National Academies Press: OpenBook

Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks (2024)

Chapter: Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses

« Previous: Appendix A: NCHRP Synthesis 54-19 Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks - DOT Survey
Page 67
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×

APPENDIX B

Aggregate Survey Responses

Respondent Information

The following 33 agencies responded to the survey:

  • Alaska DOT and Public Facilities (AK)
  • Arizona DOT (AZ)
  • Colorado DOT (CO)
  • Connecticut DOT (CT)
  • Delaware DOT (DE)
  • District of Columbia DOT (DC)
  • Florida DOT (FL)
  • Georgia DOT (GA)
  • Idaho DOT (ID)
  • Illinois DOT (IL)
  • Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (KY)
  • Maryland Transportation Authority (MD)
  • Massachusetts DOT (MA)
  • Minnesota DOT (MN)
  • Missouri DOT (MO)
  • Nebraska DOT (NE)
  • Nevada DOT (NV)
  • New Hampshire DOT (NH)
  • New Jersey DOT (NJ)
  • New York State DOT (NY)
  • North Carolina DOT (NC)
  • Ohio DOT (OH)
  • Oklahoma DOT (OK)
  • Oregon DOT (OR)
  • Pennsylvania DOT (PA)
  • South Carolina DOT (SC)
  • South Dakota DOT (SD)
  • Tennessee DOT (TN)
Page 68
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
  • Virginia DOT (VA)
  • Washington State DOT (WA)
  • Wisconsin DOT (WI)
  • West Virginia DOT (WV)
  • Wyoming DOT (WY)

Responses to Questionnaire

Q1.-Q5. These questions identified the DOT and person completing the summary and will not be printed herein.

Q6. Does your DOT have any tunnels or long enclosed roadways (>300ft in length) such as deck structures over depressed roadways?

Response Responding State(s) # Of Responses
Yes AK, AZ, CO, CT, DC, FL, GA, IL, KY, MA, MD, MN, NC, NJ, NV, NY, OH, OR, PA, SD, TN, VA, WA, WI, WV, WY 26
No DE, ID, MO, NE, NH, OK, SC 7

Q7. In addition to your DOT’s tunnel inventory, does your DOT have tunnel-type structures with specialized systems for lighting, fire protection, or other systems?

Response Responding State(s) # Of Responses
Yes AK, AZ, CO, CT, DC, FL, GA, KY, MA, MN, NC, NJ, NV, OH, OR, PA, TN, VA, WA, WI, WV 21
No IL, MD, NY, SD, WY 5
Page 69
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×

Q8. How many tunnels in your state’s tunnel inventory are owned by your DOT?

Q9. How many of your DOT’s tunnels and tunnel-type structures have water infiltration or have experienced water infiltration in the past ten years?

State Response Q8 Response Q9
AK 4 2
AZ 7 2
CO 20 20
CT 2 3
DC 15 12
FL 5 0
GA 1 0
IL 3 2
KY 7 7
MA 7 7
MD 2 2
MN 5 2
NC 4 0
NJ 1 1
NV 4 2
NY 1 0
OH 1 1
OR 10 10
PA 10 8
SD 7 7
TN 9 0
VA 3 3
WA 54 14
WI 2 3
WV 10 10
WY 10 3
Total 206 121
Page 70
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×

Q10. What problems does the water infiltration cause, or has it caused in your DOT’s tunnels? (Check all that apply)

Response Responding State(s) # Of Responses
Structural Deterioration AZ, CO, CT, DC, IL, MA, MD, MN, NJ, OR, PA, VA, WA, WV 14
Functional System (and/or their Supports) Deterioration AZ, CO, CT, KY, MA, OR, PA, VA, WA, WV 10
Icicles AK, CO, CT, DC, MA, MD, MN, NJ, PA, SD, WA, WI, WV, WY 14
Slippery Roadways AK, CT, MA, MN, PA, SD, WA, WI, WY 9
Mineral Deposits in Drainage Systems AK, AZ, CO, MD, OR, VA 6
None FL, GA, NC, NY, TN 5
Other See below for other responses. 3

Other responses:

  • Nuisance.
  • Tile failures.
  • Leakage varying from staining to surface saturations with few areas of active dripping.
Page 71
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×

Q11. What techniques does your DOT use to manage these secondary challenges?

