Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />1- <br />l, <br />I ,..~ <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I~ <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I.. . <br />I <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />AppeuIix A. <br /> <br />69. Provide source cites for the information. <br /> <br /> <br />AwMIor B. <br /> <br />70. Please provide page IIIIIlber for an pages in this Al'peDdix. 1bcse IIl1mbep caD be <br />peIlCiled ill. <br /> <br />71. Model Cablnation. The discussion ialk'tes that tbe model was calilnIed usm, low <br />Oow water surface profile daIa. The model should be chec:bd apiDst high walei' marks to <br />verify projectiollS of the 100-year flood. <br /> <br />72. Model Cahoratioa. 1hc source of data for c:alibntioll sboald be fully described. <br />iWuding date of the lcnown measured water surface profile. Please include in text. <br /> <br />73. Model CalibratioD. In additiOD to the table Iistin8 a complIisoll of COO'po.l1Ied and <br />lcnown WSEL, it would be belpftll to see a plot of ~utt;d and known (mnwred, CRP. <br />aDd lOO-year profile) water surface profiles to see bow wen the model is eaIihrated, rather <br />dwl simply stating calibration is reasonable. <br /> <br />74. ModeliDg Parametm. Text indicates that tbe mnimum berm beight modeled was <br />about 6 feet, but drawing (PIatc 3) shows bem1 height to be a mllTimum of 8 feet. Drawing <br />should be corrected to reflect coDditioDS 1$ modeled or else HEC.2 model needs to be <br />changed. <br /> <br />7S. Flood PWn Analysis. 'Ibis sectionniDdicates that impacts 10 die Dood pJaill from Jipot <br />clwlnel COnstructiOD were iDsigDificaDt. also the imp4lCtS to navigation were w..,irJIIlJi <br />Ple3se provide a basis (or these staetmeDtl. See discussion ill ('.......If!tlf 2l'i above. Pease <br />review the model to ensure that there are DO erlOIS. Thee results of die model are <br />questioDable. We will discuss this in depdl at the CODf'i:;l~ call. <br /> <br />76. FiBuJe 2. It would be iDluesting to see a similar 6gDre for the pilot t'.mm-J velocities. <br /> <br />T1. Table 2. This table shows project impacts only within the project limits. wbiIc the <br />section OD model calibration indicates die model e~ ll.p$tteun to river mile 535.43. <br />Show j~ upstteam to riVer mi1e S35.43. <br /> <br />78. F'sswe 3. TbeIe appears to be a very sharp change in slope at River Mile 527. <br />'Ibele is 110 HEC-2 output iDcJuded in the appendix to show this, and there was DO model <br />provided on computer disk. <br /> <br />79. The overbaDt .n"values are the same for all alrerrtltives. Diffiae..4 vegelation SC'~ <br />wonld have different .D" values. Please revise the model to reflea the ~lopet 0VClbaDk. <br />coDl1itioDs. <br />