the spillway. *
A low level outlet consisting of a 4-foot wide, 1. 7-foot highrectangular concrete conduit is located at the east end of the spillway, out-falling at the base of the lowest step (El 1239.5±). Discharges are througha 38-foot long stone masonry conduit and are controlled by a manually opera- -
ted steel rack and pinion mechanism attached to a 53-inch wide, 40-inch highsluice gate. The estimated discharge capacity of the conduit is 147 cfs. Thelatter is inside a concrete capped, stone masonry gate shaft, 3 feet by 4.5feet, located on the spillway sill about 3 feet from the east training wall.The inlet to the low level conduit is reported to be at the base of the spillwaystructure, about 26 feet from the upstream wall of the gate shaft. S S
Discharges from the spillway and the low level outlet arecarried by two channels. The primary channel which conducts the low flow,follows the natural creek and is 10 feet wide, 3 feet deep. At about 500feet downstream it continues in a 48-inch diameter steel pipe and flows .
from there, underground for about another 500 feet. The secondary channelwhich carries the high flows, is lined with stone masonry. The latter isabout 1000 feet long, 10 feet wide and 6 feet high. Both channels convergein the vicinity of Buckland Road Bridge to form South River which flows intoDeerfield River, a tributary of the Connecticut River. _ .
1-2
_ W- W _ _ S S
* . . . .Z
b. LocationThe dam is located northwest of the Town of Ashfield, about
0.5 mile northeast of the intersection of Massachusetts Highway Routes116 and 112. . O
c. OwnershipAshfield Pond Dam is owned by the Town of Ashfield. The . -,-
day-to-day maintenance is managed by the Board of Selectman, Town ofAshfield. There is no day-to-day operation of the dam.
d. Purpose of DamThe impoundment provided by the dam is for recreational - -
purposes. The Town maintains a public beach on the east abutment.
e. Design and Construction History S .Original design and construction records are not available.
* It is reported that an original smaller dam was built about 1750 to providepower for a grist mill and later failed. The present dam was built before 1800.
f . Norfial Operating Procedures •.There are no operating procedures. It is reported that the -. I
level of the lake is not controlled and that the low level outlet has notbeen operated since about 10 years ago when repairs were made to theg spillway.
g. Size ClassificationThe dam is less than 40 feet high and has a maximum storage
capacity of less than 1000 acre-feet. It is, therefore, classified as a"small" dam.
h. Hazard ClassificationThe dam is in a "high" hazard potential category because
there are, immediately downstream from the dam, about 20-25 single andmulitple family residential homes, several business establishments, muni-cipal buildings and churches. In the event of a failure, the resulting floodwave would cause substantial loss of life and property. --
For details on the selection of the hazard potential categorysee Section 5.6.
1-3
--- ~~.- Oo .W -W_ W- -vp a
.........................................................................
.................................................... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... , ' .. '-°
.... . ... ... . . .. . ... .. . .... ... .... ... ."" -- '" " -'.-..-.-.'---.. .'-. .-.. . .--.. .- '."..-.....-". ."-".-. .-. .-.. '.... '.,..T-.'.',.'.- .. .
i. OperatorThere is no day-to-day operation of the dam and no one has
been designated as the operator of the dam. In case of an emergency, theBoard of Selectmen, Town of Ashfield, is to be notified. (Phone number:413-628-4439 or through local police phone: 413-628-4445).
1.3 PERTINENT DATA
a. Drainage AreaThe total drainage area contributing to the Ashfield Pond is 0 0
634 acres and consists of steep hills with narrow valleys. About 80 percentof the drainage area is covered by well-established hardwood forest, andthere has been very little development by man. The surface area of the lake,at spillway crest (37 acres), is about 6% of the total drainage area. .-
b. Discharaes at DamsiteDischarges at the damsite are over a uncontrolled stone ma- . -
sonry spillway and through a low level outlet.
The spillway is 30 feet long, 4.5 feet high with an 8 feetwide sill at about El 1250. The computed maximum discharge, at a head of4.5 feet is 965 cfs.
The low level outlet consists of a 5.0 feet wide, 38.0 feetlong stone masonry conduit with the invert at the downstream end estimatedat El 1239.5. The invert elevation at the upstream end of the conduit is
,- unknown. The computed maximum discharge from the conduit, with a head. equivalent to the top of dam (El 1254.5) is 147 cfs.
The maximum combined outflow from spillway and low level.. outlet is 1,112 cfs.
"*' There is no record of the maximum flood at the damsite but" reportedly the dam has never been overtopped during a major flood.
c. Elevation (feet above MSL) . 0
Top of dam 1254.5Maximum pool-design surcharge Unknown
t Maximum pool-test flood 1254.7Full flood control pool Not ApplicableRecreation pool 1250Spillway crest (gated) Not ApplicableUpstream portal invert diversion
tunnel Not Applicable
1-4
. " .. .' L--.-- - .--.- . "-. - - .-,/ .- .. ... T . . ./ <.' . .. '-" -. .- .- /> .>-.. . . . . . . ..-...... .-.. . . . . . . . . .-.. . ......... . ... .--. .-.
Downstream portal invert diversion.tunnel Not Applicable. •
Streambed at centerline of dam 1239.5+
Maximum tailwater Unknown
d. Reservoir (feet) * 0
Length of maximum pool 2700+Length of recreation pool 2700+
Length of flood control pool Not Applicable
e. Storag (acre-feet)
Recreation pool 306 (est.)
Flood control pool Not Applicable
Design surcharge 184 (est.)Test flood sircharge 193.3 .
Top of dam 490
f. Reservoir Surface (acres)
Top of dam 43.9+
Test flood pool 43.9 -
Flood-control pool Not Applicable
Recreation pool 37+Spillway crest 37+
g. Dam
Type EarthLength, feet 775Height, feet 15Top width Varies from 9 feet to
13 feet -0
Side Slopes - Upstream Varies from I(V): 2(H)to 1(V): 3 (H) withS(V):2.5 (H) average
a - Downstream Varies from l(V):l. I(H)to I(V):3(H) with I(V): 0 .2 (H) average.
Zoning Unknown
Impervious core UnknownCutoff Unknown
Grout curtain Unknown .
Other None
1-5
. . ..'.[,') [- '[)[ii- .". -[,-' .- " :' i, .' ." '-. . .) --.-- ' . - . -' - - ... '- --- '. .'--.- -. .-- : . . ." ,-. [) ) 2 ---
.)) -.- " l i--)/ -. " .:.').,- -) ',.') ., "" .' .. '. -.) 4 > . , -. ...-.".."..'-."...-. -.. ".... .-. .'.. . .'..'......•.. ...-. .".... .- '-... .-.. '.".- ..
• • , .- ,. ,. - . , . . -. -o . °. %; - ,' . ,o .. , , -, . . ,. . - -o • - . .. • • • .-... . .-.. . .-
-. ...
