NJ-NY ERFO FW WARI 2019-1(1)_HYD_Memo.pdf

FHWA: I. Rosado (6257): JM: M:\PROJECTS\_FWS\WARI\NY ERFO FW WARI 2019-1(1)\ Techserv\ Hydra\ Reports\ Rev 03 - Riprap\ NY ERFO WARI 2019-1(1)_ Scour Memo 2025.12.05.docx CC: Hydraulics, Geotech, Env, HD Engineer, TS Engineer, Bridge

Form FHWA-201 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (Rev. 11-87) FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

MINUTE - MEMO

Use this form in lieu of transmittal slips within Dept. of Trans. when message comment is to be retained as file material. Do not prepare carbons. Not to be used in lieu of Form FHWA-121 for informal correspondence.

SUBJECT: NY ERFO WARI 2019-1(1) Scour Hydraulic Memo

TO MESSAGE/COMMENT FROM/DATE

Gwendolyn Riffle Project Manager

Canisha Lyons Highway Design Manager

We have completed the scour analysis for the stream stabilization along the Winding Waters Trail within the Wallkill River National Wildlife Refuge in Warwick, New York. This memo has been revised to reflect changes to the scope and limits of work identified during the Plan-in-Hand site visit in mid- July 2025.

The project scope includes streambank repair work at three locations. The streambank failures along the Winding Waters Trail (Sites 240 and Site 324) will be repaired using buried vegetated riprap revetment. At Site 3, an eroded bank at the outlet of a gully will be repaired using standard riprap revetment.

All project sites are located within FEMA Zone AE mapped floodplains with designated Base Flood Elevations (BFEs).

Winding Waters 240 (41.295016700, -74.526450000) Winding Waters 324 (41.295733333, -74.525733333)

Streambank failures along the Winding Waters Trail (Sites 240 and 324) will be repaired using stream-stabilization measures by realigning the trail and regrading the banks to create a flatter and more stable slopes suitable for installing buried vegetated riprap revetment as a scour countermeasure.

Based on Chapter 7 of the PDDM, longitudinal embankments should be designed to withstand the estimated worst-case longitudinal scour up through the 100-year flood.

The hydrologic analysis was performed using the USGS Streamstats® online automated hydrologic module which automates drainage area delineation from digital terrain models and computes peak flow discharges following standard regional regression equations. In addition to the main channel (Wallkill River), two unnamed tributaries were also considered in our hydrology analysis. Please refer to Table 1 for a summary of flow rates, and Table 2 and Table 3 for a summary of average water surfaces elevations (WSELs). Refer to Attachment 02 for StreamStats Reports; Attachment 03 and Attachment 04 for Site 240 SMS WSELs Plots; and Attachment 08 and Attachment 09 for Site 324 SMS WSELs Plots.

Isis Rosado- Vazquez Hydraulics Senior Technical Specialist

THROUGH

Wendy Hiciano Hydraulics Team Leader

12/05/2025

Reports\ Rev 03 - Riprap\ NY ERFO WARI 2019-1(1)_ Scour Memo 2025.12.05.docx CC: Hydraulics, Geotech, Env, HD Engineer, TS Engineer, Bridge

Hydraulic modeling was conducted using the two-dimensional software Sedimentation and River Hydraulics – Two Dimensional (SMS SRH-2D) v13.3. The results indicate that the proposed streambank grading, which combines excavation with minor areas of fill, will not increase water surface elevations (WSELs) for any design-year flood event.

While minor filling within FEMA floodplains is generally discouraged, site constraints—including steep existing streambanks, wetlands across the trail, the minimum slope required for riprap installation, and the need to avoid channel encroachment—limit the extent of feasible excavation. The proposed grading balances these constraints while maintaining existing WSELs, and SMS results confirm that excavation exceeds the minor filling at eroded locations; as a result, the channel’s cross-sectional area will increase rather than decrease, providing equal or greater conveyance than the original stream segment.

Sites 240 and 324 are located within FEMA Zone AE mapped floodplains with a Base Flood Elevation (BFE) of 388 ft, reflecting the relatively flat topography in the area (see Attachment 20 – FEMA FIRM# 36071C0417E). Results presented in Tables 2 and 3 indicate that existing and proposed WSELs remain

388.34 ft at Site 240 and 388.31 ft at Site 324. Attachment 21 further illustrates an SMS plan view comparing existing and proposed Q100 WSELs across the study area and project site, confirming that the proposed grading will not increase WSELs or cause physical damage to adjacent or downstream properties. No new structures requiring floodproofing are proposed.

Table 1: Hydrology Summary Event (year)

Wallkill River Flow (cfs)

Upstream Tributary Flow

(cfs)

Downstream Tributary Flow

(cfs) 2 2030 46 44

10 3960 108 101 25 5220 150 140 50 6280 187 174

100 7470 226 210 200 8810 254 236 500 10800 338 313

Table 2: Site 240 Water Surface Elevation Summary

Flood-Event (year)

EX WSEL PRO WSEL

(ft) (ft)

2 381.53 381.46 10 384.46 384.46 25 386.11 386.11 50 387.22 387.21

100 388.34 388.34 200 389.64 389.63 500 391.35 391.34

Reports\ Rev 03 - Riprap\ NY ERFO WARI 2019-1(1)_ Scour Memo 2025.12.05.docx CC: Hydraulics, Geotech, Env, HD Engineer, TS Engineer, Bridge

Table 3: Site 324 Water Surface Elevation Summary Flood-Event

(year)

EX WSEL PRO WSEL

(ft) (ft) 2 381.22 381.10

10 384.24 384.24 25 386.05 386.05 50 387.19 387.18

100 388.32 388.31 200 389.63 389.62 500 391.34 391.33

Scour Analysis:

Scour analysis was performed according to HEC 23 V1, Section 4.3.5, Scour at Protected Bendways, using a (W/Dmnc) minimum value of 20, Rc/W of 1.5, and a Factor of Safety of 1.1. Riprap rock size was designed using the channel revetment riprap calculator within the FHWA HYD Toolbox V5.1 software, which is based on DG 4 of HEC 23 V2. The design parameters such as flow depth and flow velocities were obtained from two-dimensional software Sedimentation and River Hydraulics – Two Dimensional (SRH-2D) v13.3.

Table 4: Velocities Summary Channel Design Velocities

Average (fps) Max (fps) Site 204 4.45 5.44 Site 324 4.30 7.93

The D50 of 0.0002952756 ft. (0.09 mm) was obtained from boring logs samples at the sites, and subsequent particle size analysis performed for this location. Due to the visible presence of bedrock in the channel, which has been confirmed by borings at the site, long term degradation is considered negligible.

