Little Calumet River
Forest Ave Levee System
Periodic Inspection No.1
Yuki Galisanao, PE, PG
Team Lead, Geotechnical Engineer
Chicago District
September 10, 2015
US Army Corps of Engineers
BUILDING STRONG®
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Agenda
• System Description
• Design Criteria Review
• Inspection Findings
• Conclusions & Recommendations
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
2
BUILDING STRONG®
SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
3
BUILDING STRONG®
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
4
BUILDING STRONG®
Summary Information
•
•
Features
Measurement
Levee
2,000 LF
Sheet Pile Wall
325 LF
Concrete Block Wall
1,950 LF
Gap Closures
9
Culverts
6
Check Valves
3
Pump Stations
2
Protected Area
55 acres
This is part of a federally authorized and non-federally
operated and maintained urban flood-protection project. It
was non-federally constructed and incorporated into the
project when the PCA was signed. The State Line Rd tieback
was non-federally constructed and is waiting for approval
under the Section 408 Permit process to be incorporated into
the project.
The overall Little Calumet River Project was authorized to a
200 year level of protection. The levee portion of the Forest
Ave system was constructed to the 200 year. The State Line
Rd tieback and the area between Hohman Ave and the
NICTD Railroad does not quite provide a 200 year level of
protection. Plans to achieve the 200 year level of protection
will be completed at a later date and will include raising the
State Line Rd Tieback and constructing floodwall in the
neighboring Southmoor subdivision east of Hohman Ave.
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
5
BUILDING STRONG®
Project Modifications
•
Permit 10-06 7258 Forest Ave Drainage
o
•
Permit 11-02 Forest Ave Levee Repairs
o
•
The work consisted of removing vegetation from the levee; repairing holes left in the levee
from tree removal; drainage modifications that included replacing portions of culverts, adding
manholes and check valves; and seeding. Construction occurred from October to December
2012.
Permit 13-05 State Line Tieback
o
•
The permit request consists of installing a perforated drain line along the toe of the levee and
connecting to a catch basin and 8 inch PVC pipe that leads out to a storm inlet on the road.
This request was submitted in response to was backflow of river water through a flap gate that
caused interior flooding of a property behind the levee during the 2008 flood.
The work consisted of constructing a semi-permanent concrete block wall with gaps along
State Line Road up to the 100 year level of protection. The wall was not tied into the existing
levee. Although the Local Sponsor did not receive approval for the permit, construction took
place between Nov 2013 and Jun 2014.
Permit 15-01 Forest Ave Manhole
o
The work consists of removing the pump in the manhole at Station 1+38.31, cleaning the
pipes, abandoning the 2 inch PVC pipe by backfilling the pipes and manhole with flowable fill,
removing the check valve, and then capping the manhole with clay and seed.
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
6
BUILDING STRONG®
Foundation Geology
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
7
BUILDING STRONG®
DESIGN CRITERIA REVIEW
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
8
BUILDING STRONG®
Hydraulics
Criteria
Hydrologic Analysis of Interior Areas
Guidance
EM 1110-2-1413
(15 January 1987)
EM 1110-2-1416
(15 October 1993)
Applicable
Yes
Criteria Met
Yes

Yes
Yes

Channel Stability Assessment for Flood
Control Projects
EM 1110-2-1418
(31 October 1994)
Yes
Yes

Hydraulic Design of Flood Control
Channels
Risk Based Analysis for Flood Damage
Reduction Studies
USACE Process for the National Flood
Insurance Program Levee Evaluation
(NFIP)
EM 1110-2-1601
(30 June 1994)
EM 1110-2-1619 (1
August 1996)
EC 1110-2-6067
(31 August 2010)
Yes
Yes

Yes
Yes

Yes
Yes

Risk Analysis for Flood Damage Reduction
Studies
Hydraulic Design for Local Flood
Protection Projects
ER 1105-2-101
(3 January 2006)
ER 1110-2-1405
(30 September
1982)
ETL 1110-2-299
(22 August 1986)
River Hydraulics
Overtopping of Flood Control Levees and
Floodwalls

