7A6 37 BLACK AND VEATCH KANSAS CITY NO F/ 13/L3NATIONAL DAM SAFETY PROGRAM. KERNODLE LAKE DAM NUMBER I (MO 201-ETC(U)SEP 79 P R ZAMAN, E R BURTON, H L CALLAHAN DACW4379-C-0040

NCLASSIFIED mmml-IIIIII..Illll..llll....IEHIlllllllIEIIEEEEEEEEEEE

LEVEL rIMISSOURI-KANSAS CITY BASIN

0, 1 6 4 ,c-

KERNODLE LAKE DAM NO. 1

JACKSON COUNTYMISSOURI

MO 20140

PHASE 1 INSPECTION REPORTNATIONAL DAM SAFETY INSPECTION

• i

f, Unit ed Sates Army[w , , Corps of Engineers

&LJ ...Sem)in the Army..Senvinq 11w Nadoe,St. Louis District DTIC

NOV 2 1981

PREPARED BY: U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, ST. LOUIS D

FOR: STATE OF MISSOURI

SEPTEMBER 1979

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT AApproved for public .1,.;, 81 10 26 O61

Distribution Unlimited

6A

UIMT AQ_ IF!_SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (When Daa Entered)

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE READ CMSTRUCINOMS,. REPORT NUMBER 1 2. GOVT ACCS IONNO . q,ENT'S CATALOG NUMBER

4. TITLE (and Subtitle) . , PE OF REPORT & PERIOD COVERED

Phase I Dam Inspection Report 1 ! /

National Dam Safety Program Final Reprt-Kernodle Lake Dam #1 (MO 20140) 6. PERFORMING GISW ORT NUMBER

Jackson County i Missouri -.7. AUTHOR(a) S. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER(s)

Black & Veatch, Consulting Engineers

_ DACW-7gC-poo'9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS $0. PROGRAM ELEMENT, PROJECT, TASK

U.S. Amy Engineer District, St. Louis

Dam Inventory and Inspection Section, LMSED-PD210 Tucker Blvd., North, St. Louis, Mo. 63101

11. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 12. REPORT DATE

U.S. Army Engineer District, St. Louis Sepembe2 1979 IDam Inventory and Inspection Section, LMSED-PD 'or NUMB O G- -210 TuckerBlvd..North._St_1oui__Mo. F, 1n1 ________________, ___

14. MONITORING AGENCY NAME & ADDRESS(I/dllfret rom G n ffi~e) IS. SE RITY CLASS. ('f thle report)

'6N~ ~~ 15. S EKgY!*S

'• I -, IS.. DECLASSIFICATION DOWNGRADING

SCHEDULE .

16. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of this Report) f . ,

Approved for release; distribution unlimite ,di

17. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of the abstract entered In B1-i205,'?f different from Report)

National Dam Safety Program. KernodleLake Dam Number 1 (MO 20140),

1S. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES Missouri - Kansas City Basin, JacksonCounty, Missouri. Phase I InspectionReport.

19. KEY WORDS (Continue on reverse side It necessary end Identify by block number)

Dam Safety, Lake, Dam Inspection, Private Dams

W TRACT (C.0- anm revere efi N neveemy ami identify by block number)

This report was prepared under the National Program of Inspection ofNon-Federal Dams. This report assesses the general condition of the dam withrespect to safety, based on available data and on visual inspection, todetermine if the dam poses hazards to human life or property.

DD , 1473 EDITIN OF I MOV 6S1 OBSOLETEM( 7

CATIONSECUITY CASSI1 Daa tw

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAOSK(Rhi Dom a el*Q

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF TIS PAGE(When Date gnt.,.4o

F7

MISSOURI-KANSAS CITY BASIN

KERNODLE LAKE DAM NO. 1

JACKSON COUNTY,MISSOURI

MO 20140

PHASE 1 INSPECTION REPORTNATIONAL DAM SAFETY INSPECTION

United States Armyj: 4| Carps of Engineers

I)A ' s,1o.) evng the Army,

Is-- ., itnq the Nation

St. Louis District

PREPARED BY: U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT ST. LOUIS

FOR: STATE OF MISSOURI

SEPTEMBER 1979

4....... '

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMYST. LOUIS DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS

210 NORTH 12TH STREETST. LOUIS. MISSOURI 63101

*'"tN,CN OS

SUBJECT: Kernodle Lake Dam No. 1 Phase I Inspection Report

This report presents the results of field inspection and evaluation ofthe Kernodle Lake Dam No. 1 (MO 201140).

It as prepared under the National Program of Inspection of Non-FederalDams.

This dam has been classified as unsafe, emergency by the St. LouisDistrict as a result of the application of the following criteria:

1) Spillway will not pass a 10-year frequency flood withoutovertopping of the dam. The spillway is, therefore,considered to be unusually small and seriously inadequate.

2) Overtopping could result in dam failure.

3) Dam failure significantly increases the hazard to life andproperty downstream.

Submitted By: SIGNED 2 81 B 1980Chief, Engineering Division Date

Approved By: SIGNLu 2 8 FEB 1980Colonel, CE, District Engineer Date

Accession For

NTIS GiA&-

DTIC TABUnannounced []

_ustficato , D T ICBi,. ELECT E

Lstribution/ ~NOV 2~ 1IAvailability Codes

, Avail ndn,2

DistD

KERNODLE LAKE DAN NO. i

JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI

MISSOURI INVENTORY NO. 20140

PHASE I INSPECTION REPORT

NATIONAL DAM SAFETY PROGRAM

PREPARED BY:

BLACK & VEATCHCONSULTING ENGINEERS

KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI

UNDER DIRECTION OF

ST. LOUIS DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS

FOR

GOVERNOR OF MISSOURI

SEPTEMBER 1979

om__.

PHASE I REPORT

NATIONAL DAM SAFETY PROGRAM

Name of Dam Kernodle Lake Dam No. 1State Located. MissouriCounty Located Jackson CountyStream Tributary to Blue RiverDate of Inspection 6 September 1979

Kernodle Lake Dam No. 1 was inspected by a team of engineers fromBlack & Veatch, Consulting Engineers for the St. Louis District, Corpsof Engineers. The purpose of the inspection was to make an assessmentof the general condition of the dam with respect to safety, based uponavailable data and visual inspection, in order to determine if the damposes hazards to human life or property.

The guidelines used in the assessment were furnished by the Depart-ment of the Army, Office of the Chief of Engineers, and developed withthe help of several Federal and state agencies, professional engineeringorganizations, and private engineers. Based on these guidelines, thisdam is classified as a small size dam with a high downstream hazardpotential. According to the St. Louis District, Corps of Engineers,failure would potentially cause damage to two buildings, two improvedroads, a lake and a park area within the estimated damage zone, whichextends approximately two miles downstream of the dam.

