Hope Dam Inspection Report - Dam - 160-Hope Dam-6!23!16

-- HOPE DAM --
VISUAL
INSPECTION / EVALUATION REPORT
Dam Name: Hope Dam
State Dam ID#: 160
Owner: Unknown
Town: Scituate
Consultant: Pare Corporation
Date of Inspection: June 23, 2016

Hope Dam
INSPECTION SUMMARY
Dam Name (No): Hope Dam (160)

Location: Scituate
Hazard Classification: Significant
Inspector: Joshua E. Rosenberg, P.E., Pare Corporation

Inspection Date: June 23, 2016
DAMLOCATION
41.73107N
71.56429W
SCITUATE,RI
CROMPTONQUADRANGLE
When describing the dam, left and right refer to the respective sides of the dam as viewed
when facing downstream (with normal flow of water).

Insp Report 160-Hope Dam-6-23-16 i
Hope Dam
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
INSPECTION SUMMARY i
PREFACE ii
1.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT 1
1.1 General............................................................................................................ 1
1.1.1 Authority 1
1.1.2 Purpose of Work 1
1.1.3 Definitions 1
1.2 Description of Project ..................................................................................... 1
1.2.1 Location 1
1.2.2 Owner/Caretaker 2
1.2.3 Purpose of the Dam 2
1.2.4 Description of the Dam and Appurtenances 2
1.2.5 Operations and Maintenance 3
1.2.6 Hazard Potential Classification 3
2.0 INSPECTION 4
2.1 Visual Inspection ............................................................................................ 4
2.1.1 General Findings 4
2.1.2 Dam Embankment 4
2.1.3 Appurtenant Structures 5
2.1.4 Downstream Area 7
2.1.5 Reservoir Area 7
2.2 Caretaker Interview ........................................................................................ 7
2.3 Operation and Maintenance Procedures ......................................................... 7
2.3.1 Operational Procedures 7
2.3.2 Maintenance of Dam and Operating Facilities 8
3.0 ASSESSMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 9
3.1 Assessments .................................................................................................... 9
3.2 Recommendations ......................................................................................... 10
3.3 Alternatives .................................................................................................... 12
ATTACHMENTS:
Definitions
References and Resources
Visual Dam Inspection Limitations
Photographs
Figure 1: Site Sketch

Insp Report 160-Hope Dam-6-23-16 iii
Hope Dam Description of Project
1.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
1.1 General
1.1.1 Authority
The RIDEM Office of Compliance and Inspection has retained Pare Corporation of Foxboro,
Massachusetts and Lincoln, Rhode Island to perform a visual inspection and develop a report of
conditions for the Hope Dam along the Pawtuxet River-North Branch in Situate, Rhode Island. This
inspection and report were performed in accordance with current Rhode Island laws.
RIDEM will develop an overall condition rating based upon the data presented herein. It is
understood that this rating will consider operational and structural deficiencies and will be presented
under separate cover.
1.1.2 Purpose of Work
The purpose of this investigation was to inspect and evaluate the present condition of the dam
and appurtenant structures in accordance with current dam safety regulations to provide information
that will assist in both prioritizing dam repair needs and planning/conducting maintenance and
operation.
The investigation was divided into three parts: 1) obtain and review reports, investigations,
and data pertaining to the dam and appurtenant structures available within the Rhode Island
Department of Environmental Management files; 2) perform a visual inspection of the site; and; 3)
prepare and submit a final report presenting the evaluation of the structure, including
recommendations for remedial actions.
1.1.3 Definitions
To provide the reader with a better understanding of the report, definitions of commonly used
terms associated with dams are attached. Many of these terms may be included in this report. The
terms are presented under common categories associated with dams which include: 1) orientation; 2)
dam components; 3) hazard classification; 4) general; and 5) condition rating.
1.2 Description of Project
1.2.1 Location
The Hope Dam is located in the Town of Scituate, approximately 4.4 miles northwest of the
Town center. The dam impounds water along the Pawtuxet River (North Branch) to form an unnamed
pond, with the dam located at the southern end of the impoundment area near coordinates
41.73107N/71.56429W. Please refer to the inspection summary for a locus plan depicting the area of
the dam and its immediate surroundings.
To reach the dam from I-295, take exit 4 to RI-14 West/Plainfield Pike. After 4.0 miles, turn
left onto RI-116 South/East Road and continue for 4.2 miles. Turn right onto Hope Furnace Road and

