TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT DEWATERING OF EARTH

EMBANKMENT DAMS TO FACILITATE REHABILITATION

Greg M. Landry, P.E.1
Cari R. Beenenga, P.E.2
ABSTRACT
Earth embankment dam stability is greatly affected by pore water pressures within the
dam and related through- and under-seepage. Elevated pore pressures, with or without a
high water table in the dam, increases the likelihood of failure by slope instability.
Uncontrolled movement of water, through- or under-seepage, increases the likelihood of
soil erosion, piping and loss of foundation or embankment mass. Additionally,
excavations into an earth embankment dam for rehabilitation purposes must first consider
the insitu conditions in the dam. Many situations occur during a rehabilitation effort that
require lowering the phreatic surface within an earth embankment dam to provide safe,
continued operation of the dam during rehabilitation.
Permanently lowering the water table in a dam through either actively or passively
pumped wells and collection trenches can improve the factor of safety against slope
failure and also prevent soil migration by collecting and discharging water through
properly graded trench and well filters. Unfortunately, installation of a permanent
dewatering system or groundwater collection system often requires excavating into the
dam itself. This can be problematic, particularly for dams already in need of
rehabilitation, since removing mass from the dam during excavation can change the
dams global stability.
This paper will explore issues relating to designing and constructing permanent and
temporary dewatering systems for earth embankment dams to mitigate these [Link]
first half of the paper will discuss design of permanent dewatering systems, including
subsurface investigation, groundwater and failure mode analysis, system design,
maintenance, contractual language, and regulatory oversight and requirements. The
second half of the paper will discuss issues related to design and implementation of
temporary dewatering systems on dams, including flow rate estimation, the need for
redundant designs, and opportunities for value engineering.
INTRODUCTION
Earth embankment dams must be designed to satisfy several safety concerns, the four
primary ones being (1) stable slopes, (2) seepage control, (3) overtopping protection, and
(4) control of excessive foundation stresses. Items 2 and 4, control of seepage and the
stresses generated, i.e. pore water pressures, relate directly to the topic of this paper and
the ability of the designed structure to safely maintain stable slopes. Additionally, these
1

Moretrench American Corporation, 100 Stickle Avenue, Rockaway, New Jersey

[Link]@[Link]
2
Gannett Fleming Inc., PO Box 67100, Harrisburg, PA [Link]@[Link]

Temporary and Permanent Dewatering

1145

safety concerns must be evaluated for all anticipated loading conditions. Each individual
loading condition will create an individual structural response, especially with regard to
internal pore pressures.
What are pore pressures and why are they significant? All earthen strata contain void, i.e.
pore, space. This void space is filled with water and /or air. When the earthen stratum is
loaded, the load is carried by both the soil particles and the pore space. The load carried
by the pore space is defined as the pore water pressure. Drainage, and the related
reduction in strata pore pressures, is controlled by the soils porosity or hydraulic
conductivity. Granular soils will drain rapidly, while fine-grained silts and clays drain
extremely slowly. When pore pressures are elevated, soil strength is reduced.
Structure stability is greatly reduced when pore pressures are high due to the relationship
between shear stress and pore pressure, as shown by Coulombs Equation:
S = c' + ( - u) tan '

(1)

Where, using consistent units

S is shear strength in pounds per square feet,
c' is cohesion in pounds per square feet,
is normal stress in pounds per square feet,
u is pore water pressure in pounds per square feet, and
' is angle of internal friction in degrees
Based on the above relationship, the friction portion of the soils shear strength is reduced
by the pore water pressure, resulting in an overall reduction in shear strength. Soil with
reduced shear strength will be less able to support the embankment slopes. Reducing the
pore pressures will yield higher shear strengths and increase embankment slope stability.
In addition to soil shear strength concerns, pore pressure control is also needed where
excessive pressure exists in the foundation soils and / or rock. This is likely in locations
where a pervious stratum is located beneath an impervious stratum. Pore pressures in this
situation result in uplift pressures which cause destabilization of the embankment. Piping
and heave of the foundation and earth embankment soils must be evaluated to prevent
failure of the structure. Control of the pore pressures and artesian conditions will reduce
seepage, piping and heave and increase embankment stability.
As infrastructure ages, rehabilitation of existing earth embankment dams is occurring
with greater frequency. Lowering the reservoir supported by the earth embankment is
often prohibited due to concerns over environmental damage and / or economic hardship
associated with temporary loss of the resource.
Stability of the embankment during construction activities must be investigated and
addressed during rehabilitation design. More often than not, the rehabilitation scheme
requires excavation into the existing embankment. The excavation provides a short

