DOCSLIB.ORG

Stormwater Culvert and Manhole Repairs Using High Density Polyurethane

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Stormwater Culvert and Manhole Repairs Using High Density Polyurethane Stormwater Culvert and Manhole Repairs Using High Density Polyurethane 1 OUTSIDE INSIDE URETEK for External Rehabilitation CentriPipe for Internal Renewal Sewer Rehabilitation “Outside and Inside” Assess · Rehabilitate · Renew GROUNDWORKSSOLUTIONS.COM 2 Polyurethane Grout Structural Polymer for Soil Stabilization GROUNDWORKSSOLUTIONS.COM 3 Polyurethane Grout URETEK Chemistry: Characteristics Rapid Cure Can support loads after 15 minutes; full strength after 24 hours Strength Rigid Structural Polyurethane created as material cools E Modulus, Compressive Strength, Tensile Strength directly proportional to Density Spread is limited due to speed of reaction Weight Lightweight: 4 to 25 pcf (installed density) Water Resistance Hydro-Insensitive Contains water insoluble diluents - can be injected into wet soils and even standing or flowing water Resists water intrusion into the chemical reaction that forms polyurethane GROUNDWORKSSOLUTIONS.COM 4 Polyurethane Grout URETEK Chemistry: Composition Composition Resin & Hardener Mixing Ratio 1:1 Chemical Reaction Exothermic chemical reaction generates C0₂ gas C0₂ gas causes expansion of material, creating lifting pressure/ strength Reaction Time Fast Adjustable – varying injection methods Can be completed in 1 minute Environmental Impact Environmentally benign material: NSF-61 certified and only patented hydro- insensitive polyurethane foam GROUNDWORKSSOLUTIONS.COM 5 East Main Culvert Durham, NC Project Challenges Solution Support Outcome • Aging culvert, originally • Inject URETEK 486Star • Designed injection plans • Work was completed in a few weeks. constructed in 1930s. Polymer to densify the for culvert stabilization. • Culvert was stabilized and restored to surrounding soils and allow for • Oversaw tree removal. • Large tree growing into the functionality. structural repairs to the box • Set up cofferdam and side of the structure. culvert. bypass pumping. • The city of Durham was able to avoid • Actively flowing creek. • Coordinated with multi-million replacement of culvert. • Cofferdam and bypass restoration company on • Soil loss around the structure. pumping. rebar and epoxy. • Structural repairs to culvert, • Performed shotcrete. including rebar and epoxy, • Placed rip rap. crack injection, and shotcrete, GROUNDWORKSSOLUTIONS.COM 6 Cutler Spur Culvert Stabilization Crystal River, FL Project Challenges Solution Support Outcome • Concern of weak soil zones • Inject URETEK polyurethane • Specifications • Minimal downtime: All work underneath a culvert and new from surface to stabilize soils performed in one day • Designed injection points two lane road to create a solid support for the quantity and depth • Stabilized soil: Final roadway culvert • Area is in an environmentally work was able to continue on • Pre-construction meeting with sensitive area known for • Injection points at various schedule contractor, city and L3 natural springs and manatee locations and depths Communications migration • On-site installation GROUNDWORKSSOLUTIONS.COM 7 72” RCP Dam Outfall Pipe Repair Gainesville, GA Project Challenges Solution Support Outcome • 72” RCP dam outfall pipe had • Stabilize and densify • Uretek designed the • Quick Installation: Project took 6 water flowing along the outside of surrounding soils, creating a injection process using hours compared to 4 days to remove the pipe and entering the weak non-permeable layer to stop a hydrophobic 2 part and relay the RCP (would not have pipe joints water movement by use of Star 486 HDP material needed to replace). • Customer did not want to remove / Deep Injection of high density • We were able to fix the • Cost Effective: Project was more replace the RCP because was in polyurethane joints from inside the cost effective than remove/relay and good condition • Inject the Uretek 486 material pipe and did not need to bringing in additional fill material. • Customer tried cementious grout to seal the leaking joints close the road Also, slip lining was not a viable to seal joints and failed (see • Injections made at 5 & 7 option since the water was coming cementious grout attempt in pipe o’clock