SACO RIVER BASIN

EFFINGHAM, NEW HAMPSHIRE

0

I OHEAD WORKS DAM- BERRY BAY DAM -

v-OSSIPEE LAKE OSSIPEE LAKE

t NH 00328 NH 00329

NHWRB 75.01A NHWRB 75.01

I

I PHASE I INSPECTION REPORT

m NATIONAL DAM INSPECTION PROGRAM i

I~DTIC

I O~ELECT .I

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

NEW ENGLAND DIVISION, CORPS OF ENGINEERS

WALTHAM, MASS. 02154

NOVEMBER 1978 DSTRIBUTION STATEMENT A

U IAppzoved for public releo"st* maua jDistribution unlimited

3 WIi 85 06 17 01%

___"___m___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __m_ _ __m(w mmamm l• lLL ___ __

JJNP1 ASSFEDSECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (When Date Entered)

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE READ INSTRUCTIONSBEFORE COMPLETING FORM

1. REPORT NUMBER 12. GOVT ACCESSION NO. 3. RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER

NH 00328/00329 _

4. TITLE (and Subile) S. TYPE OF REPORT & PERIOD COVERED

Heads Works Dam- Ossipee Lake INSPECTION REPORTBerry Bay Dam- Ossipee Lake

NATIONAL PROGRAM FOR INSPECTION OF NON-FEDERAL 6. PERFORMING ORG. NEPORT NUMBER

DAMS7. AUTHOR(s) 11. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMLIER(e)

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERSNEW ENGLAND DIVISION

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT. PROJECT. TASKAREA 6 WORK UNIT NUMBERS

11. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 12. REPORT DATS

DEPT. OF THE ARMY, CORPS OF ENGINEERS November 1978NEW ENGLAND DIVISION, NEDED ,=. NUMBER OF PAGES

424 TRAPELO ROAD, WALTHAM, MA. 02254 7314 MONITORING AGENCY NAME & ADDRESS(if diferenl Ieum Ca nfrJltir Olfice) IS. SECURITY CLA.S. (Of thiE rsporf)

UNCLASSIFIEDI|a. DECLASSIFICATION/DOWNGRADING

SCHEDULE

IS. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (o! fal Report)

APPROVAL FOR PUBLIC RELEASE: DISTRIBUTION UNLIMITED

17. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of the abolract entered in block 20, It dieferentfros t A N')

It. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

Cover program reads: Phase I Inspection Report, National Dam Inspection Program;however, the official title of the program is: National Program for Inspection ofNon-Federal Dams; use cover date for date of report.

IS. KEY WORDS (Continue on reveae side il neceeary aE E41utE0yl by L 6 .W.ber)

DAMS, INSPECTION, DAM SAFETY,

Saco River BasinEffingham, New HampshireOssipee River

20. ABSTRACT (Continue on reverse aide I neceesary sod tdentitY 6Y block mabet)

--i-The dam is a 33 ft. long concrete gravity structure with a maximuj'-height ofabout 12 ft. It is intermediate in size with a low hazard potential. THe damsare in fair condition at the present time. Considerable operating and mainten-ance type repairs are required to preserve the long-term use and safety of thestruci4 tes.

DD .o3 1473 EDITION o, 1OV 65 IS OBSoLETE

-TO •• mm •• am•

DISCLAIMER NOTICE

THIS DOCUMENT IS BEST QUALITYPRACTICABLE. THE COPY FURNISHEDTO DTIC CONTAINED A SIGNIFICANTNUMBER OF PAGES WHICH DO NOTREPRODUCE LEGIBLY.

7'

-I

1'

/ :

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMYNEW ENGLAND DIVISION. CORPS OF ENGINEERS

424 TRAPELO ROAD

WALTHAM. MASSACHUSETTS 02154

"- REPLY TOATTENTION OF:

I NEDED

Honorable Hugh J. GallenGovernor of the State of New Hampshire

State HouseConcord, New Hampshire 03301

1

Dear Governor Gallen:

jI am forwarding to you a copy of the Head Works Dam and Berry Bay DamPhase I Inspection Report, which was prepared under the National Programfor Inspection of Non-Federal Dams. This report is presented for your

use and is based upon a visual inspection, a review of the pastperformance and a brief hydrological study of the dam. A briefassessment is included at the beginning of the report. I have approvedthe report and support the findings and recommendations described in

ISection 7 and ask that you keep me informed of the actions taken toimplement them. This follow-up action is a vitally important part of

jthis program.

A copy of this report has been forwarded to the Water Resources Board,the cooperating agency for the State of New Hampshire. In addition, acopy of the report has also been furnished the owner, Central PowerCompany, 8 Green Street, Augusta, Maine 04330.

Copies of this report will be made available to the public, uponrequest, by this office under the Freedom of Information Act. In thecase of this report the release date will be thirty days from the dateof this letter.

I wish to take this opportunity to thank you and the Water ResourcesBoard for your cooperation in carrying out this program.

Sincerely yours,

Incl HN P. CHANDLERAs stated C lonel, Corps of Engineers

\..Division Engineer

tit

------..... . ... -

Add@ijon For_NTIS ORA&I

DTIC TABUnannounoedJustification -

Distribution/

HEAD WORKS DAM Availability CodesNH 00328 i Avail and/or

Dist special

BERRY BAY DAMNH 00329

*T9tC

SACO RIVER BASINEFFINGHAM, NEW HAMPSHIRE

PHASE I INSPECTION REPORTNATIONAL DAM INSPECTION PROGRAM

1

NATIONAL DAM INSPECTION PROGRAM

PHASE I INSPECTION REPORT

Identification No.: NH 00328 and NH 00329NHWRB No.: 75.01A and 75.01Name of Dam: HEAD WORKS DAM AND BERRY BAY DAMTown: EffinghamCounty and State: Carroll County, New HampshireStream: Ossipee RiverDate of Inspection: September 12, 1978

BRIEF ASSESSMENT

The Head Works and Berry Bay Dams are at the same locationin the Ossipee River, but are separated by a small island. Inessence, the dams act as a single hydraulic feature, with theBerry Bay Dam serving as the spillway and the Head Works Damas the outlet works. For this reason, the dams are consideredtogether.

The Head Works Dam is a 33 foot long, concrete gravity structurewith a maximum height of approximately 12 feet. The structurecontains five 4 foot wide by 6 foo, high sluice gates operatedfrom a gate house which spans across the entire dam.

The Berry Bay Dam is basically an 84 foot long, concrete gravityspillway with provisions for up to 2.5 feet of flashboards.The structure has a maximum height of approximately 5 feet. Asteel service bridge provides access over the dam and permitsthe lowering and raising of swinging stanchions to support theflashboards.

Historical records indicate that the Head Works Dam was builtin 1919. Since this dam could not function properly withoutsome control on the other channel, it can be inferred that theBerry Bay Dam was originally constructed in the same year. Thisstructure was, however, extensively altered in 1944. The CentralMaine Power Company owns both dams and uses them to regulateflows for downstream hydroelectric power generation.

The dam's reservoir includes Ossipee Lake, Leavitt Bay, BerryBay and Broad Bay and receives runoff from 357 square miles ofgently to steeply sloping forest. The dams' maximum impoundment of47,200 acre-feet places them in the INTERMEDIATE size category.The downstream topography and the lack of any appreciable develop-ment in the potential flood plain indicate a hazard potentialclassification of LOW.

__ _ I1-!

4

Based on the size and hazard potential classifications and in

accordance with the Corp's guidelines, an inflow Test Flood (TF)of 50,000 cfs is selected. This inflow yields a maximum outflowat the dams of over 32,000 cfs. Since the total dischargecapacity of the dams prior to overtopping is only 2,270 cfs, or7% of the Test Flood, it is apparent that the dams' dischargecaVacity is seriously inadequate for the Test Flood selected.In this case, the Read Works dam would be overtopped by as muchas 11.3 feet. Therefore, considerable improvement in the dis-charge capacity of the dams or provision of suitable emergencyspillway facilities is recommended.I

Both dams are in FAIR condition at the present time. Consider-able operating and maintenance type repairs are required topreserve the long-term use and safety of the structures. Atthe Berry Bay Dam these measures include repair of all damagedconcrete, repair and monitoring of seepage areas, trimming orremoval of overhanging trees and replacement of inadequateflashboards. At the Head Works Dam, the recommended remedialmeasures include repair of damaged concrete and rubble stonemasonry, provision of a barrier to protect the gate house from

• ice and debris damage, removal of trees with eroded root struc-tures in the downstream channel and trimming or removal of allother overhanging trees, monitoring of downstream channel ero-

I. sion and training of municipal officials in dam operations.

- The above recommendations and remedial measures should beimplemented within one year of receipt of the Phase I Inspec-

-- tion Report by the owner. In light of the FAIR condition ofboth dams, periodic technical inspections should be conducted

* annually.

I

[ WILLIAM

ZOINO -NbrOL

No. 3226 N o.OST>

William S. Zo*1 Robert mnu oliNew Hampshir R gistration 3226 Massachusetts Registration 29165

I?

iThis Phase I Inspection Report on Head Works Dam and Berry Bay Damhas been reviewed by the undersigned Review Board members. In ouropinion, the reported findings, conclusions, and recommendations are-consistent with the RecoL-mended Guidelines for Safety Inspection ofS Dams, and with good engineering judgment and practice, and is herebysubmitted for approval.

II

RICHARD F. DOHERTY, ME14BER (JYi Water Control Branch

Engineering Division

CARNEY M. TERZIAN, NDOERDesign Branch

I ineering Division

JOSEPH A. MCELROY, CHAIRMANChief, NED Materials Testing Lab.Foundations & Materials BranchEngineering Division

I

I ~~~APPQRUO . :Zi

I AEcEc32:!ryE&Di:,*3E S. FRYAR]i Chief, Enginering Division

I!

!

PREFACE

I This report is prepared under guidance contained in theRecommended Guidelines for Safety 7nspection of Dams forPhase I Investigations. Copies of these guidelines may beobtained from the Office of Chief of Engineers, Washington,D.C. 20314. The purpose of a Phase I Investigation is toidentify expeditiously those dams which may pose hazards tohuman life or property. The assessment of the general con-idition of the dam is based upon available data and visualinspections. Detailed investigation and analyses involvingtopographic mapping, subsurface investigations, testing, anddetailed computational evaluations are beyond the scope ofa Phase I investigation; however, the investigation is inten-ded to identify any need for such studies.

In reviewing this report, it should be realized that thereported condition of the dam is based on observations offield conditions at the time of inspection along with dataavailable to the inspection team. In cases where the reser-voir was lowered or drained prior to inspection, such action,while improving the stability and safety of the dam, removesthe normal load on the stiucture and may obscure certainconditions which might otherwise be detectable if inspectedunder the normal operating environment of the structure.

It is important to note that the condition of a dam dependson numerous and constantly changing internal and externalconditions, and is evolutionary in nature. It would beincorrect to assume that the present condition of the damwill continue to represent the condition of the dam at somepoint in the future. Only through continued care and inspec-tion can unsafe conditions be detected.

Phase I inspections are not intended to provide detailedhydrologic and hydraulic analyses. In accordance with theestablished Guidelines, the Test Flood is based on theestimated "Probable Maximum Flood" for the region (greatestreasonably possible storm runoff), or fractions thereof. Be-cause of the magnitude and rarity of such a storm event, afinding that a spillway will not pass the Test Flood shouldnot be interpreted as necessarily posing a highly inadequatecondition. The Test Flood provides a measure of relative

L spillway capacity and serves as an aid in determining theneed for more detailed hydrologic and hydraulic studies,considering the size of the dam, its general condition andthe downstream damage potential.

iv

I-

I "T - - - . . .. .. . .. . . .. . . ... ..