1146

Innovative Dam and Levee Design and Construction

circuit to the steady state seepage within the embankment. If the seepage is left
uncontrolled, embankment failure is likely. Therefore, to maintain embankment stability
during rehabilitation, lowering of the phreatic surface within the embankment, i.e.
dewatering, must be provided. The required dewatering serves two purposes: (1) seepage
control and erosion prevention, and (2) increased soil shear strength and structure
stability.
Dewatering efforts and control of pore pressures must be completed to the satisfaction of
the federal and state regulatory agencies, usually a Department or Bureau within the state
government, and federal agencies (i.e. the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
FERC). Owners, such as the Army Corp of Engineers and natural resources regulatory
agencies, have their own design criteria and process. Therefore the design and
construction of permanent and temporary dewatering systems for earth embankment
dams must take into consideration the state and federal regulations and codes, owner
requirements and sound engineering judgment.
PERMANENT DESIGN SOLUTIONS
Long term control of pore pressures must provide adequate relief of these pore pressures
so that they do not lead to destabilization of the earth embankment structure. This is
typically handled through the installation of relief wells which penetrate the strata of
concern. Relief wells are designed either as passive or active systems, with collection
trenches and associated piping to safely convey the flow. Passive systems are designed
to permit flow at any time, as needed by the site conditions. Active systems are designed
with pumps and control systems to maintain a particular head differential defined by the
design.
Access to the well head for maintenance and monitoring should be provided. A manhole
system is shown in the passive relief well example, Figure 1. The gravel bed surrounding
the header pipe is not required in most applications. It is included in the figure since the
header pipe in the particular application was installed within the footprint of the
structures drainage system.
Design methods for permanent relief wells are adequately addressed in the following
literature: Dewatering and Groundwater Control (United Facilities Criteria, 2004) and
Design, Construction & Maintenance of Relief Wells (USACE. 1992).
Generally, permanent facility design considerations include:
1.
2.
3.
4.

Quantity of flow
Well spacing
Hole diameter and screen openings
Filter Pack

Temporary and Permanent Dewatering

1147

Figure 1. Passive Relief Well

1148

Innovative Dam and Levee Design and Construction

Input data for these design considerations include:

1.
2.
3.
4.

Flow source: gravity, artesian or a combination

Boundary conditions: source geometry, strata variability, well penetration
Soil and rock engineering characteristics: hydraulic conductivity, gradation
Water quality: chemical and biological contamination, i.e. corrosive or bacteria
laden, etc.

Therefore, a thorough site subsurface investigation program with laboratory testing is

required. Laboratory testing must include gradation evaluation of site soils for adequate
filter design. Design of the permanent relief wells will only be as successful as the ability
of the models and calculations to adequately reflect the actual site conditions. Casagrande
piezometers should also be installed in strategic locations throughout the site to provide
long term pore pressure measurements. Transducers and data loggers installed in the
piezometers should be considered so that response of pore pressures to changes in
reservoir pool elevation can be recorded for evaluation during design.
In addition to laboratory testing of collected soil, rock and water samples, field testing
should be completed during the subsurface investigation to assess in situ hydraulic
conductivity. This is generally completed through falling head testing of soils and
pressure testing of bedrock.
The subsurface investigation and field testing may also encounter artesian conditions.
Measurement and containment of the artesian head must be completed during the field
work. The field crew should be prepared for artesian condition with packers, bentonite
and grout to quickly backfill the hole if required for safety.
Seepage analysis is required. Many computer programs are commercially available
which provide modeling capabilities. However, the output is only as reliable as the
quality and accuracy of the input. Field instrumentation data as recommended above is
extremely useful to validate model outputs. Flow nets constructed by hand are also a
reliable technique to estimate through- and under-seepage quantities. Regardless of
technique, the permanent dewatering system should be designed for a capacity greater
than the calculated seepage quantity. A minimum factor of 10 is suggested to reflect the
inherent variability in soil permeability and minimal increase material cost.
Compatibility of the relief well components must be evaluated during design to prevent
migration of fines with the dewatering effort. The filter pack must be compatible with
the site soils with which it will be placed in contact. Well screen slots or perforations
must be compatible with the filter pack. The goal of the design effort is to prevent soil
particles from entering the filter pack; the well screen must be sized large enough to
provide pore pressure relief, but sufficiently small enough to prevent soil particle
infiltration.