Insp Report 160-Hope Dam-6-23-16 1
after approximately 250 feet, a parking area will be on the right. Follow the driveway beyond the
utilities (left) and the dam will be on the right.
1.2.2 Owner/Caretaker
Based on RIDEM records, the Owner/Caretaker of the dam is unknown.
1.2.3 Purpose of the Dam
The dam currently impounds water for recreational purposes and to possibly operate a turbine
within a mill located downstream of the dam. Past inspection reports indicate the turbine(s) were in
use; however, this was not confirmed during the present inspection. Based on a review of historical
information, the dam was originally built in 1885 as a water supply for the mill industry.
1.2.4 Description of the Dam and Appurtenances
The following is based upon information contained within the RIDEM files and observations
made during the inspection:
The Hope Dam is an approximately 475 foot long, 15 foot high structure consisting of an
earthen embankment, a concrete overflow spillway, a gated raceway that provides mid level capacity,
an auxiliary spillway, a diversion gate from the raceway, and a gate system at an old mill complex
located several hundred feet downstream of the dam.
The 300 foot long L shaped earthen embankment is about 15 feet high and is supported by a
stone wall on the upstream side and stone buttress and walls on the downstream side. The crest is
earthen and is about 10 to 15 feet wide. The embankment extends from the right side of (and
perpendicular to) the primary spillway and extends upstream for about 100 feet and then extends to the
right and continues for about 200 feet to the right abutment.
Left of the earthen embankment is a 150 foot long concrete overflow spillway with cut granite
training walls on both sides. The gravity structure appears to be an amberson type structure with a
concrete upstream face supported by concrete or stone buttresses bearing on the downstream apron.
The weir section of the spillway consists of a rounded uncontrolled concrete weir that discharges
flows back into the natural river channel and under a bridge at Main Street/Route 116.
Left of the primary spillway are four (4) timber gates with an opening approximately 30 feet
wide that regulates flows into a 10 to 15 foot wide raceway channel. At the time of the inspection, it
appeared that these gates were abandoned and allow water levels along the mill raceway channel to be
the same elevation as the impoundment.
To the left of the main spillway is the raceway channel that leads to the mill. This channel is
bordered by granite stone masonry walls on both sides and runs for approximately 300-feet before
branching off in two directions. One branch is directed under Main Street by concrete training walls
and enters an apparently abandoned mill facility. The other branch turns right and passes through the
secondary gate structure and reconnects with the main downstream channel about 175-feet before it
passes under Main Street. The downstream channel and the mill raceway channel are separated by a
piece of land that is supported by granite stone masonry walls.

On the right side of the raceway channel, immediately downstream of the gates, there is a
stepped granite block auxiliary spillway that carries flows from the raceway channel (when at higher
levels) to the primary spillway channel.
A diversion gate system (i.e., two 4 x 4 timber lift-gates) is located approximately 260 feet
downstream of the dam along the right side of the raceway channel. This diversion is upstream of
Main Street/Route 116 and the mill complex (Hope Mill). The gate operating mechanisms consist of a
single geared crank supported by a timber frame that diverts flows from the raceway into the primary
spillway channel.
The raceway downstream of the diversion system continues with a full head of water and
flows to the northwest side of the mill complex. At the mill, it is controlled by two gates that allow
water to flow into a turbine housed within the mill building. The turbine discharges out the northeast
side of the mill, where it flows into a manmade channel and then back into the river about 1,000 feet
downstream of the mill. At the time of the inspection, the two gates and turbine at the old mill were
inaccessible.
1.2.5 Operations and Maintenance
The Hope Dam was partially rehabilitated in 2007, including vegetation removal, placing
boulders along the dam face, regrading the embankment, and repairs to the stone channel walls at the
mill raceway.
1.2.6 Hazard Potential Classification
In accordance with current classification procedures under State of Rhode Island dam safety
rules and regulations, Hope Dam has been classified by RIDEM as a Significant hazard potential dam.

Hope Dam Inspection
2.0 INSPECTION
2.1 Visual Inspection
Hope Dam was inspected on June 23, 2016. At the time of the inspection, the weather was near 80F
and mostly cloudy. Photographs to document the current conditions of the dam were taken during the
inspection and are attached. The level of the impoundment appeared to be near normal operating
levels. Underwater areas were not inspected as part of the field activity.
For reference purposes, a baseline was established along the approximate centerline of the dam
embankment. Station 0+00 was located at the left abutment at the low level outlet and extended to
Station 4+75 at the right abutment. Observations are reported in relation to their location along the
baseline as noted herein.
2.1.1 General Findings
In general, Hope Dam was found to have an eroded and low area beyond the right abutment,
an eroded and irregular upstream side with failed wall sections and missing capstones, an eroded
irregular crest, bulged sections of the downstream wall and missing capstones, vegetation throughout
the embankment, an inoperable low level outlet, leakage through the auxiliary spillway masonry, a
deteriorated diversion gate structure, and other dam safety deficiencies. The specific concerns are
identified in more detail in the sections below:
2.1.2 Dam Embankment
The embankment at the dam consists of an earthen section in generally fair condition. The
following was noted during the inspection:
Upstream Side
The right abutment area appears to be low and may be susceptible to overtopping. The area
consists of an eroded boat launch area (identified as a Rhode Island Public boat launching site)
that leads to the gravel access road right of the dam and is consistently lower than the crest.
From station 2+80 to 4+75 (east-west section) the upstream side is generally overgrown with
medium to dense vegetation, brush, and saplings.
Form station 2+80 to 4+75 the upstream side consist of a raveled and failed (multiple sections)
stone masonry wall section that is partially buttressed along the waterline with a rock/boulder
slope. The exposed height of the wall varies from 4 to 6 feet above the waterline. Boulders
were reportedly added during the 2007 rehabilitation to help stabilize the upstream side.
The rock buttress is partially infilled with soil that is scarped along the waterline (3-6 inches).
At the bend near station 2+80 the upstream side is eroded and provides a gradual transition to
the waterline.
Between station 2+80 and 1+80 (north-south section) along the approach to the spillway the
upstream side is a mortared vertical stone masonry wall. The alignment of the wall is fair but
it does appear to be leaning toward the impoundment slightly. The mortar is deteriorated and
cracked with areas of missing mortar along the top and along the waterline. The majority of
the capstones have displaced from the top of the wall, resulting in an eroded and rounded

