LEVEE OWNER’S MANUAL 

FOR

NON-FEDERAL 

FLOOD CONTROL WORKS 

THE REHABILITATION AND INSPECTION 

PROGRAM

PUBLIC LAW 84-99 

MARCH 2006

US Army Corps 

of Engineers ® 
i
i

IMPORTANT QUICK REFERENCE INFORMATION 

CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: 

1. PROJECT NAME: _______________________________________________________ 

2. IDENTIFICATION NUMBER/CWIS NUMBER: ______________________________ 

3. RIVER: _________________________________________________________________ 

4. PROJECT LOCATION 

 CITY/COUNTY: _________________________________________________________ 

 TOWNSHIP/SECTION: ___________________________________________________ 

5. PUBLIC SPONSOR: ______________________________________________________ 

6. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS DISTRICT OFFICE 

 LOCATION: ____________________________________________________________ 

 TELEPHONE NUMBER: _________________________________________________ 

7. EMERGENCY POINT OF CONTACT FOR THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS 

 NAME: _________________________________________________________________ 

 TELEPHONE NUMBER: _________________________________________________ 

 CELL PHONE NUMBER: _________________________________________________ 

8. COUNTY EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER: __________________________ 

9. STATE EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER: ____________________________ 
ii
iii

PREFACE 

 This manual was written specifically for the local, state, or tribal governments that 

have the primary responsibility for operating and maintaining flood control works. The intent 

of the document is to provide you, the public sponsor of a flood control system, with some 

clear and comprehensive guidance on the operation and maintenance of levees, floodwalls, 

and other flood control structures. It describes how to plan and prepare for high water, and 

lays out steps to take during emergencies that will help reduce the threat of flooding. It also 

touches upon other related components of a complete flood protection program, such as how 

you might promote public awareness of local flood issues. 

 In addition to providing recommendations on how to make your flood control 

programs more effective, this manual also explains the types of assistance that the U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers can provide to a community before, during, and after a flood. We hope the 

information presented will make the emergency programs we administer more clear and 

accessible. 

 One of these programs referenced throughout this manual is the Rehabilitation and 

Inspection Program. Through this program, the Corps helps communities rehabilitate flood 

control projects that become damaged in a flood. These types of repairs are often so costly that 

they would be difficult for a community to complete without assistance from the federal 

government. In order for communities to participate and benefit from this program, they need 

to properly maintain the flood control project and prepare for high water. One of the primary 

purposes of this manual is to clearly explain the minimum requirements that the Corps has 

established for participation in this program. The Corps will verify that the basic requirements 

are met through routine inspections. These inspections are not intended to be a burden, but to 

help you identify potential problems and properly maintain your infrastructure so that your 

community is better protected from floods. 

Without a firm understanding of the details or requirements of a flood control system, 

many people tend to take the protection provided by the flood control project for granted. 

Floodwalls tend to blend in with the scenery in industrial areas and levee slopes are used for 

concerts and picnics. While there isn’t anything wrong with this, it makes it easy to lose sight 

of the true significance of these structures. There are intricacies to these systems that require 

detailed knowledge for operation and maintenance, and many tasks that need to be carefully 

coordinated during high water. A flood protection system simply cannot be relied upon if it 

hasn’t been properly maintained or if people aren’t trained and ready to operate it during high 

water. 

As a public sponsor of a flood control project, you should be prepared to carry out 

maintenance activities on your flood control structures every year. Regular maintenance is 

critical, because many types of problems will escalate exponentially when left unchecked. 

There are many ongoing requirements of which you should be aware. For example, debris and 

unwanted growth needs to be removed from levees, riprap, the areas adjacent to floodwalls, 

and from channels. An animal control program is needed on levees, and any burrows that are 
iv

found need to be filled properly. Metal gates and other components need to be painted and 

greased periodically. Concrete damage needs to be identified and repaired early or it will get 

worse, especially in northern climates where freeze-thaw damage becomes a factor. Beyond 

these examples of ongoing maintenance, there are also more significant repairs that will be 

necessary from time to time. Sometimes, you may have to add stone to control an erosion 

problem, or do some major earthwork to repair an embankment. Metal culverts running 

through a levee will have to be completely replaced from time to time, because they typically 

don’t last more than about fifty years. Pump stations also need to be completely overhauled 

periodically. Don’t let these larger repairs take you by surprise, as they are to be routinely 

expected in any project, and you can plan for them in advance. 

 You can also plan and prepare for what you are going to do when there is high water. 

A listing of the various activities you might have to coordinate is presented in this manual, but 

this list is not exhaustive, and it is not designed to be used by itself. As the public sponsor, you 

are responsible for developing and maintaining a basic flood response plan. You may wish to 

start with the general information presented here, but a lot of details such as likely location of 

sand boils, key personnel, and the location of closings, gates and other important project 

features should be collected and clearly documented in one place. Plans need to be tested, 

personnel need to be trained; and necessary supplies such as sandbags and plastic sheeting 

need to be maintained for emergency use. 

 

 The proper operation and maintenance of a flood control system is a challenging and 

complex responsibility, but is vital to communities that have been constructed within the flood 

plain. When the water rises, it can be quite sobering when one realizes that the river on the 

other side of a floodwall or levee is actually flowing above the ground level, and that a simple 

wall or levee is the only thing keeping it from crashing down and filling your streets. This is 

when all of your maintenance and vigilant preparation pays off. 
v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

This publication is the collaborative effort of all Corps divisions and districts, largely 

written and compiled by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Office of Homeland Security, 

Emergency Management Branch in Washington, DC. Special thanks go to the Department of 

Environmental Protection in the State of Pennsylvania for allowing the Corps to use material 

from their Handbooks for Operating, Maintaining, and Monitoring Flood Protection Projects. 

We would like to thank all of the state agencies and public sponsors of flood control works 

that have contributed to the material presented. 
vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Purpose of This Manual.............................................................................................. 1 

1.2 Scope of This Manual................................................................................................. 1 

1.3 Supporting and Related Laws and Regulations .......................................................... 1 

1.4 Reproduction............................................................................................................... 3 

1.5 Future Revisions ......................................................................................................... 3 

1.6 Disclaimer................................................................................................................... 3 

2. MAINTENANCE OF PROJECT FEATURES ..................................................... 5

2.1 Introduction................................................................................................................. 5 

2.2 Erosion (Applicable to all FCWs) .............................................................................. 6 

2.3 Encroachments (Applicable to all FCWs) .................................................................. 7 

2.4 Slope Stability (Applicable to all FCWs) ................................................................... 9 

2.5 Removal of Debris (Applicable to all FCWs) .......................................................... 11 

2.6 Animal Control (Applicable to all FCWs)................................................................ 11 

2.7 Riprap Revetments and Banks (Applicable to all FCWs) ........................................ 13 

2.8 Vegetation (Levee Specific) ..................................................................................... 16 

2.9 Cracking (Levee Specific) ........................................................................................ 18 

2.10 Ruts and Depressions (Levee Specific) .................................................................... 19 

2.11 Underseepage Control Berms (Levee Specific)........................................................ 20 

2.12 Excavations (Levee Specific) ................................................................................... 20 

2.13 Utilities (Levee Specific).......................................................................................... 20 

2.14 Underseepage Relief Wells/ Toe Drainage (Levees and Floodwalls) ...................... 21 

2.15 Seepage/ Sandboils (Levees and Floodwalls)........................................................... 21 

2.16 Closure Structures (Levees and Floodwalls) ............................................................ 22 

2.17 Concrete Surfaces (Applicable to all concrete structures)........................................ 22 

2.18 Tilting, Sliding, and Settlement (Applicable to all Concrete Structures) ................. 25 

2.19 Vegetation (Floodwall specific)................................................................................ 26 

2.20 Internal Drainage Systems ........................................................................................ 26 

2.21 Pump Stations ........................................................................................................... 31

2.22 Flood Control Rivers and Channels.......................................................................... 32 

2.23 Concrete Lined Channels.......................................................................................... 33 

2.24 Debris Basins ............................................................................................................ 33 

2.25 Floodways................................................................................................................. 34 

3. FLOOD PREPAREDNESS ................................................................................... 35

3.1 Flood Fight Equipment and Supplies........................................................................ 35 

3.2 Plans.......................................................................................................................... 38 

3.3 Training and Exercises.............................................................................................. 40 

3.4 Relations with Local and State Partners ................................................................... 41
vii

4. ACTIONS DURING HIGH WATER EVENTS.................................................. 43

4.1 Phase I: Preliminary Response Activities................................................................. 43 

4.2 Phase II: Full Response Activities............................................................................ 49 

4.3 Evacuation Plans....................................................................................................... 50 

4.4 After the Event.......................................................................................................... 51 

5. ADDITIONAL SPONSOR RESPONSIBILITIES.............................................. 53

5.1 Annual Pre-Flood-Season Inspections...................................................................... 53 

5.2 Public Awareness Activities ..................................................................................... 53 

5.3 Awareness of Adjacent Systems............................................................................... 54 

5.4 Permits ...................................................................................................................... 54 

5.5 Records ..................................................................................................................... 55 

6. REHABILITATION AND INSPECTION PROGRAM (RIP) .......................... 57

6.1 Overview of the Rehabilitation and Inspection Program.......................................... 57 

6.2 Projects that Qualify ................................................................................................. 58 

7. CORPS INSPECTIONS......................................................................................... 61

7.1 Entering the RIP – The Initial Eligibility Inspection (IEI) ....................................... 61 

7.2 Maintaining Active Status – Continuing Eligibility Inspections (CEIs) .................. 62 

7.3 Inspection Methodology ........................................................................................... 63 

8. REHABILITATION ASSISTANCE..................................................................... 65

8.1 Requesting Rehabilitation Assistance....................................................................... 65 

8.2 Requirements for Receiving Rehabilitation Assistance............................................ 65 

8.3 Cooperation Agreements .......................................................................................... 66 

8.4 Nonstructural Alternatives to Rehabilitation ............................................................ 69 

9. OTHER TYPES OF ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS EMERGENCY 

ASSISTANCE ......................................................................................................... 71

9.1 Technical Assistance................................................................................................. 71 

9.2 Direct Assistance ...................................................................................................... 72 

9.3 Advance Measures Assistance.................................................................................. 72 

9.4 Post Flood Assistance ............................................................................................... 73 

9.5 Emergency Water Assistance ................................................................................... 73 
viii

APPENDICES 

APPENDIX A: Acronyms and Definitions 

APPENDIX B: Flowchart of RIP Elegibility and Inspection Processes for Non-Federal FCWs 

APPENDIX C: FCW Inspection Guide 

APPENDIX D: Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees 

APPENDIX E: Rehabilitation Request Form 

APPENDIX F: Cooperation Agreement for Rehabilitation of Non-Federal Flood Control Works 

APPENDIX G: Cooperation Agreement for Flood Fight 

APPENDIX H: Cooperation Agreement for Advance Measures Assistance 

APPENDIX I: Useful Internet Addresses 
1 

1. INTRODUCTION 

1.1 Purpose of This Manual 

The purpose of this manual is to provide public sponsors of non-Federally constructed and 

maintained flood control projects with a single reference that describes proper operation and 

maintenance of flood control projects, and outlines the types of assistance the U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers can provide before, during, and after a flood. This manual provides 

information regarding the Corps’ Rehabilitation and Inspection Program (RIP), and explains 

the minimum standards for operation and maintenance that the Corps requires of non-federal 

flood control projects, in order for them to be eligible for the Corp’s rehabilitation assistance 

after a flood. However, since the procedures described are considered to be the minimum 

guidelines for proper maintenance of any flood control project, the manual is a useful 

reference for all public sponsors of flood control projects regardless of their status or 

involvement in the RIP. 

1.2 Scope of This Manual 

This Levee Owner's Manual is intended for general use by public sponsors of existing 

non-federally constructed flood control works (FCWs) throughout the United States. Because 

of the wide range of FCWs, from small channels to large levees, it doesn’t cover the detailed 

operation and maintenance of all project-specific features or the necessary steps to respond to 

specific situations such as ice jam flooding. Also, it only covers the operation and maintenance 

of FCWs that are already completed, rather than the engineering design and construction of 

new ones or new modifications. Corps inspections may address specific features that aren’t 

specifically covered in this manual. For supplementary information on the operations and 

maintenance of Corps programs, specific features of your project, or specific situations, please 

contact your Corps district’s Emergency Management Office. 

1.3 Supporting and Related Laws and Regulations 

In addition to presenting practical guidance on the operation and maintenance of flood control 

projects, this manual gathers together a lot of information from official laws and Corps 

regulations. Though every effort was made to present this information as accurately as 

possible, this manual itself is not meant to establish policy or official guidance. For additional 

details on the policies described and to find the actual wording given in the laws and 

regulations summarized in this manual, the reader is referred to the following documents: 

The publication of this manual was directed by Public Law 104-

303, the Water Resources Development Act of 1996. It covers 

more than just levees, but it’s called a Levee Owner’s Manual 

because of the statutory wording in this law. 
2 

a. Public Law (PL) 84-99 

This is the federal law which gives the Corps the legal authority to supplement local 

efforts in the repair of flood control projects that are damaged by floods. It can be 

found on the web at http://uscode.house.gov. Click on the link to “Search the US 

Code.” Search for title “33” and chapter “15”. Look through the search results, and the 

current form of PL 84-99 will be listed as 33 USC 701n. 

b. Title 33, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 203 (33 CFR 203) 

This federal regulation establishes the Rehabilitation and Inspection Program (RIP), 

describes the types of assistance the Corps can provide, and describes the general 

operation, maintenance, and disaster preparedness that is expected of non-federal flood 

control works. The current version of the CFR can be accessed through the CFR main 

page, http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/index.html Select “Browse and/or search the 

CFR,” then scroll down to the current version of Title 33, (Navigation and Navigable 

Waters). Browse parts 200-399; then open part 203. 

c. Title 33, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 208 (33 CFR Part 208): 

This federal regulation provides more specific details on the operation and 

maintenance required of Federally constructed FCWs. This regulation provides a 

guideline for O&M, but doesn’t provide the level of detail regarding specific 

requirements that the Levee Owner’s manual does. The current version of the CFR can 

be accessed through the CFR main page, 

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/index.html Select “Browse and/or search the CFR,” then 

scroll down to the current version of Title 33, (Navigation and Navigable Waters). 

Browse parts 200-399; then open part 208. 

d. Engineer Regulation (ER) 500-1-1 

This Corps-wide regulation expands on the previously mentioned laws and regulations, 

provides basic information on the Corps’ implementation of Public Law 84-99. 

Chapter 5 of ER 500-1-1 details the RIP program. Any discrepancies or conflicts that 

occur between the Levee Owner's Manual and ER 500-1-1 will be resolved based on 

the content of ER 500-1-1. This document can be found on the web at 

http://www.usace.army.mil/inet/usace-docs/eng-regs/er500-1-1/toc.htm 

 

e. Engineer Pamphlet (EP) 500-1-1 

This Corps-wide pamphlet provides further detail on how the ER will be applied 

practically. It establishes the Inspection Guide and other applicable forms that are 

listed in the appendices to this manual. Any discrepancies or conflicts that occur 

between the Levee Owner's Manual and any EP or ER will be resolved based on the 

content of the ER or EP, and any discrepancies or conflicts that occur between the EP 

and the ER will be resolved based on the content of the ER. EP 500-1-1 can be found 

on the web at http://www.usace.army.mil/inet/usace-docs/eng-pamphlets/ep500-1-

1/toc.htm
3 

f. Engineer Manual (EM) 1110-2-1913 

This manual provides the Corps of Engineer’s guidelines for engineering design and 

construction of levees. The document can be found at 

http://www.usace.army.mil/inet/usace-docs/eng-manuals/em1110-2-1913/toc.htm

g. Engineer Manual (EM) 1110-2-301 

This manual provides guidelines for landscape planting at Floodwalls, Levees, and 

Embankment Dams. This document provides additional clarification as to which types 

of vegetation are acceptable on and around flood control works. This can be found at 

http://www.usace.army.mil/inet/usace-docs/eng-manuals/em1110-2-301/toc.htm

h. Engineer Manual (EM) 1110-2-2705 

This manual provides guidance on the design of closure structures for local flood 

control projects. It can be found on the web at 

http://www.usace.army.mil/inet/usace-docs/eng-manuals/em1110-2-2705/toc.htm

i. Engineer Manual (EM) 1110-2-1205 

This manual provides information regarding environmental engineering for flood 

control channels. This EM can be found at 

http://www.usace.army.mil/publications/eng-manuals/em1110-2-1205/toc.htm

1.4 Reproduction 

The material presented is not copyrighted and can be reproduced as needed. This and similar 

materials can be downloaded from 

http://www.usace.army.mil/inet/functions/cw/cecwhs/em/fcw/fcw.html Send inquiries to the 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Headquarters, Emergency Management Branch, 441 G St NW, 

Washington, DC, 20314. Send inquiries to CECW-HS@USACE.ARMY.MIL The Corp’s 24-

hour emergency telephone number is 202-761-1001. 

1.5 Future Revisions 

There are no scheduled future revisions of this manual. However, as Corps districts and 

divisions revise and improve upon various sections of this text, it is requested that these 

revisions be provided to the Office of Homeland Security in Corps Headquarters, so that the 

most current and accurate information can be presented on the Corps website and shared with 

other districts. The Corps would also make use of any updated or corrected information when 

compiling similar manuals in the future. 

1.6 Disclaimer 

Nothing in this manual creates any liability of the United States or its officers or employees 

for the recovery of damages caused by an action or failure to act; or relieves the owner or 

operator of a Flood Control Work of any legal duty, obligation or liability incident to the 

ownership or operation of the Flood Control Work. 
4 

This page intentionally left blank. 
5 

2. MAINTENANCE OF PROJECT FEATURES 

2.1 Introduction 

All flood control works (FCWs) must be properly maintained to provide the protection for 

which they were designed. Remember that as the public sponsor, you are solely responsible 

for ensuring that the FCW is properly maintained and will protect the lives and property of 

your families, friends, and taxpayers. Even if you have sub-agreements with local landowners 

who routinely perform project maintenance, these landowners are not ultimately responsible 

for the operations and maintenance of the FCW. If landowners fail to perform needed 

maintenance or correct deficiencies on their property, it’s your duty to ensure that the 

maintenance and repairs are completed. Proper maintenance of the FCW must be taken very 

seriously, and local plans and budgets need to be structured so that the maintenance of each 

project feature is carried out on a regular and continual basis. In addition to providing for 

usual operations and maintenance expenses, this budget needs to account for the replacement 

of more expensive project components such as pumps, motors, gates, and corrugated metal 

pipes as they age and come to the end of their design life. 