Temporary and Permanent Dewatering

1149

Water removed by the system, whether passively or actively via pumping, must be
monitored for sediment load. Quantity of flow should also be monitored. Directing flow
through a weir prior to discharge is recommended. Instrumentation of the weir should be
considered to provide continuous records of flow and system performance. Changes to
sediment load or flow rate/quantity should be immediately evaluated by the design
engineer. These changes may reflect poor performance of the system due to degradation,
structure seepage flow path changes, or other situations which require action to continue
safe operation of the earth embankment dam.
Long-term monitoring of the phreatic surface within the earth embankment dam is
required to ensure the system as installed provides the required control of water to reduce
pore pressures. If Casagrande piezometers have not been installed during the design
phase, they should be installed as part of the relief well construction contract. Even in
locations where Casagrande piezometers exist, additional monitoring locations should be
considered so that adequate data is collected during dam operation to verify pore
pressures are within safe limits.
Successful performance of any dewatering system requires that it be properly installed.
Construction documents for the installation of permanent dewatering facilities must
require a dewatering specialist with experience in the type and depth of system required.
Proof of successful completion of projects of similar size and duration, both by the
contractor and the driller, should be submitted with the bid documents. Drilling a plumb
hole, as well as installation of the filter material without bridging, are extremely
important to the successful long-term operation of the relief well system. Only an
experienced individual can provide the best likelihood of a successful installation.
Development and testing of the system should be completed upon installation.
Development of the well allows easy flow of water through the filter pack immediately
adjacent the screen. Pump tests verify well capacity and provide a benchmark against
which future flow rates are compared.
Field operations should be observed and monitored by the design engineer, or qualified
delegate, who has a complete understanding of the intent of the design and requirements
of the installed permanent dewatering system. This individual should record all
observations and report deficiencies to the owner or owners representative for
reconciliation with the contractor.
A maintenance program must also be provided with the design. The maintenance
program should be site-specific, based on actual water quality test results. However, all
relief wells experience a loss in efficiency over time and require periodic surging and
cleaning.
It is recommended that the general contractor be required to identify his dewatering
specialist with the bid documents. Since the installation of the permanent and temporary
dewatering systems is critical to safe operation of the structure during construction,
designers should encourage a detailed dewatering plan be submitted with the bid and

1150

Innovative Dam and Levee Design and Construction

evaluated along with price. The critical nature of dewatering to the safe and on-time
execution of the work cannot be stressed enough.
TEMPORARY DESIGN SOLUTIONS
Designing a temporary dewatering system for a dam rehabilitation project requires the
designer to synthesize various pieces of information to create a design that (1) has a valid
theoretical underpinning, (2) is constructible and does not interfere with other work, and
(3) is cost effective. In order to do this the designer must consider:

the size and depth of the proposed excavations as well as their locations on the
dam
the geology of the embankment and the surrounding native soils and bedrock
historical groundwater and reservoir levels
the planned reservoir level during construction
seepage barriers such as grout curtains or corewalls that are part of the structures
existing geometry.
global slope stability (this is sometimes addressed in the specifications by
requiring certain groundwater elevations to be maintained in piezometers placed
throughout the embankment)
availability of materials, equipment and commercial power, and
schedule

Generally speaking, this information is available in the contract documents. Gaps in

knowledge may need to be filled using the designers judgment, contractors past
experience working on the dam, or information from published sources such as the
United States Geological Survey or state geological surveys.
Quantitative Design
The actual techniques and equations used during design of the dewatering system will
vary with the physical layout of the project and hydrogeology of the dam site. However,
a common strategy to use when designing temporary dewatering systems for dam
rehabilitation projects is to design the system to have the capacity to intercept the total
seepage flow through the dam. This method is especially useful when the rehabilitation
works are parallel to the dams crest, such as a trench for well field collection headers or
toe drains(see Figure 2 below). If we analyze the dewatering system for such a trench as
a line sink and assume that the dam reservoir acts as a line source, the flow that the
dewatering system must capture can be computed using:
Qs =

xK ( H 2 h 2 )
2 R0

Temporary and Permanent Dewatering

(2)