Responses below are not tied to the responding state.

  • Icicles are removed manually. Ice melt is applied to slick surfaces. Drainage is flushed annually.
  • Localized repairs on structural deterioration and functional system deterioration.
  • Collection systems, large collection system, and Drainage material with plumbing.
  • The Department includes Maintenance forces during the bridge inspections in order to capitalize on the lane closure to perform repairs/cleanup.
  • Joints injection.
  • Each tunnel typically has a special plan of action procedure in place.
  • Routine monitoring, pressure injection of cracks, conduit plug, joint repair, divert to “collection area.”
  • Cleared roadway drainage issue to minimize water infiltration.
  • Added secondary trough to catch water leaking into tunnel.
  • We have tried different expanding joint type products with little success.
  • Routine monitoring and removal of icicles. Attempts have been made to seal tunnel with limited success. (2)
  • Consistently wash the tunnels, flush drainage system, and repair/replace areas of deterioration by a standby, on-call, specialized contractor.
  • Epoxies inject the cracks where water appears to be infiltrating.
  • Drains behind new tunnel liners.
  • Some tunnel owners have a dedicated tunnel maintenance contract to perform minor repairs and maintenance. Flushing inlets within the tunnel, general preventative maintenance and knocking down ice as it forms at locations of leaks.
  • Tunnels are bare rock tunnels (6) and one rock tunnel with shotcrete. Really is no big issues for our tunnels.
  • Use a contractor to mitigate the issues such as sealing the leaks and making the structural repairs.
  • Historically these issues have not been of great concern. Slippery roadways are treated with deicer along with outside roadway. Icicles are removed prior to becoming excessively large. One structure had a heating system installed to prevent water freezing in liner. More recent construction has created issues with infiltration to conduits, still being addressed in contract. Leaks of concern are typically addressed with targeted epoxy or foam sealant injection. Leaks not of concern are handled via tunnel drainage system.
  • Maintenance response to mitigate hazards as appropriate at the time.
  • Inspection.
  • None at this time.
Page 72
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×

Q12. How many tunnel-type structures exist within your state that are not owned by your DOT?

Q13. How many of the non-DOT owned tunnel-type structures have experienced water infiltration issues?

Q14. How many of your DOT’s tunnel-type structures currently have water infiltration or have experienced water infiltration in the past ten years?

State Response Q12 Response Q13 Response Q14
AK 0 0 2
AZ 1 0 2
CO 12 12 18
CT 1 1 3
DC 0 0 12
FL 2 Unknown Unknown
GA 0 0 0
IL 2 0 N/A
KY 3 3 7
MA 6 3 7
MD 0 0 N/A
MN 1 0 2
NC >20 0 0
NJ 2 Unknown 1
NV 2 0 2
NY 9 Unknown N/A
OH 0 0 1
OR 5 5 10
PA 23 13 Unknown
SD 0 0 N/A
TN 5 Unknown Unknown
VA 0 Unknown Unknown
WA 4 1 3
WI 3 0 3
WV 1 0 10
WY Unknown Unknown N/A
Total >102 38 83
Page 73
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×

Q15. If GPR, thermography, LiDAR scan or photogrammetry were used, how effective were these non-destructive testing (NDT) methods in detecting leak locations?

Response Responding State(s) # of Responses
Very Effective AK, CO, NJ 3
Somewhat Effective MD, OR, PA 3
Very Ineffective DC 1
N/A AZ, CT, FL, GA, OL, KY, MA, MN, NC, NV, NY, OH, SD, TN, VA, WA, WI, WV, WY 19

Q16. What is the primary source of water into your DOT’s tunnels or long enclosed roadways? (Check all that apply)

Response Responding State(s) # of Responses
Groundwater AK, CO, CT, IL, KY, MA, MD, MN, NV, OH, OR, PA, SD, VA, WA, WV, WY 17
Direct Surface Runoff AZ, CO, CT, FL, GA, IL, KY, MA, MD, MN, NC, NJ, NY, OR, PA, SD, WI 17
Utility MA, TN 2
Other See below for other responses. 4

Other responses consisted of:

  • Leakage from the glacier above.
  • Deck park irrigation system.
  • Flood event.
  • Still investigating.