Our inspection and evaluation indicates the spillways do not meetthe criteria set forth in the guidelines for a dam having the above sizeand hazard potential. The spillways will pass neither 50 nor 100 percentof the probable maximum flood without overtopping, but will pass 5percent of the probable maximum flood. The spillways will not pass the10-year flood. The spillway design flood recommended by the guidelinesis 50 to 100 percent of the probable maximum flood. Considering thevolume of water impounded, the characteristics of upstream reservoirs,and the downstream hazard zone, 50 percent of the probable maximum floodis the appropriate spillway design flood. The probable maximum flood isdefined as the flood discharge that may be expected from the most severecombination of critical meteorologic and hydrologic conditions that arereasonably possible in the region.

Deficiencies visually observed by the inspection team were brushand tree growth on both slopes of the embankment, areas of erosion onthe embankment and at the downstream end of the emergency spillway, anda 120 foot long area of excessively steep slope on the downstream face,beginning about 75 feet left of the siphon.

There were no observed deficiencies or conditions existing at thetime of the inspection which indicated an immediate safety hazard.Future corrective action and regular maintenance will be required tocorrect or control the described deficiencies. In addition, detailedseepage and stability analyses of the existing dam, as required by theguidelines, should be performed. A detailed report discussing each ofthese deficiencies is attached.

Paul R. rnn, PEIllinoi i-29261

Edwin R. Buiton, PEMissouri E-10137

L a PartnerBla & Veatch

( .

t

e 49'.9

It ~ I

~ $4

"; 4tt.9..,, I

4q9

f, U.'I,

tz40

I-I

0

I

''I.,

PHASE I INSPECTION REPORTNATIONAL DAM SAFETY PROGRAM

KERNODLE LAKE DAM NO. 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Paragraph No. Title Page No.

SECTION 1 - PROJECT INFORMATION

1.1 General 1

1.2 Description of Project 1

1.3 Pertinent Data 3

SECTION 2 - ENGINEERING DATA

2.1 Design 6

2.2 Construction 6

2.3 Operation 6

2.4 Geology 6

2.5 Evaluation 6

SECTION 3 - VISUAL INSPECTION

3.1 Findings 8

3.2 Evaluation 10

SECTION 4 - OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES

4.1 Procedures 11

4.2 Maintenance of Dam 11

4.3 Maintenance of Operating Facilities 11

4.4 Description of Any Warning System in Effect 11

4.5 Evaluation 11

SECTION 5 - HYDRAULIC/HYDROLOGIC

5.1 Evaluation of Features 12

SECTION 6 - STRUCTURAL STABILITY

6.1 Evaluation of Structural Stability 14

SECTION 7 - ASSESSMENT/REMEDIAL MEASURES

7.1 Dwm Assessment 15

7.2 Remedial Measures 15

* ,.

LIST OF PLATES

Plate No. Title

1 Location Map

2 Vicinity Topography

3 Plan

4 Embankment Cross Section

5 Photo Index

LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS

Photo No. Title

1 Crest of Dam Looking South

2 Crest of Dam Viewed from Left Abutment

3 Upstream Face of Dam and Siphon

4 Downstream Slope of Dam

5 Primary Outlet Pipe Entrance

6 Trash Screen at Pipe Entrance

7 Outlet Pipe Downstream End and Emergency Spillway Chute

8 Emergency Spillway Viewed from Crest of Dam

9 Emergency Spillway Crest Looking Downstream

10 Channel Below Emergency Spillway Chute

11 Natural Channel Overfall Downstream from Emergency Spillway(Top Limestone Slab About 12 Inches Thick and Height ofDrop About 8 Feet)

12 Natural Channel Below Overfall

13 Siphon Control Valve Below Toe of Dam

LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS

Photo No. Title

14 Siphon Outlet Pool Looking Toward Toe of Dam

15 Recent Repair Work on Crest of Dam

16 Erosion on Face of Dam

17 Erosion on Back Slope of Dam

APPENDIX

Appendix A -Hydrologic Computations

SECTION 1 - PROJECT INFORMATION

1.1 GENERAL

a. Authority. The National Dam Inspection Act, Public Law 92-367,authorized the Secretary of the Army, through the Corps of Engineers, toinitiate a program of safety inspection of dams throughout the UnitedStates. Pursuant to the above, the District Engineer of the St. LouisDistrict, Corps of Engineers, directed that a safety inspection of theKernodle Lake Dam No. 1 be made.

b. Purpose of Inspection. The purpose of the inspection was tomake an assessment of the general condition of the dam with respect tosafety, based upon available data and visual inspection, in order todr~ermine if the dam poses hazards to human life or property.

c. Evaluation Criteria. Criteria used to evaluate the dam werefurnished by the Department of the Army, Office of the Chief of Engi-neers, in "Recoimmended Guidelines for Safety Inspection of Dams." Theseguidelines were developed with the help of several Federal agencies andmany state agencies, professional engineering organizations, and privateengineers.

1.2 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT

a. Description of Dam and Appurtenances.

(1) The Kernodle Lake Dam No. 1, hereafter referred to in thisreport as Dam No. 1, is an earthen structure located in southwesternJackson County, Missouri on a tributary to the Blue River. The-princi-pal purpose for this dam is recreation. Dam No. 1 is one of two reser-voirs located on property owned by Mr. John Kernodle of Kansas City,Missouri. The dam is 25 feet wide at the crest, 1,000 feet long, and 28feet high. The dam has an emergency spillway located at the rightabutment, and a principal spillway located just to the left of theemergency spillway. The embankment is protected on the upstream face byscattered rock, trees, and brush. The crest is characterized by sparsegrass cover, weeds, and vehicular path. The downstream face is coveredwith dense brush and trees.

(2) A concrete emergency spillway is located at the right abut-ment. It consists of a concrete approach and discharge channel withconcrete block sidewalls. The spillway approach and discharge channelshave rectangular cross sections.

(3) The principal spillway consists of a 12-inch vitrified claydischarge pipe with trash screen. The 12-inch pipe discharges into thedischarge channel of the emergency spillway.

(4) An 8-inch cast iron siphon is located approximately 500 feetleft of the emergency spillway. The siphon is valved at the downstreamembankoment toe and upstream face.