". .". .-.. . . . °
h. Diversion and Regulating Tunnel
Type Not Applicable
Length Not Applicable 0 0
Closure Not Applicable
Access Not Applicable
Regulating facilities Not Applicable
i. Spillway
Type Broad-crestedLength of weir, feet 30Crest elevation, feet 1250Gates None -
Upstream channel NoneDownstream channel See description in .
Section 1.2 andSection 3.1
General None
J. Regulating OutletsThe regulating outlets consist of an uncontrolled spillway and
a stone masonry conduit.
a- The spillway is 30 feet long, 4.5 feet high with a flat crest 0 0
width of 3.0 feet at El 1250.
The low level outlet conduit is about 4 feet wide, 1.7 feet
high, 38 feet long with the invert at the outlet estimated at El 1239. 5.Discharges into downstream channel are controlled by a manually operatedrack and pinion sluice gate, in an open 3 feet by 4.5 feet concrete capped
stone masonry gate shaft. The sluice gate is presently not operable. .
L 1-6 *
.. .-. . .......................... *."* -..-..
-.-- - . I ,. ,
SECTION 2 ENGINEERING DATA
2.1 DESIGN _
There are no design data, conistru~ction drawings or specific memo-randa available for the dam. There is a drawing, made in 1936, showingsome details of the low level outlet structure, gate and gate shaft and is --
included in the Appendix. Sketch of the davn, plan and section, given inthe Appendix were prepared on the basis of approximate field measurementsmade at the time of this visual inspection.
Information on subsurface conditions could not be located.
2.2 CONSTRUCTION RECORDS
There are no construction records available.
2.3 OPERATING RECORDS
No operation records are available and there is no daily record 5 •
of pool elevation or rainfall at the dam site.
2.4 EVALUATION OF DATA
a. AvailabilityExisting information was made available by the Board of
Selectmen, Town of Ashfield.
b. Adequacy
The lack of in-depth engineering data did not allow for adefinitive review. Therefore the adequacy of this dam could not be assessedfrom the standpoint of reviewing design and construction data, but is basedprimarily on visual inspection, past performance history and sound engi-neering judgment.
c. ValidityIn general, the information obtained from the above mentioned
drawing and the personal interviews is consistent with observations madeduring the inspection and therefore considered reliable.
2-1
.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . . . .- . . .. . . . . . . .. .. . . .. . -. . . -. . - .-. v . ...- .--- - - . -- ., . --
~~~~~~~~~~~~~..-...'..............,... . .. . .'. .... .................... . .... ....- . .: i'_L...-._.............................. .... . ... .
SECTION 3 - VISUAL INSPECTION
3.1 FINDINGS
a. GeneralA visual inspection of Ashfield Pond Dam was made on
3 August 1978. The weather was cloudy, temperature about 750 F. The lastrainfall occurred the previous night. At the time of inspection, the pondlevel was about 12 inches below spillway crest.
b. EmbankmentThe earth embankment appears to be in fair condition. The
horizontal and vertical alignments of the crest are good with only minorrutting and erosion caused by pedestrian traffic. The crest is covered withvegetation, shrubs, ground cover, saplings and large trees (See Photograph 6No. 5)
The downstream slope shows some minor sloughing in the areawhere steep slopes occur and there is some minor erosion in the form ofgullys caused by trespassing and runoff. At several locations on the slope S Sand on the crest there are some fairly large animal burrows. The slope iscovered with heavy vegetation, mainly shrubs, ground cover, saplings and :'':'very large trees (See Photograph Nos. 2 - 4). The roots of these trees areat the surface of the slope. There is evidence that some trees have beencut in the past. In the vicinity of the downstream toe, about 10 feet westof the spillway structure, there is a damp zone which may be due to runofffrom the rainfall of the previous evening. A channel located about 170 feet - . * -.
west of the spillway which carries runoff from Mass. Highway 116 approachesthe embankment, and flows along the downstream toe of the embankment tothe spillway channel. At several locations, the channel has cut away thetoe approximately 1 to 2 feet. (See Photograph No. 9).
The upstream slope does not exhibit any sloughing or signsof trespassing, but there are a few areas where the riprap protection is dis-placed. The ground vegetation is growing up through much of the riprapprotection. The slope is covered with heavy vegetation including large trees. 0 0
c. Appurtenant StructuresThe stone masonry spillway appears to be in good condition
with only few stones missing. Mortar pointing is missing over large areasand there is some vegetation growing from the joints. The concrete on thespillway sill is in generally good condition, however, the crest has beensedimented with beach sand and there is some vegetation growing. Thereare no flashboards in use, and it is reported they have never been used.The stone masonry, the concrete base of the training walls and the spillway
3-1
....................
• ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~..-. .. ..... ''. -L-'. :' .- ," ... ..... .... -... .. .. ... . . .- .--. , .
channel floor are in good condition. The wood deck of the pedestrian bridge*. is in fair condition with only a few boards broken and/or missing. The steel
support beams are in good condition, however, they are rusty. (See Photo-* graph No. 6).
There Is minor seepage at several locations along the base ofthe spillway. There is slight leakage (about 3 to 5 gpm) at the contact withthe first step of the spillway and the east training wall. Very minor seepagewas observed exiting from behind the downstream end of the east training
.* wall. Examination of the vicinity around the spillway indicates that the * 0foundation is probably glacial till. No bedrock outcropping was observedin the vicinity of the dam.
Though the gate is closed, water is discharging from the lowlevel outlet; probably flowing over and through the gate seals. The stonemasonry and mortar pointing of the gate shaft walls are in good conditionbut there is minor seepage through the pointing of the upstream wall. Thebottom of the gate shaft is completely filled with silt and debris coveringthe gate. The gate is inoperable because of the filled condition of the shaft.It is reported that the gate has not been operated in 10 years. The openend of the gate shaft is protected with a grid consisting of 0.5 inch steel - .
- reinforcing and is secured to the operating stand mechanism by means of." wires. All metal is extremely rusty. (See Photograph Nos. 7 & 8).
d. Abutments .There are no signs of seepage or other unusual conditions atthe abutments.
e. Downstream ChannelThere are two downstream channels; the primary channel oper-
ates for normal flows and the secondary channel for above normal flows. S SThe primary channel is in generally good condition, with only some debrisin the channel and some overhanging vegetation. At the time of inspection,flows did not appear to be impeded. The secondary channel is completelyovergrown with swamp-grass. (See Photograph Nos. 10 - 12). No flowwas observed in this channel. The walls of the channel appear to have beenlined with stone masonry which has fallen into the channel, except adjacentto the Buckland Road Bridge. Both channels converge under the bridge andflows are unimpeded in the South River.
f. Reservoir AreaIn the vicinity of the dam there is no evidence of sloughing,
potentially unstable slopes or other unusual condition which would adverselyaffect the dam. . . -.
