unclassified elllleeeeellli l //ifll li ieee////iie//i · iw ing remedi i .art ions should be nit...
Post on 04-Nov-2019
0 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
AO-AI02 724 NEW JERSEY DEPT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION TRENTON -ETC F/6 13/13NATIONAL DAN SAFETY PROGRAM. N.J. NO NAME NUMBER 56 DAM (NJOOO -ETC(U)
MAY 81 R J MCOERMOTT, J E GRIBBIN DACW61-79-C-O011UNCLASSIFIED DAEN/NAP -5384 2/NJO 0 04- 81/ NI
l //Ifll l lIEllllEEEEElllIIEEE////IIE//IEIEEEEEIIII-IIIII TEMhEEE
DISTRI~Uj LI , Uid TED.
I | WHIPPANY RIVER BASIN
AALAPARDIS BROOK,MORRIS COUNTY 1
LEVEU NEW JERSEY.LEVEI, VLoQ 1\,4 J, NO NAM11 NO 5
DAMI J 000
PHASE 1 INSPECTION REPORT
NATIONAL DAM SAFETY PROGRAM
IR .t(% p r,% pi -1*,-. ,-,V , PUBLIC RE[ kSE
,, , STI , UNLIMITED
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMYPhiladelphia DistrictCorps of Engineers
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania81 8 1'
MAY 1981*- - - - - - - - - - - - -
National Dam Safety Program.No Name Number 56 Dam (NJ00804), Whip-pany River Basin, Malapardis Brook, Mor-
7SECURITY CLESEFICATtON OF THIS PAGE (When De,. R New haseris County, NwJersey.PhsT
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Inspection Report.-i, REPR'T 0 BIER2. GOVT ACCESSION NO- 3. CIPIENT'S CATALOG N4UMBER
;DAEN/NAP 53842/NJO0804-81/05Ic ______________
4. TITLE (end Sbili) TYPE OF REPORT & PERIOD COVERED
Phase I Inspection ReportNational Dam Safety Program ;FINAL.N.J. No Name Dam No. 56 NJ00804 6. pef, RMNUORO- REPOR'NUMBER
Morris County, NJ7. AUTHOR($o 1 6 -- . CONTRACT QR GRANT NUMER(e)
McDermott, Richard J., P-? DACW61-79-C-00iIGrib-in,,John E.,-PE
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT. PROJECT. TASKAREA II Wef(-UJT NUMOIERS
Storch Engineers _220 Ridgedale Ave.Florham Park, NJ 07932
1 1.CQDNTROLLING OFF) E NAfAND ADOREIS ft RZRORT DAYS
Div~onofWater Resources ProtectiOFonGEP.O. Box CN029Trenton, NJ 08625 50
T4. -MONITORING AGENCY NAME * AOORESS(II dlllerent hv Controlling Offics) 1S. SECURITY CLASS. (of tis gpait)
U.S. Army Engineer District, PhiladelphiaCustom House, 2d & Chestnut Streets UnclassifiedPhiladelphia, PA 19106 160. DECL ASSI FICATION/DOWNGRADING
SCm EDULE
16 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of tisi Report)
Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.
17. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of the obekarci onloewdlf Block 20. II diffenaim hotm Report) (.
CIS. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Copies are obtainable from National Technical Information Service,Springfield, Virginia 22151.
,19. KEY WORDS (Continue an reves side If necoewp and Ide.,ilj' by' block number)
Malapardis Brook NJDams National Dam Saf'ety ProgramEmbankments Spillways Whippany River Basin, NJVisual Inspection Erosion Morris County, N.J.Structural Analysis Embankment N.J. No Name Dam No. 56, N.J.
20. A mt Acr M~tm -m sovewight N aeom di REUty by block nmmbew)
This1 report cites results of a technical investigation as to the dam's adequacy.The inspection and evaluation of the dam is as prescribed by the National DamInspection Act, Public Law 92-367. The technical investigation includes visualinspection, review of available design and construction records, and preliminarystructural and hydraulic and hydrologic calculations, as applicable. Anassessment of the dam's general condition is included in the report.
SECURITY CLASSIFICATIONt OF T141S PAGE (When. Dole Enlered)
S9CUMyy CLAWICATIOW OF T1419 PAGE(Wbin Date SaiumQ
SCCURITY CLASSIFICATION OF TIS PAGE(Whssn Date Entere)
NOT I CE
THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRODUCED
FROM THE BEST COPY FURNISHED US BYTHE SPONSORING AGENCY. ALTHOUGH IT
IS RECOGNIZED THAT CERTAIN PORTIONSARE ILLEGIBLE, IT IS BEING RELEASEDIN THE INTEREST OF MAKING AVAILABLE
AS MUCH INFORMATION AS POSSIBLE.
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMYPHILADELPHIA DISTRICT CORPS OF ENG.NIEkRS
CUISTOM HOUSE-2 0 & CHFI;TNUT S1REI 1;
PHILADFLPHIA, PENNSLi ,ANIA I1OC,(6
I , i .,ibl,. htj/lIld,:ll . h v;n. , 3
uoveralor of New 'r (.cytrenton, New Jersey 6h-I2li
,)ear Governor Byrne:
inclosed is the Phase i Inspection Report for N.J. 'h, Name oam No. :)6 in,orris County, New Jersey which has beeti prepared under authorization of th.,Dam Inspection Act, Public Law 92-367. A hri.f .ssessment of the dar's
condition is given in the front of the report.
Based on visual inspection, available records, calculations and pastoperational performance, N.J. No Name No, 56 Dam, initially listed as a highhazard' potential structure, but reduced to a significant hazardi potentialstructure as a result of this inspection, is judged to be in fair overallcondition. The dam's spillway is considered inadequate because a tlow
equivalent to 7 percent of the Spillway Design ItLood -lSDF) would caise tiecdam to he overtopped. To ensure adequacy of the I-Il':,. II re, tho tollowingactions, as a Iinimum, art, recommended:
a. .he spillway's adequacy shokil d be determined by a qualifiedprofessional consultant engaged by the owner using more sophisticatedmethods, procedures and studies within six months from the date If approvalof this report. Within three months of the consultant's findings remedialmeasures to ensure spillway idequacy should he initiated. a
b. Within six months trom thp date ot approv.-i i 'f this report thefollowing remedial -ctions should be initiated:
(1) Erosion of the channel imm ioatel) (oI,:;t r,:10 I t Lth, d:ml shouldbe repaired, and th( chalmnel properly :Ld) i;;t
(2) All trees and advrse vegetatilon oa the eniank:ieit should beremoved, and the embankment suitably graded and pr)t-L-L,! a,,.6ils: rosmon.
(3) The concrete w ll ) I 'r,-t' -, ';,h 11 tho embankmentshould be repaired e -- L' -DISTRIBUTV""I., r F UC RULLy,
NAPEN-N
Honorable Brndan T. Byril4
c. The owner should develop written operating; proc'durus and a periodicmaintenance plan to ensure the safety o! th, daii, witbin one year from Lhc
!ate of approval of this report.
d. An emergency action plan and warning system should be developedwhich outlines actions to be taken by the owner to minimize the downstream
effects of an emergency at the dam within six monthi from the date of
approval of this report.