This chapter identifies many of the activities that are necessary to maintain flood control 

works. The following sections provide maintenance recommendations, requirements, and 

examples of the types of deficiencies that will reduce the project’s eligibility status within the 

Rehabilitation and Inspection Program (RIP), which is described in chapter 6. To avoid 

confusion between the baseline requirements that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has 

established for inclusion in the RIP and the additional suggestions and recommendations that 

are provided in this chapter, please refer to the Corps’ Inspection Guide, found in Appendix C. 

The Inspection Guide is used in Corps inspections of all non-Federally constructed FCWs, and 

lists the specific requirements for inclusion in the RIP. This listing is not all-inclusive and 

some Corps districts may specify additional requirements based on local conditions. More 

information on Corps inspections is provided in chapter 7. 

Note that many of the pictures in this chapter are labeled with the words “ACCEPTABLE”, 

“MINIMALLY ACCEPTABLE” and “UNACCEPTABLE.” The ratings are provided here along 

with the pictures in order to give you a better understanding of the standards that the Corps 

uses while inspecting flood control works across the country. The ratings given are the ones 

that a Corps inspector might assign to the project feature if it was observed during a routine 

inspection. A definition of these ratings is provided in chapter 7. 
6 

Figure 2.3 Slope failure on bank 

protection project. (WA)

Figure 2.1 UNACCEPTABLE 

erosion of levee slope. (TX)

Figure 2.2 Flood damage. (WA)

2.2 Erosion (Applicable to all FCWs) 

a. Types of Erosion 

There are several types of erosion that effect FCWs. 

For example, the slopes of any embankment can 

become eroded from rain runoff, as shown in Figure 

2.1 or by embankment overtopping, as in Figure 2.2. 

Depending on the extent of the erosion, the level of 

protection provided by the FCW can be significantly 

reduced. In cases of embankment overtopping 

during a flood, there may be a total failure of the 

structure. 

A second type of erosion often seen on 

embankments is wave wash. Under high water 

conditions, wave action can form long terraces along 

the length of the embankment slopes. If additional 

material or bank protection is not provided, the 

embankment will continue to cave as the waves 

work their way farther into the slope. Further 

discussion on the treatment of wave wash is 

provided in Appendix D of this manual. 

A third type of embankment erosion is caused by 

the flow of water within a river or channel. These 

flows can erode a channel bank or levee, or 

undermine other flood control structures and cause 

them to cave into the water. Bank caving or stream 

bank erosion can be a very serious threat to the 

stability of an FCW. It’s critical that the riverward 

bank be inspected for bank caving or erosion. If the 

river or stream bank erosion or caving is observed 

to be moving in the direction of a levee or 

floodwall, immediate action should be taken to 

stabilize the banks. 

b. Repair of Areas Damaged by Erosion 

All erosion gullies like those pictured in 2.1 need to 

be repaired to prevent further erosion and more 

significant damage during high water. The ground 

should be scarified and backfilled with the same type of material that the levee is made 

of. The backfill material should generally be placed in 6 inch layers and compacted 

mechanically or by hand, in order to restore the original shape of the levee. 

Additionally, since this erosion is typically a reoccurring problem, something should 

be done to improve the drainage and prevent further erosion in the area. Consideration 
7 

should be given to installing drainage channels or appropriately sized rock, and areas 

of the levee that remain exposed should be reseeded and mulched. Please refer to 

section 2.7, below, for details on the placement of riprap. In extreme cases of channel/ 

bank erosion, a relocation or setback of the levee may be the only economical solution. 

2.3 Encroachments (Applicable to all FCWs) 

Excavations, structures, or other obstructions present within the project easement area are 

generally prohibited. Fencing that prohibits access along the crown of the levee is prohibited. 

Where access control is needed, the public sponsor should install gates that will allow 

continued access along the crown of the levee for surveillance and flood fight activities. The 

Corps may make certain exceptions to this rule, provided the encroachment does not impact 

the operation, maintenance, or structural integrity of the project. Figures 2.5 through 2.14 are 

examples of common encroachments that should not be permitted. 

Figure 2.4 ACCEPTABLE. Landowner has not 

encroached on levee easement area and has stayed 

back 10 - 15 feet. (MN) 

Figure 2.5 MINIMALLY ACCEPTABLE. Field 

encroaches on levee easement. The landowner has 

tilled the soil right to toe of the levee, and was 

requested to stay back at least 10 feet. (ND) 

Figure 2.6 UNACCEPTABLE levee encroachments. 

This landowner tilled near one third of the way up 

the landward levee slope. (MN) 
8 

Figure 2.10 UNACCEPTABLE, unapproved 

encroachment. Material stockpiled against the levee. 

(OK) 

Figure 2.14 UNACCEPTABLE encroachment. Patio 

construction using railway timbers and fill without 

approval. (ND) 

Figure 2.8 UNACCEPTABLE encroachment. Piping 

for lawn irrigation system drilled through levee 

without approval. (ND) 

Figure 2.9 UNACCEPTABLE encroachments on 

earthen levee. Fallen woody debris requires removal. 

(KS) 

Figure 2.11 UNACCEPTABLE encroachment. 

Residential and rural fences crossing the levee. (ND)

Figure 2.12 UNACCEPTABLE, unapproved 

encroachment on levee easement (fencing). (OK) 

Figure 2.13 UNACCEPTABLE encroachment. 

Gardens and compost bins located on levee crest and 

riverward slope. (ND) 

Figure 2.7 UNACCEPTABLE levee encroachments. 

Utility poles in levee embankment. (IN) 
9 

Figure 2.17 UNACCEPTABLE earthen embankment 

failure. (MN)

Figure 2.15 UNACCEPTABLE. Slope failure and 

erosion caused by inadequate channel bottom and 

side slope protection. This was a direct result of

bottom scouring that undercut the levee slope and 

erosion caused by turbulent flow at the end of the 

bank protection. (ND)

Figure 2.16 UNACCEPTABLE. Slope failure and 

erosion on a channel improvement project. (MN)

2.4 Slope Stability (Applicable to all FCWs) 

Some earthen materials tend to become saturated with water very easily. When this happens, 

they loose stability and can’t support their own weight. If a stream or river embankment is 

composed of these materials, the embankment will slump off and move down the slope into 

the river, causing a bulge at the base of the slope. When river banks break down like this, they 

are said to have slope stability problems and need to be repaired. Slope failures can lead to 

serious problems, especially if the failure occurs near a levee or floodwall. Figures 2.15 

through 2.17 show examples of slope stability problems. 

 

Levees, like riverbanks, are subject to the 

same soil saturation effects during a flood or 

period of heavy rainfall. Levees are generally 

less susceptible to slope stability problems 

because of the materials they are made of and 

because of their shallow slopes. However, 

slope failures have occurred during prolonged 

periods of high water or heavy rainfall. Figure 

2.16 shows an earthen embankment that failed 

as floodwaters receded. While slope failures 

will generally occur on the riverward slope of 

a levee, be aware that slope failures on 

landward slopes are also possible. A levee should be carefully inspected for slope stability 

problems after these events. 
10 

Figure 2.18 Classic picture of a tree causing slope failure. (WA) 

A related slope failure/ stability 

problem involves trees growing 

on or near the channel or levee 

slopes. It’s very important to 

prevent tree growth near levee or 

channel embankments, because 

when the roots of these trees 

decay they leave voids in the 

soil, which allow water to 

quickly saturate the slope and 

cause a slope failure. Trees can 

also be uprooted and deflect 

flood flows into the 

embankment, accelerating the 

erosion of the bank. 

The classic signs of slope 

stability problems are listed below, and you should watch for these signs during routine 

inspections. 

a. Wide deep cracks that parallel the riverbank or levee crest. In the case of levees, 

these cracks may also extend down the slope of the levee. 

b. Vertical movement of the material along the crack. Remember that this movement 

may be very obvious like in Figures 2.16 or 2.17, or very subtle if the stability 

problem is just starting to develop. 

c. If the slope has slumped or is starting to slump, examine the area along the toe of 

the embankment. In many cases there will be a noticeable bulge in the slope or 

riverbank. 

Please also refer to section 2.9 for further discussion on levee cracking. 

Deep seated sliding often requires the removal and replacement of that section of the levee or 

river slope, and the stabilization of the area with a soil or rock berm. If you identify signs of a 

developing slope stability problem, it is very important that you contact your local Corps 

district office for an investigation and to get technical assistance as to the best way to repair 

the problem. 
11 

Figure 2.20 Animal burrow in a levee. (IA) 

Figure 2.19 UNACCEPTABLE erosion of river channel, caused by a 

log jam. (ND)

2.5 Removal of Debris (Applicable to all FCWs) 

Any accumulations of drift, grass clippings, and other objectionable materials deposited on the 

riverward side of any FCW or along the crown and side slopes of a levee must be removed and 

disposed of at suitable locations outside of the floodway. When debris collects in a flowing 

channel, it can deflect the water 

towards the channel bank, causing 

significant damage to the FCW. 

Figure 2.19 shows the result of 

what started out as a beaver dam 

that was not removed, which 

expanded into a log jam. Before 

this log jam was removed, both 

the inside river bank and the levee 

experienced severe bank erosion. 

Log jams have endangered 

bridges and railway crossings, 

and they lead to higher flood crest 

elevations upstream of the 

obstruction. 

One common problem experienced along urban levees is that the residents pile lawn clippings 

and yard waste on the riverward side of the levee. This practice should not be allowed because 

the clippings will kill the grass cover that protects the levee. During a flood, the debris gets 

washed away, exposing the levee material to erosion. 

2.6 Animal Control (Applicable to all FCWs) 

Close attention must be given to the presence of 

burrowing animals, since they may not be 

readily detected without a thorough inspection. 

Burrows created by gophers, muskrats, 

opossums, badgers, and other animals can lead 

to rapid levee failures during floods. For this 

reason, an active animal abatement program 

needs to be implemented to remove these 

animals. Rodent control techniques involving 

fumigation, bait stations, bait broadcasting, or 

trapping have proven effective in certain 

situations, but you should always contact your 

state’s Fish and Game Agency, Department of Natural Resources, or Wildlife Agency to 

determine which rodent control procedures are allowable and recommended in your area. 

Inspections to detect the presence of burrowing animal activity are generally most effective 

immediately after the levee has been mowed. Animal burrows that are identified should be 

thoroughly excavated and inspected, backfilled with compacted soil that is similar to material 
12 

of the levee, and reseeded. This will avoid the possibility of water piping through unfilled 

portions of the burrows during a flood. 

Beavers pose an additional concern in streams and channel improvement projects. They have 

been known to cause problems by building dams, blocking culverts, and by burrowing into the 

stream bank to create a den. When beaver activity is noted, the beaver should be removed and 

the dam and blockages removed. Failure to correct the problem may result in increased bank 

erosion and slope stability problems in the area of the beaver den during periods of high water. 

Figure 2.21 Beaver dam. Such dams can stop flow 

within the channel and cause erosion to the channel 

banks. Sponsors are encouraged to remove beaver 

dams ASAP. (ND)

Figure 2.22 Beavers attempting to block the culvert 

passing through a gated embankment. (MN)
13 

Figure 2.23 Flood damage on a naturally protected bank, as compared to damage on an adjacent bank 

which was protected with riprap. (Note that even though the riprap clearly protected the area during the 

flood, if it was observed an inspection it would have probably been rated Minimally Acceptable because the 

grass would have prevented an inspector from properly examining the riprap.) (WA) 

Figure 2.24 Channel erosion located at 

the upstream end of a flood control levee 

protected by riprap. Erosion caused by 

riprap protection and eddy currents. (MN)

2.7 Riprap Revetments and Banks (Applicable to all FCWs) 

As shown in Figure 2.23, riprap can be a very effective method for protecting a riverbank or 

flood control feature from erosion. However, if the riprap protection is not placed correctly, it 

can cause eddy currents to erode unprotected areas of the bank upstream or downstream of the 

project, as shown in figure 2.24. 
14 

For riprap protection to be effective, it’s important to ensure that it is properly maintained. 

During project inspections, look for settled areas that may indicate the riprap is being 

undermined by the river, ice, or debris. When undermining or rock displacement occurs, 

additional rock will need to be added to restore the even slope. When the rock protection is 

uneven the flow turbulence will increase, resulting in additional erosion of the project or of 

areas upstream or downstream of the project. 

The protected area needs to be kept free of unwanted brush, saplings, and trees. Unwanted 

vegetation should be sprayed with an appropriate herbicide to kill the plant, and the root 

system should be removed. Failure to control the sapling and tree growth can result in the trees 

being uprooted during a flood, displacing the riprap and increasing the rate of erosion. 

Any areas of stone riprap that have settled, moved, or been damaged by erosion should be 

filled in with hard, durable rock of suitable size or with a six-inch filter-blanket layer or a layer 

of geotextile fabric under the stone riprap, between the soil and the rock. These sublayers 

allow the water to pass from the soil, yet prevent the fine soil from washing out from under the 

Figure 2.28 UNACCEPTABLE. Tree and sapling 

growth is well established within the riprap 

protection on an earthen levee. This overgrowth 

must be removed. (MO) 

Figure 2.27 MINIMALLY ACCEPTABLE. Trees and 

saplings are becoming established within riprapprotected areas and along the lower portions of the 

river channel, and must be removed. (ND) 

Figure 2.25 ACCEPTABLE riprap for erosion 

control. (MT) 

Figure 2.26 ACCEPTABLE riprap for erosion 

control. (NE) 
15 

stone riprap. It’s very important that you contact the Corps for technical assistance when 

installing geotextile fabrics, as the Corps has significant experience in installing riprap over 

geotextile fabric, and can help you to avoid complications with the process. 

When selecting stone for riprap, choose durable rock that’s insoluble in water. Stratified or 

easily crumbled rocks such as shale, or rocks such as claystones that are likely to decompose 

in water are not good for riprap. Stone for riprap should be block shaped with a specific 

gravity of at least 2.5. Smooth rounded stone or flat, thin, elongated and slab stones are not 

recommended. As a general rule, no more than 25% of the stones distributed throughout the 

gradation should have a length more than 2.5 times longer than the other dimensions, and none 

of the stones should be 3 times longer than their width or thickness. 

Grouted riprap should be avoided unless it is absolutely necessary. The surface of grouted 

riprap can look perfectly fine until the bond between the grout and the rock fails. Grouted 

riprap can fail suddenly if it is undermined, and this can lead to unexpected and catastrophic 

failure of the slope. Other objections to using grout include the cost of installation, the lasting 

environmental impact, and the undesirable aesthetics of having a cement-lined stream bank as 

opposed to a plain rock bank. 

It should be noted that work within a river channel which involves placing or adding material 

(soil or rock) may require a Section 404 permit from the Corps. Please contact your Corps 

district before placing any material along the banks of a river or stream to determine whether 

you will need a permit for the work. If the FCW is damaged by a flood or by high-water and is 

eligible for rehabilitation assistance under PL 84-99 as discussed in later chapters of this 

manual, the Corps will help you to obtain the necessary permits. 

The Corps can provide recommendations or materials on the proper sizing, gradation, 

thickness, use of geotextile fabrics, and other details related to the placement of riprap. 
16 

2.8 Vegetation (Levee Specific) 

The Corps’ policy for landscaping around levees, floodwalls, and embankment dams, is found 

in EM 1110-2-301. The requirements are sometimes seen as being excessive and out of touch 

with contemporary environmental concerns, but as the primary function of a levee is to protect 

communities from flooding, the Corps’ maintenance requirements have been established to 

reduce the chance of catastrophic failures during high water. If you’d like a variance to the 

Corps’ vegetation requirements (allowing additional vegetation on or around the levee) then 

you need to contact your local Corps district. A variance would be granted if the proposed 

vegetation is seen to preserve, protect, or enhance natural resources, or if it protects the rights 

of Native Americans. Such variances will only be granted if the vegetation retains the safety, 

structural integrity, and functionality of the levee; retains the accessibility for inspection and 

flood fighting purposes; and doesn’t reduce the level of protection required by the National 

Flood Insurance Program or the RIP if the levee is a part of these programs. Specific items 

relating to the maintenance of levee vegetation include the maintenance of the grass or sod 

cover and the removal of unwanted bushes and trees. 

a. Maintaining and Promoting a Good Grass or Sod Cover 

Grass or sod cover is one of the most effective and economical means of protecting 

flood control levees and drainage swales against erosion caused by rain runoff, channel 

flows, and wave wash. As the public sponsor, you are required to ensure the grass 

cover has every opportunity to grow. This will require that you periodically fertilize, 

water, and mow the grasses as needed. In addition, every effort must be made to 

prevent unauthorized encroachments, grazing, vehicle traffic, the misuse of chemicals, 

or burning during inappropriate seasons. Failure to properly maintain the grass cover 

can result in unnecessary erosion and possible embankment failure. 

b. Mowing 

Periodic mowing is essential to maintaining a good ground cover. Levees should be 

mowed regularly in order to control weeds and to prevent the growth of brush and 

saplings. Long grasses and native prairie grasses are one of the many challenges facing 

the project inspector. Long grasses (greater then 12 inches in length) can make a visual 

inspection nearly impossible and can hide serious concerns such as rodent activity, 

levee slides, and cracking; all of which can lead to the failure of the levee. For these 

Figure 2.29 MINIMALLY ACCEPTABLE. This photo shows cattle grazing on the levee. Cattle typically 

don’t harm the sod cover to the extent that sheep or other animals do. In this case, the landowner and 

the public sponsor were informed of the Corps’ policy that grazing is not permitted on levees or within 

the levee easement area. 
17 

Figure 2.30 UNACCEPTABLE levee with knee-high 

grass, making visual inspection nearly impossible. 

(MN) 

Figure 2.31 UNACCEPTABLE. Levee is mowed but 

trees and longer grasses within levee easement area. 

Trees are greater than 2” in diameter. (MN) 

Figure 2.32 UNACCEPTABLE long grasses and 

trees on levee side slopes. (ND) 

reasons, the grass should be mowed to a minimum height of 3 inches. The last mowing 

of the season should be accomplished under conditions that will allow the grass to 

grow to approximately 8 to 10 inches by the winter season. It’s important to ensure that 

the entire levee profile has been mowed, including zones extending 15 feet beyond the 

toes of the embankment, which should 

be free of all woody growth and should 

be clear of other obstructions so that a 

truck could drive beside the levee if 

needed. 

c. Control of Trees, Brush, and 

Weeds 

If the public sponsor mows the levee at 

regular intervals, the growth of saplings, 

trees, and brush will not become a 

problem. However, if the levee is not 

mowed regularly, the resulting growth 

will make it difficult to properly 

maintain and inspect the project. Trees 

and brush can also affect the stability of 

the structure and interfere with 

emergency operations during highwater conditions. All trees and brush 

must be cleared and disposed of away 

from the flood control project. The 

disposal of material on the riverward 

side of the levee or areas where flood 

waters can carry the material 

downstream is prohibited. In riprap 

protected areas, ditches, or in other 

areas of the project where power 

mowing is impractical, the unwanted 

vegetation should be controlled with an 

approved herbicide spray or should be 

cut by hand. Herbicides must be used in 

accordance with state and local laws 

and regulations. Any trees that reach 2 

inches in diameter or greater, and are 

located on the levee, riprapped areas, 

drainage channels, or within 15 feet of 

the toe of the levee must be cut down, 

the root ball removed, the voids filled 

with impervious material, and the fill 

material firmly compacted and reseeded. 
18 

Figure 2.33 ACCEPTABLE cracking in clay levee 

with shrinkage cracking caused by dry conditions. 