Q17. What methods has your DOT used to identify the source of water infiltration? (Check all that apply).

Response Responding State(s) # of Responses
Investigation construction documents and details AK, CO, DC, FL, IL, MA, MD, NJ, OH, OR, PA, VA, WA, WI, WV 15
Sampling and chemical testing of water infiltration CO, DC, MA, VA, WA 5
Dye testing of water infiltration CO, DC, VA 3
Other See below for other responses. 14

Other responses consisted of:

  • Visual/NTIS/In-Depth inspection. (4)
  • None or N/A. (9)
  • Judgment. (1)
Page 74
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×

Q18. What methods has your DOT used to identify the location of water infiltration? (Check all that apply).

Response Responding State(s) # of Responses
Hands on Visual Inspections AK, AZ, CO, CT, DC, FL, IL, KY, MA, MD, MN, NC, NJ, NV, OH, OR, PA, VA, WA, WI, WV, WY 22
GPR AK, OR 2
Thermography CO, MD, NJ, OR 4
Photogrammetry OR, VA 2
LiDAR Scan AK, CO, MD, NJ, OR 5
N/A GA, NY, SD, TN 4

Q19 TO Q39. DOTs were asked to provide information regarding their tunnels with the most water infiltration currently or within the past ten years.

Page 75
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
State Tunnel Name Tunnel Shape and Construction Type Level of Concern/Priority of Repair Primary Substrate Primary Sources of Water Infiltration Location(s) of Water Infiltration Location of Heaviest Leakage
AK Anton Anderson Memorial Tunnel Unlined rock 3 - Concerning but not high priority Rock Groundwater, Leakage through the rock from the glacier above Cracks Cracks
AK Portage Lake Tunnel Horseshoe or oval drill-and-blast 3 - Concerning but not high priority Rock Surface runoff; Groundwater Cracks; Penetrations through the liner Penetrations through the liner
AZ Deck Park Tunnel Cut-and-cover rectangular box 2 - High concern/remediation planned in next 5 years Mixed conditions Utilities Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction Joints
AZ Mule Pass Tunnel Horseshoe or oval drill-and-blast 2 - High concern/remediation planned in next 5 years Mixed conditions - rock and soft ground Surface runoff Cracks; Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction Cracks
CO Eisenhower Horseshoe or oval drill-and-blast 1 - Top concern/needs remediation within 2 years Rock Groundwater; Surface runoff Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction; Cracks; Penetrations through the liner Cracks
CO Johnson Horseshoe or oval SEM 1 - Top concern/needs remediation within 2 years Mixed conditions - rock and soft ground Groundwater; Surface runoff Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction; Cracks; Transitions in structure types; Penetrations through the liner Transitions in structure types
Page 76
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
CO Boulder Tunnel Horseshoe or oval drill-and-blast 1- Top concern/needs remediation within 2 years Rock Surface runoff Cracks Cracks
CT Bridge TU00773, Heroes Tunnel, https://www.heroestunnelproject.com/index.php Horseshoe or oval drill-and-blast 2 - High concern/remediation planned in next 5 years Rock Groundwater; Surface runoff Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction; Cracks Cracks
DC 173 Cut-and-cover rectangular box 1 - Top concern/needs remediation within 2 years Mixed conditions Still Investigating Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction; Penetrations through the liner Joints
IL 016-2020 Hubbards Cave Cut-and-cover rectangular box 4 - Not a concern nor top priority Soft ground Surface runoff Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction Joints
IL 016-1171 SB Lower Wacker Tunnel Cut-and-cover rectangular box 4 - Not a concern nor top priority Soft ground Groundwater Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction Joints
FL Port of Miami Tunnel Circular TBM tunnel 4 - Not a concern nor top priority Mixed conditions Surface runoff Unknown Unknown
KY 099BT0001N Horseshoe or oval drill-and-blast 4 - Not a concern nor top priority Rock Groundwater Cracks Cracks
KY 061CT0001N Horseshoe or oval SEM 4 - Not a concern nor top priority Soft ground Groundwater; Surface runoff Joints Joints
KY 096BT0001N Horseshoe or oval SEM 4 - Not a concern nor top priority Soft ground Groundwater Joints Joints
MA I-90 Connector Cut-and-cover rectangular box 2 - High concern/remediation planned in next 5 years Soft ground Groundwater; Utilities; Surface runoff Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction; Cracks; Joints
Page 77
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
Penetrations through the liner; Embedded Utilities
MA Thomas P. O’Neill Jr. Cut-and-cover rectangular box 2 - High concern/remediation planned in next 5 years Soft ground Groundwater; Utilities; Surface runoff Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction; Cracks; Transitions in structure types; Penetrations through the liner Cracks
MA Ted Williams Cut-and-cover rectangular box 2 - High concern/remediation planned in next 5 years Soft ground Groundwater; Utilities; Surface runoff Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction; Cracks; Transitions in structure types; Embedded utilities Cracks
