National Dam Inspection Program. Comet Lake Dam (NDI I.D. Number PA-00796, PennDER I.D. Number 28-103), Potomac River Basin, Spring Run, Franklin County, Pennsylvania. Phase I Inspection Report,
Bernard M Mihalcin
Abstract
Bernard M Mihalcin
Abstract
Based on a visual inspection, operational history, and hydrologic/hydraulic analysis, the dam is considered to be in fair condition. The size classification of the facility is small and its hazard classification is considered to be high. In accordance with the recommended guidelines, the Spillway Design Flood (SDF) for the facility ranges between the 1/2-PMF (Probable Maximum Flood) and the PMF. Due to the high potential for damage to downstream structures and possible loss of life that could be associated with a sudden breach of the embankment, the SDF is considered to be the PMF. Results of the hydrologic and hydraulic analysis indicate the facility will pass and/or store only about 44 percent of the PMF prior to embankment overtopping. A breach analysis indicates that failure under less than 1/2-PMF conditions would likely not lead to increased downstream damage or loss of life. Thus, based on the screening criteria contained in the recommended guidelines, the spillway is considered to be inadequate, but not seriously inadequate. If the embankment crest was regraded to its original design elevation, the facility would pass and/or store approximately 73 percent of the PMF prior to embankment overtopping, but would still be considered inadequate.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Based on a visual inspection, operational history, and hydrologic/hydraulic analysis, the dam is considered to be in fair condition. The size classification of the facility is small and its hazard classification is considered to be high. In accordance with the recommended guidelines, the Spillway Design Flood (SDF) for the facility ranges between the 1/2-PMF (Probable Maximum Flood) and the PMF. Due to the high potential for damage to downstream structures and possible loss of life that could be associated with a sudden breach of the embankment, the SDF is considered to be the PMF. Results of the hydrologic and hydraulic analysis indicate the facility will pass and/or store only about 44 percent of the PMF prior to embankment overtopping. A breach analysis indicates that failure under less than 1/2-PMF conditions would likely not lead to increased downstream damage or loss of life. Thus, based on the screening criteria contained in the recommended guidelines, the spillway is considered to be inadequate, but not seriously inadequate. If the embankment crest was regraded to its original design elevation, the facility would pass and/or store approximately 73 percent of the PMF prior to embankment overtopping, but would still be considered inadequate.
Key concepts: Spillway, Levee, Flood myth, Dam failure, Hydrology (agriculture), Environmental science, Flooding (psychology), Embankment dam