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Yes
Yes

Yes
Yes

Yes
Yes

9
Comment
An interior hydraulic analysis was performed for the Forest
Avenue levee segment that conforms with the EM requirements
Due to the complex hydraulics (flow splits, flat gradient)
unsteady flow modeling was selected as the appropriate
hydraulic analysis method
A sediment analysis was provided in FDM 5 Volume 2
Appendix A pages A-23and A-24. There have been no
significant changes to the channel in regard to the Forest Avenue
Levee
Adequate erosion protection (rip rap) design was included
The 13 May 2010 memo includes a risk analysis consistent with
the EM requirements
The risk analysis included in the 13 May 2010 memo is
consistent with the EC requirements.
The Corps has not performed a full levee system evaluation in
support of the NFIP for Forest Avenue/ State Line Levee.
The risk analysis developed for the 13 May, 2010 memo is
consistent with the requirements of the ER
The unsteady flow model developed to evaluate the levee is of
sufficient detail and complexity to evaluate the potential flood
risk posed by Little Calumet River/Thorn Creek.
A superiority analysis was performed that includes the Forest
Avenue Levee segment. The superiority analysis assumes the
Corps design with 200 year plus freeboard protection between
the NICTD railroad and the stateline with overtopping of the
Illinois levee at the state line. The portion between the NICTD
railroad and Hohman Avenue was not constructed, but would
likely overtop at about the same time as the state line tieback.
The intent of the ETL would be satisfied, i.e. overtopping would
occur in locations that would
have a minimal
probability of
BUILDING
STRONG
®
catastrophic impacts
Geotechnical
Criteria
Settlement Analysis
Guidance
EM 1110-1-1904
(30 September
1990)
EM 1110-2-1901
(30 April 1993)
EM 1110-2-1902
(31 October 2003)
EM 1110-2-1908
(30 June 1995)
Applicable
Yes
Criteria Met
No

Comment
No design documentation available.
Yes
No

No design documentation available.
Yes
No

No design documentation available.
Yes
No

The EM does not prescribe mandatory requirements, but does
recommend an instrumentation plan be developed. No
instrumentation is present at the project, and no
instrumentation plan was available for review.
EM 1110-2-1913
(30 April 2000)
Yes
No

No
N/A

No design documentation available showing that the proper
seepage, settlement, and stability analysis was conducted.
Crest width is less than 10’, and there is no record of an
inspection trench.
No design documentation available.
Yes
No

No design documentation available.
Yes
No

No design documentation available.
Yes
No

While the project lies in a low risk seismic zone, ER-1110-21806 still requires a seismic evaluation. No documentation
regarding seismic investigations was available.
Engineering and Design, Design
ETL 1110-2-569
Guidance for Levee Underseepage (1 May 2005)
Yes
No

No design documentation available.
Evaluation of I-Walls
Yes
No

No design documentation available.
Seepage Analysis and Control for
Dams
Slope Stability
Instrumentation of Embankment
Dams and Levees
Construction of Levees
Design, Construction and
Maintenance of Relief Wells
Stability Analysis of Concrete
Structures
Retaining and Floodwalls
EM 1110-2-1914
(29 May 1992)
EM 1110-2-2100
(1 December 2005)
EM 1110-2-2502
(29 September
1989)
Earthquake Design and Evaluation ER 1110-2-1806
for Civil Works Projects
(31 July 1995)
ETL 1110-2-575
(1 Sep 2011)
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
10
BUILDING STRONG®
Civil
Criteria
Standards and Procedures for
Referencing Project Elevation
Grades to Nationwide Vertical
Datums
Guidance
EM 1110-2-6056
(31 December
2010)
Applicable
Yes
Criteria Met
No

Comment
Notes on provided drawings indicated NGVD29 and
Little Calumet River Coordinate System.
Design and Construction of
Levees
EM 1110-2-1913
(30 April 2000)
Yes
No

No design documentation available.
Conduits, Culverts, and Pipes
EM 1110-2-2902
(31 March 1998
Change 1)
ER 1110-2-8160
(1 March 2009)
Yes
No

No design documentation available.
Yes
No

Notes on provided drawings indicated NGVD29 and
Little Calumet River Coordinate System.
ETL 1110-2-571
(10 April 2009)
Yes
No