I

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

BRIEF ASSESSMENT

REVIEW BOARD SIGNATURE SHEET

PREFACE iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS v

OVERVIEW PHOTOS vii

LOCATION MAP ix

SECTION 1 - PROJECT INFORMATION

1.1 General1.2 Description of Project 1-21.3 Pertinent Data 1-4

SECTION 2 - ENGINEERING DATA

2.1 Design Records 2-12.2 Construction Records 2-12.3 Operational Records 2-12.4 Evaluation of Data 2-1

SECTION 3 - VISUAL INSPECTION

3.1 Findings 3-1

3.2 Evaluation 3-7

SECTION 4 - OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES

4.1 Procedures 4-14.2 Maintenance of Dam 4-14.3 Maintenance of Operating

Facilities 4-14.4 Description of Any Warning

System in Effect 4-14.5 Evaluation 4-1

I v

| ?~

Table of Contents - cont. Page

SECTION 5 - HYDRAULIC/HYDROLOGIC

5.1 Evaluation of Feature 5-15.2 Hydraulic/Hydrologiv Evaluation 5-45.3 Downstream Dam Failure

Hazard Estimate 5-4

SECTION 6 - STRUCTURAL STABILITY

6.1 Evaluation of Structural Stability 6-1

SECTION 7 - ASSESSMENT, RECOMMENDATIONSAND REMEDIAL MEASURES

7.1 Dam Assessment 7-17.2 Recommendations 7-17.3 Remedial Measures 7-i

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A - VISUAL INSPECTION CHECKLIST A-i

APPENDIX B - FIGURES AND PERTINENT RECORDS B-i

APPENDIX C - PHOTOGRAPHS C-i

APPENDIX D - HYDROLOGIC AND HYDRAULICCOMPUTATIONS D-i

APPENDIX E - INFORMATION AS CONTAINED IN THENATIONAL INVENTORY OF DAMS E-i

viV i- --- i~

BerIa a v ri wf o i habtmn

Berry Bay Damn Overview from rigtI abutment

vi

I'I

IHead Works Dam -Overview from

downstream .

I

I

1

i Head Works Dam -Overview of left side ofdam from upstream

viii

I

II

91 ~ p ,,,

V, V

t% Lo/ .j

.1.kB417- ) -

/~ 1

DavisMe I 'iri 'N 4~/

I'

FROM! USGS OSSIPEE LAKE,N.H. EOTIECNNIAI CONSULTANTS tSAM*GNE'bVNWEGAD

LOCUS PLANcsz HEAD WORKS DAM:4 8E-R BA DA .. EW HAMPSHIRF-ij~L At ICLANOTEd

la _;ZP. __

Io

IPHASE I INSPECTION REPORT

HEAD WORKS DAM AND BERRY BAY DAM

SECTION 1

PROJECT INFORMATION

1.1 General

(a) Authority

Public Law 92-367, August 8, 1972, authorized theSecretary of the Army, through the Corps of Engineers,to initiate a national program of dam inspection thrcugh-out the United States. The New England Division of theCorps of Engineers has been assigned the responsibilityof supervising the inspection of dams witiin the NewEngland Region. Goldberg, Zoino, Dunnicliff & Associates,Inc. (GZD) has been retained by the New England Divisionto inspect and report on selected dams in the State ofNew Hampshire. Authorization and notice to proceed wasissued to GZD under a letter of August 22, 1978 from

v Colonel Ralph T. Garver, Corps of Engineers. Contract_ No. DACW33-78-C-0303 has been assigned by the Corps of

Engineers for this work.

(b) Purpose

(1) Perform technical inspection and evaluationof non-federal dams to identify conditions which

I threaten the public safety and thus permit cor-rection in a timely manner by non-federal interests.

(2) Encourage and prepare the .tates to initiatequickly effective dam safety programs for non-federal dams.

V (3) Update, verify and complete the NationalInventory of Dams.

(c) Scope

The program provides for the inspection of non-f federal dams in the high hazard potential category based

upon location of the dams and those dams in the signifi-cant hazard potential category believed to represent animmediate danger based on condition of the dams.

1-1Il

I

I 1.2 Description of Project

(a) Location

The two dams which are the subjects of this reportlie on the Ossipee River 0.45 miles west of the inter-

Isection of Routes 25 and 153 in Effingham Falls, N.H.The dams, which are approximately 100 yards north ofRoute 25, are accessible via a dirt road off the highway.The portion of the USGS Ossipee Lake, N.H. quadranglepresented previously shows this locus. Figure 1 ofAppendix B presents a detail of the site developed from

- the map and site inspection.

(b) Description of Dam and Appurtenances

The engineering works creating Ossipee Lake andthree smaller neighboring bays consist of two indepen-dent structures located at the same point in the river,but separated by a small island (Figure 1). The first

I of these structures, locally known as the Head WorksDam, is basically a 33 foot long, concrete gravitystructure with concrete cutoff walls at both abut-ments (Figures 2 through 4). The top of the dam isapproximately 12 feet above the stream bed. Five sluicegates, each approximately 4 feet by 6 feet, control thestructure's discharge; three of the five gates areelectrically operated. A gatehouse spans the entire dam.

The second structure, locally known as the BerryBay Dam, is approximately 100 feet north of the firstone, across a rocky outcrop in the river bed. This damis primarily a concrete gravity spillway with a maximumheight of 5 feet above the stream bed (page B-6). Aservice bridge spans the structure across 4 piers andpermits the installation and removal of swinging stanchionswhich can support up to 2.5 feet of flashboards (page B-7).The stanchions, which remain raised during drawdown per-iods, are hinged at the service bridge and rotate downinto locking shoes set in the concrete spillway (page B-7).The weir has a total length of 96 feet, including 11.5feet of emergency spillway at the left abutment.

V Because these two structures act essentially as

one dam, with the Berry Bay Dam being the spillway andthe Head Works Dam being the outlet works, they are dis-cussed in one report.

1

1-2

II#

- ~ g

(c) Size Classification

The two structures' maximum impoundment is approxi-mately 47,200 acre-feet, which falls within the 1000acre-feet to 50,000 acre-feet range defining theINTERMlEoIATE size category.

(d) Hazard Potential Classification

The downstream reaches of these structures consistJof 1000 feet of two relatively steep, narrow channelswhich abruptly widen at the confluence of the channels(Fig. 1). These features would tend to contain and thenattenuate any flood wave. For this reason and since thereis very little development downstream of the dams for atleast 3 miles, a hazard pote.tial classification of LOWis assigned.

(e) Ownership

The Central Power Company (MCPC), 9 Green Street,Augusta, Maine 04330, owns both structures.

(f) Operator

The office of Mr. Edward Cowles, Chief LoadDispatcher, directs the operation of the facility; its

3phone number is (207) 623-3521 ext. 401. The PortlandMaine sub-office at telephone number (207) 772-7411 ext.231 carries out the actual operations.

(g) Purpose of Dams

The structures serve to store water for hydro-electric power production at downstream generatingstations. Between June 1 and October 12 of each year,the New Hampshire Water Resources Board (NHWRB) requiresthe company to maintain a lake level adequate to satisfyrecreational interests; by agreement between CMPC and theNHWRB, this level is established at El. 405. In general,however, CMPC maintains the lake at El. 407 during therecreational season.

(h) Design and Construction History

An inscription on the upstream side of the HeadWorks Dam indicates that construction occurred in 1919.Neither the original designer nor contractor are knownand no plans or documents pertaining to the originalconstruction are available.

iI 1-3

1 1i

IWhi.e available records do not contain an initialconstruction date for the Berry Bay Dam, the fact thatthe Head Works Dam would not function properly withoutsome control on the other channel (Figure 1) indicatesthat original construction was probably also in 1919.Extensive modifications did, however, take place around1944, to include construction of the service bridge,installation of the hinged stanchions and provisions foradditional flashboards (pages B-6 and B-7).

I(i) Normal Operational Procedures

Personnel from the Portland office visit the siteweekly and report gage levels back to the Chief LoadDispatcher in Augusta. He, in turn, directs the necessaryoperations. The company uses only the gated Head WorksDam to control discharges. The flashboards of the Berry

L Bay Dam remain in place from early spring to fall at whichtime the company draws the lake and bays down in anticipa-tion of fall storms and spring runoff.

1.3 Pertinent Data

(a) Drainage Area

Ossipee Lake, Broad Bay, Leavitt Bay and Berry

Bay receive runoff from a 357 square mile drainage area.t At least 10 small brooks and rivers carry runoff to the

reservoir. The area around the reservoir is heavilyT forested and flat to gently sloping within i to 2 miles

of the shoreline; beyond this point, the terrain risessharply, most notably to the south and southwest. There

ris considerable development, both seasonal and year-round, along the reservoir shores, particularly on OssipeeLake, Broad Bay and Leavitt Bay.

i (b) Discharge at Dam SiteL

(1) Outlet Works (Head Works Dam)

IThe dams' outlet works consist of the fivetimber sluice gates, each approximately 4 feetwide by 6 feet high. The inverts of the gates areat El. 397 +.

1-4f

Iil-3

(2) Maximum Known Flood at Damsite

The Central Maine Power Company has gage

V readings at the dam site dating back to the mid-

1940's. These records reveal a maximum readingof 413.0, or 5 feet over the Head Works Dam, onApril 1, 1953. The next highest reading occurredon April 3, 1945 when the level reached 411.8.Assuming all gates were open and all flashboardswere removed at the time of the 413.0 reading, aswould normally be the case, a computed flow of10,790 cfs at the site results.

(3) Spillway capacity at maximum pool: 1320 cfsat El. 408.

(4) Gate capacity at normal pool: 1315 cfs atEl. 407

(5) Gate capacity at maximum pool: 1400 cfs atEl. 408.

(6) Total discharge capacity at maximum pool: 2720cfs at El. 408.

(c) Elevation (ft. above MSL)

(1) Top dam (Head Works): 408 +

(2) Recreational pool: 407 +

(3) Spillway crest (Berry Bay)-withouL fiashboards" 405-flashboards in place: 407.5

(4) Streambed at centerline of damHead Works: 396 +Berry Bay: 400 +

(5) Maximum tailwater: Unknown

(d) Reservoir

(1) Length of recreational pool

-Lake: 3 miles-Broad Bay: 1 mile-Leavitt Bay: 0.6 miles-Berry Bay: 1.4 miles (including unnamed body

of water immediately behind thedam)

1-5

i-t

|

1 (2) Reservoir Area

-Ossipee Lake: 3200 acresI-Broad Bay: 385 acres-Le Ltt Bay: 255 acres-B y Bay: 255 acres (including unnamed body

of water immediately behind thei dam)

(3) Storage

-Recreational pool: 23,000 acre-feet-Top of Dam: 47,200 acre-feet

(e) Dam (Head Works)

(1) Type: Gravity concrete

1 (2) Length: 33 ft.

(3) Height: 12 ft. + structural11 ft. T hydraulic

(4) Top width: 2 ft. 8 in.

(5) Side slopes

-D/S (exposed): 1:1.2-D/S (submerged): Vertical-U/S Vertical

(6) Cutoff and grout curtain: No information

(f) Spillway (Berry Bay Dam)

(1) Type: Concrete weir with 2.5 ft. offlashboards

1 (2) Length of weir: 84 ft. plus 11.5 feet ofemergency spillway

1 (3) Upstream channel: Shallow approach channel

(4) Downstream channel: Narrow channel withmoderately steep sides androcky bottom

1-6

Iiit i

I.-- . . . . . . . .

- (g) Regulating Outlets

Five gated openings, each approximately 4 feetwide by 5 feet high, control discharges at the Head WorksDam. The inverts of the gates are at elevation 397 +.

An electric motor operates the three rightmost gates,while ratchet mechanisms permit control of the remainingtwo. The gates equipped with the electrical operating

mechanism can also be operated manually.

iL

Iii

[fIi

I

I-

11

Ii!o

I

I SECTION 2 - ENGINEERING DATA

2.1 Design Recoids

The design of both structures is straightforward andincorporates no unusual features. No design calculations or de-sign drawings of any type are available for either structure.

2.2 Construction Records

Original construction plans are available for neitherstructure. Plans for the 1944 alterations to the Berry BayDam are available and are quite detailed. Additionally, these

£. drawings do provide some data on the original structure. Noas-built drawings or construction logs were Jocated.