3-2
-. - - , . , .-
• . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2 EVALUATION OF OBSERVATIONS
m ~Visual observations made during the course of the investigations____*revealed several deficiencies which at present do not adversely affect the
adequacy of the dam. However, these deficiencies do require attentionand should be corrected before further deterioration leads to a hazardous - .. *
condition. Recommended measures to improve these conditions are given-.*in Section 7.-
3-3
0* aS
SECTION 4 - OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES
4.1 PROCEDURESII .. .0.
There are no operational procedures for the project.
4.2 MAINTENANCE OF DAM-
There is no formal maintenance manual for the project. Maintenance -
of the embankment and appurtenant structures are minimal to non-existent.There is no scheduled program of inspection by Town personnel, however,there is a statewide program of inspection established several years ago bythe Department of Environmental Quality Engineering Division of Waterways.
A copy of their last report dated October 25, 1976 is included in the Appendix. -"
4.3 MAINTENANCE OF OPERATING FACILITIES
There is no established maintenance program for the operatingfacilities.
4.4 WARNING SYSTEMS IN EFFECT
There is no warning system in effect.
4.5 EVALUATION '0
The maintenance and operating procedures for the dam and appur-
tenant structures are considered totally inadequate. Measures to improvethese deficiencies are given in Section 7.
* 0.
* 0
I°
4-1-- ,.....*.:-. . . . . . . . .
SECTION 5 -HYDRAULIC/HYDROLOGIC
*5.1 DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS
The total drainage area contributing to the Ashfield Pond is 634.* acres and consists of steep hills with narrow valleys. About 80 percent of
the drainage area is covered by well-established hardwood forest, and therehas been very little development by man.
5.2 SPILLWAY CAPACITY
The uncontrolled spillway is 30 feet long with a flat concrete sill, (El 1250), 3.0 feet wide, 4.5 feet below the top of the training walls, and
a stepped downstream face about 10.5 feet high. It is escimated that the 0 0capacity of the spillway, at a maximum head of 4.5 feet, corresponding tothe top of the dam (El 1254.5) is about 965 cfs. In addition, the 4.0 feetwide, 1.7 feet high, 38 feet long low level outlet has a maximum calculatedcapacity with the same head of 147 cfs. Maximum ottflow capacity is1,112 cfs. "
5.3 RESERVOIR CAPACITY
The maximum capacity, including surcharge storage, is given inthe National Inventory of Dams as 490 acre-feet. It is estimated that thesurcharge storage, between the spillway crest (El 1250) and the top of the .dam is 184 acre-feet, which is equivalent to a depth of 3.5 inches of run-
- off over the entire basin.
5.4 FLOODS OF RECORD
There are no records of flow from this small drainage area and norecords of the maximum water elevation on the pond. Rainfall records in-dicate a total of 9.92 inches during the period September 20-22, 1938 with4.34 inches falling on September 19 at Greenfield Mass. 1/
* S
5.5 DESIGN FLOOD'
Because there are no data on Probable Maximum Floods for an areaof 0.99 square miles, it was necessary to synthesize a test flood hydro-graph for the contributing area. Initially, a depth-duration relation for max-
imum probable point rainfall (10 square miles area), for duratons, from 6hours to 24 hours, was taken from Weather Bureau Sources . The distribu-
!Hurricane Floods of September 1938, U.S.Geological Survey Water SupplyPaper No. 867, 1940.
2-/Seasonal Variation of the Probable Maximum Precipitation East of the 105 .M4eridan for Areas from 10 to 1,000 Square Miles and Durations of 6, 12,Z and 48 Hours, Hydrometeorological Report No. 33, 1956..'- ~~~5-1"-""""'""
. .. . . . . .
S-. . . . . . . .. . ..
tion of the rainfall was based on data in a publication of the World Meteoro-logical Organization.-V Increments of depth from the depth-duration relation, ." .-
at 15 minute intervals, were arranged in the probable storm sequence shownin the Appendix. ,
The drainage area was then sub-divided into three sub-basins; (1)the Pond, 37 acres, with no lag and no incremental losses, (2) the unchan-nelled area, 129 acres, with a 15 minute, lag and 0. 2 inches per hour in-filtration loss, and (3) the channelized area, 468 acres, with a 15 minute 0 0
" lag and a loss of 0.2 inches per hour.
A test flood, equal to one half the Probable Maximum Flood. (1/2 PMF) was derived by summing one half the Probable Maximum Flood
hydrographs from each sub-basin as shown in the Appendix, resulting in a1/2 PMF inflow-peak of about 2,640 cfs.
5.6 OVERTOPPING POTENTIAL
The adequacy of the Ashfield Pond Dam spillway was tested byrouting one half the Probable Maximum Flood through the reservoir, and itssurcharge storage of 3.5 inches, using a computerized technique. Thewater surface was assumed to be at the spillway crest at the start of theflood inflow. With the low level outlet open, the routed flood with a peak
g outflow of 1476 cfs raised the lake to El 1254.71 or 0.21 feet above the cresto1 the dam. With the low level outlet closed, it is expected that a peak S
outflow of 1,698 cfs would raise the lake to El 1254.93 or 0.43 feet abovethe crest.
In order to estimate the downstream dam failure hydrograph, theU.S. Corps of Engineers "Rule of Thumb" guidance was used. The estimate O
*-. assumes: (a) the reservoir surface is at the top of the dam at the time of . -
the breach, (b) a breach of 40% of the dam length occurs (300 feet) and (c)the channel has an average roughness coefficient (n) of 0.07. It is estimatedthat at a selected section, 750 feet downstream of the dam, the peak floodwave discharge is 26,500 cfs with a wave height of about 13 feet. The visualinspection corroborates the information shown on the USGS Quadrangle sheet
for Ashfield, Mass., which indicates, at this section, about 20 - 25 houses . .
at or about El 1240. These houses would probably be destroyed or damaged
by the estimated flood wave.
5.7 EVALUATION
Since the dam is expected to be overtopped with an inflow equal to1/2 PMF, it is considered that the spillway is not adequate from a hydraulic
[" 3/' Manual for Estimation of Probable Maximum Precipitation, World Meteor- S _
ological Organization, Operational Hydrology Report No. 1973.
5-2
W W IV * o " "----.*,a Sa
and hydrologic standpoint. It should be pointed out however, that the dam
supposedly has not been overtopped in almost 200 years and has been ade-
quate against the major floods in the region in 1936, 1938 and 1955. The
flood used to test the adequacy of the spillway assumes that a 6-hour rain-
fall, equivalent to twice the 100-year, 6-hour rainfall, will be centered
over a 0. 99 square mile area.
I iS:--'i: S--.-.--:
5-3
. .
- . -
....... ....... ....... ...... .-....
. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
. °. . OoO..