A copy of the report is being furnished to Mr. Dirk C. Hofman, Naw Jersey
Department of Environmental Protection, the designated State Office contact
for this program. Within five days of the date of this letter, a copy will
also be sent to Congresswoman Fenwick of the Fifth District. Under the
provision of the Freedom of Information Act., the inspection report will besubject to release by this office, upon request, five days after the date of
this letter.
Additional copies of this report may be obtained from the National Technical
Information Services (NTIS), Springfield, Virginia 22161 at a reasonable
cost. Please allow four to six weeks frow the date of this letter for NTISto have copies of the report available.
An important aspect of the Dam Inspection Program will be the implementation
of the recommendations made as a result of the inspection. We accordingly
request that we be advised of proposed actions taken by the State to
implement our recommendations.
iicere ly,
1 Incl ROGER L. BALDWIN
As stated Lieutenant Colonel, Corps of EngineersGonmmander and District: Engineer
Copies furnished:
Mr. Dirk C. Hofman, P.E., Deputy Director
Division of Water Resources
N.J. Dept. of Environmental Protection
P.O. Box CN029
Trenton, NJ 08625
Mr. John O'Dowd, Acting Chief
Bureau of Flood Plain Regulation
Division of Water ResourcesN.J. Dept. of Environmental Protection
P.O. Box CN029
Trenton, NJ 08625
e - --2
N..I. NO NAME NO. ')o AN . Njt)OI),O,
CORPS OF ENGINEERS ASSESSMEN'I OF Gl-NEhA'. LW-il! FI UNS
Th i s dam %.as inspec-ted )n 17 Deceibc r 1 8U by :- t L [ Ew. in,.,, r , unde rcontract to the State ot New Jersey. The StaLe, uid-:r agreement witll tile
C.S. Army Eogineer District, Philadelphia, had tui:! ilispct ion pertorca,, inaccflr,lance wi t tht- National] Dam Inspection Act, Pob i ,,Jw ')?- i)7.
N.J. No Name No. 56 Dam, initialiy listed as a i , :azard potontialtruature, ijt reduce I t o a significanc hazard pl t -ii structur( ,is ,_
:usuiL i tlis in.oectIn, is judged t be in fair vral coniion. 'he
s spi I lway Is con ;idered inadequate because 1 o ,iw o qu iva lent L1, 7percent , f the Spil iway Des ign F lood (SDF) would a'iis t thIie dam 1o b eovertopped. To ensure adequacy of ,_1, itLtucture, ti:' I o'loing actionu;, asa mi:; imum, are r, conended
Tht ipil tway's adequacy shoil d be (et i it i ned by a qual i f it-dprofessional consultant engageu by the owner asing mort- sophisticatedmethods , procedure, and studies within ; i. months t rom tie ,late of approvalof this repert. Within three months of the consultant's findiog r,-medialmeasures t ensure spillwav adequacy should be initiated.
b. Within six mon:h. om tie date of ppre a u t:i rt port theiw ing remedi I .art ions should be nit iatd
(1) Erosion o f the channel imediately d uwtsltraam of te idam should.,o r,.paired. and the channel properly stabilizeda.
(2 ) A I trees .nd adverse vep atation on the embankment should hereumoved, ,rid the tra nnIksen i i-,tiitably grad,-d .ind prot.,ctlod against erosion.
(3) The concrete wall along tLbe upstream side of the embankmentshould be repaired.
c. The owner should develop written operating procedures and a periodicmaintenance plan to ensure the safety c' the dam, within one year from thedate of approval of this report.
d. An euergency action plan and warning system should be developedwhich outlines actions to be taken by the owner to minimize the downstreameffects of an emergency at the dam ,rithin six months from the date ofapproval of this rep;rt.
-1. /
APPROVED: _ _ 6ROGER L. uALDWINL.ie'itenant Colonel, Corps of Engineers
Conrmnander arid District Engineer
DATE:
Ar
r 7
PHASE I REPORT
NATIONAL DAM SAFETY PROGRAM
Name of Dam: N.J. No Name No. 56, Dam, NJO0804
State Located: New Jersey
County Located: Morris
Drainage Basin: Whippany River
Stream: Malapardis Brook
Date of Inspection: December 17, 1980
Assessment of General Conditions of Dam
Based on visual inspection, past operational performance and Phase I
engineering analyses, the dam is assessed as being in fair overall
condition.
Based on investigations of the downstream flood plain made in connection
with this report, it is recommended that the hazard potential classification
be downgraded from high to significant hazard.
Hydraulic and hydrologic analyses indicate that the spillway is inadequate.
Discharge from the spillway is not sufficient to pass the designated
spillway design flood (SDF) without an overtopping of the dam. (The SDF
for N.J. No Name No. 56 Dam is equivalent to the 100-year storm.) The
spillway is capable of passing approximately 6 percent of the SDF.
Therefore, the owner should engage a professional engineer experienced
in the design and construction of dams in the near future to perform
more accurate hydraulic and hydrologic analyses. Based on the findings
of the analyses, the need for and type of remedial measures should be
determined and then implemented.
4r'•K r ,.
".' I
The owner should, in the near future, develop an emergency action plan
together with an effective warning system outlining actions to be taken
by the operator to minimize the downstream effects of an emergency at
the dam.
In addition, it is recommended that the following remedial measures be
undertaken by the owner in the near future.
1) Erosion of the channel immediately downstream of the dam
should be repaired, and the channel properly stabilized.
2) All trees and adverse vegetation on the embankment should be
removed, and the embankment suitably graded and protected
against erosion.
3) The concrete wall along the upstream side of embankment should
be repaired.
In the future, the owner of the dam should develop written operating
procedures and a periodic maintenance plan to ensure the safety of the
dam.
Richard . McDermott, P.E.
John E. Gribbin, P.E.
ii
LnI
-
AD
-Lj
iLi
Af1
ol9
TABLE OF CONTENTSPage
ASSESSMENT OF GENERAL CONDITION OF DAM
OVERVIEW PHOTO
TABLE OF CONTENTS iv
PREFACE vi
SECTION 1 - PROJECT INFORMATION 1
1.1 General
1.2 Description of Project
1.3 Pertinent Data
SECTION 2 - ENGINEERING DATA 7
2.1 Design
2.2 Construction
2.3 Operation
2.4 Evaluation
SECTION 3 - VISUAL INSPECTION 9
3.1 Findings
SECTION 4 - OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES 12
4.1 Procedures
4.2 Maintenance of Dam
4.3 Maintenance of Operating Facilities
4.4 Description of Warning System
4.5 Evaluation
iv
• I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.)
Page
SECTION 5- HYDRAULIC/HYDROLOGIC 14
5.1 Evaluation of Features
SECTION 6 - STRUCTURAL STABILITY 16
6.1 Evaluation of Structural Stability
SECTION 7 - ASSESSMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 18
7.1 Dam Assessment
7.2 Recommendations
PLATES
1 KEY MAP
2 VICINITY MAP
3 SOIL MAP
4 GENERAL PLAN
5 SECTIONS
6 PHOTO LOCATION PLAN
APPENDICES
1 Check List - Visual Inspection
Check List - Engineering Data
2 Photographs
3 Engineering Data
4 Hydraulic/Hydrologic Computations
5 Bibliography
v
i: ~ - -
PREFACE
This report is prepared under guidance contained in the Recommended
Guidelines for Safety Inspection of Dams, for Phase I Investigations.