2.3 Operational Records

The operation of these dams is in accordance with theirintended purpose and engineering features. The CMPC maintains

L satisfactory records of all dam operations.

2.4 Evaluation

(a) Availability

The lack of any drawings for the Head Works Darn,and the existence of only the alteration plans for the BerryBay Dam warrant a marginal evaluation for availability.

I (b) Adequacy

The lack of in-depth engineering data does not_ permit a definitive review. Therefore, the adequacy of

the dam could not be assessed from the standpoint ofreviewing design and construction data. The evaluationis thus based primarily on the visual inspection, past

. performance history and sound engineering judgement.

V (c) Validity

Since the visual inspection generally confirmsthe sparse written data available, these sources warranta satisfactory evaluation for validity.

i2-1

I-

I

SECTION 3 - VISUAL OBSERVATIONS

I 3.1 Findings

(a) General

IBoth the Head Works and Berry Bay Dams are in FAIRcondition at the present time. Both structures requireextensive operations and maintenance type repairs toinsure their long-term safety and use.

(b) Additional Description

4 (1) Head Works Dam

This dam, which is the only controlled dis-charge for the reservoir, contains five splinedtimber sluice gates operated from a gate housespanning across the entire 33 foot long structure.The gate house sits on the approach and outlet train-ing walls at each end of the dam and on two concretepiers at midspan. Additionally, a timber bent and an

Iisolated timber column provide supplementary supportI between the gate house and the top of the dam.

Concrete cutoff walls extend into the banksperpendicular to the concrete and rubble stonemasonry abutment walls. The front faces of the

cutoff walls are approximately two feet downstreamI of the upstream face of the dam.

While the dam contains only five gates, con-j crete buttresses form six openings, three on the

left side and two on the right side. The thirdopening from the right side has no gate and canpass no flow. The inverts of the openings are 11feet below the top of the dam. There are threeconcrete buttresses, each 1.5 feet thick, on theupstream face of the dam. These elements are mono-lithic with the face of the dam and with the slabforming the top of the sluice gate outlets. Thecenter buttress carries the two piers which supportthe center portion of the gate house.

The dam superstructure is constructed ofcyclopean concrete masonry. The upstream trainingwalls consist of cemented stone masonry, while the

[ downstream walls are primarily dry stone masonry.

I 3-1

Electrically or manually operated rack gearspermit opening and closing of the five gates. Afour pulley reduction system connected to a beltdriven worm gear meshed with a bull gear whichdrives a shaft provides the power for turning therack gears on the three electrically operated gates.Clutches permit individual control of each gate.The electrical drive system consists of a one horse-power G.E. repulsion-induction motor drawing 5amps at 220 volts or 10 amps at 110 volts.

The remaining two gates are raised and loweredusing a six foot long, 2 inch by 2 inch bar whichturns a ratchet connected by a shaft to theirrespective bull gears.

The owner's representative indicated that the

gates receive regular inspections owing to thehigh incidence of vandalism of this dam.(2) Berry Bay Dam

This dam consists of 3 spillway bays equippedwith flash boards and an emergency spillway. The1944 reconstruction drawings indicate that the con-crete spillway is a broad crested weir, but visualinspections reveal that the structure is actuallyan ogee spillway. The combined length of the pri-mary spillways is 84 feet and the emergency spill-way is 11.5 feet in length. The crest of theemergency spillway is 3.08 feet above the primaryspillways, which in turn are 3 feet below the topof the Head Works Dam. A steel truss servicebridge spans over the three primary spillways.The spillways are divided by means of abutmentsand intermediate piers.

The right abutment, which is approximately3 feet thick, is constructed on a rock outcrop.The right intermediate pier, which also serves asa transition for horizontal rotation of the damaxis by approximately 450, varies in thicknessfrom approximately 5 feet at its upstream face to2 feet at its downstream face. The left pier is2 feet thick, while the left abutment is 2.5 feetthick. All concrete, including the spillways, is

of the cyclopean variety.

3-2

I!

!

.. • • • •m.

~I

IIt should be noted that the left abutment wasmodified during the 1944 construction in orderto permit construction of the emergency spillwayfrom the left face of this abutment to the adja-cent bank. The foundation conditions beneath theintermediate piers, the left abutment and the spill-ways are unknown.

The service bridge, including the floor fram-ing, is fabricated from steel angle sections. Thebent at the left intermediate pier is fabricatedfrom steel column sections braced with steel angles.Steel bearing plates, which are welded to the pierbent columns, are bolted to this pier. The steeltruss is anchored directly to the top surface ofboth abutments and the right pier. The walkwayconsists of 2 inch timber planking.

Flashboards are held in place by means ofswinging "drop" stanchions. These movable stan-chions are pinned to the lower chord of the upstreamtruss. A hinge pin which penetrates through a slottedhole in the stanchion assembly permits rotationabout the lower chord members. The stanchions arelowered from beneath the service bridge by permanentlyinstalled chains and lock into slots set in the topof the spillway. There are four stanchions on theright spillway and three on each of the other twosections. Flashboards 15 inches in height havebeen fabricated from 2 inch by 8 inch lumber; thedesign height of flash boards is 2.5 feet.

(c) Condition of Berry Bay Dam

(1) Abutments and Piers (Photo 1)

The right abutment has been subject to ero-sion and spalling and contains a hole dischargingconsiderable seepage. The surface spalls, withadjacent random cracking and minor efflourescence,are located adjacent to and above the ogee section.The construction joint between the abutment andthe spillway exhibits minor erosion. A scour holeapproximately 9 inches deep is located adjacent tothe spillway crest, while a similar 20 inch deephole is located adjacent to the base of the spill-way. Both holes are outlets for considerableseepage.

3-3

L*1

!

Inspection of the right pier revealed thata horizontal construction joint on both the up-stream and downstream faces is eroded approxi-Imately 2 inches deep. This construction joint islocated approximately 3 feet below the top of thepier. Inspection of the left pier revealed thatthe base of the downstream end and adjacent sidesof this pier is eroded immediately above its foot-ing. Minor joint erosion was also observed at the

jjoint between the spillway and this pier. Theright abutment reveals similar erosion and an openjoint between its wall and the ogee spillway. Thetop surfaces of the exposed pier and abutment foot-

I ings suffer from minor surface erosion. Minorhairline cracks exist over random areas of the piersand abutments.

I

(2) Spillway (Photo 2)

The surfaces of the three primary spillways

suffer from severe erosion which has resulted inexposure of cyclopean aggregate. Erosion haspenetrated up to 2 inches beyond the originalsurface and was observed over 50 percent of thespillway surface.

1 (3) Service Bridge

The structural components of this structureare in good condition. While the stanchions whichsupport the flashboards could not be inspected foreast of operation, it is apparent that they can bereadily relocated from a horizontal to a verticalposition. Observations of the hinged connectionreveal that they are well lubricated. The timbeifloor decking on the structure is in good condition.Representatives of the owner indicated that mainte-nance of the service bridge is a problem due tovandalism.

_(4) Flashboards

The structural steel stanchions were fabri-Icated to receive flashboards uo to 4 inches in

nominal thickness. The present flashboards are2 inches nominal. The bottom section of theflashboards, which consist of two stacked 2 inch

V by 8 inch boards forming a flashboard 15 inchesdeep, have deflected due to a 30 inch hydrostatic

|- head.33-4

I

(4) Cut-off Walls

The expos, d surfaces of these walls are ingood condition.

(5) Sluice Gates

The operation of the three electricallydriven sluice gates indicates that the motor drive,belt and gear system function properly when eitheropening or closing the gates. Manual operation ofthese three gates was not attempted by the Owner'srepresentatives due to the strenuous labor effortrequired. The operation of the two manually operatedgates, though cumbersome, was satisfactory.

The owner's representative indicated that theright three gates were replaced recently while theleft two gates are approximately two years old.

(6) Gate House

This structure has been subjected to extensivevandalism. All vision glass has been removed andreplaced with plywood, while doors on either endof the structure are reinforced. A timber bent andan isolated timber column were erected on the rightquarter point of the spillway in order to precludeexcessive deflection of the structure due the heavyloads induced by mechanical equipment required forthe gate operation. Furthermore, the upstream faceof the gate house between elevations 412 + and 414 +,has been subjected to damage from debris and ice

) during high water conditions. The bases of the

bent and the isolated column are suitably anchoredto resist lateral loading. The deficiencies notedabove are primarily cosmetic in nature and do notrequire attention.

(e) ReservoirI

An inspection of the reservoir shore revealed noevidence of movement or other instability. No sedimenta-tion was evident behind the spillway, although some was

4noted in the narrow channels connecting the several pondswhich make up the reservoir. A check of the surroundingarea revealed io work in progress or recently completedwhich might increase the flow of sediment into the lake.

3-6

I(

II

Additionally, there were no obvious changes to thesurrounding watershed which might adversely affect therunoff characteristics of the basin.

There is considerable development, both seasonaland permanent, all around the reservoir. Much of thedevelopment is subject to flooding with even relativelysmall rises in the level of the lake and ponds.

(f) Downstream Channel (Photo 4)

There are no downstream conditions which adverselyaffect the operation of the dam or which pose a hazardto the safety of the structure. Of some concern, how-ever, is the large number of trees which overhang thechannels, particularly below the Head Works Dam. Alongthis reach, water discharged from the dam has erodedthe root structures of many of the trees in the area,causing them to lean over the channel from both sides.These trees could fall in a severe flood and create aserious downstream restriction to flow.

3.2 Evaluation

Because the design of these dams is relatively simpleand because most major components are readily accessible forinspection, the visual inspection is considered satisfactoryto assign the FAIR condition rating.

3-7

I

SECTION 4 - OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES

4.1 Procedures

An operator from the CMPC Portland sub-office visits thedams weekly, usually on Friday, and reports the gauge readingback to the office of the Chief Load Dispatcher in Augusta. He,in turn, directs any changes in the dam's discharge. The

] operators control all discharges by means of the gated outlets.One gate remains half open at all times to insure a continuousdownstream flow.

The company installs the flashboards on the Berry BayDam in early spring and they then remain in place until fall.At that time, Central Maine removes the flashboards and thereservoir drains in anticipation of the fall storms and springrunoff.

By agreement with the NHWRB, the company maintains thej water level at a minimum elevation of 405 feet from 1 June to

12 October of each year to satisfy recreational interests.

While El. 405 is the mandated level, CMPC generally keeps theI reservoir at El. 407 during the summer.

4.2 Maintenance of Dam

During their weekly visits, the operators report anydeficiencies noted back to the company's engineering depart-ment. Additionally, the Maintenance Engineer from the Hydro-electic Section of the Production Department inspects eachdam at least yearly and arranges for any required maintenance.

j 4.3 Maintenance of Operating Facilities

The procedures discussed in section 4.2 also apply tothe Head Works Dam's operating mechanisms.

4.4 Description of Any Warning System in Effect

No formal warning system exists for these facilities.

4.5 Evaluation

IThe Central Maine Power Company operates and maintainsboth structures in a generally satisfactory manner. Additionalemphasis on routine maintenance is, however, indicated. Inlight of the LOW hazard potential rating, the lack of a formalwarning system is not significant.

4-1

J

~----

I SECTION 5 - HYDRAULIC/HYDROLOGIC

5.1 Evaluation of Features

(a) Design Data

Design data for neither dam is available. Basicinformation concerning the structures was obtained fromprior inventories and inspection reports on file with theNew Hampshire Water Resources Board (NHWRB). Includedin these documents are reports by the New Hampshire WaterControl Commission, prepared in 1936, entitled "Data onDams in New Hampshire" and "Data on Reservoirs and Pondsin New Hampshire." Also available are a 1936 NHWRBinventory for the Head Works Dam, a 1930's Corps ofEngineer report on Ossipee Lake, a 1952 CMPC dischargeIcurve for the Head Works Dam, 1973 inspection reports bythe NHWRB on both dams, and plans of the 1944 alterationsto the Berry Bay Dam.

