AD-R154 643 NATIONAL PROGRAM FOR INSPECTION OF NON-FEDERAL DAS i/iFOSS RESERVOIR DAM (M.. (U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS WALTHAM

U MR NEW ENGLAND DIV APR 81UNCLASSIFIED F/G 13/13 NL

aEaaaa/llla/aIEIIIIIIIIIIIIullEllIlllllllEEEEEEE---/I/EElE//E//E///E

III 3 ,-

Jo-.

~BH 1.81IIII"125 Il,6

MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART

- oA -, - . -

-o' . 'r . . " . " oA" , N,. J'Jp A• (,f , A -

0

AA

MERRIMACK RIVER BASIN

HAMINGHAM, MASSACHUSETTS

I FOSS RESERVOIR DAM0 MA00339

HIiASE I iNSPECTION REPORTNA h2OA 7L DAM INSPECTION PROGRAM

J.14

S ))E'ART1'MEN'r OF TIlE ARMY0' 1]'" LN(;I. ) D|VISION, CORPS OF ENGINEERS

WALTHAM, MASS. 02154

APRIL 1981 pbi-AT- I'- A,#, ;i o;, o public reloema l-1)istritutioh Unlimited

85 5 20 09*S. . .. . , , . - . -" -'- " . ", -

* IINCIASITFnSECLIRITY CLASSIFICATION OF ?NIS PAGE DWhen E ntered)

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE READ INSTRUCTIONSBEFORE COMPLETING FORM

:.RPR NU~;MBER 2.GOVT AeI3IO W IENTSCATALO~GNUMBER" ." MA 00339

. 4 TI T LE (and Sublifle) S. TYPE OF REPORT & PERIOD COVErRED

Foss Reservoir Dam INSPECTION REPORT

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

DAMS7 AUTHOR(a) 6. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER(s)

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERSNEW ENGLAND DIVISION

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT PROJECT, TASKARZA & WORK UNIT NUMBERS

II. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 12. REPORT DATE

DEPT. OF THE ARMY, CORPS OF ENGINEERS April 1981NEW ENGLAND DIVISION, NEDED ,,. NUMMEROFPAGES

424 TRAPELO ROAD, WALTHAM, MA. 02254 5414. MONITORING AGENCY NAME A ADDRESS(II different Item Controlling Office) IS. SECURITY CLASS. (of this report)

UNCLASSIFIEDIo. DECLASSIFICATION/DOWNGRADING

SCHEDULE

Il. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of ihle Report)

APPROVAL FOR PUBLIC RELEASE: DISTRIBUTION UNLIMITED

I7. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of the abstract entered in 14oc1 20, It different hoe RepOrt)

IS. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

Cover program reads: Phase I Inspection Report, National Dam Inspection Program;however, the official title of the program is: National Program for Inspection of

*e Non-Federal Dams; use cover date for date of report.

19. KEY WORDS (Continue en reverse aide if necess y and Identify by block Itmber)

DAMS, INSPECTION, DAM SAFETY,Merrimack River BasinFramingham, MassachusettsStony Brook, tributary of the Sudbury River, Merrimack River Basin Date ofInspection: December 5. 1980

20 ABSTRACT (Ceninue en reverese ide It necessery end Identity by block ewmsber)Foss Reservoir Dam is a 1640 foot earthfill dam with a maximum height of

29 feet. Although the dam is in good condition, the spillway will not passthe peak test flood oitflow without overtopping the dam. The dam has beenclasgified inthe intermediate size and high hazard categories. It is recom-menr' That the Owner employ a registered professional engineer to conduct a

more detailed hydraulic and hydrological study.

DD J AN 1473 EDITION OF 1'OV 8,S 0SOL5"

, . . . .".,, ....... :......,

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY -

NEW ENGLAND DIVISION. CORPS OF ENGINEERS424 TRAPELO ROAD

WALTHAM, MASSACHUSETTS 02254

REPLY TOATTENTION OF:

NEDED ~t~0

ULJU Edward31

Honorabl~e EwrJ.KingGovernor of the Commonwealth of

Massachusetts

State HouseBoston, Massachusetts

Dear Governor King:

r Inclosed is a copy of the Foss Reservoir Dam (MA-00339) Phase IInspection Report, prepared under the National Program for Inspectionof Non-Federal Dams. The report is based upon a visual inspection, areview of past performance, and a preliminary hydrological analysis.

The preliminary hydrologic analysis has indicated that the spillwaycapacity for the Foss Reservoir Dam would likely be exceeded by floodsgreater than 35 percent of the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF). Ourscreening criteria specifies that a dam classified as high hazard witha spillway capacity insufficient to discharge fifty percent of the PMFbe judged as having a seriously inadequate spillway. As a result thisdam is assessed as unsafe, non-emergency until more detailed studiesprove otherwise or corrective measures are completed.

The term "unsafe" applied to a dam because of an inadequate spillwaydoes not indicate the same degree of emergency as it would ifapplied because of structural deficiency. It does indicate, however,

that a severe storm may cause overtopping and possible failure of theIdam, with significant damage and potential loss of life downstream.

We recommend that within twelve months from the date of this report* the owner of the dam engage the services of a qualified registered

engineer to determine further the potential of overtopping the dam andthe need for and the means to increase project discharge capacity.Based on this determination, appropriate remedial mitigating measuresshould be designed and completed within 24 months of this date ofnotification. In the interim a detailed emergency operation plan andwarning system should be promptly developed and round-the-clocksurveillance should be provided during periods of heavy precipitationor high project discharge.

NEDED JUL 0 7 1)81Honorable Edward J. King

I approve the report and support the findings and recommendations

described in Section 7, with qualifications as noted above. I request

that you keep me informed of the actions taken to implement these

recommendations since this follow-up is an important part of the

program.

Copies of this report have been forwarded to the Department of Environ-

mental Quality Engineering and to the owner, State of Massachusetts,

Metropolitan District Commission, Boston, Mass. Copies will be

available to the public in thirty days.

I wish to thank you and the Department of Environmental Quality

.- Engineering for your cooperation in this program.

Sincerely,

C. E. EDGAR, IIIColonel, Corps of EngineersCommander and Division Engineer

Aeeession For

TTS GRA&I

DIC ' A B1U11,n1-ounced [

justification-

BY

Availabili-tY CodeS

Avail and/orD peci

2a

Si .B

.*_ ........................................... codes ___&

I77

FOSS RESERVOIR DAM

MA 00339

MERRIMACK RIVER BASINFRAMINGHAM, MASSACHUSETTS

PHASE I INSPECTION REPORTNATIONAL DAM I1NSPECTION

PROGRAM

- 7-

NATIONAL DAM INSPECTION PROGRAM

PHASE I INSPECTION REPORT

BRIEF ASSESSMENT

Identification No.: MA00339

Name of Dam: Foss Reservoir

Town: Framingham

County and State: Middlesex County, Massachusetts

Stream: Stony Brook, tributary of the Sudbury River, MerrimackRiver Basin Date of Inspection: December 5, 1980

Foss Reservoir Dam is a 1,640-foot long earthfill dam builtin 1878. The reservoir is presently used as an emergency watersupply for the Metropolitan Boston area. The maximum storagecapacity is 4,350 acre-feet. The dam has a maximum height of 29feet, and the top varies from Elevation (El) 185.4 to 186.0National Geodetic Vertical Datum (I4GVD). A spillway and gatehouseare located near the south abutment of the dam. The spillway is a

3narrow crested, stone masonry weir, 100 feet long, with the crestat El 179.6. The gatehouse contains two outlets, 4 feet wide by 5feet high and two water supply pipes 4 feet in diameter. Theinverts of the outlets and pipes are at El 156.75. Flow into theoutlets is controlled by sluice gates located in the gatehouse.An earthfill dike 250 feet long and 4 feet high also impounds the

Oreservoir and is located about 1,000 feet north of the main dam.The top of the dike is at El 185.8.

There are minor deficiencies which must be corrected to .

assure the continued performance of this dam. This conclusion isbased on the visual inspection of the site and a review of theavailable data. Although the dam is in good condition, thespillway will not pass the peak test flood outflow withoutovertopping the dam. Therefore, the project is in fair overallcondition.

The following minor deficiencies were observed at the site:localized erosion on the top of the dam; localized growth of brushand trees on the dam; animal burrows on the downstream sice ofthe dam; and a dense growth of brush and trees on the dik:e.

Based on Corps of Engineers' guidelines, the dam has beenclassified in the intermediate size and high hazard categories. A

- test flood equal to the full probable maximum flood (PMF) was used

FOSS RESERVOIR DAMi

"- .i- "" ).- .- d " " •. . -.. .......... ,... .... ...... . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .

to evaluate the capacity of the spillway. The peak test floodinflow is estimated to be 13,100 cubic feet per second (cfs).There is no adjustment for surcharge storage due to the delayed

• "arrival of the peak inflow. The peak test flood outflow is 13,100cfs, resulting in a pond level at El 187.1. The test flood wouldovertop the dam by 1.7 feet. Hydraulic analyses indicate that the

* spillway can discharge 4,650 cfs, or 35 percent of the test floodoutflow before the dam is overtopped.

It is recommended that the Owner employ a qualified regis-tered professional engineer to conduct a more detailed hydraulicand hydrologic study to further assess the need for and means to

" increase the project discharge capacity and the ability to"- withstand overtopping. In addition, the Owner should repair the

deficiencies listed above, as described in Section 7.3. The Ownershould also implement a program of biennial technical inspections,a plan for surveillance of the dam during and after periods ofheavy rainfall, and a plan for notifying downstream residents inthe event of an emergency at the dam.

U- The measures outlined above and in Section 7 should beimplemented by the Owner within a period of 1 a after ceiptof this Phase I Inspection Report./

.vEdward 1'L. Greco, P.E EDV,R D 0--.

" M(CH -_" Project ManagerG RCO -lMetcalf & Eddy, Inc.

.-',ST Massachusetts Registration. 4; j-"No. 29800

* Approved by:

Steptn L. Bishiop, P. *w! c7 STEPHEN '7Vice President L..- t~~~ B'SHOP /tMetcalf & Eddy, Inc. 0703

" Massachusetts Registration - 2 ST 'No. 19703 " A

FOSS RESERVOIR DAM

This Phase I Inspection Report on Foss Reservoir Dam (MA-00339)has been reviewed by the undersigned Review Board members. In ouropinion, the reported findings, conclusions, and recommendations areconsistent with the Recommended Guidelines for Safety Inspection ofDams, and with good engineering judgement and practice, and is herebysubmitted for approval.

