Dam Maintenance Fact Sheet Maintenance Fact Sheet ... 82 dams are jurisdictional (creates a...

C O L O R A D O P A R K S & W I L D L I F E

Dam Maintenance Fact Sheet

5-YR PARKS AND WILDLIFE FUNDING PROPOSAL FOR DAMS

COLORADO PARKS & WILDLIFE • 6060 Broadway, Denver CO 80216 • (303) 297-1192 • cpw.state.co.us

Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) owns and operates over 110 dams (100 Wildlife, 10 Parks) , the largest inventory of dams for any owner in the State. An inventory of the dams shows that, as classified by the State of Colorado, the CPW dams are classified as follows:

82 dams are jurisdictional (creates a reservoir which impounds more than 100 acre-feet, or a surface area in excess of 20 acres, or dam exceeds 10 feet in height)

17 are high hazard (loss of human life is expected to result from failure of the dam) 17 are significant hazard (significant damage is expected to occur, but no loss of human life is expected)

48 low hazard (no human loss and no significant damage is expected from a dam failure)

In mid-2013, CPW developed a Screening Level Risk Analysis (SLRA) tool to provide an overview of our dams’ risk profile and to assist in prioritizing future actions to manage and reduce risks for the portfolio. The SLRA results clearly indicated that based on the consequences vs. the probability of occurrence that 11 dams were higher risk and very evenly matched. In order to determine the priority of fixing these dams, we developed an analysis “tool” that considered multiple factors including; Loss of Life, Economic/ Recreation and Environmental Impacts.

Based on the results of this analysis, 11 CPW dams are in need of critical repairs to reduce their risk to an acceptable level. Of these 11 dams, two (2) are “parks-owned” dams and nine (9) are “wildlife-owned” dams. The total capital necessary to improve these 11 dams, in 2015 dollars is $38,890,000.00. Accomplishing this important work will take years.

1. Alberta Park (w) 7. Sylvan Lake (p)

2. Willow Creek (p) 8. Spring Creek (w)

3. Chief Creek #4 (w) 9. Haviland Lake (w)

4. Rito Hondo (w) 10. Black Lake #2 (w)

5. Trujillo Meadows (w) 11. Two Buttes (w)

6. Big Meadows (w)

5 year Funding Proposal

Year Parks Capital Wildlife Capital Parks Maintenance Wildlife Maintenance 2016/17 $8,000,000.00 $2,000,000.00 $800,000.00 $600,000.00

2017/18 $2,500,000.00 $2,100,000.00 $800,000.00 $630,000.00 2018/19 $2,500,000.00 $2,200,000.00 $800,000.00 $660,000.00 2019/2020 $0.0 $2,300,000.00 $800,000.00 $690,000.00

2020/2021 $0.0 $2,400,000.00 $800,000.00 $720,000.00 Total $13,000,000.00 $11,000,000.00 $4,000,000.00 $3,300,000.00

The Dam Capital Request will be updated annually for a 5-yr period until we have accomplished our goal of reducing risk at the facilities to a level that meets industry standards. An ongoing maintenance budget will still be required to keep all 110 dams in reasonable condition and to fix minor problems before they require major repairs. For the last 4 years we have experience at least one dam repair emergency per year, which requires a quick response and available funds.

Proposed Capital Dam Funding Fact Sheet

COLORADO PARKS & WILDLIFE • 6060 Broadway, Denver CO 80216 • (303) 297-1192 • cpw.state.co.us