SECTION 6- STRUCTURAL STABILITY - -
6.1 EVALUATION OF STRUCTURAL STABILITY
a. Visual ObservationsVisual observations did not indicate any serious structural
. problems with the embankment, spillway, low level outlet structure or" pedestrian bridge. The deficiencies, which are described in Section 3, re-
quire attention; recommended measures to improve the deficient conditionsare given in Section 7. 0 .
b. Design and Construction DataNo design computations or other data regarding the structural
-- stability of the dam have been located. *. •
On the basis of the performance experience, the visual inspec-tion, as well as engineering judgment, the dam appears to be adequate. . .
c. Operating RecordsThere are no operating records kept or available. There are • S
no records or reports of any operational problems which would affect thestability of the dam. However, the silting and debris laden low level gateshaft which renders the gate inoperable, could lead to problems.
d. Post-construction Changes pIt is reported that the present dam was built sometime before
1800. There are no records of any construction changes which have takenplace since that time. It is reported, however, that the spillway, thetraining walls, the spillway floor, the gate shaft and the low level outlet
i conduit were repaired about 10 years ago.
e. Seismic StabilityThe dam is located in Seismic Zone No. 2 and in accordance
• - with recommended Phase I guidelines does not warrant seismic analyses.
. "°p -.
6-1
W -. .
.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
- .. . .. .
SECTION 7 - ASSESSMENT, RECOMMENDATIONS & REMEDIAL MEASURES
7.1 DAM ASSESSMENT
a. ConditionPhase I investigation of Ashfield Pond Dam does not indicate
conditions which would constitute an immediate hazard to human life orproperty. Based on engineering judgment and the performance of the earth
- embankment and outlet works, the project appears to be in fair condition.The project, however, does have inadequacies and deficiencies which, if ...-
not remedied, have the potential for developing into hazardous conditions.
Because there are no data on Probable Maximum Floods (PMF)- for an area of 0.99 square miles, it was necessary to synthesize a test
flood hydrograph for the contributing area. The drainage area was divided 6 6into three sub-basins and a test storm, equal to one half the ProbableFlood (1/2 PMF), was derived by summing one half the Probable MaximumFlood hydrographs from each sub-basin. The 1/2 PMF inflow-peak wasabout 2,640 cfs.
The adequacy of the spillway was tested by routing the floodthrough the reservoir using a computerized routing technique. The watersurface was assumed to be at the spillway crest at the start of the storm.The peak outflow from the routed test flood (1/2 PMF), with the low leveloutlet open, was 1,476 cfs at a head of 4.71 feet (El 1254.71 or about0.21 feet above the crest), with the low level outlet closed, the peak out-flow was 1,698 cfs at a head of 4.93 feet (El 1254.93 or about 0.43 feetabove the crest).
* Since the dam is expected to be overtopped with an inflowequal to 1/2 PMF, it is considered that the spillway is not adequate froma hydraulic and hydrologic standpoint. It should be pointed out, however,that the dam supposedly has not been overtopped in almost 200 years andhas been adequate against the major floods in the region in 1936, 1938 and1955. The flood used to test the adequacy of the spillway assumesthat a 6-hour rainfall, equivalent to twice the 100-year, 6-hour rainfall, 0
* will be centered over a 0.99 square mile area.
b. Adequacy of InformationThe lack of in-depth engineering data did not allow for a _
S"- definitive review. Therefore the adequacy of this dam could not be assessedfrom the standpoint of reviewing design and construction data, but is basedprimarily on visual inspection, past performance history and sourd engineeringjudgment.
7-1
..
, , - - -. 11.1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .- '-. -.. . . . . . .
::i: :::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..::::::::::::::::::: .:.::! .. .- .- . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..::::: ::::::--: :--: -:-:.;.:.:-.......-.... -.-........-..................:..:..-........................:..........................-......<.... ... . --:.:.-.......-..-.....
c. UrcencyThe recommendations and remedial measures described in sub-. - -
sequent paragraphs should be undertaken by the owner within the next 123 months after receipt of this Phase I Inspection Report.
d. Necessity for Additional InvestigationsAdditional investigations to assess the adequacy of the dam .. :-..
and appurtenant structures do not appear necessary. -..--..
7.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
It is recommended, that within 12 months of receipt of this Phase I .1Inspection Report, the owner take the necessary steps to have either theexisting spillway widened, construct an additional spillway at a differentlocation, or provide additional storage by maintaining a lower lake level. 6 .
7.3 REMEDIAL MEASURES
a. AlternativesThe inadequacy of the spillway described above indicates an
overtopping of the dam of about 0. 2 to 0.4 feet. This is not consideredcritical since the assumptions used in calculating the test flood are conserv-atlve. In addition, overtopping the dam with a short duration, small headwould probably not breach the heavily vegetated slope of the dam. Never-
U theless, to prevent possible overtopping, consideration should be given towidening the existing spillway, constructing an additional spillway at adifferent location, or providing additional storage by maintaining a lowerlake level.
b. Operation & Maintenance ProceduresIt is recommended that the following measures be undertaken 6
by the owner within the next 12 months:
1. A monitoring program should be established to determinewhether the zone of dampness described in Section 3 isactually caused by seepage. If seepage is the case, asystematic program of observation and monitoring ofchanges in the pattern and quantity of the seepage shouldbe initiated. Such observations can be accomplished bythe installation of piezometers.
2. A formal program of maintenance and operation should be ..
established and periodic inspections on a biannual fre-quency should be made.
7-2 *
... ---- -- .-.- - . '
. . : ." " ." -".-'." . ..-. . . .. .. - . . .... . ..". -. .. '. . . . ', ", .- ', .' .- , .. ' ',.''. ,-'" .* '_,- ,, ."." ,. .. . ,,---. -. '. -.. -,'-' - '
3. Missing stones should be replaced on the downstream faceof spillway.
a 4. Crest of spillway should be cleaned and vegetation removed. 0
5. Low level outlet gate mechanism should be made operable,greased and painted. The gate shaft should be cleaned and - -"- ..
provisions made for preventing a reoccurrence of the siltingof the shaft. Consideration should be given to construction 0of a gate house.
6. The missing and broken wood decking for the pedestrianbridge should be replaced and the steel beams should bepainted.
7. The highway drainage channel located along the down-stream toe of the embankment should be rerouted. Areasalong the toe which have been eroded should be refilledwith suitable material.
8. Riprap, where displaced, should be rebuilt on suitablebedding material. All vegetation growing through the rip-rap should be eliminated.
I 9. Crest rutting, gullys and animal burrows should be refilledto grade with suitable material. Where sloughing hasoccurred, the slope should be flattened. Measures shouldbe taken to prevent the reoccurrence of these conditions.
10. Debris and overhanging trees should be removed and hauled Oaway from the spillway downstream channels. The stonemasonry lining in the secondary channel should be rebuilt.
11. Heavy brush, shrubs and young saplings should be removedfrom the embankment, spillway channel and the area immedi-ately downstream of the embankment toe. Large conifers,but not deciduous hardwoods, should be removed and the re-maining trees should be inventoried and their condition moni-tored. If a tree dies, the area around the tree should be closelymonitored for seepage.