(5) Pertinent physical data are given in paragraph 1.3.

b. Location. The dam is located in southwestern Jackson County,Missouri, as indicated on Plate 1. The lake formed by the dam is shownon the United States Geological Survey 7.5 minute series quadrangle mapfor Grandview, Missouri in Section 10 of T47N, R33W.

c. Size Classification. Criteria for determining the size classi-fication of dams and impoundments are presented in the guidelines refer-enced in paragraph 1.1c above. Based on these criteria, the dam andimpoundment are in the small size category.

d. Hazard Classification. The hazard classification assigned bythe Corps of Engineers for this dam is as follows: The Kernodle LakeDam No. 1 has a high hazard potential, meaning that the dam is locatedwhere failure may cause loss of life, and serious damage to homes,agricultural, industrial, and commercial facilities, and to importantpublic utilities, main highways, or railroads. For Dam No. 1 the esti-mated flood damage zone extends downstream for approximately two miles.Within the damage zone are two buildings, a lake, a park, and two im-proved road crossings.

e. Ownership. The dam is owned by Mr. John Kernodle, 4100 E. 119th,

Kansas City, Missouri, 64137, Telephone (816) 763-7000.

f. Purpose of Dam. The dam forms a 19-acre recreational lake.

g. Design and Construction History. Data relating to the designwere not available. The owner reported that the structure was con-structed in 1967 by James Gould Construction Company.

h. Normal Operating Procedure. Normal rainfall, runoff, trans-piration, evaporation, capacity of the uncontrolled principal andemergency spillways, and the operation of the siphon all combine tomaintain a relatively stable water surface elevation. According to theowner, the lake level is drawn down to an arbitrary useful elevationbelow the principal spillway crest, through operation of the siphon,subsequent to heavy rains and prior to winter.

i. Maintenance. Infrequent maintenance of this dam has beenperformed according to the owner. Reconstruction of the emergencyspillway and a section of the embankment crest near the left abutmentwas completed a few weeks prior to inspection of the structure.

2

- ,.A_

1.3 PERTINENT DATA

a. Drainage Area - 935 acres (includes 784 acres of area aboveseveral upstream impoundments).

b. Discharge at Damsite.

(1) Normal discharge at the damsite is through an uncontrolledprincipal spillway.

(2) Estimated experienced maximum flood at damsite - Unknown.

(3) Estimated combined ungated spillway capacity at maximum poolelevation -290 cfs (Probable Maximum Flood Pool El.892.7).

c. Elevation (Feet above m.s.l.).

(1) Minimum top of dam - 890.1 + (see Plate 3)

(2) Emergency spillway crest - 888.0

(3) Principal spillway crest - 887.1

(4) Streambed at toe of dam - 861.9

(5) Maximum tailwater - Unknown.

d. Reservoir.

(1) Length of maximum pool - 1,300 feet +

(2) Length of normal pool - 1,200 feet +

e. Storage (Acre-feet).

(1) Top of dam - 275

(2) Emergency spillway crest - 233

(3) Principal spillway crest - 217

(4) Design surcharge - Unknown.

f. Reservoir Surface (Acres).

(1) Top of dam - 21

3

II

001

(2) Emergency spillway crest - 19

(3) Principal spillway crest - 19

g. Dam.

(1) Type - Earth embankment

(2) Length - 1,000 feet

(3) Height - 28 feet +

(4) Top width - 25 feet

(5) Side slopes - upstream face 1.0 V on 2.5 H and downstream facevaries from 1.0 V on 2.2 H to 1.0 V on 2.6 H.

(6) Zoning - Unknown.

(7) Impervious core - Unknown.

(8) Cutoff - Unknown.

(9) Grout curtain - Unknown.

(10) Internal drainage system - Unknown.

h. Diversion and Regulating Tunnel - None.

i. Emergency Spillway.

(1) Type - Chute spillway with rectangular cross section.

(2) Bottom width of chute - 11.3 feet

(3) Channel side slopes - Vertical.

(4) Crest elevation - 888.0 feet m.s.l.

(5) Gates - None.

(6) Upstream channel - Not applicable.

(7) Downstream channel -Open channel comprised of broken shale

and limestone.

4

j.Principal Spillway.

(1) Type - 12-inch diameter vitrified clay pipe with trash screen

and inlet weir.

(2) Inlet weir crest elevation - 887.1

(3) Gates - None.

(4) Upstream channel - None.

(5) Discharge pipe - 12-inch diameter vitrified clay pipe.

(6) Downstream channel - Open channel comprised of broken shaleand limestone.

k. Regulating Outlets - An 8-inch diameter cast iron siphon withcontrol valves on both upstream and downstream ends is located approxi-mately 500 feet left of the emergency spillway. Discharge from thesiphon is into an unprotected pool downstream of the dam embankment.

SECTION 2 - ENGINEERING DATA

2.1 DESIGN

Design data were unavailable.

2.2 CONSTRUCTION

According to the owner, the dam was constructed in 1967 by JamesGould Construction Company. Further construction data were unavailable.

2.3 OPERATION

According to the owner, the siphon is periodically operated tolower the pool level below principal spillway crest subsequent to heavyrains and prior to winter.

2.4 GEOLOGY

Design drawings, construction records, and geologic reports for thedam and reservoir sites were not available. The geologic conditionswere determined from existing general data on the site and from visualobservations made during the inspection of the dam.

The dam is located in a broad valley formed in interbedded lime-stones and shales that are overlain by soils derived from bedrock andloess. Alluvial soils are present along the streams. The bedrock inthe area consists of Pennsylvanian age shales and limestones of theDesmoinesian Series, Kansas City Group, Linn and Zarah subgroups. Thesurficial soils have been mapped by the Soil Conservation Service asSharpsburg, on the ridges and interstream divides, and as Polo-Sogn soilassociation complex on the slopes and in the valleys. The foundationand the abutments of the dam are anticipated to be Polo-Sogn soil over-lying interbedded limestone and shale units. It is anticipated thatpervious alluvial soils were removed from the foundation prior to con-struction.

The Sharpsburg soil is developed from loess and the Polo-Sogn soilassocation is developed from loess or residuum over shales or weatheredlimestones. The alluvial soils consist of sand, gravel, and varioussize fragments of weathered bedrock along and within the stream channel.

2.5 EVALUATION

a. Availability. No engineering data were available.

b. Adequacy. No engineering data were available upon which tomake a detailed assessment of the design, construction and operation.Seepage and stability analyses comparable to the requirements of the

6

-"MOW

"Recommended Guidelines for Safety Inspection of Dams" were not avail-able, which is considered a deficiency. These seepage and stabilityanalyses should be performed for appropriate loading conditions(including earthquake loads) and made a matter of record.