No design documentation available.
Policies for Referencing Project
Elevation Grades to Nationwide
Vertical Datums
Guidelines for Landscape
Planting and Vegetation
Management at Levees,
Floodwalls, Embankment Dams,
and Appurtenant Structures
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
11
BUILDING STRONG®
Structural
Criteria
Evaluation and Repair of Concrete
Structures
Structural Design of Concrete
Lined flood Control Channels
Stability Analysis of Concrete
Structures
Strength Design for Reinforced
Concrete Hydraulic Structures
Design of Hydraulic Steel
Structures
Retaining and Flood Walls
Guidance
EM 1110-2-2002
(30 June 1995)
EM 1110-2-2007
(30 April 1995)
EM 1110-2-2100
(1 December 2005)
EM 1110-2-2104
(20 August 2003)
EM 1110-2-2105
(31 May 1994)
EM 1110-2-2502
(29 September 1989)
Design of Sheet Pile Walls
EM 1110-2-2504
(31 March 1994)
Structural Design of Closure
EM 1110-2-2705
Structures for Local Flood Control (31 March 1994)
Protection Projects
Design of Pile Foundations
EM 1110-2-2906
(15 January 1991)
Structural and Architectural
EM 1110-2-3104
Design of Pumping Stations
(30 June 1989)
Inspection, Evaluation and Repair
of Hydraulic Steel Structures
Responsibility for Hydraulic Steel
Structures
Evaluation of I-Walls
EM 1110-2-6054
(1 December 2001)
ER 1110-2-8157
(31 January 1997)
ETL 1110-2-575
(1 Sep 2011)
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Applicable
No
Criteria Met
N/A

No
N/A

Comment
The criteria given in this manual is for maintenance purposes,
not design.
Not Applicable
No
N/A

Not Applicable
Yes
Yes

No
N/A

The pump station outfall structures were designed in accordance
with this document.
Not Applicable
Yes
Yes

The block wall was evaluated for sliding per this EM and met
the safety factors. The SSP structure acts as a seepage barrier
and stability support to the levee embankment. However, this
levee section is called a flood wall in some project documents.
No
N/A

Not Applicable
No
N/A

Not Applicable
No
N/A

Not Applicable
Yes
Yes

Concrete modifications to the existing pump stations were
designed in accordance with this document. New pump stations
also meet these criteria.
No
N/A

Not Applicable
No
N/A

Not Applicable
No
N/A

Not Applicable
12
BUILDING STRONG®
Mechanical/Electrical
Criteria
Guidance
Applicable
Criteria Met
Comment
General Principles of Pumping
Station Design and Layout
EM 1110-2-3102
(February 1995)
Yes
No

Discharge chamber at Forest Avenue pump station is
not to the protection elevation. 7.4.b.
Mechanical and Electrical
Design of Pumping Stations
EM 1110-2-3105
(August 1994)
Yes
No