(MN)

2.9 Cracking (Levee Specific) 

It’s important to closely monitor and evaluate 

all visible areas of cracking on a levee or 

riverbank, to ensure they don’t develop slope 

stability problems as shown in Figure 2.35 

and discussed in section 2.4. Cracks in a levee 

develop when the levee material is saturated 

with water and when it is overly dry. Clay, 

like most impervious materials, will shrink as 

it dries and re-expand when wet. Clay levee 

surfaces tend to shrink and expand slightly, 

and some cracks in the surface of the FCW are 

to be expected. Shrinkage cracks are generally 

narrow and shallow, not extending more than 

more then a few inches into the levee, but 

during long periods of drought they may extend as much as two feet into the levee. These 

cracks can run longitudinally or transverse to the levee, as in Figure 2.33, or may appear as 

blocks as shown in Figure 2.34. If the cracking becomes excessive, it needs to be corrected 

even if the levee appears to be stable. It’s important that you contact your local Corps district 

office for guidance on how to repair cracks observed in your levee. 

Figure 2.35 UNACCEPTABLE embankment cracking 

and slope failure. This photo shows what started out 

as cracking along the crest of the embankment and 

quickly developed into a slope failure. All cracking 

located on a levee or riverbank must be closely 

monitored. (MN)

Figure 2.34 UNACCEPTABLE cracking with 

landside pooling, Whitehead Levee Project, (IA)
19 

2.10 Ruts and Depressions (Levee Specific) 

Ruts and other depressions often develop along levees or patrol roads as a result of pedestrian 

or vehicular traffic, settlement, or because of an inadequate crown slope. Sometimes the levee 

material over a culvert can settle, leaving a trench across the crown of a levee. This process 

and related maintenance is discussed below in section 2.20. Ruts and depressions are a 

problem because they allow water to pond on the levee crest or access road. If left 

uncorrected, the ponded water will seep into the levee’s interior or into roadway embankment, 

saturating the foundation material, and making the levee more susceptible to failure during a 

flood. The levee or access road should be inspected for ruts, pot holes, and areas of standing 

water after it rains. 

To correct these problems, the topsoil and sod should be removed and the existing levee 

surface should be roughened. This is ideally done when the ground is not frozen; if there are 

ice crystals in the ground then the entire frozen layer should be removed. Loose fill material 

should be added evenly, in approximately 6 inch layers. Add water or dry the backfill 

materials as necessary to attain optimal moisture content during compaction. Compact in place 

by hand or mechanical methods in order to bring the levee back to its original shape. The 

topsoil should be replaced and the area should be reseeded and mulched for erosion control. 

Figures 2.36 through 2.39 show common ruts that can hold water on access roads and levees. 

Figure 2.36 MINIMALLY ACCEPTABLE 

levee rutting caused by pedestrian and bicycle 

traffic. (ND)

Figure 2.37 UNACCEPTABLE ruts in 

levee crown require fill. (MO)

Figure 2.38 MINIMALLY ACCEPTABLE

ponded water along a levee crest. (MN)

Figure 2.39 UNACCEPTABLE rutting in 

levee. (OK) 
20 

When the crest of the levee is used for recreation, inspections, surveillance during floods, and 

flood fighting activities, a surface treatment (e.g., gravel, crushed rock, pavement, etc.) should 

be provided to reduce the deficiencies listed above. This is not a requirement but it is 

recommended for active levees. 

2.11 Underseepage Control Berms (Levee Specific) 

Underseepage control berms, also known as seepage berms, perform two functions in 

controlling seepage. First, they provide a downward weight to counteract the upward force of 

the seepage pressure within the foundation material adjacent to the levee, which is where the 

pressure is highest. Second, seepage berms lengthen the seepage path, which increases the 

flow resistance and decreases the seepage pressure in the area beyond the berm. The berms 

should be constructed with material at least as permeable as the existing levee to reduce the 

chance of increasing dangerous build up of hydrostatic pressures within the levee. They should 

be thoroughly inspected both before and after each flood along with the rest of the FCW, and 

any cracks, depressions, settlement, or other problems identified need to be repaired as 

outlined in previous sections of this chapter. 

2.12 Excavations (Levee Specific) 

The removal of levee blanket materials may endanger the levee by increasing the potential for 

seepage or stability problems. Any excavation that is proposed within the boundaries of the 

levee easement or right-of-way should be reviewed by the Corps. This review may result in a 

recommendation to not allow the excavation, or to recommend restrictions on the excavation 

in order to maintain the project’s eligibility for rehabilitation assistance. The areas the public 

sponsor should monitor for excavation activities include the levee itself, and those areas within 

100 feet, both landward and riverward, of the levee. 

2.13 Utilities (Levee Specific) 

It’s also recommended that you coordinate the construction of any utilities that cross over, 

under, or through levees or other flood control structures with the Corps prior to the start of 

construction. During the installation of the utility, care needs to be taken to ensure that pipes 

do not leak, and that there is adequate compaction around the utility. Failure to provide good 

compaction will allow for seepage along the pipe during a flood. Once installed, the utility 

trench will need to be monitored for cracks, depressions, settlement, sink holes, or saturated 

soils that may indicate a leak or possible seepage along the utility line. These types of 

problems should be brought to the utility company’s attention as soon as they are discovered 

and repaired expeditiously. Additional guidance on the placement of utilities, excavations, and 

on other related topics can be found at 

http://www.nwk.usace.army.mil/local_protection/guidance.html, as referenced in Appendix I 

of this manual. You district office may be able to provide additional information, if needed. 

Figure 2.40 Sketch of a seepage berm. 
21 

Figure 2.41 Evidence of sandboils. (IN) 

2.14 Underseepage Relief Wells/ Toe Drainage (Levees and Floodwalls) 

Relief wells are used to relieve hydrostatic pressures in the foundation of a levee, which is 

caused by fluctuation in the water table or seepage under a levee or flood control structure 

during a flood. Typical relief wells consist of a well screen, a filter pack (granular material 

surrounding the well screen), a riser, and an outlet system. Relief wells, over time, can become 

less efficient at relieving hydrostatic pressures because of clogging of the filter pack, 

sedimentation build up in the well screen, and/or bio-fouling. Clogging of the filter pack and 

sedimentation within the relief well occurs when the foundation material migrates into the 

filter pack, making it less permeable and reducing the well’s effectiveness. Bio-fouling is the 

build up of bacteria on the well screen itself, reducing the area in the screen through which 

water can flow. 

Maintenance of relief wells requires surging and pump testing of the well, and comparing the 

results to the test results recorded when the well was initially installed. Well testing and 

clearing should be accomplished by qualified well drillers. You can request technical 

assistance from the Corps on the proper procedures and/or a list of qualified well drilling 

contractors in your area. 

2.15 Seepage/ Sandboils (Levees and Floodwalls) 

Sandboils and seepage problems are not generally 

identified during routine inspections because 

these problems typically only appear under high 

water conditions. However, if sandboils or 

continuously saturated soils (not caused by 

ponded water or poor drainage) are observed on 

the landward side of the levee or floodwall under 

low water conditions, regardless of their size, they 

will likely become serious problems under high 

water conditions. Sandboils and underseepage is a 

serious problem that should not be taken lightly. 

If sandboils are observed during a flood or low 

water conditions, or if there’s evidence that 

foundation material is being (or has been) removed from the levee foundation, then the Corps 

should be contacted to evaluate the situation and provide technical advice regarding repairs. 

Appendix D of this manual provides additional information regarding seepage and sandboils. 
22 

2.16 Closure Structures (Levees and Floodwalls) 

Closure structures must be in good repair. Placing equipment, stoplogs, sandbags, and other 

materials must be readily available at all times; stored nearby on the protected side of the 

levee, or stored on a trailer for quick transportation to the site. It’s important that all 

components are clearly marked and that installation instructions and related procedures are 

readily available. You should regularly check your inventory of all components of the closure 

structure to ensure that stoplogs and other components will be there when you need them. 

Note that when aluminum stoplogs are stored, they should be supported along their entire 

length so they don’t deform during extended periods of storage. 

2.17 Concrete Surfaces (Applicable to all concrete structures) 

Visible cracking, scaling, or spalling are signs of concrete movement and stresses within the 

concrete. Cracks in concrete walls that aren’t repaired are subject to freeze / thaw damage, 

which widens the gap and leads to additional spalling of the concrete. When examining any 

concrete flood control structures, spalling, scaling, or cracking should be very minimal. 

Figures 2.43 through 2.47, on the following page, show various degrees of cracking, spalling, 

and scaling. 

Figure 2.42 ACCEPTABLE floodgate in a levee. (KS) 
23 

Figure 2.47 MINIMALLY 

ACCEPTABLE floodwall. 

Exposed surface rebar resulting 

from poor construction 

practices. The public sponsor 

has painted over the rebar in an 

attempt to keep it from rusting. 

(MN) 

Figure 2.44 

MINIMALLY 

ACCEPTABLE 

Vertical floodwall 

crack with spalling. 

The rating for this 

particular crack is 

Minimally Acceptable 

because the crack is 

still tight but there is 

some spalling 

occurring as well. 

(MN) 

Figure 2.45 

UNACCEPTABLE 

exposed rebar. 

Monolith joint 

separation with 

exterior spalling 

along the joint and 

interior spalling in 

the area of the 

rebar. (MN) 

Figure 2.43 MINIMALLY 

ACCEPTABLE 1/8th inch 

crack extends through 

concrete floodwall and 

needs to be sealed to 

prevent further damage. 

(MN) 

Figure 2.46 Detail of

the crack in Figure 

2.45, showing the 

exposed rebar that 

tied the two 

monoliths together. 

(MN) 
24 

Fire and extreme heat can also be very damaging to concrete, and sponsors should discourage 

fires from being built beside concrete structures. Common grass or incidental fires are not 

typically a great concern, but repeated hot or large fires such as bon fires, camp fires, or brush 

fires can cause spalling in the concrete. Even though fire damage is not specifically listed in 

the Corps’ FCW Inspection Guide (Appendix C), the related spalling, cracking, or other 

damage would be noted during an inspection and is something that should be taken seriously. 

If this type of damage is identified, efforts must be made immediately to stop fires near the 

FCW. Depending on the extent of the damage, the integrity of the structure should be 

investigated and repairs should be made as soon as possible. 

Over time, concrete surfaces will weather, leaving the concrete rough to the touch, or will hold 

moisture on the surface. When this occurs consider applying a protective coating to the 

concrete to help prevent moisture from entering the structure. By applying a protective coating 

to the concrete surface and sealing the cracks the chances of freeze / thaw damage will be 

greatly reduced, increasing the life expectancy of the structure. Prior to the application of a 

concrete sealer the structure should be cleaned, existing cracks should be sealed with a flexible 

sealant, and any spalling repaired. Any sealer chosen for the concrete floodwall should be a 

water or solvent-based acrylic protective coating, which may be either clear or colored, and 

may be textured. A clear system should contain at least 23% solids by weight, and a colored 

system should contain at least 67% solids by weight and 46% solids by volume. 

More serious damage such as spalling should be repaired as soon as it is identified, especially 

if steel reinforcing has been exposed. Perform concrete repairs with a polymer-modified 

Portland cement mortar that will provide a minimum or 2500-psi compressive strength in two 

hours. For repairs greater than 1 1/2 inches deep, add 3/8-inch clean-washed pea gravel so that 

aggregates don’t result in variations of the physical properties of the mortar. Limestone gravel 

is not acceptable. All surfaces to be patched need to be structurally sound, clean, and free of 

loose debris, oils, vegetation, paints, sealants, and other contaminants. Remove all deteriorated 

concrete to a minimum of 1⁄4-inch in depth. Cut edges should be square with the concrete 

surfaces, and not feathered. Surfaces should be sufficiently rough to ensure a good bond. Any 

existing reinforcing bars should be thoroughly cleaned. If required, existing concrete should be 

removed to fully expose the reinforcing bar. Sandblasting may be required to clean them 

thoroughly. All surfaces should be fully saturated and freestanding excess water should be 

removed before applying the repair material. The material should be placed in the prepared 

area starting from one side and working to the other side. For vertical areas, trowel the 

material in an upward motion over the repaired area. Successive applications must be troweled 

against the previously placed material just prior to hardening. Work the material firmly into 

the bottom and sides of the repair. Level the material to the desired thickness and close up 

edges of the repair with a trowel. Finish the material to match the existing concrete finish. 

Remove any material applied or spilled beyond the desired areas. All exposed surfaces should 

be thoroughly saturated with water immediately after finishing. 
25 

Figure 2.49 UNACCEPTABLE monolith 

movement in floodwall. The monolith shown in the 

photo has tilted about 6 inches riverward as well a 

vertically. Note the movement when compared to 

the adjoining monolith and the top cap. As the 

monolith moved considerable spalling has 

occurred along the joint. This project is monitored 

very closely during flood events. (ND) 

2.18 Tilting, Sliding, and Settlement (Applicable to all Concrete Structures) 

If soil conditions were poor prior to construction or if there has been inadequate soil 

compaction, concrete structures (floodwalls, pump stations, and gate wells) will frequently 

show signs of settlement. As the structure settles it may begin tilting in the lateral or transverse 

directions, settle vertically, or may even begin to slide downhill, if constructed on a slope. As 

the pressure within the concrete builds cracking and large spalls will develop. If the movement 

is considerable like that shown in Figures 2.48 and 2.49, a licensed engineer should be 

contacted to determine the best approach to correct the problem, or to closely monitor the 

structure during high water to avoid a structural failure. 

Figure 2.48 MINIMALLY ACCEPTABLE floodwall. 

Monolith joint separation caused by settlement, no 

landward or riverward tilting. The opening is about 3 

inches wide at the top but the rubber joint sealer is 

still intact and undamaged. This joint has since been 

repaired by bolting another joint sealer on the both 

sides of the wall and filling the void with an 

expandable joint sealer. (ND)

Figure 2.50 ACCEPTABLE. 

decorative floodwall is in straight 

alignment, with no tilting or spalling, 

and all joints are tight together. (MN)
26 

Figure 2.53 UNACCEPTABLE interior drainage 

at the toe of an earthen levee. (OK) 

2.19 Vegetation (Floodwall specific) 

Vegetation must be removed from both sides of floodwalls for maintenance, flood fighting 

activities, and to protect the floodwall from damage from roots. Roots under a floodwall can 

greatly accelerate seepage rates during high water, increasing the chance of sandboils on the 

landward side and potentially leading to the failure of the structure. For these reasons, you 

should maintain a zone extending 2.5 meters (8') beyond both the underground toe and heel of 

the floodwall, keeping it free of everything but grass or sod, or possibly riprap on the 

riverward side. Since the floodwall may have been constructed in the shape of an inverted T, 

the underground toe and heel may extend several feet past the visible base. Additional 

guidance on landscaping around levees, floodwalls and embankment dams can be found in 

EM 1110-2-301, as referenced in Chapter 1. 

2.20 Internal Drainage Systems 

During non-flood conditions, rainwater is 

permitted to drain naturally through culverts in the 

levee and into the river. However, during high 

water, the gates on the drainage culverts are 

closed, and rainfall and flood seepage becomes 

trapped within the protected area of the FCW. If 

there is insufficient ponding area within the FCW, 

the water will need to be pumped over the levee or 

floodwall and into the river. Even if a levee 

operates exactly as intended to keep the river back, 

a community can still be flooded from within if the 

interior drainage system is not functioning properly. 

Some of the features of an interior drainage system include ponding areas, drainage swales or 

ditches, inlet and outlet structures including gates and concrete components, culverts, gate 

wells, and pump stations. Natural or modified streams or ditches within the protected area are 

generally not considered part of the flood control project unless specifically stated in the 

project design. However, don’t forget that you could still experience significant damage from 

seepage and rain runoff if these channels are not maintained. 

Figure 2.51 UNACCEPTABLE. Trees growing too 

close to floodwall. (KY) 

Figure 2.52 UNACCEPTABLE. Trees growing too 

close to floodwall. (KY) 
27 

Figure 2.57 ACCEPTABLE interior ponding 

area and drainage ditch. (MN) 

As the public sponsor, it’s your responsibility to ensure that all ditches, drainage structures, 

and other components of the project are kept in an acceptable condition. All drainage 

structures should be inspected and maintained at least once a year prior to flood season and 

again after periods of high water. The following paragraphs describe the maintenance of some 

components of interior drainage in greater detail. 

a. Drainage Ditches 

Drainage ditches should be maintained to ensure that the capacity of the ditch is not 

decreased by heavy vegetation growth or sedimentation. As part of a good 

maintenance program, the drainage ditches should be cleared at scheduled intervals 

and restored to the original channel design grade and cross section. Material removed 

from drainage ditches should be removed from the floodway, and not left in area near 

the banks. Removal of the excavation spoils will improve water quality and help to 

prevent further flooding and maintenance problems. During an inspection, drainage 

ditches are rated on flow capacity, sedimentation, vegetative growth, and cross section. 

Regularly scheduled maintenance will ensure the flood control project performs in a 

satisfactory manner during high water. 

Figure 2.56 UNACCEPTABLE vegetation and 

sediment in interior drainage channel. (IA) 

Figure 2.55 MINIMALLY ACCEPTABLE 

vegetation (cat tails and bull rushes) in 

interior drainage ditch. (MN) 

Figure 2.54 ACCEPTABLE interior drainage 

channel. (IA) 
28 

Figure 2.58 Concrete drainage tunnel. (AK) 

b. Concrete Culverts/ Pipes 

All culverts must be clear of debris and 

must be structurally sound. Remember 

that inspections of drainage structures 

require compliance with confined space 

entry regulations. Any spalling in concrete 

culverts should be patched with an 

appropriate concrete material as described 

above. Repairs should be made to the 

bottom of the culvert if they show more 

than 1 inch of loss due to wear and 

abrasion. If significant settlement is 

detected in a culvert or pipe, it should be 

excavated, the foundation raised, the pipe 

replaced, the fill material added in four 

inch layers and compacted around the pipe to a density equal to or greater to that of the 

surrounding undisturbed material, and the area reseeded. Do not use a roller or heavy 

machinery to compact fill material when repairing the settlement over a culvert. 

