DOCSLIB.ORG

Port Bay Barrier Bar Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Port Bay Barrier Bar Assessment DRAFT May 2019 Port Bay Barrier Bar Assessment Prepared for New York State Office of General Services and New York State Department of Environmental Conservation DRAFT May 2019 Port Bay Barrier Bar Assessment Prepared for Prepared by NYS Office of General Services Bergmann NYS Department of Environmental Conservation EcoLogic Project Number: OGS SC286 DRAFT TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Project Purpose and Objectives............................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Project Team/Sponsors .............................................................................................................................. 3 1.3 Stakeholder Coordination and Outreach.............................................................................................. 4 2 Existing Conditions .................................................................................................................... 6 2.1 Physical/Geological Conditions ............................................................................................................... 6 2.1.1 Data Sources .................................................................................................................................. 6 2.1.2 Condition of the Shoreline......................................................................................................... 7 2.1.3 Lake Level History and Projections ........................................................................................ 11 2.1.4 Typical Current Velocities ......................................................................................................... 13 2.1.5 Wind Generated Waves ............................................................................................................ 13 2.1.6 Storm Surge.................................................................................................................................. 15 2.1.7 Coastal Sediment Transport .................................................................................................... 15 2.1.8 Coastal Sediment Trapped During 2016 and 2017 Breaches ........................................ 23 2.1.9 2018 - 2019 Dredged Material Placement .......................................................................... 24 2.2 Economic Conditions ................................................................................................................................ 81 2.2.1 Data Sources ................................................................................................................................ 81 2.2.2 Private Property Damage Costs from 2017 Breach Event ............................................... 81 2.2.3 Private Property Damage Costs from 2018 Breach Event ............................................... 93 2.2.4 Determination of Anticipated Damage Cost Per Breach................................................. 96 2.3 Biota, Habitat, and Water Quality Conditions ................................................................................... 99 2.3.1 Data Sources ................................................................................................................................ 99 2.3.2 Fisheries ......................................................................................................................................... 99 2.3.3 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species and Significant Habitats ..................... 101 2.3.4 Regulated Wetlands ................................................................................................................ 102 2.3.5 Aquatic Macrophytes.............................................................................................................. 102 2.3.6 Invasive Species........................................................................................................................ 104 2.3.7 Water Quality ............................................................................................................................ 104 2.3.8 Littoral Zone Habitat ............................................................................................................... 105 2.3.9 Summary of Impacts of the 2017 Breach on Biota, Habitat, and Water Quality ... 108 3 Management Alternatives and Design Requirements ................................................. 133 3.1 Management Alternatives .................................................................................................................... 134 3.1.1 Permanent Equipment Access ............................................................................................. 134 Port Bay Barrier Bar Assessment i May 2019 DRAFT 3.1.2 Alternative A: No Action ........................................................................................................ 134 3.1.3 Alternative B: Limited Sediment Management ............................................................... 135 3.1.4 Alternative C: Nature-Based Barrier Bar ............................................................................ 136 3.1.5 Alternative D: Adaptive Management ............................................................................... 137 3.1.6 Alternative E: Infrastructure Protection Measures.......................................................... 138 3.1.7 Alternative F: Fortification Using Rock Revetment......................................................... 139 3.1.8 Alternative G: Fortification Using Rock Revetment with Armored Overflow ......... 140 3.1.9 Alternative H: Fortification Using Rock Revetment with Culvert(s) ........................... 141 4 Evaluation and Recommendations .................................................................................... 151 4.1 Overview of the Alternatives Evaluation Process .......................................................................... 151 4.2 Evaluation of Alternatives Against Project Goals and Indicators .............................................. 153 4.3 Project Costs and Life-Cycle Cost Analysis of Most Feasible Alternatives ............................. 165 4.3.1 Conceptual Project Construction Costs............................................................................. 