Site 240 - Based on the analysis, for the worst-bendway case total scour elevation of 365.70 ft was calculated from a thalweg elevation of 370.86 ft. at the bendway section. The average upstream flow depth in the main channel is 13.32 ft and the maximum water depth in the bend is 16.95ft. Based on the Geotechnical Report, bedrock elevation was assumed to range from 368.38 ft to 370.08 ft and the soil in the area is classified as a combination of SM (silty sand) and ML (low plasticity silt). Please refer to Table 5 for a summary of the computed scour elevations; the Scour recommendation section and Table 6 for final recommended scour elevations.

Site 324 - Based on the analysis, for the worst-bendway case total scour elevation of 363.74 ft was calculated from a thalweg elevation of 367.07 ft. at the bendway section. The average upstream flow depth in the main channel is 14.90 ft and the maximum water depth in the bend is 21.16ft. Based on the Geotechnical Report, the closest boring to this site, place the bedrock at elevation 370.08 ft and the soil in the area is classified as a combination of SM (silty sand) and ML (low plasticity silt). Please refer to Table 5 for a summary of the computed scour elevations; the Scour recommendation section and Table 6 for the HYD team’s final recommended scour elevations.

Reports\ Rev 03 - Riprap\ NY ERFO WARI 2019-1(1)_ Scour Memo 2025.12.05.docx CC: Hydraulics, Geotech, Env, HD Engineer, TS Engineer, Bridge

Table 5: Computed Scour Depth Summary*

Event Location Scour Type Scour

Depth* (ft)

Thalweg Elevation at

Bendway **(ft)

Scour Elevation

(ft)

100 year (Design)

Site 240

Bendway scour depth with Factor of Safety 5.16

Long Term 0

TOTAL 5.16 370.86 365.70***

Site 324

Bendway scour depth with Factor of Safety 3.33

Long Term 0

TOTAL 3.33 367.07 363.74***

Notes:

* See Table 6 for final recommended scour elevations.

** Thalweg is the required elevation for the bottom placement of revetment per FHWA guidelines.

*** Scour elevation is expected to be below the bedrock elevation.

Scour Recommendation:

Given that bedrock is visible in the channel, the borings confirm shallow bedrock, and the EFL HD and Construction team desire to minimize channel disturbance and avoid significant channel narrowing during construction operations, HYD will proceed as directed by the design team and will run the scour analysis setting the bottom of the proposed revetment at the scour depth specified in Table 6, Attachment 07 (Site 240) and Attachment 13 (Site 324) toe layout, instead of the HEC 23V2 Figure 4.2 or Figure

4.3 toe layout.

Based on the proposed contours and alignment provided by HD, the elevation of the toe of embankment (TOE) varies along the length of the proposed revetment. As a result, Table 6 reflects only the lowest TOE elevation along the proposed revetment.

Table 6: Recommended Scour Depth Summary

Event Location Scour Type Scour

Depth** (ft)

Lowest Toe elevation along proposed revetment* (ft)

Scour Elevation

(ft)

100 year (Design)

Site 240

Bendway scour depth with Factor of Safety 5.16

Long Term 0

TOTAL 5.16 373.54 368.38***

Site 324

Bendway scour depth with Factor of Safety 3.33

Long Term 0

TOTAL 3.33 370.91 367.58***

Notes:

* Reflects the lowest elevation along the TOE of the proposed revetment.

** Scour depth is referenced from the TOE elevation and not the thalweg elevation.

*** Scour elevation may be below the expected bedrock elevation.

Reports\ Rev 03 - Riprap\ NY ERFO WARI 2019-1(1)_ Scour Memo 2025.12.05.docx CC: Hydraulics, Geotech, Env, HD Engineer, TS Engineer, Bridge

Velocities:

Banks:

No increase in water velocity along the banks is anticipated, as the proposed vegetated riprap will maintain the existing surface roughness. To address areas of highest hydraulic shear stress, the toe of the embankment will be protected with Class 5 exposed riprap revetment.

Above the ordinary high-water mark, Class 3 riprap will be buried within the bank and overlaid with native vegetation. This approach preserves surface roughness to sustain stable flow velocities while reinforcing the embankment toe against scour.

Toe of embankment (TOE):

Flow velocities along the proposed TOE for existing and proposed conditions were assessed for the Riprap Class 5 using the Observation Plot tool within the SMS software. Refer to Attachment 05 (Site 240) and Attachment 10 (Site 324) for SMS velocity plots.

Our analysis indicates that the increase in flow velocity downstream of the riprap treatment limits between the Class 5 toe riprap and the adjacent existing ground is less than 1 fps. This minor increase in velocity is not anticipated to adversely impact the performance or stability of the vegetated riprap revetment, the banks, or the surrounding channel given that the average velocities remain within the tolerable limits for typical bank materials and vegetation and are therefore considered to be within the design threshold for bank stability and erosion resistance.

Table 7: Site 240 - Velocities along the proposed Riprap TOE

Site 240

Velocity at the downstream edge of riprap (fps)

EX 2.41

PRO 2.03

Difference in Velocity due change in roughness along the TOE from

Riprap Class 5 to existing ground

- 0.38 (bedrock is exposed and visible downstream of the riprap limits of work)

Table 8: Site 324 - Velocities along the proposed Riprap TOE

Site 324

Velocity at the downstream edge of riprap (fps)

EX 2.0

PRO 3.8

Difference in Velocity due change in roughness along the TOE from Riprap

Class 5 to existing ground + 0.8

Reports\ Rev 03 - Riprap\ NY ERFO WARI 2019-1(1)_ Scour Memo 2025.12.05.docx CC: Hydraulics, Geotech, Env, HD Engineer, TS Engineer, Bridge

Bioengineering analysis:

Vegetated Riprap revetment recommendation was performed based on HEC 23 V1, Chapter 6, Biotechnical Engineering. USDA - Chapter 16 –Soil Bioengineering for Streambank and Shoreline Protection, 2021, was also considered in this analysis. Riprap rock size was designed using the channel revetment riprap calculator within the FHWA HYD Toolbox V5.1 software, which is based on HEC 23 V2, DG 4, Riprap Revetment. Large riprap at the toe of embankment was calculated using a factor of safety of 1.5. Refer to Attachment 06 (Site 240) and Attachment 12 (Site 324) for Hyd Toolbox Reports.

The bioengineering alternatives evaluated during our analysis are the following:

Table 9: Bioengineering Design Criteria and Recommendation Summary Site 240 Site 324

Practice Permissible shear stress* (lb/ft^2)

Permissible Velocity*

(ft/s)

Shear stress (lb/ft^2)

Velocity (ft/s)

Shear stress

(lb/ft^2)

Velocity (ft/s)

Live stakes/poles

Initial: 0.5 to 2 Established: 2 to 5+

Initial: 1 to 2.5+ Established: 3 to 10

0.30 (avg)

0.56 (max)

4.45 (avg) 5.44(max)

2.29 (avg)

5.40 (max)

4.30 (avg)

7.93 (max)

Live stakes/poles and riprap

Initial: 3+ Established: 6 to 8+

Initial: 5 to 10+ Established: 12+

Turf Reinforcement

Mats

Established: 6+ (5.A, FP-24 Table

713.4) Established: 3 to 8

HYD

Recommendation:

Live stakes/poles with buried riprap

Turf Reinforcement Mat with buried riprap or Live stakes/poles with buried riprap

* Figure 16-19. Design Criteria for various Streambank Soil Bioengineering Practices, USDA – Chapter 16 –Soil Bioengineering for Streambank and Shoreline Protection, 2021.