Copies of these guidelines may be obtained from the Office of Chief of
Engineers, Washington, D.C. 20314. The purpose of a Phase I Investigation
is to identify expeditiously those dams which may pose hazards to human
life or property. The assessment of the general condition of the dam is
based upon available data and visual inspections. Detailed investigation,
and analyses involving topographic mapping, subsurface investigations,
testing, and detailed computational evaluations are beyond the scope of
a Phase I investigation; however, the investigation is intended to
identify any need for such studies.
In reviewing this report, it should be realized that the reported condition
of the dam is based on observations of field conditions at the time of
inspection along with data available to the inspection team. It is
important to note that the condition of dam depends on numerous and
constantly changing internal and external conditions, and is evolutionary
in nature. It would be incorrect to assume that the present condition
of the dam will continue to represent the condition of the dam at some
point in the future. Only through continued care and inspection can
there be any chance that the unsafe conditions be detected.
Phase I inspections are not intended to provide detailed hydraulic and
hydrologic analyses. In accordance with the established Guidelines, the
Spillway Test flood is based on the estimated "Probable Maximum Flood"
for the region (greatest reasonably possible storm runoff), or fractions
thereof. The test flood provides a measure of relative spillway capacity
and serves as an aid in determining the need for more detailed hydraulic
and hydrologic studies, considering the size of the dam, its general
condition and the downstream damage potential.
vi
....................
PHASE I INSPECTION REPORT
NATIONAL DAM SAFETY PROGRAM
N.J. NO NAME NO. 56 DAM, I.D. NJO0804
SECTION 1: 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
Program of Dam Inspection throughout the United States. The
Division of Water Resources of the New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection (NJDEP) in cooperation with the
Philadelphia District of the Corps of Engineers has been
assigned the responsibility of supervising the inspection of
dams within the State of New Jersey. Storch Engineers has
been retained by the NJDEP to inspect and report on a selected
group of these dams. The NJDEP is under agreement with the
Philadelphia District of the Corps of Engineers.
b. Purpose of Inspection
The visual inspection of N.J. No Name No. 56 Dam was made on December 17,
1980. The purpose of the inspection was to make a general
assessment of the structural integrity and operational adequacy
of the dam structure and its appurtenances.
-ogo
1.2 Description of Project
a. Description
N.J. No Name No. 56 Dam is an earthfill dam with a boulder
lined chute spillway and an adjacent outlet conduit connected
to a downstream mill building. The upstream face of the dam
is formed by a concrete wall to the right of the spillway and
a stone rubble wall to the left of the spillway.
The intake structure for the outlet conduit consists of a
concrete inlet located at the left end of the dam. The structureis fitted with steel fish screens and contains no observable
gate operating mechanism. The conduit is a 24-inch cast iron
pipe.
The elevation of the spillway crest is 275.0 National Geodetic
Vertical Datum (N.G.V.D.) while that of the crest of dam is
277.0. The downstream channel bed elevation is 269.8. The
overall length of the dam is 123 feet and its height is 7.2
feet. the top width of the embankment is 20 feet and the
slope of the downstream face is 4 horizontal to I vertical.
b. Location
N.J. No Name No. 56 Dam is located in the Township of Hanover,
Morris County, New Jersey. It impounds an unnamed lake located
west of North Jefferson Road. Principal access to the dam isby an unpaved road which is entered from North Jefferson Road.
Discharge from the spillway of the dan flows into the MalapardisBrook, tributary to the Whippany River.
-2-
. . . . . . . . .. ... ..... .. . .. . . . . ... . .. . . - .,. ... ,..., . . .- . m -.. z .- :: ,L .* - .... ... I
c. Size and Hazard Classification
The dam is classified in accordance with criteria presented in
"Recommended Guidelines for Safety Inspection of Dams" published
by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Size categories consist
of Small, Intermediate and Large while hazard categories are
designated as Low, Significant and High.
Size Classification: N.J. No Name No. 56 Dam is classified as
"Small" size since its maximum storage volume is 128 acre-feet
(which is less than 1000 acre-feet) and its height is 7.2 feet
(which is less than 40 feet).
Hazard Classification: Visual inspection of the downstream
flood plain of the dam together with breach analysis indicate
that failure of the dam due to overtopping during a storm
equivalent to the spillway design flood (SDF) could cause
property damage to the mill building and grounds located 350
feet downstream from the dam. Extensive structural damage to
the road bridge (North Jefferson Road) located 350 feet from
the dam is not anticipated as a result of dam failure. Loss
of more than a few lives is not anticipated. Accordingly,
N.J. No Name No. 56 Dam is classified as "Significant" hazard.
d. Ownership
N.J. No Name No. 56 Dam is owned and operated by the Whippany
Paper Board Company, 10 North Jefferson Road, Whippany, New
Jersey 07981.
e. Purpose of Dam
The purpose of the dam was the impoundment of a lake used for
flood control and for water supply for the downstream mill
owned by the Whippany Paper Board Company. Reportedly, the
impoundment is not presently being used for any purpose.
-3-
.. , -.. . . ..... ... .... ... . ..., . .. ... . ' , - "" -M -M " ... .
f. Design and Construction History
N.J. No Name No. 56 Dam reportedly was constructed by Whippany
Paper Board Company around 1960.
g. Normal Operational Procedures
The dam and appurtenances are operated and maintained by the
Whippany Paper Board Company. Repairs are made on an "as
needed" basis. However, the dam is not presently in use and,
reportedly, the Whippany Paper Board Company does not intend
to make use of the dam in the future.
1.3 Pertinent Data
a. Drainage Area 4.55 square miles
b. Discharge at Damsite
Maximum flood at damsite Unknown
Outlet works at pool elevation N.A.
Spillway capacity at top of dam 189 c.f.s.
c. Elevation (N.G.V.D.)
Top of Dam 277.0Maximum pool-design surcharge 279.1
Spillway crest 275.0
Stream bed at toe of dam 269.8
Maximum tailwater 275 (Estimated)
d. Reservoir
Length of maximum pool 1100 feet (Estimated)
Length of recreation pool 900 feet (Scaled)
-4-
e. Storage (Acre-feet)
Recreation pool 15
Design surcharge 654
Top of dam 128
f. Reservoir Surface (acres)
Top of dam 234 (Estimated)
Maximum pool - design surcharge 459 (Estimated)
Recreation pool 8.7
g. Dam
Type Earthfill
Length 123 feet
Height 7.2 feet
Sideslopes - Upstream Left Section: 1 horiz. to 1 vert
Right Section: Vertical
- Downstream 4 horiz. to 1 vert.