Figure 2.59 The culvert on the left is 

Minimally Acceptable with sediment 

accumulation within the culvert. The culvert 

on the right is totally unacceptable with 2/3 

of its flow capacity reduced by sediment and 

debris. This project was rated as 

UNACCEPTABLE because of the reduced 

flow capacity of the culverts. (MN) 

Figure 2.60 MINIMALLY ACCEPTABLE, 

vegetation blocking the concrete culvert 

must be removed. (KS) 
29 

Figure 2.61 UNACCEPTABLE, Failing 

corrugated metal pipe. DO NOT WALK INTO 

A FAILING CULVERT LIKE THIS. This 

section has actually separated, allowing the 

surrounding soil to enter the pipe and the 

overburden to collapse. This sponsor was 

denied rehabilitation assistance due to this 

maintenance deficiency. 

Figure 2.62 Pieces of the same pipe, once 

removed from the levee. Note that while much of

the pipe may have appeared to be in good 

condition from the inside, the outside was 

extremely corroded. The public sponsor 

attempted to patch the pipe the first year, but 

when it failed again, the entire CMP was 

replaced. 

c. Corrugated Metal Pipes 

One significant maintenance item in many levee systems involves the repair and 

replacement of corrugated metal pipes (CMPs). Many levees all over the country were 

constructed with corrugated metal pipes to transport interior drainage, because CMP 

was one of the cheapest and most reliable materials available at the time. When the 

levees were constructed, the engineers designed them for an established design life 

(usually no more than 50 years), and since CMP was predicted to last for design life of 

the project, it was the material of choice for many drainage culverts. However, with 

many of the levees around the country at or beyond the design life of the CMP, it 

becomes critical that the pipes are inspected frequently and thoroughly, and replaced as 

needed. Remember that even if a CMP looks OK on the inside, the outside of the pipe 

may be very corroded and weak. Interior and exterior rust, reduction in metal 

thickness, joint separation, holes, and settlement, have all lead to the failure of the 

culverts. When a CMP fails during a flood, not only does the culvert cease to function 

as necessary, but material from the levee collapses to fill in the void, leaving a low spot 

in the crown of the levee. This low spot can quickly lead to a breach in the levee and 

the flooding of the protected area. 

In some cases, a decaying CMP may temporarily be maintained by lining the pipe with 

an appropriate plastic liner or by patching it in various ways, but these are only 

temporary solutions and the pipe will eventually need to be replaced as part of the 

ongoing maintenance of the project. Because of this, you need to budget for the 

replacement of the pipes as their design life comes to an end. If it is noted during an 

inspection that a CMP culvert is Minimally Acceptable and the levee becomes 

damaged during a flood as a direct result of the failure of the CMP, then the Corps will 

deny post flood rehabilitation assistance for the repair of this damage. The 

maintenance and replacement of these pipes is considered to be part of the ongoing 

maintenance of the project and is therefore the responsibility of the public sponsor. 
30 

Figure 2.64 ACCEPTABLE flap gates in earthen levee. (KS) 

Figure 2.66 UNACCEPTABLE flap gate in 

earthen levee. (Broken hinge and vegetation 

growth.) (MO) 

Figure 2.63 ACCEPTABLE culvert gate. (LA) 

d. Gated Structures 

All flap gates, slide gates, and other 

gate systems need to be inspected and 

lubricated at least once a year just 

before the flood season. If gates aren’t 

seated properly, water will flow back 

through the drainage structure during 

high water. During the inspection, all 

gates should be manually operated, and 

any debris or obstructions removed. All 

gate seats should be checked and the 

frames readjusted if the gate is not 

seating properly. Cracked or damaged 

gates need to be replaced. The inlet and outlet channels need to be kept free of debris, 

trees, brush and other vegetation, and sediment. All concrete cracks in the inlet/ outlet 

structure need to be repaired. Metal grates, hand wheels, and other metalwork should 

be secure and sound, free from rust, and regularly maintained by cleaning, painting, 

and greasing. If any pipe or culvert has separated from the inlet/ outlet structure 

headwall, this needs to be repaired as soon as possible. When high water is predicted, 

all flap and slide gates should again be inspected and any debris or obstructions should 

be removed immediately. 

Figure 2.65 UNACCEPTABLE vegetation 

around flap gates in earthen levee. (OK) 
31 

Figure 2.67 Hole in roof of pumping station. (IL) 

Figure 2.68 Pump station beside earthen levee. (OK) 

2.21 Pump Stations 

Pump Stations should be inspected at least 

annually by the sponsor, preferably just before 

the flood season, following the manufacturers' 

publications and recommendations on 

maintenance. Preventative maintenance 

includes adjusting, lubricating, repairing, and 

replacing warn out or defective parts. A guide 

for the inspection frequencies and tasks for the 

various items of equipment is usually found in 

the manufacturer’s recommendations, but may 

need to be adjusted depending on the frequency 

of operation of the pumping station. Any change 

to the manufacturer’s recommendations should be coordinated with the manufacturer to avoid 

the possibility of voiding warranties. 

Some pump stations are located in remote areas and operated automatically. These stations 

may be easily overlooked, but need to be inspected, tested, and maintained just like any other 

pump station. 

Megger tests need to be conducted at least every other year to ensure proper insulation of 

electrical components. While the cost of running the pumps typically prohibits the Corps from 

conducting a Megger test during continuing eligibility inspections, you need to conduct this 

test on your own when the pump is in operation. A logbook needs to be maintained at each 

pump station, which should include the date and type of testing conducted, the maintenance 

performed, and the number of hours each pump or piece of machinery was operated. 

Pump stations are exposed to 

potential fires, and should have 

adequate fire protection measures. 

This would include safety 

equipment for diesel generators 

and may include automatic 

sprinklers. 
32 

Figure 2.71 MINIMALLY ACCEPTABLE shoaling 

within a concrete lined channel. (MN) 

Figure 2.70 UNACCEPTABLE channel shoaling below 

a control structure. The original channel bottom 

extended all the way to the riprapped banks. There is 

an estimated 2-3 feet of sediment in the channel, mostly 

from upstream field erosion and highway construction. 

(MN)

Figure 2.69 UNACCEPTABLE vegetation in channel 

and sediment shoaling. (OK) 

2.22 Flood Control Rivers and Channels 

Flood control channels should be inspected on 

a regular and continual basis to ensure that 

erosion is not causing bank instability that 

could result in a bank failure/ sloughing. When 

areas of bank instability or erosion are located, 

measures should be taken to correct the 

problem. If left unattended, the continued bank 

erosion will form sediment shoals within the 

river channel causing a reduction in channel 

capacity. As the shoals grow in size they begin 

to support vegetation and divert the channel 

flow into the river bank, causing additional 

bank erosion and instability. Trees that have 

fallen into the river channel or that may soon fall need to be removed to prevent log jams 

during high water, which can cause significant damage as described in section 2.5 above. 

Sedimentation, silt, vegetation, downed trees, and other debris in the channel must be removed 

to maintain channel capacity. These materials should be disposed of in a manner that does not 

adversely affect the project or the floodway/floodplain. This improves water quality as well as 

helping prevent further flooding and maintenance problems. Before removing any sediment, 

trees, vegetation, or placing rock bank protections, you should contact the Corps’ Regulatory 

Office and your local Department of Natural Resources to determine if any environmental 

permits are required. 
33 

2.23 Concrete Lined Channels 

Concrete lined channels should be kept clear of debris, sediment, and vegetation. The 

concrete, flap gates, and other structures must be inspected annually and maintained as 

described in previous sections of this chapter. Sample maintenance and inspection activities 

may include (but are not limited to) clearing the sediment, vegetation, and debris; replacing 

joint seals as needed, and repairing damage to the concrete. 

2.24 Debris Basins 

Debris basins, sometimes called sediment retention basins, are reservoirs that are placed 

upstream of flood protection or navigation channels in order to collect sand, rocks, logs and 

other debris, and prevent it from obstructing the channel downstream. They help with flooding 

and navigation, and make the project easier to maintain, since it’s easier to clean out the basin 

than to remove debris from the entire length of a channel. 

As the basin fills up with sediment, the flowing water tends to take on the same width as the 

natural channel (rather than spreading over the surface of the basin), and the basin looses its 

ability to hold back as much debris. For this reason, debris basins are designed with the intent 

that they’ll be periodically cleaned out. While some basins may have a 50 or 100-year 

capacity, others are sized for only one or two major storms. 

Figure 2.75 UNACCEPTABLE vegetation and 

extensive sediment in channel. (TX) 

Figure 2.74 ACCEPTABLE concrete lined 

channel. (AK)

Figure 2.72 ACCEPTABLE concrete lined flood 

control channel. (ID) 

Figure 2.73 ACCEPTABLE intake structure 

upstream of the concrete channel. (ID) 
34 

Remove the sediment from the debris basin whenever it approaches one-half of its capacity by 

visual inspection, and whenever the deposits direct the flow against the channel or levee slope 

where they can cause erosion. Remove any large obstructions after every high-water event. 

The debris basin should kept be free from brush and trees, and sod should be maintained over 

the area to protect it from erosion. 

The bottom of the basin slopes can erode during high water. Any eroded areas should be 

repaired as described in previous sections of this manual, and riprap or other erosion 

protection should be placed along the slopes to prevent further damage. 

2.25 Floodways 

A floodway is a designated piece of land that is purposefully left clear of development, for the 

purpose of passing floodwaters. When water rises beyond the capacity of the nearby rivers and 

channels, it then passes over this designated area. (In some areas of the country, the term 

floodway is used to designate the 100-year floodplain.) Floodways must be maintained so that 

when water passes over them, it doesn’t rise beyond the expected levels. Obstructions such as 

earth deposits, debris, trash, undesirable vegetation, or unauthorized structures or 

encroachments reduce the floodway capacity and must be removed and disposed of properly. 

Vegetative growth that contributes to the preservation of natural resources and wildlife should 

be left alone unless the growth lessens the degree of protection or threatens the structural 

integrity of the project. 
35 

Figure 3.1 Flooding along Skagit River. (WA)

Figure 3.2 Sandbag storage in a levee pumping station. 

(OK)

3. FLOOD PREPAREDNESS 

Flood fighting is an art, and can be 

extremely difficult to execute. There is no 

absolute method that one can apply to 

guarantee success. However, failure to 

react in a timely manner and apply proven 

flood fighting techniques greatly increases 

the risk of failure. Although each flood is 

unique, there are many common elements 

from one flood to the next, and plans and 

preparations will improve your response 

time and success. 

Public sponsors of flood control works are 

responsible for project maintenance and 

flood fighting activities during high water 

events. To be ready for these tasks, 

sponsors are responsible for establishing 

flood fight plans, conducting training, 

stockpiling needed materials, and for other 

flood preparations. Disaster preparedness and flood fighting training are necessary for project 

inclusion in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineer’s Rehabilitation and Inspection Program (RIP). 

This chapter outlines some basic preparedness activities that will help insure that your flood 

responses will be timely and effective. 

3.1 Flood Fight Equipment and Supplies 

As the local project sponor, it is your 

responsibility to stockpile and maintain the 

necessary supplies and equipment needed to 

respond to typical high-water events. In a 

flood, the stockpiled materials will allow you 

to quickly provide an initial flood response 

while additional materials and equipment are 

being delivered. The specific requirement for 

supplies varies depending on the size of your 

FCW and on past flood events. The best way 

to determine the quantities that are needed is 

to look at the supplies that were needed 

during previous floods. For example, if you 

typically use 1,500 sandbags in a flood response, then you should maintain a stockpile of 

1,500 sandbags in a secure location within the protected area. 
36 

a. Sandbags 

As stated above, it’s your responsibility to maintain an adequate supply of sandbags to 

allow you to respond to typical high-water events. Burlap sandbags have a limited 

shelf life (usually about 8 years if humidity is controlled) and should be inspected 

annually and replaced when necessary. The stockpile of sandbags should be stored in a 

dry, secure location that does not expose the sandbags to sunlight. Continued sunlight 

and weather will rapidly deteriorate the sandbag material. 

b. Plastic Sheeting 

There are many applications for plastic sheeting during flood fights. If it is one of the 

things that typically gets used in your community during a flood fight and there is any 

doubt about it’s availability during an emergency, it should be stockpiled in 

preparation of an event. 6 mil polyethylene sheeting is the minimum thickness 

recommended for flood fighting applications. 

c. Shovels/ Sandbag Filling Machines 

If you’ve identified places that you know you’re going to need a lot of sandbags, then 

you need to have a reliable method for filling them, and you may want to consider 

investing in some equipment that will let you do it more quickly. Some Corps districts 

own sandbag filling machines and can lend them out during emergencies. If these 

machines are needed, you should contact your State. Since the availability of these 

machines changes, your State may need to coordinate and prioritize these requests 

before passing them to the Corps. See Appendix D for details on sandbagging 

operations and other tools that have been used. 

d. Emergency Lighting 

Unfortunately, flood fight operations don’t stop at night. It is strongly recommended 

that you plan ahead to find some emergency lighting which would be readily available 

for use during flood fights. 

e. Communications System 

A reliable communication system is extremely important for coordinating flood 

fighting efforts and for calling for assistance when needed. Cell phones work very well 

but are limited in their capacity for communicating with multiple people at one time, 

which can be important during emergencies. You may also experience dead spots or 

non-availability of service if the phone traffic is very heavy. Because of these 

problems, two-way radios are preferable because they are extremely reliable for short 

distances and have the capability to broadcast to several people at once. Without a 

reliable communication system, any flood fighting effort will be much more difficult 

and will probably require additional man power. 
37 

Figure 3.3 Portable pumps supplied by the Corps of Engineers during an emergency. 

f. Riprap for Erosion 

It is recommended that you develop plans to address erosion that may occur during a 

flood emergency. It might not always be necessary to stockpile riprap, but you should 

at least know the location and emergency telephone numbers of local quarries capable 

of supplying riprap if it’s needed. Some levee districts choose to keep a supply of 

gravel on hand, so they can maintain the levee access routes during an emergency. 

g. Floatation Vests. 

The safety of workers and volunteers should always be the highest priority during a 

flood fight. Floatation coats or vests (PFD) are recommended and should be worn at all 

times when working near the riverward crest of the levee, on the riverward side slope, 

or near fast moving water. Floodwaters can quickly sweep a person downstream, and 

hypothermia can set in quickly in cold water conditions. 

h. Pumps 

Like sandbags, pumps are also a critical part of any flood fighting effort. Pumps are 

used to control interior drainage and seepage through the levee. Those communities 

that experience frequent flooding should consider purchasing one or more high 

capacity pumps. If additional pumps are needed during a flood fight, you should 

contact your State, because your local Corps district office may have pumps available, 

but your State may need to coordinate and prioritize these requests before passing them 

to the Corps. 

i. Sources of Borrow Material 

Sources of borrow material should be located prior to a flood event. Several borrow 

areas should be identified in advance, because wet or sloppy weather could 

unexpectedly limit access to some sites. Carefully consider the access points to your 

levee when you choose the sites for the borrow material. 
38 

3.2 Plans 

It is a local sponsor’s responsibility to develop and maintain a minimal level of written plans, 

and to keep those plans up to date. The extent of the plans depends on the specific FCW. 

Large systems with multiple pumps and drains would require more detailed plans than smaller 

systems. Documented plans ensure that the information needed to address known problem 

areas will be available during a flood, even if the main supervisor is unavailable. As a 

minimum, every sponsor should maintain at least an organizational chart or roster, and lists or 

maps of important project features. Additional planning is also recommended, and some 

guidance is presented to help you develop these plans. 

As you read through this section, you’ll see that there’s a large amount of planning that can be 

done in advance of a flood. While it would clearly take a substantial amount of time to collect 

and update all of the information described, don’t be discouraged and assume that this 

planning is too big of a chore to ever begin. Instead, try to prioritize the work, remembering 

that every piece of information you assemble and every decision you can make before an 

actual flood will potentially make your response that much more effective during a real 

emergency. 

 

a. Organizational Chart / Roster 

You need to keep an updated list of project supervisors, inspectors, and other 

personnel, including their detailed contact information. The list should clearly indicate 

which people would be contacted during a flood emergency. 

Additionally, it’s strongly recommended that you compile a directory including 

telephone numbers for your Corps district’s Emergency Operation Center, local 

contractors, flood fight supply and equipment vendors, the Red Cross, Salvation Army, 

hospitals, railroad/ highway departments, the police and fire departments, local and 

state Emergency Operations Centers, and other critical numbers. 

b. List of Important Project Features 

As a minimum requirement for planning, you need to develop and maintain either a 

bullet-point list or annotated map that describes each project feature and areas of 

concern during a flood event. The list should clearly note things such as: 

− Low areas 

− Areas subject to boils 

− Areas of known seepage 

− Areas of recent rodent activity 

− Alternate access points to the levee (should one become impassible) 

− Locations of drains that should be checked for closure 

− Available sources and locations of sandbags, pumps and other supplies 
39 

Along with this information, you should develop and maintain a detailed table of all of 

the locations of project features that may need to be closed, such as 

− Floodgates 

− Flap gates 

− Other closures 

In this table, you should indicate the river level or other indicator that would signal that 

each of these project features needs to be closed. Remember that the highway or 

railroad departments need to be contacted prior to closing roads or railroad tracks 

running through levees and floodwalls. 

c. Flood Response Plan 

It is strongly recommended that you supplement the previously mentioned rosters and 

lists of project features with a site specific flood response plan. This plan does not have 

to be long and shouldn’t be wordy, but should outline the things that need to be done 

during a flood fight, and indicate when they need to be done. Ideally, it would also 

delegate responsibilities for the tasks, and this information would be updated as 

necessary to account for changes in personnel. Your plan should identify necessary 

information such as potential assembly or staging areas for flood fights, and the 

location of earth borrow sites, and should address procedures for maintaining records 

of equipment, manpower, and supplies used during a flood fight. The records are key 

items for obtaining assistance for flood and post flood activities. Flood fighting plans 

should acknowledge that it may not be feasible to protect entire communities, based on 

economic or time and equipment considerations; therefore, evacuation of certain areas 

may be a necessary fact of an emergency operation. There should be a plan of 

evacuation for all areas lying in the flood plain, in case the need develops. See the 

following chapter of this manual for additional information on flood response plans. 

d. Short Term Planning Elements 

In addition to your long-term planning, it is your responsibility to have an 

understanding of the FCW and the ability to address any short term situations that may 

arise during the life of the project. For example, if a culvert that runs through a levee is 

being replaced, then you need a plan for what to do in case there’s a flood during the 

construction, when the levee integrity is lacking. 

e. Continued Plan Management 

Your flood response plan should be reviewed annually and after each event where 

flood levels reach half of the levee or wall height, or where an unusual or unexpected 

incident has occurred. 