1151

Where, using consistent units

Qs is the system flow in cubic feet per day,
x is the length of the trench in feet,
K is the soils hydraulic conductivity in feet per day,
H is the distance from the bottom of the aquifer to the potentiometric surface of the
aquifer in feet,
h is the distance from the bottom of the aquifer to the target water elevation in feet, and
R0 is the radius of influence of the system in feet
Note that the equation above calculates flow from a source on one side of the sink (say
the reservoir impounded by the dam). A common error made when applying this
equation to dewatering problems of all types is to neglect the component of flow from the
other side of the sink. Some dams have pools or reservoirs on their downstream sides as
well. Flow from this source to the dewatering system will need to be accounted for by a
separate application of the equation, often with new values of K, H and R0. The
downstream flow may be neglected if there is no downstream pool or if its elevation is
below the work.
Radius of influence is generally calculated using the Jacob Straight Line Method:

R0 =

2.25Tt
Cs

(3)

where, using consistent units

T is the transmissivity of the aquifer in square feet per day,
t is the pumping time in days, and
Csis the aquifers storage coefficient or storativity (dimensionless)
Or using the following empirical equation:

Where

R0 = 3000( H h) K

(4)

R0 is in feet,
H-h is in feet, and
K is in meters/second

1152

Innovative Dam and Levee Design and Construction

Figure 2. Conceptual Plan and Section of Flow to a Line Sink from a Line Source
Experienced judgment must be used when deciding on a radius of influence. If the
distance from the dewatering system to the dams reservoir is less than the calculated
value for radius of influence, it is good practice to substitute the distance to the reservoir
for the calculated radius of influence (in effect the designer is saying that the distance to
the point of no drawdown is the same as the distance to the reservoir). The radius of
influence may also be lengthened to account for soil anisotropy, interlocking steel
sheeting or other cut-off methods installed for construction, grout curtains or corewalls,
and accumulations of fine-grained material that may have built up at the reservoir/dam
interface.
For example, a common scenario confronting the designer is presented in Figure 3, where
the dewatering system is quite close to the reservoir and the dam has a partially
penetrating corewall or grout curtain.

Figure 3. Factors Affecting Radius of Influence and Length of Flowpath.

The impermeable wall lengthens the flow path from the reservoir to the dewatering
system. Since the wall forces flow through the dam to become vertical, the designer may

Temporary and Permanent Dewatering

1153

apply a factor equal to the ratio of horizontal to vertical hydraulic conductivity (Kh/Kv) or
anisotropy. In the absence of other information, this ratio is generally taken to be
between 5 and 10 for most dewatering applications. Therefore the effective radius of
influence becomes:

where, using consistent units

K
R0 = L1 + h L2
Kv

(5)

L1 is the distance from the dewatering system to the reservoir,

Kh and Kv are the horizontal and vertical hydraulic conductivities of the soil respectively,
and
L2 is the distance from the water level in the reservoir to the bottom of the barrier
It is also worth noting that the designer of the permanent rehabilitation works has likely
performed a flow/seepage analysis. It is often instructive to study the methodology used
in this analysis and to compare results obtained using different methods.
Once the required system flow rate has been determined, the designer must decide on the
number of dewatering devices (wells, wellpoints etc.) to install. Generally this is done by
dividing the expected system flow rate by the expected flow per well. The flow per well
may be estimated empirically using Sicharts equation:

Qw = 0.0352l w rw K
where

(6)

Qw is the flow per well in gallons per minute,

lw is the length of well screen in contact with the saturated aquifer in feet,
rw is the radius of the wells borehole in inches, and
K is the hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer is gallons per day per square foot
This equation appears in a slightly different form in Dewatering and Groundwater
Control (UFC 3-220-05, 2004). Actual yield of the wells will be influenced by such
factors as drilling method, development effort and well construction materials.
It is worth noting that nearly all of the parameters in the equations above can be obtained
from the geometry of the dewatering problem and should be known reasonably well from
the project drawings and borings. Hydraulic conductivity (K) is the exception. This
value may be given to the designer in the projects geotechnical report (perhaps in the
form of an earlier seepage or flow analysis) or be estimated based on mechanical analyses
of the soil, slug and packer tests performed during the projects geotechnical
investigation, or based on known seepage rates and groundwater gradients.
Descriptions of methods for estimating K are beyond the scope of this paper and are well
treated elsewhere. In particular, Construction Dewatering and Groundwater Control, 3rd