JOSE W. FINEGAN, . MERWate ontrol BranceEngineering Division

ARAMAST MAHTESIAN, MEMBERGeotechmical Engineering BranchEngineering Division

CARNEY M. TERZIAN, CHAIRMANDesign BranchEngineering Division

APPROVAL RECOMMENDED:

JOE B. FRYARChief, Engineering Division

PREFACE

This report is prepared under guidance contained inRecommended Guidelines for Safety Inspection of Dams, for a PhaseI Investigation. Copies of these guidelines may be obtained fromthe Office of Chief of Engineers, Washington, D.C. 20314. Thepurpose of a Phase I Investigation is to identify expeditiouslythose dams which may pose hazards to human life or property. Theassessment of the general condition of the dam is based uponavailable data and visual inspections. Detailed investigations,and analyses involving topographic mapping, subsurfaceinvestigations, testing, and detailed computational evaluationsare beyond the scope of a Phase I investigation; however, theinvestigation is intended 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 of fieldconditions at the time of inspection along with data available tothe inspection team. In cases where the reservoir was lowered ordrained prior to inspection, such action, while improving thestability and safety of the dam, removes the normal load on thestructure and may obscure certain conditions which might otherwisebe detectable if inspected under the normal operating environmentof 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 be incorrectto assume that the present condition of the dam will continue torepresent the condition of the dam at some point in the future.Only through continued care and inspection can there be any chancethat unsafe conditions will be detected.

Phase I inspections are not intended to provide detailedhydrologic and hydraulic analyses. In accordance with theestablished Guidelines, the Spillway Test Flood is based on theestimated "Probable Maximum Flood" for the region (greatestreasonably possible storm runoff), or fractions thereof. Becauseof the magnitude and rarity of such a storm event, a finding thata spillway will not pass the test flood should not be interpretedas necessarily posing a highly inadequate condition. The testflood provides a measure of relative spillway capacity and servesas an aid in determining the need for more detailed hydrologic andhydraulic studies, considering the size of the dam, its generalconditions and the downstream damage potential.

The Phase I Investigation does not include an assessment ofthe need for fences, gates, no-trespassing signs, repairs toexisting fences and railings and other items which may be neededto minimize trespass and provide greater security for the facilityand safety to the public. An evaluation of the project forcompliance with OSHA rules and regulations is also excluded.

FOS"' RESERVOIR DAMiv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

BRIEF ASSESSiENT i

PREFACE iv

OVERVIEW PHOTO vii

LOCATION M!AP viii

REPORT

SECTION 1 - PROJECT INFORMATION 1

1.1 General 11.2 Description of Project 11.3 Pertinent Data 4

SECTION 2 - ENGINEERING DATA 8

2.1 General 82.2 Construction Records 82.3 Operating Records 82.4 Evaluation 8

SECTION 3 - VISUAL INSPECTION 10

3.1 Findings 103.2 Evaluation 11

SECTION 4 - OPERATING AND MAINTENANCEPROCEDURES 12

4.1 Operating Procedures 124.2 Maintenance Procedures 124.3 Evaluation 12

SECTION 5 - EVALUATION OF HYDRAULIC/HYDROLOGIC FEATURES 13

5.1 General 135.2 Design Data 135.3 Experience Data 135.4 Test Flood Analysis 135.5 Dam Failure Analysis 14

FOSS RESERVOIR DAMv

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

Page

SECTION 6 - STRUCTURAL STABILITY 16

6.1 Visual Observations 166.2 Design and Construction Data 166.3 Post Construction Changes 166.4 Seismic Stability 17

SECT ION 7 - ASSESSMENT, RECOMMENDATIONS,AND REMEDIAL MEASURES 18

7.1 Darn Assessment 187.2 Recommendations 187.3 Remedial Measures 187.4 Alternatives 19

APPENDIXES

APPEN.DIX A - PERIODIC INSPECTION CHECKLIST

APPENDIX B - PLANS OF DAM AND PREVIOUSINSPECTION REPORTS

APPENDIX C - PHOTOGRAPHS

APPENDIX D - HYDROLOGIC AND HYDRAULICCOMPUTATIONS

APPE:;DIX E - INFORMATION AS CONTAINED IN THENATIONAL INVEN:TORY OF DAMS

FOSS RESERVOIR DAM

OVERVIEWFOSS RESERVOIR DAM

FRAMINGHAM, MASSACHU~SETTS

-1SECTION 5

EVALUATION OF HYDRAULIC/HYDROLOGICFEATURES -A

5.1 General. Foss Reservoir Dam has a drainage area of 27.6square miles of which 22.3 square miles drains into SudburyReservoir (see Figure D-1, Drainage Area Map). Hydraulicanalyses conducted for Sudbury Reservoir Dam are given in aPhase I Inspection Report dated 1978. The additionaldrainage area downstream of Sudbury Reservoir is gentlyrolling and moderately developed. About 3.8 percent of thisarea is ponds and swamps. Ground elevations in the watershedrange fom 180 to 550.

Foss Reservoir has a surface area of approximately 232 acres,

and a maximum storage capacity of 4,650 acre-feet at El155.~.

The two low level outlets can discharge a combined flow of2,700 cfs when the reservoir is at El 179.59 which is thecrest of the spillway. With the reservoir at this elevationand with no additional inflow, the outlets can lower thereservoir by 1 foot in about 1 hour. The two water supplylines could also discharge approximately 300 cfs with thereservoir at El 179.59.

5.2 Design Data. There are no hydraulic or hydrologic computa-tions available for the design of the spillway at FossReservoir Dam. However, the drawings show a design surchargeof El 181.35.

5.3 Experience Data. There is no record of overtopping of thepresent dam, which was constructed in 1878. The MDC recordsindicate the following reservoir levels occurred duringperiods of high runoff:

Reservoir Elevation Storm

182.80 August 1955181.67 11arch 1938181.57 September 1938180.82 January 1979

5.4 Test Flood Analysis. Foss Reservoir Dam has been classifiedin the "intermediate" size and "high" hazard categories.According to the Corps of Engineers guidelines, a test floodequal to the full FNF (Probable Maximum Flood) should be usedto evaluate the capacity of the spillway.

FOSS RESERVOIR DAM13

SECTION 4

OPERATING AND MAINTENANCEPROCEDURES

4.1 Operating Procedures

a. General. According to M1DC personnel the standardoperating procedure is to visit the dam daily, read thereservoir level, and, if necessary, adjust the gatesettings to release water downstream. The EDC isrequired to discharge 1.5 mgd into the Sudbury Riverdownstream of Stearns Reservoir.

t. Warning System. There is no warning system in effect atthis dam.

4.2 Maintenance Procedures

a. General. The dam is generally well maintained, however,the dike is not maintained. The MDC is responsible formaintenance of the facility. Typical maintenanceprocedures have included clearing brush and mowing grasson the dam. One inspection report by the MassachusettsDepartment of Public Works has been obtained and isincluded in Appendix B.

b. Operating Facilities. Routine maintenance of theoperating facilities consists of periodic cleaning ofscreens in the gatehouse. In 1956, a portion of thestone masonry spillway was replaced, the rest of themasonry was repointed, and miscellaneous repairs weremade to the gatehouse. The sluice gates on the outletsare reportedly operable. Water was last released intothe water supply pipes in April 1980.

4.3 Evaluation. There is a program for maintaining theembankment and appurtenant structures in good operatingcondition, however, the dike has not been maintained. Inaddition, there is no program of regular technicalinspections, no plan for surveillance of the embankmentduring and after periods of heavy rainfall, and no emergencywarning system in effect. This is extremely undesirable,considering that the dam is in the high hazard category.These programs should be implemented, as recommended inSection 7.3.

YJZi hKN'LRVOIR DAT:12

gatehouse is in good condition. The outlets aresubmerged and were not visible during the inspection.The sluice gates on the outlets are reportedly inoperating condition. IIechani3ms to operate the sluicegates are located on the main floor of the gatehouse (seePhoto No. 6). Openings covered with gratings are locatedin the floor of the gatehouse. These openings provideaccess to the sluice gates. Screens are located on theupstream side of the wet well to collect debris. At thetime of inspection, water was discharging fromi the outletnext to the spillway.

Two cast-iron water supply are located in the gatehouse.The pipes are submerged and were not visible from thefloor of the gatehouse. The pipes discharge 0.9 miledownstream into the Sudbury Aqueduct.

An earthfill dike is located about 1,000 feet north ofthe main dam. The upstream and downstream slopes areovergrown with brush and trees (see Photos 11 and 12).Riprap has been placed on the upstream slope. The top ofthe dike is relatively clear of vegetation, however,erosion has occurred due to tire ruts which exposed treeroots embedded in the embankment. There was no seepageobserved at the downstream toe, but the dike was notimpounding any water at the time of inspection.

d. Reservoir Area. Moderately developed sections of theCity of Framingham are located around the reservoir.Residential development is located on the north and eastsides of the reservoir, high rise apartment buildings areto the south, and commercial development occurs along thewest side. Most of the land is cleared with 5 to 10percent slopes. There is a high potential for futuredevelopment to occur in the reservoir area.

e. Downstream Channel. The spillway and low-level outletsdischarge into a downstream pond (Stearns Reservoir).The earth slopes around the sides of the pond are coveredwith grass and there are no overhanging trees (seePhotograph 11o. 7).

About 400 feet downstream of the dam, an embankm-ent andbridge for Route 9 crosses the pond. Water flows underthe bridge through a 35-foot long, 13-foot high opening;which will restrict the flow from the test flood.

3.2 Evaluation. The visual inspection indicates that the dam isin good condition, however, the dike is in need of main-tenance. The stated deficiencies which must be corrected toassure the continued performance of this dam and measures toimprove these conditions are outlined in Section 7.