** Based on our analysis, floodplain overtopping across the trail at Site 324 is causing higher flow velocities and shear stress along the banks compared to Site 240.

*** To provide a more conservative basis for design, the HYD Toolbox values were used for design purposes, as they were higher than those obtained from SMS.

**** To provide a more conservative basis for design, the values reflect the higher velocity and shear stresses observed within the channel cross-section at each respective site, not only the eroded banks.

Based on our analysis, vegetated riprap in a form of a combination of live stakes/pole plantings and riprap is recommended for Site 240, as the calculated shear stress and velocity values fall within the permissible limits for live stakes/poles once they are fully established. Refer to Attachment 07 for the draft typical section of live pole plantings and riprap.

Site 324 is expected to experience higher flow velocities and shear stress than Site 240, along with a greater risk of erosion from overbank overtopping. As such, this memo presents two design alternatives for Site 324:

Notes:

Reports\ Rev 03 - Riprap\ NY ERFO WARI 2019-1(1)_ Scour Memo 2025.12.05.docx CC: Hydraulics, Geotech, Env, HD Engineer, TS Engineer, Bridge

Alternative 01: Turf Reinforcement Mat with buried riprap (see Attachment 13a for the typical section) Alternative 02: Live stakes/pole plantings with buried riprap (see Attachment 13b for the typical section)

While live pole planting with riprap at Site 324 falls within permissible hydraulic limits once fully established, the HYD team recommends using Alternative 01, turf reinforcement with buried riprap, as a more conservative design approach. Turf reinforcement mats offer greater resistance to shear stress compared to live stakes or poles, providing added protection under higher flow conditions.

Table 10. Site 240 and Site 324 Riprap Summary

Location Riprap Type

Riprap Class

D50 (in)

Riprap Thickness

(in)

Maximum Slope

Length (ft)*

Width (ft)

Bedding filter thickness (in)

Geotextile

Angular along Bank

12 24 1V:1.5H +/- 158 Varies 6 Yes along

TOE

18 54** 1V:1.5H +/- 226 Varies 9** No**

Notes:

* HEC-23 recommends that riprap along bendway extend one channel width upstream of the Point of Curvature (PC) and

1.5 channel widths downstream of the Point of Tangency (PT). The riprap limits in this project do not meet this FHWA requirement. During the Plan-in-Hand site visit in mid-July 2025, the length of the vegetated riprap was reduced to minimize tree removal.

** To provide mitigation for installation below the ordinary high-water mark.

Vegetated riprap includes the installation of pole plantings, void-filling with appropriate materials, topsoil placement, and measures for vegetation establishment. Continued inspection and maintenance will be essential to ensure the long-term performance and stability of the bioengineered banks. Refer to Attachment 07 (Site 240) and Attachment 13 (Site 324) for site-specific draft vegetated riprap details.

The recommended spacing for pole plantings is 3 feet. Container plant spacing will vary based on the proposed planting plan and is subject to approval by the CO. For design purposes, a spacing of 4.5 feet is recommended as a general assumption.

Temporary Conditions:

Based on Construction’s feedback, stream diversion is not necessary because the work will be performed during the low-flow season. Hydraulics estimates that the low-flow period extends from June through August.

Winding Waters Site 3 (41.294566670, -74.529000000)

Based on the DSR, the scope of work is to address the bank erosion at the end of a gully. Hydraulic modeling was performed using the two-dimensional software Sedimentation and River Hydraulics – Two- Dimensional (SRH-2D, SMS) v13.3. Riprap was designed per Hydraulic Engineering Circular (HEC) 23, Volume 2, Guideline 4 using the Hydraulic Toolbox V4.4.

Based on the analysis, the main channel average upstream flow depth is 15.19 ft, and the average velocity is 2.38 ft/s. Please refer to Table 12 for a summary of flow rates with their corresponding WSELs, Attachment 14 and Attachment 15 for SMS WSELs Plots and Attachment 16 for the SMS Velocity Plot.

Table 12: Site 3 Water Surface Elevation Summary

Event (year)

EX WSEL PRO WSEL

(ft) (ft) 2 382.21 382.18

10 385.19 385.14 25 386.51 386.48 50 387.52 387.51

100 388.55 388.55 200 389.78 389.78 500 391.44 391.44

We recommend placing a Class 3 riprap revetment with a minimum depth of 24-inch at a maximum slope of 1V:1.5H up to the top of the bank to inhibit the risk of future erosion. Refer to Attachment 19 for the riprap plan view layout and proposed contours; Attachment 18 for Cross Section;

and Attachment 17 for Riprap Analysis (HYD Toolbox Report).

Table 13. Riprap Summary Location Riprap

Type Riprap Class

D50 (in)

Riprap Thickness (in)

Maximum Slope

Length (ft)

Width (ft)

Site 3 Angular 3 12 30 1V:1.5H +/- 26 6

Please contact us if you should have any questions or concerns.

ATTACHMENTS

The following attachments can be found in the following link:

\\fhfl15fileserve.flhd.fhwa.dot.gov\data\PROJECTS\_FWS\WARI\NY ERFO FW WARI 2019- 1(1)\Techserv\Hydra\Reports\Rev 03 - Riprap\Attachments

Attachment 1: NY WARI 2019-1(1)

SMS Plan View

No Scale

Upstream Tributary

Downstream Tributary

Wallkill River

Site 240

Site 3

Vegetated riprap plan view in ORD — intended for visualization only

Riprap Class 5

Buried Riprap Class 3

Bank grading to tie into existing

StreamStats Report- Stream Stabilization SMS Inflow BC

Basin Characteristics

Parameter Code Parameter Description Value Unit

BSLOPCM Mean basin slope determined by summing lengths of all contours in basin mulitplying by contour interval and dividing product by drainage area

552 feet per mi

CENTROIDX Basin centroid horizontal (x) location in state plane coordinates 532368.4 meters

CENTROIDY Basin centroid vertical (y) location in state plane units 4558841.3 meters

CONTOUR Total length of all elevation contours in drainage area in miles 845.8 miles

CSL1085LO 10-85 slope of lower half of main channel in feet per mile. 2.67 feet per mi

CSL1085UP 10-85 slope of upper half of main channel in feet per mile. 18.7 feet per mi

CSL10_85 Change in elevation divided by length between points 10 and 85 percent of distance along main channel to basin divide - main channel method not known