Hope Dam Inspection
transition to the crest. Small saplings were observed growing from the face the wall in two
locations.
Crest
The earthen crest is exposed gravel that forms a walking path that widens between the
spillway and station 2+80.
Along the outer shoulders (2-3 feet) vegetation typically consist of thin to moderate grass
cover; however, areas of brush are encroaching from the upstream and downstream sides in
areas.
The horizontal alignment is fair but appears slightly irregular. Several vertical irregularities
and undulations were noted along the crest.
3 potential animal borrows (less than 3 inches in diameter) were noted along the crest most
notably right of station 2+80.
Several depressions, up to 12 inches deep were observed behind the downstream wall.
As noted previously, the area beyond the right abutment is low by approximately 3 feet and
will overtop prior to the crest during elevated pool levels.
Downstream Side
The downstream side consists of a dry set stone masonry wall with an average exposed height
of approximately 15 feet.
The section of the wall between stations 4+75 and 2+80 is slightly battered and consists of
large rounded stones/boulders with some chinking stones present. Saplings are growing along
the entire wall obscuring a full view; however, it appears as though the bottom third is bulging
slightly with some shifting stones noted. Several areas of missing chinking stones were also
noted.
Between station 2+80 and the spillway, the downstream wall is near vertical and is of different
construction with cut (flat faced) stones for the last 80 feet approaching the spillway. The
alignment of this section appears satisfactory. Vegetation and saplings are growing along the
majority of the toe along the entire section and a stump was noted near the bend.
The downstream toe is soft and moist with standing water and staining observed further
downstream. It is unclear if this is due to seepage or tail water influences from the downstream
channel.
2.1.3 Appurtenant Structures
Primary Spillway
The spillway generally appeared to be in fair condition as viewed through the flowing water.
The following was noted during the inspection:
The right training wall concrete is in state of advanced deterioration with deep spalls,
delamination, and exposed aggregate. No stability concerns were noted.
The left training wall consist of stacked masonry with concrete facing along the upstream side.
The concrete facing is deteriorated with loss of almost all surface concrete. Vegetation and
efflorescence were observed in the joints of the masonry along the downstream section.
The flashboards along the crest have tripped and are either lying parallel with the crest or have
washed away. Tripped flashboards remain on the crest were noted near the right end, middle

Hope Dam Inspection
and left side. No flow over the crest was observed in these areas. Flow was conveyed through
areas where the boards were not present.
When visible, the surface of the weir is deteriorated with loss of surface concrete, scour and
abrasion from flowing water.
Several of the joints visible in areas of low flow were open with varying degrees of spalling
noted. Most notably along the transition (top) to the downstream side and between the seepage
gallery walls.
The downstream apron/splash pad was not visible due to high tailwater and water flowing
over the spillway. In addition the seepage galleries/buttresses could not be accessed.
Some minor vegetation is developing along the approach and the downstream area was clear.
Auxiliary Spillway
A stepped granite block mortared masonry overflow spillway is located downstream of the
raceway gates immediately downstream of the left training wall of the spillway. Water passing
over the spillway drops over a single step and then down a vertical face into the primary
spillway channel.
Leakage was observed in several areas including from the raceway thought the masonry and
onto the step, and through the joints of the downstream masonry along the face and the base.
Leakage was clear.
Mortar is missing in several locations resulting in voids through the masonry. Stones along the
crest and top of the step are shifted resulting in increased leakage in areas.
Raceway Gates
There is no head drop across the raceway controls (gates).

The gates appear to be abandoned and inoperable and the timber supports, frame and bracing
are rotted in several locations. The horizontal timber boards that form the control section are
less deteriorated but do not appear to be functioning or are open below the waterline.
The steel components to the rack and pinion operating mechanism are corroded and do not
appear functional.
The granite block masonry channel walls are in fair condition with good alignment, voids
(from displaced stones) and missing mortar (typical).
The raceway channel is separated from the primary spillway by an embankment section that is
20 feet wide near the spillway and widens to about 40 or 50 feet wide near the raceway
diversion. The embankment is completely overgrown with brush, weeds and saplings with an
eroded path down the centerline. The vegetation growth limited visibility of the ground
surface and details.
Raceway Diversion
An additional diversion structure from the raceway to the primary spillway channel is located
approximately 260 feet downstream from the raceway gates.
The diversion is controlled by two wooden lift gates which were closed during the inspection.
The wooden components (frame, boards, etc) were protected with coating; however, they were
deteriorated and rotted in areas, and the rack and pinion operating mechanism and associated
hardware were corroded.
Both gates were closed and leakage of 20 30 gpm was noted at the downstream side.

Hope Dam Inspection
Downstream of the gates flow is conveyed to the spillway channel via a concrete walled
channel. The concrete walls were in satisfactory condition with good alignment and minor
surface deterioration.
Access restrictions to the mill complex prevented an inspection beyond Main Street/Route
116.
2.1.4 Downstream Area
Downstream of the spillway, the channel is a natural channel that flows freely for
approximately 500-feet before concrete training walls direct the flow under Main Street. After passing
under Main Street the downstream channel meanders through a mix of lightly residential areas and
densely wooded areas.
To the immediate downstream right of the spillway (approximately 200-feet) there is a