7

SECTION 3 -VISUAL INSPECTION

3.1 FINDINGS

a. General. A visual inspection of Dam No. 1 was made on 6 September1979. The inspection team included professional engineers with experiencein darn design and construction, hydrology, hydraulic engineering, andgeotechnical engineering. This dam is in fair condition. Specificobservations are discussed below. No observations were made of thecondition of the upstream face of the dam below the pooi elevation atthe time of the inspection.

b. Dam. The inspection team observed several deficiencies duringthe visual inspection of this structure. No seepage was observed,however, approximately 90 percent of the embankment length, includingthe downstream slope and toe and left abutment, could not be observeddue to extremely dense brush and tree growth which hampered compre-hensive visual inspection of the structure. Scattered rock, brush, andtrees, wiZh one particularly large tree, comprise the upstream slopeprotection. A sparse grass cover and vehicle track characterize theembankment crest with minor erosion of abutment material. The down-stream slope is protected by dense brush and trees as previouslymentioned. The downstream embankment slope, over a width parallel tothe centerline of about 120 feet and beginning about 75 feet left of thesiphon, is excessively steep. Although the slope was not measured, itappeared to be less than 2 to 1. This condition of excessively steepslope could lead to failure under conditions of extreme high water orovertopping. Erosion to a depth in excess of 3 feet exists in the leftportion (section about 200 feet in length parallel to the centerline) ofthe downstream slope of the dam. Erosion on the upstream slope consistsof minor sloughing up to 2 feet deep in isolated spots due to waveaction and undercutting The upstream erosion protection is inadequate.The material being eroded is primarily residual CL. Residual shale isbeing eroded along the right emergency spillway wall. Repair work hastaken place in an area 50 feet in length along the crest of the dam andin the area of the spillways. The repaired area has neither riprap norgrass to provide erosion protection. An area of erosion and rutting wasobserved on the left abutment. These areas of erosion and evidences ofrepair are indicators that overtopping may have occurred. There is noevidence of sliding, cracking, settlement, sinkholes, potholes, oranimal burrows.

C. Appurtenant Structures. The inspection team observed the fol-lowing items pertaining to appurtenant structures. The emergency spill-way consists of an ungated concrete chute with concrete block retainingwalls. The emergency spillway will act as a weir. The width of thespillway is 11.3 feet, while the height of the walls ranges from 12inches to 17 inches. Because the spillwav was just recently constructed,

8

the backfill and grading around the retaining walls is not yet complete.It was impossible to tell if any of this material was being eroded. Theonly erosion observed was minor erosion at the downstream end of thespillway chute. The recently constructed discharge channel in this areamay prevent future erosion. The spillway channel appears to be in goodcondition with no visible cracks in the chute and no apparent movementin the joints between the concrete blocks in the walls. The emergencyspillway channel contains no wall drains or floor weepholes and is clearof obstructions to flow.

The principal spillway consists of a 12-inch vitrified clay outletpipe and headwall which discharges into the emergency spillway on thedownstream side of the embankment. A trash screen covers the entranceon each of three sides. The outlet pipe is constructed with a bendthrough the embankment. The portion of the conduit which was exposed,about 20 feet upstream from the outlet point, appeared in good conditionwith no apparent movement at the joints and no leakage into or out ofthe pipe. A large plank was jammed inside the pipe at the bend.

The 8-inch cast iron siphon pipe discharges into an unprotectedpool downstream of the embankment. About 50 percent of the siphon pipewas observable. This portion of the pipe appeared in good conditionwith no evidence of leakage. The siphon pipe alinement through theembankment includes several bends. The siphon is operated by a valve ateach of the upstream and downstream ends. The operating valves alsoappeared to be in good condition. The siphon outlet pool has causedminor erosion downstream of the toe of the embankment.

No toe drains or relief wells were observed.

d. Geology. Observations of exposed material in the downstreamchannel and eroded areas indicated that the foundation material consistsof weathered shale with limestone units. Observations of both exposedregions and probing indicated the embankment to be primarily residual CLmateria.. The emergency spillway is constructed at the right abutmentin soil and weathered shale. It discharges into an unlined streamchannel that parallels the toe of the embankment until it intersects theoriginal stream channel. The discharge channel is formed in interbeddedshale and limestone. The limestones are horizontal and thin bedded withtwo sets of intersecting, vertical, closely spaced, closed joints. Theshales are soft and blocky and are easily eroded. Approximately 80 feetdown the discharge channel from the end of the emergency spillway chute,a thin limestone unit (12 inches thick) forms a ledge with a drop ofapproximately 8 feet into a basin formed in the underlying shale. Noseepage was observed from any of these units. However, recent rainscould have obscured such seepage.

9

e. Reservoir Area. No slides or excessive erosion due to waveaction were observed along the shore of the reservoir. There is a minoramount of sediment buildup along the shoreline.

f. Downstream Channel. The channel downstream of the spillway isa natural open channel to the original streambed.

3.2 EVALUATION

During the inspection several deficiencies which warrant attentionwere observed. Should the embankment be subjected to high lake levelsand correction of slope deficiencies be ignored, the embankment mayfail. Based on partial observation of the structure, seepage appears tobe unlikely to become a problem in the foreseeable future. The erosionof the embankment could lead to failure. Dense brush and tree growthprevents the establishment of grasses which provide more effectiveerosion protection. The upstream slope would particularly benefit fromthe establishment of proper riprap protection. The recent embankmentrepair section, if left unprotected on the crest and downstream slope,will deterioriate with time unless proper vegetal cover is established.The erosion of the channel downstream of the emergency spillway chutecould potentially be a problem. Rock erosion protection in the dischargechannel is warranted. The erosion downstream of the siphon pipe outletis not expected to become a problem. The plank should be removed fromthe principal spillway pipe to prevent clogging.

10

SECTION 4 - OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES

4.1 PROCEDURES

The pool is primarily controlled by rainfall, runoff, evaporation,transpiration, capacity of the uncontrolled principal and emergencyspillways, and the operation of the siphon. The owner reported that thesiphon is opened during periods of heavy rainfall or other periods whenthe lake level is high.

4.2 MAINTENANCE OF DAMI

The owner reported that there is no regularly scheduled program formaintenance.

4.3 MAINTENANCE OF OPERATING FACILITIES

Reconstruction of the emergency spillway and a section of theembankment crest near the left abutment was completed a few weeks priorto the inspection of the dam.

4.4 DESCRIPTION OF ANY WARNING SYSTEM IN EFFECT

There is no existing system or preplanned scheme for warning occu-pants of the hazard zone below this dam.