FOSS RESERVOIR DiM

SECTION 3

VISUAL IN4SPECTIOII

3.1 Findings

a. General. The Phase I Inspection of the dam at FossReservoir was performed on December 5, 1980. A copy ofthe inspection checklist is included in Appendix A. Aprevious inspection was conducted by the M'assachusettsDepartment of Public Works in 1973. A copy of thatreport is given in Appendix B. Selected photographstaken during our Visual Inspection are included inAppendix C.

b. Dam. The dam is an earthfill structure with a spillwayand gatehouse. There is no evidence of seepage orsettlement of the dam.

An area of localized erosion caused by trespassing andsurface runoff was noted at the top of the dam, adjacentto the gatehouse (see Photo 1:O. 10). Tire ruts alsoexist on the top of the dam, and a rut was observedacross the top of the dam at the bend near the northabutment. The riprap on the upstream face of the embank-ment is intact, although there is no chinking between theblocks.

About 10 large trees from 2 to 3 feet in diameter aregrowing on the top and slopes of the dam near the northabutment (see Photo N~o. 3). One small tree is growing atthe downstream toe near the south abutment, and somebrush is growing in the riprap on the upstream face.

Five animal burrows about 1 inch in diameter were alsoobserved on the downstream slope of the dam south of thespillway. The burrows are scattered at various locationson the slope.

c. Appurtenant Structures. The spillway is a narrow-crested, stone masonry weir without flashboards. Thestone masonry was in good condition. Slightefflorescence and minor openings in the joints werevisible on the downstream face of the weir (see Photo No.9). However, no areas of leakage through the masonrywere observed.

Iwo low-level outlets are located in the gatehouse at thenorth end of the spillway. As shown in Photo 1, the

FOSS RESERVOIR DAM10

valid. One of the three outlet openings shown on theoriginal drawings has since been changed to a 48-inchcast-iron pipe that discharges into the Sudbury Aqueductinstead of into the downstream channel.

The datum for the elevations shown on the original draw-ings is unknown. The NDC currently uses 185.24 BostonCity Base datum for the crest of the spillway. Thiselevation is equal to 179.59 NGVD, as compared to 175.24given in the original design data (page B-12). There-fore, 4.35 feet should be added to the elevations on theoriginal drawings in order to convert to 1MGVD.

FOSS RESERVOIR DAV

9

SECTION 2

ENGINEERING DATA

2.1 General. The engineering data available for this Phase Iinspection includes a description and drawings of the projectpublished in 1882 by the Boston Water Works (see Figures B-3

* through B-6 and pages B-9 through B-12). There is also adrawing showing repairs to the spillway prepared by theMetropolitan District Commission (MDC) and dated 1956. Thedata were obtained from the MDC office in Framingham,Massachusetts. There are no specifications or computationsavailable from the Owner, State, or County agencies. Theonly previous inspection report is dated 1973 and wasprepared by the Massachusetts Department of Public Works. Acopy of that report is also given in Appendix B.

We acknowledge the assistance and cooperation of personnelfrom the Massachusetts Department of Environmental QualityEngineering, Division of Waterways; the MassachusettsDepartment of Public Works; and the MDC-Water Division. Inaddition, we acknowledge the assistance of Mr. EdwardGinsburg, Superintendent of The MDC, who provided informa-tion on the history and operation of the dam.

2.2 Construction Records. The only construction recordsavailable for the dam are a written description and draw-ings given in a report entitled "Additional Supply FromSudbury River" by the Boston Water Works, dated 1882. Thedrawings are not labelled "as-built".

* 2.3 Operating Records. Operating records are available. Dailyrecords are kept of the elevation of the pool and the amountof rainfall at the dam.

2.4 Evaluation

a. Availability. Some engineering data is available forthis dam.

b. Adequacy. The lack of detailed hydraulic, structural andconstruction data did not allow for a definitive review.Therefore, the evaluation of the adequacy of this dam isbased on the visual inspection, past performance history,and engineering judgment.

c. Validity. Comparison of the available drawings with thefield survey conducted during the Phase I inspectionindicates that the available information is generally

FOSS RESERVOIR DAM8

- - . -C°. ~ . - . .

" (9) Grout curtain: none

(10) Other: earthfill dike located 1,000 feet north ofmain dam: 250 feet long, 4 feet high with top at El185.8.

h. Diversion and Regulating Tunnel: N/A

I i. Spillway

(1) Type: narrow-crested

(2) Length of weir: 100 feet

(3) Crest elevation: 179.59

(4) Gates: none

(5) Upstream channel: earthfill bottom slopes at 3:1

(6) Downstream channel: stone-paved bottom extends 60feet downstream

j. Regulating Outlets

(1) Invert El: 156.75

(2) Size: 5 feet by 4 feet

(3) Description: two rectangular openings

(4) Control mechanism: sluice gates

(5) Other: two 48-inch cast-iron pipes extend from thegatehouse 0.9 mile downstream and discharge into theSudbury Aqueduct.

FOSS RESERVOIR DANI7

(5) Test flood pool: 10,1400

e. Storage (acre-feet)

(1) Normal Pool: 3,300

(2) Flood control pool: N/A

(3) Spillway crest Pool: 3,300

(14) Top of dam: 4,650

(5) Test flood Pool: 5,050

f. Reservoir surface (acres)

(1) Normal pool: 232

(2) Flood-control pool: N/A

(3) Spillway crest: 232

*(14) Test flood pool: 232

*(5) Top of dam: 232

g. Dam

(1) Type: earthfill

(2) Length: 1,6140 feet

(3) Height: 29 feet (maximum)

(14) Top width: 20 feet

(5) Side slopes: 2:1 upstream and downstream

(6) Zoning: none

(7) Impervious core: stone masonry wall for a length of1,1140 feet

(8) Cutoff: timber sheet piling for a length of 3814feet

*Based on the assumption that the surface area will not signifi-cantly incrase with changes in pool elevation from 179.59 to187.1.

FOSS RESERVOIR DAM6

F

(4) Ungated spillway capacity at test flood elevation:6,850 cfs at El 187.1.

(5) Gated spillway capacity at normal pool elevation:Not applicable (N/A).

(6) Gated spillway capacity at test flood elevation:N/ A

(7) Total spillway capacity at test flood elevation:6,850 cfs at El 187.1.

(8) Total project discharge at top of dam: 4,650 cfs atEl 185.4.

(9) Total project discharge at test flood elevation:13,100 cfs at El 187.1.

c. Elevation (feet above National Geodetic Vertical Datum of1929 (NGVD)). A benchmark was established at El 179.59at the crest of the spillway. This elevation wasobtained from the MDC records.

(1) Streambed at toe of dam: 156

(2) Bottom of cutoff: 130

(3) Maximum tailwater: 162.2 (water surface downstreamat time of inspection)

(4) Normal pool: 179.6

(5) Full flood control pool: N/A

(6) Spillway crest: 179.6

(7) Design surcharge (Original design): 181.35

(8) Top of dam: 185.4 to 186.0

(9) Test flood surcharge: 187.1

d. Reservoir (Length in feet)

(1) Normal pool: 10,400

(2) Flood control pool: N/A

(3) Spillway crest pool: 10,400

(4) Top of dam: 10,400

FOSS RESERVOIR DAM

5

of the three original outlets now contains a pipelinethat extends downstream and discharges into the Sudbury

K aqueduct.

A previous inspection report indicates that in 1972 thedam was in good condition. Repairs were made in 1956 tothe stone masonry on the spillway, which had been damagedduring the 1955 hurricane.j

i . Normal Operating Procedures. Personnel from the MDCreportedly visit the dam once a day. At that time, theyrecord the elevation of the reservoir and adjust the gatesettings as necessary to release water downstream. TheNIDC is required to discharge a minimum of 1.5 milliongallons per day (mgd) into the Sudbury River downstreamof Stearns Reservoir. In order to do this, water isreleased from the upstream reservoirs, including FossReservoir.

1.3 Pertinent Data

a. Dramnage Area. The drainage area which is approximately17,70 acres (27.6 square miles) extends into the townsof Southborough, Westborough, Northborough and Marl-borough (see Figure D-1 in Appendix). About 80 per-cent of the watershed (22.3 square miles) drains into theSudbury Reservoir located 2.3 miles upstream of FossReservoir. The topography is generally gently rolling.About 4 percent of the drainage area is ponds and swamps.Undeveloped portions of the drainage area consist of 50

percent woodland, and 50 percent open fields. Denseresidential and commercial development occurs in thevicinity of the Massachusetts Turnpike, Route 9, and inJ

b. Discharge. Discharge from Foss Reservoir is over thespillway and/or through openings in the gatehouse. Thedischarge flows into Stearns Reservoir which is impoundedby a dam 0.9 miles downstream. Water can also be drawnout of Foss Reservoir through two 48-inch diameter watersupply lines that discharge into the Sudbury Aqueduct.

(1) Outlets (two): Size - 4 ft. x 5 ft. Invert El.-156.75.Combined Discharge Capacity - 2,760 at El 179.59

(2) Maximum known reservoir elevation:

182.8 (August 1955)(3) Ungated spillway capacity at top of dam 4,650 cfs at]

El 185.4

FOSS RESERVOIR DAM4I

A 250-foot long, 4-foot high earthfill dike is locatedabout 1,000 feet north of the main darm. The top of the

F, dike is 8 feet wide and varies from El 185.8 to 186.0.Th ptemfc sa21soecvrdwt irpThe upwstream face is a 22:1 slope covered with ir.and trees. There are no discharge facilities at thedike.

c. Size Classification. Foss Reservoir Damn has beenclassified as "intermediate"t on the basis of its maximumstorage capacity of 4~,650 acre-feet. A dam classified asintermediate must have a height between 40 feet and 100feet or a maximum storage capacity between 1,000acre-feet and 50,000 acre-feet.

d. Hazard Classification. There are 10 homes locatedbetween 500 and 1,000 feet downstream of the dam (seeFlood Impact Area shown on the Location Map). Thefoundations of these structures are approximately 9.5feet above the pond downstream of the dam. An assumedfailure of the dam would result in a flood wave 14 feethigh in the pond downstream of the darn as compared to aflood height of 6 feet prior to failure. The pond wouldoverflow its channel and flood the area around thehouses. It is possible that more than a few lives couldbe lost and an excessive amount of property damage couldoccur. Accordingly, the dam has been placed in the"high" hazard category.