transformer station.
2.1.5 Reservoir Area
The dam is located within the southern portion of an impoundment area that is roughly S-
shaped. The impoundment is long and narrow (Approximately 1500x250) and bends around two
peninsulas, creating many coves. The shape of the impoundment limits the effective fetch leading to
the embankment section too approximately 800 feet.
Along the perimeter of the impoundment is a mix of light residential development (west
shoreline) and densely wooded (east shoreline) areas. A beach area with several docks is located at
about the middle of the impoundment on the eastern shoreline. A pair of high tension power cables
runs over the impoundment. The impoundment is fed by outflow from the Gainer Memorial Dam,
which impounds water along the Pawtuxet River to create the Situate Reservoir.
2.2 Caretaker Interview
As stated earlier in this report, the current owner of the dam is unknown.
2.3 Operation and Maintenance Procedures
There was no formal operations and maintenance manual for the dam available at the time of the
inspection.
2.3.1 Operational Procedures
At the time of the inspection, it appears that impoundment levels can be controlled at two
locations; the primary spillway (with flashboards) and the raceway gates. The raceway gates did not
appear operable during the inspection. Flows within the raceway can be controlled by the gates at the
diversion and the reported gates at the mill complex. The raceway diversion was closed during the
current inspection and was reportedly open during the 2011 inspection, and it is not clear who operates
the system. No operational plan was indicated to exist at the time of the inspection.

Hope Dam Inspection
2.3.2 Maintenance of Dam and Operating Facilities
There was no maintenance manual for the dam available at the time of the inspection. While
some evidence of maintenance is apparent to control vegetation near the spillway and along walking
paths, maintenance in critical areas such as along masonry sections, the spillway components, and
gates does not appear to be completed.

Hope Dam Assessments and Recommendations
3.0 ASSESSMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
3.1 Assessments
The Hope Dam was found to have the following deficiencies:
1. A low area near the right abutment.

2. Eroded and irregular upstream slopes.
3. An irregular crest.
4. Failed sections of upstream walls.
5. Bulging along sections of the downstream wall with missing capstones.
6. Vegetation growth and saplings along the majority of the embankment and along the
downstream toe.
7. An inoperable raceway gate system.
8. A leaking and deteriorated auxiliary spillway.
9. A deteriorated diversion structure of unknown operability.
RIDEM completed an inspection of the dam on August 29, 2007 and visited the dam to assess it for
damage on March 31 and April 1, 2010 after extensive rainfall that caused flooding in much of the
state. In addition, Pare inspected the dam on December 14, 2011. Based on comparison of
observations between this inspection and the previous one, the dam is in condition similar to that
previously observed with exception of increased vegetation growth throughout the dam
Previously Identified Deficiency/Recommendation Resolution or Current Condition

The upstream slope protection is partially eroded. Erosion still evident at the bend. Some apparent slope
protection buttressing the upstream side
Disturbed and loose material on the crest of the slope Crest is irregular with several undulations and vertical
after August 2007 vegetation removal irregularities.
Inspect areas that are usually underwater (from 1999 PARE did not find any records that indicate this was
report) completed.
The dam should be inspected at least yearly (from PARE did not find any records that indicate this was
1999 report) completed.
Complete an evaluation for repairing the raceway gate Note completed
system
evaluate the ability of the diversion outlet and/or the
gates at the mill building to perform as a low level
drawdown mechanism
Evaluate the low area beyond the right abutment
Complete stability analyses
Complete an underwater inspection
Stumps need to be removed, the root systems grubbed
Repair the stone masonry training walls
Repair the stone masonry at the auxiliary spillway
Regrade/fill crest of the dam to a uniform elevation
Establish a maintainable grass cover along the crest
Develop an Operations and Maintenance Manual
Implement a program of regular inspection and Inspections ongoing; however no monitoring program
monitoring implemented.

The following recommendations and remedial measures generally describe the recommended
approach to address current deficiencies at the dam. Prior to undertaking recommended maintenance,
repairs, or remedial measures, the applicability of environmental permits needs to be determined for
activities that may occur within resource areas under the jurisdiction of RIDEM or other regulatory
agencies.
3.2 Recommendations
The following present additional studies, routine and recurrent operations and maintenance activities,
and repairs recommended to address deficiencies noted during the inspection and the completion of
this report. The recommendations provided below should be implemented in accordance with general
dam safety practice. Further, if left unaddressed, many of the conditions identified above will
continue to deteriorate and could compromise the future safety of the dam and appurtenant structures.
The following recommendations for engineering studies, evaluations, maintenance repairs, and
remedial measures are generally consistent with those stated in PAREs 2011 Inspection/Evaluation
Report for the Hope Dam; therefore, the recommendations provided therein remain valid. Additional
recommendations include, but are not limited to, clearing the vegetation that has developed since the
previous inspection.
1. Complete an evaluation for repairing the raceway gate system, including an underwater
inspection to observe the approach, gate components, training walls, and discharge area.
Based on this evaluation, complete repairs as necessary which could include repairing and/or
replacing the gates and controls. Potential replacement options include installing a series of
aluminum lift gates that are channel mounted at rehabilitated masonry training walls and the
installation of at least one concrete or stone masonry pier to support the central sections of the
gates.
2. As an alternative to repairing the raceway gates, evaluate the ability of the diversion outlet
and/or the gates at the mill building to serve as a low level drawdown mechanism for the
impoundment. This includes survey measurements, verifying the operability of both gate
systems, assessing the condition of the diversion gates, inspecting the gates at the mill,
inspecting the channel walls and associated embankments for adequately containing the flows
from the impoundment, and making repairs as needed. At a minimum, the timber frame that
supports the diversion gates should be rehabilitated. Please note that this alternative may be
more costly compared to rehabilitating the low level outlets at the dam due to the extended
network of channels and gates that will serve to impound the pond.
3. Evaluate the low area beyond the right abutment as to how it will affect the dam structure
during high flows and complete mitigary improvements if needed. This may include the
construction of a dike from the right abutment to higher natural ground.
4. Complete stability analyses to evaluate the current condition of and the potential movement
occurring at the upstream walls/slope, crest, and downstream walls. In order to complete these
analyses, completion of a subsurface investigation consisting of soil borings will likely be
required to assess the current conditions of the embankment soils and pressures applied to the
stone masonry walls. Based on the results of the analyses, rehabilitate the upstream walls,
downstream walls, and crest in order to provide a stable section. This could include partially