Alphabetical List of CPW’s Portfolio of Jurisdictional Dams

High Hazard

Dams

Significant Hazard

Dams

Low Hazard Dams 1 Alberta Park1 Banner Lake #1 North Michigan Creek

2 Beaver Park2 Banner Lake #10 Poose Creek

3 Big Beaver Banner Lake #11 R.R. Rutherford

4 Big Meadows Banner Lake #2 Road Canyon #2

5 Black Lake #2 Banner Lake #3 Sand Creek

6 Chief Creek #4 Banner Lake #4 Supply Basin

7 Dowdy Lake Banner Lake #5 Twin Lakes

8 Echo Canyon Banner Lake #8 Upper Dome

9 Flagler Beaver Lake Upper Elk Falls Ranch

10 Garfield Wildlife Pond Bellaire Upper Stillwater

11 Garnet Mesa Cabin Creek Watson Lake2

12 Haviland Lake Clark White Owl

13 Heart Lake Davis #1 Woods Lake

14 Horseshoe Lake Davis #2 Zimmerman Lake 2

15 La Jara Dam Davis #3

16 Lake Christine Deer Creek #1

17 Lake John Deer Creek #3

18 Lester Creek Deer Creek #4

19 Meadow Creek1 Duck Slough

20 Miramonte Freeman

21 Parvin Frenchman Creek

22 Rito Hondo Hahns Peak

23 Road Canyon #1 Heart Lake North Dike

24 Skaguay Home Lake

25 Spring Creek Johnnie Johnson

26 Sylvan Lake Jumbo

27 Tarryall Karval 2

28 Troutvale #1 (upper) L.G. Kinney

29 Troutvale #2 (lower) Lake Brennand

30 Trujillo Meadows Lake John Annex

31 Two Buttes2 Las Animas Fish Hat. 70B

32 Upper Highline Lost Lake

33 Williams Creek Mesa Creek #2

34 Willow Creek Muddy Creek

(1) Alberta Park and Meadow Creek Dams are being reclass i fied to High Hazard dams (2) Currently under a State Engineer’s Office Storage Restriction

STATE OF COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES COLORADO PARKS AND WILDLIFE 6060 BROADWAY | DENVER, CO 80216

Executive Summary Screening Level Risk Analysis Colorado Parks & Wildlife Project No. 114-311351 Date: February 2, 2015

350 Indiana Street, Suite 500, Golden, CO 80401 Phone: 303-217-5700 Fax: 303-217-5705

Screening Level Risk Analysis Colorado Parks & Wildlife

February 2015 1

1 .0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 . 1 P R O J E C T O V E R V I E W

Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) owns and operates over 110 dams, the largest inventory of dams for any owner in the State (Figure 1-1). An inventory of the dams shows that, as classified by the State of Colorado, the CPW dams are classified as follows (Table 1-1):

82 dams are jurisdictional (creates a reservoir which impounds more than 100 acre-feet, or a surface area in excess of 20 acres, or dam exceeds 10 feet in height)

17 are high hazard (loss of human life is expected to result from failure of the dam)

17 are significant hazard (significant damage is expected to occur, but no loss of human life is expected)

48 are low hazard (no human loss and no significant damage is expected from a dam failure)

The average age of this portfolio of dams is approximately 67 years, with construction of most of the dams taking place between 1950 and mid 1970’s. The majority of dams are earthen structures, generally with an impervious core and an up and downstream shell. Two older dams, Skaguay and Beaver Park, are rockfill dams. Tarryall Dam, a thin concrete arch dam, was constructed in the mid-1920’s. The dams are exposed to highly-variable climatic conditions, and many structures have limited seasonal access due to their elevation, and normal snow pack.

Figure 1-1 - Location of CPW’s High and Significant Hazard Dams


February 2015 2

Table 1-1 - CPW’s Portfolio of Jurisdictional Dams (Alphabetically Sorted)