e. Ownership. The dam is owned by the State of Massa-chusetts, Metropolitan District Commission (MDC), 20Somerset Street, Boston, Massachusetts 0211~4. Mr.Francis Faucher, Acting Director, Water Division (tele-phone 617-727-5274) granted permission to enter theproperty and inspect the dam.

f. Operator. The dam is operated by personnel from the MDCWater Division in Framngham, Massachusetts.

g. Purpose of the Dam. The water in Foss Reservoir iscurrently used as an emergency water supply by the MDCwhich provides water for Boston and 33 surroundingcommunities.

h. Design and Construction. Foss Reservoir Dam, origi-nally named Reservoir Dam 14o. 3, was completed in 1878 aspart of a series of three water supply reservoirs on theSudbury River. Drawings and a description of the projectare given in a report dated 1882 prepared by the BostonWater Works. The drawings show that the dam was con-structed essentially as it appears today, except that one

FOSS RESERVOIR D013

b. Description of Dam and Appurtenances

Foss Reservoir Dam is a 1,640-foot long, earthfill damwith a maximum height of 29 feet at the spillway (seePlan of Dam and Sections in Appendix B and photographs inAppendix C). The top of the dam is 20 feet wide andvaries from El 185.4 to 186.0. The upstream face is a2:1 (horizontal:vertical) slope. The upstream slope fromthe south abutment to about 400 feet north of thegatehouse is covered with riprap between El 170 and El183. North of that area, the upstream slope is coveredwith grass. The downstream face is a 2:1 slope coveredwith grass. Available drawings indicate that the dam isan unzoned embankment with a central core wall made ofstone masonry (see Figure B-4). The core wall extendsfrom the south abutment to about 750 feet north of thegatehouse. The drawings also show that a timber sheetpiling cutoff extends into a sand foundation up to 13feet below the base of the dam (see Figure B-3).

The spillway, located near the south abutment of the dam,is 100 feet long and has a narrow-crested stone masonryweir. The floor of the approach channel slopes at 3:1.The sidewalls of the spillway are vertical, stone masonrywalls 6 to 28 feet high (see Section CD on Figure B-4).There are no stoplogs or flashboards on the crest of thespillway which is at El 179.6. The channel below thespillway is a 200-foot wide pond which is part of StearnsReservoir (Reservoir No. 1). The sides of the channelare 10 to 15-foot high earth slopes and the floor ispaved with stone for a distance of 60 feet downstream.Water from the pond passes under the Route 9 highwaythrough a 35 foot by 13 foot culvert and joins the mainbody of Stearns Reservoir.

A gatehouse at the north abutment of the spillwaycontains two low-level outlets and two water supplypipelines. The two low-level outlets are 4-foot wide by5-foot high openings, located on the downstream face ofthe gatehouse. The water supply lines are 48-inchdiameter cast-iron pipes. The inverts of the outlets andwater supply pipes are at El 156.75. Flow through theoutlets and water supply pipes is controlled by upper andlower level sluice gates in the wet well of the gate-house. The outlets discharge into the pond below thespillway. The two water supply pipes extend from thegatehouse to the Sudbury Aqueduct. The aqueduct beginsat Stearns Reservoir Dam and extends to Chestnut HillReservoir in Brookline.

FOSS RESERVOIR DAM

2

NATIONAL DAD1 INSPECTION PROGRAMl

PHASE I IN," 'CTION REPORT

FOSS RESERVOIR DAM4

PRECT IFORMATO

SROECNMTION

a. Authority. Public Law 92-367, August 8, 1972, authorizedthe Secretary of the Army, through the Corps ofEngineers, to initiate a national program of daminspection throughout the United States. The New EnglandDivision of the Corps of Engineers has been assigned theresponsibility of supervising the inspection of damswithin the New England Region. Metcalf & Eady, Inc. has

£ been retained by the New England Division to inspect andreport on selected dams in the State of Massachusetts.Contract No. DACW 33-80-C-0054, dated April 18, 1980, hasbeen assigned by the Corps of Engineers for this work.

b. Purpose

(1) Perform technical inspection and evaluation ofnon-Federal dams to identify conditions whichthreaten the public safety and thus permitcorrection in a timely manner by non-Federalinterests.

(2) Encourage and assist the States to quickly initiateeffective dam safety pro-rams for non-Federal dams.

(3) Update, verify and complete the National Inventoryof Dams.

1.2 Description of Project

a. Location. The dam is located on Stony Brook about 0.8miles upstream of the confluence with the Sudbury River,in the Merrimack River Basin. The dam is in the Town ofFramingham, Middlesex County, Massachusetts (see LocationMap). The coordinates of this location are Latitude 412deg. 17.7 min. north and Longitude 71 deg. 27.6 min.west.

1 FOSS RESERVOIR DAM *

QUADRANGLE :z..

LUBR RSR O ATINMPMFS EEVI A

The test flood inflow for Foss Reservoir consists of the fullP11F runoff from the drainage area below Sudbury Reservoirplus the full PNF outflow from Sudbury Reservoir Dam.

The PMF rate for the drainage area downstream of SudburyReservoir watershed was calculated to be 1,300 cfs per squaremile. This calc.l&iAon is based on the average slope of 1.7percent in the drainage area, the pond-plus-swamp area todrainage area ratio of 3.8 percent, the U.S. Army Corps of

-Engineers' guide curves for Maximum Probable Flood Peak FlowRates (dated December 1977). For this analysis, the peakflow rate was determined to be between the guide curves forflat and coastal and for rolling topography.

Applying the full PIlF rate to the 5.3 square mile drainagearea below Sudbury Reservoir results in a peak inflow of6,890 cfs. However, a larger peak inflow of 11,100 cfs fromSudbury Reservoir occurs about 4 hours later. At that time,the inflow from the drainage area downstream is 2,000 cfs.This results in a maximum test flood inflow of 13,100 cfs forFoss Reservoir Dam. No adjustment for surcharge storage ismade because the reservoir would already be full from earlierrunoff. Therefore, the peak test flood outflow is 13,100 cfsand would result in a pool at El 187.1.

Hydraulic analyses indicate that the spillway can dischargeI4,650 cfs or 35 percent of the test flood outflow with the

pond at El 185.4, which is the low point on the top of thedam.

Hydraulic analyses indicate that the 1/2 P1F would result inthe reservoir at El 186.1. The spillway can discharge 71

U percent of the 1/2 PTIF outflow before the dam is overtopped.

During the test flood, the low point on the dam would beovertopped by 1.7 feet. About 6,850 cfs would discharge overthe spillway, and about 6,250 cfs would discharge over thedam. Where critical flow occurs over the dam, the waterwould be 1.0 foot deep at a velocity of 5.7 feet per second(fps).

5.5 Dam Failure Analysis. Although a failure could occur at anypoint along the dam, for the purposes of this report, thefailure is assumed to occur north of the spillway where thedam is directly upstream of a housing development. The peakdischarge rate due to failure of the dam was calculated to be26,600 cfs with the reservoir at El 185.4. This calculationis based on a maximum head of 17.4 feet and an assumed180-foot wide breach occurring in the embankment. Failure ofthe dam would produce a flood wave about 14 feet high in thedownstream pond as compared to a flood height of 6 feet priorto failure.

FOSS RESERVOIR DAM14

There are 10 houses located between 500 and 1,000 feet down-stream of the dam and close to the north side of the pond.The foundations of these structures are approximately 9.5

4| feet above the normal level of the pond. Due to the widevalley downstream of the dam, some attenuation of the floodflow is expected. The assumed failure of the dam could

i .result in a flood wave that would rise 5 feet above theground surrounding these houses. It is possible that thisflooding could cause the loss of more than a few lives and an

* excessive amount of property damage. Accordingly, the dam hasbeen placed in the "high" hazard category.

I

FOSS RESERVOIR DAM15

SECTION 6

STRUCTURAL STABILITY

*6.1 Visual Observations. The evaluation of the structuralstability of Foss Reservoir Dam is based on a review ofprevious inspection reports, a review of available drawingsand the visual inspection conducted on December 5, 1980.

As discussed in Section 3, Visual Inspection, the dam is ingood condition. No seepage or settlement was observed alongthe embankment. Areas of erosion and some growth of treeswere observed on the top and slopes of the dam. A few smallanimal burrows are located on the downstream slope south ofthe spillway. Also, the dike is heavily overgown with brushand trees.

6.2 Design and Construction Data. Construction of Foss ReservoirDam was completed in 1575. Computations for design of thedam, spillway and outlets are not available.

Drawings from a report dated 1882 prepared by the BostonWater Works show the construction of the dam (see Figures B-3through B-6). It is not known if these are "as-built"drawings. The drawings show that the dam is an unzonedearthfill embankment founded on sand. An impervious corewall made of stone masonry is located in the center of theembankment. The core wall extends from the south abutment to730 feet north of the gatehouse. The remaining earthfill isshown as gravel on the drawings. A cutoff of timber sheetpiling extends a maximum of 13 feet below the base of thedam. The sheeting only exists from 130 feet south of the

S spillway to 100 feet north of the gatehouse. The side slopesof the embankment are 2:1 upstream and downstream.

Specifications for construction of the dam are not available.

There is no information on the shear strength or permeabilityof the soil and/or rock materials of the embankment.

A number of observation wells were originally placed alongthe downstream toe of the dam (described on page B-9). Thesecould not be located during the field inspection.

6.3 Post-Construction Changes. Since the original construc-tion of the damn, repairs were made to the stone masonry onthe spillway and miscellaneous repairs made to the gatehousein 1956. Also, one of the three original outlets in thegatehouse was replaced with a second water supply pipe.

FOSS RESERVOIR DAM16

6.~4 Seismic Stability. The dam is located in Seismic Zone No. 2,and in accordance' with Corps of Engineers' guidelines does

not warrant further seismic analysis at this time.

*17

SECTION 7

ASSESSMENT, RECOMMENDATIONS, ANDREIEDIAL MEASURES

7.1 Dam Assessment

a. Condition. As a result of the visual inspection, thereview of available data, and information on operationand maintenance, the dam is considered to be in goodcondition. However, due to the inability of the spillwayto pass the peak test flood outflow without overtoppingthe dam, the project is classified in fair overallcondition. The following deficiencies must be correctedto assure the continued performance of this dam:localized erosion next to the gatehouse and at the bendin the top of the dam; growth of large trees on the topand slopes of the dam near the north abutment; animalburrows on the downstream slope of the dam; and a heavygrowth of trees and brush on the slopes of the dike.