positions of the pipe from the outside of the pipe. haunch of picture on right) GROUNDWORKSSOLUTIONS.COM 8 NAS – Inflow & Infiltration Restoration Pensacola, FL Project Challenges Solution Support Outcome • Inflow & Infiltration into storm drain • Inject URETEK polymer using • Pre-estimate meeting with • Infrastructure Restoration: system The URETEK Method to NAVFAC URETEK polymer compacted and encapsulate and seal faulted void filled loose surrounding soils • Pavement and manhole structure • Designed injection locations, joints from inflow and infiltration to rehabilitate storm drain system settlement due to loss of bearing quantities and depths soils • The Deep Injection Process at 4 • In-situ Technology: Restored • Pre-construction and safety distinct elevations to fill voids and and increased soil load-bearing • Surface depressions due to soil meeting onsite with crew densify weak base soils to capacity at depth in two days with migrating into storm drain system prevent additional pavement and • On-site installation minimal disruption • Manhole, joint, and lateral line structure settlement encapsulation and sealing GROUNDWORKSSOLUTIONS.COM 9 USAF – Andrews Air Force Base Joint Base Andrews, MD Project Challenges Solution Support Outcome • Runway settlement caused a • Seal pipe and densify • Specifications • Sustainable Solution: work dip 11 years before scheduled compacted soils sustained until scheduled • Designed injection port quantity replacement replacement took place. • Lift runway back to original and depth • Settlement was caused by elevation • Minimally Invasive: work • Pre-construction meeting faulted joints in 60” reinforced performed allowed USAF to avoid concrete pipe beneath runway • On-site installation under strict ripping up the runway for repair security and avoid delays in its operations • USAF wanted to avoid rip & replace due to downtime GROUNDWORKSSOLUTIONS.COM 48” RCP Pipe Rehab Video 11 Hwy 61 – Emergency Sinkhole Repair Natchez, MS SHIFTED RCP BINDING AGGREGATE CRACKED RCP Project Challenges Solution Support Outcome • Sinkhole formed on HWY61 in • Mechanically align the pipe utilizing • Specifications • Sealed and rehabilitated Natchez, MS a trackhoe stormwater drainage system • Utility locates • 24” RCP misaligned due to a leaky joint • Stabilize and seal the pipe utilizing • Stabilized support soils: • Pre-construction meeting that degraded the support soils and URETEK’s Deep Injection method bound #57 aggregate to form a caused voids beneath the pipe • MDOT construction solid monolithic mass below • Fill excavated area with #57 stone support highway • The RCP shifted and caused a sinkhole aggregate and stabilize the that shut down a portion of the highway aggregate at every 4-5ft of fill • Emergency Response • Quick Installation: Project was route to a nearby hospital completed over 2 Days GROUNDWORKSSOLUTIONS.COM 12 AL DOT 4th Division SR22 Alexander City, AL Before Before Water flow is underneath culvert Water flow is underneath culvert After After Upstream Downstream Water flow is through Water flow is culvert through culvert Project Challenges Solution Support Outcome • Extensive voids and • Inject hydro-insensitive URETEK • Designed injection points • Minimal downtime: All work extremely weak soil zones polyurethane through floor quantity and depth performed in 6 hours underneath a culvert and two surface of culvert surface to • Pre-construction meeting with • Stabilized soil: Final roadway lane road cutoff flow of water, fill voids, DOT and local authorities to work was able to continue on and stabilize soils to create a • Water flowing completely minimize disruption schedule solid support for the culvert under rather than through • On-site installation with no • No Road Closure: Traditional culvert • Lift culvert and pavement full bypass required repair methods would created 50 2.5” to original elevation • Culvert & road settled 2.5” mile detour to closest river crossing GROUNDWORKSSOLUTIONS.COM 13 Jackson Lakes Box Culvert Lift Pensacola, FL Project Challenges Solution Support Outcome • Significant undermining and • Inject using The Deep Injection • Designed injection points quantity • 24” Lift of quadruple soil displacement from under Process to lift and realign the and depth barrel box culvert culvert caused by a flood event southwest corner of culverts. • Pre-construction meeting with • 25% the cost of rip and April 2014 of rain over 20” in 2 • Inject on 4’ grid using a string Escambia County Engineering replace days. line to void-fill, stabilize and Department. • Typical flow of Jackson • Voids and lose of supporting ensure a uniform lift. • Holland Pump assisted with Creek and overflow of soils caused approx. 