13.6 feet per mi

DRNAREA Area that drains to a point on a stream 153 square miles

EL1200 Percentage of basin at or above 1200 ft elevation 6.08 percent

FOREST Percentage of area covered by forest 53.4 percent

JULAVPRE Mean July Precipitation 4.31 inches

JUNAVPRE Mean June Precipitation 4.53 inches

JUNMAXTMP Maximum June Temperature, in degrees F 77.7 degrees F

LAGFACTOR Lag Factor as defined in SIR 2006-5112 3.7 dimensionless

LC11DEV Percentage of developed (urban) land from NLCD 2011 classes 21-24 13.1 percent

LC11IMP Average percentage of impervious area determined from NLCD 2011 impervious dataset 2.04 percent

LENGTH Length along the main channel from the measuring location extended to the basin divide 31.5 miles

MAR Mean annual runoff for the period of record in inches 22.3 inches

MAYAVPRE Mean May Precipitation 4.55 inches

MXSNO 50th percentile of seasonal maximum snow depth from Northeast Regional Climate Center atlas by Cember and Wilks, 1993

11.2 inches

OUTLETX Basin outlet horizontal (x) location in state plane coordinates 539435 feet

OUTLETY Basin outlet vertical (y) location in state plane coordinates 4571595 feet

PRECIP Mean Annual Precipitation 45.1 inches

Region ID: NY Workspace ID: NY20220512202205943000 Clicked Point (Latitude, Longitude): 41.29483, -74.52905 Time: 2022-05-12 16:22:32 -0400

Page 2 of 3StreamStats

5/12/2022https://streamstats.usgs.gov/ss/ isis.rosado-vazquez Typewritten Text Attachment 02a: Wallkill River

Parameter Code Parameter Description Value Unit

PRJUNAUG00 Basin average mean precip for June to August from PRISM 1971-2000 13 inches

SLOPERATIO Ratio of main channel slope to basin slope as defined in SIR 2006-5112 0.0246 dimensionless

SSURGOA Percentage of area of Hydrologic Soil Type A from SSURGO 13.3 percent

SSURGOB Percentage of area of Hydrologic Soil Type B from SSURGO 16.6 percent

STORAGE Percentage of area of storage (lakes ponds reservoirs wetlands) 6.98 percent

Peak-Flow Statistics Parameters [99.7 Percent (153 square miles) 2006 Full Region 2]

Parameter Code Parameter Name Value Units Min Limit Max Limit

DRNAREA Drainage Area 153 square miles 1.93 996

LAGFACTOR Lag Factor 3.7 dimensionless 0.014 6.997

STORAGE Percent Storage 6.98 percent 0 11.88

MAR Mean Annual Runoff in inches 22.3 inches 16.03 33.95

Peak-Flow Statistics Flow Report [99.7 Percent (153 square miles) 2006 Full Region 2]

PIl: Prediction Interval-Lower, PIu: Prediction Interval-Upper, ASEp: Average Standard Error of Prediction, SE: Standard Error (other -- see report)

Statistic Value Unit SE ASEp Equiv. Yrs.

80-percent AEP flood 1400 ft^3/s 25.5 25.5 4.8

66.7-percent AEP flood 1660 ft^3/s 25.6 25.6 4.3

50-percent AEP flood 2030 ft^3/s 25.8 25.8 4.4

20-percent AEP flood 3100 ft^3/s 27 27 7.3

10-percent AEP flood 3960 ft^3/s 28.2 28.2 10.1

4-percent AEP flood 5220 ft^3/s 29.9 29.9 13.6

2-percent AEP flood 6280 ft^3/s 31.5 31.5 15.8

1-percent AEP flood 7470 ft^3/s 33.3 33.3 17.6

0.5-percent AEP flood 8810 ft^3/s 35.3 35.3 18.9

0.2-percent AEP flood 10800 ft^3/s 38.4 38.4 20.1

Peak-Flow Statistics Citations

Lumia, Richard, Freehafer, D.A., and Smith, M.J.,2006, Magnitude and Frequency of Floods in New York: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5112, 152 p. (http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2006/5112/)

USGS Data Disclaimer: Unless otherwise stated, all data, metadata and related materials are considered to satisfy the quality standards relative to the purpose for which the data were collected. Although these data and associated metadata have been reviewed for accuracy and completeness and approved for release by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), no warranty expressed or implied is made regarding the display or utility of the data for other purposes, nor on all computer systems, nor shall the act of distribution constitute any such warranty.

USGS Software Disclaimer: This software has been approved for release by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Although the software has been subjected to rigorous review, the USGS reserves the right to update the software as needed pursuant to further analysis and review. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made by the USGS or the U.S. Government as to the functionality of the software and related material nor shall the fact of release constitute any such warranty. Furthermore, the software is released on condition that neither the USGS nor the U.S. Government shall be held liable for any damages resulting from its authorized or unauthorized use.

USGS Product Names Disclaimer: Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Application Version: 4.8.1

StreamStats Services Version: 1.2.22

NSS Services Version: 2.1.2

Page 3 of 3StreamStats

5/12/2022https://streamstats.usgs.gov/ss/

Tributary 1 - Winding Waters StreamStats Report

Parameter Code Parameter Description Value Unit

DRNAREA Area that drains to a point on a stream 0.66 square miles

LAGFACTOR Lag Factor as defined in SIR 2006-5112 0.00783 dimensionless

MAR Mean annual runoff for the period of record in inches

20.3 inches

STORAGE Percentage of area of storage (lakes ponds reservoirs wetlands)

0.0175 percent

Region ID: NY Workspace ID: NY20220412140837950000 Clicked Point (Latitude, Longitude): 41.29564, -74.52885 Time: 2022-04-12 10:09:06 -0400 isis.rosado-vazquez

Attachment 02b: Upstream Tributary

Peak-Flow Statistics Parameters [2006 Full Region 2]

Code Parameter Name Value Units

Min Limit

Max Limit

DRNAREA Drainage Area 0.66 square miles 1.93 996

LAGFACTOR Lag Factor 0.00783 dimensionless 0.014 6.997

STORAGE Percent Storage 0.0175 percent 0 11.88

MAR Mean Annual Runoff in inches

20.3 inches 16.03 33.95

Peak-Flow Statistics Disclaimers [2006 Full Region 2]

One or more of the parameters is outside the suggested range. Estimates were extrapolated with unknown errors.

Peak-Flow Statistics Flow Report [2006 Full Region 2]

Statistic Value Unit

80-percent AEP flood 27.9 ft^3/s

66.7-percent AEP flood 35.2 ft^3/s

50-percent AEP flood 46 ft^3/s

20-percent AEP flood 79.9 ft^3/s

10-percent AEP flood 108 ft^3/s

4-percent AEP flood 150 ft^3/s

2-percent AEP flood 187 ft^3/s

1-percent AEP flood 226 ft^3/s

0.5-percent AEP flood 271 ft^3/s

0.2-percent AEP flood 338 ft^3/s

Peak-Flow Statistics Citations

Lumia, Richard, Freehafer, D.A., and Smith, M.J.,2006, Magnitude and Frequency of Floods in New York: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5112, 152 p.