No documentation
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
13
BUILDING STRONG®
INSPECTION FINDINGS
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
14
BUILDING STRONG®
Preliminary Segment/System Rating
Segment / System
Rating
Forest Ave
Acceptable
All items or components are
rated as ACCEPTABLE
Minimally Acceptable
Minimally Acceptable
One or more items are rated as
MINIMALLY ACCEPTABLE or one
or more items are rated as
UNACCEPTABLE and an
engineering determination
concludes that the Unacceptable
items would not prevent the
segment / system from performing
as intended during the next flood
event.
Unacceptable
One or more items are rated as
UNACCEPTABLE and would
prevent the segment / system from
performing as intended, or a
serious deficiency noted in past
inspections (which had previously
resulted in a minimally acceptable
system rating) has not been
corrected within the established
timeframe, not to exceed two years.
Rehabilitation Program Status
Rehabilitation Program Status
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Active
15
BUILDING STRONG®
Field Inspection
 Date of Inspection – May 4, 2015
 Levee Team:
• Yuki Galisanao – USACE Lead
• John Groboski – USACE Civil
• Adam Karr – USACE GIS
• Tina Kowitz – USACE Geotechnical
• Erin Maloney – USAC Hydraulics
• Andy Wadysz – USACE Structural
• Dan Repay – LCRBDC
• Mark Gordish - City of Hammond
 Pump Station Team:
• Ernie Go – USACE Electrical
• Robert Sezonov – USACE Mechanical
• Ricky Wilcox – Hammond Sanitary District
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
16
BUILDING STRONG®
Deficiency Map
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
17
BUILDING STRONG®
Individual Item / Component Rating Definition
Acceptable
Minimally Acceptable
Unacceptable
The inspected item is in
satisfactory condition,
with no deficiencies, and
will function as intended
during the next flood
event.
The inspected item has one
or more minor deficiencies
that need to be corrected.
The minor deficiency or
deficiencies will not
seriously impair the
functioning of the item as
intended during the next
flood event.
The inspected item has one
or more serious deficiencies
that need to be corrected.
The serious deficiency or
deficiencies will seriously
impair the functioning of the
item as intended during the
next flood event.
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
18
BUILDING STRONG®
General Items
Rated Item
1.
2.
3.
Operations and Maintenance
Manuals
Emergency Supplies and
Equipment
Flood Preparedness and
Training
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Rating
Comments
M
Forest Ave Levee System O&M Manual to be developed. It was
identified as a separate system from the Hammond Levee. Manuals
maintained by the City Engineering
Department at City Hall and relevant copies distributed to appropriate
internal agencies.
A
City of Hammond has ready inventory of flood fighting supplies and
equipment. Primary resources available through public works
department, but also can be supplemented by other city departments.
Street Dept Public Works facility at 601 Conkey maintains pay loader,
concrete blocks, portable welders, 69 pallets (100/pallet) of shrinkwrapped sandbags last checked 1-2 years ago, 2 forklifts, 1000 empty
sandbags, 4 pallets of empty sandbags, and visqueen. Borrow source
is Krooswyk. Hammond manually fills sandbags or uses a salt
spreader to fill large quantities of bags.
M
Forest Ave Levee System flood response plan still to be developed. It
was identified as a separate system from the Hammond Levee.
Hammond uses reverse 911 and WJLB station to relay information.
Public Works also uses frequency radios with the police and fire
departments. Evacuation areas include City Hall, Civic Center, Jean
Shepherd Community Center, Armory, Purdue University Calumet,
Area Career Center. Fire Department has rescue boats. Specific
features will need to be developed such as implementation of action
levels for levee patrols, flood fighting, road closures, etc. A levee
system Flood Warning Handbook is recommended to be prepared.
Response action levels should be referenced to existing USGS River
Gages at Hohman Ave.
19
BUILDING STRONG®
Levee Embankment
Rating
Number of
Deficiencies
Minimally Acceptable
4
2. Sod Cover
Acceptable
0
3. Encroachments
Acceptable
0
Not Applicable
-
5. Slope Stability
Acceptable
0
6. Erosion / Bank Caving
Acceptable
0
7. Settlement
Acceptable
0
8. Depressions / Rutting
Acceptable
0
9. Cracking
Acceptable
0
Minimally Acceptable
2
11. Culverts / Discharge Pipes
Acceptable
0
12. Riprap Revetments & Bank Protection
Acceptable
0
13. Revetments other than Riprap
Acceptable
0
Not Applicable
-
Acceptable
0
Rated Item
1. Unwanted Vegetation Growth
4. Closure Structures
10. Animal Control
14. Underseepage Relief Wells / Toe Drainage System
15. Seepage
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
20
BUILDING STRONG®
Levee Embankment
Unwanted Vegetation
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
21
BUILDING STRONG®
Levee Embankment
Animal Control
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
22
BUILDING STRONG®
Floodwalls
Rating
Number of
Deficiencies
1. Unwanted Vegetation Growth
Minimally Acceptable
1