2’ of • Onsite testing identified an dewatering. rainwater restored. settlement at the southwest average of a 2’ void across all corner of culvert. • H2O Environmental completed four barrels. masonry repairs. GROUNDWORKSSOLUTIONS.COM 14 Sealing and Stabilizing Rehabilitate the OUTSIDE Before After Without proper void fill, the structure and road are not supported to the originally designed weight-bearing capacity GROUNDWORKSSOLUTIONS.COM 15 City of Dunlap – I&I Mitigation Dunlap, TN Project Challenges Solution Support Outcome • Excessive groundwater • Seal leaking pipe collars and • Public Works Director • Fast Repair: Work inflow identified at two pump cracks. attended URETEK technical performed in
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SECTION 3 Erosion Control Measures
    SECTION 3 Erosion Control Measures 1. SEEDING When • Bare soil is exposed to erosive forces from wind and or water. Why • A cost effective way to prevent erosion by protecting the soil from raindrop impact, flowing water and wind. • Vegetation binds soil particles together with a dense root system, increasing infiltration thereby reducing runoff volume and velocity. Where • On all disturbed areas except where non-vegetative stabilization measures are being used or where seeding would interfere with agricultural activity. Scheduling • During the recommended temporary and permanent seeding dates outlined below. • Dormant seeding is acceptable. How 1. Site Assessment. Determine site physical characteristics including available sunlight, slope, adjacent topography, local climate, proximity to sensitive areas or natural plant communities, and soil characteristics such as natural drainage class, texture, fertility and pH. 2. Seed Selection. Use seed with acceptable purity and germination tests that are viable for the planned seeding date. Seed that has become wet, moldy or otherwise damaged is unacceptable. Select seed depending on, location and intended purpose. A mixture of native species for permanent cover may provide some advantages because they have coevolved with native wildlife and other plants and typically play an important function in the ecosystem. They are also adapted to the local climate and soil if properly selected for site conditions; can dramatically reduce fertilizer, lime and maintenance requirements; and provide a deeper root structure. When re- vegetating natural areas, introduced species may spread into adjacent natural areas, native species should be used. Noxious or aquatic nuisance species shall not be used (see list below). If seeding is a temporary soil erosion control measure select annual, non-aggressive species such as annual rye, wheat, or oats.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 8 Drainage & Wastewater Infrastructure
    Chapter 8 Drainage & Wastewater Infrastructure Chapter 8 Drainage and Wastewater Infrastructure .................................. 8-1 8.1 Key Terms ...................................................................................................................... 8-2 8.1.1 Abbreviations .................................................................................................................................... 8-2 8.1.2 Definitions ......................................................................................................................................... 8-3 8.2 General Information ..................................................................................................... 8-6 8.2.1 Comprehensive Plans, Codes, and Policies ................................................................................ 8-7 8.2.2 System Maps ...................................................................................................................................... 8-8 8.3 General Requirements .................................................................................................. 8-8 8.3.1 Standard Specifications and Plans ................................................................................................. 8-8 8.3.2 Regulations ........................................................................................................................................ 8-9 8.3.3 Industry Standards and other Agency Standards ..................................................................... 8-10