1154

Innovative Dam and Levee Design and Construction

Ed (Powers et al., 2007) is recommended for a discussion of using grain size curves to
estimate hydraulic conductivity, and Applied Hydrogeology, 4th Ed.(Fetter, 2000)
recommended for a treatment of rising and falling head (slug) tests.
All of these methods will produce estimates only. The selection of hydraulic
conductivity will greatly affect the outcome of the design and uncertainty surrounding
this parameter may drive up the cost of dewatering unnecessarily. Project owners and
others setting budgets for the initial geotechnical investigation may wish to specifically
allocate resources to the problem of accurately estimating K and to reduce its uncertainty.
CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS
System Selection
Three types of dewatering system are commonly used in the industry; deep wells,
wellpoints and [Link] wells (Figure 4) generally consist of relatively large
diameter screen and casing (4-in. to 12+-in.) installed in large diameter boreholes (8-in.
to 36-in.). The wells are equipped with individual submersible pumps and connected to a
common discharge header pipe. Electricity must be distributed to the wells individually.
Deep wells are generally widely spaced (50+ ft) compared to wellpoints and eductors;
however, they may be installed at closer spacings if soil conditions require it.
Wellpoints (Figure 5) typically consist of small (1.5-in. to 3-in.) diameter screen and
casing installed in 6-in. to 8-in. diameter boreholes. The wellpoints are connected to a
common vacuumized header and pumped by a single pump on the surface. The major
drawback with wellpoints is their limited suction lift. Since they rely on vacuum,
wellpoints can only lift water up to 25 ft (at the wellpoint itself, drawdown will be less as
one moves away from the dewatering system). This limitation may be overcome by
installing multiple stages of wellpoints at successively lower elevations. At higher
elevations, where ambient air pressure is lower, wellpoints may achieve even less
drawdown. Wellpoints are relatively inexpensive on a unit basis and are therefore
usually installed on close centers (10 ft is typical).

Temporary and Permanent Dewatering

1155

Figure 4. Typical Deep Well Schematic. From Construction Dewatering and

Groundwater Control, 3rd Ed., Powers et al. John Wiley & Sons, 2007.
Reprinted with permission of John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Figure 5. Typical Wellpoint Schematic. From Construction Dewatering and Groundwater

Control, 3rd Ed.,Powers et al. John Wiley & Sons, 2007.
Reprinted with permission of John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

1156

Innovative Dam and Levee Design and Construction

Eductor systems (Figure 6) use the energy of pressurized water for pumping power.
Eductor wells typically consist of 2-in. to 4-in. screens and casings installed in 6-in. to
10-in. boreholes. Pressurized supply water is forced through a nozzle and venturi
installed at the bottom of the well. This creates a vacuum and draws water into the well
from the surrounding soil. Each well is connected to two header pipes, one supply line
carrying pressurized water to the wells, and one return line carrying the used supply
water and the pumped water back to a surface-mounted pump station. Eductors are
generally installed on 10 to 20 ft centers.

Figure 6. Typical Eductor Schematic. From Construction Dewatering and

Groundwater Control, 3rd Ed., Powers et al. John Wiley & Sons, 2007.
Reprinted with permission of John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Temporary and Permanent Dewatering

1157

Redundant Designs
Dams are high value structures where the consequences of even a small or partial failure
can be large. Therefore, where temporary dewatering systems are required to ensure the
stability of the dam during construction, it is desirable to make the system as redundant as
possible.
Wellpoint and eductor systems both rely on a single pump station and common piping to
transmit pumping energy (vacuum and pressurized water respectively) to the wells and to
expel pumped water. A break in one of the lines will disrupt pumping and cause any
wells attached to that line to fail.
By contrast, deep wells overcome this problem by distributing pumping power throughout
the system. A break in a pipe will cause a leak but will not cause all of the wells to stop
pumping. The problem of redundancy in electrical distribution may be solved by running
individual cables to the wells. If this is not cost-effective, the electrical system should be
designed such that adjacent wells are not on the same circuit so that a power disruption
will not cause all of the wells in a given area to fail at once. Regardless of the type of
system selected, backup power systems should be incorporated into the design.
Pumping from open trenches may be permitted in certain controlled situations, provided
adequate filtering of the water is provided. However, this method must be closely
monitored and used only as a supplement to deep wells, wellpoints and eductors and in
limited areas.
Again, regardless of the system chosen, contingency plans should be developed and
incorporated into the larger dewatering plan. The following contingencies should be
addressed in the dewatering specification and the plan submitted by the contractor:

A provision for additional wells or other dewatering devices if the base or

proposed system needs to be augmented.
A requirement for stand-by power with automatic transfer switch in case the main
power source fails.
A requirement for spare parts including pumps, electrical components and piping.
A requirement for stockpiled granular material on site to be placed quickly in case
of uncontrolled flow or soil loss.