(b) Experience Data

Basic historical data concerning the hydraulic/hydrologic aspects of the dams are contained in subpara-graph 1.3 (b). Additionally, following the severe floodin 1953, the CMPC carried out a study of lake levelsduring another less severe storm in May, 1954. The pur-pose of this study was to establish water levels backthrough the series of ponds and into Osipee Lake relativeto the level at the dams. The results of this surveyindicated water levels about 2.1 feet higher in the mainlake than at the dams. It was further noted that it isvery common to have water levels during the spring runoffperiod cause flow over the top of the Head Works Dam(about elevation 408.0 feet) with flashboards removed atBerry Bay, as is standard practice at that time of year.

(c) Visual Observations

The Head Works Dam and the Berry Bay Dam are con-L crete gravity structures on the Ossipee River just upstream

of Effingham Falls, New Hampshire. The dams create aseries of ponds separated by narrow channels: Berry Bay,Broad Bay, Leavitt Bay, and Ossipee Lake. There is exten-sive development on the shores of these ponds. The CMPCown the dams and uses them to regulate flows for the

j_ generation of hydroelectric power at downstream locations.

iV 5-1

i _ _ _ _

-- ' --- !

II

The Head Works Dam is a concrete structure locatedon a narrow channel. It is used to control the dischargesjfrom the lake and 'he series of ponds through 5 sluicegates. A staff gauge on the approach channel to the damis graduated at one tenth foot intervals to indicate waterlevels above the dam relative to mean sea level. Corres-I ponding dam elevations are 408.0 feet at the dam crestand 397.0 feet at the sluice gate inverts. A gate houserests on piers at a height of about 3.3 feet above the

}dam's crest.

Berry Bay Dam serves as the spillway for the com-I bined structure. It consists of an 84 foot long concreteA. weir with a smaller 11.5 foot weir to one side providing

additional discharge capacity. The main weir is at 405feet MSL, 3 feet below the crest of the Head Works Dam,

- with the small weir 3.08 feet higher. Flashboards areoften maintained to a height of approximately 2 feet abovethe main weir throughout the summer months to maintainthe lake at desirable levels, while still allowing regu-lation of discharge through the gates of the Head WorksDam. The Berry Bay Dam has no control features otherthan flashboards.

The two dams are separated by a low island approxi-mately 100 feet wide. Their discharge channels rejoin

Aabout 1000 feet downstream after a drop of some 3 feet.The downstream channel then flattens and widens consider-

- ably. There are few low-lying structures in the flood-plain immediately downstream of the dams.

(d) Overtopping Potential

I. The hydrologic conditions of interest in this PhaseI investigation are those required to assess the dam'sovertopping potential and its ability to safely allow anappropriately large flood to pass. This requires usingdam discharge and storage characteristics to evaluatethe impact of an appropriately sized Test Flood. Noneof the original hydraulic and hydrologic design records

1- are available for use in this work.

Guidelines which determine a recommended TestFlood based on the size and hazard potential classifica-tions of a dam are specified in the "Recommended Guide-

lines" of the Corps of Engineers (COE). As shown in Table1 3 of that document, the appropriate Test Flood for a dpm

classified as INTERMEDIATE in size with a LOW hazardpotential would be between the 100-year flood and one-] half of the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF).

5-2

VL

1-1

The magnitude of the 100-year peak inflow of thelake is estimated using a regression equation providedby Dennis LeBlanc in USGS Water Resource Investigation78-47, "Progress Report on Hydrologic Investigations ofSmall Drainage Areas in New Hampshire." This equation,which uses drainage area, mainstem slope, and average 2year, 24 hour peak rainfall to estimate peak inflow fora given recurrence interval, yields 10,600 cfs as the100-year peak inflow.

The PMF is estimated using the chart of "ProbableMaximum Peak Flows" obtained from the COE New EnglandDivision. The drainage area contributing to Ossipee Lakeis considered to have topography between "rolling" and"flat," but closer to rolling. For a drainage area of 357square miles, the chart gives a PMF of 600 cfs/square milefor "rolling" topography. Using 500 cfs/square mile, thePMF for Ossipee Lake is 178,500 cfs and the one-half PMFis 89,250 cfs.

The "Recommended Guidelines" suggest that if arange of values is indicated for the Test Flood, themagnitude most closely related to the involved risk should

be selected. Since the risk is in the middle of the LOWcategory, a Test Flood of 50,000 cfs is used as inflowto Ossipee Lake.

Application of the procedure sugges ,d by the COENew England Division for "Estimating the Et.ect of Sur-charge Storage on Maximum Probable Discharges" resultsin a final attenuated Test Flood of 32,450 cfs. Thus,the lake has a significant damping effect on the magnitudeof the peak flow.

The Storage-Stage Curve used for these calcula-tions is developed assuming that the surcharge storageavailable in a given part of the lake is equal to thesurface area of that part of the lake times the depth ofsurcharge. No spreading or increase of area with depthis considered. The difference in water surface elevation(and, thus, in the depth of surcharge) between the damand the various parts of the lake is determined from the1954 measurements of water surface elevation during flood

flows.

The Stage-Discharge curve results from summing thedischarges through the gates (which are treated as ori-fices), over the spillway (Berry Pond Dam), over the damcrest (Head Works Dam), over the island between the dams,and over the banks beside the dams. The calculationsassume that all gates are open and that no flashboardsremain on the spillway.

5-3

I5

I

IThe peak Test Flood discharge of 32,450 cfs wouldresult in a maximum stage at the dam of 14.3 feet abovethe Berry Bay Spillway crest, or elevation 419.3 feet.This level of overtopping implies estimated elevations of420.3 feet on Berry Bay, 420.4 feet on Leavitt Bay,420.6 feet on Broad Bay, and 421.4 feet on Ossipee Lake.Surface elevations of this magnitude would obviouslyresult in serious flooding in the developed areas aroundthe ponds and lake. Due to the slow rate of rise whichcould be anticipated, however, it is unlikely that lossof life would result, although extensive property damagecould be expected.

5.2 Hydrologic/Hydraulic Evaluation

The results of the hydrologic and hydraulic calculationsindicate that the outlet capacity of the dams in question isinsufficient to pass the applicable Test Flood resulting fromthe relatively large, contributing drainage area of 357 squaremiles. Potential depths of overtopping of the earthen embank-ments under these conditions would be about 9 feet at the HeadWorks and about 10 feet at Berry Bay.

It seems likely that the Head Works Dam was designed topass flow through its gates, but not over its crest at eleva-

tion 408 feet. This being the case and assuming the same stageat the Berry Bay spillway, the resulting flow capacity would beabout 2700 cfs. It is significant to note, however, that thedam apparently handled the 1953 flood (estimated flow of 9,500cfs and stage of about 412.3 feet) without appreciable struc-

I tural damage.

5.3 Downstream Dam Failure Hazard Estimates

The flood hazards in downstream areas resulting from afailure of one of these dams are estimated using the proceduresuggested by the COE New England Division's April 1978 "Ruleof Thumb Guidelines for Estimating Downstrtar, Dam FailureHydrographs." This procedure accounts for the attenuation ofdam failure hydrographs in computing flows and flooding depthsfor downstream reaches.

It is assumed that the dams are not likely to fail sim-i ultaneously. Therefore, the peek failure outflow from both- dams is computed and routed to the point at which the streams

reunite some 1000 feet below the dams. The larger flow of 2730cfs from the failure of Head Works Darr, being the critical case,is then routed downstream.

* 5-4I

|I

I For the purpose of these calculations, failure isassumed with upstream water levels just overtopping the abut-I ments. The peak outflow from the Head Works impoundment isrouted down a 1000 foot channel to the main stem of the OssipeeRiver. The 2nd reach (2250 feet long) extends along the OssippeeI to the Route 153 bridge over the river. The 3rd reach is3400 foot long and extends to a widening in the Ossipee pastEffingham Falls. Beyond this point the river and floodplainboth widen considerably and would therefore attenuate the floodwave quickly. Furthermore, there is no further developmentwithin this floodway to be affected.

None of the reaches defined above offers sufficientstorage capacity to attenuate the peak failure flow, whichwould therefore remain at 2730 cfs through the region of inter-est. The resulting computed flood depths of about 8 feet inReach 1, 5 feet in Reach 2, and 3.5 feet in Reach 3 do notappear to present a significant flooding threat anywhere withinthis region.

L

5-

III!

I

SECTION 6 - STRUCTURAL STABILITY

6.1 Evaluation of Structural Stability

(a) Visual Observations

I The field investigation revealed no significantdisplacements or distress which warrant the preparationof structural stability calculations based on assumedIsectional properties and engineering factors.(b) Design and Construction Data

No plans or calculations of value to a stabilityassessment are available for the Head Works Dam. Whileno calculations exist for the Berry Bay Dam, the modi-fication drawings would be useful were a stabilityanalysis necessary.

(c) Operating Records

The Central Maine Power Company maintains excel-lent records since the mid-1940's. These records, sup-plemented by the company's and the state's inspections,reveal no evidence of instability despite at least twosignificant overtoppings of both structures.

(d) Post Construction Changes

The only alterations to either structure occurredIto the Berry Bay Dam around 1944 and involved provisionsfor additional flashboards. Due to the size and natureof this structure, it is unlikely that the modificationssignificantly influenced its stability.

(e) Seismic Stability

These dams -re located in Seismic Zone No. 2 and,in accordance with recommended Phase I guidelines, donot warrant seismic analyses.

[

6-i4

4

a -

*1 SECTION 7 - ASSESSMENT, RECOMMENDATIONS AND

REMEDIAL MEASURES

7.1 Dam Assessment

(a,) Condition

The Head Works and Berry Bay Dams are in FAIRcondition at-the present time.

I (b) Adequacy of Information

The lack of in-depth engineering data does notpermit a definitive review. Therefore, the adequacy ofthese dams cannot be assessed from the standpoint of

* reviewing design and construction data. The assessmentis thus based primarily on the visual inspection, past

:A performance history and sound engineering judgement.

(c) Urgency

The recommendations and improvements containedherein should be implemented by the owner within oneyear of receipt of the Phase I Inspection Report.

(d) Need for Additional Investigations

Since the dams are significantly deficient interms of discharge capacity, an investigation into alter-

I natives for increasing capacity at the dams or for>1 providing suitable emergency spillway facilities is

indicated.

7.2 Recommendations

it is recommended that a competent engineer be retainedto develop suitable alternatives for increasing the dams'discharge capacity or for developing suitable emergency spill-way facilities.

£1Additionally, periodic technical inspections of thestructures should be accomplished every year.

7.3 Remedial Measures

(a) Berry Bay Dam

1 This dam requires considerable operating and

maintenance type repairs to insure its long term use andsafety. Included in these repairs are:

~~1 ~~7-1 77111

(1) Repair of the eroded con, rete on the spillway.

(2) Repair of the seepage points near the rightabutment and monitoring of this area for futureseepage problems.

(3) Repair of cracked, spalled and eroded concreteon the abutments and piers.

(4) Trimming or removal of trees overhanging the leftside of the dam upstream and overhanging theentire immediate downstream channel.

(5) Replacement of 2 inch thick flashboards with 4inch thick material.

(6) Provision of some type of safety device to limitthe height to which flashboards can be placed.The primary concern in this area is that it notbe possible to inadvertently place sufficientflash boards to create horizontal thrusts capableof deflecting or toppling the service bridge.

(b) Head Works Dam

This dam also requires considerable operating andmaintenance type repairs for continued serviceabilityand safety. Included in these measures are:

(1) Repair of all cracked, spalled and eroded concrete,particularly on the end walls and buttresses.

(2) Repair of the void in the rubble masonry, upstreamleft side training wall.

(3) Provision of a suitable barrier to keep ice anddebris from piling up against the gate house duringperiods of high water.

(4) Removal of all trees in the downstream channelwhich have eroded root structures and which areleaning over the channel. Trimming or removalof all other trees, both upstream and downstream,which overhang the channel.