The peak test flood (full PMF) outflow is estimated to be13,100 cfs with the pond at El 187.1. The test floodwould overtop the low point of the dam by 1.7 feet.Hydraulic analyses indicate that the spillway candischarge 4,650 cfs or 35 percent of the test floodoutflow before the dam is overtopped.

b. Adequacy. The lack of detailed design and construc-tion data did not allow for a definitive review. There-fore, the evaluation of this dam is based on a review ofthe available data, the visual inspection, pastperformance and engineering judgment.

c. Urgency. The recommendations and remedial measuresoutlined below should be implemented by the Owner within1 year after receipt of this Phase I Inspection Report.

7.2 Recommendations. It is recommended that the Owner employ aqualified registered engineer to perform a detailedhydrologic/hydraulic analysis to further assess the need forand means to increase the project discharge capacity and theability to withstand overtopping. The Owner should implementthe recommendations of the Engineer.

7.3 Remedial Measures

a. Operating and Maintenance Procedures. It is recommendedthat the Owner accomplish the following:

FOSS RESERVOIR DAM18

(1) Develop procedures for clearing trees, brush androots from the darm and dike embankments, and to aI distance of 25 feet from the downstream toe. Allstumps and roots removed should be backfilled withselect material.

(2) To prevent continued erosion, fill in and seederoded areas on the top of the dam.

U (3) Fill in existing animal burrows on the downstream* slope of the dam south of the spillway. Continue to

examine the embankment for new animal burrows andbackfill any that appear.

(JInstitute a definite plan for surveillance of thedam and spillway during and after periods of heavyrainfall and a plan to warn people in downstreamareas in the event of an emergency at the dam.

(5) Implement a systematic program of maintenanceI inspections. As a minimum, the inspection program

should consist of a monthly inspection of the darnand appurtenances and be supplemented by additionalinspections during and after severe storms. Allrepairs and maintenance should be undertaken incompliance with all applicable State regulations.

* The maintenance program should include removal ofany debris caught on the spillway weir to preventclogging of the spillway.

* -(6) Institute a program of technical inspections of thisdam on a biennial basis.

~7.4~ Alternatives. There are no practical alternatives to theabove recommendations.

FOSS RESERVOIR DAM19

APPENDIX A

d PERIODIC INSPECTION CHECKLIST

F

Foss RESERVOIR DAM

PERIODIC INSPECTION

PARTY ORGANIZATION

PROJECT FOSS RESERVOIR DAM DATE December 5, 1980

Abbreviations: TIME 9AM-3 PMD/S = Downstream WEATHER Clear & ColdU/S = Upstream

W.S. ELEV.176 .6 * U.S.16 2"2tN.S.IE *based on benchmark at El. 179. 59

on crest of spillway

g PARTY:

1. Ed Greco Metcalf & Eddy, Inc. Geotechnical

2. Carol Sweet Metcalf & Eddy, Inc. Geotechnical

3. Lyle Branagan Metcalf & Eddy, Inc. Hydraulics

4. Bill Cheechi Metcalf & Eddy, Inc. Geotechnical

5. Frank Gordon Metcalf & Eddy, Inc. Geotechnical

S1 6. Steve Cash MDC Assistant Foreman

8.i 9.

10.

PROJECT FEATURE INSPECTED BY REMARKS

1. Dam Greco/Sweet

2. Dike Greco/Sweet

3. Spillway Greco/Sweet/Branagan

4. Gatehouse Greco/Sweet/Branagan

6.

pageA-.Lof S__

PERIODIC INSPECTION CHECK LIST

PROJECT FOSS RESERVOIR DAM DATE December 5, 1980

PROJECT FEATURE Dam Embankment NAME Ed Greco

DISCIPLINE Geotechnical NAME Carol Sweet

AREA EVALUATED CONDITIONS

,AM E':B:ANKMENT

Crest Elevation Varies from 185.4 to 186.0I

Current Pool Elevation 176.6

Maximum Impoundment to Date 182.8 August 1955

urface Cracks None visible

Pavement Condition N/A

Movement or Settlement of Crest None visible

Lateral Movement None visible

Vertical Alignment Relatively flat

Mostly straight with bend near northnorizontal Alignment abutment

South abutment ties into Rte 9 roadwayCondition at Abutment and at North abutment ties into natural groundConcrete Structures

None visibleIndications of Movement of

tructural Items on Slopes

Tire ruts on top"o a -am& bike rut at bend-Trespassing on Slopes 5anima burrow§ ? diam. on D/S slope

of dim next to ill]wny_Sloughing or Erosion of Slopes Erosion at top of U/S slope adjacent toor Abutments gatehouse

Riprap is hand placed stone blocks in goodRock Slope Protection - Riprap condition-no failures-local growth of brusFailures

None visibleUnusual Movement or Cracking ator near Toes

None visibleUnusual Embankment or Downstream

Seepage

Piping or Boils one visible

Foundation Drainage Features one

Toe Drains None

NoneInstrumentation System

u oak trees .diam.on sloes + topVegetation on Slopes am near nort abutment-i tree tdownstream toe of dam near south abutment.

pageA-2 of 5

PERIODIC INSPECTION CHECK LIST

PR '3 E T FOSS RESERVOIR DAM DATE December 5, 1980

PRDJECT- FEATURE Dike Embankment NAME Ed Greco

-ISCIPLINE Geotechnical NAME Carol Sweet

E EVALUATED CONDIT0!

Fre* Elevation 185.8 to 186.0

r oo! Elevation 176.65

7. _7 -1i1poundment to Date 182.80 August 1955

2facE Cracks None visible-heavily overgrown

-: avement Condition N/A

ovemient or Settlement of Crest None visible

L teraIl Movement None visible

.ert ical Alignment Flat

norizontal Alignment Straight

"audition at Abutment and at Abutments tie into natural ground

Concrete Structures

na'fcations of Movement of N/A - no structural itemsStructural Items on Slopes

Trespassing on Slopes Tire ruts in top of dike

Slouhing or Erosion of Slopes None visibleor zitments

Hand placed cut stone riprap on UiS

.: Slope Protection - Riprap slope-heavily overgrown-no visibleFailures failures

Unusual Movement or Cracking at None visibleor near Toes

None visible.;usal Embankment or DownstreamCeepage

IL:ing or Boils None visible

i cndation Drainage Features None

T e rains None

rrimentation System None

Vegetation on Slopes U/S and D/S slopes heavily overgrown

with brush + small trees; many 2 ft.

diam. trees within 10 ft. of D/S toe.

page A-3_ 5

.. . .. . . .- -' ". ' ? ...........i......•... .... . . . .................. .. .i i

PERIODIC INSPECTION CHECK LIST

PROJECT FOSS RESERVOIR DAM DATE December 5. 1980

PROJECT FEATURE Spillway NAME Ed Greco/Carol Sweet

DISCIPLINE Geotechnical NAME Lyle Branagan

AREA EVALUATED CONDITION

OUTLET WORKS - SPILLWAY WEIR, .4APPR.ACH AND DISCHARGE CHA..NELS

a. Approach Channel .__4

General Condition Submerged

Loose Rock Overhanging None

Channel

Trees Overhanging Channel None

Floor of Approach Channel 3:1 slope paved with mortared stone

b. Weir and Training Walls

General Condition of Good-slight efflorescence onConcrete D/S face

Rust or Staining None

Spalling None

Any Visible Reinforcing N/AbilgnL efflorescence from mortar

Any Seepage or Efflorescence on D/S face.- few open joints

Drain Holes None visible

c. Discharge Channel

General Condition Good

Loose Rock Overhanging NoneChannel

Minor_- along edges ot channelTrees Overhanging Channel

Natural streambedFloor of Channel

35'x13'Rectangular openingOther Obstructions Under Rte 9 400 ft. D/S of dam

page A-4of 5

PERIODIC INSPECTION CHECK LIST

PROJECT FOSS RESERVOIR DAM DATE December 5, 1980

PROJECT FEATURE Gatehouse NAME Ed Greco

DISCIPLINE Geotechnical NAME Carol Sweet

AREA EVALUATED CONDITION

OUTLET WORKS - CONTROL TOWER

a. onceteandStrctualConstructed of mortared stone blocks

General Condition

Condition of Joints N/A

Spalling N/A

Visible Reinforcing N/A

Rusting or Staining None

None visibleAny Seepage or Efflorescence

Joint Alignment N/A-

Unusual Seepage or Leaks in SubmergedGate

NoneCracks

Rusingor orosin o StelGate mechanisms are good-painted andRustng r Crroson f Seelno visible corrosion

b. Mechanical and Electrical

Air Ventsoninpaofrf

Float Wells None-water level read manually inwet well using staff gauge

Crane Hoist__________________________________None

Elevator None

Hydraulic System None

Service Gates Four on outlets

Emergency Gates Five on water supply pipes

Lightning Protection System None visible

Emergency Power System None

Wiring and Lighting System NoneinGateChamber _________________

page A-5of_5

APPENDIX B

PLAN4S OF DAN AND PREVIOUS

INSPECTION REPORTS

P age

Figure B-i, Plan of Dam B-i

Figure B-2, Sections through Darn B-2

Figure B-3, Longitudinal Section of Darn,dated 1877 B- 3

Figure B-.4, Cross Sections through Darn andSpiliway, dated 1877 B-4~

Figure B-5, Plan and Section of Dike from FieldSurvey B-5

Excerpts Describing Construction of Darnfrom Report by Boston Water Works, dated 1882 B-6

Previous Inspection Report by NassachusettsDepartment of Public Works, dated July 1973 B-10

FOSS RESERVOIR DAM

crFPRont ICFf Al -,) RNMI- e Xpl"-JSE

7L2& S FSERVO/P D/?4Z

(; r6 A10

/717,6r-9~a ~ ~ Y

6L&( ra r

y 0 33v

Nlx0- V4*'*/,7

17 :_ NO

1725E £

WATFK1 S, 0 (r-

-PNO

~/"171 *'9 171 3

HOu5es

/ 0§C~F ~ENPY P W

S.C'~2I~ CF2 TQAS AND RESEaVOI-TV8

*:i~.)L~-mn -,-'2o; £BzIvU M4Q Damn No. -- h5

q'acof ran~ Y. Inspzotpd hyA. .j>ZAM-

Date of Inspection7-25-f

1-)~~ ~ ~ Prev. inspection _____

ReLg.. Of' Deeds -- Pars. contaet-

St.& Oi.~ 4y/Tiwn stato Tel.

st. %k ITO,, CitU~/Town State Tel.