(http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2006/5112/) http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2006/5112/

USGS Data Disclaimer:

Unless otherwise stated, all data, metadata and related materials are considered to satisfy the quality standards relative to the purpose for which the data were collected. Although these data and associated metadata have been reviewed for accuracy and completeness and approved for release by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), no warranty expressed or implied is made regarding the display or utility of the data for other purposes, nor on all computer systems, nor shall the act of distribution constitute any such warranty.

USGS Software Disclaimer:

This software has been approved for release by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Although the software has been subjected to rigorous review, the USGS reserves the right to update the software as needed pursuant to further analysis and review. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made by the USGS or the U.S. Government as to the functionality of the software and related material nor shall the fact of release constitute any such warranty. Furthermore, the software is released on condition that neither the USGS nor the U.S. Government shall be held liable for any damages resulting from its authorized or unauthorized use.

USGS Product Names Disclaimer:

Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Application Version: 4.8.1

StreamStats Services Version: 1.2.22

NSS Services Version: 2.1.2

Tributary 2 - StreamStats Report

Parameter Code Parameter Description Value Unit

CENTROIDX Basin centroid horizontal (x) location in state plane coordinates

540501.8 meters

CENTROIDY Basin centroid vertical (y) location in state plane units

4570804.5 meters

CSL1085LO 10-85 slope of lower half of main channel in feet per mile.

14.6 feet per mi

DRNAREA Area that drains to a point on a stream 0.64 square miles

EL1200 Percentage of basin at or above 1200 ft elevation

0 percent

Region ID: NY Workspace ID: NY20220412141357205000 Clicked Point (Latitude, Longitude): 41.29754, -74.52584 Time: 2022-04-12 10:14:25 -0400 isis.rosado-vazquez

Attachment 02c: Downstream Tributary

Code Parameter Description Value Unit

JULAVPRE Mean July Precipitation 4.05 inches

JUNAVPRE Mean June Precipitation 4.37 inches

JUNMAXTMP Maximum June Temperature, in degrees F 79 degrees F

LAGFACTOR Lag Factor as defined in SIR 2006-5112 0.0428 dimensionless

LENGTH Length along the main channel from the measuring location extended to the basin divide

1.85 miles

MAR Mean annual runoff for the period of record in inches

19.7 inches

MAYAVPRE Mean May Precipitation 4.36 inches

PRJUNAUG00 Basin average mean precip for June to August from PRISM 1971-2000

12.5 inches

SSURGOA Percentage of area of Hydrologic Soil Type A from SSURGO

2.42 percent

SSURGOB Percentage of area of Hydrologic Soil Type B from SSURGO

10.8 percent

STORAGE Percentage of area of storage (lakes ponds reservoirs wetlands)

0 percent

Peak-Flow Statistics Parameters [2006 Full Region 2]

Parameter Code Parameter Name Value Units

Min Limit

Max Limit

DRNAREA Drainage Area 0.64 square miles 1.93 996

LAGFACTOR Lag Factor 0.0428 dimensionless 0.014 6.997

STORAGE Percent Storage 0 percent 0 11.88

MAR Mean Annual Runoff in inches

19.7 inches 16.03 33.95

Peak-Flow Statistics Disclaimers [2006 Full Region 2]

One or more of the parameters is outside the suggested range. Estimates were extrapolated with unknown errors.

Peak-Flow Statistics Flow Report [2006 Full Region 2]

Statistic Value Unit

80-percent AEP flood 26.4 ft^3/s

66.7-percent AEP flood 33.3 ft^3/s

50-percent AEP flood 43.4 ft^3/s

20-percent AEP flood 74.9 ft^3/s

10-percent AEP flood 101 ft^3/s

4-percent AEP flood 140 ft^3/s

2-percent AEP flood 174 ft^3/s

1-percent AEP flood 210 ft^3/s

0.5-percent AEP flood 251 ft^3/s

0.2-percent AEP flood 313 ft^3/s

Peak-Flow Statistics Citations

Lumia, Richard, Freehafer, D.A., and Smith, M.J.,2006, Magnitude and Frequency of Floods in New York: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5112, 152 p.

(http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2006/5112/)

USGS Data Disclaimer:

Unless otherwise stated, all data, metadata and related materials are considered to satisfy the quality standards relative to the purpose for which the data were collected. Although these data and associated metadata have been reviewed for accuracy and completeness and approved for release by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), no warranty expressed or implied is made regarding the display or utility of the data for other purposes, nor on all computer systems, nor shall the act of distribution constitute any such warranty.

USGS Software Disclaimer:

This software has been approved for release by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Although the software has been subjected to rigorous review, the USGS reserves the right to update the software as needed pursuant to further analysis and review. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made by the USGS or the U.S. Government as to the functionality of the software and related material nor shall the fact of release constitute any such warranty. Furthermore, the software is released on condition that neither the USGS nor the U.S. Government shall be held liable for any damages resulting from its authorized or unauthorized use.

USGS Product Names Disclaimer:

Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Application Version: 4.8.1

StreamStats Services Version: 1.2.22

NSS Services Version: 2.1.2 http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2006/5112/

Attachment 03:

Attachment 04:

Riprap limits of work Exposed Bedrock

Exposed Bedrock

Attachment 05:

-0.38 ft isis.rosado-vazquez

Line

Hydraulic Analysis Report- Site 240

Project Data

Project Title: NY WARI 2019-1(1)

Designer: EFL HYD (IRV)

Project Date: Thursday, December 04, 2025

Project Units: U.S. Customary Units

Notes: Q100

Channel Analysis: Channel Analysis 240 XS Q100 Notes:

Input Parameters Channel Type: Custom Cross Section

Cross Section Data Station (ft Elevation (ft) Manning's n

0.00 381.46 0.0350

2.28 381.39 0.0350

10.81 381.11 0.0350

15.67 381.18 0.0350

39.81 382.17 0.0350

42.96 382.30 0.0350

44.49 377.56 0.0350

48.03 375.65 0.0350

58.99 375.17 0.0350

68.34 375.02 0.0350

70.69 373.23 0.0350

74.94 372.83 0.0350

106.59 370.80 0.0350

128.75 370.52 0.0350

142.22 371.28 0.0350

150.58 373.00 0.0350

153.13 374.89 0.0350

159.70 376.62 0.0350

160.12 376.74 0.0350

160.41 376.81 0.0350

160.44 376.82 0.0350

160.48 376.83 0.0350

167.07 380.25 0.0350

181.35 387.46 0.0350

182.21 387.50 0.0350

Attachment 06:

183.35 387.54 0.0350

185.40 387.62 0.0350

187.36 387.70 0.0350

189.86 387.60 0.0350

191.37 387.54 0.0350

192.76 387.48 0.0350

193.38 387.46 0.0350

195.46 386.77 0.0350

198.54 385.74 0.0350

199.46 385.43 0.0350

207.40 383.53 0.0350

207.84 383.52 0.0350

209.18 383.51 0.0350

209.91 383.50 0.0350

215.89 383.44 0.0350

216.09 383.44 0.0350

219.20 383.41 ----- Longitudinal Slope: 0.0005 ft/ft

Depth 16.9500 ft

Result Parameters Flow 9742.7300 cfs

Area of Flow 2170.9593 ft^2

Wetted Perimeter 226.3406 ft

Hydraulic Radius 9.5916 ft

Average Velocity 4.4878 ft/s

Top Width 207.4394 ft

Froude Number: 0.2445

Critical Depth 8.2034 ft

Critical Velocity 13.7757 ft/s

Critical Slope: 0.0103 ft/ft

Critical Top Width 120.00 ft

Calculated Max Shear Stress 0.5458 lb/ft^2

Calculated Avg Shear Stress 0.3088 lb/ft^2

Composite Manning's n Equation: Lotter method

Manning's n: 0.0340

Riprap Analysis: Riprap Analysis 240 Q100- Class 3

Input Parameters Riprap Type: Revetment

The channel is a natural channel

Local Depth of Flow: 16.95 ft

Riprap Shape is Angular

Stability Coefficient: 0.3

This value is updated by the selected Riprap Shape

Blanket Thickness Coefficient: 1

Channel Cross-sectional Average Velocity: 4.48775 ft/s

Which is the Average Velocity with Spurs

Centerline Radius of Curvature of Channel Bend: 35 ft

Width of Water Surface at Upstream End of Channel Bend: 207.439 ft

Bank Angle: 1.5 :1 H:V

.966 < Bank Angle < 4.011

The location of the revetment protection is on the outside of a bend

Specific Gravity of Riprap: 2.65

Safety Factor: 1.1

Result Parameters Side slope Correction Factor: 0.717953

Velocity Distribution Coefficient: 1.43756

Design Velocity: 9.61218 ft/s

Design velocity never less than average channel velocity

Computed D30: 215.557 mm

Computed D50: 258.668 mm

Riprap Class

Riprap Class Name:CLASS III

Riprap Class Order:3 The following values are an 'average' of the size fraction range for the selected riprap class.

D100: 609.60 mm

D85: 431.80 mm

D50: 317.50 mm

D15: 228.60 mm

Layout Recommendations Minimum Riprap Thickness: 288.00 in

Name of Selected Channel: Channel Analysis 240 XS Q100

Riprap along banks = Class 3 – D50=12-in

Riprap along TOE = 12”*1.5 = 18-in (Class 5)

UNDERWATER

E251-A

DETAIL B

Riprap Key-in

1:

1.

(m ax with void-fill backfill. See Note 4.

Riprap, Class 3, D50=12-in, Native riparian seed mix.See Note 5.

Type 4.A (woven coir). See Note 6.

Rolled erosion control product, See Note 5.

Topsoil, 15-in depth.

ground (typ.)

Existing

See Note 4 and 6.

Biodegradable stake (typ.)

filter, aggregate #57

6-in depth granular and/or

Geotextile, class 1

1:

1.

(m ax

See Note 4 and 6.

Biodegradable stake (typ.)

See Note 4.

with void-fill backfill. 24-in depth

Riprap, Class 3, D50=12-in, Type 4A (woven coir). See Note 6.

Rolled erosion control product, Native riparian seed mix. See Note 5.

filter, aggregate #57.

-in depth granular 9

Asummed beckrock elevation varies from 370.08 ft to 373.84 ft.

Place riprap 5 ft deep or to bedrock, whichever comes first.

or excavated during construction using riprap Class 5 if disturbed

Backfill as needed

See Note 5.

Topsoil, 15-in depth

Top of Slope

Proposed

54-in min. thickness.See Note 2.

Riprap, Class 5, D50=18-in, Apparent TOE (Elevation varies)

Total assumed container plant quantity needed: 315 plans assuming a 4.5 ft spacing

Existing Top of Slope

+/- 67-in the water table.

extend 6-in min. beneath

Ensure pole plantings

Water table

:1

See Detail A.

Pole plantings

OHW = +/- 378'

whichever is greater. See Note 2.3 ft above Apparent TOE, OHW or

Silky Willow (Salix sericea)

Silky Dogwood (Cornus amomum)

Pussy Willow (Salix discolor)

Missouri River Willow (Salix eriocephala)

Pole Species:

Rooted or unrooted pole plantings @ 3 per LNFT

See Note 10

Varies m in

P o le

P la n ti n g s

See Note 3.

DETAIL A

POLE PLANTINGS

1-3" dia.

table

Water zone

Vadose m in

Finished ground backfilling. when

Remove air pockets

6"

Total assumed pole planting quantity needed: 103 poles assuming a 3 ft spacing

SITE 240

underwater conditions buried riprap) for

(Live stake/pole with

VEGETATED RIPRAP

54-in

-i n m in aggregate #57.

granular filter, 6-in depth and

Geotextile, class 1, Riprap3-in depth of void-fill backfill

3-in depth of void-fill backfill

Container plants. See Note 8.

of the live cutting (pole).

10. Width of excavation hole must be at least twice the diameter during construction.

damaged void-fill material, pole plantings and geotextile

9. Replace any displaced riprap. Replace any displaced and of all plantings prior to installation.

8. Coordinate and obtain CO approval on the location/placement downstream ends to prevent flanking. See detail B.

7. Provide a key-in trench into the bank at both upstream and of bank. See Section 629 and 713 for more information.

erosion control product a minimum of 12-inches into the top manufacturer's recommendations. Key and stake the rolled bio-degradable stakes and stake the matting according to

6. Place rolled erosion control product, type 4A (woven coir). Use information.

native riparian seed mix. See Sections 624 and 625 for more

5. Place topsoil (15-in depth) and stabilize the slope using a stake the geotextile into the top of bank.

prior to encapsulate the rock with the geotextile. Key and material approved by the CO. Place 3-in depth oid-fill backfill while simultaneously backfilling voids with the void-fill backfill

4. Place geotextile, granular filter and then place riprap (class 3) post-planted. SSee Section 251 for more information.

either fully soaked in water, stored until they can be planted or plantings harvested and not installed immediately must be

3. Harvest and install Pole Planting on dormant season. Pole directed by the CO.

Place the largest available rocks at the toe of the slope as

3ft vertical rise (65-in of slope lenght), whichever is greater.

2. Place granular filter and Class 5 riprap up to the OHWM or to a

1. Refer to Section 251 for more requirements.

Attachment 07:

isis.rosado-vazquez Typewritten Text isis.rosado-vazquez Text Box This detail is for informational purposes only. HD is responsible for revising it as necessary to comply with PS&E format requirements and permitting requirements.