4.5 EVALUATION

A maintenance program should be developed in conjunction with theimprovements previously suggested. Both the slopes and the crest of theembankment should be mowed. Trees should be removed before they becomelarge. Riprap should be maintained, and if necessary replaced, tocontrol erosion.

SECTION 5 - HYDRAULIC/HYDROLOGIC

5.1 EVALUATION OF FEATURES

a. Design Data. Design data pertaining to hydrology and hydraulicswere unavailable.

b. Experience Data. The drainage area and lake surface area weredeveloped from the USGS Grandview Quadrangle Map. The dam layout isfrom a survey made during the inspection.

c. Visual Observations.

(1) The emergency spillway appears to be in good condition. Thelake level at the time of the inspection was below the inlet level and

there was no flow through the channel. Minor erosion was observed atthe downstream end of the spillway chute.

(2) The principal spillway was partially blocked by a large plankjammed inside the spillway pipe. Otherwise, the spillway appears to bein good condition. The lake level at the time of the inspection wasbelow the upstream pipe invert and there was no flow through the pipe.No erosion was observed at either the upstream or downstream end of theprincipal spillway.

(3) The siphon pipe provides a possible means for evacuating thepool depending upon the relative elevations of the water level and thepipe inlet and outlet.

(4) Abnormally large spillway discharges may have an adverseeffect on the integrity of the dam. These flows could potentially causeundercutting of the downstream toe and erosion along the right side ofthe emergency spillway.

d. Overtopping Potential. Hydraulic data for impoundments up-stream of Dam No. 2, which is immediately upstream from Lake No. 1, werenot obtained due to denial of access by the owner of the upstream pro-perty. An estimated inflow hydrograph was developed and added to thehydrograph of the runoff directly flowing into Lake No. 2. The estimatewas based upon adjusting the 200 square mile, 24 hour, Probable MaximumPrecipitation Index to reflect experienced outflow/ inflow ratios ofsimilar impoundments and drainage areas. The historical difference ininflow and outflow peaks was also analyzed. The resultant estimatedhydrograph is developed in the output for HEC-l. The emergency andprincipal spillways discharging simultaneously will not pass the probablemaximum flood without overtopping the dam. The probable maximum floodis defined as the flood discharge which may be expected from the mostsevere combination of critical meteorologic and hydrologic conditions

12

that are reasonably possible in the region. The spillways will pass 5percent of the probable maximum flood without overtopping the dam. Thespillway will not pass the 10-year flood. According to the recomendedguidelines from the Department of the Army, Office of the Chief ofEngineers, a high hazard dam of small size should pass 50 to 100 percentof the probable maximum flood. Considering the volume of water impounded,the characteristics of upstream reservoirs, and the downstream hazardzone, 50 percent of the probable maximum flood is the appropriate spill-way design flood. The portion of the estimated peak discharge of theprobable maximum flood overtopping the dam would be 6,440 cfs of thetotal discharge from the reservoir of 6,730 cfs. The estimated durationof overtopping is 14.5 hours with a maximum depth of 2.6 feet. Theportion of the estimated peak discharge of 50 percent of L.he probablemaximum flood which would overtop the dam would be 2,840 cfs of thetotal discharge from the reservoir of 3,060 cfs. The estimated durationof overtopping is 10.9 hours with a maximum depth of 1.9 feet. Failureof upstream water impoundments shown on the USGS maps would have asignificant impact on the hydrologic and hydraulic analyses. There isevidence that the soils typical of the embankment surfaces tend toerode. Prolonged overtopping of the embankment is believed capable ofcausing erosion which could lead to failure.

According to the St. Louis District, Corps of Engineers, the effectfrom rupture of the dam could extend approximately two miles downstreamof the dam. There are two buildings, a lake, a park, and two improvedroad crossings downstream of the dam which could be severely damaged andlives could be lost should failure of the dam occur. The Blue RiverParkway downstream of the dam is city owned park land. Development hasbeen restricted in the 100-year flood plain of the Blue River.

13

............

SECTION 6 - STRUCTURAL STABILITY

6.1 EVALUATION OF STRUCTURAL STABILITY

a. Visual Observations. Visual observations of conditions whichaffect the structural stability of this dam are discussed in Section 3,paragraph 3.1b.

b. Design and Construction Data. No design data relating to thestructural stability of the dam were found. Seepage and stabilityanalyses comparable to the requirements of the "Recommended Guidelinesfor Safety Inspection of Dams" were not available, which is considered adeficiency.

C. Operating Records. No operational records exist.

d. Post Construction Changes. According to the owner, compactedCL material was placed in an eroded area of the embankment crest, nearthe left abutment in August, 1979. The repaired area has neither riprapnor grass to provide erosion protection.

e. Seismic Stability. The dam is located in Seismic Zone 1 whichis a zone of minor seismic risk. A properly designed and constructedearth dam using sound engineering principles and conservatism shouldpose no serious stability problems during earthquakes in this zone.

Adequate descriptions of embankment design parameters, foundationand abutment conditions, or static stability analyses to assess theseismic stability of this embankment were not available and therefore noinferences will be made regarding the seismic stability. An assessmentof the seismic stability should be included as part of the stabilityanalysis required by the guidelines.

14

SECTION 7 - ASSESSMENT/REMEDIAL MEASURES

7.1 DAM ASSESSMENT

a. Safety. The primary concern is the danger of overtopping thedam due to the hydraulic inadequacy of the spillways. Several conditionsobserved during the visual inspection by the inspection team should bemonitored and/or controlled. These are brush and tree growth on theembankment, areas of erosion over the embankment and at the downstreamend of the emergency spillway, and an area of excessively steep slope.Seepage and stability analyses comparable to the requirements of the"Recommended Guidelines for Safety Inspection of Dams" were not available,which is considered a deficiency.

b. Adequacy of Information. Due to the lack of engineering designdata, the conclusions in this report were based only on performancehistory and visual conditions. The inspection team considers that thesedata are sufficient to support the conclusions herein. However, seepageand stability analyses comparable to the requirements of the "RecommendedGuidelines for Safety Inspection of Dams" were not available, which isconsidered a deficiency.

c. Urgency. It is the opinion of the inspection team that aprogram should be developed to implement remedial measures recommendedin paragraph 7.2b as soon as possible. The items recoimmended in para-graph 7.2a should be analyzed on a high priority basis by the owners ofthis dam.

d. Necessity for Phase II. The Phase I investigation does notraise any serious questions relating to the safety of the dam or iden-tify any serious dangers that would require a Phase II investigation.

e. Seismic Stability. This dam is located in Seismic Zone 1.Adequate description of embankment design parameters, foundation andabutment conditions, or static stability analyses to assess the seismicstability of this embankment were not available and therefore no infer-ences will be made regarding the seismic stability. An assessment ofthe seismic stability should be included as part of the recomnuudedstability analyses.