Zoning Unknown
Impervious core Unknown
Cutoff Unknown
Grout curtain Unknown
h. Diversion and Regulating Tunnel N.A.
i. Spillway
Type Boulder lined chute,
Trapezoidal Section
Length of weir 16 feet
Crest elevation 275.0
Approach channel N.A.
Discharge channel Natural Streambed
-5-
j. Regulating Outlet
24-inch C.I.P. running to downstream mill
(Operating mechanism unknown)
-6-
. . . . __ . . .. .. . . . .. . ,, .. . . .I i lI '.. . . .. :l " .. . . . • . . . .. . . . ..
SECTION 2: ENGINEERING DATA
2.1 Design
No plans or calculations pertaining to the original design of the
dam could be obtained.
2.2 Construction
No data or reports pertaining to the construction of the dam are
available.
2.3 Operation
No data or reports pertaining to the operations of the dam are
available. Reportedly, drawings relating to a pending lake lowering
permit are presently available in the files of the Hanover Township
Engineering Department.
2.4 Evaluation
a. Availability
Available engineering data is limited to that which is on file
at the Hanover Township Engineering Department. The file
contains drawings relating to the lake lowering permit presently
pending.
b. Adequacy
Available engineering data pertaining to N.J. No Name No. 56
Dam is not adequate to be of significant assistance to the
performance of a Phase I evaluation. A list of absent inform-
ation is included in paragraph 7.1.b.
-7-
* . ° ,
c. Validity
The validity of engineering data cannot be assessed due to the
absence of data.
-8-
- .
SECTION 3: VISUAL INSPECTION
3.1 Findings
a. General
The inspection of N.J. No Name No. 56 Dam was performed on
December 17, 1980 by staff members of Storch Engineers. A
copy of the visual inspection check list is contained inAppendix 1. The following procedures were employed for the
inspection:
1) The embankment of the dam, appurtenant structures and
adjacent areas were examined.
2) The embankment and accessible appurtenant structures were
measured and key elevations determined by surveyor's
level.3) The embankment, appurtenant structures and adjacent areas
were photographed.
b. Dam
The concrete wall forming the upstream side of the dam appeared
to be in fair condition. The crest and downstream
side of the dam appeared to be deteriorated condition. The
crest was covered with weeds and the downstream side was
irregularly shaped and overgrown with weeds and small trees.No evidence of seepage or animal holes on the downstream side
of the dam was observed, although the dam was obscured by
approximately 1-inch of snow.
The spillway discharge channel leads directly away from the
dam for approximately 20 feet and then bends sharply to the right,
or south, for another 30 feet and then sharply to the left,
-9-
or east, to lead away from the dam as the downstream channel.
At the first bend considerable erosion was observed along the
left bank of the channel or chute, with many roots of trees
exposed.
c. Appurtenant Structures
The outlet structure located at the left end of the dam appears
to be an outlet for a 24-inch cast iron pipe used to supply
water to a mill downstream from the dam.
The concrete forming the outlet structure chamber and the
headwall appeared to be in satisfactory condition. It appeared
that there were two fish screens or trash racks on both the
upstream and downstream sides of the headwall. Their conditions
appeared to be satisfactory. Approximately 1 foot downstream
from the headwall there was a slot with another fish screen
protruding and its condition appeared to be satisfactory as
well.
d. Reservoir Area
The impoundment of the dam is 900 deet long with a width
varying from 300 to 400 feet. The land surrounding the reservoir
appeared to be undeveloped grassland. The reservoir bank is
approximately 2 feet high and the land beyond the bank has a
terrain with flat slopes. To the left of the reservoir at its
upstream end there is an adjacent garage with approximately
10 bays and a yard for trucks and equipment. The upstream end
of the impoundment is connected by culverts under Route 287 to
an additional impoundment including a large area known as Lee
Meadows.
-10-
e. Downstream Channel
The spillway discharges into the Malapardis Brook, a tributary
of the Whippany River. Between the dam and the North Jefferson
Road Bridge (approximately 350 feet downstream) the downstream
channel is a rock-lined stream with high banks having slopes
of approximately 50 percent and tree and brush growth on the
banks. Downstream from the bridge the channel bed remains the
same, rocky and slightly meandering; however, the right bank
is formed by the Brick Mill Building and the left bank is
rocky and tree and brush covered. The 24-inch cast iron pipe
bringing water from the dam impoundment to the mill crosses
the channel at a skewed angle approximately 100 feet downstream
from the bridge.
-i-I
i l l l -;1-
SECTION 4: OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES
4.1 Procedures
The level of water in the impoundment of the subject dam is regulated
by discharge over the boulder lined chute spillway. The outlet
works of the dam is used to draw off water for the purpose of
supplying the mill downstream via the 24 inch C.I.P. but reportedly
is no longer in use.
The Whippany Paper Board Company has applied to Hanover Township
for permission to lower the normal lake level by approximately two
feet for the purpose of lowering the water table at the request of
the Prudential, which is located in the vicinity of the subject
dam.
4.2 Maintenance of the Dam
Reportedly, maintenance is performed on an "as needed" basis.
4.3 Maintenance of Operating Facilities
Reportedly, the outlet works is maintained on an "as needed" basis.
4.4 Description of Warning System
Reportedly, no warning system is currently in use for the dam.
4.5 Evaluation of Operational Adequacy
The operation of the dam has not been successful to the extent that
the dam reportedly has been overtopped in the past.
-12-
Maintenance is inadequate and maintenance documentation is poor.
Areas of maintenance that have not been adequately performed are:
1) Erosion of the spillway discharge channel immediately downstream
of the dam not repaired.
2) Trees and bushes on the embankment not removed.
3) Embankment not suitably protected against erosion.
4) Concrete wall along upstream side of embankment not repaired.
1
-13-
SECTION 5: HYDRAULIC/HYDROLOGIC
5.1 Evaluation of Features
a. Design Data
The quantity of storm water runoff that the spillway should be
able to handle is based on the size and hazard classification
of the dam. This runoff quantity, called the spillway design
flood (SDF) is described in terms of return frequency or
probable maximum flood (PMF) depending on the extent of the
dam's size and potential hazard. According to the "Recommended
Guidelines for Safety Inspection of Dams" published by the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the SDF for N.J. No Name No. 56
Dam falls in a range of 100-year storm to 1/2 PMF. In this
case, the low end of the range, 100-year storm is chosen since
the factors used to select size and hazard classification are
on the low side of their respective ranges.
The SDF peak computed for N.J. No Name No. 56 Dam is 3183
c.f.s. This value is derived *from the 100-year flood hydrograph
computed by the use of the HEC-1-DAM Flood Hydrograph Computer
Program using the Soil Conservation Service triangular unit
hydrograph method with curvilinear transformation. Hydrologic
computations and computer output are contained in Appendix 4.
