Laserfiche WebLink
• Structural Inventory and Information Related to Monument Dam and Minnesota <br />Reservoir -Exhibit 74 <br />A) Monument Reservoir Capacity Table (circa 1987) from the SEO. <br />B) 'Appendix D (Partial) from Armstrong and Associates 1983 Report, <br />containing: <br />1) July 1979 Phase I Dam Inspection Analyses (USAGE Program) <br /> by Hydro-Triad, LTD. <br />2) Plate D-1: First page ~mm~ri~es November 1976 SEO H&H <br /> Analysis based on Monument Dam being classified as low <br />h <br />L <br />3) azarr <br />Plate D-1: Rema;n;no pages (partial) show updated H&H 1979 <br /> analysis by Hydro-Triad. Pertinent data sheet showing high <br /> hazard class assigned by Hydro-Triad <br />4) Page 1 of report indicating high hazard class. <br />5) Pages 5-7 discussing 1979 H&H Analysis. <br />~ Letter from James Norfleet sent to Grant Farnsworth, May <br /> 1990 transmitting a February 1984 Breach Analysis prepared <br />• by K. Bateman of the iISFS indicating a Hazard Rating of <br /> moderate for Monument Dam and a recommendation to reduce <br /> the high to moderate (last page) if supported by a field check of <br /> the floodplain conditions. <br />C) Monument Dam - A Case Study - hvstrumentation of Landslide <br />Enables Continued Operation of Reservoir Without Compromising <br />Safety, by Jim Norfleet, P.E., Dam Safety Engineer, Colorado <br />Division of Water Resources, Montrose, CO and Brace Marvin, P.B., <br />President Western Engineers, Inc., Grand Junction , CO. <br />D) Report on the Feasibility of Repairs to the Minnesota Dam, Armstrong <br />and Associates, Inc., by Keith Koler, P.E., and Raymond Hansen, P.E., <br />Executive Vice President, Armstrong and Associates, Inc. <br />s The information in B is fragmented, however, this is the information we have received <br />from the SEO and Minnesota Canal and Reservoir Company. <br /> <br />