Attachment 08:

Attachment 09:

Attachment 10:

Riprap limits of workExposed Riprap

+0.8 isis.rosado-vazquez Line

Attachment 11:

Riprap limits of work

Hydraulic Analysis Report- Site 324

Project Title: NY WARI 2019-1(1)

Designer: EFL HYD (IRV)

Project Date: Thursday, December 04, 2025

Project Units: U.S. Customary Units

Notes: Q100

Channel Analysis: Channel Analysis 324 XS Q100 Notes:

Input Parameters Channel Type: Custom Cross Section

Cross Section Data

Station (ft Elevation (ft) Manning's n

0.00 380.31 0.0350

2.03 380.43 0.0350

44.94 379.92 0.0350

52.05 379.33 0.0350

67.39 378.59 0.0350

72.50 378.87 0.0350

73.69 377.11 0.0350

78.23 373.73 0.0350

89.09 372.70 0.0350

122.52 369.61 0.0350

127.01 368.87 0.0350

128.01 369.14 0.0350

128.26 369.44 0.0350

138.41 371.69 0.0350

139.80 372.50 0.0350

139.81 372.50 0.0350

141.35 373.57 0.0350

141.35 373.57 0.0350

141.36 373.57 0.0350

141.44 373.60 0.0350

141.57 373.65 0.0350

141.76 373.72 0.0350

141.90 373.77 0.0350

Attachment 12:

158.07 382.13 0.0350

160.66 383.53 0.0350

162.57 383.61 0.0350

162.67 383.61 0.0350

162.83 383.62 0.0350

164.72 383.70 0.0350

166.69 383.77 0.0350

170.24 383.63 0.0350

170.71 383.61 0.0350

170.99 383.60 0.0350

172.72 383.53 0.0350

177.30 382.40 0.0350

179.03 381.97 0.0350

181.37 381.96 0.0350

187.44 381.94 0.0350

191.90 381.93 0.0350

195.32 381.92 0.0350

195.46 381.92 0.0350

195.82 381.92 0.0350

197.05 381.91 0.0350

198.03 381.91 0.0350

246.70 381.66 0.0350

250.48 381.57 0.0350

254.66 381.59 0.0350

257.65 381.53 ----- Longitudinal Slope: 0.0005 ft/ft

Depth 21.1600 ft

Result Parameters Flow 14406.8751 cfs

Area of Flow 2999.6622 ft^2

Wetted Perimeter 281.8309 ft

Hydraulic Radius 10.6435 ft

Average Velocity 4.8028 ft/s

Top Width 257.6550 ft

Froude Number: 0.2481

Critical Depth 13.9724 ft

Critical Velocity 12.4306 ft/s

Critical Slope: 0.0109 ft/ft

Critical Top Width 241.52 ft

Calculated Max Shear Stress 0.6602 lb/ft^2

Calculated Avg Shear Stress 0.3321 lb/ft^2

Composite Manning's n Equation: Lotter method

Manning's n: 0.0335

Riprap Analysis: Riprap Analysis 324 Q100- Class 3 Notes:

Input Parameters Riprap Type: Revetment

The channel is a natural channel

Local Depth of Flow: 21.16 ft

Riprap Shape is Angular

Stability Coefficient: 0.3

This value is updated by the selected Riprap Shape

Blanket Thickness Coefficient: 1

Channel Cross-sectional Average Velocity: 4.80283 ft/s

Which is the Average Velocity with Spurs

Centerline Radius of Curvature of Channel Bend: 35 ft

Width of Water Surface at Upstream End of Channel Bend: 257.655 ft

Bank Angle: 1.5 :1 H:V

.966 < Bank Angle < 4.011

The location of the revetment protection is on the outside of a bend

Specific Gravity of Riprap: 2.65

Safety Factor: 1.1

Result Parameters Side slope Correction Factor: 0.717953

Velocity Distribution Coefficient: 1.45639

Design Velocity: 10.5222 ft/s

Design velocity never less than average channel velocity

Computed D30: 259.021 mm

Computed D50: 310.825 mm

Riprap Class

Riprap Class Name:CLASS III

Riprap Class Order:3 The following values are an 'average' of the size fraction range for the selected riprap class.

D100: 609.60 mm

D85: 431.80 mm

D50: 317.50 mm

D15: 228.60 mm

Layout Recommendations Minimum Riprap Thickness: 288.00 in

Name of Selected Channel: Channel Analysis 324 XS Q100

Riprap along banks = Class 3 – D50=12-in

Riprap along TOE = 12”*1.5 = 18-in (Class 5)

SITE 324

ALT 1

underwater conditions buried riprap) for

(Turf Mat with

VEGETATED RIPRAP

Notes:

E251-B

DETAIL B

Riprap Key-in

1:

1.

(m ax with void-fill backfill. See Note 4.

Riprap, Class 3, D50=12-in, Native riparian seed mix.See Note 5.

See Note 6.

Turf Reinforcement Mat, Type 5.A.

See Note 5.

Topsoil, 15-in depth.

ground (typ.)

Existing

See Note 4 and 6.

Biodegradable stake (typ.)

Apparent TOE (Elevation varies)

1:

1.

(m ax filter, aggregate #57

6-in depth granular and/or

Geotextile, class 1, Thalweg

See Note 4 and 6.

Biodegradable stake (typ.)

See Note 4.

with void-fill backfill. 24-in depth

Riprap, Class 3, D50=12-in, See Note 5.

Topsoil, 15-in depth

See Note 6.

Turf Reinforcement Mat, Type 5.A.

Native riparian seed mix. See Note 5.

Asummed beckrock elevation is 370.08 ft.

bedrock, whichever comes first.

Place riprap 5 ft deep or to

Existing Top of Slope

Proposed Top of Slope or excavated during construction using riprap Class 5 if disturbed

Backfill as needed

Silky Willow (Salix sericea)

Silky Dogwood (Cornus amomum)

Pussy Willow (Salix discolor)

Missouri River Willow (Salix eriocephala)

Pole Species:

Rooted or unrooted pole plantings @ 3 per LNFT m in

P o le

P la n ti n g s

See Note 3.

DETAIL A

POLE PLANTINGS

1-3" dia.

table

Water zone

Vadose m in

Finished ground backfilling. when

Remove air pockets

6"

:1 the water table.

extend 6-in min. beneath

Ensure pole plantings

See Detail A.

Pole plantings

Water table

+/- 67-in whichever is greater. See Note 2.3 ft above Apparent TOE, OHW or

See Note 10

Varies filter, aggregate #57.

-in depth granular 9

54-in min. thickness.See Note 2.

Riprap, Class 5, D50=18-in, 54-in

-i n

Riprap

3-in depth of void-fill backfill

3-in depth of void-fill backfill

OHW = +/- 375'

9. Replace any displaced riprap. Replace any displaced and of all plantings prior to installation.

8. Coordinate and obtain CO approval on the location/placement downstream ends to prevent flanking. See detail B.

7. Provide a key-in trench into the bank at both upstream and

Section 629 and 713 for more information.

product a minimum of 12-inches into the top of bank. See recommendations. Key and stake the turf reinforcement mat stakes and stake the matting according to manufacturer's

6. Place Turf Reinforcement Mat, type 5A. Use bio-degradable information.

native riparian seed mix. See Sections 624 and 625 for more

5. Place topsoil (15-in depth) and stabilize the slope using a stake the geotextile into the top of bank.

prior to encapsulate the rock with the geotextile. Key and material approved by the CO. Place 3-in depth oid-fill backfill while simultaneously backfilling voids with the void-fill backfill

4. Place geotextile, granular filter and then place riprap (class 3) post-planted. SSee Section 251 for more information.

either fully soaked in water, stored until they can be planted or

3ft vertical rise (65-in of slope lenght), whichever is greater.