~-~0Ciy/o'r± "ate Tel.

-1- --- , :)u'-! ,' 'ear~ -1 c mnr2 ple .el.

:T.2 ~ ::~ ~~ca3 Ia u o chi nre (Ifuttrs devzelopmien~t)2fl~~~~~~~~~~~~~a d- - d ar ~s~ - 2., r>,jrS.rCZV2 .2s

r(1j]~HJ) .~j~ K~t;M~4~~I__Ha _ual_

.L/1. L Z,4L~J~ &f/ 4 ~J.~LSI Y10~

3B-1O ; c.)is 1 FOSS m RSROaI DA

A numnlr of pilpes i were il-o placed in the ground blow the (I.1in, on a line genci-

M1% parallll with it. for the Jpurpo-e of" ol,,terving the level of the tudtlerground water and

the direction of its flow. The ob-;crvatiow made Lv mcan;4 of these pipes have alway-shown that the surface of the water underground slopes uniformly from the extremities

of the dain tom~ards the l)(tk.All lit, aprons and all thi.' sheet-l)iling abfut them were, like the foundations, built

bv day labor; they are substantiallv as has been described fo.r )ai No. 1. All the work

built by the eitv byl day labor was done during the working season of 1870; and 1877.The material ned for refilling the treneheq and for forming the up-strean side of

the banks wa composed of variou-z material., clavey sand, grravel, and loam, often mixed

together and carefully compacted; the compact, clavey material, from the "lIomner's " hill,

was us,d exelusivels for th.t' fir-st 10 fiet adjacent to the masonry wall on the up-streamside.

The down-stream slopes are made of gravel.In clearing the ground north of the gate-house for the embankment, a deep laver

WUs ; foun,. of 1,:am and other material, mixed with roots and unuiiital ih, for folriii ig em-

banknients; a large amount was dumped below the cmlhankmene. forming a hoavy berm'eundr which the surface soil has not been removed; the rest of the wa-ti, material was

dmnped in a swamp below the dam.

The ovurflow and the masonrv work generally (Plates 4, 5, and 6) is built in the

same rainn,.r as thiv of the other dams. The overlloWv is 1(M.25 feet ]on, The elevation

of the crest of the dain is 175.24.The gate-chamber contains:First. The end of one branch of the 48-inch pipe connected with Dam No. 1.

,S, -wun. Six gate;, 5 ft. X 4 ft.,' plae.d at 2 different levels, and controlling the 3chamberz, through which the water flows from Reservoir No. 3 to Reservoir "No. 1.

Third. Three gates, one 4 ft. X 6 ft.,' and two 4 fl. X 4.5 ft.,' for regulating theflow into the -48-inch pipe.

Fourth. A floating gaugc indicating the height of water in the res'rvoir.

A house is built over the gate-chamber.The 4$-inch pipe, afier leaving the gate-chamber, is protected from the action of

the water bv a heavy wall, laid in ceme'nt mortar, and, farther friom the dam, by a roughwall, laid (rv, and by rijpraplping.

.B

-4

B-9 FSS RSERVOR DA

below the level of the meadow. Owving to the conipaetne.ss of the mand tilt pilvs i catdown very doi wly under tiw haniwr; for thc ~ist 5 or 6 ftevt the advan-c wais frequcittir

lvs . than 4 inch at eauh b)Lmw. i),, Jirogress . %\as so slow anti tile blo ws wvere so fejei

that, att two.(111lit len t timeits. a pilt was extracledl with much effort, to judge of' it., Coniit i. ll.

In both cflsIIS theiiv rv found ent irely uninjured by the drivin,-rFri mu thlt end of the sheet-pimn" nt. Station 8 + 09, thle centre-waill has beeni bil

weveral feet into the compact sand tinderlv-in- thle superficial straturn of gras (. of variii,thickn-li-, which i- fimad' .111 alt in tht- line ; at Station 9 + 40 the- tsand, in whbich thle i all is

built, is les onict. and remiains so, a ; fir as the first nngle Conined by the ]in(, of the dam~

there the gaul If lhe folmuidi ti t n beet mnes compact again iunt il Station 12 + 0), '%vlwhere

material i, encomt ted. inl which the centre-wall terminates at St at io n 14 + 5 At thaitpoilit thle ''luueti- rdtii i widt h at thev to),, from 20 to 10 feet.

Frnmi Siifn 1 H + 3:jt Sito 19 + 24 no (-ehtrv-wall has been hiid, and the, eta-

batukiluint isz out I a few fee(t alp ive the natural ground. North of 1.11 o1,d flirjik'ti

gra11v beig foundl verv coanrtu. it -was feared that water would perc(Oate freely through it

at a point '"here tilt ridge formning the edge of' the reservoir is flalriw, cown;cqueutl I

wall. 3 f"eet in ticikywe:s and 3(0 feet long, wva built thl-lrog the gravel in~to the( gmtid. till-

de rlying it t4 a d'tth varvitug fromu 18 to 22 feet below the top of the ciu] a iknituutFurther ii iiiti'h tie ex' 'pthin (if a place wh-lere a shallow cmiL a uhnent lm,; 1 uec1 IIt'withi lut all.\otii prc~ t il t han th it oI' remloving the loam from it - 1 ia-. the data1 is

fi wriid liv thet nlatuaral1 widt ridge, which extenid' friit tile old turnpike tolwa1d, the rail-

rfi ad trae].. Frim itu .1 -sipt ion and frotiti tlike (xamtinlation (if thel dte it inm y I-( i

that in secvral parts oftIs Pt ruttare wails ha~ e 1 en built to a conisideral e del th lthr I,)mjil

flte gri l'. where the ase of the- nat ural enibankineit fl ining the dam i.- b roatd tnt i

to~ii pe 1.iee t -a ft y 1 hut t he uiat ure of the material was suchi that it Nv:v; thoi-,-hit ad-visal ut. to inake that o.xj,iidit iur., ill order to avoid too abiudant Perci that ii . Tile evenithia' just i fld the ci iir- -bi ti~4Wo.t. for at several places, mainly at the south end Of tie' d:.Lni,

ne'ar ftc new roatd, in the portions extending north of thle gate-house to, the old1 I urnjii',and n i'til of lilt. latter, thle water is filtering through the porous strata of' the gravellyridg''s whi('hl fP'n a po)rtion of the damn. The water, which thus finds i4s m~ay from the.

mc- Iv(i r. i., ('i dhccc rd inl Basil _No. 1.With the t'x 1 t ltoiofl that some percolation would take 1place through thlt- gra\ k~

t rata -irinding" thle van'iur lK'rt ions oif the damn, two wecirs were erected, heforc fillinglit..Mrvoir 'No. :;. ft r the putrpo(' of meaturing it. Some additional weirs wvere put up

at,1vrwaiA-ds. Thet wate'r w1hich found its way through the ground was concentrattetd andlmiade I') pa-s Iiver thle-e AWelt's, where daily measurements 'were made. 1iceWh fill It'if

Reservoir No. 1, three of tlifti ise eirs, have been petfliaflelyl kept, and th, volume ()fwater paWNSsiig' 0%vet' t~w htais been observed. The amiount of' wat ir whiich 1ii iws throug-h

lde gri i d nec -sregal arl.v w ith the height of tile reAervoir. liii1 euia in . flea ri vuinifirm forq the same hleads,; sic tile timec of.' construction it has slightly clirtiji,1itI.W~hen colI1;iteritng thle large area of gramvchly surfuces iiit'ci v eli'edto thle water

press-urc. mnd the comparatively smiall amiountt oif water which tinds its -way throughi tiitii,

it is evidlent that tlt'. vehi ic(it v with w~hich this %vatc'r flows through the grounld i- so "ll

that it canniot en rrv with it 11n1Y solid miatter. It is always fomund perfeetlv car, and free.from earthy partiCles iii sumpension.

B-8 FOSS RESERVOIR DAM

The fluctuation allowed between the crest of the dam and the high-water mark. in

reference to which the seizure has been made, is 1J feet; it must be limited, in time of

freshetb, by the opening of the gates, which have been given, for that purpose,. a very

large art-,.

The capacity of the reenrvoir, when fll, is 1,074,200,000 gallons.(For the capacities oorresponding to various heights of water in the basin, see

Appendix.)The gates at Dam No. 3 were closed for the first time on December 3, 1878, to let

the water rise in the reservoir, the flow of the brook being then large; on December 11,at 10.30 P.M., the water passed for the first time over the crest.

DAM NO. 3.

The plans and specifications for Dam No. 3 were approved by the County Commis-

sioners ofMiddlesex on Jun 6, 1876.

Dam No. 3 is formed of various sections, and ext.nda in A general nor.h. .!y direc

tiin across the vallhy of Stoney Brook, on the (formerly) Homer and Freeman farms. (For

stationing. etc., see Appendix.)

The foundatiot, of this dam is built entirely on sand and gravel. A portion of the

dam, not represented on Plate .No. 3, is formed by the new Worcester turnpike, and by an

irregular embankment connected with it, which encloses a small area of flowage on the

Homer estate. The high-water mark at this point was about one foot only above the

natural surface of the ground; care was taken, however, to remove all the loam friim the

base of the road and of the adjoining embankment, and, as the strata underlying the loam

were, especially under the road, of porous mnd and gravel, a puddle wall made of gravel,

compact, clayey sand, and loam, was built in the middle of the road a,,l in the heart of

the adjoining embankment, to a depth of 7 feet below high-water mark in the reservoi'.