Annual plan updates should include verification that sources of emergency equipment, 

contact names and telephone numbers are current, review of evacuation routes and 

emergency shelter locations. 
40 

After a flood or flood exercise, closely examine the events and actions taken to 

determine whether they were effective and efficient. Because floods may occur 

decades apart, it’s important that information be recorded for use in future planning 

efforts. Debriefing sessions, with all participants represented, provide valuable 

feedback on the lessons learned. Note which actions worked well, and identify the 

reason for their success. Note which actions could be improved upon, and solicit 

suggestions to correct the problems. Collect data on the response effort, such as 

necessary materials, equipment, man-hour estimates, weather reports, and monitoring 

reports. Compare the planned responses with the actions taken, and incorporate the 

information learned into the plan. 

Updated information should be forwarded to the Corps and to your local and state 

Emergency Operations Center. 

3.3 Training and Exercises. 

As the public sponsor, you are responsible for training personnel to operate, maintain, and 

patrol your FCW. The Corps encourages you to hold training or flood control exercises at least 

once a year. There are many reasons to hold these exercises. First, they show new personnel 

how to do things like operate the closure structures, respond to sandboils and patrol the FCW 

during a flood. Second, none of the plans you’ve developed for a flood response are any good 

unless they’re practiced and communicated to those who need them. Training exercises also 

let you know how much time and manpower is necessary to complete certain tasks. Important 

practical considerations and physical limitations that could be easily overlooked in a plan 

become clearly exposed during an actual exercise. 

At a minimum, these exercises should include: 

− Physical operation of project features such as sluice gates, pumping stations, and 

closure structures 

− Notification of emergency response personnel 

− Testing communications/ backup communications system 

− Mobilization of monitoring teams, and monitoring project features 

− Basic flood fight techniques, such as how to ring a sandboil 

− Coordination and control (between volunteers, patrols, operators, nearby levee 

districts, the highway department, the state Emergency Operations Center, the 

Corps, etc.) 

− Dissemination of information to the public 
41 

The exercises can also be more elaborate, to include other emergencies that may take place 

during a flood such as car accidents or gas spills occurring when interior streets are flooded or 

evacuation routes are flooded. The exercises should be tailored to your community. 

Representatives from agencies or organizations that would actually be called upon, such as 

medical personnel, public works, and the mayor’s office might be involved in planning more 

complex exercises. You are encouraged to involve the local and state Emergency Operations 

Center in these events, and your local Corps district can also provide technical assistance for 

training and exercises as needed. 

Documentation of the exercise is important to identify where any shortfalls exist in planning 

and coordination, training, personnel, equipment, and facilities. Debriefing sessions held with 

all participants can provide valuable feedback on the effectiveness of policies and procedures, 

identification of areas of improvement and suggestions to correct deficiencies. Lessons learned 

during the exercise should be incorporated into the project operations plan and local 

emergency operations plan. 

3.4 Relations with Local and State Partners 

There are usually many ways that your county and state can assist you during a flood. For 

example, states may provide trucks, tractors, radios, helicopters for emergency inspections, 

support from the National Guard, or financial assistance. If you run out of supplies needed for 

a flood fight, you should try to find the needed supplies at the local and state level, before 

requesting this aid from the federal government. The Corps expects counties and states to be 

involved with the levee districts, and provides support only when state resources are being 

fully utilized. For these reasons, you are strongly encouraged to maintain relations with the 

Emergency Managers at your local and state Emergency Operations Center and to contact 

them at least once annually, well in advance of a flood. You should keep them informed on the 

condition of your project, and send them ongoing situation reports during a flood response. It’s 

very important that you know what kinds of support the state can provide, and that you know 

who to call in order to get the support you need. 
42 

This page intentionally left blank. 
43 

4. ACTIONS DURING HIGH WATER EVENTS 

This chapter provides sample framework that you could use as a starting point as you develop 

your community’s flood response plan, as described in Chapter 3. The chapter outlines many 

of the steps that are recommended immediately before, during, and after high water events. 

Not everything that’s included here will be applicable in all situations, and there’s a lot of 

important information you may find necessary to add. Building on the material presented, a 

flood response plan should be developed that would identify and prioritize the given activities, 

identify locations along your FCW which would require attention, go into more specific 

details as to how the tasks should be completed, and specify who within your community 

would be responsible for them. Additional details on some of the steps listed (for example, 

how to raise a levee) are presented in Appendix D. 

The response activities listed below have been broken up into two phases. Phase I activities 

include the preliminary response activities that should be completed before the river rises to its 

bank full stage. By the time the river reaches its bank full stage, everything should be ready, 

and all necessary personnel should be prepared to respond to the flood. Phase II activities 

include the things that should take place once the river has risen to some gage-height beyond 

bank full, which is something should be decided ahead of time. With some rivers, it’s possible 

to specify a river gage level that would indicate when the activities should expand from Phase 

I to Phase II. Other rivers rise more quickly, and the expansion of response activities depends 

more on the developing situation than on a predetermined gage height. In developing your 

flood response plan, consider the characteristics of all adjacent rivers and streams. Flashing 

streams and rivers require rapid response, while moderately rising streams or rivers allow 

greater reaction and warning time. It’s essential that your flood fighting activities are based on 

the available time. 

4.1 Phase I: Preliminary Response Activities 

a. Public Sponsor Duties 

Upon receipt of official information forecasting imminent high water, the levee district 

should immediately alert all project personnel concerned in flood fighting operations, 

mobilizing a skeleton organization capable of quick expansion. If the public sponsor is 

responsible for many miles of a levee system, definite sections of the levee should be 

assigned to individual section leaders/ supervisors. Additionally during Phase I, the 

sponsor should: 

i. Review emergency plans and past lessons learned; identify problem areas. 

ii. Verify that personnel have access to the gate keys, current rosters, a listing of 

project features and closings, plans, and other critical items. 

iii. Coordinate efforts with communities upstream and downstream of you. 

iv. There may be isolated gates or valves on private property, and the owners 

may need to be alerted to take action. 
44 

v. Alert the community to the potential of flooding. This will give them 

advance warning to take action to minimize potential damage to their 

business or home. 

vi. Keep local/state Emergency Operations Center informed of the situation. 

vii. Begin documenting the situation; send situation reports to the local or state 

EOC and to the Army Corps of Engineers as necessary. (It’s not necessary to 

send reports to the Corps every time there’s high water; only during unusual 

situations or when there’s the potential for significant damage or 

overtopping.) 

b. Initial Project Inspection 

As soon as they’ve been notified that high water is expected, section leaders/ superiors 

should immediately make a thorough inspection of their section of the levee, omitting 

nothing from this inspection based on adequate performance during past high water 

events. In addition to the items that are typically inspected during patrols (which are 

listed in part c, below), special attention needs to be given to the following items 

during this initial inspection. (Note that several of these items can and should be 

accomplished annually and not wait for a high water prediction.) 

i. Section Limits: Ensure that the dividing line between sections/section leaders 

are clearly defined and marked, if necessary. 

ii. Condition of any recent repairs to the levee. 

iii. Water conditions and any accumulation of trash, debris, ice, etc. 

iv. Transportation Facilities: roads, rail, and water access. 

v. Material Supply: Identify location, quantity, and conditions of all necessary 

tools and materials (sacks, sandbags, lumber, lights, etc.) and distribute and 

store them at points where maintenance is anticipated. 

vi. Communications: Locate and check all two-way radios and telephones. 

vii. Drainage Structures: Most drainage structures are situated to convey interior 

drainage from low points of the protected area through the levee by gravity 

flow. Because of the location, drainage structures are generally subject to 

inundation at lower stages than most other project features, and special 

attention needs to be given to flap gates and other drainage structures that 

might not be accessible later. (See section d, below, for maintenance during 

high water.) 

c. Patrols 

To minimize damage and to prevent the FCW from failing, any problems must be 

detected early and treated appropriately. The entire FCW should be patrolled at least 

once a day during the Phase 1 response and continually during Phase II. Patrols should 

be conducted by teams, rather than by individuals. Many of the tasks typically 

accomplished during high water inspections and patrols are listed below. Any 

significant or unusual conditions identified should be reported to the Army Corps of 

Engineers. The following section lists some typical responsibilities of patrols. 
45 

i. Patrol Responsibilities: 

General items 

− Record gage readings. (hourly) 

− Inspect fences on the riverside of the levee frequently to make sure they are 

free from debris. If debris does collect along the fence, it must be cleared 

immediately or the fence must be cut to free the debris and decrease the 

possibility of damage to the levee. 

− Verify that all necessary access roads and ramps along the levee are usable 

or will be satisfactorily conditioned. 

− Take photographs of all significant issues. (Use date/time stamp on your 

camera when possible) 

Levees 

− Look for sandboils or unusual wet areas landward of the landside toe. 

− Look for slides or soughs in levee side slopes. 

− Look for wave wash or scouring of the riverside levee slope. 

− Look for low areas in levee crown. 

− Monitor relief wells (flowing/non-flowing). 

− Check flap/sluice gates for proper closure. 

− Check gap closures (stoplog/ sandbag, etc.). 

Floodwalls 

− Look for saturated areas or sandboils landward of the floodwall. 

− Look for settlement (movement) of the floodwall. 

− Look for bank caving which may affect the structural stability of the 

floodwall. 

− Inspect toe drain risers (discharging/non-discharging). 

− Inspect the landside of floodwall for any leakage, especially around the 

monolith joints. 

− Inspect for wet areas, soft areas, seeps, and sink holes landward of the toe 

of the floodwall. 

− Check gap closures (stoplog/ sandbag, etc.). 

Pump Stations 

− Verify proper ventilation (fans on, vents open, etc.) of the pumping plant, to 

prevent overheating of pump motors. 

− Look for sink holes or wet areas around the perimeter of the pumping plant, 

and/or settlement of the pump house, all of which could potentially be the 

result of separation in the conduits. If this condition is suspected, the pumps 

and motors should be shut down until an engineering review can be 

conducted to analyze the condition. 

− Verify that assigned operators are on duty 24 hours daily. 
46 

ii. Equipment for Patrols 

− Portable radio or cell phone 

− Watch 

− Log book 

− Patrolling instructions 

− Plan of action for patrolling 

− Plans of flood control project 

− Operation and Maintenance Manual for the project 

− Weather gear 

− Flashlights 

− Record Log 

− Life Jackets 

− Probing rod 

− Short wooden stakes 

− 40 feet of 1⁄2 inch nylon safety line to connect team members 

− Camera 

iii. Safety/Security Precautions 

The members of the patrol team should walk side by side with one person on the 

water side of the levee near the water surface, one at the top of the levee, and one 

on the land side toe of the levee. The team should move slowly enough to enable 

the member closest to the water to probe below the surface with a rod, to discover 

any erosion that may be taking place. The person closest to the water should be 

wearing a safety line. 

The person walking closest to the water should be especially observant of floating 

objects. The limbs and roots of a floating tree that has been uprooted can extend 

above the water surface and strike anyone walking along the water’s edge. To 

increase the chance of seeing floating objects, it’s best to walk upstream when 

patrolling the water side of the levee. 

When patrolling floodwalls, the patrol should not attempt to walk the top of the 

wall, but should concentrate on potential problem areas on the land side (inside) of 

the wall. Where the wall is more than five feet above the land side ground level, it 

is recommended that observation points be selected every 100 yards or so, and 

ladders used to observe the water side of the floodwall. 

Each person on the patrol should be thoroughly familiar with the community 

evacuation plan and signals. If evacuation is necessary, the patrolling organization 

should move to a predetermined location and keep the team intact. 

If evacuated, when returning to the levees and floodwalls, physical conditions may 

be considerably different from those observed prior to the evacuation, especially if 
47 

the levee was overtopped. If overtopping occurs during the darkness, it’s 

recommended that the patrols not be resumed until daylight, though there may be 

cases where this recommendation can’t be followed. 

Patrols should also keep an eye out for anyone that seems out of place, or who is 

doing something that looks doubtful. There are unfortunately some people, 

terrorists or otherwise, that would try to take advantage the already dangerous 

situations on levees or floodwalls for their own purposes. Any suspicious activities 

observed by the patrol should be reported immediately to the local law enforcement 

agency. 

iv. Interaction with the public 

The patrol team may see observers on the levees or at floodwalls. If there are many 

observers, it is recommended that an additional person be assigned to each patrol 

team. This additional person will act as a safety officer, explaining the dangers that 

are present. The patrol team is not responsible to order observers off the levees and 

floodwalls. 

It is recommended that each team carry and pass out instruction cards describing 

the community evacuation plan. It is important to pass out information, so the 

observers are aware of the danger. 

d. Phase 1 General Maintenance Activities 

Once the initial inspection has been completed, each section leader should organize his 

labor force to take care of any pressing maintenance issues, before the river rises 

further. Emergency maintenance activities are no substitute for normal annual 

maintenance, and many of the activities listed here should not wait until high water. 

i. Because of their location, drainage structures are generally subject to 

inundation at lower stages than most other features of the flood control 

project, and any maintenance problems need to be identified and corrected as 

quickly as possible before the water rises. Manually check all flap gates that 

are critical or in questionable repair, and maintain as needed. Sluice gates 

should be inspected before the outlet end of the structure becomes 

submerged, and any trash, debris, or other potential obstruction present 

should be removed. If, for any reason, the gate system on a drainage 

structure fails to operate and cannot be repaired because of high water, 

immediate consideration should be given to blocking the structure opening 

by other means. If stream stages permit, the outlet end of the structure should 

be blocked using timber, metal plates, tarps, sandbags, or by other means. If 

the efforts to plug the outlet structure fail, immediate action should be taken 

to build a sandbag or earth ring around the inlet structure. While the primary 

concern in blocking the structures is to prevent high stages of the river from 
48 

flowing into the protected area, emergency closures should be such that they 

can be readily removed after the river recedes. 

ii. Immediate attention should be given to the grade line of each levee section 

or profile by comparison of existing grades with those shown in “As Built” 

record drawings. Fill any holes, gullies, and washes in the levee crown, 

embankments, and landside berms with compacted fill material if possible, 

or otherwise fill them with sandbags. (See Appendix D for details) 

iii. Examine all drainage ditches on the landside of the levee and remove any 

obstructions. Be prepared to construct seepage drainage ditches, but not until 

actual seepage appears. Excavation of ditches near the levee or in the long 

berm area is hazardous and should not be undertaken except under direct 

supervision of the section leader and with the advice of the Corps of 

Engineer advisor assigned to that unit. 

iv. Repair all levee settlement or depressions which have been worn down 

below levee grade. Materials to be used in filling holes and depressions 

should be obtained from distant sources (not adjacent to a levee system) 

unless it has been determined that borrowing in areas adjacent to the levee 

will not adversely affect its stability or the control of underseepage. Avoid 

taking material for these repairs from the area adjacent to the levee, 

particularly in the area of the seepage berm, except under direct supervision 

of the section leader and with the advice of the Corps of Engineer advisor. 

The fill material should be compacted and protected from wave wash and 

other erosion as necessary. 

e. Other Phase 1 Activities 

Once the initial inspection has been completed, each section leader should organize his 

labor force to perform the maintenance work as described in Appendix D of this 

manual. Additional activities to complete during Phase I are listed below: 

i. Review assignments for patrols, closings, etc. 

ii. Obtain lists of all construction equipment, motorboats, cars, earthmoving 

equipment and trucks that can be made available. 

iii. Assess needed support (Vehicles, radios, etc). 

iv. Verify serviceability of flood fighting equipment. 

v. Record gage readings and monitor river stages. 

vi. Close the levee to the public and remove cattle as necessary. 

vii. Install levee or floodwall closures as necessary. (Remember to coordinate all 

road closings with the Department of Transportation or railroad authorities 

before limiting road or rail access through the levee!) 

viii. Remove all dynamite and explosives from the vicinity of the levee. 
49 

4.2 Phase II: Full Response Activities 

a. Continuing Activities 

i. Patrol continuously, 24/7 (as the situation requires). 

ii. Be sure all of the closures and gates are in place, and all maintenance is 

complete as described in Phase I, above. 

iii. Completely remove padlocks from access gates to facilitate patrols. 

iv. Monitor inventory of flood fighting equipment, materials and supplies as 

they are used. 

v. Keep the public informed of the current situation through the media, if 

warranted. 

vi. Repair any erosion and seepage problems identified by patrols as quickly as 

possible, as described in Appendix D of this manual. 

vii. During flood periods, competent operators should be on duty whenever it 

appears that operation is imminent, even when station operation has been 

automated. Operators should thoroughly understand the manner in which the 

pumping station was designed to operate and be capable of manual operation 

should automated equipment or sensors fail. 

viii. Portable pumps may be used to pump water over the levee, if water is 

ponding in undesirable areas or is rising too quickly in ponding areas. 

Ponding areas should be continually patrolled during high water. 

ix. Monitor debris basins and trashracks for sediment and accumulated debris. 

As debris and sediment continue to be deposited in the basin, debris loads 

will substantially block racks, and sediment deposits will block the entrance 

to the basin, forcing the flow against the sides. Any large accumulation of 

debris on racks or flow directed on the sides of basins will cause local 

erosion and scour. Levees and concrete structures that are part of the debris 

basin facility will need to be closely monitored to ensure performance. 

Debris should be removed from trashracks at pumping stations periodically 

when the station is in operation. 

b. Volunteer Assistance 

If it becomes necessary to recruit volunteers during the flood fight, there are a number 

of steps that can be taken to organize their support. 

i. Identify primary and alternate assembly areas, with adequate parking. 

ii. Arrange transportation, subsistence, and shelter for the labor force as 

appropriate. 

iii. Contact media to request that volunteers report to the designated assembly 

area, bringing flashlight, work gloves, rain gear, shovel, and a snack. 

iv. Maintain sign-in roster at assembly area, to account for volunteers and 

personnel (name, home phone number, address, work group assignment). 
50 

v. Identify staging areas, away from the work site but as close to the flood fight 

locations as possible and with good access to clear roads. Separate areas in 

the staging site should be established for: 

− sandbag filling 

− carrying and loading 

− materials stockpiles 

− rest and breaks 

− first aid 

vi. Establish an emergency operations center to oversee the flood fight 

operations, and for interagency coordination. This operations center is to be 

manned 24 hours daily until the emergency is over. Consider equipping the 

EOC with: 

− Radios and telephones for communication 

− Television and/or radio to monitor weather and river forecasts 

− Emergency generator in case of power outages 

− Flashlights 

− Administrative supplies 

− Levee operations and maintenance manuals 

− All emergency action plans 

− Past flood reports/ after action reports 

− State, county, and local maps; utility, flood plain, and levee maps 

− Telephone books, phone rosters, and a directory listing numbers for the 

Army Corps of Engineers’ Emergency Operation Center, railroad/ highway 

departments (needed when closing access), local contractors, the Red Cross, 

Salvation Army, hospitals, the police and fire departments, local and state 

Emergency Operations Centers, and other critical numbers 

vii. Establish traffic patterns that will be used to move the sandbags from the 

staging area to the work site. If conditions permit, one-way traffic patterns 

should be established on the levee system if trucks are going to be used to 

transport the filled sandbags to the laying party. 

viii. Be certain that the people laying sandbags are well supervised by a trained 

individual that knows how to properly lay the sandbags. 