The spillway discharge rates were computed by analysis of
critical depth flow at the entrance to a channel. The spillway
discharge with lake level equal to the top of the dam was
computed to be 189 c.f.s. The SDF was routed through the dam
by use of the HEC-1-DAM computer program using the modified
Puls method. In routing the SDF, it was found that the dam
crest would be overtopped by a depth of 2.1 feet. Accordingly,
the subject spillway is assessed as being inadequate in accordance
with criteria developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
-14-
b. Experience Data
Reportedly, the dam has been overtopped in the past. No
damage to downstream structures was reported at the time of
the overtoppings.
c. Visual Observation
Severe erosion of the spillway discharge channel was observed
at the time of inspection. Also, the observed irregular shape
of the downstream face of dam could be due to overtopping
erosion.
d. Overtopping Potential
As indicated in paragraph 5.1.a. a storm of magnitude equal to
the SDF would cause overtopping of the dam by a depth of 2.1
feet over the crest of the dam. The spillway is capable of
passing approximately 6 percent of the SDF with lake level
equal to the top of dam.
e. Drawdown Data
No drawdown computations can be performed due to the apparent
absence of a functioning low level outlet.
-15-
SECTION 6: STRUCTURAL STABILITY
6.1 Evaluation of Structural Stability
a. Visual Observations
The dam appeared, at the time of inspection to be outwardly
structurally sound with no evidence of cracks or distress.
The crest and the downstream face of the dam however, appeared
to be irregularly shaped, possibly due to erosion.
b. Generalized Soils Description
The generalized soils description of the dam site consists of
clay and silt deposited during the Wisconsin glaciation inter-
mingled with recent alluvium composed laregly of gravel and
sand deposited by streams. The glacial moraine overlies shale
and sandstone bedrock known as the Brunswick Formation.
c. Design and Construction Data
Analyses of structural stability and construction data for the
embankment are not available.
d. Operating Records
No operating records are available for the dam. The water
level of the lake impounded by N.J. No Name No. 56 Dam is not
monitored.
e. Post-Construction Changes
Reportedly, there have been no post-construction changes since
the dam was constructed in 1960.1
-1 6-
f. Seismic Stability
N.J. No Name No. 56 Dam is located in Seismic Zone 1 as defined
in "Recommended Guidelines for Safety Inspection of Dams"
which is a zone of very low seismic activity. Experience
indicates that dams in Seismic Zone 1 will have adequate
stability under seismic loading conditions if they have adequate
stability under static loading conditions. N.J. No Name
No. 56 Dam appeared to be stable under static loading conditions
at the time of inspection.
-17-
SECTION 7: ASSESSMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 Dam Assessment
a. Safety
Based on hydraulic and hydrologic analyses outlined in Section 5and Appendix 4, the spillway of the subject dam is assessed as
being inadequate. The spillway is not able to pass the SDF
without an overtopping of the dam.
The embankment appeared, at the time of inspection to be
outwardly stable. The crest and the downstream face of the
dam, however, appeared to be in deteriorated condition, possibly
due to erosion.
b. Adequacy of Information
Information sources for this report include 1) field inspections,2) USGS quadrangle, 3) plans on file with the Hanover Township
Engineering Department, 4) consultation with personnel of theHanover Township Engineering Department, 5) consultation with
personnel of the Whippany Paper Board Company. The information
obtained is sufficient to allow a Phase I assessment as outlined
in "Recommended Guidelines for Safety Inspection of Dams."
Some of the absent data are as follows:
1. Construction and as-built drawings
2. Description of fill material for embankment.
3. Design computations and reports.
4. Maintenance documentation.
5. Soils report for the site.
-18-
c. Necessity for Additional Data/Evaluation
Although some data pertaining to N.J. No. Name No. 56 Dam are
not available, additional data are not-considered imperative
for this Phase I evaluation.
7.2 Recommendations
a. Remedial Measures
Based on hydraulic and hydrologic analyses outlined in paragraph
5.1.a, the spillway is considered to be inadequate. It is
therefore recommended that a professional engineer experienced
in the design and construction of dams be engaged in the near
future to perform more accurate hydraulic and hydrologic
analyses. Based on the findings of these analyses, the need
for and type of remedial measures should be determined and
then implemented.
The owner should, in the near future develop an emergency plan
together with an effective warning system outlining actions to
be taken by the operator to minimize the downstream effects of
an emergency at the dam.
In addition, it is further recommended that the following
remedial measures be undertaken by the ownr in the near future.
1) Erosion of the channel immediately downstream of the dam
should be repaired and the channel properly stabilized.
2) All trees and adverse vegetation on the embankment should
be removed, and the embankment suitably graded and protected
against erosion.
3) The concrete wall along the upstream side of embankment
should be repaired.
-19-
* ]
II
I7
b. Maintenance
In the future, the owner of the dam should develop written I
operating procedures and a periodic maintenance plan to ensurethe safety of the dam.
-20-
PLATES
N.J. No Name No.
SUSSEXr F&SSAIC
WARQEld
SSE.0p*:s ton
V -'CSON
I K r.
MUNTEADON - - - - - - -
so..ERSET
",so-
WE It
wohmourmit,
ptbn%
CAMOV. OCEAM
BunINGTok
SAIAM
10!
Va- A A ft 7 ICCUUDEPLAME)
."L&NIC Cry
CAME WAY
CAK a"
PLATE I
STORCH ENGINEERS INSPECTION AND EVALUATION OF DAMSFLORHAM PARK, NEW JERSEY KEY MAP
DIVIS40N OF WATER RESOURCES RJ. No Name No. 56 DAM
N.,l DEPT OF ENVIR. PROTECTION SCALE- NONETRENTON, NEW JERSEY DATE: FEB.1981
7
-po
Loake 0%
Parsippany r..
0
200
3000
7*1
N.J. No Name No-56 DAM]
Pon
A 2400
sm
5' pardir,ck.:
(4.em
Idemo4F
aLI.V*4V* 'Lem
4
4*
M 0
A
illsA.
0
SCALE IN MILESPLATE
STORCH ENGINEERS INSPECTION AND EVALUATION OF DAMS
FLORHAM PARK, NEW JERSEY VICINITY MAPDIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES N.J. No Name No. 56 DAM
N.J. DEPT. OF ENVIR. PROTECTION SCALE: AS SHOWNTRENTON, NEW JERSEY DATE: FEB. 1981
4C- ~ kgC-46geo °M4
% N.J. No Name No. 56 DAM -e
r
-4- 1gT
AR/GL-67 Remains of glacial lake bed deposits, composed of stratified
materials, and intermingled with recent alluvium placed bystreams.
GM-4 Glacial ground moraine; composed of unstratified materialdeposited during the Wisconsin glaciation.
Note: Information taken from: Rutgers University, Engineering Soi.Survey of New Jersey, Report No. 9, Morris County, November
1953 and Geologic Map of New Jersey prepared by J. V. Lewisand H. Kummel 1910-1912, revised by H. B. Kummel 1931 andM. Johnson 2950.
I PLT 0
STRC EGIEESINSPECTION AND EVALUATION OF DAMSFLORHAM PARK, NEW JERSEY.
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCESN.. oNme o.5 DA~~~N.J. DEPT. OF ENVIR. PROTECTIONSCE;NN
~~~~~TREf4tTON, NEW JERSEY. JOaE .198I'
?4 t A R'
/"o ter 51e v. £75.0 Stone Rvube Y"o/i
1 f itke structurefR PiOe to 411/
(Do vnsreom Location
Inormation
inspection2 C.c7 /98 PLAE.