High Hazard Dams Significant Hazard Dams Low Hazard Dams

1 Alberta Park1 Banner Lake #1 Muddy Creek

2 Beaver Park2 Banner Lake #10 North Michigan Creek

3 Big Beaver Banner Lake #11 Poose Creek

4 Big Meadows Banner Lake #2 R.R. Rutherford

5 Black Lake #2 Banner Lake #3 Road Canyon #2

6 Chief Creek #4 Banner Lake #4 Sand Creek

7 Dowdy Lake Banner Lake #5 Supply Basin

8 Echo Canyon Banner Lake #8 Twin Lakes

9 Flagler Beaver Lake Upper Dome

10 Garfield Wildlife Pond Bellaire Upper Elk Falls Ranch

11 Garnet Mesa Cabin Creek Upper Stillwater

12 Haviland Lake Clark Watson Lake2

13 Heart Lake Davis #1 White Owl

14 Horseshoe Lake Davis #2 Woods Lake

15 La Jara Dam Davis #3 Zimmerman Lake 2

16 Lake Christine Deer Creek #1

17 Lake John Deer Creek #3

18 Lester Creek Deer Creek #4

19 Meadow Creek1 Duck Slough

20 Miramonte Freeman

21 Parvin Frenchman Creek

22 Rito Hondo Hahns Peak

23 Road Canyon #1 Heart Lake North Dike

24 Skaguay Home Lake

25 Spring Creek Johnnie Johnson

26 Sylvan Lake Jumbo

27 Tarryall Karval 2

28 Troutvale #1 (upper) L.G. Kinney

29 Troutvale #2 (lower) Lake Brennand

30 Trujillo Meadows Lake John Annex

31 Two Buttes2 Las Animas Fish Hat. 70B

32 Upper Highline Lost Lake

33 Williams Creek Mesa Creek #2

34 Willow Creek

(1) Alberta Park and Meadow Creek Dams are being reclassified to High Hazard dams (2) Currently under a State Engineer’s Office Storage Restriction

With this number and varied condition of dams, coupled with limited funds for capital and maintenance of the aging portfolio, CPW required methodology to:

1. Identify dams which may pose the largest risk 2. Develop a capital improvement plan for funding improvements, and 3. Prioritize actions with the acknowledgement that capital and personnel resources are

limited.


February 2015 3

In order to meet these goals and objectives, the CPW embarked upon a Screening Level Risk Analysis (SLRA) for the high and significant hazard dams.

1 . 2 S C R E E N I N G L E V E L R I S K A N A L Y S I S

CPW determined that a semi-quantitative method was the most appropriate way to efficiently evaluate risks associated with 34 high and significant hazard dams that it owns and operates. The CPW Dam Operations Engineer engaged with the agency responsible for regulating these dams, the Division of Water Resources State Engineer’s Office (SEO), to capitalize on the knowledge base within these two Department of Natural Resources agencies. In mid-2013, CPW retained Tetra Tech to design and facilitate the process, and codify the results for the Screening Level Risk Analysis (SLRA).

The SLRA generally follows the Best Practices in Dam and Levee Safety Risk Analysis prepared by Reclamation and the U. S. Army Corp of Engineers (USACE). Dams were screened in a workshop setting, attended by SEO Dam Safety Engineers, CPW and Tetra Tech personnel. To facilitate rapid assessment of the risk of each dam, Tetra Tech developed an SLRA tool that enabled capture of information about the dam as well as to facilitate discussion of potential failure modes (PFM). The output of each workshop included a semi-quantitative risk assessment and ranking for each dam.

1 . 3 P O T E N T I A L F A I L U R E M O D E S & L O S S O F L I F E

Dams were generally classified based upon the likelihood of failure (qualitatively ranked from low to very high likelihood - Figure 1-2) and the potential for loss of life (Figure 1-3 —Level 1 indicates that the loss of life is unlikely; Level 4 indicates that loss of life could be greater than 100 persons).


February 2015 4

Figure 1-2 - Failure likelihood categories and descriptors for semi-quantitative dam safety studies.


February 2015 5

Figure 1-3 - Loss of life consequences descriptors mirror for a semi-quantitative assessment.

Once the individual failure likelihood/consequence value was determined for each PFM, all PFMs were factored and summed to represent the overall potential for risk by dam. Table 1-2 provides this data.

Table 1-2 - PFM Scoring for Loss of Life (N) x Failure Likelihood (f)

