This report provides the results of a detailed Level II analysis of scour potential at structure BRNETH00610046 on Town Highway 61 crossing East Peacham Brook, Barnet, 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 east-central Vermont. The 15.8-mi² drainage area is in a predominantly rural and forested basin. In the vicinity of the study site, the surface cover is forest. In the study area, East Peacham Brook has an incised, sinuous channel with a slope of approximately 0.02 ft/ft, an average channel top width of 59 ft and an average bank height of 5 ft. The channel bed material ranges from gravel to boulder with a median grain size (D₅₀) of 121 mm (0.397 ft). The geomorphic assessment at the time of the Level I and Level II site visit on August 23, 1995, indicated that the reach was laterally unstable with cut banks both upstream and downstream of the bridge. The Town Highway 61 crossing of East Peacham Brook is a 28-ft-long, one-lane bridge consisting of one 26-foot steel-beam span (Vermont Agency of Transportation, written communication, March 24, 1995). The opening length of the structure parallel to the bridge face is 24.5 ft. The bridge is supported by vertical, concrete abutments with wingwalls. The channel is skewed approximately 5 degrees to the opening while the opening-skew-toroadway is zero degrees. A scour hole 0.7 ft deeper than the mean thalweg depth was observed along the upstream left wingwall extending along the left abutment during the Level I assessment. The only scour protection measure at the site was type-2 stone fill (less than 36 inches diameter) at the upstream end of the upstream left wingwall extending along the upstream left bank and along the entire base of the downstream left wingwall. 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) for the 100- and 500-year discharges. In addition, the incipient roadway-overtopping discharge is determined and analyzed as another potential worst-case scour scenario. 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 to 1.2 ft. The worst-case contraction scour occurred at the 500-year discharge. Abutment scour ranged from 10.4 to 13.9 ft. The worst-case abutment scour occurred at the 500-year discharge. 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 cross-section 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.