Thi% puddle bank, where it strikes at a right angle the centre wall of the main dani, forms

a close connection with it by dividing in two branches enelo.,,ing a spur projecting from

the wall.The centr-e wall, built on the main line of the damn, starts at Station 2 + 25, aluit

70 feet sontb of the new turnpike. It extends in a straight line almost tru. north for

8,4 feet, and then bends to the right. The first strata found are of gravel and coarse

sand, through which the masonry is built to a depth of 21 feet below the surface. Under

the road the gravel is much coarser, and friom there to Station 3 + 5o the v-all is built to

a depth of asmit 33 feet below the surface; it ,nters then a stratumn of fine, gritty sand,

wvhich it I,11,,, its far as the overflow; the latter is built in the same material; the .,-

h,,u-~ ai' a d tilt ccii rc wall l cvond it. a. far as Stal in 9 + .10, al built ill a very filn. lelmmi h

Fr'in Statio 4 + 23 t,) Station .S + 09, the front of the masonry of the centre-wall, of

the overfl, w ail of the gratc-chainlr i4 protected by a heavy sheet-pililng 8 ill. ill thick-

nes:, ton ed and gro,,vl. driven with rifh care. At the overflow the bottom of tlhe

sheet-piling extellls 1I f:ct below the bottom of' the masonry, which stand, it Mlf 15 fiet

B-7 FOSS RESERVOIR DAM

• ..- ....... . -... ... .: ......i... .. ......... ...... .. ......... - _,.... .....- - -- - - -- - ---.- -----. . .- .. .. .. . • . ...

RESEF"VOIR NO. 3.

ris r. srvoir is the large4st of tile tl:'(.e now built; it extends in the valh- d"'ton, v lBrok from in -am N,. '3, which liuits tile northerly arm of l1.eservoir Ni,. 1, i,, ageera I i w'lti-westerlv di'i(torl, aer,,.ss the track of the Old Colony L.1h. ( wnirl fl tit,

{1, t,. -I. ( 'linton, & Fithlburg P.R.), to a point on the stream a little beyond the b,,u,,-darv lia m4& Franingiham l and of Southboroughi. The land covered by this reev'\ir i,

enirel of* a faring" descrilpti m.

A, the top of the railroad embankment extending through the valley occupiied1 hythe res, 'v,,ir was too near the high-water mark, it became necessary to raise the grade ,d"th, track, and to rebuild the bridge over Stoney Brook. By mutual agreement the Rail-road Company raised its embanlimet, widened it sufliciently for the a, ominodatiton ()f aprolposed second track, and built a new bridge, 50 feet in span, over the bed of StoanyBrook; it assued also all the risks arising from the construction of the regervoir.

The city, by the paymcnt of damages to the Railroad Company, acquired the rightof1 florag,, over its bank and of maintaining the reservoir, " provided the heighl of tiwoverflow at lhe damn, be it f iarmed lby stone coping, or by flash-boards, or in any otherman1r. is not above elevation 176.5 above tide nmarsh level" (i.e., 1.26 above the presentgranit( c,,aping), "and jan,,vial'd the height of the emlbankments of the dam are i' abi)%v\,.1e~ation 181.5." (It is at present 181.32.)

The old W ,',.ce.ster tu'rnlike c,',ssud tile valley now oceupied by the reservoir;SO. .,:tl road were surveyed to take its place; finallv the County Commissioners orderedlie present one, with aft iron bridge 35 feet in span over Stonev Brook. (For date

location, Ac., Se A pem|dix.'Tle se.izure of land made by tl eo mtini.fsioi'rs for the road, in.-tead of enularaeig,

as usual, a strip of uniform width, includes irregular areas, such as are suflicient to containtIme eminbankment and cuts.

Thu portions of the embankments which are in the reservoir are paved to a lineabove the high-water mark.

It must be remembered that several hundred feet of this road form a portion of theembankment of the reservoir, and mu.t/ be kept to conforin to its reqpirements.

A small portion of the old Southborough road, near tme house of V. P. Temple,was rais,(d and straightened, and a culvert was built under it to accommodate the brookcoming friom the estate of I)r. P. Parker.

All the brush and wood growing on the location of the reservoir was cleared, in1877, to tlme high-water line.

The depth of Reservoir No. 3, at the dam, is 25 feet. It is nearly as deepfor all the portion of the basin south of the railroad, with the exception of the borders andof an extensive gravel ridge which extends diagonally across the reservoir. The depthnorth of the railroad diminishes gradually towards the end.

B-6 FOSS RESERVOIR DAM

FOSS R SER~VOIR~ DPAr

J.AL - M 1.

0101

'Cc Ft LE L

CC0 1. 2

1E164 ~ 4~-'

iNvoVi SECT.S I "LP

vSk.T SCALE ~NOTE: OWAL A B.MKOW6W11 1WII .

1. Elevations shown based on spillway crest M MIelevation 179.59 (NGVD) taken from the 1111PORMO NPCJIO O-R.4

Metropolitan District Commission records. FOS RESERVOIR DAN

2. Information shown based on field inspection FIK - ff AND IE SECTOhSof December 5, 1980.

3. N.2 indicates location and direction of SCUTSview for photographs. SCM. AS NOW rO1!: *!CENSER. 1960

,lif)AT GOVERNMI. FXPEN~SE

jN0. :3.ECTIONS

'pA

'1-40

FIGURE B-4

Extract of book plate from

S "Additional Supply

ON CD from Sudbury River*

by Boston Water Wor&s1882

*SCALES AS NOTED

RrPRonucED AT GOVFR~ W,~J ,:-N XPENSEDA vl N ODAMNO

CROSS SECTIC

.1" Morr SV . ,,,eo

, J . .

*.SECTION...

" , fff,'ODntCFi) Al GOVERNMENT P FPENSE

t -

0a

f L ...

-130

* FIGUR E B-3

!-.xt ritt of hook plate fron

'Additional SuipplIytr-o),i Sudbury River"

- bv B- .;.ton Water Works1882

SCALES AS NOTED

.t-t

R [PRODUCE-D AT 60VtRN '7CT EXPENISE

DAM NO. 3LONGITUDINAL SECTI

SHOWING FORMATI

c R. AC ~

v 19 L 0 O

- 7:- ca

; It' TI cw .

14 C. A -.

ili i"1W0Ducrr AT (, 1.ERNmF7JT FXPENSE

N 1~~ ~' 83.0 L~kT or Rp RAp

SECTikGN 3-OP% VA (- M5OC1 KK K-

VtOR't SCALt II

IA NOTE:

1. Elevations shown based on spillway crestelevation 179.59 (NcVD taken from theMetropolitan District Commission records.

*2. Information shlown baS~d on field inspecti 1i

of December 5, 1980.

Msi~e lotidine"

FOSS EESERVI ANF

*~~T1OTN j KONC U 4fihE6 CTlg Tug

$MI, A lo

R[PRODUCED AT GOVERNMC TJ EXPENSE

ROUT

~ow174.

SPILLW#W( -VI ROUTrE14RM scmtE 1 27

-SECT~o ION

VM lbAblA ttIt

tI~ ZOA S

cl ,El 10K LA_ II>m V bPoI U4-

0S

M 111i(WOMf AT C()vANMFN I F)(PENSS

.91 ..... IV

A-K7lf,

3v'

~.$Z~4 ~ -~.?/$'N

* ~ n.;shownbased on spiliwaY crest

: 17 179.9 (N11 VD) taken from the

.. itJn istrict Comrmissin records.

~shown ba sed on field inspectionD

r . 19 80

it ii~tc' 1'wtion and dire tion of

0

/UI

.CU I. I . K 98 " "

"-. IPRC)lUCFD Al (,'. fNMENT FXPENSE

-..- F62S3 i9&S§?VOlR D/ft

5PLlwA y WF_.,.

I VI6 20 T. ,.1 . -,op_

e-, _ 1,74 2. L

/\ \ir<

Iro~

NOTE:

\\\ WOODEDj 1.Elevations shown

* j Nf /h ,elevation 179.59

1(2 Metropolitan Dist

2.1nformation shown

of December 5.198

* 3. 4indicates swam

I 4:'*'%.#2 indicates loI iI ~ 4view for photogra

\ m , Housr, I :

SCALE

0 i~otoo s

K-: 8~Down!.--~rn 'ae of DaRMn Condition, ~ Goodi__ 2 Minor Rqpa-*vz

3- Major Reptnirs Urgent Rlepairs-

P~rgn~yspi!3>;ay: C -idition A,, Gooi._L 21, Minor Repairs____

3, Mlajor iiePairs___ 4.2 Urgent Repaizs

* YJT .~~~ t. r.ote cnbobv,- be.lo -

2~OD of c. ?rinc~lpa1 spi, l-11way______

Ev-:'6aic oil'

-. *1 I.2

vl: 14h.)I a~m v _________

C r- ~ uz.~n:&zx t~______________

gr ~~~~ ~ ~ FS REEROI DAMo :p ~ . .. __

(1z ~ r-0arv~'~-~ ~: 0 r _______ ______B

DAM /s A'&~J ~b//r" '

- Ov -mUL Condition:

- ~~2 7zvi reair~s ~r2 ud__

3. CoiiitionaiJy vs3f0 maI~Ljor rs~pair6 3eled ________

B-12 FOSS RESERVOIR DAM

* Date ___ __ __ n__-

m Provide - :' 11" in ae-r copy of topo ip ith lccation of Dam* c ,-"eaKy idic .d

*.2,

* Yc'2r b tJ j j Yeais of ub.eantr ir

?ux, ose of D..,n: :dater u.-. Recr:at2.oa__... ... ....- : . -- - C t. -!

"- . .. ?oY-L: '72O.. o~fr", -et

A Z3U - -,,. .-- ___ A

*177

,_x.........._ .. .e.........................................

* . . ... ' .-° . -[

_3 .- ,

7 o .

B-13 FOSS RESERVOIR DAM '

II

Of 1. Oj. J -

0 h r~s~

F ow (

oDPrA Va7rw )-*T .L Torop Si i WA7OII6PVii PL L Y'AY

<: 5TW46 M~ASciPfL4

IV UP

Al IAt7LoT

-- 25I,9 .419 14v/ATML

1g'L.TO TOP., TO TO P

~14-- lot \//

B-14 FOSS RESERVOIR DAM

p -,

- - k J-/L .) -

Wi. ..

II

-,2.-.-

Is

- .

°

B-15 FOSS RESERVOIR DAM

... .. .. ....................... .. .." ...... -- -- - .. . " •: " :" ---: '- - .--. -:" : ,• -"-, , :. -~

APPENDIX C

PHOTO GRAPHS

Note: Location and direction of photographs shown onFigures B-1 and B-5 in Appendix B

U

FOSS RESERVOIR DAM

i,, iRoD! JCD AT r I i I >. EXPENSE

;~C-.