2. Place granular filter and Class 5 riprap up to the OHWM or to a

1. Refer to Section 251 for more requirements.

aggregate #57.

granular filter, 6-in depth and

Geotextile, class 1, isis.rosado-vazquez Typewritten Text Attachment 13a:

isis.rosado-vazquez

This detail is for informational purposes only. HD is responsible for revising it as necessary to comply with PS&E format requirements and permitting requirements.

SITE 324

ALT 2

underwater conditions.

buried riprap) for

(Live stake/pole with

VEGETATED RIPRAP

E251-C

DETAIL B

Riprap Key-in

1:

1.

(m ax with void-fill backfill. See Note 4.

Riprap, Class 3, D50=12-in, Container plants. See Note 8.

Native riparian seed mix.See Note 5.

Type 4.A (woven coir). See Note 6.

Rolled erosion control product, See Note 5.

Topsoil, 15-in depth.

ground (typ.)

Existing

See Note 4 and 6.

Biodegradable stake (typ.)

Apparent TOE (Elevation varies)

1:

1.

(m ax filter, aggregate #57

6-in depth granular and/or

Geotextile, class 1, Thalweg

See Note 4 and 6.

Biodegradable stake (typ.)

See Note 4.

with void-fill backfill. 24-in depth

Riprap, Class 3, D50=12-in, aggregate #57.

granular filter, 6-in depth and

Geotextile, class 1

See Note 5.

Topsoil, 15-in depth

Type 4A (woven coir). See Note 6.

Rolled erosion control product, Native riparian seed mix. See Note 5.

Asummed beckrock elevation is 370.08 ft.

bedrock, whichever comes first.

Place riprap 5 ft deep or to

Existing Top of Slope

Proposed Top of Slope or excavated during construction using riprap Class 5 if disturbed

Backfill as needed

Total assumed container plant quantity needed: 338 plans assuming a 4.5 ft spacing

Silky Willow (Salix sericea)

Silky Dogwood (Cornus amomum)

Pussy Willow (Salix discolor)

Missouri River Willow (Salix eriocephala)

Pole Species:

Rooted or unrooted pole plantings @ 3 per LNFT m in

P o le

P la n ti n g s

See Note 3.

DETAIL A

POLE PLANTINGS

1-3" dia.

table

Water zone

Vadose m in

Finished ground backfilling. when

Remove air pockets

6"

:1 the water table.

extend 6-in min. beneath

Ensure pole plantings

See Detail A.

Pole plantings

Water table

+/- 67-in

Total assumed pole planting quantity needed: 118 poles assuming a 3 ft spacing whichever is greater. See Note 2.3 ft above Apparent TOE, OHW or

See Note 10

Varies

-i n filter, aggregate #57.

-in depth granular 9

54-in min. thickness.See Note 2.

Riprap, Class 5, D50=18-in, 54-in

Riprap void-fill backfill

3-in depth of

3-in depth of void-fill backfill

OHW = +/- 375'

9. Replace any displaced riprap. Replace any displaced and of all plantings prior to installation.

8. Coordinate and obtain CO approval on the location/placement downstream ends to prevent flanking. See detail B.

7. Provide a key-in trench into the bank at both upstream and of bank. See Section 629 and 713 for more information.

erosion control product a minimum of 12-inches into the top manufacturer's recommendations. Key and stake the rolled bio-degradable stakes and stake the matting according to

6. Place rolled erosion control product, type 4A (woven coir). Use information.

native riparian seed mix. See Sections 624 and 625 for more

5. Place topsoil (15-in depth) and stabilize the slope using a stake the geotextile into the top of bank.

prior to encapsulate the rock with the geotextile. Key and material approved by the CO. Place 3-in depth oid-fill backfill while simultaneously backfilling voids with the void-fill backfill

4. Place geotextile, granular filter and then place riprap (class 3) post-planted. SSee Section 251 for more information.

either fully soaked in water, stored until they can be planted or

3ft vertical rise (65-in of slope lenght), whichever is greater.

2. Place granular filter and Class 5 riprap up to the OHWM or to a

1. Refer to Section 251 for more requirements.

Attachment 13b:

isis.rosado-vazquez

This detail is for informational purposes only. HD is responsible for revising it as necessary to comply with PS&E format requirements and permitting requirements.

Attachment 14:

Attachment 15:

isis.rosado-vazquez Line isis.rosado-vazquez Typewritten Text Riprap work limits isis.rosado-vazquez Typewritten Text

0.15 fps isis.rosado-vazquez

Attachment 16:

Site 3 - Hydraulic Analysis Report

Project Title: NY WARI 2019-1(1)

Designer: EFL

Project Date: Friday, May 13, 2022

Project Units: U.S. Customary Units

Notes:

Channel Analysis: Channel Analysis Q100 Notes:

Input Parameters Channel Type: Custom Cross Section

Cross Section Data Station (ft Elevation (ft) Manning's n

0.00 382.05 0.0400

0.43 382.06 0.0400

6.19 381.78 0.0400

6.82 381.75 0.0400

11.73 381.70 0.0400

12.17 381.68 0.0400

21.55 380.62 0.0400

23.21 380.62 0.0400

48.06 380.36 0.0400

50.60 380.25 0.0400

52.01 380.16 0.0400

80.14 379.40 0.0400

80.87 377.44 0.0400

81.11 377.31 0.0400

91.00 375.82 0.0400

92.23 375.60 0.0400

93.62 375.42 0.0400

103.94 374.65 0.0400

111.82 373.95 0.0400

116.00 373.82 0.0400

127.94 371.85 0.0400

155.90 374.09 0.0400

158.41 374.36 0.0400

160.55 375.01 0.0400

Attachment 17

163.98 377.26 0.0400

166.28 380.09 0.0400

171.16 385.63 0.0400

174.90 384.27 0.0400

175.28 384.33 0.0400

176.43 384.45 0.0400

176.97 385.69 0.0400

178.82 387.38 0.0400

180.80 388.45 0.0400

181.39 388.57 0.0400

182.59 388.83 0.0400

183.38 388.85 0.0400

183.72 388.87 0.0400

187.71 389.08 0.0400

187.92 389.07 0.0400

192.37 388.75 0.0400

192.60 388.74 0.0400

195.75 388.58 0.0400

205.81 384.34 0.0400

206.25 384.17 0.0400

207.49 384.10 0.0400

235.43 382.85 0.0400

244.63…