165 4.3.2 Life Cycle Analysis .................................................................................................................... 165 4.4 Recommended Alternative .................................................................................................................. 167 4.5 Regulatory Requirements for the Recommended Alternative .................................................. 170 5 References ............................................................................................................................... 172 TABLES Table 2.1-1 Conversion from IGLD85 to NAVD88 for Port Bay ............................................................... 7 Table 2.1-2 Monthly Variation of Water Levels in Lake Ontario, 1918-2017 ..................................... 11 Table 2.1-3 Maximum and Minimum Allowable Monthly Mean Water Level of Lake Ontario Based on an Order by IJC Effective Jan. 2017 ...................................................................... 12 Table 2.1-4 Largest Three Observed Waves at Three Stations North of Port Bay, 1970-2014 ...... 14 Table 2.1-5 Top 10 Surges in Oswego, 1976-2006 ................................................................................... 15 Table 2.1-6 Lake Ontario Annual Sediment Budget ................................................................................. 18 Table 2.1-7 Representative Waves of Sediment Transport Calculations ............................................. 19 Table 2.1-8 Sediment Fractions for Calculation of Longshore Sediment Transport......................... 20 Table 2.1-9 Potential Longshore Sediment Transport Along East Barrier Bar ................................... 21 Table 2.2-1 NYSDEC Environmental Permits Within Port Bay ................................................................ 86 Table 2.2-2 Survey Responses for Damage Incurred During 2017 ....................................................... 88 Table 2.2-3 Description of Damage Incurred During 2018..................................................................... 93 Table 2.3-1 Number and Relative Abundance of Fish Species Captured by Gill Netting and Board Electrofishing from Port Bay During NYSDEC Fisheries Survey, Sept. 2012 ... 100 Port Bay Barrier Bar Assessment ii May 2019 DRAFT Table 2.3-2 Species and Native/Invasive Status of Aquatic Macrophytes Known to Occur in Port Bay ........................................................................................................................................ 103 Table 4.1-1 Project Goals and Indicators Used to Screen Management Alternatives ................... 152 Table 4.2-1 Visual Summary of Project Goals Evaluation ...................................................................... 161 Table 4.2-2 Project Goals Evaluation .......................................................................................................... 162 Table 4.3-1 Maintenance Activities Summary .......................................................................................... 166 Table 4.3-2 Life Cycle Analysis Costs .........................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Roman Watchtower on the Gask Frontier W S Hanson* & J G P Friellf
    Proc Soc Antiq Scot, (1995)5 12 , 499-519 Westerton: a Roman watchtower on the Gask frontier W S Hanson* & J G P Friellf ABSTRACT The excavation of the Roman timber watchtower at Westerton was undertaken to obtain dating evidence and a complete plan. The four-post tower was more elongated in plan than anticipated provided frontwas the at and with steps giving accessfirst-floorthe to level,a feature readilynot paralleled excavatedin towers anywhere Romanthe in Empire.one The fragment f probableo mortarium recovered frome singleth enclosing ditch s commensuratei with a Flavian date. Disturbance of the post-holes indicated that the tower had been deliberately demolished. The tower consideredis relationin otherto adjacent examples which Gask makethe up frontier. The function of this system is discussed and placed in its broader historical context. INTRODUCTION existence Th seriea f eo f timbe o s r towers alon Gase gth k Ridg lons eha g been known beste Th . - preserved examples follow the line of the Roman road to the east of the fort at Strageath along this low ridge of hills, which runs approximately east/west immediately to the north of the river Earn. e numbeTh f siteo r s know s grownha n ove pase , largelyear0 th rso 5 t r o sy through aerial reconnaissance resulta s A . , somattested w tower7 1 eno e e distributiosar th , f whicno h extends beyon Gase dth k Ridg enorth-easte botth o ht , towarde th o fore t t Berth Taye sth a d t th an , n ao south, past the fort at Ardoch (illus 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Stick Bomb for 37-Mm Antitank Gun
    THE COMMAND AND GENERAL STAFF SCHOOL LIBRARY 940 5-HI-D Class Symbol... 60720 Accession Number TACTICAL AND TECHNICAL TRENDS No. 21 March 25, 1943 Prepared for ARMY GROUND AND AIR FORCES AND SERVICES OF SUPPLY by MILITARY INTELLIGENCE SERVICE, WAR DEPARTMENT CONTENTS SECTION I Page Air 1. The Me-323 Transport 1 Antiaircraft 2. German Air-Raid Warning System 3 Antitank 3. German AA Guns for Use against Mechanized Vehicles . 4 4. German 76.2-mm Self-Propelled Gun 6 5. Finnish Tank Traps Over Frozen Rivers 8 Armored Force 6. Pz. Kw. 3 with 75-mm Gun 11 Chemical Warfare 7. Three Japanese Lacrimatory Weapons 11 Engineers 8. Japanese Field Works at Buna '17 Infantry 9. Japanese Ruses - Buna Area 18 10. Japanese Tactics on Guadalcanal 18 Ordnance 11. Italian 45-mm Mortar 19 12. Some Notes on German Weapon Development 22 Quartermaster 13. Axis Use of Diesel Oil for Anti-Freeze 26 14. Gas and Oil in German Mechanized Vehicles 26 General 15. Food Available in the Jungle 28 16. Japanese Date Systems 31 Glossary 17. Code Names of Japanese Fighter Aircraft 32 SECTION II Some German Views on Fortifications 35 A. Elements of Modern Fortification Design B. The Failure of Fortifications in the 1940 Campaign Readers are invited to comment on the use that they are making of this publication and to forward suggestions for future issues. Such correspondence may be addressed directly to the Dissemination Branch, Military Intelligence Service, War Department, Washington, D. C Other publications of the Military Intelligence Service include: Special Series (published at least once a month); Intelligence Bulletin (monthly); Military Reports on the United Nations (monthly).