or fully rebuilding the walls, installing a stone buttress against the face of the existing wall
sections, and resetting capstones.
5. Complete an underwater inspection of the spillway to assess mortar/concrete condition,

alignment, erosion, and leakage; including the seepage galleries/buttresses. Seal scoured areas,
seal spalled areas, seal open joints, and resurface the top of the spillway weir. Perform crack
and additional repairs as necessary based on observed conditions. Temporary cofferdams may
be needed in order to divert flows from the downstream sections. Several stages of cofferdam
installations are anticipated to complete this work. Complete repairs as needed
6. Clear the entire dam embankment, inclusive of the dam crest, upstream and downstream sides
of fallen leaves, brush, and trees/saplings, including the vegetation growing out of masonry
and along the toe. Biannual clearing (i.e. late spring and fall) is recommended to keep the
vegetation from returning. The clearing should extend at least 15 feet beyond the toe of the
dam. When brush is cut down, it should be removed from the dam to permit a clear view of
the embankment. Significant root systems should also be pulled and the resulting holes
properly filled.
7. Following the clearing of the inundated areas described within this report, perform a follow-up
inspection on the condition of these areas.
8. Stumps need to be removed, the root systems grubbed from the embankment and the resulting
holes promptly filled with suitable, compacted material. Depending upon the type of tree
stumps to be removed, the procedure for removing the root system may vary. Some trees have
taproots while others have a shallow network of roots that cover a large area. The impacts to
the embankment should be evaluated by an engineer prior to grubbing roots from the
dam.
9. Repair the stone masonry training walls to the primary spillway. Repairs would include
installing chinking stones and/or mortar within joints.
10. Repair the stone masonry at the auxiliary spillway including the installation of chinking stones
and resetting missing blocks. If the leakage is not mitigated with typical masonry repairs,
filling of internal voids with pressure injected grouting techniques or replacement may be
necessary.
11. Regrade/fill the crest of the dam to provide a uniform top of dam elevation along the length of
the dam.
12. Establish a maintainable grass cover along the crest. If properly maintained, grass is not only
an effective means of controlling erosion, it also enhances the appearance of a dam and
provides a surface that can be easily inspected. Grass roots and stems tend to trap fine sand
and soil particles, forming an erosion resistant layer once the plants are well established.
Grass is least effective in areas of concentrated runoff or in areas subjected to wave action or
pedestrian traffic. In these areas, a more durable protection such as stone may be more
desirable.
13. Complete detailed hydrologic and hydraulic (H&H) analyses to evaluate the capacity of the
structure to accommodate various storm events that would be typical for the watershed. It is
recommended that the analyses consider flows associated with the 100-year through the one

half probable maximum flood (1/2 PMF) storm events. The analysis should account for the
routed inflow that utilizes the full storage capacity within the impoundment and drainage area.
A structure that cannot discharge the inflow associated with normal storm events will be
overtopped in an uncontrolled manner that could damage the structure and threaten
downstream areas.
14. A formalized Operations and Maintenance Manual should be developed for this structure.
This manual should include procedures for maintaining the level of the impoundment,
including adjusting the level of the impoundment in anticipation of rain events to provide
additional free board during the wetter months. Additionally, the manual should include
periodic inspection schedules and operational and maintenance procedures required to ensure
satisfactory operation and minimize deterioration of the facility. The manual should also
provide record keeping procedures for ongoing inspection and monitoring, including the
monitoring of the observed wet areas near the downstream toe, the bulging downstream wall
section, and other areas of potential movement and deterioration.
The manual should include schedule for regular maintenance activities to be continued to
control and prevent growth of unwanted vegetation.
15. Implement a program of regular inspection and monitoring of the dam. As the dam is
currently classified as a significant hazard potential dam, the completion of a formal visual
inspection by a RI registered professional engineer familiar with dam engineering is
recommended every 5 years.
3.3 Alternatives
The following alternatives are presented based upon a conceptual review of the concerns. Additional
studies and or considerations may indicate that some or all of the options presented below are not
suitable for the conditions specific to this dam and dam site. In addition to the general activities,
appropriate environmental permits will be required to complete many of the alternatives presented
below.
Dam Removal/Breaching: Alternative to implementing any of the repairs noted above, breaching of
the dam is a viable alternative for addressing safety and stability concerns at the dam. While this
alternative will address the safety concerns at the dam, it will result in the loss of the recreational and
environmental resource and reduce potential flood control capacity provided by the dam and
impoundment. Additionally, while removal will result in elimination of yearly operating and
maintenance expenses, permitting activities and construction costs associated with dam removal may
exceed those of rehabilitation and operations and maintenance.
In evaluating the potential for dam removal several preliminary studies should be completed
including:
Hydrologic/Hydraulic Analysis similar to those described above should be completed to

assess any changes that may occur during routine storm events.
A review of the historic significance that the structure may have with the community, if any.
This review should include discussions with the local and state historic commissions.
A review of rare or endangered species which may be present in the area and dependent upon
the resources created by the dam.