STOCH NGIEER INPECIONAN EAUATIONa OF DAMSe
-7eHA PARKS NEW JESE GEEA R001CPLAN e
DII~OOWTERSORE NJ N AE . 5KA
N.. ETOFCENINERTCTO I0NPETI 0080 SALEAIO NOE AM
TRENTON, NEW JERSEY A
Toir/voter fflev 2700
240Crest of Ilivale v 275. 0
Cob66e5 0-30uder5
AVo /e r ev. 2 75.0./7 0Avsra
SPILLWAY SECTION
Con'crete 14/o// Crest oF Dor-,
I/Vote r -f e vO Rol
=275.0
--
TYPICAL DAM SECTION
A/o te:/nformotion tok<en from feldinspection Decem6er 7, 1980
PLATE5
INSPECTION AND EVALUATION OF DAMSSTORCH ENGINEERS
FLORHAM PARK, NEW JERSEY S E C T I0 N S
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES N.J. NO NAME N2 56 D A MN.J. DEPT. OF ENVIR PROTECTION I.D. N.J. 00804 SCALE: NONE
TRENTON, NEW JERSEY DATE: F E B. 1981
71
I-Vote r fle v. 2 275. 0 Stone Ru6e ;-Vol
Inta7 Eleuct2re
Par /pipe to Mill
\ 24" C.IAR(Do*vnstreom Locationel k-n o i*vn.)
In orm at/_n
take, fromeo field~
in spe ction7 Dec. 17,1/980 FPLATE 6
STORCH ENGINEERS INSPECTION AND EVALUATION OF DAMSFLORHAM PARK, NEW JERSEY PHOTO LOCATION PLAN
DIVISiON OF WATER RESOURCES N .J. NO NAME Ng 56 DAMN.J. DEPT OF ENVIR PROTECTION 1. 0. N. J. 0 0804 " SCALE. NON E
TRENTON, NEW JERSEY DT;FEB 98
APPENDIX I
Check List - Visual Inspection
Check List - Engineering Data
0-0
004-)-
00
0 0L
C))
-o 0
o 0. "141 - d
00
41)4J U
*i a) (L)
4.))
0)
4-)
0
0
C)aoo4.V)
0.04- 0) S-
u) S- 04--CL 00
C0:
- 4-(A. L) ue
cu 0 e
S 41 L
ro 0) c0
C)
-
LL
oL -C=U .n
uc -01 l
oe -L .
LOV 0
0
-o-44- a)
>0) (V
o- CofC. - 4- 4-to4 - 4-
a) a) .S- * 4--)
C) 4-.- o -+jtI - 0)CC.)
r ( S-o
M- LJ
LU V)S nC
L oCU U, L 0)
4J) E(U E S
3: - a) o-W 4--
0)a ) 0)( C - -( a)S- a 4) r >>>
a)c - - S...L S.-.
> - OS O 0 (U -O .0 U - U_ a 0 00
u ) 0) -0: 0- 0
0.r- r0(
LiiJ
I-
-i CDLL LJ
CL V)
U- 2--Diw L)J Li
to) 17
...-4-..~
tj
LJ~
U,
LU
I--
E --
'Ji S- -
0 0 -0M
C cr_ - S-
LL..C))
w) CD C) CCD :I P4 -
C) 0) J V) (03F-~ co D )
F-- mN
Ci e Cz i ->.~~ -CDC
CD F-
oU mU U,
cc iD le Lii = = IS A- V) U c C F
(V) w3 tnI-V)=.c
4-)
00a -=
C) 0
,-J c + -:
4--o
C o a o S
o c > 0.CC CU a
1= 4- 0 a)
= C 0 CaL. c> a
CUa
c LA-) 4-)
i- 04-. LL0 -O 0C
a)C>CO 0
u oC 0- .
to 'a.-
W nCa- a) 0
3c .- -0 >-00-O- S LC
w oS-.-
C: Co O 4- -'A
C0 -00 to
w 0E- L 44-3
Ln O tC 0 4o 0 - a)*O-'- aCo3- L . - - .- 0
E - 01 - 5-VU- - -CQ 4-'L)
u 3 0 u5C-.S U CC a) 3
04 - S- -4V-C) Qo- 0 o > >o 00 -3 -
uE0> ) )a(U 41 a +j V Q)Ln
= 0 . ( Ma-0 0'C0 >0 U0o
Li- LD-*0-
0))-t)-C1) 5-rO 0 a
__ .OO>U LLr
U..LJ )
= LA..- I.... I- Lii
C-). -3crLL
-~ C) j.D C)' .~-
aa)N .
.00
E
-L 0
~~ 00.00
o 00 4N-
~ -0
Mj 0
CU 4-) 'D0
4-4->
c0 -0a
0 0) s-(V0 c..(AV .9- a,--
.- 0.0 0 0
5-- 0--
a,- *0 4-J CAW
4-'1- *- -.e 'V
4-1 CA a) u a -
4. S.-0) 0 .0 +j
>- 0) C) - 0.0 = S0 4- 4- S.-
o~ Co (a a)- 0-0 d) -o
E r- 4- 4-C~ .U., .3j - 0U
0~U fa 0 .0 .
4V) =d aU C'4V.0ACS4- 0 0S- .0 c-c
S-9' 0.o a, QJ4 )u0 S- 4l- C 4- 5-
00..C.C A)
a, 0 uuW
E - 4-'5-'- >.-. 0CL
0EVJ w04-20) 4-V)
LJ
LLJm-
- a-
-0 -0 -. *
o 0 00
a) a) a.)
o 0 00=
LI
CD 4=
LLA-
- u-
L-11 z -Lil 0o Lii
CD 09 0-
LL~J
4-,
-0
tz
LLI
-Y.4-
LO 4- '0
0 7-
cou
tn 4-.' 0)
(a S.-E
C C CA
Q) 0 cm
_r_.0 a0
-'--
C)4 (.D'
US-U, ~. JC 0 .
Lii ~ -~ Lii ~u -
0) V-o c
LAi
-CCLii
0l
4-)-
zS(A S
4-) CC ' -0-
-C (L (
u- )N - UL0E CD -0 4J 5-
-j E 3E o U4Lii a (U- u - cS c S -4 (U -
tn J1 f +i4-J . Ccm (Aa 0 EC- E UE- 0~ 0 0 to 4-) S
LL . 0-0 40> LA EI- .0*CD ,- , V)
tn Lii o >, ra CO(4 o (41 Lfld 4- 0 0 ) s
) 0 CE 0- C
S- 4-E ar(a -
-o c- to a c aE s--. 3:a .- a) *
-o 4-) 0 0M 00-'0E
wra toU > 0.0 aW
~cc.0 E co-W t -
IL
- D
Liij
-L C5 Lii
Li)
-44
CLC-
cc
-4fi cc c
Lu L&J~
LLLII
('Q0C Q 1)a
0 0 ~ 0 .C -0 0 0 0~
cc cc cc L c cc c c
cc o
0i J -j cc L L DC-) 0- -4 -1 CD) L
cc~~~c L) c Li cO~LL IA CDI 0.C. 0 -
0 Q:
I) Liii < LU 0
cZI < i. -I. CL -j CD Cl-) L CD
SM4
4-) -0 4-0 0 4-3
0 0 0 0 (0
C.)