(5) Monitoring of erosion along the toe of the channelto preclude collapse of the steep banks.

7-2I

I

(6) instruction of local municipal officials such asthe police and fire chiefs in the proper opera-tion of the dam, and arrangement for their accessto the gate house in the event of an emergency.Such a program might decrease response time inthe event of unforseen circumstances.

7.4 Alternatives

As an alternative to increasing the dams' dischargecapacity, the structures can be left as is. This actio.,however, would lead to continued overtopping of the Head WorksDam, which was not designed for flow over its crest. Suchovertopping would almost certainly decrease the remaining lifeof the structure and would necessitate additional repairs.

. Similarly, the higher than anticipated flows over the BerryBay Dam could generate horizontal thrusts beyond the resistingability of the structure.

There are no meaningful alternatives to the routineoperating and maintenance improvements.

7

L

I

t

7-3

[ °

APPENDIX A

VISUAL INSPECTION CHECKLIST

A-1

I

I INSPECTION TEAM ORGANIZATION

I Date: 12 September, 1978

NH 00329BERRY BAY DAMEffingham Falls, New HampshireOssipee LakeNHWRB 75.01

Weather: Cloudy and cool

INSPECTION TEAM

Nicholas Campagna Goldberg, Zoino, Dunnicliff& Associates, Inc. (GZD) Team Captain

Robert Minutoli GZD Soils

Andrew Christo Andrew Christo Engineers(ACE) Stuctural

Paul Razgha ACE Structural

Richard Laramie Resource Analysis, Inc. Hydrology

Mr. Harold Hebert, Area Supervisor for Central Maine PowerCompany, and Mr. Tom Rankin, also of Central Maine, accompaniedthe inspection team.

i-A-2

I

[i

BERRY BAY DAM September 12, 1978

Effingham, N.H. NH 00329

CHECK LISTS FOR VISUAL INSPECTION

AREA EVALUATED BY CONDITION & REMARKS

I SUPERSTRUCTURE

a. General

Vertical alignment andmovement No deficiencies noted

IHorizontal alignmentand movement No deficiencies noted

Condition at abutments Right abutment cast on bedrockoutcrop; leakage of 5 gpmthrough scour hole 1" x 6" at

I I junction of concrete and rock;left abutment okay

Unusual downstreamseepage Seepage of 10 to 20 gpm through

7 a 4" x 6" hole at base of spill-way near right abutment

b. Spillway and Abutments

IErosion or cavitation Entire length of spillway ero-ded up to 2" deep exposingaggregate in cyclopean concrete;50% of surface damaged; rightabutment shows minor erosion;minor erosion at constructionjoint between right abutmentand spillway; minor erosion atbase of both abutments

Spalling Some surface spalling on rightabutment adjacent to spillway

IICracking! Minor hairline cracking on both

abutments

Condition of joints Minor erosion at constructionts joint between right abutmentand spillway

A-3

I BERRY BAY DAM September 12, 1978Effingham, N.H. NH 00329

CHECK LISTS FOR VISUAL INSPECTION

AREA EVALUATED BY CONDITION & REMARKS

I+ Rusting or staining onconcrete None noted

Visible reinforcing None notedIAny seepage or efflour-escence Two seepages near right abut-

ment mentioned previously;minor efflourescence on rightabutment

L OUTLET WORKS

a. Approach Channel

Slope conditions 06u Wide, shallow approach frompond

Bottom conditions Rocky with some sediment

Rock slides or falls None notedILog boom None on hand

Control of debris Good

I Trees overhangingchannel . Numerous trees growing immedi-

_0. ately on left shoreline andS b soverhanging channel

' b. Flashboards TV/

v Condition Stanchions can accommodate 4"thick boards, but only 2"boards in place; boards deflec-ting considerably under 30" head

Mounting and seating Good

V Movable support system Good condition

A

A-4

Ii>

I BERRY BAY DAM September 12, 1978Effingham, N.H. NH 00329

CHECK LISTS FOR VISUAL INSPECTION

AREA EVALUATED BY CONDITION & REMARKS

Adequately secured(tamperproof) Flashboards not locked in

, I place

c. Service Bridge Super-i structure.1

Supporting piers Horizontal construction jointon right pier shows 2" deep

I erosion; left pier revealserosion Just above base; minorjoint erosion at junction ofleft pier and spillway; minorsurface erosion and hairlinecracks on all piers; some ero-sion under all piers

Anchor bolts No deficiencies noted

Longitudinal members No deficiencies noted

Vertical members No deficiencies noted

Secondary bracing No deficiencies noted

I Deck Good condition

Railings Good condition

f Paint Recent

d. Outlet Channel (in.ne-J diate area)

Slope conditions Banks 8 to 10 feet high and on1:1 slope; natural rock pro-tection

Rockslides or falls None noted

- Control oi debris Good

A-5ii

I. I .. ... ... ....j

I BERRY BAY DAM September 12, 1978

Effingham, N.H. NH 00329

CHECK LISTS FOR VISUAL INSPECTION

I AREA EVALUATED BY CONDITION & REMARKS

IiTrees overhanging Ichannel Many trees in and over channel

Other obstructions None noted

e. Existence of Gages fj. Gage on Head Works Dam

RESERVOIR

a. Shoreline

Evidence of slides None

Potential for slides None noted; shoreline stable

b. Sedimentation None noted near dam, but somein narrow channels connectingponds

c. Upstream hazard areasin the event of backflooding Many summer and permanent resi-

dences subject to flooding ifreservoir rises 5 feet

d. Changes in nature ofwatershed (agriculture, - ..

logging, construction,etc.) None noted

DOWNSTRFAM CHANNEL

Restraints on damoeainNone noted

Potential flooded areas Few structures would be affec-

ted by levels of 10 feet ofabove normal

A-6

31

BERRY BAY DAM SeptemberEffingham, N., NHp00329 12, 1978

CHECK LISTS FOR VISUAL INSPECTION

I AREA EVALUATED BY CONDITION & REMARKS

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCEFEATURES

I a. Reservoir regulationplan

Normal procedures . CMPC maintains reservoir atEl. 405 from June 1 to Oct. 12for recreational purposes;otherwise operates as neededfor power generation downstream;reservoir, drawn down in fall,flash boards installed in spring

Emergency procedures Portland sub-office monitorsdam at all times and can openV or close as required; no localA operator

b. Maintenance

Quality Service bridge well maintained;concrete elements display lackof maintenance

Adequacy Additional emphasis on routinemaintenance

A-7

Afii

I-!

i

INSPECTION TEAM ORGANIZATION

J Date: 12 September 1978

NH 00328HEAD WORKS DAMEffingham Falls, New HampshireOssipee Lake

NHWRB 75.01A

Weather: Cloudy and cool

INSPECTION TEAM

Nicholas Campagna Goldberg, Zoino, Dunnicliff

& Associates, Inc. (GZD) Team Captain

Robert Minutoli GZD Soils

Andrew Christo Andrew Christo Engineers (ACE) Structural

Paul Razgha ACE Structural

Richard Laramie Resource Analysis, Inc. Hydrology

Mr. Harold Hebert, Area Supervisor for Central Maine PowerCompany, and Mr. Tom Rankin, also of Central Maine, accompaniedthe inspection team.

[[

V

A- r

-I

f!

Fi

I HEAD WORKS DAM September 12, 1978Effingham, N.H. NH 00328

CHECK LISTS FOR VISUAL INSPECTION

AREA EVALUATED BY CONDITION & REMARKS

JSUPERSTRUCTURE

a. General

IVertical alignment andmovement e%.. No deficiencies noted

Horizontal alignmentand movement No deficiencies noted

Condition at abutments Downstream corner of left abut-ment wall severely eroded andspalled; no erosion of soilnear either abutment noted;exposed tops of cutoff walls ingood condition

I- Abutment slope protec-tion Squared stone masonry and con-

crete walls protect earthfrom erosion; random bouldersprovide some protection fartherdownstream

_Unusual downstreamseepage None noted

b. Condition of concrete

Erosion or cavitation Erosion up to 2" deep on up-4stream buttresses; central

upstream buttress and left endwall (inside abutment) severelyeroded

Spalling Severe spalling on central up-stream buttress and left end

1.4. wall; evidence of surfacespalling on concrete just belowtop of dam on upstream side

II

A-91i

I HEAD WOBIKS DAM September 12, 1978Effingham, N.H. NH 00328

I CHECK LISTS FOR VISUAL INSPECTION

AREA EVALUATED BY CONDITION & REMARKS

j Cracking / Random hairline cracking inmost concrete

ICondition of joints 1 Construction joint betweencentral upstream buttress andpier supporting gate house

Ieroded around perimeter; hori-zontal construction joint openover entire length of dam;construction joints betweenbuttresses and slab formingtop of gate outlets open

Rusting or staining onL concrete None noted

U Visible reinforcing I None noted

Any seepage or efflour-escence( Considerable efflourescencetaround eroded and spalled con-

crete on buttresses and endwalls

IOUTLET WORKSa. Approach channel

Upstream training walls Fair condition; 6" x 18" voidin rubble stone masonry on leftwall near spillway

Bottom conditions Deep approach; bottom not

JvisibleRock slides or falls None noted

1 Log boom On site, but stored for winter

Control of debris Good

iA A-IO

I HEAD WORKS DAM September 12, 1978Effingh-:. N.H. NH 00328

CHECK LISTS FOR VISUAL INSPECTION

I AREA EVALUATED BY CONDITION & REMARKS

I Trees overhanging

channel .ol, Shoreline heavily wooded withmany trees growing over approact

I b. Gates e

Condition of gates Good; right 3 gates replacedIrecently, left 2 replaced 2

years ago

Gate mountings Gates slide in slots in up-

stream concrete buttresses; nodeficiencies noted

Operating mechanisms Right 3 gates can be operatedelectrically or manually;eectrical mechanism performedsatisfactorily, not operatedmanually; left 2 gates have

only manual operation and workesatisfactorily

c. Gate house

I. Condition I Evidence of damage on upstreamside from ice and debris during

I high water periods; some addi-J I tional timber supports placedunder gate house to limitdeflections created by heavymechanical equipment; buildingis anchored to dam againstuplift

I Adequately secured: All windows boarded up anddoors reinforced to prevent

Y vandalism which has occurredj in the past

II

A-Il

I HEAD WORKS DAM September 12, 1978Effingham, N.H. NH 00328

CHECK LISTS FOR VISUAL INSPECTION

I AREA EVALUATED BY CONDITION & REMARKS

Id. Outlet Channel (immedi-1 ate area)

Slope conditions I Banks 10 to 12 feet high andsteep; considerable erosionat toe of slope

Rockslides or falls None noted; placed and naturalboulders tend to protectcurved portions of slope

Control of debris GoodI

Trees overhangingchannel Root structures of many treesIalong channel severely eroded

such that trees leaning over

Other obstructions None noted

e. Existence of Gages (ha Gage on left upstream trainingwall

RESERVOIR

a. Shoreline

Evidence of slides L None

Potential for slides None noted; shoreline stable

b. Sedimentation None noted near dam, but somein narrow channels connecting

_ , ponds

i c. Upstream hazard areasin the event of back-flooding f.. Many summer and permanent resi-

dences subject to flooding ofIreservoir rises 5 feet

A-12

I A

I HEAD WORKS DAM September 12, 1978Effingham, N.H. NH 00328

1CHECK LISTS FOR VISUAL INSPECTION

1 AREA EVALUATED BY CONDITION & REMARKS

d. Changes in nature ofwatershed (agriculture,logging, construction,etc.) None noted

DOWNSTREAM CHANNEL

Restraints on damoperation None noted

Potential floodedareas Few structures would be affec-

ted by levels of 10 feetabove normal

j OPERATION AND MAINTENANCEI FEATURES

a. Reservoir regulationplan

Normal procedures CMPC maintains reservoir atEl. 405+ from June 1 to Oct. 12for recreational purposes;otherwise operates as neededfor power generation downstream;reLrvoir drawn down in fall,flashboards at Berry Bay Daminstalled in spring

IEmergency procedures Portland sub-office monitors

dam at all times and can openor close as repuired; no localoperator

b. Maintenance

Quality Gates and operating systemsgood; structure needs atten-tion

Adequacy Additional emphasis on routinemaintenance

A-13

Iff

APPENDIX B

FIGURE 1 Site Plan B-2

FIGURE 2 Plan - Head Works Dam B-3

FIGURE 3 Elevation from Downstream-Head WorksDam B-4

FIGURE 4 Sections - Head Works Dam B-5

Concrete details - Berry Bay Dam B-6

Stanchion and Steel Details - BerryBay Dam B-7

List of pertinent records not includedand their location B-8

Letter dated 7 November 1974 fromthe Central Maine Power Company to theBroad-Levitt Bay Association discussingthe Company's operation of the dams B-9

Memorandum dated 13 August 1974 byMr. Francis C. Moore of the NHWRBdiscussing flood levels in Ossipee Lakeduring May 1954 B-11

Report of a 14 June 1973 inspection bythe NHWRB B-12

Letter dated 5 August 1952 from theCentral Maine Power Company to theNHWRB containing discharge curves forthe dam B-13

B-1X-

4,~

",' g

'HEAD WO06

.4 4 BER RY BAY DAM

?, J

oirqrTO4 OUT- 2

ClY

i~ ~ 0

'IC) REOI *0 FETDW

~ ~ J ~ STREAM OF DAMS.