An analysis of the volume, character and disposition of the sediment behind the dam. This is
required to understand the amount of material to be removed or stabilize the potential for
contamination within the sediment which would require special handling, and potential
scouring which would result in the migration of sediment through the downstream reaches.
Once these preliminary studies and reviews have been completed the permit requirements should be
reviewed.
Lower the Dam: Complete modifications to the dam to reduce the dam height, thereby reducing the
maximum height and volume of water that may be impounded by the dam. Evaluate the impact of the
lowered dam upon the hazard potential. While this alternative may result in reducing the hazard
potential, recommendations listed above remain valid and should be implemented in accordance to
general dam safety practice. Additionally, permitting activities and construction costs associated with
reducing the dam height may exceed those of repair.

Hope Dam
COMMON DAM SAFETY DEFINITIONS
For a comprehensive list of dam engineering terminology and definitions refer to State of Rhode Island
Rules and Regulations for Dam Safety, or other reference published by FERC, Dept. of the Interior Bureau
of Reclamation, or FEMA.
Orientation
Upstream Shall mean the side of the dam that borders the impoundment.
Downstream Shall mean the high side of the dam, the side opposite the upstream side.
Right Shall mean the area to the right when looking in the downstream direction.
Left Shall mean the area to the left when looking in the downstream direction.
Dam Components
Dam means any barrier made by humans, including appurtenant works, that impounds or diverts water.
Embankment means the fill material, including but not limited to rock or earth, placed to provide a
permanent barrier that impounds water.
Crest Shall mean the top of the dam, usually provides a road or path across the dam.
Abutment Shall mean that part of a valley side against which a dam is constructed. An artificial abutment
is sometimes constructed as a concrete gravity section, to take the thrust of an arch dam where there is no
suitable natural abutment.
Appurtenant Works means any ancillary feature of a dam including such structures as dikes, training
walls, spillways, either in the dam or separate there from, low level outlet works, and water conduits such
as tunnels, channels, pipelines or penstocks, either through the dam or its abutments.
Spillway means a structure, a low area in natural grade or any part of the dam which has been designed or
relied upon to allow normal flow or major flood flow to pass over or through while being discharged from a
reservoir.
Hazard Classification
High Hazard means a dam where failure or misoperation will result in probable loss of human life.
Significant Hazard means a dam where failure or misoperation results in no probable loss of human life
but can cause major economic loss, disruption of lifeline facilities or impact other concerns detrimental to
the publics health, safety or welfare. Examples of major economic loss include but are not limited to
washout of a state or federal highway, washout of two or more municipal roads, loss of vehicular access to
residences, (e.g. a dead end road whereby emergency personnel could no longer access residences beyond
the washout area) or damage to a few structures.
Low Hazard means a dam where failure or misoperation results in no probable loss of human life and low
economic losses.
General
EAP Emergency Action Plan Shall mean a predetermined (and properly documented) plan of action to
be taken to reduce the potential for property damage and/or loss of life in an area affected by an impending
dam failure.
O&M Manual Operations and Maintenance Manual; Document identifying routine maintenance and
operational procedures under normal and storm conditions.
Normal Pool Shall mean the elevation of the impoundment during normal operating conditions.
Acre-foot Shall mean a unit of volumetric measure that would cover one acre to a depth of one foot. It is
equal to 43,560 cubic feet. One million U.S. gallons = 3.068 acre feet.
Inspection Date: December 14, 2011

Insp Report 160-Hope Dam-6-23-16
Hope Dam
Height of Dam means the vertical distance from the elevation of the uppermost surface of a dam to the
lowest point of natural ground, including any stream channel, along the downstream toe of the dam.
Hydraulic Height means the height to which water rises behind a dam and the difference between the
lowest point in the original streambed at the axis of the dam and the maximum controllable water surface.
Maximum Water Storage Elevation means the maximum elevation of water surface which can be
contained by the dam without overtopping the embankment section.
Spillway Design Flood (SDF) Shall mean the flood used in the design of a dam and its appurtenant works
particularly for sizing the spillway and outlet works, and for determining maximum temporary storage and
height of dam requirements.
Maximum Storage Capacity The volume of water contained in the impoundment at maximum water
storage elevation.
Normal Storage Capacity The volume of water contained in the impoundment at normal water storage
elevation.
Condition Rating
Unsafe Means the condition of a regulated dam, as determined by the Director, is such that an
unreasonable risk of failure exists that will result in a probable loss of human life or major economic loss.
Among the conditions that would result in this determination are: excessive vegetation that does not allow
the Director to perform a complete visual inspection of a dam, excessive seepage or piping, significant
erosion problems, inadequate spillway capacity, inadequate capacity and/or condition of control structure(s)
or serious structural deficiencies, including movement of the structure or major cracking.*
Poor A component that has deteriorated beyond a maintenance issue and requires repair.; the component
no longer functions as it was originally intended.
Fair Means a component that requires maintenance
Good Meeting minimum guidelines where no irregularities are observed and the component appears to be
maintained properly.
* Structural deficiencies include but are not limited to the following:
Excessive uncontrolled seepage (e.g., upwelling of water, evidence of fines movement,

flowing water, erosion, etc.)
Missing riprap with resulting erosion of slope
Sinkholes, particularly behind retaining walls and above outlet pipes, possibly indicating loss
of soil due to piping, rather than animal burrows
Excessive vegetation and tree growth, particularly if it obscures features of the dam and the
dam cannot be fully inspected
Deterioration of concrete structures (e.g., exposed rebar, tilted walls, large cracks with or
without seepage, excessive spalling, etc.)
Inoperable outlets (gates and valves that have not been operated for many years or are broken)