    [Show full text]
  • FHBRO Heritage Character Statement
    HERITAGE CHARACTER STATEMENT Page 1 FHBRO Number 96-51 Kingston, Ontario Redoubt FINAL DRAFT Fort Henry The Redoubt, the main work of Fort Henry, was constructed between 1832 and 1836 for the Master General, Board of Ordnance. A six-sided casemated fortification, the redoubt, was built to observe and defend the glacis on the north-west front, dominate the eastern approaches to the dockyard and naval and commercial harbour of Kingston, command the entrance to the Rideau Canal, defend the dry ditch on all faces, and provide bomb-proof space for barrack accommodation, the storage and shifting of gunpowder and other support activities. The redoubt was the work of two members of the Corps of Royal Engineers: Lieutenant Colonel Gustavas Nicolls, who produced the design and Lieutenant Colonel Ross Wright, who oversaw the construction. External modifications include: the diverting of water from the valleys between the dos d’ânes of the casemates into internal cast iron vertical pipes and the blocking up of the original gargoyles (1844-46), the replacement of the 24-pdr. SBML gun in the north-east angle with an 8-inch shell gun on a common traversing platform (1845), the dismounting of nine 24-pdr. guns (1859), the sheathing of the superior slope of the parapets in pine boards (1861-64), the replacement of the 8-inch shell gun with a 7-inch (11 0-pdr.) Armstrong Gun RBL (1875), the demolition of the west curtain (1895), the covering of the terreplein with a built-up roof and the re-sheathing of the superior slope of the parapets (1914-1 5), the
    [Show full text]
  • Inventory of Coastal Engineering Projects in Fort Matanzas National Monument
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Inventory of Coastal Engineering Projects in Fort Matanzas National Monument Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/NRSS/GRD/NRTR—2013/703 ON THE COVER Fort Matanzas, St. Augustine, Florida Photograph by: Kate Dallas Inventory of Coastal Engineering Projects in Fort Matanzas National Monument Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/NRSS/GRD/NRTR—2013/703 Kate Dallas Oregon State University 104 CEOAS Administration Building Corvallis, OR 97331 Michael Berry, Peter Ruggiero Oregon State University 104 CEOAS Administration Building Corvallis, OR 97331 March 2013 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Technical Report Series is used to disseminate results of scientific studies in the physical, biological, and social sciences for both the advancement of science and the achievement of the National Park Service mission. The series provides contributors with a forum for displaying comprehensive data that are often deleted from journals because of page limitations. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner. This report received informal peer review by subject-matter experts who were not directly involved in the collection, analysis, or reporting of the data.