2. Encroachments
Minimally Acceptable
1
3. Closure Structures
Acceptable
0
4. Concrete Surfaces
Acceptable
12
Minimally Acceptable
3
Acceptable
0
Minimally Acceptable
3
Not Applicable
-
Acceptable
0
Rated Item
5. Tilting, Sliding or Settlement of Concrete Structures
6. Foundation of Concrete Structures
7. Monolith Joints
8. Underseepage Relief Wells / Toe Drainage Systems
9. Seepage
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
23
BUILDING STRONG®
Floodwalls
Unwanted Vegetation and Encroachments
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
24
BUILDING STRONG®
Floodwalls
Concrete Surfaces
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
25
BUILDING STRONG®
Floodwalls
Tilting, Sliding or Settlement of Concrete Structures
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
26
BUILDING STRONG®
Floodwalls
Monolith Joints
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
27
BUILDING STRONG®
Interior Drainage
Rating
Number of
Deficiencies
Minimally Acceptable
2
2. Encroachments
Acceptable
0
3. Ponding Areas
Not Applicable
-
4. Fencing and Gates
Not Applicable
-
5. Concrete Surfaces
Minimally Acceptable
1
6. Tilting, Sliding, or Settlement of Concrete and Sheet Pile Structures
Acceptable
0
7. Foundation of Concrete Structures
Acceptable
0
8. Monolith Joints
Acceptable
0
9. Culverts / Discharge Pipes
Acceptable
0
Not Applicable
-
11. Flap Gates / Flap Valves / Pinch Valves
Acceptable
0
12. Trash Racks
Acceptable
0
13. Other Metallic Items
Acceptable
0
14. Riprap Revetments of Inlet/ Discharge Areas
Acceptable
0
Not Applicable
-
Rated Item
1. Vegetations and Obstructions
10. Sluice / Slide Gates
15. Revetments other than Riprap
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
28
BUILDING STRONG®
Interior Drainage
Vegetation and Obstructions
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
29
BUILDING STRONG®
Interior Drainage
Concrete Surfaces
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
30
BUILDING STRONG®
Pump Stations
Rating
Number of
Deficiencies
1. Pump Stations Operating, Maintenance, Training, & Inspection Reports
Acceptable
0
2. Pump Station Operations and Maintenance Equipment Manuals
Acceptable
0
3. Safety Compliance
Acceptable
0
4. Communications
Acceptable
0
5. Plant Building
Acceptable
0
6. Fencing and Gates
Acceptable
0
7. Pumps
Acceptable
0
8. Motors, Engines, Fans, Gear Reducers, Back Stop Devices, etc.
Acceptable
0
9. Sumps / Wet well
Acceptable
0
Not Applicable
-
Minimally Acceptable
1
Not Applicable
-
13. Power Source
Acceptable
0
14. Electrical Systems
Acceptable
0
15. Megger Testing on Pump Motors and Critical Power Cables
Acceptable
0
16. Enclosures, Panels, Conduit and Ducts
Acceptable
0
17. Intake and Discharge Pipelines
Acceptable
0
18. Sluice / Slide Gates
Acceptable
0
19. Flap Gates / Flap Valves / Pinch Valves
Acceptable
0
Not Applicable
-
Rated Item
10. Mechanical Operating Trash Rakes
11. Non-Mechanical Trash Racks
12. Fuel System for Pump Engines
20. Cranes
21. Other Metallic Items
31
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Acceptable
BUILDING
0
STRONG
®
Pump Stations
Non-Mechanical Trash Racks
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
32
BUILDING STRONG®
CONCLUSIONS &
RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
33
BUILDING STRONG®
Design Recommendations
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
34
BUILDING STRONG®
Design Recommendations
 Geotechnical
•
Perform a slope stability analysis to verify that the current levee condition, especially since the
dimensions do not meet Corps standards.
•
A seepage analysis should be performed for the levee since there is no record of an inspection
trench. A seepage analysis should also be performed for the tieback wall.
•
•
Perform settlement calculations and seismic analysis.
Perform a subsurface exploration approximately every 1,000 feet, consisting of an exploration at
the riverside toe, at the landside toe, and a deep exploration at the levee crest.
 Civil
•
Perform a subsurface investigation to verify levee material.
 Structural
•
Provide the design analysis for the sheet pile wall.
 Mechanical
•
The design analysis, plans, specifications, and equipment data should be provided for the South
Hohman Pump Station.
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
35
BUILDING STRONG®
Inspection Recommendations
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
36
BUILDING STRONG®
Item
Levee
Embankments
Floodwalls
Interior Drainage
System
Pump Stations
Rated Item
Rating
Recommendations
1. Unwanted Vegetation
M
Remove trees on the levee and at the toe. Mow and maintain
tall grass.
10. Animal Control
M
Fill open burrows.
1. Unwanted Vegetation
Growth
M
Remove trees from next to sheet pile wall.
2. Encroachments
M
Remove debris from next to sheet pile wall.
5. Tilting, Sliding or Settlement
of Concrete Structures
M
Repair sheetpile cap.
7. Monolith Joints
M
Caulk gaps in block wall.
1. Vegetation and Obstructions
M
Clear silt and vegetation from outlet.
5. Concrete Surfaces
M
Cracks on the headwall should be sealed and monitored for
changes / deterioration.
11. Non-Mechanical Trash
Racks
M
Clean debris
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
37
BUILDING STRONG®