"wrvoon x co a y~NATONAL PROGRAM OF tN%4 1( ,I

FIG. I

SITE PLAN' HEAD WORKS DAM

BEIkRY ,IDAY_,HRE

00

z2EV Iau~ 3: -

Za CO

W CL

0 Z

00LLr

F 0

jai. I-

1000

40~

3: w

bit

0~~~~~~~ AVOV NI WOfN'

0 0 -

~~UW LL 'A a C

% c N± 3tUfl w _

Nt 0 0: A

coZ If)

I--C, 0

rk w

0~~ cc>

0~~ 15 F

ILil

1d z

l~0 W

o at 0i

00

6 >0A~~NO9~~~Pw Ir1 19f1 a '

Swz

z -r

_____~~~ ___________Om-

a.

0a 0 lt Lq 04 4r x Z

* I.0 Z "

a. q )

.14U. C

0 0

W o

ca C

WW

ZW >.

-B 5

*~w

-347IFtN 'PI A-/

Z. __-

-

7,f-~~~ Ilrw yAI

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

_ 9

1? /

_ _ }*~74,77

26t

't xt

CAW, r

LA--i

-.- l-._

__ __ _

U~~~~~~- -04ffA all__ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _

7. 1

AcAl-,

NOTE-._ DRVYN AS BE EU' 2 C v aaI

~~-,f

j~~F - 1M

~41-747fd1o~~ce

71,

'I~~e e, -7-----

/6V --.

o

- /r

AAX.

L.~rf -r -_ ___ni ___..._G " S E i

.IPAL- ARE~ NO ASS2V

7 *Fmf Le,

c*Am4Mdr

I]

The NHWRB, 37 Pleasant Street, Concord, N.H. 03301 maintainsthe following records on this dam:

(a) Letter dated 3 January 1975 from the NHIWRBto the Central Maine Power Company listingminor dp'iciencies noted during a 14 Jane, 1973inspection.

(b) Letter duted 28 September 1954 from the CentralMaine Power Company to the NHWRB discussing thesurvey made of lake levels around the reser-voir.

(c) A 1938 report on the Head Works Dam by the NewHampshire Water Control Commission entitled"Data on Dams in New Hampshire."

(d) An identical report on the Berry Bay Dam.

(e) A 1938 report by the same agency entitled "Dataon Reservoirs and Ponds in New Hampshire."

(f) A 1936 report by the NHWRB entitled "Inventoryof Dams and Water Power Developments."

I" B-8

I

COp

/ Y

CENTRAL MAINE POWTER C,0TIPANYGeneral Ofice - 9 Green Sireet - Aucu, Maine 0=0

November 7, 1974

Broad-Leavitt Bay AssociationLeavitt RoadCenter Ossipee, New Hampshire 03814

Gentlemen:

I have your letter of October 31, 1974, concerningelevations of Great Ossipee Lake and I would like toexplain and clarify Central Maine Power Company's positionwith respect to operation of that lake.

From our point of view, the purpose of the dam on theoutlet of Great Ossipee is to retain water in storage whichcan be utilized in the production of hydroelectric energy.Our position is modified by an agreement with the State ofNew Hapshire I whereby -e maintain the lake level a orabove the 405 elevation from June 1 to October 12 eachyear. .Please note that the 405' elevation allows a draw-down of 2k feet below the crest elevation of the dam. Inactual practice of recent years, we have generally main-tained an elevation of 407 or higher between June I andLabor Day, after which we have utilized the draw-down tothe 405' level before October 12. We have never agreed tohold any specific level after October 12 and through May 31of the following year, and 'P would not now voluntarilyrelinquish the right to draw the stored water each year,after commitments for recreational use have been satisfied.

This year we had two specific requests to draw thelake down in October. A Mr. Herbert Merrow of Peabody,Massachusetts, had obtained a Special Board permit to workon a retaining wall, and a Mr. Cecil Neal of Leavitt Bayrequested that the lake be pulled a foot lower than 1973in orver to clean his shore. Since the requests were notin di.agreement with our plans tc utilize the water as anenerg, source alternative to oil and nuclear fuels, we didpull the lake down to meet these specific requests.Mr. Merro notified us on October 30 that his work wassuccessfulty completed. The lake level is now approximately

B-9

!1

2CENTRAL MAINE POWER COMPANY .AOI -

Broad-Leavitt Bay Association November 7, 1974

.403' elevation and holding. It is probable now that it willnot be drawn further unless there is heavy snow cover nextspring, in which event we will draw the lake to an absoluteminimum in anticipation of snow melt.

We recognize the fact that agreements concerning recre-ational lake levels were made in the past for people who wereseasonal residents. In 1938 the agreement terminated onSeptember 1; in 1958 the season was extended to October 12;now you point out that 40 of your association members areyear-round residents. Obviously our use of Great OssipeeLake as a hydroelectric storage pond is incompatible withthe wishes of year-long residents of the lake shore. Howeverat this time I can offer no solution to this dilemma. Weconsider it prudent operation to draw the lake down each yearin anticipation of fall rains. Otherwise we might riskflooding of the lake shore whenever the fall rains areheavier than average.

I realize that this letter is not the reply which youhoped to receive from us, but I did feel that it was necessaryto state the Company's position as to the operation of the lakefor hydroelectric storage. To the best of our knowledge weare operating the lake in conformance with the laws of theState of New Hampshire according to the policies of its WaterResources Board.

If I can be of further assistance to your association in

this matter, please czll or wzite me at this address.

Very truly yours,

tEdwarz.l R. CcrwlrsChief Load Dispatcher

ERC/wcc: Vernon Knowlton

N.H. Water Resources Board

B-jO

IJ

I!

CSSiP? ..

"qocl 'riot Livelo cn Vv 1,2"

.;r ta~i.5f duirinsy flOCI coniticns. :s .1evationp ire de9tor-~I, ~ r %2&1ttLn to a Co-zion JItuji-n jU.,U, 1.1, 1)4 'rith thie ncopiration

ir Oci -,ntral :.tnq) Po-,r C;Ormpany in.;ineer. nfoc tio i and12at% sl-git shcd~n~v elz Vlticzns Of reference bsnih rnarkr, lake 2.wfAls 1a'.1 t 4 ,Ierof o)!irvition accr.n this reoort.

'rhe co-non datum, w~as axc.irto.ins, b7 3hutting all tu't one 'rate at thenin :am an,' after stabilizaticn, Al1Qwinc9 fiva-hundreaths !oot :cr a vo2.ocityhoad los3. ' hiu iA the anount ieaermnond by rawls~ re2U~.n~r a'. tI-g on,! oft . -:,our shut dc~rn or aU1 -:at~s as alainst r'iu-z roadin~s :thi1'i one 7ate *,aac- !i. Rforria bincl r'..rks .43, 09 ornd .10 used thi corract-3: 1ova trJ:nat 1.2 :30 F.:4, ihile al) o~thers .ira taken i.n reliktion to t*:1 'Ina! -. rrectod

1v. a. 3:55 P.1'. astheir renotaen-si --o..2 not '.i afI3,i -- P

SaW in t%3 iolays near to :!on. From iw-ls taken from -.-is 3st,-11cIa,, .t~zin th3 a-ounl. ,*(,ajo rifii-snna ben,hs "S70 1*07,1 thl d~~n

flc1 l3v'~s n ' 12., the :!a 11 flo 13*l2 "tre r!ltarnineg.

: ~i t.,noctiorI of tho !ratmr lqvaij lurln,. **-a 11, it app, t--s th.tL--avitlria "a It',i.

L:~vt~ 2,5t (A furt 3r .iron o:.- 0.21 foot); ~ZJr7.r -bil t'.hrAroli of~ 0 .7 fzct) at '7.A*".t 500 foot u',str-ium of~ th-1 -- at laC.A

(:. ;zr p O, o f X ct) .1al; a LVna2. !ro to the~ Uri, maaw at l~to

f'aat .,ar sacon'.!. ?roi &, stu.: .c: , ai1' -&aurs roadin s (ta2ken in/~ .i ~'~:e ~z~ i.OhO~n ~ay10, re~d 430. on ~yUa4~1.

on 4i-y i . "'s the a3 peaked at soma L,/lC- eoot hi-:h3r th~n at the tire.c: n~u~te7' ths 1l'- and bay ).e';ols p rotab1y peaked a. teeru3VR iongu

t!,. racl1 ^13, '.1hr licargis w:ouli insroaae the differon'tal-In~tor *.0-1s Uo atte'itt his b'oen rmais to stan'.arlize the i2ke

1lrvels At various pol.3 Arth a constant discharp~. To lo 3o, arlhitrar~sw-.,o a cs 1,o di:'frentials tit- rss ::tater bodies would hAV3 to b3 mada.

7vron ths an-Alysis of ricod 1-ee1, it ap.)e3rs that the, sectionA-t,3jn Osetie'i lake outlot to ""ro.14 Zay - a distincD of 3c% 4CC0 f~ -

:-al f.-or t:ti v.13t of 3rry Zay to the main Jam - a listano~s of acne3:31*1 , - 3a .cunt for 32 psnert of the !~rcp b-t-raqn C.osi 1k 11i a

un~t ±~otstr~an 0of nain -Ax -ar- thi- 3 11, 1?5' flo Ift- ' 2: ,~tionn wera '.r i I to, incrvxsa 13i t h - 4'r~~' cao i9.t4.. ,

Best AvaiabeCp

N1. H. WATER RESCURCES BOARD

Concord, N. H. 03301

DAM SAFETrY In-sPE.TION R-E.ORT FO.M

Towr: - f4 in ... Dam Fumber: 75.Cl

Inspected by: Robert B. Chamberlin Date: June 14 1973

Local name of dam or water body: Lake .ssipee

Owner: Central Maine Power Address: 9 Green St.. Augusta, ..fe.

Owner was/was not interviewed during insp3ction.

Drainage Area: 357.2 sq. mi. Stream: Oss-pee River

Pond Area: 3100 Acre, Storage 12,300 Ac-Ft. Max. Head L_ Ft.

Foundation: Type .... , Seeage present at toe - Yes/,fo,_

Spillway: Typa Concrete , Freeboard o.er perm. crest: ;I

Width 45 -L 35 + 6 Rate, Flashboard ,-ight... " . ,turns

,Vx. Capacity 955 c.f.s.

E beinlent: Te , Cover Width_._ _

Upstream slope _ to 1; Downstream slope to l-

Abut=ents: Type Stone ., Condition: Good, Far Poor

Gates or Pond Drain: Size 4' x 5' Capacity Type Slide

Lifting apparatus Housed Operational condition r.ood

Changes since construction or last inspection: One sate still not or ble-

Concrete on downstream side of gate house piers chipped and eroded. Flashboar-ds

in droo stanchions on main spillway. Some stones missing from sbuMents of zane housI

D zvzatream development:

This dam woud/wwould not be a menace if it failed.