MD The Baltimore Harbor Tunnel Circular shield-driven 3 - Concerning but not high priority Mixed conditions Groundwater; Surface runoff Penetrations through the liner Joints
MD The Baltimore Harbor Tunnel Cut-and-cover rectangular box 3 - Concerning but not high priority Mixed conditions - rock and soft ground Groundwater; Surface runoff Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction Joints
MN Portland Rigid Frame—Bridge Number 27851 Cut-and-cover rectangular box 3 - Concerning but not high priority Mixed conditions Surface runoff Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction Joints
MN Silver Creek/Hasty TH61 North Shore Tunnels Horseshoe or oval sequential excavation method 3 - Concerning but not high priority Rock Groundwater Cracks Cracks
Page 78
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
NJ NJ 29 Tunnel Cut-and-cover rectangular box 3 - Concerning but not high priority Soft ground Surface runoff Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction; Cracks Joints
NY Breakneck Unlined rock 4 - Not a concern nor top priority Rock Surface runoff Portals - basically its water flowing on the road Portals
NV US 50 Dave Rock Tunnel Eastbound Horseshoe or oval drill-and-blast 4 - Not a concern nor top priority Rock Groundwater Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction; Cracks Joints
NV US 50 Dave Rock Tunnel Westbound Horseshoe or oval drill-and-blast 4 - Not a concern nor top priority Rock Groundwater Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction; Cracks Joints
OH Lytle Tunnel Cut-and-cover rectangular box 3 - Concerning but not high priority Mixed conditions Groundwater; Cracks Cracks
OR Vista Ridge Tunnel Horseshoe or oval drill-and-blast 3 - Concerning but not high priority Rock Groundwater; Surface runoff Cracks; Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction; Transitions in structure types; Penetrations through the liner Joints
OR Cape Creek Tunnel Horseshoe or oval drill-and-blast 3 - Concerning but not high priority Rock Groundwater; Surface runoff Cracks; Transitions in structure types; Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction; Penetrations through the liner Cracks
Page 79
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
PA Squirrel Hill Tunnel - PennDOT District 11 (Allegheny County) Horseshoe or oval drill and blast 4 - Not a concern nor top priority Mixed conditions Groundwater; Surface runoff Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction; Roof of tunnel buildings. Icicle buildup on portal facades of tunnels. Roof of tunnel portal buildings
PA Stowe Tunnel - PennDOT District 11 (Allegheny County) Horseshoe or oval drill and blast 4 - Not a concern nor top priority Rock Groundwater Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction; Cracks Joints
SD All of our tunnels would be similar - none that has more or less than the others. Unlined rock 4 - Not a concern nor top priority Not certain Groundwater; Surface runoff Unlined bare rock tunnels - in cracks/joints of the rock Unlined bare rock tunnels - in cracks/joints of the rock
VA Hampton Roads Bridge/Tunnel Not certain (Actually Circular Immersed Tube) 1- Top concern/needs remediation within two years Not certain Groundwater Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction; Cracks Joints
WA Alaskan Way Tunnel Cut and cover rectangular box 1- Top concern/needs remediation within two years Mixed conditions Groundwater; Surface runoff Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction; Cracks; Transitions in structure types; Penetrations through the liner Penetrations through the liner
WA Mount Baker Ridge Tunnel Horseshoe or oval drill and blast 1- Top concern/needs remediation within two years Not certain Groundwater Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction; Cracks Joints
Page 80
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
WI B-40-832 Cut and cover rectangular box 3- Concerning but not high priority Soft Ground Surface runoff; Utilities Cracks; Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction; Penetrations through the liner Penetrations through the liner
WI B-40-827 Cut and cover rectangular box 3- Concerning but not high priority Soft Ground Surface runoff; Unknown Cracks; Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction Cracks
WI B-40-821 Cut and cover rectangular box 3- Concerning but not high priority Soft Ground Surface runoff; Unknown Cracks; Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction Cracks
WV All Horseshoe or oval drill and blast 3- Concerning but not high priority Rock Groundwater Joints - either expansion, contraction or construction; Penetrations through the liner; Cracks Joints
WY Wind River Canyon Tunnel 1 Unlined rock 3- Concerning but not high priority Rock Groundwater Cracks Cracks
WY Wind River Canyon Tunnel 2 Unlined rock 3- Concerning but not high priority Rock Groundwater Cracks Cracks
WY Wind River Canyon Tunnel 3 Unlined rock 3- Concerning but not high priority Rock Groundwater Cracks Cracks
Page 81
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×