7.2 REMEDIAL MEASURES

a. Alternatives. According to the estimated hydrologic/hydraulicanalysis, the present spillway has the capacity to pass a discharge of 5percent of the probable maximum flood without overtopping the embank-ment. A detailed hydrologic/hydraulic analysis should be performedsubsequent to data collection on the upstream impoundments and hydraulicstructures. The estimated analysis provided in this inspection is not

15

adequate for proper alternative determinations. In order to pass 50percent of the probable maximum flood as required by the RecommendedGuidelines, the spillway size and/or height of dam would need to beincreased or the lake level would need to be lowered to increase storagecapacity.

b. Operation and Maintenance Procedures. The following operationand maintenance procedures are recommended:

(1) An improved maintenance program to remove and control thegrowth of brush and trees on the embankment should be developed. Removalof large trees should be under the guidance of an engineer experiencedin the design and construction of earthen dams. Indiscriminate clearingcould jeopardize the safety of the dam. Grass cover on the embankmentsshould be cut periodically.

(2) Erosion protection should be maintained and added as necessaryon the upstream slope of the dam to prevent erosion of embankmentmaterial due to wave action.

(3) The plank should be removed from the principal spillway pipeto prevent clogging.

(4) A detailed inspection of the dam should be made periodicallyby an engineer experienced in design and construction of dams. Morefrequent inspections may be required if additional deficiencies areobserved or the severity of the reported deficiencies increases.

(5) Seepage and stability analyses should be performed by a pro-fessional engineer experienced in the design and construction of dams.

16

KERNIDDLE

~ KERODLE LAKE NO. I

N LCATIO MAP

SCL IN MILES

LAKPLATE I

S SUMMI

; f

7 7Lskes

7

C6

KERNODLE LAKE NO. IVICINITY TOPOGRAPHY

SCALE IN FEET

Roug HM 0 2000 4i Dl)

PLATE 2

0+00 EMERGENCY SPILLWAY11)1.3' WIDE RECTANGULAR

CHANNEL)1+00

EL. $90.I

NflRAL

leg vcpx(APPROX. IiAUGNMENT)

2+00 IPRINCIPAL SPILLWAY INLET

a44-00

EL.091.1

S CAST INW .jSIPWNNII ~--

EL.SO91.0

REPAIRED AREA

EMBANK ENT TOE(APPROX.) EL. 890.2

II 1.oEL.S904

ORIGINALSTRE-AM EL.8973_CHANNEL

KERNODLE LAKE NO. IPLAN

PLATE 3

L

z0

0

Ow

In

+ oz

>;i

ww

*>

cgal

a4l.z LL

law -

*PLATE

Cd S 0"

EMERGENCY SPILLWAY

.u (I I.-3sWIE RECTAISILAR

(APPROX. CANL

CHANNEL-

* a Ia PRECIPAL SILL INLET

Is

V"CAT RjfN

SPH=O LOAINNI:EC

KENOL LAENOPHTOINE

PLAEI

F

PHOTO 1: CREST OF DAM LOOKING SOUTH

PHOTO 2: CREST OF DAM VIEWED FROM LEFT ABUTMENT

' .I , k ' '

PHOTO 3: UFST1REAM FACE OF DAM AND SIPHON

PHOTO 4: DOWNS TREAMI SLOPE OF DAM

rv

~I-

PHOTO 5: PRIMARY OUTLET PIPE ENTRANCE

PHOTO 6: TRASH SCREEN AT PIPE ENTRANCE

I.

PHOTO 7: OUTLET PIPE DOWNSTREAM END AND EMERGENCY

SPILL14AY CHUTE

PHOTO 8: EMERGENCY SPIL.LWAY VIEWED 1'ROM CREST OF DAM

PHOTO 9: EMERGENCY SPILLWAY CREST LOOKING DOWNSTREAM

PHOTO 10: CHANNEL BELOW 1EMERGENCY SPILLWAY CHUTE

PHOTO 11: NATURAL CHANNEL OVERFALL DOW NSTREAM FROM EIIERGEC-YSPILLWAY (TOP LDISTONE SLAB ABOUT 12 INCHES THIIZAND HEIGHT OF DROP ABOUT 8 FEET)

PHOTO 12: NATURAL CHANNEL BELOW OVERFALL

PHOTO 13: SIPHON CONTROL VALVE BELOW TOE OF DAM

PHOTO 14: SIPHON OUTLET POOL LOOKING TOWARD TOE OF DAX

Ad

PHOTO 15: RECENT REPAIR WORK ON CREST OF DAM

PHOTO 16: EROSION ON FACE OF DAM

6L*

PHOTO 17: EROSION ON BACK SLOPE OF DAM

4.I

APPENDIX A

HOYROLOGI C COMIPUTATIONS

*aid

HYDROLOGIC COMPUTATIONS

1. The Soil Conservation Service (SCS) dimensionless unit hydrographand HEC-l (1) were used to develop the inflow hydrographs, and hydro-logic inputs as follows:

a. Twenty-four hour, probable maximum precipitation determinedfrom U.S. Weather Bureau Hydrometeorological Report No. 33.

200 square mile, 24 hour rainfall inches - 24.8

10 square mile, 6 hour percent of 24 hour200 square mile rainfall - 101%

10 square mile, 12 hour percent of 24 hour200 square mile rainfall - 120,

10 square mile, 24 hour percent of 24 hour200 square mile rainfall - 130%

Because the hydraulic data for impoundments upstream of Dam No. 2were unavailable, an estimated inflow hydrograph was developed and addedto the hydrograph of the runoff directly flowing into Lake No. 2. Theoutflow and inflow peaks were determined for impoundments of similarsize and drainage area. The outflow/inflow ratios and the time differencebetween the peak inflow and peak outflow were determined for each ofthese impoundments. An analysis of the results showed that the outflow/inflow ratio was approximately 0.90 for 50 percent and 100 percent ofthe probable maximum precipitation and 0.80 for smaller percentages ofthe probable maximum precipitation. The 200 square mile, 24 hour,Probable Maximum Precipitation Index was multiplied by these ratios.The analysis of the similar impoundments showed that the change in thetime between the peak inflow and peak outflow was small. Therefore wedid not adjust the lag from the value found by assuming that the upstreamimpoundments did not exist. The outflow hydrograph from Lake No. 2 iscombined with the hydrograph of the runoff directly flowing into LakeNo. 1 and routed to the outlet point.

b. Drainage area = 935 acres (includes 784 acres of area aboveseveral upstream impoundments).

c. Time of concentration:

T = (1.67) L

c

A-i

1 08(S+1)0.7

1,900Y0 .5

L lag in hours

= hydraulic length of watershed in feet

S 1,000 - 10 (where CN is the retardance factor and isCN equivalent to the runoff curve number)

Y = average watershed land slope in percent

T = 0.34 hours (2)C

d. Losses were determined in accordance with SCS methods fordetermining runoff using a curve number of 88 for antecedent moisturecondition III and a curve number of 74 for antecedent moisture conditionII. The hydrologic soil groups in the basin were B and D (2 and 3).

e. The soil associations in this watershed are mainly Polo-Sognand Sharpsburg Series (4).