    [Show full text]
  • Draft District of Columbia Stormwater Management Guidebook Page 10 Chapter 2
    STORMWATER MANAGEMENT GUIDEBOOK Prepared for: District Department of the Environment Watershed Protection Division District of Columbia Prepared by: Center for Watershed Protection 8390 Main Street Ellicott City, MD 21043 August 2012 i ii #!&,'!* ',$-0+2'-, 0#%0"',% $3230# 3."2#1 2- 2&# '120'!2 -$ -*3+ ' 2-0+52#0 ,%#+#,2 3'"# --) 5'** # 4'* *# 2 Q &22.S ""-#T"!T%-4 .3 *'!2'-, 12-0+52#0V%3'"# --) #-2'!#1 0#%0"',% $3230# 4#01'-,1 -$ 2&# +,3* 5'** # .-12#" 2 2&'1 5# 1'2#T $3230# 4#01'-,1 0# #6.#!2#" 2- -!!30Q 2 +-12Q -,!# 7#0T Acknowledgements A major undertaking such as this requires the dedication and cooperative efforts of many individuals. Dr. Hamid Karimi, Director of Natural Resources, Sheila Besse, Associate Director of Watershed Protection, Jeff Seltzer, Associate Director of Stormwater Management, and Timothy Karikari, Branch Chief of Technical Services each deserve credit for their overall leadership and support for this project. Their willingness to allow staff to pursue ideas to their fullest and provide necessary time, resources and managerial support, laid the foundation for much innovation. Project Manger Rebecca C. Stack, DDOE-technical services Lead Authors Greg Hoffmann, P.E., Center for Watershed Protection Rebecca C. Stack, DDOE-technical services Brian Van Wye, DDOE-stormwater Contributors and Peer Reviewers Joseph Battiata, P.E., Center for Watershed Protection Gerald Brock, Ph.D., George Washington University Josh Burch, DDOE-planning & restoration Collin R. Burrell, DDOE-water quality Walter Caldwell, DDOE-inspection enforcement Jonathan Champion, DDOE-stormwater Reid Christianson P.E., Ph.D., Center for Watershed Protection Laine Cidlowski, Office of Planning Richard DeGrandchamp, Ph.D., University of Colorado/Scientia Veritas Elias Demessie, DDOE-technical services Diane Douglas, DDOE-water quality Alex Foraste, Williamsburg Environmental Group, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Stormwater Treatment: ST-10
    ACTIVITY: Detention Computations ST – 10 Δ volum (I1+I2) Description This stormwater treatment BMP will describe the purpose, basic formulas, minimum criteria, computational methods, and types of structures that are needed for stormwater detention calculations. Stormwater detention is a necessary component of most stormwater treatment BMPs, and is required for most types of site development and redevelopment by the Knoxville Stormwater and Street Ordinance. Approach The Stormwater and Street Ordinance of the City of Knoxville is posted at the City Engineering website and must be read carefully by anyone who attempts to perform stormwater calculations within the City of Knoxville. It contains provisions for fees, bonds, necessary permits, right-of-entry, definitions, easements and penalties that will not be addressed here. A major purpose of the Stormwater and Street Ordinance is to improve water quality (erosion control, illicit storm drain connections, illegal dumping) as well as control stormwater quantity and flooding. Major Points of Stormwater Detention The following list summarizes the major points from the Stormwater and Street Ordinance that relate particularly to stormwater detention: Stormwater detention is required for any property containing one or more of the following conditions (according to Section 22.5-23): 1. Road construction containing one-half acre or more of impervious surface. 2. Commercial, industrial, educational, institutional or recreational developments containing one acre or more of disturbed area. 3. Single-family or duplex residential development containing at least five acres of disturbed area or at least five lots. 4. Any development containing one-half acre or more of additional impervious area. 5. Any redevelopment that causes the improvement of 50% of the assessed value of the lot, building, or lot use.