    [Show full text]
  • The Milton Blockhouse, Gravesend: Research and Excavation
    http://kentarchaeology.org.uk/research/archaeologia-cantiana/ Kent Archaeological Society is a registered charity number 223382 © 2017 Kent Archaeological Society THE MILTON BLOCKHOUSE, GRAVESEND: RESEARCH AND EXCAVATION. VICTOR T.C. SMITH, B.A. INTRODUCTION This is the third report of the Kent Defence Research Group of the Kent Archaeological Society. In the writer's paper 'The Artillery Defences at Gravesend', (Arch. Cant., Ixxxix (1974), 143) mention was made of Milton Blockhouse, one of five artillery blockhouses erected by Henry VIII to defend the Thames against a hostile fleet. It was suggested that this blockhouse had probably been built on a site at what is now the north-eastern corner of the Canal Basin, Gravesend (N.G.R. TQ 655743). Preliminary trenching in that area during 1973 had led to the discovery of substantial chalk foundations. Subsequently, addi- tional documentary research was undertaken and with the assistance of grants kindly given by the Gravesend Historical Society and the Kent Archaeological Society, and with the co-operation of the Gravesham Borough Council, further excavations under the writer's direction were carried out by the Kent Defence Research Group at intervals during 1974-8. The purpose of the excavations was to verify identification and to recover a basic plan which could be com- pared with the D-shaped Gravesend and Tilbury blockhouses, the plans of which were the only ones previously known of the five Thames blockhouses. This report sets out the documentary evidence and describes and discusses the results of the excavation. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND AND DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE Early in 1539 provision was made for the building of the five Thames blockhouses near the mouth of the river where it first begins to narrow after the estuary.1 They were constructed in 1539/ 341 VICTOR T.
    [Show full text]
  • Living Shoreline Design Guidelines for Shore Protection in Virginia’S Estuarine Environments
    Living Shoreline Design Guidelines for Shore Protection in Virginia’s Estuarine Environments Virginia Institute of Marine Science College of William & Mary Gloucester Point, Virginia September 2010 Living Shoreline Design Guidelines for Shore Protection in Virginia’s Estuarine Environments Version 1.2 C. Scott Hardaway, Jr. Donna A. Milligan Shoreline Studies Program Karen Duhring Center for Coastal Resources Management Virginia Institute of Marine Science College of William & Mary Gloucester Point, Virginia Special Report in Applied Marine Science and Ocean Engineering No. 421 This project was funded by the Virginia Coastal Zone Management Program at the Department of Environmental Quality through Grant #NA08NOS4190466 of the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, or any of its subagencies. September 2010 Table of Contents Table of Contents.............................................................. i List of Figures ............................................................... iii List of Tables............................................................... vii 1 Introduction ............................................................1 1.1 Statement of the Problem and Purpose .................................1 1.2 Chesapeake Bay Shorelines ..........................................2 1.2.1 Physical Setting
    [Show full text]
  • Notes on the Consolidation of Earthworks." by JULES GAUDARD,Civil Engineer, Lausanne (Translatedfrom the French by James Dredge, C.E.)
    21s THE CONSOLIDATION OF EARTHFVORKS. EO.1,274.-" Notes on the Consolidation of Earthworks." By JULES GAUDARD,Civil Engineer, Lausanne (Translatedfrom the French by James Dredge, C.E.). THEexecution of earthworks for roads, and more especially for railways, is frequentlyhindered by landslips, sometimes of so serious a nature as todefy all theresources of the engineer. In laying down the centre line of a road or of a railway, the regularity of the natural surface is not by anymeans the sole con- sideration. The attentionof the engineer has to becarefully directed to the natureof the ground; he must avoid, as faras possible, deep cuttingsin clayey soiIs, and, above all, in side-lying pound. Embankments, again, should not only be constructed of carefully- selected material,but they shouldbe formed upon a natural surface solid enough to carry their weight withoutset,tIement. It is easy to lay down rules for dealing with simple and well- defirled cases, but Nature for the most part presents complicated conditions for the engineer to control. Matter is not purely inert ; it possesses, so to speak, a certain chemical or physical life, which becomes gradually converted either into changeof material, or into motion. In the simple case of a cutting or a tunnel in rock, the sides of thecutting or the roof of thetunnel may be left unpro- tected,provided the rock is sufficiently solid. Butthere are materials which, appearing reliable at first, disintegrateunder atmospheric influences ; and natural steep sloping beds or strati& cations, which induce slips, are not unfrequently encountered. In such cases it is necessary either to give special inclinations to the faces of theearthworks, or to protect them with masonry.