Value Engineering
Cooperation between the engineer (designer of the permanent system) and the contractor
(designer of the temporary system and installer of the permanent and temporary systems)
may produce benefits to the project in terms of improved schedule, safety and cost.
Collaboration between the parties may happen at the design (pre-bid stage) if the project
is to be sole-sourced to a contractor or during the post bid stage if the owners team has
selected a contractor through a competitive bid process.

1158

Innovative Dam and Levee Design and Construction

One potential area for discussion and cost savings is whether permanent dewatering wells
may be incorporated into the temporary system. If the permanent system includes wells
and the construction sequence allows these wells to be installed early in the process,
including them in the temporary system may eliminate well drilling time and expense,
improving project cost and schedule. If the permanent wells are included in the
temporary system, provision should be made to ensure that they are not damaged in the
process.
Additionally, once the designer has arrived at some basic parameters for the permanent
system (flow rate, location, open area required etc.), an experienced contractor should be
able to advise on how best to install the wells. Designers may often be tempted to
simplify the system by proposing a few large wells. However, depending on the drilling
equipment and expertise available in the area, this may not be the best solution. Large
wells require large drill rigs which have high mobilization costs and may be cumbersome
to move around on the sloping ground found at dam sites. Handling heavy, large
diameter drill tools may also pose a safety risk for workers on uneven ground with poor
access for support equipment. If reducing the well size becomes impractical because of
the reduced open well screen area per well, the designer may specify more specialized
screen materials such as wire-on-rib or wire-on-pipe type well screen. These products are
constructed by wrapping a trapezoidal wire around a perforated pipe or a skeleton of ribs
and have much higher open areas per foot of screen than conventional slotted pipe.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the foregoing, the authors conclude the following:

Earth embankment dam stability is greatly reduced when pore pressures are high
due to the relationship between shear stress and pore pressure, as shown by
Coulombs Law. Pore pressure control is also needed where excessive pressure
exists in the foundation soils and / or rock. Stability of the earth embankment
dam structure during rehabilitation construction activities must also be addressed
during rehabilitation design.
Design and construction of permanent and temporary dewatering systems for
earth embankment dams must take into consideration the federal and state
regulations and codes, owner requirements and sound engineering judgment.
Design of the permanent relief wells will only be as successful as the ability of the
models and calculations to adequately reflect the actual site conditions. Therefore
a thorough subsurface investigation program with field and laboratory testing is
recommended. Installation of piezometers to record the in situ pore pressure
measurements will permit calibration of the design model.
Permanent dewatering systems should be designed for a capacity greater than the
calculated seepage quantity. Computer modeling output is only as reliable as the
quality and accuracy of the input. Data from field instrumentation, i.e.
piezometers, is useful to validate model outputs.
Compatibility of the dewatering system components must be evaluated during
design to prevent migration of fines with the dewatering effort.

Temporary and Permanent Dewatering

1159

Monitoring of flow and maintenance requirements must be included in the

permanent dewatering system design.
Given that the consequence of a dewatering system failure on a dam rehabilitation
project is quite high, the project specifications should require an experienced
dewatering contractor to submit a detailed dewatering plan and the plan should be
evaluated as part of the contractor selection process.
It is imperative to design the dewatering system to include redundancy and
backup systems.
The owners engineer and the contractor should work together to look for ways to
value engineer the dewatering, saving time and money and improving safety.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to acknowledge Christine Herridge and Christopher Ponnwitz for
editorial and graphics assistance respectively during the preparation of this paper.
REFERENCES
Design of Small Dams, US Department of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, 3rd Ed., 1987.
Dewatering and Groundwater Control, United Facilities Criteria, UFC 3-220-05, January
16, 2004.
Design, Construction & Maintenance of Relief Wells, USACE, EM 1110-2-1914, 1992
Fetter, [Link] Hydrogeology. Prentice Hall, 2000, pp. 190 - 205
Powers, J.P, Corwin, A.B., Schmall, P.C. and Kaeck, W. E. Construction Dewatering and
Groundwater Control: New Methods and Applications. John Wiley & Sons, New York,
NY, 2007.

1160

Innovative Dam and Levee Design and Construction