    [Show full text]
  • Storm Drainage Design & Technical Criteria
    DESIGN & TECHNICAL CRITERIA STORM DRAINAGE JEFFERSON COUNTY, COLORADO PLANNING & ZONING DIVISION Jefferson County Storm Drainage Design & Technical Criteria JEFFERSON COUNTY, COLORADO PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION Revision Dates The Storm Drainage Design and Technical Criteria was prepared by WRC Engineering, Inc. in May 1987 and was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Jefferson County, Colorado, and has since been amended on the following dates: March 19, 1996 May 12, 1998 May 27, 2003 November 25, 2003 October 13, 2009 October 1, 2013 (Temporary Regulation Amendment) April 1, 2014 November 24, 2015 July 17, 2018 June 1, 2019 December 17, 2019 Jefferson County Planning and Zoning Division 100 Jefferson County Parkway, Suite 3550, Golden, Colorado 80419 303-271-8700 • http://planning.jeffco.us Storm Drainage Design and Technical Criteria – Amended 12-17-19 page 1 Table of Contents Chapter 1 General Provisions 1.1 Short Title 1.2 Jurisdiction 1.3 Purpose and Effect 1.4 Enactment Authority 1.5 Amendment and Revisions 1.6 Enforcement Responsibility 1.7 Review and Approval 1.8 Alternative Standard Requests & Minor Variation Requests 1.9 Interpretation 1.10 Relationship to Other Standards 1.11 Abbreviations Chapter 2 Drainage Planning Submittal Requirements 2.1 Introduction 2.2 Phase I Drainage Report 2.3 Phase II Drainage Report 2.4 Phase III Drainage Report 2.5 Abridged Drainage Report 2.6 Exception to The Requirement for a Drainage Report 2.7 Construction Plans 2.8 As-Built Drawings and Final Acceptance Certificate Chapter 3
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 6 Sewer System Design Standards
    CHAPTER 6 SEWER SYSTEM DESIGN STANDARDS TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 6 SEWER SYSTEM DESIGN STANDARDS 6.00 Objective Page 1 6.01 Additional Referenced Standards Page 2 6.02 Special Design Problems Page 2 6.03 General Design Requirements Page 2 6.04 Sanitary Sewer System Capacity Page 3 6.05 Sanitary Sewer Construction Plans Page 4 6.06 Sanitary Sewer Design Page 6 6.07 Sanitary Sewer Location Page 9 6.08 Sanitary Sewer Alignment Page 11 6.09 Sanitary Sewer Appurtenances Page 11 6.10 Manholes and Cleanouts Page 11 6.11 Sewer Services Lines and Private Collection Systems Page 14 6.12 Sanitary Sewers for Floating Structures Page 16 6.13 Special Plan Review Page 16 CHAPTER 6 SEWER SYSTEM DESIGN STANDARDS 6.00 Objective These Design Standards are intended to assist, but not to substitute for competent work by design professionals. It is expected Engineers will bring to each project the best of skills from their respective disciplines. These Design Standards are also not intended to limit unreasonably any innovative or creative effort that could result in better quality, better cost savings, or both. Any proposed departure from the Standards will be judged, however, on the likelihood such variance will produce a compensating or comparable result, in every way adequate for the user and City of Keizer resident. Permanent sanitary sewer facilities shall be provided to all property (legal lots of record) created by partitioning or subdivision of land within the City per these Standards. These Design Standards have the Objective of developing a sanitary sewer system that will: a.
    [Show full text]
  • Receiving Water Modeling of Upper Mystic River/Alewife Brook
    Receiving Water Modeling of Upper Mystic River/Alewife Brook and Charles River Basin: Work Plan for Stormwater and Combined Sewer Overflow Monitoring, 2019-2020 (“Sampling Work Plan”) June 6, 2019 Revised August 27, 2019 1. Introduction The Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA) is in the final phase of its Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) Long-Term Control Plan (LTCP), the Assessment phase. MWRA, in consultation with the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will be updating receiving water quality models for the two regions with CSO Variances, the Charles River Basin and the Upper Mystic River/Alewife Brook. To update these models, MWRA and the CSO communities of Cambridge and Somerville will gather current information. In particular, stormwater and CSO outfall quality data that reflect current conditions were identified as important components in development of an updated receiving water model. MWRA’s receiving water model work plan with consultant AECOM (AECOM Receiving Water Model Work Plan), was submitted to DEP/EPA on May 24 2019, and updated based on EPA and DEP comments on July 18, 2019. The AECOM Receiving Water Model Work Plan addresses other model inputs available from recent modeling work or existing data collection efforts completed by MWRA and the communities that are also important for model development. This Work Plan for Stormwater and Combined Sewer Overflow Monitoring (the Sampling Work Plan) was submitted to EPA and DEP on June 6, 2019 and finalized on August 27, 2019 based on comments from EPA and DEP. This Sampling Work Plan describes how and where samples will be collected to support model development.