    [Show full text]
  • Desert Operations
    FM 90-3/FMFM 7-27 DESERT OPERATIONS Headquarters Department of the Army US Marine Corps Distribution Restriction: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. FM 90-3 CHAPTER 1 THE ENVIRONMENT AND ITS EFFECTS ON PERSONNEL AND EQUIPMENT This chapter describes the desert environment and how it affects personnel and equipment. CONTENTS Page Section I The Environment . 1-1 Section II Environmental Effects on Personnel . 1-17 Section III Environmental Effects on Equipment . 1-30 Section I. The Environment Successful desert operations require adaptation to the environment and to the limitations its terrain and climate impose. Equipment and tactics must be modified and adapted to a dusty and rugged landscape where temperatures vary from extreme highs down to freezing and where visibility may change from 30 miles to 30 feet in a matter of minutes. Deserts are arid, barren regions of the earth incapable of supporting normal life due to lack of water. See Figure 1-1 for arid regions of the world. Temperatures vary according to latitude and season, from over 136 degrees Fahrenheit in the deserts of Mexico and Libya to the bitter cold of winter in the Gobi (East Asia). In some deserts, day-to-night temperature fluctuation exceeds 70 degrees Fahrenheit. Some species of animal and plant life have adapted successfully to desert conditions where annual rainfall may vary from O to 10 inches. Desert terrain also varies considerably from place to place, the sole common denominator being lack of water with its consequent environmental effects, such as sparse, if any, vegetation. The basic land forms are similar to those in other parts of the world, but the topsoil has been eroded due to a combination of lack 1-1 FM 90-3 of water, heat, and wind to give deserts their characteristic barren appearance.
    [Show full text]
  • Japanese Deliberate Field Fortifications Special Translation Number 58
    UNITED STATES PACIFIC FLEET AND PACIFIC OCEAN AREAS > JAPANESE DELIBERATE FIELD FORTIFICATIONS SPECIAL TRANSLATION NUMBER 58 CINCPACCINCPOA BULLETIN NO. 94-45 20 ii.f UNITED STATES PACIFIC FLEET AND PACIFIC OCEAN AREAS HEADQUARTERS OF THE CORIANDER IN CHIEF B MCH/pJc 25 April 1945 - Ser From: Commander in Chief, U.S.. Pacific Fleet and Pacific Ocean Areas. Distribution List. Subject: CINCPAC-CINCPOA BULLETIN No. 94-45, Special Translation No. 58, Japanese Fortifications and Emplacements. Enclosure: (A) Subject Bulletin. 1. Subject Bulletin, forwarded herewith, need not be reported and when no longer of value should be destroyed. No report of destruction is necessary. M.C. HAVILAND, By direction. DISTRIBUTION LIST: No. Copies ARMY 2 Army Map Service, War Dept., Wash., DC 5 Chief of Engineers, War Dept., Wash., DC 5 Chief of Ord. Wash., DC 2 Chief Signal Officer, War Dept., Washington, DC Inc: Arlington Hall Station, Arlington, Virginia 2 Comdt., Com., & Gen., Staff School, Ft. Leavenworth, Kansas 2 Comdt., MIS Language Scnool, Ft. Snelling, Minn. 12 CG, AAF, Wash. DC Attn: Chief of Air Staff Intel. Inc: Hq AAF AC/AS Intel. Attn: T & T Sec, Capt. W.L. Tibbets Inc: Joint Target Group 12 CG AGF Wash., DC Attn: Asst. Chief of Staff, G-2 12 CG ASF Wash., DC Attn: Director of Intel, 2 CG Fourth AF, S.F. Calif. Attn: A-2 2 G-2 Western Defense Command, Presidio, S.F. Calif. 2 Hq. Aero Chart Service, Army Air Forces, Wash., DC. 14 MIS Reading Panel, WDGS, Wash., DC 2 Pac Military Intel. Research Sec, Camp Ritchie, Maryland 2 US Army Unit, West Coast, PO Box 651, Tracy Calif.