Q40. Which of the following methods has your DOT utilized to mitigate water infiltration in existing tunnels? (Check all that apply)

Response Responding State(s) # of Responses
Redirecting drainage with troughs, pipes, etc. AK, FL, IL, MA, MD, NJ, OR, PA, VA, WA, WV 11
Injecting cracks with chemical grouts CO, DC, MA, NJ, OH, OR, PA, VA, WA 9
Coatings applied on the inside of the liner VA 1
Replacing joint material and/or repairing/replacing gaskets AZ, CT, DC, MA, MD, MN, NJ, NV, VA, WV 10
Installing a waterproofing membrane on the inside of the tunnel liner (umbrella) CO, OR 2
Excavating and installing waterproofing membrane on the outside of the tunnel DC, MA, MD, NJ 4
Curtain grouting by drilling holes through the liner and injecting chemical grouts behind the liner CO, WA 2
Other See below for other responses. 10

Other responses consisted of:

  • Shotcrete with drains.
  • None or N/A. (8)
  • Clearing storm water drain behind abutment.
Page 82
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×

Q41. Which of the following methods has been successful as a long term (>10 years) remediation for water infiltration? (Check all that apply)

Response Responding State(s) # of Responses
Redirecting drainage with troughs, pipes, etc. AK, FL, IL, MD, OR, PA, VA, WA, WV 9
Injecting cracks with chemical grouts MD, OH, PA, VA, WA 5
Coatings applied on the inside of the liner VA 1
Replacing joint material and/or repairing/replacing gaskets AZ, MD, VA 3
Installing a waterproofing membrane on the inside of the tunnel liner (umbrella) CO 1
Excavating and installing waterproofing membrane on the outside of the tunnel MN, NJ 2
Curtain grouting by drilling holes through the liner and injecting chemical grouts behind the liner None. 0
Other See below for other responses. 13

Other responses consisted of:

  • Shotcrete with drains.
  • None or N/A. (11)
  • Still Investigating

Q42. Which method has been most successful for your DOT in resolving leaks?

