This report provides the results of a detailed Level II analysis of scour potential at structure ROYATH00550025 on Town Highway 55 crossing Broad Brook, Royalton, Vermont (figures 1–8). A Level II study is a basic engineering analysis of the site, including a quantitative analysis of stream stability and scour (U.S. Department of Transportation, 1993). Results of a Level I scour investigation also are included in Appendix E of this report. A Level I investigation provides a qualitative geomorphic characterization of the study site. Information on the bridge, gleaned from Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTAOT) files, was compiled prior to conducting Level I and Level II analyses and is found in Appendix D. The site is in the New England Upland section of the New England physiographic province in central Vermont. The 11.6-mi² drainage area is in a predominantly rural and forested basin. In the vicinity of the study site, the surface cover is pasture on the upstream and downstream left overbanks and forest on the upstream and downstream right overbanks. In the study area, Broad Brook has an incised, sinuous channel with a slope of approximately 0.01 ft/ft, an average channel top width of 41 ft and an average bank height of 5 ft. The channel bed material ranges from sand to boulder with a median grain size (D₅₀) of 58.3 mm (0.191 ft). The geomorphic assessment at the time of the Level I site visit on April 13, 1995 indicated that the reach was laterally unstable. The stream impacts the upstream left bank where there is a cut bank. The Town Highway 55 crossing of the Broad Brook is a 35-ft-long, two-lane bridge consisting of one 31-foot steel-beam span (Vermont Agency of Transportation, written communication, March 22, 1995). The opening length of the structure parallel to the bridge face is 32 ft. The bridge is supported by vertical, concrete abutments with wingwalls. The channel is skewed approximately 20 degrees to the opening, while the opening-skew-toroadway is zero degrees. A scour hole 1.0 ft deeper than the mean thalweg depth was observed along the left abutment and the downstream left wingwall during the Level I assessment. The scour countermeasure at the site was type-2 stone fill (less than 36 inches diameter) along the upstream and downstream left banks that extended to the ends of the wingwalls. Additional details describing conditions at the site are included in the Level II Summary and Appendices D and E. Scour depths and recommended rock rip-rap sizes were computed using the general guidelines described in Hydraulic Engineering Circular 18 (Richardson and others, 1995). Total scour at a highway crossing is comprised of three components: 1) long-term streambed degradation; 2) contraction scour (due to accelerated flow caused by a reduction in flow area at a bridge) and; 3) local scour (caused by accelerated flow around piers and abutments). Total scour is the sum of the three components. Equations are available to compute depths for contraction and local scour and a summary of the results of these computations follows. Contraction scour for all modelled flows ranged from 0.6 to 1.5 ft. The worst-case contraction scour occurred at the incipient-overtopping discharge which was less than the 100-year discharge. Abutment scour ranged from 3.5 to 8.9 ft. The worst-case abutment scour occurred at the incipient road-overtopping discharge for the left abutment and at the 100-year discharge for the right abutment. Additional information on scour depths and depths to armoring are included in the section titled “Scour Results”. Scoured-streambed elevations, based on the calculated scour depths, are presented in tables 1 and 2. A crosssection of the scour computed at the bridge is presented in figure 8. Scour depths were calculated assuming an infinite depth of erosive material and a homogeneous particle-size distribution. It is generally accepted that the Froehlich equation (abutment scour) gives “excessively conservative estimates of scour depths” (Richardson and others, 1995, p. 47). Usually, computed scour depths are evaluated in combination with other information including (but not limited to) historical performance during flood events, the geomorphic stability assessment, existing scour protection measures, and the results of the hydraulic analyses. Therefore, scour depths adopted by VTAOT may differ from the computed values documented herein.