    [Show full text]
  • Kenai River Bank Erosion Study
    KENAI RIVERBANK EROSION STUDY by Lowell S. Barrick Number 41 KENAI RIVERBANK EROSION STUDY by Lowell S. Barrick Number 41 Alaska Department of Fish & Game Division of Fisheries Rehabilitation, Enhancement and Development Don W. Col linsworth Commissioner Stanley A. Moberly Director P.O. BOX 3-2000 Juneau, A1 aska 99802 July, 1984 TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE -Page 1. FOREWORD 1 2. FIELD OBSERVATIONS 2.1 Cook Inlet to Soldotna: RM 0 - 22 2.1.1 Natural Terrain 2.1.2 Devel opment 2.1.3 Riverbank Development 2.2 Soldotna to Sterling: RM 22 - 37 2.2.1 Natural Terrain 2.2.2 Development 2.2.3 Riverbank Development 2.3 Sterling to Skilak Lake: RM 37 - 50 2.3.1 Natural Terrain 2.3.2 Development 2.3;3 Ri verbank Development 2.4 Boat Wake Induced Erosion 2.5 Field Observations Summarized 2.5.1 General 2.5.2 Riparian Development 2.5.3 Structure Placement 2.5.4 Boat Wake Erosion 3. VALUE OF THE RIPARIAN ECOSYSTEM 4. EROSION 4.1 Definition 4.1.1 Geologic 4.1.2 Climatic 4.1.3 Hydraulic 4.1.4 Induced Erosion Forces 4.1.4.1 Land Clearing and Development 4.1.4.2 Boat Wakes 4.2 Understanding Streambank Erosion 4.3 Planning Considerations 4.3.1 Define the Problem 4.3.2 Planning Protective Measures 4.3.3 Investigations 4.3.4 Design Considerations 4.3.4.1 Design Frequency 4.3.4.2 Design Velocities 4.3.4.3 Channel Changes 4.3.4.4 Undermining of Revetments 4.3.4.5 Ends of Revetment 4.3.4.6 Freeboard 4.3.4.7 Removal of Debris 5.
    [Show full text]
  • DA PAM 385-64 Ammunition and Explosives Safety Standards
    Department of the Army Pamphlet 385–64 Safety Ammunition and Explosives Safety Standards Headquarters Department of the Army Washington, DC 24 May 2011 UNCLASSIFIED SUMMARY of CHANGE DA PAM 385–64 Ammunition and Explosives Safety Standards This major revision, dated 24 May 2011-- o Updates and prescribes Army policy on ammunition and explosive safety standards (throughout). o Makes administrative changes (throughout). Headquarters *Department of the Army Department of the Army Pamphlet 385–64 Washington, DC 24 May 2011 Safety Ammunition and Explosives Safety Standards o t h e r w i s e s t a t e d . I t a l s o a p p l i e s t o a l l or senior leader of the requesting activity Army civilian personnel in a duty status, and forwarded through their higher head- on or off a DOD installation; and to all quarters to the policy proponent. Refer to persons at any time on an Army installa- AR 25–30 for specific guidance. tion. DOD military munitions under U.S. title, even though stored in a host country, S u g g e s t e d i m p r o v e m e n t s . U s e r s o f r e m a i n t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f t h e U . S . this regulation are invited to send com- Commander. Storage will conform with m e n t s a n d s u g g e s t e d i m p r o v e m e n t s o n Army standards for explosives safety un- DA Form 2028 (Recommended Changes less the use of more stringent criteria has to Publications and Blank Forms) directly been agreed to or is mandatory.
    [Show full text]
  • Bank Stabilization Design Guidelines
    Bank Stabilization Design Guidelines Report No. SRH-2015-25 Albuquerque Area Office Science and Technology Policy and Administration (Manuals and Standards) Yuma Area Office 1.1.1 1.1.2 U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Technical Service Center Denver, Colorado June 2015 Mission Statements The U.S. Department of the Interior protects America’s natural resources and heritage, honors our cultures and tribal communities, and supplies the energy to power our future. The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. Cover Photograph: Stream vanes on the Calapooia River, Washington. Courtesy of Scott Wright, Natural Resources Conservation Service. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION Technical Service Center, Denver, Colorado Sedimentation and River Hydraulics Group, 86-68240 Report No.: SRH-2015-25 Bank Stabilization Design Guidelines Report Prepared by: Drew C. Baird Ph.D, P.E., D.WRE, Hydraulic Engineer Sedimentation and River Hydraulics Group, Technical Service Center Lisa Fotherby Ph.D., P.E. Hydraulic Engineer Sedimentation and River Hydraulics Group, Technical Service Center Cassie C. Klumpp, M.S., P.E. Retired Hydraulic Engineer Sedimentation and River Hydraulics Group, Technical Service Center S. Michael Sculock, Ph.D., Research Scientist Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Engineering Research Center Colorado State University. Report Peer-Reviewed by: Blair Greimann Ph.D., P.E., Technical Specialist Sedimentation and River Hydraulics Group, Technical Service Center (Reviewed chapters 1-11 and 13-14) Nathan Holste, M.S., P.E., Hydraulic Engineer Sedimentation and River Hydraulics Group, Technical Service Center (Reviewed chapter 12) 1.1.5 1.1.6 U.S.
    [Show full text]