4.3 Evacuation Plans 

You should be ready with a plan to evacuate the area. Consider the following points: 

a. Immediately coordinate evacuation with police, fire department, and responders. 

b. Remove sign-in roster and contact information from EOC, if possible. 

c. Follow the predetermined plan for evacuation. 

d. Meet in predetermined locations & immediately verify the safety of all personnel. 
51 

4.4 After the Event 

Once the water has subsided and it isn’t predicted to rise again, the area should be returned to 

the pre-flood condition. 

 

a. Reopen any sluice gates that were closed, once the water on the river side has 

receded to 3 inches below the pond level on the protected side. 

b. Open all closure structures and properly store all components. 

c. All temporary protection measures (e.g. sandbags and material placed during 

temporary levee raises) must be removed and disposed of properly. 

d. Take an inventory of all remaining flood fight equipment, sandbags, plastic, and 

other supplies. Repair or replace damaged equipment, and restock supplies such 

as sandbags or plastic in preparation for the next flood event. 

e. Salvage any materials and supplies (e.g. wood from flashboards). 

f. Return all borrowed equipment. 

g. Identify whether remaining materials can be reused within the community. 

h. Inspect the entire flood control work, noting locations of damage and the extent of 

damage at each location. 

i. Coordinate potential rehabilitation with the Army Corps of Engineers. 

j. Soon after the event, meet with key personnel, volunteer representatives, and 

community partners to debrief, share remaining concerns, and discuss lessons that 

were learned during the event. 

k. Revise local emergency plans to account for lessons learned and changes to 

recommended procedures. 

l. Document the event: keep a map record of the FCW, indicating areas that were in 

stress at the time of the flooding. This is useful for making repairs or 

improvements, and for use as a guide to focus attention on these areas during the 

next flood event. 

m. For future planning, locate and keep records of the flood’s high water marks; keep 

these records along with any rainfall and river data you may have gathered. 

n. Make repairs to the FCW as soon as possible, in preparation for the next flood 

event. 

o. Initiate actions to provide a permanent means of flood protection, if the existing 

system relies heavily on temporary solutions during emergencies. 
52 

This page intentionally left blank. 
53 

5. ADDITIONAL SPONSOR RESPONSIBILITIES 

As the public sponsor, you’re responsible for ongoing maintenance as discussed in chapter 2, 

for preparedness activities as discussed in chapter 3, and for flood response activities during 

high water as outlined in chapter 4. There are several additional requirements that you should 

be aware of. 

5.1 Annual Pre-Flood-Season Inspections 

You should have a pre-flood-season inspection program in place for your flood control 

projects, using information from this manual along with your own experience and resources. 

The specific maintenance items to look for and some of the corrective actions that should be 

taken are discussed in detail in chapter 2 of this manual, and the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers’ Inspection Guide (Appendix C) can be used as a guide for these inspections. If 

you’d like more specific advice or information regarding FCW operations, maintenance, or 

inspections, please contact your Corps district office. When you make these pre-flood-season 

inspections, you should document the condition of your project in an annual inspection report. 

Items that would be appropriate to document in this report include: 

− The name/ location of the FCW 

− The date of the inspection 

− The name of the inspector 

− What project features were inspected 

− The overall condition of the project features 

− Maintenance that has been completed 

− Maintenance that is being preformed currently 

− Maintenance items that need to be accomplished in the future 

− Photographs showing flood damages, noted deficiencies, and overall project 

condition. 

− Maintenance costs incurred for the flood control project that year, etc. 

5.2 Public Awareness Activities 

Many sponsors of flood control projects have trouble finding the funding and support they 

need to make necessary repairs and improvements. The best examples of well supported levee 

districts are those that have ensured that local businesses and citizens understand the flood 

hazard and the importance of the flood control system. While public awareness activities are 

not required for participation in the RIP, the key to ensuring support from your community lies 

in promoting a public awareness of the situation. You may be able to promote a greater 

awareness of key issues through publications and planned public meetings, as described 

below. 
54 

a. Provide Public Materials 

Flood protection is interesting! Many people will take the time to read through 

brochures or leaflets detailing local flood protection if this material is provided to 

them. You might also release annual newsletters or articles for newspapers on the 

subject. Information should be presented on the following topics: 

i. The areas protected 

ii. The key elements/ equipment in the local flood control system 

iii. How the system works 

iv. The regular impact on the community and ongoing costs for regular 

operation and maintenance 

v. The consequences if it fails 

vi. Local flood evacuation plans 

vii. Historical overview of past floods and experiences 

viii. Flood response plans and procedures- how the community can contribute 

b. Schedule Public Meetings 

Unless there’s an actual flood, attendance at public meetings on flood control may be 

discouraging, especially if the public is poorly informed on flood control to begin with. 

You may find it useful to combine such meetings with discussions on local industry or 

other issues, or to raise certain issues during community events. Always try to involve 

industry and local groups in your decision making process, so they will support what 

you’re doing. 

5.3 Awareness of Adjacent Systems 

A flood control system is made up of many components, and won’t protect you unless they all 

work together properly. You need to understand how adjacent sections of levee or components 

on private property impact the larger system. Even though these components might not be 

situated within your area of responsibility, your community could still be flooded if adjacent 

systems don’t operate properly. 

5.4 Permits 

Whenever you plan to modify the FCW, be sure to get the appropriate local, state, tribal, or 

federal permits (or waivers for these permits). The process of getting some of these permits 

may be cumbersome, expensive, and frustrating, and may be more difficult in some states than 

in others. However, you must be prepared to get these permits in order to comply with the law. 

If you make changes to your flood control project without first obtaining the necessary 

permits, you may be denied rehabilitation assistance after a flood, regardless of whether a 

Corps inspector noticed the changes and asked to view the permits during a Continuing 

Eligibility Inspection. Please understand that this requirement wasn’t invented so that the 

Corps can deny post flood assistance. Modifications to your FCW don’t only affect your own 

community but can also affect communities upstream and downstream of you as well, or can 

have a negative impact environmentally; so it’s important that any proposed modifications are 

reviewed and approved by the appropriate parties before you begin construction. 
55 

5.5 Records 

As the public sponsor, you are responsible for keeping accurate records of all repairs done to 

the flood control project, including photographs, plans and specifications, as-built drawings, 

and surveys. Make records of all modifications such as the installation of natural gas pipes, 

fiber optic cables, and any sewage outfall lines added by commercial companies or municipal 

agencies. It’s important to coordinate these types of changes with the Corps and to provide 

them with copies of the documents for their files. 

To assist you in the proper maintenance of the project, it’s also recommended that you keep 

organized, accurate records of all equipment, maintenance, and inspections. An equipment 

database file should be maintained that indexes equipment by name or title and contains all 

pertinent data for that equipment, such as manufacturer’s instruction books, operating pressure 

limits, parts catalogues, manufacturer’s drawings, reference field tests, special reports on 

major requirements, and most importantly, changes in operating procedures. A preventative 

maintenance database file for things like pump stations should contain equipment inspection, 

maintenance data, hours of operation, number of operations, and other significant operating 

data. 
56 

This page intentionally left blank. 
57 

Figure 6.1, Levee breach in Lynden, WA

Figure 6.2 and 6.3, Levee breaches along the Wabash River

6. REHABILITATION AND INSPECTION PROGRAM (RIP) 

6.1 Overview of the Rehabilitation and Inspection Program 

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has authority 

under Public Law (PL) 84-99 to supplement 

local efforts to repair flood control projects after 

they get damaged during a flood. There are 

many things that must be carefully balanced in 

carrying out this authority, such as the needs of 

the local community, sensitivity to the 

environment, the need to apply sound 

engineering judgment for the proper functioning 

of the FCW, and the need to provide proper 

stewardship of the taxpayers' dollars with which 

the Corps is entrusted. In light of all these 

competing interests, the Corps has developed a 

program called the Rehabilitation and Inspection 

Program (RIP), which specifically defines the types of projects that can be eligible for 

assistance, and specifies the ongoing for operation and maintenance requirements for the 

FCWs that qualify. 

The principal reason the RIP exists is to ensure that flood control works continue to provide 

reliable protection, so that people’s lives, communities, and improved property are protected 

from floods. The principal benefit of the RIP for you, the public sponsor, is that through this 

program you can receive federal assistance to help repair your FCW if it becomes damaged in 

a flood. 
58 

6.2 Projects that Qualify 

The Rehabilitation and Inspection Program covers certain levees, channels, floodwalls, flood 

control dams, retention basins, pump stations, and even some extremely large underground 

tunnels that have been built for flood control. However, there are certain exclusions to the 

types of projects that may enter the program. Projects that don’t meet the basic criteria below 

are categorically excluded from the Rehabilitation and Inspection Program. For more 

information regarding the types of projects that are eligible for the RIP, refer to ER / EP 500-

1-1, which can be found through the web-link provided in Chapter 1 of this manual. 

a. Protecting People and Property 

The principal function of the project must be to protect people or property from floods. 

If the project was built or is primarily used for any other purpose, such as channel 

alignment, recreation, fish and wildlife, land reclamation, drainage, or to protect 

against land erosion or tidal inflows, then it’s categorically excluded from admittance 

in the RIP. 

 

b. Public Sponsor 

The project must have a non-federal public sponsor. The public sponsor is the public 

representative for the project, and represents the interests of any private landowners 

involved. For example, a levee may be constructed by a county, which would be the 

public sponsor, on private land for which the county has an easement from the property 

owners. A public sponsor is a legally constituted public body with full authority and 

capability to perform the terms of its agreement as the non-federal partner of the Corps 

for a project, able to pay damages, if necessary, in the event of its failure to perform. 

The public sponsor may be a state, county, city, town, Federally recognized Indian 

tribe or tribal organization, Alaska Native Corporation, or any political subpart of a 

state or group of states that has the legal and financial authority and capability to 

provide the necessary cash contributions, and the lands, easements, rights-of-way, 

relocations, and borrow and dredged or excavated materials disposal areas (LERRD's) 

necessary for the project. Finally, the public sponsor must be legally able to “hold and 

save” the federal government free from damages that could arise during post-flood 

rehabilitations or other work the federal government would undertake on the FCW. If it 

ever becomes necessary to rehabilitate the project, the sponsor will need to sign an 

agreement limiting the federal government’s liability before the Corps will begin any 

work on the project. 

c. Reliability 

The project must provide reliable flood protection, and it must be technically sound. 

To provide complete flood protection, the floodwall or levee must either make a 

complete a ring around the community, or tie into high ground on both the upstream 

and downstream ends of the project. From an engineering perspective, it has to be 

geotechnically stable and properly designed, and it must be well maintained. 
59 

d. Project Completion Required 

The project must be completed. If it’s still under construction, it can’t enter the RIP. 

e. Minimum Level of Protection 

To be eligible to enter the RIP, agricultural levees (those protecting predominantly 

agricultural areas or agribusinesses) must be built to provide at least a 5-year level of 

protection. Urban levees (those protecting land with residences, public or commercial 

buildings, industrial facilities, etc.) must provide at least a 10-year level of protection. 

Drainage channels that were designed and constructed for flood control are required to 

have capacity for a 10 year flood event and must additionally provide drainage to an 

area 1.5 square miles or greater and have a drainage capacity greater than 800 cfs. 

To clarify some of this terminology, a 5-year flood event means that there’s a twenty 

percent chance of this level of flooding every year, not that the flooding actually 

happens every five years. This means that if an agricultural levee, for example, has a 

statistical probability of being overtopped more than once every five years, it is 

categorically ineligible to be in the RIP. 

Drainage structures that were specifically constructed for flood control as components 

of a larger FCW system (such as ponding areas or channels carrying water from the 

ponding area up to and through a levee) are considered to be components of the overall 

FCW system. They would be evaluated for inclusion in the RIP and potential 

rehabilitation with the remainder of the FCW. However, natural or modified streams 

within a levee’d area, including drainage swales such as roadside ditches, are not 

considered to be components of flood control works and would not be included in the 

RIP. 

f. Primary Levee Requirement 

In the case of a levee project, the levee must be a primary levee. Secondary levees are 

not eligible to enter the rehabilitation program. Exceptions to this policy may be 

granted if the secondary levee was designed to protect human life or the levee is a 

major component of the primary levee system and is necessary to assure the flood 

control protection of the total system. 

g. Construction Compliance 

The project must have been constructed in accordance with all applicable federal, state 

and local permits, codes, ordinances, and applicable laws. This includes flood plain 

management ordinances in counties where no flood insurance programs exist. 
60 

This page intentionally left blank. 
61 

Figure 7.1, Inspection of pumping station 

controls. (OK)

7. CORPS INSPECTIONS 

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has established minimum standards for the construction, 

operation, maintenance, and preparedness of flood control works that must be met in order for 

the FCW to be eligible for federal rehabilitation 

assistance after a flood. This chapter describes the 

inspections that the Corps conducts in order to 

monitor the condition of levees, floodwalls, 

channels, and other FCWs. The information 

described in this chapter is supplemented in a 

flowchart in Appendix B, which summarizes the 

relationships between the Corps’ inspections and 

the status of a project’s eligibility for rehabilitation 

assistance. Additional information on the Corps’ 

inspections can be found in Appendix C, which is 

the Inspection Guide used during all Corps 

inspections of non-federal FCWs. 

One important note on Corps inspections and project ratings is that individual sponsors are not 

treated completely independently, but the Corps inspects and rates the entire “hydrologically 

independent” flood control project as one system. This means that if there are multiple public 

sponsors with responsibility over sections of a single flood control system, then they’ll all pass 

or fail their inspections together. This only makes sense, because the entire area will flood if 

one section fails during high water. It’s the responsibility of the multiple public sponsors, not 

of the Corps, to coordinate all necessary responsibilities and obligations under the RIP. 

7.1 Entering the RIP – The Initial Eligibility Inspection (IEI) 

To enter the RIP, you should contact 

your local Corps Emergency 

Management Office. Upon receiving a 

request to join the RIP, the Corps will 

conduct an Initial Eligibility Inspection 

(IEI) of your non-federal flood control 

project, which will include an 

evaluation of the technical capabilities 

of your project, as well as a review of 

project operation, maintenance, and 

preparedness. The purpose of the IEI is 

to determine whether the project meets 

the specific minimum criteria and 

standards set forth by the Corps for 

providing reliable flood protection. During the IEI, the Corps will evaluate things such as the 

standards of construction, physical location of the FCW, the cross-section of levees, and the 

elevation of levees and floodwalls in relation to the anticipated flood levels. The Corps 

normally conducts IEIs when FCWs are undamaged during low water or normal water-level 

Active: A status applied to flood control 

projects concerning their participation 

in the Rehabilitation and Inspection 

Program under authority of PL 84-99. 

An Active project has met the Corps’ 

criteria for entry into the program, and 

continues to meet ongoing criteria for 

continuing eligibility. Only Active 

projects may receive PL 84-99 

rehabilitation assistance to repair 

damage caused by a flood event or 

coastal storm.
62 

conditions. This allows for more of the FCW to be inspected, so the condition of the project 

can be determined more accurately. 

After the IEI is conducted, you’ll receive a letter with the inspection results. If your project is 

rated “Acceptable,” it is immediately placed in an Active status in the RIP. If it’s rated 

Minimally Acceptable, it’s placed in an Active status in the RIP and the letter will indicate the 

deficiencies that would need to be corrected in order for your project to meet the Corps’ 

standards for entering the program, as well as a time frame for making these repairs. If the 

project is rated Unacceptable, the sponsor will be notified of the inspection results and the 

project will be placed in an Inactive status in the RIP (or may not be entered into the program 

at all). In this case, the deficiencies may have come from poor maintenance, or from more 

fundamental aspects of the FCW such as inadequate elevation or cross section in relation to 

the anticipated flood levels. Further inspections of a project receiving an IEI rating of 

Unacceptable will not be made until the Corps has been notified in writing that such corrective 

action work has been completed. If you don’t agree with the results of the Corps’ evaluation, 

you may choose at your own expense to provide a detailed engineering study (certified by a 

licensed professional engineer) of the FCW and request that the Corps reconsider its 

evaluation. 

7.2 Maintaining Active Status – Continuing Eligibility Inspections (CEIs) 

To maintain an Active status in the RIP, you’re required to provide ongoing maintenance of 

the project. The Corps monitors this ongoing maintenance through Continuing Eligibility 

Inspections (CEIs), which are conducted at least every other year, though many Corps districts 

have elected to hold them on a more frequent basis in order to ensure compliance with the 

requirements of the RIP. CEIs typically don’t go into the same level of detail that IEIs do, 

since project features such as elevation or cross section don’t need to be reevaluated during 

continuing inspections. However, the majority of project components are inspected using the 

same criteria that were used during the Initial Eligibility Inspection. 

If, during the CEI, the FCW is found to meet the Corps’ standards for the RIP program, it will 

remain Active in the RIP. If it’s found to be “Minimally Acceptable,” based on deficiencies in 

some area of operation or maintenance, you’ll be required to correct the noted deficiencies, 

and will be given a timeframe to make those repairs. If the repairs are completed to the Corps’ 

specifications, the FCW will remain Active in the program. If the repairs are not completed 

within a timeframe, the FCW will be put into an Inactive status in the RIP. If the FCW is 

given an “Unacceptable” rating, then the FCW will immediately be put into an Inactive status 

in the RIP. You will regain your Active status as soon as you send the Corps documentation 

showing that the repairs are complete. 
63 

7.3 Inspection Methodology 

Using the Inspection Guide found in Appendix C, each of the individual items or components 

of the project are rated according to the following table: 

INDIVIDUAL ITEM / COMPONENT RATING 

SYMBOL CONDITION DEFINITION 

A Acceptable The rated item is in satisfactory, acceptable condition, and will function 

as designed and intended during the next flood event. 

M Minimally 

Acceptable 

The rated item has a minor deficiency that needs to be corrected. The 

minor deficiency will not seriously impair the functioning of the item 

during the next flood event. The overall reliability of the project will be 

lowered because of the minor deficiency. 

U Unacceptable 

The rated item is unsatisfactory. The deficiency is so serious that the item 

will not adequately function in the next flood event, compromising the 

project's ability to provide reliable flood protection. 

Once each project feature is rated, the inspector will look through the list of rated items to 

identify the lowest rating that was given for a project feature. The overall project is rated 

based on the lowest-rated project feature, and the overall project status is confirmed as either 

Active or Inactive in the RIP depending on the overall project rating. 

DETERMINATION OF OVERALL PROJECT RATING AND PROJECT STATUS 

If the lowest rated 

project component is: 

Then this results in an overall 

project rating of: And the project status in the RIP is: 

Acceptable Acceptable Active 

Minimally Acceptable Minimally Acceptable Active, though status is contingent 

upon completion of required work. 