12. Round the clock surveillance should be provided by the ownerduring periods of unusually heavy precipitation.
13. The owner should develop a formal warning system with localofficials for alerting downstream residents in case of emergency. .9 .
7-3
-: .-. " . ° :.- *.-W - .- . - , _. W V W- ;. , W W 0 1P , )
Z '4 A°° . . " . .. " , . -' - ."- , • - .-. - . ° ..- . ° . ° , / ' .' - % . - . . '- .o - . - ° • . ° •.
0 -0
t VISUAL INSPECTION CHECKLIST
APPENDIX A
w w W- W W WV U U V U V
VISUAL INSPECTION CHECK LIST3 PARTY ORGANIZATION
PROJECT AiJFf E L b POWAI P,441 DATE ~ -?TIME /0-0o0 1?M
-- ~WEATHER Sammy 0
W.S. ELEV24.10 U. S.
* PARTY:
tip S Fdcki 6. __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
2. T~~~A .I. 1.Pae _ 7. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
4.9. __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
S.10. __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
PROJECT FEATURE INSPECTED BY REMARKS
1. All )bnWd ,e-iu re S IA%4. ed i/ -v/, m.iez1kr-2.
3.
* 4.
*6.
7.
* 8.
9.0 0
10.
* ~I-ake level Prow-'/~ (1f5577c~r/$C~~ V$/ -'~/*c
/L. 12 51. /'4 IX as~rvped 7la tk, 4Fvew, I.S O C7/
F 'a w W w w -0 w w w w 0 w w w w 0 0
*' "_*_. ' -. - --. -- ....- :.-, -.. .. .- . .... II" r1 1 1 - .-1 - .--1" ,-.1.-. . .. -. .- r -I-.- . - r . .- .v . . = -
PERIODIC INSPECTION CHECK LIST 0 0
PROJECT ANIELb PoiK.i DAM DATE 8-3-79
PROJECT FEATURE NAME___...._•_.....
DISCIPLINE NAME_ _ _ _
DAM EMBANKMENTA j d (.. .-. -.-.- .
Crest Elevation 12450l, a r :V7
Current Pool Elevation 2f?,O a , ( ,,J4 p "s s S#e"- .
Maximum Impoundment to Date -
Surface Cracks m4ovvpe plose .veA
Pavement Condition o . on ,•"
Movement or Settlement of Crest ooia,,.--
Lateral Movement K~cj- ..M "-
Vertical Alignment V- c Jc4( A ,j M Lf-f...
"A4 --4L ak'-r '
*!!i Horizontal Alignment t , -
Condition at Abutment and at Concrete Structures A p11J 4-
Indications of Movement of Structural Items on Slopes N 4 .*
Trespassing on Slopes Mb J "r . . ns-* A &-..-." ...t4.1-
Sloughing or Erosion of Slopes or Abutments .k 1 ). I . .,.,k
_ _ , . . . . ,. , . " .. .. " ,., " ;4": ". '
Roc Slope Poectiorf- Riprp, -.-.-...
'f" .r O . AU f , ... A.L. "
Unusual Movement or Cracking at or near Toes A .
Am L.. p )4*a Za4 to~J. ~ - 2 *(ccUnusual Embankment or Downstream Seepage f-.i In - ,... , -"' . .
., .- l a fW * a'-a _ T .0 op - .....
Piping or Boils jfhO
Foundation Drainage Features_________ _____________
*Toe Drains _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Instrumentation System
-KAI 5Ct.A t,~'& w. ~ fri 4 J. ~t. p L.~ ZL 1 i
l~O #~a~*.4 ~ .~&D.M/v- ."4 . %.. /d A A -a* jk Ac
XC.,~ 0 S-
-4) 00 0C
At .
v AA
ww-CA v 4Ck 90
p * w V V V V V V V
PERIODIC INSPECTION CHECK LIST
PRO~r--T Aw~EL 9=1- AM DATE 2.~-7
PROJECT FEATURE_________ NAME___________
DISCIPLINE _____________ NAME ___________
*- OUTLET WORKS - CONTROL TOWER k- too~7&~ uA
* a. and S tructural 1 -4teLA ~--9
GnlCondition n~
Spalling__________________________
Visible Reinforcing__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Rusting or Staining of~mesee .
Any Seepage or Efflorescence -j,.*~Au AAO. Q a- 4I
joint Alignment le 07
Unusual Seepage or Leaks in Gate Chamber. kL
Cracks 4
Rusting or Corrosion of Steel '4A..
b. Mechanical and Electrical (ON 0 ,4 0"k AAg
Air Vents _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
L. ~Float Wells ki.....
Crane Hoist A
Elevator __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
w w W W V V V V V V V 0
Hydraulic System ____________________
* ~~~Service Gates _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Emergency Gates_______________ _______
Lightning Protection System .- .-
Emergency Power System __________________
Wiring and Lighting System__________
..
f~k~~~U*~~&t4 "L fr~L~'~W
PERIODIC INSPECTION CHECK LIST
PROECT___________ DATE _________
PROJECT FEATURE ___ _______ NAME___________
DISCIPLINE ______________ NAME____________
OUTLET WORKS -TRANSITION AND CONDUIT d d10"- 4y40
General Condition of__
Rust or Staining of Concrete___ _____________
Spal111ng __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Erosion or Cavitation ~ ' ~ ~A~fve
Cracking ~~~-.
Alignment of Monoliths RE C "
Alignment of joints ~~""
Numbering of Monoliths __________________
S
PERIODIC INSPECTION CHECK LIST
PROJECT _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ DATE _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
PROJECT FEATURE ___ _______NAME ___________
DISCIPLINE ______________ NAME ____________
OUTLET WORKS -OUTLET STRUCTURE AND.$j I
OUTLET CHANNEL ~ 9ee~~ q ~ A'~
General Condition of Concrete ___ _________
- ~~Rust or Staining__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Spalling___________________________
Erosion or Cavitation ___________________
Visible Reinforcing____________ _________
Any Seepage or Efflorescence______ __________ . -
Condition at joints____________ _________
Drain Holes ________________________
Channel
Loose Rock or Trees Overhanging Channel _______
Condition of Discharge Channel S 0
. ~ ~~ ..- ..
PERIODIC INSPECTION CHECK LIST
PROJECT A N F/IL40 PPNA/' DATE 3_______
U PROJECT FEATURE _________NAME___________
DISCIPLINE ______________ NAME_____________
OUTLET WORKS - SPILLWAY WEIR, APPROACHAND DISCHARGE CHANNELS
* a. Approach Channel
General Condition____________ ________
Loose Rock Overhanging Channel_________
Trees Overhanging Channel____ ____________
Floor of Approach Channel____ ___________
b. Weir and Training Walls
General Condition otT& rConrt .trc*-* 7'7 c2 C
Rust or Staining 4e'-'&~e/ PIC, ~ " .