* 71

iiF iPFionucF AT '(I l%\MFNT FXPFNSE

II

N3 EI:BXNMEYI NI'.AR NORTH ABUTMENT

U A NOTIFNINN-TT AEMS

0

0FO~SS RIESERVO)IR RAL1

1jpnnnuCFr) AT ('.1 -JIMFNT F'PFNSE

II

N 0. 1 ITSTH LAN 0IKNINGS INTO AIT WEAA, OF'

IN 0. 0 1 ""1 .I IIO Of., (;AIII1OLSK \ND t)1,111 (;ATI

R,1[14I11 ()li DAN

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

i R 'IBICC AlT( iVt . X~'

II

No. 11 I MB \ N NIINT 1AND IDGE FOR l( i ROVTU 9

Fl hS IIESU I (di DNN

"I OnATCGOVUP f FXPFNSE

NO. 9 I)OWNSTRFXM FACE OF SPILLWAY

NO. 10 DETAAL OF LROSION NV.XTT Gl()(ATEHlOUtSE,

IcI FOSS RESERVOIR D)AM

!1FPrnnntCFO A I ;W~llPNIM~ 'T FXPENSE

No. I I L isTI1EAM~ SIALOPE OF D)IKE

NO. 12 TOP OF' IIF

D )SS R ESFli N 111i lAN

APPENDIX D

HYDROLOGIC AND HYDRAULICCO .IPUTATIONS

Page

Figure D-1, Drainage Area Nap D-1

Hydrologic and Hydraulic Computations D-2

FOSS RESERVOIR DAN

cc-

u-C

cc

C) z

-' - d

Jal

I-I

7'U

-j.c7 it~

Mr)A < rn

Project Md. pie vie t ~o i (i -d. DO V . Acct No -71..S Page ____ o 1*Subject 14 1Q l 19- 4 ek I Lil -5- Comptd. 3y Date 2i 7 T

Detail Foss /?esevcn rN~ CD d. By QI.2vL Date L~4zL

CC

Ofie cvci. - a~ea o( Fovr e R.Vo 3 i 27(oop l14sce-~ 4 cto& S TC 14aA.~1~ # ,c; 75

WThecr' a 4-e d-e+ p ea-k 1 1 4Aa

aSf- e v 1 0,1-1 J#4 e %- C.,#4 e dcrajtoi IL A- o4i 2re d (,ir ve c-4-1 -v AcS' +o Fojr

0 f .l ,; /J k ' (vw (,c v

0

z

(( u~4fo cf Afo~3 2-nd oal-, has-i' 6200q 'Aeedd~ es-t (S

-J ~ -td . i'2ooc( ti#~ a. peak( ptk fel, & Of

I- L coo vcf ' - G (tie it (e l-r SOIaJ

1 /

Aooys~~~rOO' tc((4(e5u ,v- e

>:o6t.ooq

D-2 FOSS RESERVOIR DAM

Project N6L+. R~evi.u o ,, eJ E a.%s Acct.No. 7 6- - Page_ of 5

Subject Adil(-5Cx( CCoLu~v. 4/ 'f' Comptd By -"BEDa te 1=_

Detail rir P SPt-5 eAO Ckd. By A- Date 1 -~

I-~a AveoL

7fofa 7L.Area. IArl.~i1.e0vflM5I "Z i

0_- 17?~ 2- d~ iOX "04Lt-

0JU - s- a t u v,- jN LFl--fo

oU ve k (. it erA fe..6eeIv7f0

w~'fo A.I~ 'I F1& (DAd*7A, 1 0

a (.0 o*d5 oeL e

uotje~r Pe&G f~o. s s 0, 4. (0 Spes A";, 44

J &Qse CI4m at~~ Czs4 -dL&1ed e4 j~ IptII Ve,~ 4 ', r.,

7i - plA, ei

6-i 7s40cL- Food 5%t, civ4e 6ce (3 t~ok A89o'fs

to D' -__3_Da_40___

D f .pae. a chov... si'l ott cekai t rrv~

5to-A#23O94# - (eesf PA ood Y f? bC VJE

6 -0-U 'r - o. r

*xFF -34-- ( .Cpnr&

x , Io vr cCo ooaP Po,

7~~~10 4S'Ic cra fe..islr 5

6-~~D- FOSScty REEVI DAMbaec ~c.J.Q1

Project 4UfIRevi~wor DCM FV'A. 011 6W Acct. No. 7 2.Page B of ___

Subject mjP-o nui ,Mr Comptdl By 1Lfl Date

Detail Fo c c p o'P-A6 Ckd By Date i4e

w~es~ rwvt 3

0

z

zI

-r, .. fpPe~iLks A s

- rp

0 _____f~

0 40cc 'a.As0o~ fo.

//co(/ifo dojrp

f 4

D-4 FOSS RESERVOIR DAMi

Project NAL ('?e1 FPW d~. ~.~Acct. No, P'5 age o1

FSubject 4Sf (sey(ayK: A- Comptd. By Date iL O..

Detail -Fo>s. r Frrr m'p~ A/0 0-3 Ck d.By Date -4 A

s Coc-kf ee& q .

*qA 1 2 o I 3080 4t 'o 4640 S'400 67Z4o bo Tic

J

0

0z at .r-( 'y3r4" ,tee l r

LPCre 185.4-o 2640rot

z

0 To~ ic~aw

7~1 f"- eve(, re aileer (2~..~/(u d,"rv.)ILir l-e. oAj k

C,,

cuW~r, W. d

10 1.06 Ie" 2. SU 3", ev I

4 r~T rb% 17 7*oo 87r7o IVS-0 i

POW "-J'1 5

II&ACire"f doer bof rA'tt C(. TW,

D-5 FOSS RESERVOIR DAM

Project Ncd. I is 0( KCVICWO F 117-" A c ct N o. ZSSPage oSuMc 'LOJE.*X COOM~ AO 5 - Comptdl By Date fZ19

Detail Rcs iEE~Ie /,3 Cd yDate J4I

( ©. Ws~a~ t9/,(r' eI Z 5r I. .i.'We 100),

D O-67 1 e r4 04t --- s

0

R~ es. Ell. too '2- 10 10C i'0r74 ~ ~ 17/'

A H~ S 119 13 Or, 4 14 14,5' 1~7S

0

* z

9 6- L ~~ce( A~s~d 4,e a- lr

w L' ki~~~reQ~ CtA CA0.(- V1~-- -*J -J%(Lt 4 C'+ -ROW durf&

0

SLow.. Level 04/e C

U

6 IS7 7,S-7TW 16 rl-V~

HA ft95

1601 1f

A vt cQ' -- Z oo Cpj77 Lo.)e- Pg, "0'(q 6) = 1. 03 la vrc

D-6 FOSS RESERVOIR DAM

Project Ai eview o A/op5ea'.r" Acct.No. 7ZiZ87 Page of 1Subject M;7 l-ee U7~7~1 Comptd. By Date /.fe

Dealr.V AQ 3 Ckd By 4KO.Date 14- eL

0/ egn vs (?0es, jFte~ v.7~ Fod-r~ os hu

00

Ili

I: I

u~

0.s 9 0

D- OSRSEVI A

Project A-kv'vw ol(Aor r-edierda Daii"' Acct No. 72 -'-2 Page 7 of tFSubject M idd leSe, COw"']j A~r- Comptd. By Date

Detail FC)SS R~ESE(RV04 NOc,3 -Ck d By Date1 A.L

(~)QI~(~c evs 5 's~/ ~T Flood 6-a eeP

*~ I.

-0

0

z

z iz

0 10

-J .

U

I- :W4

to 00(

*D-8 FOSS RESERVOIR DAM

Projecti of t .- Fed' Pilt"A ACct.No. 7Z 5-2- Page of to

Subject tiddi, saw eo 4 7SJ Comptd By .Date

Detail F5a5 s R IV 3Ckd. By Date

( Cre~s Flowv

*Fe k 77e Fou e V.~

I P .Cre4 E(ev. /0. ,4-

00a , qet-le(, I7ee e

9

0

0) ) =

0

0

la

UI- /s cr4eJ, c O,

vc * rHfps

D-9 FOSS RESERVOIR DAM

.- . . . .. -

Project Mal~+ f, ooitW of A~o FJt D~aln Acct. No. -- . S Page EZoff,Subject Mdfse 'CO U A i .M4t Comptd.- By LDate //(;/8Detail Fos-c 7fcX)vp A1. 3- Ck'd. By Date

Failure 6'f VoAn

):Wet 64J&Xz,.A- 185-.- Zoe to

oT -red -f -t

0 Y

eciv 3re"..k 45O

0fo

0

__6 Q, Ra Po -l fd~'(oo)fA)z~~~~~~~L ____ ___0_________________

5 " ol ' OF-11 e IOV2 V0,1 WA Zo f '3 - r - 7 A) 1

L 4quitvo~ 4? 141?DtA ~r

Pie "?Opapk" fa hipiE as t 7oka -be.~ee

LitAJJ.,,i v wJif~vv~I. for. j r*e( creri

10490 54 I5T~O 31' 2Z84o 140S lie V,1 71.3 17i.3 177, 177,3 X7,3 /74-8

i~o vrodeftis aea-e..... s (1 *5 fe ove. ie grou/ndl lvel

a c.4- ct A 4 ts Ieec

. . .. -7

Project 1, LQ WS CCom No. 7 Z __ _,_ t to- -- j 145 cct No Pge of

Subject Afld/5 CCL4eA rou) r j Comptd. By Lt Date

Detail Ti _-_O k.B Date {-12 L

: @ g-os' € v A'e's. E/e'.

le188

0

4L• '0

a

z 140

z 14-

000'z

I.l

hiz

* IL Iv ro

-

D-I er, arep I! frrowect 4FOSS ca SE A4 +

9L f 23D. f&LC ver io- 4(01e res eV-,'o iv (EueP- I

D-11 FOSS RESERVOIR DAM

APPENDIX E

INFORMATION AS CONTAINED IN THENATIONAL INVENTORY OF DAMS

FOSS RESERVOIR DAM

NOT AVAILABLE AT THIS TIMEI

FILMED

7-85

DTIC.