2. Emergency spillway release rates are based on the level and unlevelweir equations.

Level weir equation:

Q = CLH1.5 (C = 2.63, L = 10.5 feet, H is the head onweir)(5).

Principal spillway release rates are based on an assumed maximumdischarge of 10 cfs.

Discharge rates over the top of the dam are based on the unlevelweir equation:

2Cb 2.5 2.55 (hb-h a ) (h2"5"h2)

(C = 2.60 = weir coefficient, b = the length of flow normalto the weir in feet, hk = the head of the low end of the weirin feet, and h = the read of the high end of the weir infeet.) (6) a

A-2

3. The elevation-storage relationship above normal pool elevation wasconstructed by planimetering the area enclosed within each contour.Storage at various elevations was computed utilizing the conic methodfor computation of reservoir volume provided in HEC-I(l).

A-3

( I

BIBLIOGRAPHY

(1) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Hydrologic Engineering Center, FloodHydrograph Package (HEC-l), Dam Safety Version, July 1978, Davis,California.

(2) U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, NationalEngineering Handbook, Section 4, Hydrology, August 1972.

(3) U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service,Technical Release No. 55, Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds,January 1975.

(4) Mid America Regional Council, Regional Soils Guide, March 1976.

(5) Horace W. King and Ernest F. Brater, Handbook of Hydraulics, SixthEdition, McGraw Hill Book Company, 1976.

(6) U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey, Techniques ofWater-Resources Investigations, Book 3, Chapter A5, Measurementof Peak Discharge at Dams by Indirect Methods, by Harry Hulsing,1967.

I----- --- -

I I

x It a .wC-C CIC

ad 0

C- b

j pmw C4 co 0

,j a .-- .

It. 0 *, a. W. wl ft

4K C.

c C.*

0, 0 00 Iop C

.4 09W'o 0r .0 CO

0 0 0a

I IL

or .v - .

S.

.. C. C. ... ~ 0* *@ *000 J

~:g.~:' j

-- - -.1 I

* I I I I

* I I I I.

I I

I i t I

I , I

I I

I I I I I I

I I

I a

C

I 4

I I I II --a

I I

I I

I V

I I II -

I I I j

2

I I I I -

2

I ~

I -

~I I*1 I

J ~ Ia~ I

-3-,, I

I Ii I I I

~~1~I I

) C. .1 ~) 0

- I '0' W

a y

-44

KC.

IIn

K .- e l It14

C'.n 4

It

4L~ Ito 4a 1 96

-9 a. C,

-. 0,

at

0 -

WA. DO * * . a .

Ca 3

z 4L

20

C 0

ILI

'-N

*t-.:q

a

S * 0 00 0 0 0

Wl I

I Ii

-C a. A ,5

.., . a .a 'a -: 0 ; W. ,

a .

2~. ze C

1, I ,

-~~~a .04I@., IO 10olm fm 0 ay 0' -

go WS vi

t.4~fo J. a e

.3 0 ~ M. I* 0 1.

fft to W , I5

AL 14 bg W, K af

AS W I2"

0 P*. AW*0 M- *.4 1 rJ ft C V NO.- .4 me.

d -

It II ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I, S *0',... ,'.

F 'I 1

1 I. I

I . I

I II II I

I I I

I . II I I

I I II I I

I.. I

I . I

I I .

- 'I'll I

PillI t II II . I

I iIlI~IIlI I

* .11 -I a

I I I I-

I I I I -I I

I I I

I, *l

I III I a'

I -

Ii I B.

N-awl~-2

* -a-a.,

.1 I

* 4

'I I

171' It I ~ -. .~L' II.~. *egee * eee. CC@ . ~E

( I

a ------.---.-------

* 4 * * * * * * * 0 * * * * 0 8 ~ qi qi ~- .- t--.. . -a - 'I '~* a-.. -. ~ K7 ']

II

$ ~ 1 ft

C. I

4- I,

3:G

I Iu I

C~0*4OCtasS~4I I

.3o.q4 .4 -3' ~ - - - - .d - -* t..U. *3S *5 Sn Sn *3 *e .5% 35%

e ~,a ... . .s.ai a.'Ct .t.a 3,5s g.fl aea4 .~..,* 0~~ ~. 9%. 3 - N S 3' * - 3 - 3 3~.aaa.* *a N N $9 VS 4t N.4-t~ aNL~

.4 &. Iv~ ~

3S..a~ ' 3- -~ - - -~

b 414J S 95% Sfl *5- 3~t . .g~ cc ~- N'a a~ N~3 $&

~ * 3'S .45 3,5 Na ~3-- N .9* 1$ fl N 94

3. 0 5-N 3' -

~.4 44

5-S.SS'ANt N~ aSS *S= sas S... a St. 55%

p.3*4 .' *544 CC .35.- 5,3, Nb .3.-* a... a OC. ~ .43' 5.0 5.5- 3,5* N*4~ C )* @54 5.9 CS - 5.5

&"S (p .3 S~ 0.3 *1 Clv.

N

- .4 -* a-- -a *. .a *SS apa .3'. *n 35%

o N 3.5* CC. 5.95* *9* 9

t~ .45.. .C. NC* .. a..* a Cr4 oat ON 5*.~ 99,4 .1.4 95*S*

N.4 '~ *S *aa ~S ~* 3,. ~S 5.95- - .3 a ., .c. .o

O.~4 5~ N tj ~'a N

-- N

- . -' - - -o C - - 9. - I .

4

.5 -' 'e-*C 9595% 5*5% C 45%O 9 9.9 54

0J 9550 NCS .1.3 .1.3

- * SI 33' 5.1 *54 35..

3t3 -~

'a 14:2O - N.4

.5.*54 4

9.. 3.

II1~1~IC & ~

* 4 4 .I~.3'

I I~s:~I~i~iE.aM U U 4 II III II

SI

.1 I . a . aa) . *~ S!a..; 3 1.aj

* q~ * * * * 0 *;., * * * * * * g~ q~ *' *' S' *t (b

a C

* .. L.IK ~

Is

0 0.