Dam Name Sum of PFMs from f-N Chart Dam Name Sum of PFMs Considering f-N Chart

Alberta Park 142 Flagler 17

Rito Hondo 52 Lester Creek 17

Willow Creek 45 Heart Lake 14

Sylvan Lake 43 Dowdy Lake 13

Big Meadows 42 Tarryall 13

Haviland Lake 41 Lake John 12

Trujillo Meadows 41 Horseshoe Lake 11

Chief Creek #4 40 Miramonte 11

Spring Creek 39 Parvin 11

Black Lake #2 31 Williams Creek 11

Two Buttes 31 Lake Christine 10

Troutvale #2 24 Troutvale #1 10

Road Canyon 23 La Jara #1 8

Garnet Mesa 21 Beaver Park 3

Meadow Creek 21 Skaguay 3

Upper Highline 20 Echo Canyon 2


February 2015 6

1 . 4 R E C R E A T I O N / E C O N O M I C & E N V I R O N M E N T A L R I S K F A C T O R S

Due to limited resources, CPW required additional factors to assist in prioritizing capital and maintenance projects. In keeping with the CPW Dam Safety Mission to “Prevent loss of life and property damage, manage reservoirs to enhance the wildlife resources of the state and provide enjoyable and sustainable outdoor recreational opportunities” CPW decided to include the evaluation of environmental and economic/recreational factors that would be affected downstream of each dam should it fail. Table 1-3 explains the qualitative, semi-quantitative and quantative units that were used for input into the decision model.

Table 1-3 - Qualitative and Quantative Environmental & Economic Attributes

Attributes Placed in Model for Assessment Associated Units (Quantitative, Qualitative or Semi-Qualitative)

ENVIRONMENTAL

BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY

Aquatic: Downstream River Fishery 1 to 5 ranking (5 is important) Terrestrial 1 to 5 ranking (5 is important)

CULTURAL RESOURCES 1 to 5 ranking (5 is important)

RECREATION/ECONOMIC

COSTS

Essential Facilities (from FEMA’s HAZUS) # of Facilities with Loss of Use Damage to Structures (from HAZUS) $ / 10,000 Dam Reconstruction Costs $ / 10,000 Road Level of Service

Federal Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) State AADT

County AADT Diversity Fish Replacement Cost $/1,000

REVENUE

Fishing Recreation Day Annual Economic Value $/1,000 Water Rights 0 to 5 ranking (5 is important) Park Revenue Annual Park Revenue in $ / 1000

POTENTIAL FAILURE/LOSS OF LIFE

Number of people who might potentially suffer loss of life (Consequence) X Likelihood

0 to 150 Summed for Each Dam’s PFM

1 . 5 L I F E L O S S , R E C R E A T I O N / E C O N O M I C I M P A C T A N D E N V I R O N M E N T A L

R I S K S C R E E N I N G

Using these quantitative and qualitative data, each criteria category was given a weight by CPW staff based on its importance. Rankings add to 100%, and in the outcomes presented below loss of life was given a weight of 80, Environment was given a weight of 15, and Recreation/Economic Impact was given a weight of 5, summing to a total of 100. Because of the importance of loss of life, it was given a commensurate high weighting. When the model was run with this weighting, the dams are prioritized around the estimated loss of life due to failure (Figure 1-4).


February 2015 7

Figure 1-4 - Prioritization of Dam capital improvements based on loss of life weighting at 80%; environment weighted at 15% and recreation/economic impact weighted at 5% in overall importance

1 . 6 R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S A N D C O N C L U S I O N S

Findings from the potential failure mode analyses include that the average condition of the high hazard dams is fair, with a number of dams having inadequately-sized spillways and, as such, are unable pass the 100-year or greater flood. Generally the significant hazard dams are in similar condition, while the low and non-jurisdictional dams tend to be in relatively worse condition. Additional effort from the CPW’s outlet investigation program conducted in 2014 determined that a number of the outlet works were in need of immediate repair. In addition, maintenance work is needed on some of the structures’ embankments, outlet works, spillways, and other appurtenances. There are some rehabilitation, refurbishment and replacement items that require immediate attention in order to manage the potential for loss of life or significant damage to downstream facilities and the environment.

Table 1-4 provides an overview of the condition and risk analysis information of the highest priority dams, as well as a rough order magnitude (ROM) cost for repairing, replacing or refurbishing dam structures and appurtenances.


