My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP06630
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
6001-7000
>
WSP06630
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:23:39 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 1:46:12 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8443.400
Description
Narrows Unit - Reports
State
CO
Basin
South Platte
Water Division
1
Date
2/1/1978
Author
US DoI BoR
Title
Supporting Data for Special Report Investigation of Review Issues Narrows Unit Colorado part 1 of 3
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
123
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />'-';/'- ,-- <br />..of <br /> <br />l", ,..,.,.... <br />t 4 i <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />G. F. Sowers: "Based on the data available and on the feasibility <br />analysis and the preliminary designs that have been prepared, it <br />is my professional opinion that a safe dam can be designed and <br />constructed on this site." <br /> <br />T. M. Leps: "* * * we fores"e no reason why a safe dam could <br />not be constructed at the Narrows site." <br /> <br />, H. A. Coombs: "Information available at present is sufficient <br />to establish a preliminary design for the Narrows Dam" although <br />Mr. Coombs' statement does not use the word 'safe' there is <br />little doubt that it was implied since his introduction states <br />'The review is to determine if a safe foundation exists and if <br />a safe earthfill structure can be constIUcted upon it. '" <br /> <br />2. Is the embankment design proposed by the USSR satisfactory for <br />the feasibility design stage? <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Both Leps and Sowers agree with the general cross section proposed <br />by the USBR and support the idea of a chimney drain and a horizontal <br />drainage blanket. Mr. Coombs, as a geologist, is not versed in <br />embankment dam design and did not address the embankment design <br />question. Mr. Leps and Mr. Sowers suggest that the USSR consider <br />a number of points when collecting information for the final <br />designs. None of the consultants' reports criticizes the type <br />of dam or recommends a different type or cross sectional con- <br />figuration of the embankment. <br /> <br />( <br /> <br />\_~ <br /> <br />3. <br /> <br />Were the data supplied to the consultants sufficient? <br /> <br />None of the consultants' reports noted any deficiency in the <br />data supplied. <br /> <br />4. Was there any criticism' of the proposed foundation treatment <br />far the dam? <br /> <br />No consultant criticized the proposed foundation treatment but <br />several suggestions were made for improving the details of <br />treatment. <br /> <br />5. The consultants agreed that the following items should be <br />addressed or confirmed during final designs: <br /> <br />1;2.0. <br /> <br />a. The surface of the Pierre formation should be thoroughly <br />explored along the dam's axis. A continuous seismic profile <br />would be helpful. <br /> <br />,--,' <br /> <br />b. The permeabilities of all strata of alluvium on the south <br />abutment should be determined by testing. <br />, <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.