    [Show full text]
  • Deep Corrugated Structural Plate for Bridge, Culvert and Tunnel Applications
    A division of WGI Westman Group Inc. Deep corrugated structural plate for bridge, culvert and tunnel applications. Bridge Plate Bridge Plate is one of the strongest and deepest corrugated TYPICAL APPLICATIONS structural plate products on the market today, providing for the • Bridges economical construction of long span soil-steel structures. Available • Stockpile Tunnels in arch, ellipse, round and box-culvert shapes, structures are • Stream Crossing Enclosures pre-engineered to make the selection process quick and easy. • Road or Rail Grade Separations Standard spans range from 4m to 18m, with larger custom designs • Pipeline Crossings available. Bridge Plate is available with the Strata-CAT polymer • Structure Relines coating system for added corrosion and abrasion protection. • Mine Portals and Haul Roads • Wildlife Crossings Segmental Plate Construction Bridge Plate Deep Corrugated Structural Plate Structures (DCSP) are assembled in the field using sectional pre-curved plates bolted together and backfilled with compacted, well graded granular material. The engineered backfill provides structural stability and completes the installation of the Bridge Plate steel shell. The interaction of a well compacted engineered backfill with the superior sectional properties of Bridge Plate ensures a structure capable of supporting high loads with the most economical use of steel. With installation time measured in weeks rather than months, road closure periods are shortened and disruption to environmentally sensitive locations is minimized. Choosing
    [Show full text]
  • Design for Fish Passage at Roadway-Stream Crossings: Synthesis Report
    U.S. Department Publication No. FHWA-HIF-07-033 of Transportation June 2007 Federal Highway Administration DESIGN FOR FISH PASSAGE AT ROADWAY-STREAM CROSSINGS: SYNTHESIS REPORT Federal Highway Administration Office of Infrastructure Research and Development Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center 6300 Georgetown Pike McLean, Virginia 22101 Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. FHWA-HIF-07-033 June 2007 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date June 2007 DESIGN FOR FISH PASSAGE AT ROADWAY-STREAM CROSSINGS: 6. Performing Organization Code SYNTHESIS REPORT 7. Author(s) Rollin H. Hotchkiss and Christopher M. Frei 8. Performing Organization Report No. 9. Performance Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Washington State University Pullman, WA 11. Contract or Grant No. Brigham Young University Provo, UT 13. Type of Report and Period Covered 12. Sponsoring Agency and Address Final Report September 2004 – June 2007 Office of Infrastructure Research and Development Federal Highway Administration 14. Sponsoring Agency Code 6300 Georgetown Pike McLean, VA 22101 15. Supplementary Notes Contracting Officer’s Technical Representative: Bart Bergendahl 16. Abstract Cataloging and synthesizing existing methods for the design of roadway-stream crossings for fish passage began in January 2005 with an extensive literature review covering the topics of culvert design and assessment to facilitate fish passage. A survey was posted online to gather input from design professionals across the country, and a Culvert Summit Meeting was held in Denver Colorado from February 15-16, 2006, to allow presentation and discussion of state-of-practice design and assessment techniques. Following the Summit meeting, a Technical Advisory Committee was developed with individuals specifically knowledgeable in the topics of interest.