Response Responding State(s) # of Responses
Redirecting drainage with troughs, pipes, etc. AK, CO, FL, IL, MD, OR, WV 7
Injecting cracks with chemical grouts OH, PA, VA, WA 4
Coatings applied on the inside of the liner None. 0
Replacing joint material and/or repairing/replacing gaskets AZ, MA, NV 3
Installing a waterproofing membrane on the inside of the tunnel liner (umbrella) None. 0
Excavating and installing waterproofing membrane on the outside of the tunnel MN, NJ 2
Curtain grouting by drilling holes through the liner and injecting chemical grouts behind the liner None. 0
Other See below for other responses. 10

Other responses consisted of:

  • Still investigating.
  • No remediation attempted.
  • None or N/A. (8)
Page 83
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×

Q43. What problems has your DOT experienced attempting to mitigate leakage in your tunnels?

Responses below are not tied to the responding state. Similar responses were combined with (#) at the end of each bullet representing the number of states who had a similar comment.

  • The best and most cost-effective solution is to collect and control the water. (2)
  • Seasonal flows, Durability of mitigation systems, Freeze/Thaw, Ice.
  • Could not access top of tunnel to reseal joint after pavement was placed over tunnel.
  • Investigating the source. (3)
  • Excavating can be difficult with traffic interruption impacts.
  • Roof leaks – Roof shape (generally flat roofs) and type of roof.
  • Tunnel joints – Difficult to reliably seal the joints. (3)
  • Cost of repairs.
  • After crack injection/sealing one location a leak forms in adjacent location. (3)
  • Porous rock.
  • Nothing out of the ordinary.
  • No mitigation techniques have proven successful in the long term. (2)
  • No attempts to mitigate leakage have been attempted at this time. (3)
  • N/A (5)

Q44. Has your DOT experienced any unintended consequences from the techniques used to remediate water infiltration?

Response Responding State(s) # of Responses
Yes WA, WV 2
No AK, AZ, CO, CT, DC, FL, GA, IL, KY, MA, MD, MN, NC, NJ, NV, NY, OH, OR, PA, SD, TN, VA, WI, WY 24

Q45. Describe the unintended consequence noted in the prior question.

Responses below are not tied to the responding state.

  • Sealing one location can inadvertently create leak in new location. (2)
Page 84
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×

Q46. What information would be most valuable to your DOT as a tunnel owner with regard to water infiltration?

Responses below are not tied to the responding state. Similar responses were combined with (#) at the end of each bullet representing the number of states who had a similar comment.

  • Information on better ways to contain and control water. (4)
  • Effective remedies/lessons learned to address leakage for various liner types/repair methods. (7)
  • Inspection/Condition assessment of different repair methods.
  • Effectiveness/Lessons Learned from maintenance methods (flushing underdrains, etc.)
  • What NDT evaluation techniques work the best and what are the limitations? (2)
  • What condition becomes a safety issue?
  • Know the history of the tunnel prior to repairs.
  • Knowing the source.
  • With our 6 unlined rock tunnels and 1 shotcrete lined rock tunnel - water infiltration is not a problem or concern. Natural groundwater and or surface run off is the source of the water through natural cracks/joints in the underlying rock.
  • Make sure when the tunnel is being constructed that all joints are sealed properly. (2)
  • To remain on top of the situation, particularly in the winter. To continue washing the tunnel liners to properly see if any structural damage exists, and to monitor the source of water through dyes and thermography. You can replace joint material every year, but the source of water, needs to be redirected, or mitigated, first.
  • Recommendations on preventing groundwater infiltration into electrical conduits which travel from tunnel to ground and back to tunnel. Conduits collect ground water at some point in that ground interface. This is very tunnel specific. In general, leaking is a relatively minor concern for which we have good repair solutions when needed.
  • Unknown or N/A (8)
Page 85
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×

Q47. What is the threshold for leakage at which your DOT would initiate water remediation?

Responses below are not tied to the responding state. Similar responses were combined with (#) at the end of each bullet representing the number of states who had a similar comment.