February 2015 8

Table 1-4 - ROM Estimate to Replace, Repair and Refurbish the Highest Priority Structures

Dam Potential Failure Mode Analysis (PFMA)

Required Capital Improvements (Rough Order of Magnitude -ROM)

Estimated Maintenance Work

Estimated Repair Costs (ROM) Estimated Capital Costs

Alberta Park*

Significant Hazard

Overtopping of Embankment by Flood - (Undersized Spillway) Concentrated leakage out of conduit

Enlarge spillway Rehabilitate Outlet Pipe

Perform survey for dam and set monumentation Rehabilitate gate to reduce leakage at gate

Spillway Work - $2.75M Rehabilitate outlet conduit -$400K Rehabilitate outlet gate - $400k Set survey monumentation -$20k $3,570,000

Willow Creek

High Hazard

(Parks Dam)

Concentrated leakage into/ out of conduit Tower

Tower is structurally deficient - working with a consultant to identify solution

Tower work is currently being evaluated - repair costs presented are approximate $8,000,000

Rito Hondo

Significant Hazard

Overtopping of Embankment by Flood - (Undersized Spillway) Concentrated leakage out of conduit Left Abutment Seepage issues (filter and collections system required)

Enlarge spillway Rehabilitate Outlet Pipe Design filter and drainage system for left abutment

Perform survey for dam and set monumentation Rehabilitate gate to reduce leakage at gate

Spillway Work - $2.75M Rehabilitate outlet conduit -$400K Rehabilitate outlet gate -$400K Set survey monumentation -$20K Resolve left abutment seepage -$200K $3,770,000

Trujillo Meadows

Significant Hazard

Overtopping of embankment by flood (undersized spillway) Concentrated leakage into conduit

Enlarge spillway Rehabilitate outlet pipe Add seepage collection for left abutment

Perform survey for dam and set monumentation Rehabilitate gate to reduce leakage at gate Correct spillway channel to remove water from outlet pipe

Spillway Work - $2.75M Rehabilitate outlet conduit -$500K Rehabilitate outlet gate - $400K Set survey monumentation -$20K Spillway channel- $30K $3,870,000

Big Meadows

High Hazard

Overtopping of embankment by flood Saddle dam is 3-ft lower than the main dam

Enlarge spillway Evaluate saddle dam with inflow design flood Determine if capacity must be increased

Perform survey for dam and set monumentation

Spillway Work - $2.75M Improve Saddle Dam - $300K Raise 4-ft and set survey monumentation - $20k $3,070,000

Spring Creek

High Hazard Concentrated leakage into conduit Rehabilitate Conduit


Rehabilitate outlet pipe and gate - $500K Set survey monumentation - $20K $520,000

Sylvan Lake

High Hazard

(Parks Dam)

Overtopping of Embankment by flood - (undersized spillway) Concentrated leakage into conduit

Enlarge spillway (Alternative report currently in progress) Rehabilitate conduit

Perform survey for dam and set monumentation (with the current design)

Spillway Work - $3.0M Rehabilitate outlet conduit - $400K Rehabilitate Gate - $400K Set survey monumentation -$20K $4,000,000


February 2015 9

Dam Potential Failure Mode Analysis (PFMA)

Required Capital Improvements (Rough Order of Magnitude -ROM)

Estimated Maintenance Work

Estimated Repair Costs (ROM) Estimated Capital Costs

Black Lake #2

Significant Hazard Overtopping of embankment by flood

Enlarge spillway Complete hydrology study


Spillway Work - $1.5M Set survey monumentation -$20K $1,700,000

Haviland Lake

High Hazard

Overtopping of embankment by Flood Concentrated leakage into conduit

Rehabilitate Conduit Perform hydrological analysis


Rehabilitate outlet conduit - $400K Set survey monumentation - $20K Upgrade spillway - $1.0M $1,420,000

Chief Creek #4

Significant Hazard

Overtopping of embankment by Flood Concentrated leakage into conduit

Enlarge spillway Rehabilitate outlet works

Perform survey for dam and set monumentation Improve concrete slope paving on upstream side of dam embankment Rehabilitate gate to reduce leakage

Spillway Work -$2.0M Rehabilitate outlet gate -$200K Repair upstream slope paving - $30K Set survey monumentation -$20k $2,450,000

Two Buttes **

High Hazard

Overtopping of embankment by flood Dam currently restricted based on Spillway Maintenance work also include rehabilitation of outlet gates