5:-Cl

4c -1 0

01 *C- 0

Is I

0tL,

.* . . .'. .* .. ..

I i i cc =04' -

C . C.

.c 'L .J I.r.a -,o mw" so". ze -0 . 0 .0~ ' 0 .0.

*sf.C"j .I . 0l, r.-~ ,C,) .o A bLt ;; C, , 0 C C: c

".U -A O ,.

"UN 10 09 O.D

I- L &

4-9 WOMUC ,0*0000oo 0oc0o00t12aoo;;Q;r;oC;o000C

*IL a. . . . . . . . . .

x-, S

to. o~1 S ,. d0 C0 N.5.0 0 00 0 0

QO O O O 3 C0.oIoC O O ce OE 030

aC 10 hm-6A P nIqp %a .

*~ .4 , . . .. . .. .~ . . . . .I . . . .

I F

., c ! c ,t C

c' . .... . t. . . . . .

fl..l ..

I- le e**c.. .... .Or tJ%.-f. O.. . .t .t.O ia

.. 0.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I - * . . . . . . .

10 -' .00, .0 0, .0 6 .

F 3

* 4 I *i i°; l

c. a,. . " . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . * .. .. . . . .J

1.~F ON C. Z; -C

o oc¢ o' o ct Ioo U, ¢ L4COOCC t'

-w 100 .10. 44

, C, 42 la

co **0 *

m B. ,11 P 0CIf4 44 I 1 F 2

- s I I O tOT,

1 -7

I I

'*1 F

A Z

v c .0 1A . .. . .A. . . . A A

. .. . , MN I l,

.......... .. .... fl.... ..d0-' .

".. . .. . . . .o. . . . . . . . '" • . C ,

i C;

ADoo.o Y ~~, C.U~., A c 0 A.

.0 00.

A . . .o . .A.

0i. 0 . 014 ~ ~ ~ ~ *. ..d C A 120 M

1. C. c :1 ,C '02

t Iat -.. . ! 4S -o - - - - - - -- 1 -. 0 W% .. NW a

- - - - -

- _" • i -

- ..

' IiI I

i I 1J I

I. I

2a.!

* I

IL '='q -4 I C .

I

..o" ,, . .. . .s .- .. *.. .. I: .' . .4 I .° ra ..

- - -

I 4Ua

, ,I

teI . . " ° , -' -I

C 0 C CC 0 0 0 0 0 i o o o*

0 9L

1. - 0.

c-a a

0 0

'a ~~. . . ...... 0. ,

I 2. vI . v ,V

CI "0 c

O.: w ofto Lftf

r- 0"0: ..C .i.L .a .S .. C:,C 0 ) C :L C. 06: I.C:i 0

tj~aC.OO~t6,C5OiCii1 "Jis'Ci~0C'.I0'CICI 00c-

to0 V 'a ,,0 00 i'.6,3,cb.cai6 ),o0Cs0Oc,)c Ib . 0*. . .. . . . . ... ~ . . .. *. . .*. . . .* CC

z IC

09 C: C

a.- c

- C

000a C" U-c w .F

0- .* .0 'S0 - . 0Ie**or is3

-t 5 -6- - - -000 - -- ,- - - - o ~ -a -o--co--o-.I.C60 4 WC000000000000 00000000000000000 mag 00000o

qWe P.i Is 0

a 6, "'aM Wr F4

'o

0 ' it

.U~-A ohm n,,n,,,,00,iN~60066666,,,4 Fgd66666

... . . ... . . .~ . . . . .. .. . .. .C . .s . . . .

C . C.

0 C: I.

4. C. ac c. .

v.r . C . ir . * .. pi1L si'II. . . .%V. . .s.

* ~ ~~~~ ~~~~~ VC- -. O- - O~J%~ ,~l

~. r~~r~.Ct.,C~L..OC0.flCC~l 0 C. -Cr a.2 0

I-a d_ 9.C CIO,'J)0 em fll0cf .. --

. . C :. . . Is. .4M * *

1.10 .j101 .

0 00 I

C~~~~~s sA GM~lC~is e q~ m

0(~@ ~ ~ t.00 U::::::: ~ CA: P. --

J, z cC 0CDC

.. or C.CDo a a a

0.- 0( 0030.9..

r.,.Oe v.tP.OfV% ,.C VV rrsl. 61 a - a 04 . 0 flf a

I .. ; 0 . a

I X * .2. 00

*JCsi4 00~ VS 0 000 0.

* os .i s s

*~ ~ .. ..~ .. ..... . 0 ....o .e

C, CA r

I1 V

* . ft ..-

010

*w .12"!*v *

m I

U.. . .. . . . .

TI

'At~ 0C I4 1.

4* -f .0 f.In"~~ I, go ,-.0

It~

________________________________ -~ - . & I t

0 C' 3 o '~ '~ ~ S C) ~ 0 0I ~I.il

-

I. .,I. -

Or. WI V. pVr. *fl Wa*

1I ~ JJ -0. *'d0. N0 .. j.) *U *.a.,a .0 * * * *N eN

- -.. -'..~ a . - . - . - a - .,S.

a - - - - - - .C. a. *e. * *a * *'% *a

~ 3.)W ~N ~ a~v~ 00 N 0.0

t . . . a a * .- C - N - N -aen 1%. .-a. ~.'a

I I 6~,- . - ~ -, -

- C. *a *a a * a * *r.~N ~t ab~ N. *0

P(~ ~.0a, -~ Ned Ok.. *-,# ~Ai uva~ced = 4 4. S - N N 6-'1 I II

I t* fl a .a *a a .a a en

-t) '3(' .~ ** *e~ rv% 00 NO3N* Na -. * N4 -~

-- 6 N - C 0-- , e1

a - - - - ,

'~ *gn*3 4~= -~3CM V *a *a * * *r * a'

4 *CCC NAC C~D 0 C.~ ON-o Cd Na a* 6.44.4 .1

2 . .o- - - - - - -

4 N aC .1 a~ . o N-- . Ia0S I44 II I

Ii4 I 6

C- ~. U-* 4 4 4 I

C- * *~a:

3 *, a~o e eel * o ~.

* CU C. I - a. C-- 0 0 C 3 * S ~- C- - *~* 0 - N 0

33 .3 a

o.~. '.f 0.1. ~& up~' ~ ~ Ce". ~*Ki.)~J~ ,~ W. q

( C

1p * 1 --t -

r -

Wp. 02i

.4. -. 44