Suggested reinspection date: __

Remarks: :ond height 408.C'

B-12

I

i

V

/W., V. rr - -. e August 5, 1952

czamax S. wq.mxs. ScIcwnE V~cxZ.PWOV axl &'~ mHA oL 0. Jg.s"W TxIvsU m

Mr. Francis Moore, Civil EugiueerState Water Reso-ce BoardConcord, N.H.

Dear Mr. Moore:

Enclosed please find dischargecurve for spillway and gate openings at GreatOssipee Lake. We appreciate your patience dur-ing the time it has taken to assemble the nec-essary data for these curves. If we can be offurther service, please do not hesitate to call.

Very trU17 yours,

CW2AL UAINE POWM COMYANr

< J. A. Per7/Chief Load Disacher

JAP/1ZEac.

B-13

t

- - :::1::::~-:r:j::: - - - - -~

- .91' .. :tzri

-. -9-- --- --.- t . - - - 1 9------- A____ ,.L o~. --

* I A.

[z:L: -- _______ :tL.~. ~ir-:~' ~ ____

-7-a - - -1--7 ;->s £ - r -:9 -- t------- --

4:~&nt, Z\.fTJTFr. ~~tit S~ L.W~

o ---- 3------- A- £1

_____ _____-4a,

- I

V-a

3-

-4--I--- KY' £ 3$

174 '1- '--~"----c-tV-~ It77CMt

----- I------K, -~

- -- 49,r f:%iu\nrs-cr ~c"--- ~N 4

I 4 -

- 4'IC4ZOACr I :,~ IF

I________ -U±3Afr' ____________________ -- t-I -jI - sr~ Ct*Z4~ EL"t -1 £~ .T9?'JV f

-322 -tJw -

- I Ac7Th4 S4rA3>.V;f-zr* - - - - -nrmz. at- t4-fl~ C A-V J/t7f'c-

a 1 ---- t--- - '----' * -I- -- I

1 . 9 4 9 4

9 - - - .c~- .stiicr2±LZZI - I,-_- - -

3/s t 4w L t c6e viesnra, Ct-. -1-- - A, -- , --

6- W.a'~ :2-~Y - , Ott/Ut' /4'rc: -- - - 77< -

- ____1 ink:--- c&zza~ il/kw? ~,~cAv-~ -'P-tvT2

'-'cAsco Iscaorcs. j"zc________ ~ -, -- o-o-Sv:j:::v" --- -CiY~ a:,,~c

4 ____ 9 --- 19 -1p5e~eM-w a- 9-r.l

B-14II

|

APPENMIX C

SELECTED PHOTOGRAPHS

i

USGS EL.406

"HEAD WORKS

BERRY BAY DAM

TO ROUTE 25

Q,; 0

~m

~ ~ I NOTE.

L';~ TWO BRANCHES OF RIVER~ REJOIN 1Q00 FEET DOWN-

cx( STREAM OF DAMS.

GOt DBEMt4,ZOIO, MI~mCLIFF & ASSOCtNCQ U.S.ARMY ENGINEER DIV NEW ENGLAND)GEOTECN~CA4 CONSULTAN4TS COR~PS Or ENGINEER$NEWOX LPPER FALLS, MASI I WALTHAM. XA33.

NATIONAL PROGRAM OF INSPECFION OF NON-FED DAMW

LOC'ATION AND ORIENTATION- OVERVIEW PHOTOS t

0 OF PHOTOS-4> AP*PEI)IX C PHOTOS d EDW~K A

Li BERRY SAY DAM NEW HAMPSHIRE______________ I_______ I SALE I -1 oo"

C-2

Ber a a ieIfseaea

1.Berry Bay Dam -View of setep4aged

Ij concrote spillway

S-7

3. Head Works Damn View of central pier andleft endwall showing deteriorated concrete

C-4

4. H a o k a i w f d w s r a h n eshwnIvragn re

C-

APPENDIX D

HYDRAULIC/HYDROLOGIC COMPUTATIONS

D-1

P&sr- 10L)yZ, FLooib ;o/z I F.

y( We Lju '--

7 Lt ! ~C(Lc: es0, 4C W r l0mL

?Q5 so 0 Lx en ve &3?L

Az bcA A0 y Ceci,

2T .31fYA toy,. 0~'2 q ~&~r GqgD0

1,0 5 61

C, GC4C CdLC Y1..(I\.c"D-2

CI ei w &1e 4Ilp+y c-Fs el

Th-e D-)'\ zt6 /7'goc Xzf~z

I bt ie6+ CODOP i;cr-,u.$>ea tfCo&q5

0 Z),000 ,(

D-

-. '

let _ I -

t> -

%I. d ~ A' -.:~ Th~, V..Z~*- B

Ln ho.zes\

_ -to

7:' ZY-

b.C,- Camp

13-!