    [Show full text]
  • Stormwater Feature and Attribute Definitions
    Washington State Department of Transportation Stormwater Features Inventory Database: Feature and Attribute Definitions Version 1.0 Author: Tim Hall, Stormwater & Watersheds Program, Stormwater Features Inventory Field Lead/ Data Steward Cory Simon, Stormwater & Watersheds Program, Stormwater Features Inventory Coordinator Kathy Prosser, Environmental Information Program, Environmental GIS/GPS Data Steward Date: July 16, 2012 Coordinator/Reviewer: Sarah Burdick, Stormwater & Watersheds Program, Quality Assurance Date: August 21, 2012 Reviewers: Elizabeth Lanzer, Environmental Information Program, Program Manager Cory Simon, Stormwater & Watersheds Program, Stormwater Features Inventory Coordinator Kathy Prosser, Environmental Information Program, Environmental GIS/GPS Data Steward Date: December 4, 2012 QA Approval: Sarah Burdick, Stormwater & Watersheds Program, Quality Assurance Date: December 4, 2012 The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Stormwater Features Inventory Database: Feature and Attribute Definitions is an independent publication and is not affiliated with, nor has it been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by, a referenced product’s parent company or manufacturer. The feature and attribute definitions presented herein are adapted from WSDOT’s NPDES Municipal Stormwater Permit (Ecology, 2009) or were developed by in-house technical experts. Their primary purpose is for internal use by WSDOT’s Stormwater and Watersheds Program, Stormwater Features Inventory Group, although procedures may have a wider utility. The Stormwater Features Inventory Database (SFID) feature and attribute definitions may vary from those used by other WSDOT groups. They do not supplant official published definitions. Distribution of this document does not constitute an endorsement of a particular procedure or method. Any reference to specific equipment, software, manufacturers, or suppliers is for descriptive purposes only and does not constitute an endorsement of a particular product or service by the authors or WSDOT.
    [Show full text]
  • Geomorphologic Impacts of Culvert Replacement and Removal: Avoiding Channel Incision Photo Courtesy of Jane Kelly by Janine Castro, Geomorphologist, U.S
    Geomorphologic Impacts of Culvert Replacement and Removal: Avoiding Channel Incision Photo Courtesy of Jane Kelly By Janine Castro, Geomorphologist, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, OR These guidelines are used by Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office when implementing culvert replacement and removal projects, and are recommended practices for entities involved in stream crossing activities. These guidelines should serve to assist with any culvert-related endangered species consultation requirements. Compliance with these guidelines should assist in minimizing or avoiding impacts during project construction activities, and are intended to help culvert projects result in long-term benefits to listed species recovery. However, consistency with these guidelines does not negate the need for Endangered Species Act (ESA) consultation on culvert removal and replacement projects, where listed ESA species may be present. For additional information on ESA compliance requirements for culvert replacement and removal projects, please contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office at (503) 231-6179 (Rollie White), or any of the following field offices: LaGrande (541- 962-8509), Bend (541- 383-7146), Newport (541-867-4558), or Roseburg (541-957-3474). OVERVIEW This technical note describes a specific methodology for determining the vertical stability of stream channels in the vicinity of existing road crossings (primarily culverts), although the methodology is applicable along any reach of a stream. Vertical stability refers to the relative constancy over time of streambed elevation through a given stream reach. A streambed that deepens over time is referred to as “incising,” while a rising bed elevation is indicative of an “aggrading” stream channel.
    [Show full text]
  • Culvert Installation
    Installation Manual for ➤ Corrugated Steel Pipe ➤ Pipe Arches ➤ Structural Plate NATIONAL C ORRUGATED S TEEL P IPE A SSOCIATION INSTALLATION MANUAL — NCSPA The NCSPA Installation Manual is not a copyrighted publication. If excerpted or copied, credit to the source would be appreciated. * * * The information contained in this Installation Manual is the product of industry experience and practice. The methods used to install corrugated steel pipe can affect both its effectiveness and useful life. The situations described in this publication and the suggested techniques for installation are general sugges- tions and guidelines intended to alert installers to the need for careful review of on-site conditions. Each installation will require its own individual evaluation. The statements or descriptions provided herein are for general information only. The National Corrugated Steel Pipe Association assumes no responsibility for their use. * * * NATIONAL CORRUGATED STEEL PIPE ASSOCIATION 1255 Twenty-Third Street, NW, Suite 200 Washington, DC 20037-1174 Phone: 202/452-1700 • Fax: 202/833-3636 E-mail: [email protected] • Web: www.ncspa.org 08 InstallMan00 CSP Installation Manual 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD .............................................................................................. 3 BASIC PRINCIPLES FOR PROPER CONSTRUCTION AND INSTALLATION ............................................. 4 LOCATION ................................................................................................. 5 EXCAVATION............................................................................................
    [Show full text]