Hope Dam
REFERENCES AND RESOURCES
The following reports were located during the file review completed at RIDEM Offices in
Providence, Rhode Island:
1. Dam Inspection/Evaluation Report, Pare Corporation, December 14, 2011.
2. Hope-Dam#160-Significant Hazard, 2010 Flood Status Report, RI Department of

Environmental Management Office of Compliance & Inspection, March 30, 2010 and April
1, 2010.
3. Hope Mill Village Proposed Site Plan, Sheet No. C-2, Robinson Design, Inc., November
26, 2007.
4. Hope (160) RI Department of Environmental Management Office of Compliance &

Inspection, August 29, 2007.
5. Hope (160) RI Department of Environmental Management Office of Compliance &

Inspection, September 1, 1999.
6. On-Site Meeting - Inspection, RI Plantations Department of Environmental Management

Office of Compliance & Inspection, November 21, 2003.
7. Dam Inspection Checklist, State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations Department of
Environmental Management, June 8, 1988
The following were referenced during the completion of the visual inspection and preparation of
this report and the development of the recommendations presented herein:
1. Design of Small Dams, United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation,
1987
2. ER 110-2-106 - Recommended Guidelines for Safety Inspection of Dams, Department of

the Army, September 26, 1979.
3. Guidelines for Reporting the Performance of Dams National Performance of Dams

Program, August 1994.
The following provides an abbreviated list of resources for dam owners to locate additional
information pertaining to dam safety, regulations, maintenance, operations, and other information
relevant to the ownership responsibilities associated with their dam.
1. RIDEM Office of Compliance and Inspection Website:

http://www.dem.ri.gov/programs/benviron/compinsp/
2. Dam Owners Guide To Plant Impact On Earthen Dams FEMA L-263,September 2005
3. Technical Manual for Dam Owners: Impacts of Plants on Earthen Dams FEMA 534,
September 2005

Hope Dam
4. Dam Safety: An Owners Guidance Manual FEMA 145,December 1986
5. Association of Dam Safety Officials Website: www.asdso.org/
6. Dam Ownership Responsibility and Liability, ASDSO


Hope Dam
VISUAL DAM INSPECTION

LIMITATIONS
Visual Inspection
1. The assessment of the general condition of the dam is based upon available data and
visual inspections. Detailed investigations and analyses involving topographic mapping,
subsurface investigations, testing and detailed computational evaluations are beyond the
scope of this report.
2. In reviewing this report, it should be realized that the reported condition of the dam is
based on observations of field conditions at the time of inspection, along with data
available to the inspection team. In cases where an impoundment is lowered or drained
prior to inspection, such action, while improving the stability and safety of the dam,
removes the normal load on the structure and may obscure certain conditions, which
might otherwise be detectable if inspected under the normal operating environment of the
structure.
3. It is critical to note that the condition of the dam depends on numerous and constantly
changing internal and external conditions, and is evolutionary in nature. It would be
incorrect to assume that the present condition of the dam will continue to represent the
condition of the dam at some point in the future. Only through continued care and
inspection can there be any chance that unsafe conditions be detected.
Use of Report
4. The applicability of environmental permits needs to be determined prior to undertaking

maintenance activities that may occur within resource areas under the jurisdiction of any
regulatory agency.
5. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the RIDEM for specific application
to the reference dam site in accordance with generally accepted engineering practices.
No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made.
6. This report has been prepared for this project by Pare. This report is for preliminary
evaluation purposes only and is not necessarily sufficient to support design of repairs or
recommendations or to prepare an accurate bid.