LogSn

1 N7

~~~Dvi wMifa4 ' -.-- ).

1w

-~/ FP~~

I ~ '~'~ ~OSSIPEE LAKE AND VICINITY

i~ ~ SCALE 1:62,500

D-4

N-O OF 4 .~_M PIZ \

V;~

* ,I \7'\.\~K

~ n il N-- __ 0?

axy

L

-51LCO'"NWA

Ty

7AZX Zt- J."

Y'- -

'S

e9 71

A A

Set

r

UTA.U

j1yFdMe, est tR

SSIDee

I u;,u

PC v

&MRS

It

6-1k,

Men604

70 -31

co \ 15; - D

kee14

iv

AwL

6 nor* V I L MSuit Pk

W*kh I PCsGlendale fe Is ro--

Ellacoys Wcs bo S=131i Beach tak

ABC R,

Sao-8.0,

S;..~,-i

C cNa)

L pt

A -6I. Tlir '0 JIM

DRAINAGE AREA DELINEATIONOSSIPEE LAKE DAMSDRAINAGE AREA = 357 SQ.MI.SCALE 1:25,PO,000

D-5

wa.

Ht S&e Lc~ 9Kx)-T % TL-&, 3o 32

HeOALJcL w~~ o ~ "c c - D aonc ry cty V ar

c~k~vL (At V

-- D-6

15 qI CJ-

IA

-1IV

.Wlx4vL -%e j P -ry - __0/_7___O

CL c-e4~ VI,~ Vvcu )c( 0 -

-e. c-r e k C)

-cL -oiney) 04A9I keaayv 15 e (,I VQ +L4

D-7) t_ _

t-5 (05)s- -

Nho' cd-sP.'ZKcty cres".

Q~ C~ 4~ (C(2X) CTy~T

ot r01 1tN 4 z

-~- IL/ 0' I

0L4 O~L~ ~'7

:6(0)

2 .O 3 ,(bJ''- .oIei-2');

o, 3 .01- 4qb,

PoR -)E4-r2 (r\s, GV VAarL ?Ljt

D-8

i~~'~s 14.Os ,5~e ce '30-~? F(( s~ 0fc G

Q1f -Saw, e ,03

+ Dk

orscv* Q ~(~H-5iSC~Y' 2 42 5 (s-6)) u'-3)

0316

Q0z 4 .

* ~g: cLvxc

same

D-10

0.~~V K) r--0ki) 3 £mjof

I- nZ - tACm~ Z :Q'rq

I= 0 L .4JP

Ct) WW

C C

wU <r:f

LU . 0 L fLC

Ct) - W3

III W tPIV

S IIU w. 4z -

t0 .4 #xx. M. L Pa- U< Q.,+'~ 0 ~ 10

0 V. 14- 1-.

.4 w, wP 0j :1 w w + DcD 0 LL W 3 3A Z4-' M

.4 ~ \.. '-W zq 0-,U<X 0 *4- - V-. L 0 N*

u M J 1A 3 > z a. (\J CD -

LU m' .- U7 -~Jj 0 ~ -&tN W.~ 1" t

LU'I.* II IAZ In kWW W W LU LLN-i'. u 0.0c -40.. -4 W E BZW N. 0. Ni. V "tC ~C iiiC iCi'4C - iC -

YvUJI -F-a00aax0d'00 M 00 I-e z000000"mow00=* ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a "jr 4* Lu I~ M~ I~ # I 'JCJN' '1N' N' \ w ~ ' -r ~F~r

w

M6

U1),

4

If) If) Firi) 1r ZDco 0

0: 0* * '--4

r) C'j (NJr

-ii Li * W -U)M- MONO< 4

I~ W') 17 (Ua) )C

-,W- it)n U) C(N -* -- !; T

I(r +J* * k: *W aC

M v v- -4. W-

11 If v 11 11 If If I <EXM .L W~ U_ : 0'i V j I -C M W-Z

_.r ".0-r) U)'I noo 000u

f~) F)U)N*- rD-13-

(I) CD LM CD (S) (S D40 Co C~ j aO j N N 0,, M' M IM re iiiC ) (M G V) (S) W r4)

CM~~~~~ '-. w- 41N0 N N 0 )U) - -t all .0 W W (

CD 0 CS 0~ ND CDa S D -10 V) W a's - a's N O), 0i Vn r N CDC ~ ~ ~ ~~i (N to i N L-) Co \j(: N CD N o~ r-. OD Nv)M

4~C\ r'4 "% W) ' N w7 - qJ ') O('1 N. W C-4'- (I

o~ -. 4 .. - v M4~ .4 4C ('4 c'4 (' ('1<r

(I) 1wI-- 14LD L

00 0 Wa 0N0 - VG nOI -N M 0) M N N

14 C-4 ky

-4

L i~~--- -- 4-4--4 -- 4WW-4I-Vv 0 i 0 j W4 N4 N4 r-4- -CO ODJ CO (AMM0 N DG

(CD

OJI -CDMr C\L O~4N DN0ONWW N'rCh '. W0 (J(7 k0NOC\ *JCJ ,r L)IZN0) N0 Wp N DC\ WO

D11

ck v~J 0 . N ak OX N r- T - NU) n) pD Lin n) - j (1 vX r- o w0 O o Nmc O -wcz)aOXN NL OX0N --4'-4 N wpi r- n- m f . ' No -N ON -- N '2- VIi) 0O - Tj CA M' O Ul - U Wo LO It V- 0n W 00 W Vs 03 CJa% CD-4 N MV,) 't,. i a, O - NI V, W N VX - M' W) P- a '-T Wo O '4

-*- -4 -4-4-4 -4 kN\ N% N\ N~ N N r-) M' M' r') r-) "t < V2 9T U-)

- VX 9'2 0)1 WO 1* M' k.0 - r V -0) M' N- 0X 0-1 n CO 0O) MU') N V20 M' N U) N '- I,') Co LU)T W2 1o nX Mf F')qc NP- N OX 00 00 IM Tr ch kD '2rIT O N Wo - kD -4 kD CO W VO N P-J - C U) MF) CO OW U-) rC' -0 CDXm' m' (M N~ F') m' ~I-t v i) b") W N N- 0) aX 0X 0 - %\ N F') V2 0) Wo N N

-4 -4 -4 --4 -- 4 -4 -4 -4.-4 -4

V2 N (h V~2 OX NI"2 U) 0) M C'?OOD ~nr r- CO.W-.- v-4(SN CO UF') X O n) o U) Co U 0' VX a) 0 N N '4 U) ~ WX'? N kD CO

toU -,r m' co co' U)r n4 eN r tD w~ r- 0) F%) '-V) N- U-) U-) 0:) V2- NI'4 F) 1.D '4 r- I1) U) ^D ' V) Co U) 'dt F'' Nr -4 to N. C\J CID al '4' V CO

to N, N-C 0' 0e C .1 V ' "- to f'- MO IM N '- N CO OX - 0 - M'-4--4--4 N ~LjN N W' N N N CM M' r") M' F) V) M' 1") f' V) Vc - V

-40)'vtCO t N 'j r,. - VI MX M' N 0 M' W CO -~ M' U) - OX IM N M'm) m' wO o' mf 0) CO F' sm N n) N- rD o v2 w a,, - m' n r- CO N v2

N D N N N W N N M 0 N N W Nr N V i NM N W NC N) CN N

CQ W0 O - ff. , ti Np - a, C OX o -X F0- m- o N) wO to n0 wO mr a an

I FM)W) OD O - M' Wo a# N* n) 0 NIn) OX N ko 0O'V CO N\ to ID " OX') 0)Wm' m' r4) T'' '1- r n' u) ) U) to t r- r- N6) co cm) OX wX Co 0-4-1

-- 4 -4 -4

UC 0 ) CD o a') O U) CO 0) 0 0 U) O 0) CO U CD Ii CO U) C U) 0

"2I) f o oNIN.C C XOXC -44NN ' F)~- 4b U Oto444--- - - -- N NQ N NI N N N CAJ 0. N~ N% (\ N kN Nm

D-15

D-16

---=A-

4__ =4 H. -=44

-'7 71::7

QU=3 ~ -7-_

_

IL -.14:

oscj2ee UcUe Io-f--i -F(,

z,~~l IcI.Q A so

Ore, e AetcAi -E7i e v-'-''J'yVIl

C / evatI o ,) j 4o*Jwc &( 11

Oct m 1I) 0. qup -5 qg moc . cr4cjR~~~e

~~o~~~iy~ 1),q~c Ivek~r vs~s ~ li~ echoi

we ckre ~VcACl "MOWtI

IV s -c GCe. cisecs C,~e

D-17

6rcaoec, Rt. &bo ve). 1 hi1e.J

Cacre )(t

Leroifacy 1. 09

fa~ CLoCA(1 e a4cr~ 5-occ'e o

Ct fC(c hc-r- C(

II

ID- 18

I Dot~vi O ssiea L-cdx (.,,,ec Ioi72-

-D 1

-jj

w Wz0- 0+

CA Cf)o (n

LL 0MIL +

oL W

oj oo *

LLU)L r'VI- LL +

a, 0 i ,O

C LI X -CIx C-)'- +

F- OD :D(A I-DI *c

I.. ) LULU

m u f)+a) -aI a -~ 0-4M

mIZZ u)ZI..31a

:D OIYL- 0 2: W~ JU) D Iz= -" .

U): - -

W4 0- --4 -4 V-4 -4-4 -4-4 C'. N'~

D-20

w

w

(j)C

0

0

0-Jti- w

-U)

COW

j~ ~ c D-2

79~ ____D-22

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

---------4

-- ~-- ____ =7_

1111

0 x

~~--------- ------_-- - -

UG

C~7 zooov(I 2 oc

@)~ 2~, -56. H34 57Dk 3.3o0

32voo3o

QpuZ ~ 5Z,1o(~ 37~30 f

'b~.c- k ollc-c )( )~ C4 1.0

D-23

1icJe (car ?h~e/e- cjatoe, Dc ,,oA-ey- Ielle(

Ir

Berr &3 1420,3

D-24

9-V LCSi4c 0 r-ck

I~CIe Lo L AO

Pow CCh-4Ioeo-yi1e-e&:, c.& TiM 3 e 0' tA-k w~ ft 0 e ~ O\S %U& ckAU timiel

("1 LL) RG

'STbRAGe~ 23,c-36- 9A%3o 0 c-FQ

*~~~~~~i uv ~~:£ 0 - 1 0 1l f.

AS

CAL FCj2 7 - _ WV-V "V ~t

P. Q(t u Y ~', 4 o;?~j L~

Rec~itooD-25

1L4Z~T Ge~~ UA( /0-k SP,7 Vof 32

g;, arrCy Rc y (AZ~ 90y qoo~/

A~~sp ~ Lf 0 Ccc .-1 CID)Oo 21 Zv~ \c~r{C

~r0 Y)oi~ CA ic~

L:ioo

oo

00o,4s

D-26

Ic e

I I~\~Z50qc

I'

j~cpl2a

I L~ 220)

RC:~O7

L=: .cq

o 'w(OaIWO

D-2

7 j.

/ 7-

ok\K. Kckj

- --S

Z-75

~; 4LA ~'It/~~~ ~ "61 \- 1 am

v'-' -A,

cq<j -

17,~ N'

06 -

".

k .9&'

% FF~>~

I Dt

~-

,- 7* ~ ~ u 9at .jD2

N~ cj 0 n N O L.O - C CD CNJ W CO W O %D CN rt CD V0 M0S PO ' r- N VO

C3n~- N M~ i b'W 0 O rV WN CO ) W 0 Nb) (nj Wf W)0 V W0" N QD

04, JN4-4-4 N-,4

.0 N '-' m mN l N v m~ w mt - k) mn wf a0 w.

iX CD, CD (\j r- -t NU) M V - % a) V 03 If -%0 W' ' h COt ) 1'-- 10 N q 03 (NJ k7j (5)w 0 i *0 ~ r C~~~ C O N2a- 0f%)a- (S P l :0 J ' C. ; ; r ;k ;C.

-4-44 ,-4 .- C~IC~i 'I (4 ('

I-'

uj -,a~f ~u -~ LiX

Is.* * * * .* * * * ~* * * * * * . a ~ * a<r41

_j 00 -4- r C Ob 0;fs;

w (7 0 0 a (r 01 atal a T, 71 r, al0 10 o al 0 im m D 00 0w 00 U

~-4in)NCO'ct0Ct -4t v v vLii * a * * * * * - * a a a * * * a a a a a *

12 . 0 S~ 4 5 4 4 U; 0 Sz tz 0l fl 8 0; 8 8 1: 4 4 S U * *

C

D-29

0 ~~ v v k0 0* w U m N 0 0 0 NS - r, 0U w w w

CO ') ~ C N 4 4 4t 4t U;- in ( Ii) r: 0)2 00 CO F') CO rz. .V4 CO flv' m r-U- N N k~ in N 1%) 0o r- 0 000 W -0 N F) re) CD 03 M' v a%' al U") N v4 ko.

c:: %N u-) ar r,- r-- N- co mO EDJ w mo JI C-- mJ r- o kD kD w r- or -q v N

-4'-4N (,j f,) r,) v4 u) in w. r- N- 0) ii m "- (\jM wt) w -0 Nco-4 -4 -4 -4-4 -4 -4

0' COO) 1) )~ M~ - V f%% Vt W4 CQ %M at r 0) '-0U-) N'4 D W x 0 7' aCO cr Uf)) F')-4

U-- " Ip"" dmc4ki-mw -wr 40

<rI~ LU

I . a a a . a a . a a 0 * * a 0 a * 0 a 0 a a S 0 a a

CL 0 V W- W 0 -i o:-') ' r-- u-) iN r- .D w .v 6 N 6 w v a,,m r, - n m- MOO - .. . ... v

1 o1

D-30)

-- 4 -- 4_-4-4 -4 4 -4 -4 -4 -. 4 -- 4 -4"--4 -4

40 00 D00a0 CD 00 00m0 0o0 0 wmi 0 t 0 ko It v k* * W It v w 0 w -r v W 0 W v v 0 5

a1 NiO2'-40 WNW onD'qt 0 i'I\-Zmwmm)CO'.f)0iNO:0

Li 0 0 N N M M V V- n n aj W r- r- W W a5 al * 0 N N M M -T

0-4--4 bo')r v--3CO-1- 4 --N~4v- 4 4

(L

ZCinin~iCinininOVCtf~iC~fC~n~fl~D)-30Of) 4

13; C4 CO P; F') Fl 4 CZ OJ f Co Ifl '0 4 Co '4 U; 4~ 4 0; 4 Co If Co r: it F' i0i Wo M Vi CT'i C -~ N 00(' Co '- W. Uf) O V't 00 Wo r-0 M re ) WO Vt 0f '--4) V')

NNM Mv-00 F)N'ttVI)t tO WWN Co 0~ 0 Co .- Nmqn r-WC-4 -4-4 1-4 -4 -4 -4 -4

a ~ ~ ~ ~ * u e a SS S S SS S a s e *S S S a a s&*

(' ~-~ C\o MO I- W N CS ' 00-0C 0 j CD '- it Ch qCO 07 0*j 0~ Co F') 0U) (%j 0N

M M '-v- nS (U () ) W~ kD Wi N n IP 1- r-F'O0 o Co 0' Co0 CD

cm vo If C il It 'D -~ inO CD N D I' N o Mt U- ko f*- CO0 CD (14 Mt~ Wo.'

6- Cov co -4-4-4 (XI wU m' r-) u-) 'it ' I) r- tn p. v. c0 N. a' ) -q a,, p) r- v) a,,C

<cDD itin'a)N0'CD 0* 1OI IDO WinN o a~4 *) i0 '0 CoCD '-0OLV)' OW

w. CD ad a' U In a a' 11 M Tr 0 a o n w al v V-c 0' aaa W to (D ad 01

-' ~ 44-----4 -- 4 -- f-4-4 -4-4 -4 0*0*%0*N0*0*

WJ 0 . * & 0 a a a 0 a a a a a a 0 a % a a

i2 inwwN-Nw',om ali -40m-4-r ~nntDNNF-Now 00w 0w0 w0 0a# cinNC~l0 E.m0 0-40as t.ONoC2-1, : o m0 Ja

44.'. 0404 U ..

CL 00 MM VV n IZW r N C COa CDCD %J 'm V Mdq '

w -.-4 --d v-4 v-4.-4 -4.-4 --4 v-oU)C inCDf)CDfl

LU a aa S6a a a a aa Sa a a Da a31

0 WNG o 0 0' Ch o 7 N no) v NMt aY- .- Non Wo ~o o N qt NMr

CD ) .N If) N It") 0~ G '~ -4 ?r' 0Va' N 0T Nf 0. -4) -f at W~ W7' kD( 0- '0 0 W

M-w IM 0 N r) N- IO) I) 0 ON 0 -4 04 OD) '0 kD -' w Ci k~ 1.0 V V

4 V4 -4 -4-4-4 -4 V-4 N- N A-4N4-\-4M-M

CX0 Vf) 0 Vf) 0'. ' CD F') N kD mr0 ~ 0) N W.0 Mq r- -4 n 0'& N W00 M' N 0 V N

C 0 CD CD.'-N N N' M' M,% Vqt nf 0f Wf Wj . N N N))0 OD M M CD 00- M 4

N -N 0 N N. ND %N N 0 N N 0 N N, N Nq 0 W N N N F't 0' N' ' '

LI. 0 0 a a a a a a a a

L

C2

D-32

k..- P§ ~ 1,Ai C AL L

co -7% FjLcW4 , O

I eAC~IT*

AzE A ox( SAP~I

-j. L A..(c)

t*-(L f4%I *' -''

i-I; 6V: 5-;(00

I loo- W U5,j e'~W ~Ii-q

D-33

3 AI

-:- W - 5",]A~7c {

.... _ _ __• 5 .3 I--(

1-1

IDI

I

j D- 34

I

APPENDIX E

INFORMATION AS CONTAINED INTHE NATIONAL INVENTORY OF DAMS

i

l E-1

I" cLU-

z

to C. Ii

I.- <>R0

a V-' cc kC- a -

Qc f 1. 0 10

(0u coj

<J. L" )4u* <0 I=-I I coi 1~

L LU I , Il 0

-1 1- U. R a

-LU

LU) F-LUZ~

I2 Ij U)

I/ aI cc L.n~- or ~

< A allj pnI'~f i ~clI

to * ol

ZIE

-K

M 0

000

0 C2 t

(0~C=

cc,, o c

0 22(9 ) - 0 0 0uIr

LLJ CE

U3 -j I- 32

AL P..wC * - x !' u =CI U.

C3gm !z >

co I.- <t-

.~W.I

cr A

1901

<>0-.I'I I

0 ~~ LLI'-

ccWE - a. WI-=

i P4,3 ~ U

--

'7Ir]S) 2

j 0M

LIJ