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