Hope Dam, Scituate, RI Inspection Photographs
Photo No. 1: Overview of the Hope Dam from the left abutment looking right.
Photo No. 2: Overview of the Hope Dam from the upstream right abutment.
Photo No. 3: Upstream side of the dam from the right abutment looking left (east-
west section). Note dense vegetation growth and saplings obscuring the stone
masonry wall on the upstream side of the embankment.
Photo No. 4: Close up view of the raveled/failed upstream wall and displaced
stones (east-west section). Note the exposed soil behind the wall. Typical of several
locations along the upstream side between the right abutment and the bend leading
to the spillway.
Photo No. 5: Eroded upstream side at the bend in the embankment leading to the
right end of the primary spillway.
Photo No. 6: : Upstream wall of the embankment leading to the right end of the
spillway (north-south section). Note the raveled top section of the wall with no
capstones.
Photo No. 7: Crest of the dam from the right abutment looking left (east-west
section). Note the worn surface down the centerline and the vegetation and trees
encroaching on the shoulders
Photo No. 8: Animal borrow noted on the crest of the dam 20 feet right of the bend
in the embankment (east-west section).
Photo No. 9: Crest of the dam from near the bend in the embankment looking right
toward the right abutment (east-west section).
Photo No. 10: Crest of the dam from near the bend in the embankment looking left
toward the right end of the spillway (north-south section). Note erosion along the
upstream side and sapling growth along the downstream side.
Photo No. 11: Downstream stone masonry wall of the dam embankment from
approximately 70 feet left the right abutment looking left (east-west section). Note
vegetation, saplings and trees along the toe of the wall.
Photo No. 12: Downstream masonry wall of the embankment looking right from 20
feet left of the bend in the embankment (north-south section).
Photo No. 13: Standing/stagnant water with iron oxide in the downstream area
between the east-west section and north-south section of the embankment
(possible tailwater).
Photo No. 14: Overview of the primary spillway from the right side looking left. Note
tripped flashboards.
Photo No. 15: Approach to the primary spillway from the right side looking left and
slightly downstream.
Photo No. 16: Downstream side of the primary spillway from the right side looking
left and slightly upstream.
Photo No. 17: Downstream side of the primary spillway from the sluiceway looking
right and slightly upstream
Photo No. 18: Close up of the downstream side of the spillway. Note loss of
surface concrete and spalled/open joints
.
Photo No. 19: Left training wall of the primary spillway. Note scour along the water
line, vegetation, staining and open joints
Photo No. 20: right training wall of the primary spillway. Note Cracking and
efflorescence.
Photo No. 21: Upstream side of the abandoned raceway gates at the left end of the
dam from the left abutment looking right.
Photo No. 22: Downstream side of the abandoned race way gates at the left end of
the dam from the left bank of sluiceway looking right and slightly upstream.
Photo No. 23: Approach and crest of the overflow spillway for the raceway along the
left side of the dam approximately 20 feet downstream from the abandoned gates.
Photo No. 24: Downstream side of the overflow spillway form the raceway along.
Photo from the right end of the primary spillway looking left across the downstream
channel. Note seepage/leakage through the masonry and at the base.
Photo No. 25: Overview of the raceway diversion from downstream along the
raceway channel.
Photo No. 26: Timber lift gate and control mechanism for the right gate at the
diversion structure (typical both gates).
Photo No. 27: Concrete discharge channel for the raceway diversion looking right
toward the primary spillway channel.
Photo No. 28: Overview of the Impoundment upstream of the primary spillway.
Photo No. 29:Overview of the channel downstream of the primary spillway.
Photo No. 30: Overview of the raceway channel downstream of the overflow
spillway.

Hope Dam Inspection Report - Dam - 160-Hope Dam-6!23!16

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Hope Dam Inspection Report - Dam - 160-Hope Dam-6!23!16

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

-- HOPE DAM --

Dam Name: Hope Dam

State Dam ID#: 160

Consultant: Pare Corporation

Date of Inspection: June 23, 2016

Dam Name (No): Hope Dam (160)

Inspector: Joshua E. Rosenberg, P.E., Pare Corporation

Inspection Date: June 23, 2016

Inspection Date: June 23, 2016

1.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT

1.1.2 Purpose of Work

1.2 Description of Project

Inspection Date: June 23, 2016

Based on RIDEM records, the Owner/Caretaker of the dam is unknown.

1.2.3 Purpose of the Dam

1.2.4 Description of the Dam and Appurtenances

Inspection Date: June 23, 2016

1.2.5 Operations and Maintenance

1.2.6 Hazard Potential Classification

Inspection Date: June 23, 2016

2.1 Visual Inspection

2.1.1 General Findings

2.1.2 Dam Embankment

Inspection Date: June 23, 2016

2.1.3 Appurtenant Structures

Inspection Date: June 23, 2016

There is no head drop across the raceway controls (gates).

Inspection Date: June 23, 2016

2.1.4 Downstream Area

To the immediate downstream right of the spillway (approximately 200-feet) there is a

2.1.5 Reservoir Area

2.2 Caretaker Interview

2.3 Operation and Maintenance Procedures

2.3.1 Operational Procedures

Inspection Date: June 23, 2016

2.3.2 Maintenance of Dam and Operating Facilities

Inspection Date: June 23, 2016

3.0 ASSESSMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The Hope Dam was found to have the following deficiencies:

1. A low area near the right abutment.

Previously Identified Deficiency/Recommendation Resolution or Current Condition

Inspection Date: June 23, 2016

Inspection Date: June 23, 2016

5. Complete an underwater inspection of the spillway to assess mortar/concrete condition,

Inspection Date: June 23, 2016

Hydrologic/Hydraulic Analysis similar to those described above should be completed to

Inspection Date: June 23, 2016

Inspection Date: June 23, 2016

COMMON DAM SAFETY DEFINITIONS

Inspection Date: December 14, 2011

* Structural deficiencies include but are not limited to the following:

Excessive uncontrolled seepage (e.g., upwelling of water, evidence of fines movement,

Inspection Date: June 23, 2016

REFERENCES AND RESOURCES

1. Dam Inspection/Evaluation Report, Pare Corporation, December 14, 2011.

2. Hope-Dam#160-Significant Hazard, 2010 Flood Status Report, RI Department of

4. Hope (160) RI Department of Environmental Management Office of Compliance &

5. Hope (160) RI Department of Environmental Management Office of Compliance &

6. On-Site Meeting - Inspection, RI Plantations Department of Environmental Management

2. ER 110-2-106 - Recommended Guidelines for Safety Inspection of Dams, Department of

3. Guidelines for Reporting the Performance of Dams National Performance of Dams

1. RIDEM Office of Compliance and Inspection Website:

Inspection Date: June 23, 2016