Unacceptable Unacceptable Inactive 

Finally, the overall project ratings are defined as follows: 

OVERALL PROJECT RATING 

SYMBOL CONDITION DEFINITION 

A Acceptable 

No immediate work required, other than routine maintenance. The flood 

control project will function as designed and intended, with a high degree 

of reliability, and necessary cyclic maintenance is being adequately 

performed. 

M Minimally 

Acceptable 

One or more deficient conditions exist in the flood control project that 

needs to be improved / corrected. However, the project will essentially 

function as designed and intended, but with a lesser degree of reliability 

than what the project should provide. Specific items of the project must 

be improved / corrected. 

U Unacceptable 

One or more deficient conditions that can reasonably be foreseen to 

prevent the project from functioning as designed, intended, or required. 
64 

This page intentionally left blank. 
65 

8. REHABILITATION ASSISTANCE 

The purpose of this chapter is to provide information on the rehabilitation assistance that the 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers can provide if an FCW is damaged during a flood. It describes 

the criteria that must be met before this assistance can be given, as well as the process for 

requesting it and the types of activities to which this assistance can be applied. Although the 

rehabilitation assistance described in this chapter can only be given to those FCWs with 

Active status in the RIP, Chapter 9 lists additional types of emergency assistance the Corps 

can provide regardless of your participation or status in the RIP. 

 

8.1 Requesting Rehabilitation Assistance 

In the event of a significant flood, the Army Corps of Engineers District Commander will 

declare the flood an emergency. Immediately after the declared flood subsides (when the river 

goes back down to its bank full condition and is not predicted to rise again), the Corps district 

will issue a “Notice to Public Sponsors,” which lets you, as the public sponsor, know that the 

Corps is accepting requests for rehabilitation. If your project was damaged during the flood, 

you’ll typically be given 30 days to respond to this notification and submit a formal, written 

request for rehabilitation assistance. A sample request form can be found in Appendix E. 

8.2 Requirements for Receiving Rehabilitation Assistance 

Upon receipt of your request, the Corps will first determine whether the repairs would be 

eligible for rehabilitation assistance. There are a number of requirements that must be met 

before the Corps will provide this assistance: 

a. The FCW must have an Active status in the RIP. 

b. The FCW must have been damaged by a flood or coastal storm 

Damages by non-flood events, regardless of whether they are natural or man-made, are 

generally not eligible for Corps assistance under the RIP. 

c. Cost / Benefit Calculation 

To determine whether the cost of the repair is economically justified, the Corps will 

calculate the benefits and the costs of the repair using standard principles and 

guidelines for water resource projects. The calculated benefits will be based on the 

benefits to the entire area protected by the complete (hydrologically independent) flood 

control system, and the calculated repair costs will reflect the flood damages along the 

complete flood control system. To qualify for rehabilitation assistance, the benefits of 

the repair must outweigh the cost. 

d. Construction Cost Minimum Requirement 

The construction cost of the repair must be more than $15,000. There are several 

reasons for this policy. First, damages under $15,000 are considered to be routine 

maintenance that the public sponsor must undertake at its own expense. Second, before 

the Corps can undertake any project, specialists from many different disciplines must 

review the project. These specialists ensure that real estate and rights-of-way are 
66 

available, review environmental and endangered species considerations, and verify that 

the Corps is legally and financially correct in undertaking the repair. This work must 

be done regardless of how big or small the job is. Because of the considerable cost of 

undertaking this background work, small repair jobs simply don’t justify all of the 

work needed for Corps involvement. 

8.3 Cooperation Agreements 

If these qualifications are met, then a cooperation agreement will be prepared. The cooperation 

agreement is a contract between you, as the public sponsor, and the Corps. It clarifies the 

details of the rehabilitation, including the specific work to be done, and sponsor requirements 

of cost sharing and local cooperation. The Corps will prepare this document following the 

format in Appendix F. The sponsor and the District Engineer must sign the cooperation 

agreement before the rehabilitation can begin, and there could be additional costs involved if it 

takes more than 30 days for you to sign the document once it’s complete. 

The cooperation agreement outlines the cost breakdown for the work. The following sections 

outline the types of items that will typically be paid for by the US government, the items that 

are typically cost shared, and the items that you would usually be responsible for at 100 % 

local cost. Keep in mind that this isn’t a complete list, and that certain details have been 

omitted for brevity. Specific details concerning the cooperation agreement can be found in 

paragraph 5-10 of ER 500-1-1 and in paragraph 5-13 of EP 500-1-1. 

a. Rehabilitation components typically covered at 100% Federal cost 

The Corps will fund, at 100% federal cost, costs associated with the preparation and 

approval of Preliminary Investigation Reports, as well as the engineering and design 

costs for approved projects. 

b. Items typically cost shared at 80% Federal and 20% Local cost 

Cost sharable items include construction costs, contingency costs for construction, and 

supervision and administration (S&A) costs. 

There are several details you should know about your 20% local cost share 

contribution. Most importantly, it may be a combination of cash or work in kind. The 

value of work in kind is determined by the Corps as the estimated cost that the Corps 

would have to pay if it was to perform or contract for the same work. (Be aware that 

the Corps won’t reimburse you for work in kind that you contribute beyond your 20% 

requirements.) Also, cash contributions could potentially include funds from other 

federal agencies, as long as the other agency confirms in writing that their money can 

legally be spent on the rehabilitation. 
67 

c. Items you are responsible for at 100% local cost 

These items do not constitute credit towards your 20% local cost share, but are 

additional costs for which you will be responsible. 

i. LERRDs 

All suitable Lands, Easements and Rights-of-way, including borrow and dredge 

material disposal areas, and relocations (e.g., roadways, utilities, etc.) that are 

necessary to perform the required repairs and to secure the necessary permits. 

ii. Betterments 

Any construction effort that increases the protected area, provides features that did 

not exist prior to the flood event, or increases the degree or level of protection 

provided by the FCW are considered betterments, and are not eligible for funding 

under the RIP. Examples of betterments might include increasing the height of a 

levee, or the placement of riprap where none previously existed. Repairs that 

incorporate modern materials or technologies commonly incorporated into current 

designs (for example, the use of geotextile fabric) are not considered betterments 

and may be cost shared as part of the rehabilitation work. 

iii. Deliberate Levee Cuts 

Rehabilitation assistance will generally not be provided for the repair of levees that 

were deliberately breached by the public sponsor. For example, as river levels 

begin to recede after a flood, a public sponsor may wish to intentionally breach the 

levee in order to let out ponded water. The repairs for this deliberate levee cut 

would not be eligible for rehabilitation assistance. 

However, there may be cases when the Corps acknowledges a valid need for a 

deliberate levee cut in order to protect the integrity of the levee (or adjacent levee 

system) and minimize overall damages from a flood. If you consult with the Corps 

before making a deliberate levee cut and the Corps specifically approves the cut, 

then an exception would be made to the above policy and rehabilitation assistance 

could be provided to repair the breach. 

iv. Repairs that wouldn’t be the least cost alternative to the Federal 

Government 

If you prefer an alternative method of repair that is not the least cost alternative, 

you are responsible for paying 100% of the cost difference between the two 

alternatives. For example, the transportation of borrow material from the closest 

acceptable borrow source (as determined by the Corps) is a cost sharable item 

(80/20). However, if you wanted to use borrow material from a further source, then 

you’re responsible for paying for 100% of the transportation costs beyond what 

would have been incurred, had you opted for the closer source. 
68 

v. Maintenance Deficiencies 

If maintenance deficiencies are noted during a routine inspection, and your project 

is rated “Minimally Acceptable,” you will be given a period of time to make the 

repairs. If the maintenance is still outstanding when there is a flood, you are still 

responsible for 100% of the cost of this deferred maintenance. The maintenance 

repairs must be completed either prior to or concurrently with any approved project 

rehabilitation. It may be possible to have the Corps make the repairs along with the 

project rehabilitation, but the cost associated with the deferred maintenance is still 

your responsibility, and will be added to your 20% cost-share for the rehabilitation. 

To clarify this issue, here are two examples of deferred maintenance that would be 

the responsibility of the public sponsor: 

Deferred Maintenance Example 1: Flap Gate Requires Maintenance 

During a CEI, it was found that a flap gate for a culvert was not closing 

properly and required maintenance. After the CEI and before the public sponsor 

fixed the problem, there was a flood. Because the flap gate didn’t close 

properly, the levee around the culvert was eroded, necessitating earthwork and 

a new culvert. The public sponsor will be responsible for 100% of the cost of 

repairing the flap gate. Depending on the circumstances and the actions the 

local sponsor had taken to repair the flap gate and reduce the amount of flood 

damage, the sponsor may be responsible for replacing the culvert and the 

damage to the levee as well. 

Deferred Maintenance Example 2: Rusted Metal Pipe 

A corrugated metal pipe runs through the levee. Over time, it has rusted 

significantly, and is in danger of failure. It’s noted in a CEI that the pipe needs 

to be replaced. Even though the repair of the pipe would be a large expense, 

this type of repair is considered to be part of regular maintenance and is the 

sponsor’s responsibility. If the pipe collapses and causes the levee to fail at this 

location during a flood, the sponsor is not only responsible for the cost of a new 

pipe and installation, but also for the complete cost of repair to the surrounding 

levee. (If the pipe fails but the levee failure was unrelated to the rusted pipe, 

then the Corps may assist with the repairs, but the sponsor would still be 

responsible for replacing and installing a new pipe.) 
69 

8.4 Nonstructural Alternatives to Rehabilitation 

If your FCW is damaged in a flood and is eligible for rehabilitation assistance, the project 

could be repaired as previously discussed, or you could request a Nonstructural Alternative 

Project (NSAP) in lieu of the structural repair. This option essentially allows you to use the 

federal funding that would have been authorized to rehabilitate your flood control work, and 

apply it towards the restoration of the flood plains or floodways that were originally in your 

area. Because of this, you would typically only choose a nonstructural alternative (NSA) once 

you were absolutely sure that you no longer wanted to rely on your FCW to protect you from 

floods. Some of the things an NSA might fund include the acquisition of land for the project, 

the removal of utility connections and other structures, the total or partial removal of levee 

reaches, and the restoration of natural habitats. If you’re thinking of requesting an NSA, 

remember that the Corps may, in its sole discretion, reject a request for an NSA if it believes 

that the project would lead to significantly increased flood protection expenses, would 

negatively impact adjacent or nearby FCWs, or would lead to increased risk to life or property 

during flood events. Once an NSAP is implemented, the project is no longer eligible for 

rehabilitation assistance because it will no longer be functioning as a flood control project. 
70 

This page intentionally left blank. 
71 

9. OTHER TYPES OF ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS 

EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE 

Whereas the rehabilitation assistance described in the previous chapter is only provided to 

sponsors of flood control works that have an Active status in the RIP, the purpose of this 

chapter is to present information on other emergency related assistance the U.S. Army Corps 

of Engineers can provide you, regardless of your participation or status in the RIP. In fact, the 

assistance described in this chapter may be provided regardless of whether there is any Flood 

Control Work protecting your community. The other types of assistance authorized under 

PL 84-99 include technical assistance with preparedness activities such as planning and 

training, advance measures assistance, direct assistance during and immediately after a flood, 

and emergency water assistance which may be provided during droughts or when your 

primary water source becomes contaminated. 

It should be noted that all of the assistance described in this chapter would be of a temporary 

nature to meet immediate threats, and is not intended to provide permanent solutions to flood 

or water problems. Remember that the Corps will only provide these types of assistance after 

local and state authorities have committed all available resources and are still unable to cope 

with the situation, and in some cases will only do so if the benefits of constructing the project 

are found to outweigh the cost of the construction. Finally, except in the case of technical or 

direct assistance, the Corps will only consider requests for these categories of assistance if 

they come from the governor of a state, or from a Native American tribal leader. If you, as the 

public sponsor, believe that one of these types of assistance would be appropriate in your 

situation, first speak with your Corps district office to determine what sorts of details would 

need to be included in the request, and then coordinate your request so that it comes to the 

Corps through the proper official channels. 

9.1 Technical Assistance 

The Corps is authorized to furnish technical assistance to local authorities at their request, 

advising them in their efforts to maintain the integrity of their FCWs. Technical assistance 

consists of providing technical review advice, and/or recommendations in support of state and 

local agency efforts, and helping determine feasible solutions to uncommon situations. The 

following are examples of technical assistance: 

a. Provision of Experienced Personnel 

Providing experienced Corps personnel to inspect existing FCWs and/or structurally 

threatened dams to identify potential problems and recommend corrective measures, to 

evaluate conditions to determine the requirements for additional flood control 

protection, and to recommend the most expedient emergency construction methods. 

b. Flood fight Techniques 

Providing personnel to give guidance on flood fight techniques. 
72 

c. Hydraulic, Geotechnical and Topography 

Providing hydraulic or hydrologic analysis, geotechnical evaluations, topography and 

available stream data, maps, and historic flood or storm information. 

d. Provision of Information 

Providing information, which is readily available at Corps districts, for use in the 

preparation of local evacuation and/or contingency flood plans. 

9.2 Direct Assistance 

The Corps is authorized under PL 84-99 to provide direct assistance to local communities in 

response to flooding or coastal emergencies. Direct assistance may include, but is not limited 

to, issuing supplies, the loan of flood fight supplies and equipment, assistance with 

contingency contracting during emergencies, and supplemental support to aid local authorities 

in rescue operations and in the direction of flood fight operations. This is done in order to 

protect public facilities, residences, or improved property from flooding, or when there’s a 

potential for loss of life. As a matter of policy, the Corps limits its flood fight activities on 

agricultural levees to technical assistance. Direct assistance does not need to be requested by 

the governor of a state, and may initially be granted based on a verbal request, though a 

written request must follow and a signed cooperation agreement must be signed before it can 

be provided. Legal responsibility for the actions remains with the requesting state or local 

official. For more details on direct assistance, please contact your local Corps district. 

9.3 Advance Measures Assistance 

Advance measures assistance is another type of assistance available under authority of 

PL 84-99. Advance measures assistance is provided when there is a clear prediction that there 

is an imminent threat of unusual flooding, which would result in substantial flood damages to 

an area if no preventative action is taken in advance of the flooding. Advance measures 

assistance is provided prior to the predicted unusual flooding, and can include technical and/or 

direct assistance such as supplies, equipment, and/or emergency contracting, through which 

the Corps may be able to repair, strengthen, or temporarily raise your flood control projects, or 

remove stream obstructions. However, there are several key qualifications to this type of 

assistance that significantly restrict the types of situations where it can be provided, and these 

are listed below. Please contact your local Corps district for the terms of local cooperation, for 

details on the governor’s request, or for other details regarding this assistance. 

a. Imminent Threat & Unusual Flooding 

The Corps must determine that an “imminent threat” of “unusual flooding” exists in 

order to approve advance measures projects. The evaluation of the threat must come 

from an objective, statistically supported source like the National Weather Service. 

The determination of what qualifies as “unusual flooding” is subjective, but for 

example, if it has been predicted that the flooding will approach an area’s flood of 

record or will be greater than a 50-year level of flooding, these may be considered 

unusual flood events. Be aware, however, that some areas of the country get flooded so 

frequently that sometimes even a 50-year flood isn’t always considered a particularly 

unusual event. Again, this is a subjective determination that’s made by the Corps. 
73 

b. Project Investigation Report 

The Corps will prepare a project investigation report before advance measures 

assistance is provided. This report is needed to evaluate and justify the construction of 

an advance measures project, and this particular type of assistance wouldn’t be given 

in cases where there wouldn’t be sufficient time to complete this investigation before 

the flooding is expected. 

c. Temporary Protection Only 

Advance measures projects will only be constructed to provide temporary protection 

from flooding, and must be removed or upgraded by the public sponsor to meet federal 

flood protection standards, after the flood threat has passed. This assistance is not to be 

used as a means of circumventing the normal authorization process to have the Corps 

construct more permanent FCWs, and is not to be used as a “quick fix” for local 

agencies that do not adequately perform regular and routine maintenance. 

9.4 Post Flood Assistance 

Immediately following a major flood, hurricane, or coastal storm, the governor of your state 

may request post food assistance, in writing, from the District Engineer. This request must be 

made concurrently with or immediately after the governor’s request to FEMA for a disaster 

declaration under the Stafford Act. Post flood assistance may be either technical or direct 

assistance and is limited to actions to save lives and protect improved property. The Corps 

may assist in clearing flood-deposited debris in order to reopen critical transportation routes 

(to provide access to medical facilities, for example), or to clear watercourses, drainage 

channels, bridge openings, water intakes, sewer outfalls, or other structures, if critical for the 

restoration of public services, public safety or to prevent further significant damage. This 

assistance may be provided for a maximum of ten days of receipt of the governor’s request. 

No work will be performed after the 10-day period expired, or initiated subsequent to a 

presidential disaster declaration or denial. 

The assistance won’t be provided directly to individual homeowners, businesses, or 

agricultural property, and won’t be provided for efforts to collect post-flood data. Please 

contact your local Corps district for details on the governor’s request, for the terms of local 

cooperation, or for other details regarding this type of assistance. 

9.5 Emergency Water Assistance 

If requested by the governor of a state, the Corps may provide temporary emergency water for 

human consumption to drought distressed areas or to those areas with contaminated water 

sources in order to meet minimum public health and welfare requirements. Long-term 

solutions to water supply problems are the responsibility of state and local interests. Typically, 

the Corps will fund the transportation of water to areas with extreme drought, but will not 

purchase the actual water. For more details on this type of assistance, please contact your 

Corps district office. 
74 

This page intentionally left blank. 
Appendix A- Acronyms and Definitions

 1 

APPENDIX A: ACRONYMS AND DEFINITIONS 

Section I -Acronyms 

AR - Army Regulation 

BCR - Benefit Cost Ratio 

CEI - Continuing Eligibility Inspection 

CFR - Code of Federal Regulations 

EM - Engineer Manual, Emergency Manager, Emergency Management

EOC - Emergency Operations Center 

EP - Engineer Pamphlet 

ER - Engineer Regulation 

FCCE - Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies 

FCW - Flood Control Work 

ICW - Inspection of Completed Works 

IEI - Initial Eligibility Inspection 

LERRDs - Lands, easements, rights-of-way, relocations, and borrow and dredged or 

 excavated materials disposal areas. 

NSAP - Nonstructural Alternatives Project 

O&M - Operations and Maintenance 

OMRR&R - Operation, Maintenance, Repair, Replacement, and Rehabilitation 

PCA - Project Cooperation Agreement. 

PIR - Project Information Report 

PL - Public Law 

RIP - Rehabilitation and Inspection Program 

USACE - U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

USC - United States Code 

WRDA - Water Resources Development Act 

Section II - Definitions 

Active. A status applied to FCWs concerning participation in the Rehabilitation and 

Inspection Program under authority of PL 84-99. An Active project must have met the Army 

Corps of Engineer’s criteria for entry and been entered into the RIP. Only Active projects may 

receive rehabilitation assistance to repair damages caused by a flood event or coastal storm. 