Any Visible Reinforcing .C
A ny Seepage or Ef flores ce nce A -. ,~.:- *
~ u~ E '
* C. Discharge Channel pr. -I / I
General Condition /,~,~. .. < . . .- ' ~' ~~
Loose Rock Overhanging Channel 5e e.74w , .. * **
Trees Overhanging Channel .,.j,.. i
fT.4ErI~.g. A0 1..
_ ___ ___7
Floor of Channel 1 *~- i,~ fdrIea'iAn,~ v 1
Other Obstructions
p1 - e - or-Sr. y4J.sOs1
- - A~sceIareou (j~-1~.t-omr o Ce 011* AL14' b
V. A~(3)
Wigo e c S4ov~ m n 4 -
t rs.-*7 7.
0S
U a
*
w S S
U DRAWINGS AND INSPECTION REPORTS S
* 0*
* 0
I * ~*
APPENDIX B *
_ w ______S S U U S S S S _ 5 0 0
.......................................................... ...................
.......................................
I S
. -~ , -
1* ~. -'~, 'I..........
-t t
mr i t 4 .l T
T7 I r.-97,1 1
4- f
- Y
4 i i
1 .4
tC,, LOVEL CrCCF, TEA'AtL
I 0f 00MA q
/7'W -i
4 1 Lf~~ M.4S
w w 0 J10?§1l§ 2 1§ a lA I
~~I~4~~. 'J- -A. -- ~ ~ ~ .
Ina r
Z4
.... . ...
JZ7IV~ 7.j7.47 MO?VAOO/I,')9 Ct7V NV7d
-71
-Ler
EXEUTIVE OF71CE OF ENIJVRONCrENTAL AFFAIRS0 0DEPARI{NT OF EN4VI11ON1'tTAL QUALITY E.,GR.
DIVISION OF WATERUIAY8
October 25, 1976 0
* Town of Ashfieldc/o Chairman, Board of selectmen RE: Inspection Dar, '2-6-13-1Town Hall Ashfield Pond DamnAshf ield, Massachusetts Ashf ield-
Gentlemen:
on September 30, 1976 ,an Engineer f rorn.. the MassachusettsDepartment of Public W~orks made a visual inspection of the above dam.our records indicate the owner to be the Tow-n ofl Ashf ield.If this information is incorrect will you please notify this off ice.
The inspection was made in accordance with the provisions of 0Chapter 253 of the Massachusetts General Law-s cis wtiended (Dauts-Safety .
Act). Chapter 706 of the Acts of 1975 transferred the jurisdictionof the so-called "Dams Safety Program"i to the Co7anissioner Of theDepartment of Environrmiental Quality Engineering.
The results of the inspection indicate that this dam. is safe;however the following conditions were noted that require attention.- ..
Attached is a copy of the District Damrs Engineer's rem~arksand recommendations. Please note thlat he has rated thisdam as conditionally safe. .
On0
We call these conditions to your attention before they becoroe- serious and more expensive to correct.. Withl any cor respondence please
include the numiber of the Darti as indi.catedc above. S
Qvcr LrJy yours,
* ~ ~~ :Asaf ield rark Cmisoe
Elnclosure
iNsPECZL'ION R~EPORT - DANS AND RESERVOIRS
Sii LO0CATION:0jX own Amh1'4m&d County Faklin . Dam 40 2-6 13- 0
Names of Damn Ashriald Pond D~mMass. Rect.
Top* Sheet No.7f? Q Coordinates: N 559,000 ,E 249,900 .:-
DateInispected by; Harold T. Shumuway ,On~ Set.L 30L 1976. Last Inspection 10-30-74
'.. WITW.~S: As of Sept. 30, 1976
pert Assessors - , Reg. of Deeds_, Prey. Inap.L, Per. Contact X
Towrn of Ashfield1. % hirympn- Anan n? SP3Prt-mp Tnmin Hill, Ahigcjf~Lss....
Name St. ~cNo. City/I'own State Tel. No.
Name St. ccNo. City/Towni State Tel. No.
-CAR~EE2IE: (if any) e.g. superintendent, plant manager, appointed by3absentee owner, appointed by nailti. owners.
Mfr. Walter Tirrall,Chairman, Rshrield Park Commission, Town Hall, Ashfield,5Mass.
Name St. &No. City/Town State Tel, No.
S4-DATA tmNo. of Pictures Takenjrrr. Sketches See description of Damn.
Plane, 'WherAftn t.Tomn Hall nffica 4io A'ghfild.
ODEGlREE OF HAZA1MD (if damn should fail cornpletely)*
1 'Minor .3. Severe x S
2. Moderate 0 4.~ Disastrous_ ______
Commentes Approx. 107 million gallons imenpun) d-shf i.,].i Villagte irnnediateymn
strfan,-"'Trhis rating may change ao land use changes (future development).
9
A---- 1----------------------------
- DAM NO 2-6-13-1
OW~LETS: OUTLE CONTROLS ,WD DRAVIL'JNNear eastend of dam-concrete- capped crest overflow spillw~ay
No. I Location and Type:3f -ii-xj hirt with arouted s,-tone masonry steope2d dropuall-
Cntrl_yM,_ TYP D Po inr stoonc n la
Automatic * Ianvl . Operative Yc!.., , No x-Vertical portions of dropwali has cavities from misplaced stones,
Comments: hrnttnrm ntep bas r,_Vity I X 31- _from displaced masonry.*..1East and of-spillway dropwall-21H-. X 41W. stone and *:
No. 2 location and Tpe: rncra masionry sluice.
Controls e Type: Wlood gl _to~ thmtlstmRc and pinion lift.
Atmac. Manual X O1 rativ -,-es N o
C~~n9_9onei p9ra wall of pate well-leaks throug~h gate seals,_
No- 3 Location and Type:_ __________
Controls ,Type:____________
Automatic *Manual *Operativ7: Yes . '"S __________Comments:______________________________
Drawdolwn present Yes X ,No . Operative Yen X ,No~
* ~~Coimacts: See No. 2 above.______
07- M UPSTREAM PACE: Slope jj I De:;t~a 11ater at D. Ston
Material: Turf X *Brush t~ Trees X .Rook iZ. iIser .u-
OtherSpillway
- Condition: 1. Good .3. Major Repairs. -
2. Minor Repaira X 4, i~.trsg--t R3ptci.rs_
Conmments- Low areas warn into top of embankment from pedestrian traffic. La rr -
tree growth and minor brush lrwho lp n op of darn
W DAMNSTREAMFACE: Slope-----!*._Stone
Material: Turf X . Brush & TrrsX .Ruck P l.NscnyX * hJ04-- Sp il lwgi
Other_____________________________
Condition: 1. Good .3. Isai-cri Rci-airs X
2. Minor Repairsi_____. k Ur,;er.t ~-.
Comments: Cavities in face of rrPJaU nn± t as q,
flow out of drawcdown sl uice, and nn rrodod qulljy on embankmcnt Grpwesterly of .pillwtiy.