Work with the State Dam Safety engineer to reduce the risk for the dam

Post Request For Qualifications for gate rehabilitation Determine if work to be performed in the wet or when reservoir is dry again Repair downstream channel from effects of 2013 flood

Repair Gates - $500K Spillway work - $6.0M Set survey monumentation - $20K $6,520,000

Subtotal Parks Dams $12,000,000

Subtotal Wildlife Dams $26,890,000

Subtotal Parks and Wildlife Dams (Table 1-4) $38,890,000

* Dam currently being re-classified to high hazard by SEO Repair & Maintenance - other High and Significant Hazard (Table 1-5) $3,403,500

** Currently under a State Engineers Office Storage Restriction Repair & Maintenance - Low and NJ Dams

(Table 1-6) $2,383,500

G R A N D T O T A L ESTIMATED REHABILITATION, REFURBISHMENT, REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE FOR ALL CPW DAMS $44,677,000


February 2015 10

Table 1-5 provides a rough order of magnitude estimate of refurbishment, rehabilitation and repair costs for the remaining high and significant hazard dams, as well as a rough order magnitude cost for annual maintenance of dam structures and appurtenances.

Table 1-5 - ROM Estimate to Replace, Repair and Refurbish Remaining High and Significant Hazard Structures

Dam Estimated Maintenance Work Estimated Cost

for Maintenance Work

Comments

Tarryall High Hazard

Clean Spillway $10,000 Complete Structural Analysis $275,000 Repair spalling concrete at joints $75,000 Repair upstream to resolve waterstop leakage $750,000 Perform Hydrology Study to determine overtopping of dam $40,000 Create inundation mapping for downstream $10,000

Dowdy Significant Hazard

Repair Vent Pipe (may cause dam to drain) $2,500 Repair damage from rodent burrow activity on south dam $10,000 Perform survey for dam and set monumentation $20,000 Rehabilitation of outlet pipe (specifically structural hole located at upper end) $300,000 Update Hydrology Study $40,000

Parvin Significant Hazard

Repair and/or remove old valve stem in outlet conduit $2,500 Complete video investigation following the above $6,500 Perform survey for dam and set monumentation $20,000

Big Beaver High Hazard

Grade Dam Crest and add roadbase $15,000 Perform survey for dam and set monumentation $20,000 Grade left abutment for drainage $7,500 Rehabilitate gates to reduce localized leakage $50,000

Meadow Creek* Significant Hazard

Perform outlet video inspection $6,500 Already Funded Construct headwall at outlet pipe $15,000 Update dam Hydrology Study and evaluate spillway $40,000 Perform survey for dam and set monumentation $20,000

Upper Highline High Hazard/Parks Continue monitoring program $100,000

Heart Lake High Hazard

Complete outlet video inspection $6,500 Grade Crest of dam and add roadbase $18,500 Replace seepage weir $20,000 Implement piezometer monitoring program $85,000 Already Funded Identify consultant to investigate seepage and install piezometers along seepage path $75,000 Perform survey for dam and set monumentation $20,000

Lake Christine Significant Hazard

Clear brush and trees from right side of spillway $2,000 DOC Crew Repair grouted riprap along spillway channel $15,500 Perform survey for dam and set monumentation $20,000

Garfield Wildlife Pond *** Significant Hazard

Clear brush and trees from dam $3,500 DOC Crew

Alternative for Dam Embankment $25,000

Lake John Significant Hazard

Perform Video Outlet Inspection $6,500 Already funded Maintain repaired condition for upstream and downstream slopes (specifically regarding animal activity) $15,000 Perform survey for dam and set monumentation $20,000

Lester Creek (Pearl Lake) High Hazard/Parks

Perform survey for dam and set monumentation Check spillway elevation in relation to dam crest $20,000

Horseshoe Dam (Lathrop State Park) High Hazard/Parks

Seal leakage in horizontal opening in principal spillway riser $15,000

Continue with rodent abetment $5,000


February 2015 11

Dam Estimated Maintenance Work Estimated Cost

for Maintenance Work

Comments

Skaguay Significant Hazard

Structural analysis for existing retaining wall $75,000 Resolve willow growth in spillway channel $4,000 DOC Crew Perform survey for dam and set monumentation $20,000 Direct divers to assess condition of upstream steel plate $15,000