C),
Of ~ -- i CM LAJ0
Co LiJ <.-.v toe) Lj c_0l. 2: CDw-D=LJ0LLLJ C) CD LJn 0wC
cz 0L - - (=) -jC)LD -J ->ELJ W0 ==LL- - LJuJC 0: . I-0 L .
LiJ i Lii 0 0D
- 00
c -.- 0
La
LJ W a
F4-
CJC
co (V
0)J CL) a) mV
0V0
4- -3 CL)
- -- Ln -)
4- >3
4-' 4-) 4-) to 0o 0 0 S-C c
CD)
uLiLi
Leii
CD CD
CD F- c C
C ~ ( L. L - l uLL- 0: V 0- r
0a CD LiiJ2! MC(.7 vi - - LJ C.. >
C: F- .i- < a. Lf
V) C0 0(A
APPENDIX 2
Photographs
j'I
PHlOTO 11S PI1L LWAY
PHOTO 2INTAKE STRUCTURE FOR PIPE TO MILL
NJ NO NAME No. 56 DAM17 DECEMBER 1980
IVI
CREST OF EMBANKMENT
* *IMV
PHOTO 4DOWNSTREAM FACE OF EMBANKMENT
NJ NO NAME No. 56 DAM17 DECEMBER 1980
~Mi
PHOTO 5UPSTREAM FACE OF EMBANKMENT
PHOTO 6UPSTREAM FACE OF EMBAN'KMENT -RIGHT SIDE
WJ NO NiAME No. 56 DAM17 DECEMBER 1980O
20 JANUARY 1981
PHU]10 7AERIAL VIEW OF LAKE AND DOWNSTREAM CHANNEL
IV,
~i
17 DECEMBER 1980
FHOIO 8DOWNSTREAM CHANNEL ADJACENT TO MILL BUILDING
NJ NO NAME No. 56 DAM
APPENDIX 3
Engineering Data
I . .
CHECK LIST
HYDROLOGIC AND HYDRAULIC DATA
ENGINEERING DATA
DRAINAGE AREA CHARACTERISTICS: Wooded, residential and-swampy areas
ELEVATION TOP NORMAL POOL (STORAGE CAPACITY): 275.0 (15 acre-feet)
ELEVATION TOP FLOOD CONTROL POOL (STORAGE CAPACITY): N/A
ELEVATION MAXIMUM DESIGN POOL: 279.1
ELEVATION TOP DAM: 277.0
SPILLWAY CREST: Boulder lined channel
a. Elevation 275.0
b. Type Chute (trapezoidal section)
c. Width 16 feet
d. Length 20 feet
e. Location Spillover Downstream side of dam
f. Number and Type of Gates N/A
OUTLET WORKS: 24-inch C.I.P. connected to downstream mill building
a. Type Pipe conduit
b. Location Left end of dam
c. Entrance Invert Unknown
d. Exit Invert Unknown (pipe enters mill bldg.)
e. Emergency Draindown Facilities: None
HYDOMETEOROLOGICAL GAGES: None
a. Type N/A
b. Location N/A
c. Records N/A
MAXIMUM NON-DAMAGING DISCHARGE:
(Lake Stage Equal to Top of Dam) 189 c.f.s.
APPENDIX 4
Hydraulic/Hydrologic Computations
- . .* ..l *#
.
STORCH ENGINEERS Sheet Lof
Project '-4C, NAM'tE -(Made By ILL~ Date____
SChkd By -16 Date Q38
1ZJ N~j~ Jr-- i LLLr rz&L -c tH-
... ~ .. S .~ ....NV ot
- [t~E±L~tAt~ ~t-sill.
-Z.1
S cL4AycN if-j- 6o % .~ 5._
STORCH ENGINEERS Sheet- 7z of '
Project (h~7-~S S t m.\ F. w\.i -Made By T..Date -23op
SChkd By JS Datez/_z3//
Sp6~C NkA(~ _
0 .A N ;11MwIL
-r LC,
STORCH ENGINEERS Sheet I of /~
Project WrO Cs N. A. I-, t- N. sc Made By "D Date 2-2? 3ce
____Chkd Byr -J6 Date Z/23/8/
Ik _______At_______I_________
___________ ___________ A__ _ __ _ _ 4,
-- STORCH ENGINEERS - Sheet 4 of 1ZL
Project 11.c - ~ h N0 t.AWX FAN S -Made By , s.Date P-2~-
_____Cbkd By -'_ Dafe 2/Ze!3/6'l
r- i P.
NAV~~~~~4I'~~~4 cc,,,iA C4I~~ P.c~~
-- IM
-- - - - -
STORCH ENGINEERS Sheet Sof /'Z
Project IV~. Z A k' NO~ AV/Af "S Nz. PA,'l Made By -7'12 Date 2 -2 -Il
1132 OS Chkd By Jc EDae_______0
Zb/S7,QIPLT/OM FO99 NO qk e N'arn 'r, -9,41
. .0.
A.
___ ___ __1 ' 0.07
1/
______ ____ /2 ~~Ole _________
2q__ 03 ___p_
23,
TQv/i T? #0. 61., IV4 79$: Z? C A ~U
STORCH ENGINEERS Sheet 6.... of 'Project IV- 7- /NO L~tI A/o. -~Mode By Zila Date 2 13d
122 0 Chkd By-:: 6 1Date___
~EL-rYATIl- UAAl75
ELE4TJN6) FR& 7-)ee
275,0o
270 0 0.2 . 0~7I
3 7-1.O _ __S
------/./V=ORHA7 /O/ 7*e TRH W IG 4LP /
Al.___
STORCH ENGINEERS Sheet 7 of /Project tq., N-C! NANIC N6. S(, P~A' t Made By 'r C\Date 2 2P
Cs t" ~ Chkd By -I6: Date 2/213/el/
-7 P Lv N
vQ.ATL~jz LLviLL. J7Z7S.its
- ~,~ 1 Z' P tMIv
----- Ct"CX-N 01AM S ---.- QLZS~O L t r-, A u L-r
STORCH ENGINEERS Sheet '&-..Z. of 12-
Project fr4. A~ $4M.d NC S-DI MaeB2~ 2 - 22
/II- S Chcd By J Date_2/23/e1
__L N- 1lim4 1L) (7- sr-
- - ~ OF-- uzL
-~~~~- 4-~~~-'A
I- E-- c "- i _ _- -
STQRCH ENGINEERS Sheet9' o f 12-
Project ^IK Ncs NAK.4E NQ.C-;"4 DA H -Made By .' Date 2-23-//
ChkdBy DJ Date _! 223/e
________ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t- ti _ _ ~ t- ~- __ _ _ _ _
>I
-- U' __ ___ __4_ _ _
STORCH ENGINEERS Sheet-~ of
Project LJ LA*'ef-/ Na/-ne 1Yo ST5 DA/H-f Made By -7./ Dale 2 -2
1132 -05 Chkd By -15 Date zL2_____
ABREA CHI / IcA Z~A/±L YEQ-~iZF 3/
TH/E 11lEC -I- PA /I PRO'GRAJ1 ANYD R~OUTED 77/2006'#
7MO DOh1NSe,-Y fREAC/ BY 7?eF t/1D/F5D R IS
t'ETOD Th'1T 4Slf1H5y'D B 2ER AI C$//DI 7'1 OA&;
I.7/,- 2 EAO/ ZWgc'RJ' AleEI 7 41-S, LL-V 277.0 A/'
2. 7I=- Fo,' ;RACH To ZD-VscrOP 1-14 Y 612S /,
3. RfA Cff SEC 710Al
- -E CI /2--\--J----
-- Jpeoc4 - 2 ih,'. 2co.o £PI2
- .- A* -.