*
:-W
W 1P 4 .
G EERGmNCr SpILMAy: Available No *Needed No
U Height Above*Normal ilatev Ft, 0
Width Ft. Height Ft;. M!aterial__________
Condition: 1. Good 3. Major Repairs_____
2. Minor Rlepairs 4 . Urgent Repairs_ __
Coments: ir ia luatr eve nyZfadike at low sp2otsf erosion of' eam-
.ban!kents could be-.rapid.
DO--'WATER LEVEL AT TfLIZ OF INS1PECTION: 61± Ft. Above *Below X
Top Dam X F.L. Principal Spillway___________
Other
Norinal Freeboard 4, Ft. -S
SUMMARiJY OF DEFICIENCIES NOTED:
*Growth (Trees and Brush) on Dabankmcent Yes-Brush and tree q- owth on both slories.,
Animal Burrows anid Washouts Nono foundPedestrian path along top of embankment and an eror .
Damage to Slopes or Top of Dam nully on downstream slope 1001-1 east of spillway.
Cracked or Damaged Masonry Ye-isn tnsin face of dropwall.
Evidence of Seepage Yes-visible seep-Mo near and at base of dropwall als~o in.gato well.
Evidence of Piping None found ___________________
Leaks Yes-throuclh gate seals of drawdoiun sluice.
Erosion See damage to slopes above.
Trash ahd/or Debris Impeding Flow Mfinor trash deponits at spillway crest.
Clog~ged or Blocked Spillway None
Other
_7
-Ii-t
* 6~) OVERALL CONDITION:91Safe_______
2. Minor repairs needed_________________________
3- Conditionally safe -major repairs needed X
4. Unsafe_____________
5.Reserv'oir impoundme3nt no longer exiets (excp1Min)
Recommnend removal from inspection list ___________
RE24ANCS AND RECONLZE1DATION3: (Fully Explain)
I: Some repairs have been made an this (tam since last inspection of 10-30-74. Agrating has been installed over thea gate well opening and secured. Sevaral areas of
* pointing up of the stone masonry walls of the %piliway abutmnnts was noted.It appeared at this inspection that there were more cavities in the downrceam
face of the dropwall than noted in past inspectionn. However, these cavities, caused by -
misplaced stone masonry, were dry, with evidence of' seepage noted only at the basc of Lho
dam. The seepage, leaks, tree and brush growth, and erosion problems all seemed to be the
3 same as found at last inspection of 10-30-74. The District therefor still rates thisdarn as conditionally safe-major repairs needed,..
1175/atA
0S
p S~~S-v -. -. -
* 0
w S S
PHOTOGRAPHS *
* ~* S
p S
* S
I S S
I APPENDiX C 3 9
w w w w S U U S U S U U S S S S
* . . ~
.~- S
K.
~ N.~ V'~ d.~ c'4~.~~ .1,.
Iij ~(
Ii:,.?. ~
*. *I p
~1 1* 4..~1 I I i .. 'I ,...., p
'I . ii~IIII
1~~iI?
... ~* ~*.' . w
....................................................
'~...J. tj'~~
2*l 41
*1~
. 4)
.xj.
w W W W W 0*~ u 0
. . . . . . .
. . . . . .
'41A
2. VIEW OF SPILLWAY AND DOWNSTREAMSLOPE IN VICINITY OF EAST ABUTMENT.
3. V IEW FI EDCWNSTRLAM SLOPE IN VICINITY OF WEST ABVT: :ET.NCTL TREE S CXSlUPLS AND CLOSE PROXTMITY TC DAM CE Ll3lLCL. 0
* S
0S
- 0 0
* S
* S
4. VIEW OF DOWNSTREAM SLOPE LOOKING EAST.NOTE EXTREMELY HEAVY VEGETATION.
* S
* S S
* S
IS
- - -.--.
3.5. VIEW OF CREST LOOKING WEST.
NOTE PATHWAY AND HEAVY VEGETATION.
S V U V S S S S S S S S S S S S S...................................... .. . .....................
. . . . . . . ........ . . .. .
. . . . ..............................
C A
6. CLOSEUP VIEW OF SPILLWAY, LOW LEVEL OUTLET AND
OPERATING STAND FOR SLUICEGTE. NOTE VEGETATION, .N-S.---i-"CAVITIES AND DEBRIS. i-..". -'--.
l* w
I /~I oS...
* 0
I.
7. CLOSEUP VIEW OF RACK AND PINION SLUICEGATE STEM AND
SPILLWAY CREST. NOTE VEGETATION AND SILTATION ONSPILLWAY CREST.
- - -.- w -- S-. -o'2
• ,~~~~~~. ............. ..... . '.......-, .... ......... "- •, .- '. .
SLUIC
aII Z)WTCT HAFT. .GATrE STEM0
OCArED Ar j~oVAiLr ORMElD y bow' S R AM T OE . H IO TE EGIR AIAA
* EOETA TTC- ~ 0
* 0
#S
10 IWO PIAYCANE.OKN
1VIEW OF PRIMNARY CHANNEL OOKINGWR
DOWNESREM ANOT VEGETATION.
*
* 0
r p 0
* I.
* S S
* S
L
12. VIEW OF SECONDARY CHANNEL LOOKING
DOWNSTREAM. NOTE VEGETATION IN CHANNEL. -
L p ~
U S S U U U U _
-. -,-r.~.-----...................
. . .
HYDROLOGIC DATA AND COMPUTATIONS
APPENDIX D
w w w w ___ w w w w w w w w w
S. . .i
I ' 0 0
-0a50
130*.
00/fY-
- - 7A~~~f
0 ,
__ c~a
zz
J*-,-At--
TAMSJob No. J4 D3.(0... Sheet ___of /Project D)AM fl1~prCTI o?4 Date IZ6v- -
* ~subject AsAIfirLt ftmp ~ S~~&t By M.GO04ZAl.F-r2-
ChVk. by ________
7p t Z
0= 03)-4 -
*0 OZ/3 ~ 0, 0Z
T6 00
A- 9
IF4 p
. . .. . ._ . . . . . . . . .0
J",me. 14971-or S _h.. o:-_ -:..
Piojuet 1+~~EC~~ AIFI b E ~ J :1)w Date
"Wgat (mi 6 A1r~oL Y,4~.. ~
Chk. by
. .. . .
* /.0...C-
Zo. ..- ,
0 0 S 2 S 3' 3' o . .5o :::::60::::O 4 ,,. - l a = I 0 ::::::::::::::*::0
• .. : , " -.... ,... .
pp .. * * .. , . :. *t . -.. .-..
,.am~mi~ ~,~dii,,p~mip ~.tI~mi,.1ha~mma.m al., iiia:. ::::: *
TAMISJob No. /192-4 - Shoet of_ ___
Pwoject s.4~'l/r InIhfec Dd)y ate___
N ~~Subject ~L'"BCh'k. by
e V,1 vi' iz..