Williams Creek High Hazard

Perform survey for dam and set monumentation $20,000 Grade Spillway Crest and add roadbase material $15,000 Minor clearing of vegetation (upstream and downstream) $3,000 DOC Crew

Perform lower gate seepage investigation $7,000 Diver Only - Check Gate

Update Hydrology Report and assess spillway capacity $40,000 Rehabilitate gates to reduce gate leakage $250,000

Echo Canyon Significant Hazard

Grade Crest and add roadbase material $12,500 Clear vegetation in spillway and dam groins $3,000 DOC Crews Perform survey for dam and set monumentation $20,000

Beaver Park ** Currently under repair

Currently under repair

Upper Troutvale #1 Significant Hazard

Clear brush on right toe of dam $3,000 DOC Crew Repair joints in spillway $12,500

Perform outlet video inspection $6,500

Previous inspection yielded sub-optimal results

Perform survey for dam and set monumentation $20,000

Lower Troutvale #2 Significant Hazard

Rehabilitate outlet conduit and wet well $250,000 Perform survey for dam and set monumentation $20,000

La Jara Significant Hazard

Keep animal borrows off of dam $5,000 Perform survey for dam/ set Monumentation $20,000 Clear vegetation from downstream dam face $3,000 DOC crew

Garnet Mesa (Sweitzer Lake) High Hazard/Parks

Tree and weed control Update hydraulic motor for gate Perform survey for dam and set monumentation

$5,000 $5,000

$20,000

DOC crew

Miramonte High Hazard

Clean spillway (rock falls) Seal cracks in spillway Perform survey for dam and set monumentation Update Hydrology Report (undersized spillway)

$12,000 $5,000

$20,000 $40,000

TOTAL REHAB/REPAIR FOR 4 REMAINING PARKS DAMS $ 170,000

TOTAL REHAB/REPAIR FOR REMAINING 17 WILDLIFE DAMS $2,969,500

TOTAL REHAB/REPAIR & REFURBISHMENT FOR REMAINING 21 HIGH & SIGNIFICANT HAZARD DAMS (ENSURES DAMS ARE FUNCTIONING AS INTENDED)

$3,139,500

Complete inundation mapping for all dams (Assume $8K per dam)

$264,000

GRAND TOTAL $3,403,500

* Dam currently being re-classified to high hazard by SEO

** Currently under a State Engineers Office Storage Restriction *** Currently a Significant Hazard Dam - should be rated as Low Hazard

Table 1-6 provides a rough order of magnitude estimate of refurbishment, rehabilitation and repair costs for the low hazard and non-jurisdictional dams, as well as a rough order magnitude cost for annual maintenance of dam structures and appurtenances.


February 2015 12

Table 1-6 - ROM Estimate to Replace, Repair and Refurbish and Maintain Low Hazard and Non-Jurisdictional Dams

Dam Name Description of Work

Rehabilitation, Replacement,

Refurbishment, Maintenance

Cost

LOW HAZARD DAMS Rehabilitation, Replacement, and Refurbishment Items

ZIMMERMAN LAKE** Needs to be re-built $1,500,000

WATSON LAKE** Flood Damage and Inlet needs to be re-built $208,000

NORTH MICHIGAN CREEK (Parks Dam)

Needs some concrete work in the spillway - and other maintenance work - Dam is in State Forrest State Park

$75,000

KARVAL** Buttress was not constructed correctly - needs to be removed and re-built

$500,000

Sub-Total Rehabilitation, Replacement and Refurbishment Items (Low Hazard) $2,283,000

** Currently under a State Engineers Office Storage Restriction

Annual Maintenance Items – Low Hazard Dams Annual Maintenance Cost

DAVIS #3 (Parks Dam) Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000



UPPER ELK FALLS RANCH (Parks Dam)

Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000

BANNER LAKE #1 Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000








FRENCHMAN CREEK Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000

SAND CREEK Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000

LOST LAKE Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000

BELLAIRE Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000

TWIN LAKES Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000

JOHNNIE JOHNSON Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000

POOSE CREEK Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000

FREEMAN Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000

MESA CREEK #2 Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000

BEAVER LAKE Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000

WHITE OWL Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000

SUPPLY BASIN Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000

HEART LAKE NORTH DIKE Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000

MUDDY CREEK Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000

UPPER STILLWATER Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000


February 2015 13




Cost

LAKE JOHN ANNEX Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000

HAHNS PEAK Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000

R.R. RUTHERFORD Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000

CABIN CREEK Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000

L.G. KINNEY Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000

DUCK SLOUGH Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000

DEER CREEK #3 Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000



UPPER DOME Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000

LAKE BRENNAND Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000

HOME LAKE Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000

ROAD CANYON #2 Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000

WOODS LAKE Estimated Annual Maintenance Low Hazard Dam $ 1,000

Sub-Total Estimated Annual Maintenance (Low Hazard Dams) $41,000

NON - JURISDICTIONAL DAMS

Rehabilitation, Replacement, and Refurbishment Items

BANNER LAKE #7 $50,000

Sub-Total Rehabilitation, Replacement and Refurbishment Items (Non-Jurisdictional) $50,000

Annual Maintenance Items – Non Jurisdictional Dams

BANNER LAKE #12A Est. Annual Maintenance Non-Jurisdictional Dam $ 500

BANNER LAKE #6 Est. Annual Maintenance Non-Jurisdictional Dam $ 500

BANNER LAKE #9 Est. Annual Maintenance Non-Jurisdictional Dam $ 500

TAMARAC WILDLIFE AREA POND B

Est. Annual Maintenance Non-Jurisdictional Dam $ 500

JUMBO Est. Annual Maintenance Non-Jurisdictional Dam $ 500

MACK MESA Est. Annual Maintenance Non-Jurisdictional Dam $ 500

BISON LAKE Est. Annual Maintenance Non-Jurisdictional Dam $ 500

KONANTZ Est. Annual Maintenance Non-Jurisdictional Dam $ 500

LAS ANIMAS FISH HAT. 70A

Est. Annual Maintenance Non-Jurisdictional Dam $ 500

FRANZ #2 Est. Annual Maintenance Non-Jurisdictional Dam $ 500

FRANZ #1 Est. Annual Maintenance Non-Jurisdictional Dam $ 500

CLINGINGSMITH #2 Est. Annual Maintenance Non-Jurisdictional Dam $ 500

HOMESTAKE CREEK Est. Annual Maintenance Non-Jurisdictional Dam $ 500

SMITH Est. Annual Maintenance Non-Jurisdictional Dam $ 500

ROCK CREEK Est. Annual Maintenance Non-Jurisdictional Dam $ 500

MUDDY CREEK Est. Annual Maintenance Non-Jurisdictional Dam $ 500

CLAY CREEK Est. Annual Maintenance Non-Jurisdictional Dam $ 500

FOUNTAIN CREEK #2 Est. Annual Maintenance Non-Jurisdictional Dam $ 500

FOUNTAIN CREEK #3 Est. Annual Maintenance Non-Jurisdictional Dam $ 500

Sub-Total Estimated Annual Maintenance (Non-Jurisdictional Dams) $ 9,500


February 2015 14




Cost

Total Rehab i l i tat ion, Refurb ishment and Repair I tems (Parks Dams) $ 75,000

Total Rehab i l i tat ion, Refurb ishment and Repair I tems (Wild l i fe Dams) $2,258,000

TOTAL REHABILITATION, REFURBISHMENT AND REPAIR ITEMS $ 2,333,000

Total Annual Maintenance (Parks Dams) $ 4,000

Total Annual Maintenance (Wi ld l i fe Dams) $ 46,500

TOTAL ANNUAL MAINTENANCE $ 50,500

GRAND TOTAL FOR LOW HAZARD AND NON-JURISDICTIONAL DAMS $ 2,383,000

Dam Maintenance Fact Sheet Maintenance Fact Sheet ... 82 dams are jurisdictional (creates a...

Documents

Transcript of Dam Maintenance Fact Sheet Maintenance Fact Sheet ... 82 dams are jurisdictional (creates a...