STORCH ENGINEERS Sheet // of 12-Project %J, * No -4AMCLN6, 1( LA? -Made By lt Date 2-23-co
I IZ7 C Chkd By Date / 36
Nili
W 'I.260__
W vJ~ 2' 7..4.a t.L -
STQRCH ENGINEERS Sheet. "' of *'2-
Project 4'tN's NANE t-4:, Sa DAb' -MadeBy 'T)Da. 2-2 -41'
_________________________________Chkd By '25 Date Z1231.9/
_____E ~CH /
N tA
40.
__-C- ,iEAC 2 5-__ __
!!;tA. 74 CSP, LL--- N fl __ _
HEC -1- DAM PRINTOUT
Overtopping Analysis
'I!
I0 0
00000 cdN 00 a
0i000 r4I CA I
rxo -Wl 0 "a c
0 CA I
0000 00 m n r " i A
L0j O00 00001 1Ix I*
0 x In oN m a-O~ 04 MM I 4 l L1C OLir C3 I k
o00000 *-00 D1
2 I A ej ~- r0 N i = 0N rJ CA.7
0 0 000 0 0 00 1 :
0- ,0 4C 0 4M0r D '0 )N. 0 LI Vr _ i IA
iii-- hubs" t~l~
Wt0 O0O.
Ul .f I.*L C 0 0
4P*
id ~z C;~o.cuj
C, Jo cz z . ,* WO 0 I0> w.
Lfl Cz~ ~ 4a 00~l
'-4
le ED~ :cn0-jq* U0 I
L 0 .U
4* C- I 0 f.- - 0
I- al. U. 0
A.41 z = ei YOW04ac jCC 0 L.J
r U ,
C. I. u. WC C .II], C90
ce ow 0cC
CZ, 0
0CeI -
Z O IIIIIIIII
40
001
.4 to0
00
-* 0
~~ *00 0 X4
x - N'k 4 CL
9L~ 00 0ce 0 C-0
m u 0 C0
CD C 0 .cc 0 Xb wo (
(no - -(
4v gj 0.00 N
i cnono
0 w
0 0
i z
0
I--
*x
4* Cl
00
CLL
46
14 4* I- c ~
c 4 0 e
L Z lJJi r
4 -4W c L
464W
I- CI U4 4 CC
4* L, .
L in 4
* * Cco* * 0
* 4* LI. U
LL 0
x 00
-
3
c-J0. CA b'J
000
C. En0w f
LU 0 -:
r0 X -a
Iz*. U
4 0krIfl~~ 0 0. Z0rx c
c-S - rn
4 L6A
Im 06
Ir ci
> .w CC) CA
00
.4 0 1 -1W O
AAA 0 C . 0En n c 0cUl
c-S. LA. 00= 0 w -1
0 Li40u
00
7w &d~LJ- A
HEC -1 -DAM PRINTOUT
Breach Analysis
I."
-'.4?
4.
~00 C000 go00o
0 C. -. Ol H0CC-000 -0 0 <;I
10: &. w Jon
- -40 -. -( 0 O ) .
A C 00.riOOCI00 0001
Lom OQ0 c 0-0000 -- 0 4nC-C 0 b*i 61)
Li - - - - fa; "a- W r Cif t g0 C P C C n>,cL6 Ia0 00 00 $j
I CCo ool -c W) 0 I* , MmClwr i 4 7 0i
. l"U2 J . .0 C. C4~' M - cj~~JZ~~a ooJ 0 0 ~ r.
-, x ~ (P.0 O. 0. a fn fn 0 m m oi N, c I 0 U, r 41,,) 0-c 041 Z' co ' 10 w P) 0 g
=; 0 0 0 c 0 - c'I L) N-c' C, CA =2 Ia .
0* 0* 4; 0c- 4-i - 4
LD
0000 UN N 4r,, I
Qj 0 . 0 00 -11 00U I -0 10.. j- ;; Pc 4)C .
0 c NIIIC r ielrn1
101POW--
~1 I'. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
..
.. . .. ....
1 a.
co
.. a.Co x. -
* a.ccm
•~~~ ..:. i."... ..... .... .244 m '
• " 0.
" I" °''''a.°"°.r " '" . . .17..
a-.4. .0... ... . .. w .4 m 0 rn 6 .4 u r r Im loc or , 1. co 0
ris ri ca. 7r - )1- 1 j- o
co c 0 04 0: : -0'W 'o C cs ~~~a , :.,c ' o :o :
*n
*l I-
I *< *L
C. La 0 J
L.a
I: W-C C
=- u
r: C.I-cc
L La
0 w 0 cc . C
40
4*
w I
4C
0 0
Cd - - -zM
0 4
Do x
.X 1=- '
C N D
a~~~ CAC'r,
w- CA I- -nL(n
e 1 1.lC lni-: N I,
0 w I
> NL
.:ti icei
- CD, CD w ul 4= - 10-C OCcL c . 1..J
LU ). ; c ; r
*i ?.W N3LJ
L.LA. 0*
0 LZ
4=
0 r
APPENDIX 5
Bi bl iogra phy
1 1. "Recommended Guidelines for Safety Inspection of Dams," Department
of the Army, Office of the Chief of Engineers, Washington, D.C. 20314.
2. Design of Small Dams, Second Edition, United States Department of
the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, United State Government
Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1973.
3. Holman, William W. and Jumikis, Alfreds R., Engineering Soil
Survey of New Jersey, Report No. 11, Sussex County, Rutgers
University, New Brunswick, N.J., 1953.
4. "Geologic Map of New Jersey," prepared by J. Volney Lewis and
Henry B. Kummel, dated 1910-1912, revised by H.B. Kummel, 1931 and
M. Johnson, 1950.
5. Chow, Ven Te., Ed., Handbook of Applied Hydrology, McGraw-Hill
Book Company, 1964.
6. Herr, Lester A., Hydraulic Charts for the Selection of Highway Culverts,
U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, 1965.
7. Safety of Small Dams, Proceedings of the Engineering Foundation
Conference, American Society of Civil Engineers, 1974.
8. King, Horace Williams and Brater, Ernest F., Handbook of Hydraulics,
Fifth Edition, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1963.
9. Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds, Technical Release No. 55,Engineering Division, Soil Conservation Service, U.S. Department
of Agriculture, January 1975.
DATI
top related