39 3s97
/ZZ 4/.
- ~ 1 6f4.' 06S7
40 45
Arc ne Se0
.. * .. . . .
TAMSJob f. 14,07 -... shoet ..4-.. Of ____
alj 2AtM IttJ5riF~u, cat rieA 8
____ ___ ___ ___ ___ ____ ___ ___ ___ ___ ____ ___ ___ ___ ___ Chk. by
--- --- -
--- i - El. r-e R4*'rvfsll .-
-- --I . .----- -- ----- ------ I ..
(I n he7 9- -- --.. . .. ..... ... .. .......... ........------ ... ---- -- ---- -- -
----- --
-------- .*0 57.. . .. . . ....... --- ---........... ...................24 9. ' 1 ------.-
-------- ----.. ....A .7 0 ......
Li, L-J 0.21
2. 40 0. .1b------
--- ------. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 7 8 - - - - - - - - - . .. . . . .. .- - -7 I i -. .. . . . .. . ..-- - -- - - - - -
-------- .....
------------- - ...... ....... ...... ...... .........
-- -- - 0 13 0 0...... -----
4- -- --- ------ ----
-. 0
---- -. ---2 .---------. ... ..
+ ........... .....0 ... ... . . . . . ... ..
TAMS40bN.fs- ~ Sheet __of____
Project Ithrl2cAE-~r, A n U',d P, Date Z $ '9L
U Isubject Cer~,a.sapo4o P YF k ctor.. ,b . to F By )..
Ch'k.by
is 55.7- 0 64277 299
Lw~ b5 2- 1 q26 1iI96' i
"'Io ILV -&
Clo Is .4 Co I1 1543 2 -5 7
16-1 50. 2 4zq, aoo /S-oo
*ISO 24-7-2 11424. 301 -/1O
A2,o lo -. ++-C. z l4.o-1 99349 1.a Z sn-4 lg(,. / 7 5qJ L 9 6784 4- 1 33. Io90 l~t.76075-7 29.1 53~ Z30-
97 G5.O 2S.7-6 8
30 (o4- 22"0 ,5-D/
4C.9 210.5 642-1
4-1- Z Jo 1 59 7r11/6 q* 3.110. +-22. 164. (a 73 ?)V- 56
IUJFLo.J Aaro~~ 3+ G,4 rar., Ln (I .oc sv+
0)0
w -W w W- W- w w w 0 0
TAMS *
Job No. pSheet ~of "Project 15*iC ) '/ Date___
Subject C-- /,/w.Iq I/ene('- C . C/ayCh'k. by _______
~~1Ww.( /J 1// 0:oc/ C7" eA,#t
0-5 .3.o. /5 I
0.4 !r4 S,6
IF S - -
TAMISJoocShoot of ____
pftec SaPeCTIOI- ospip-13 P2 lfjz bAIA Dat 3 u L..7
5 ~sublOw CAPACn-'i Lov. LCJet- OU-ILn!Ccm~r1a#s BY . L.C. a *Ch'k. by ________ . .
03 O-o 0L 4V
4+- 0.BI 4- 0. 0682.Z.)~ .
-2. L 5 ~&o' 1. -
/107 12w-
L&
-7ra
lp-~ 03' 5o1 /19 /2 lp
41 1
ht
-l I tc
41 1
_ 1j I ' , " I
&4 0 C) 0 I 1 l
z I
I j ; I
2po f d a 5 0000N 000
w I nr 000 0 00 0
6.-l 100000U0
L' 7c. ' 0 0in or
W-10 U, (MI i Cjm YC4
to - wi -I % N N I (
I. "'hi-
.4W~
02 $7A7
S 0 C p: P C C n . . .
1 0 Ic 0c0 0 0 -. rt a ;1 ; 4 p,1 4I'lWP W1 4
*I M.y o l I*'-'-'% .-
.- I- M MA -t LAn A LA 10~ NfU& Wn fnn LALLLIIA LA N A W A 01 CO, 0- W A La W A WA P- r- I- Q 0 1^ L LA LA -4 I. M A M LA LA eLAr
2 I A Le F r r 0 Fp .2 A r- t F& W% W PF N 0 0 N. F0 In I P rM 0 F F. - - r4 1,- 0 r 0 01 F 0 F F F0 t FF 00 M
1 rw, . mCO -P"O n-MtO tO Ya-t 1 -C0Ct-O ~je rf-%r-j
. .L~cA0V~''U . . .... V0nn' C C 9 n N9AOO C!I.-A0'F J~ct C!F~I.O~ n .n .9In1U. 9 1!C
0 A () 0C -C CO 01 c F-- 'IC V N %00C % . ) Ne--0FM N C. 4 0 - . 0 i 0, -L TNW L A CI-C-0 ,.1
o I
W IW I .- N N. W. o~ -t 00 MA I- M. &A 0' 1'. W. N gj Mi fl \j r M! N P'F1r-00 c0 404. O' C: A III Li r.-. c~10~ rF FF t ItI C; 4t LA '0 '0 I'- r ' 14 4r W; -t 14 N, F4 F 00 .4 00 4 0'0 .~4 'r tn . !n " I' ".4 '
p 0
z . Pp 0.O S p . G
3b ft I
0* .rw V% . 0 LA N * cc 0 C *? * 0 0v cc r0 C cN 0 no-- rO 0 *~09l- * 0 111nS 1Ef 9n~Ji~~E N~-.- - eq - 0:%n" q-y : 0.Y.0000 -1-
me -A - 'D r L ~ N- f - Ot - y -W t N 0 t % e -
I C N N * co *rw- fit *a 0 .- 0 0 0~- S- -0 Cv 0 0 0 a
W Li M 'D~ 0: 0. W-0 % CP0 N P! N &M Ntz 0 N au10 N C LA O ' m C- 4 WN ON LAf0zr. j W IS pn we-0 or OOnNO 0, M 0 W. M N - 0 f- 4.1V OkA r"" W0
314 - .Om-&-SO NWt-N O N0- POUN OOcf OC oO -COM-00C -V 0
M@*i M I N
Fn .l 000i IW , 0mI 01 0r l )Uw0I nw0 m Igo .
10 1,1.1 .I P .c o0 0 -a ,c-oc -c
SN ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . CAN(N~0'0 A L 0000 D'0 SC rIO V. O 0I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U L#NIO NCEJiOUl L~I00 OfC~0f'OS0 M'D 0
.*... ... ..
APPENDIX E
INFORMATION AS CONTAINED IN
THE NATIONAL INVENTORY OF DAMS
4 (8P: ~ ~ z z
C. 4w
UA CCU
% Zo
01J IO --l cc O l
a 0
aa 'c -2 up
(A. ac z
0f 0JI
> z z
* WIa. j~ iiU'CUI-, @ 0z L
* s~0~
z. E).~
wl ru 0% -WIa.~ *
A-Z-
70 "-.
FILMED
7-85
DTIC.