  • Deterioration of structural elements. (5)
  • Icicles over traffic (2)
  • Aesthetics/losing tile
  • Varies per specific tunnel
  • No set threshold, depends on leak location
  • Prefer preventive options, but some difficult to access locations may be an issue
  • Impacting traffic operation/speed reduction warranted. (5)
  • High flow or ponding water. (5)
  • As soon as it is visible.
  • Under review.
  • A leak which causes a secondary issue that cannot be mitigated such as functional system safe performance and longevity. (3)
  • Safety Issue/traffic hazard. (5)
  • None or N/A (9)

Q48. Does your DOT have specific acceptance criteria for leakage into a tunnel structure which is part of the new tunnel design criteria?

Response Responding State(s) # of Responses
Yes WA 1
No AZ, CO, CT, IL, KY, MA, MN, NC, NV, OH, OR, SD, WV, WY 14
Unknown AK, DC, FL, GA, MD, NJ, NY, PA, TN, VA, WI 11
Page 86
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×

Q49. What is your DOT’s acceptance criteria for leakage in a new tunnel per the question above?

  • Below is the bulleted response from one responding DOT.
    • Maximum overall infiltration 1gpm per 1000 feet of tunnel. >
    • Local infiltration limit 0.25 gallons per day for 10 square feet of area, and no more than 1 drip per minute at any location.
    • No drips shall be permitted over the driving surfaces or where they have the potential to cause damage to equipment, malfunctioning of any electrical power, signaling, lighting, control, communication equipment, or compromise electrical clearances.
    • No water ingress shall cause entry of soil particles into the tunnel.
    • The interface between Cut-and-Cover Tunnel section with Bored Tunnel and other structures, (i.e. building structures, emergency egress structures, etc.) shall be designed and constructed such that the joint between the two structures is fully watertight.

Q50. Does your DOT have specific criteria for a tunnel leakage remediation/rehabilitation project for acceptance of the leakage remediation work?

Response Responding State(s) # of Responses
Yes MD, PA, VA 3
No AK, AZ, CO, CT, DC, FL, GA, IL, KY, MA, MN, NC, NJ, NV, NY, OH, OR, SD, TN, WA, WI, WV, WY 23

Q51. What is your DOT’s acceptance criteria for a tunnel leakage remediation/rehabilitation project per the previous question?

Responses below are not tied to the responding state.

  • Use of project specific special provisions that are developed for each project individually. A recent tunnel rehab included references to the following ASTM D Standards: 3574-95, 3475-955, 2369, 2196 and 756.
  • We have a contract in place to seal and coat the areas when they start leaking.
  • Under review.

Q52. Would you be willing to participate in a brief interview to learn more about your experience with tunnel leakage and remediation?

Response Responding State(s) # of Responses
Yes AZ, MD, MN, OR, PA, VA 6
No CT, FL, IL, KY, NC, NV, TN, WV, WY 9
No Response AK, CO, DC, GA, MA, NJ, NY, OH, SD, WA, WI 11
Page 67
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
Page 67
Page 68
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
Page 68
Page 69
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
Page 69
Page 70
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
Page 70
Page 71
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
Page 71
Page 72
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
Page 72
Page 73
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
Page 73
Page 74
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
Page 74
Page 75
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
Page 75
Page 76
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
Page 76
Page 77
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
Page 77
Page 78
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
Page 78
Page 79
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
Page 79
Page 80
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
Page 80
Page 81
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
Page 81
Page 82
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
Page 82
Page 83
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
Page 83
Page 84
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
Page 84
Page 85
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
Page 85
Page 86
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Aggregate Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27840.
×
Page 86
Next: Appendix C: Draft Interview Questions »
Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks Get This Book
×
 Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks
Buy Paperback | $81.00
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Water infiltration is a common problem in tunnels. Such infiltration accelerates the deterioration of the structure and elements within and creates hazards in the form of icicles and slippery roadways. The severity of water infiltration often reflects various factors, so determining the appropriate remedy is challenging and frequently requires an extensive investigation to understand the source and location of the leak, the structural details of the tunnel, and the geology of the surrounding substrate.

NCHRP Synthesis 627: Practices for Controlling Tunnel Leaks, from TRB's National Cooperative Highway Research Program, documents the methods and practices used by state department of transportation tunnel owners to control tunnel leaks.

READ FREE ONLINE

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!