Agricultural Levee. A levee that provides at least a 5-year level of flood protection to 

predominantly agricultural areas or agribusinesses. May be federal or non-federal. 

Betterment. During repair of an FCW, any construction effort that increases the area 

protected, provides features that did not exist prior to the flood event, or increases the degree 

or level of protection provided by the FCW. Examples of betterments include increasing the 

height of a levee, or providing riprap where none previously existed. 
Appendix A- Acronyms and Definitions

 2 

Channel. A natural or artificial watercourse with definite bed and banks to confine and 

conduct flowing water. 

Channel Capacity. The maximum flow that can pass through a channel without overflowing 

the banks. 

Cooperation Agreement. An agreement entered into by a District Commander (acting as the 

agent for the Department of the Army on behalf of the United States Government) and the 

public sponsor for the purpose of identifying each party's rights and obligations concerning the 

expenditure of federal funds under authority of PL 84-99. 

Deflection Weir. Also known as a bendway weir, this is a structure (earth, rock, or timber) 

built part way across a river for the purpose of controlling erosion and maintaining the 

navigation channel. 

Deliberate Levee Cut. A deliberate cut made in a levee, with the intention of either protecting 

the integrity of the structure (or an adjacent structure) from actual or forecasted river stages, or 

reducing the overall anticipated damages expected to occur to the existing structure by the 

current flood event. See also Dewatering Levee Cut. 

Dike. In some areas of the United States, this term is used synonymously with levee. In other 

areas, it is used for the kind of structure referred to in this manual as a deflection, or bendway 

weir. Some people use it exclusively to refer to the salt-water version of a levee, designed to 

protect an area from sea water. Since this term is used so differently by different people, 

"dike" isn’t used in this manual. 

Drainage Structure. Generally, any feature or system (e.g., culverts) constructed for the 

purpose of discharging surface water run-off. Such structures are components of interior 

drainage systems. 

Eligible Levee. A levee categorized as "Active" in the RIP, for which the Army Corps of 

Engineers can provide assistance under authority of PL 84-99 to repair damage caused by a 

flood event. 

Emergency. A situation involving a natural or technological disaster that would result in an 

unacceptable hazard to human life, a significant loss of property, or significant economic 

hardship. 

Emergency Preparedness. All those activities and measures designed or undertaken to 

prepare for or minimize the effects of a hazard upon the civilian population, to deal with the 

immediate emergency conditions that would be created by the hazard, and to effectuate 

emergency repairs to, or the emergency restoration of, vital utilities and facilities destroyed or 

damaged by the hazard. 
Appendix A- Acronyms and Definitions

 3 

Federally Authorized Projects/Federal Projects. An FCW project built by the Army Corps 

of Engineers that was authorized for construction by Congress or by the Corps’ continuing 

authorities (e.g., Section 205.) 

Federal FCW/Federal Levee. A Federally authorized FCW, levee, or levee system project. 

FCWs constructed by non-federal interests, or other (non-Corps) federal agencies, and 

incorporated into a federal system by specific Congressional action (i.e., United States law) 

are also designated as federal FCWs. Construction by, or previous rehabilitation or 

reconstruction of a non-federal FCW by a federal Agency (to include the Army Corps of 

Engineers, FEMA, NRCS, and EDA) does not make the levee a federal levee. Levees 

constructed under the authority of the Works Progress Administration are not federal levees. 

Section 14 projects constructed under authority of PL 79-526 are not federal FCWs. 

Flood. Abnormally high water flow or water level that overtops the natural or artificial 

confining boundaries of a waterway. A general and temporary condition of partial or complete 

inundation of normally dry land areas from the overflow of river and/or tidal waters and/or the 

unusual accumulations of waters from any sources. 

Flood Control Project. See flood control work. 

Flood Control Work(s) (FCW). Structures designed and constructed to have appreciable and 

dependable effects in preventing damage caused by irregular and unusual rises in water level. 

FCW may include levees, channels, floodwalls, dams, and Federally authorized and 

constructed hurricane or shore protective structures. Structures designed and constructed to 

protect against salt water intrusion or tidal fluctuations, channel alignment, navigation, 

recreation, fish and wildlife, land reclamation, or to protect against land erosion are not 

considered to be FCWs. A riprap bank erosion control structure is not considered to be a flood 

control work. 

Flood Fighting. Actions taken immediately before or during a flood to protect human life and 

to reduce flood damages, such as evacuation, emergency sandbagging, and providing 

assistance to flood victims. 

Flood Plain. Any normally dry land area that is susceptible to being inundated by any natural 

source, such as a stream, during floods. The Army Corps of Engineers, as a matter of policy, 

encourages local governments to zone their flood plains against development and thereby 

avoid property damage and reduce obstruction to passage of floodwaters. 

Flood Stage. The water surface elevation of a river, stream, or body of water, above which 

flooding and damages normally begin to occur, normally measured with respect to a specific 

reference gage. Flood stage is normally the level at which a river overflows its banks. Flood 

stage for any particular geographic area is unique to that geographic area. 
Appendix A- Acronyms and Definitions

 4 

Floodwall. A type of flood control work usually constructed of stone or reinforced concrete, 

and which may occasionally have plastic or steel components. Floodwalls are generally 

constructed in urban areas where insufficient area exists to construct earthen levees. 

Floodway. Designated land left essentially clear of development, for the purpose of passing 

floodwaters. In some areas, floodway is used to designate the 100-year flood plain. 

Freeboard. A factor of safety usually expressed in feet above a flood level for purposes of 

designing flood protection facilities and for floodplain management. Freeboard tends to 

compensate for the many uncertain factors that could contribute to flood heights greater than 

the height calculated for a selected size flood and floodway conditions, such as wave action, 

bridge obstructions, and the hydrological effect of urbanization of the watershed. Freeboard is 

being replaced as a technique through risk and uncertainty management. 

Haul Road. Any privately owned road used by Corps vehicles or Corps contractor's vehicles 

to haul rock, earth fill, or other borrow materials to the site of a repair/flood 

fight/rehabilitation effort, or on which empty vehicles return. This includes haul roads 

specifically constructed for a repair/rehabilitation effort. Also included are levee crown roads 

and levee patrol roads that are not public roads, if their principal purpose is for access for 

maintenance, inspection, and flood fight purposes. All public roads are specifically excluded, 

to include any public roads that are situated on levees. 

Hundred Year Flood. More accurately referred to as a "one percent chance flood," a flood of 

a magnitude that, according to historical statistics, has one chance in one hundred of occurring 

in any given year. 

Imminent Threat. A subjective, statistically supported evaluation of how quickly a threat 

scenario can develop, how likely that threat is to develop in a given geographical location, and 

how likely the threat will produce catastrophic consequences to life and improved property. 

Implicit in the timing aspect can be considerations of time (e.g., a storm front's predicted path) 

or season (e.g., a snowpack that will melt in the coming spring runoff) or of known cyclical 

activities (e.g., rising water levels in the Great Lakes), but occurring inside the normal Corps 

decision and execution cycle for small project construction. 

Inactive. A status applied to FCW concerning participation in the RIP. An Inactive project is, 

simply, any project that is not Active. It includes formerly Active FCW that left Active status 

in the RIP, either voluntarily or involuntarily, as well as those FCW that have never been 

Active in the RIP. See also "Active." 

Initial Repair. A hastily effected temporary repair of a breached levee that provides a 10- to 

25-year level of protection for a short (less than 12 month) period of time until the permanent 

repair can be designed and executed. 

Interior Drainage. Natural or modified outflow of streams within a levee'd area for the 

conveyance of run-off. Interior drainage systems are not components of flood control works. 
Appendix A- Acronyms and Definitions

 5 

LERRDs. Lands, easements, rights-of-way, relocations, and borrow and dredged or excavated 

materials disposal areas. 

Levee. A structure, normally of earth or stone, built generally parallel to a river to protect land 

from flooding. A levee is a complete unit, designed and intended for flood control. A levee 

(excluding a ring levee) is always tied to high ground at both ends. 

Level of Protection. The degree of protection against flooding provided by an FCW, normally 

expressed in terms of the cyclical flood-level against which protection is provided. 

Local Cost Share. That portion of the cost of undertaking assistance authorized under PL 84-

99 (e.g., repairing a damaged Active levee) for which the public sponsor is responsible. The 

local cost share may be paid either in cash or as work-in-kind, or as a combination of the two. 

Major Flood. A flood event determined to be a 100-year event or better, or a series of weather 

events over a short period of time (normally seven days or less), which causes loss of human 

life and/or property damage exceeding $1 million. 

Non-Federal Levee/Non-Federal Project/Non-Federal FCW. A flood control work not 

authorized by Congress, or under other federal agency authority. Works Progress 

Administration (WPA) projects are considered non-federal FCW for the application of PL 

84-99 authority. 

Nonstructural Alternative Project. A type of project, authorized by an amendment to PL 84-

99 contained in WRDA 96, that, in lieu of a structural rehabilitation effort, allows for 

restoration of floodways, flood plains, and/or the reduction of future flood damages and 

associated FCW rehabilitation costs. 

Political Subdivision. A city, town, borough, township, county, parish, district, association, or 

other public body created by or pursuant to state law and having jurisdiction over the water 

supply of such public body. 

Project Cooperation Agreement. An agreement entered into by a District Commander 

(acting as the agent for the Department of the Army on behalf of the United States 

Government) and the public sponsor for the purpose of identifying each party's rights and 

obligations concerning the expenditure of federal funds under the Army Corps of Engineers’ 

authority other than that of PL 84-99. See also Cooperation Agreement. 
Appendix A- Acronyms and Definitions

 6 

Public Sponsor. A public sponsor is a legally constituted public body with full authority and 

capability to perform the terms of its agreement as the non-federal partner of the Corps for a 

project, and able to pay damages, if necessary, in the event of its failure to perform. A public 

sponsor may be a state, county, city, town, Federally recognized Indian tribe or tribal 

organization, Alaska Native Corporation, or any political subpart of a state or group of states 

that has the legal and financial authority and capability to provide the necessary cash 

contributions and lands, easements, rights-of-way, relocations, and borrow or dredged or 

excavated material disposal areas (LERRD’s) necessary for the project. 

Rehabilitation and Inspection Program (RIP). A component of the Civil Emergency 

Management Program concerned with the inspection and rehabilitation of FCWs. 

Rehabilitation Assistance. Repair and restoration under authority of PL 84-99 of an Active 

FCW damaged in a flood event. 

Rehabilitation Project. An action or series of actions focused of the repair of an Active flood 

control work to return the FCW’s level of protection to its pre-flood/pre-storm level. 

Repair and Rehabilitation. The terms “repair”, “rehabilitation”, or “repair and rehabilitation” 

mean the repair or rebuilding of a flood control structure, after the structure has been damaged 

by a flood, hurricane, or coastal storm, to the level of protection provided by the structure 

prior to the flood, hurricane, or coastal storm. The terms do not include improvements 

(betterments) to the structure, nor does “repair and rehabilitation” include any repair, 

reconstruction, or rehabilitation activities of a flood control structure which, in the normal 

course of usage, has become structurally unsound and is no longer fit to provide the level of 

protection for which it was designed. 

Saturation. 

(1) Soil Saturation. A condition in soil in which all spaces between the soil particles are filled 

with water. Such conditions normally occur after prolonged periods of rainfall and/or 

snowmelt. The result of a saturated condition is that any additional rainfall or snowmelt runs 

off into streams and rivers instead of soaking into the ground. 

(2) Levee saturation. Soil saturation that has occurred in an earthen levee because of 

floodwaters remaining above flood stage for extremely long periods of time. This condition 

can lead to catastrophic failure of the levee. 

Secondary Levee. A levee that is landward of the main or principal levee. The level of 

protection of a secondary levee is always less than the level of protection provided by the main 

levee. 

Stream. A body of water flowing in a definite natural or manmade course that has the 

potential to flood. The term stream refers to rivers, streams, creeks, brooks, etc., and includes 

intermittent streams that are subject to flooding. 
Appendix A- Acronyms and Definitions

 7 

Unusual Flooding. For use with Advance Measures, a subjective determination that considers 

potential ability to approach an area’s Flood of record, a catastrophic level of flooding, or a 

greater than 50-year level of flooding. 

Urban areas. Cities, towns, or other incorporated or unincorporated political subdivisions of 

States that provide general local government for specific population concentrations, and 

occupy an essentially continuous area of developed land containing such structures as 

residences, public and commercial buildings, and industrial sites. 

Urban Levee. A levee providing greater than a 10-year level of flood protection to a 

predominantly urban area. 

Work-in-Kind. That portion of a public sponsor's cost share to rehabilitate a non-federal 

FCW that is a non-cash contribution. The work-in-kind may be in the form of labor, 

equipment, supplies, and/or services. Labor is defined as blue collar-type of work normally 

paid on an hourly wage basis, comparable to federal Wage Grade positions. 
Appendix A- Acronyms and Definitions

 8 

This page intentionally left blank. 
Appendix B- Flowchart of RIP Eligibility and Inspection Processes for Non-Federal FCW

1

APPENDIX B: Flowchart of RIP Eligibility and Inspection 

Processes for Non-Federal FCW 

The Sponsor will 

be told what 

deficiencies need 

to be corrected in 

order to become 

active in the RIP.

The Sponsor is required to correct noted deficiencies 

within an established timeframe, during which the 

FCW is Active in the RIP and eligible for 

Rehabilitation Assistance. However, the repair of 

noted deficiencies would be ineligible for assistance 

and the Corps would evaluate the eligibility of any 

damages caused by the differed maintenance.

Non-Federally constructed Flood Control Works (FCWs) are never initially part of the Corp's Repair 

and Inspection Program (RIP), so they aren't initially eligible for Rehabilitation Assistance. To enter the 

RIP, the Public Sponsor's first step is to request the Corps to conduct an Initial Eligibility Inspection. 

The FCW is rated 

"Unacceptable."

During the interim period between the time that the sponsor requests an IEI and the time that the 

Corps conducts the IEI, the FCW may still be eligible for Rehabilitation Assistance if it gets 

damaged by a flood. In this rare case, the Corps may conduct an IEI after the flooding to evaluate 

whether the project would have passed the inspection at the time the IEI was requested.

The FCW is rated 

"Acceptable."

Deficiencies not 

corrected within 

given timeframe.

The FCW is placed in 

Inactive status and is 

ineligible for Rehabilitation 

Assistance.

The FCW is rated 

"Acceptable."

The FCW is rated 

"Minimally Acceptable."

Deficiencies are corrected to the Corp's 

specifications and documentation is 

provided within the designated timeframe.

The FCW 

immediately gains 

an Active status in 

the RIP and is 

eligible for 

Rehabilitation 

Assistance.

The FCW is rated 

"Minimally Acceptable."

The USACE district conducts an Initial Eligibility Inspection (IEI), and provides the Sponsor 

with an inspection report which outlines the project rating and any noted deficiencies.

Continuing Eligibility Inspections (CEIs) are conducted biannually unless the Corps District specifies 

more frequent inspections. Corps provides inspection reports outlining rating and noted deficiencies.

The Sponsor is required to correct noted deficiencies within an 

established timeframe. During this timeframe, the FCW is still 

Active in the RIP and eligible for Rehabilitation Assistance, 

though the repair of noted deficiencies would be ineligible for 

assistance and the Corps would evaluate the eligibility of any 

damages caused by the differed maintenance.

If the deficiencies are corrected and supporting documentation is sent to the 

Corps, the Corps will review the situation as necessary. If the project condition 

is found to be Acceptable, the FCW immediately regains it's Active status.

The FCW is rated 

"Unacceptable."

The FCW remains 

Active in the RIP 

and is eligible for 

Rehabilitation 

Assistance.

Deficiencies are 

not corrected 

within given 

timeframe.

The FCW is 

immediately put in an 

Inactive status in the 

RIP. It is ineligible for 

Rehabilitation 

Assistance and will no 

longer be inspected by 

the Corps until 

deficiencies are 

corrected.

Deficiencies are corrected to 

the Corp's specifications and 

documentation is provided 

within designated timeframe.
Appendix B- Flowchart of RIP Eligibility and Inspection Processes for Non-Federal FCW

2

This page intentionally left blank. 
Appendix C: FCW Inspection Guide

1

APPENDIX C: FCW INSPECTION GUIDE Type of Inspection (Check One): Initial Overall Project Rating (Check One): Acceptable Continuing Minimally Acceptable (Maintenance is required) Unacceptable INSPECTOR'S OBSERVATIONS: Contents of this Inspection Report: Basic Eligibility (IEI specific) FCW Engineering (IEI specific) General Items for All Flood Control Works Levees

Concrete FloodwallsInterior Drainage SystemPump StationsEarthen Flood Control ChannelsConcrete Lined ChannelsInstructions

Note: A plan view drawing of the Flood Control Works, with stationing, should be attached to this report to reference locations of items rated less than acceptable. Photos should be taken of general project condition and any noted deficiencies. 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Name of Project: _______________________________________________________________________________Date Inspected: ________________________________________________________________________________Public Sponsor: ________________________________________________________________________________Sponsor Phone/ Email: ___________________________________________________________________________Corps of Engineers Inspector: _____________________________________________________________________Public Sponsor Representative: ____________________________________________________________________

Inspection Guide for Flood Control Works

XX
Appendix C: FCW Inspection Guide

2

Page 1 of 1

A M U N/A LOCATIONS/ REMARKS / RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Public Sponsor 

(A or U only)

A The Public Sponsor is a legally constituted public body with full authority and 

capability to perform the terms of its agreement as the non-Federal partner of the Corps for a project, able to pay damages, if necessary, in the event of its failure to perform. The public sponsor may be a State, County, City, Town, Federally recognized Indian Tribe or tribal organization, Alaska Native Corporation, or any political subpart of a State or group of states that has the legal and financial authority and capability to provide the necessary cash contributions and the lands, easements, rights-of-way, relocations, and borrow and dredged or excavated materials disposal areas (LERRD's) necessary for the project, and who could legally hold and save the Federal government free from damages that could potentially arise during post-flood rehabilitations or other work on the FCW. 

U The project does not have a public sponsor as defined above.

2.

A The principal function of the project is to protect people or property from floods. U The project was built or is primarily used for channel alignment, recreation, fish and 

wildlife, land reclamation, drainage, to protect against land erosion or tidal inflows, or for some other non-flood related purpose.

3.

A Project construction has been completed.U The project is still under construction.

4. Construction Compliance

(A or U only)

A Appropriate local, State, tribal, and/or Federal permits (right-of-way, easements, 

regulatory permits, etc.), or waivers thereof, have been obtained for FCW construction and subsequent modifications. The project was constructed in accordance with all applicable Federal, state and local codes, ordinances, and applicable laws. 

U The appropriate permits (or waivers thereof) have not been obtained for the project, 

or the project was not constructed in accordance with applicable codes, ordinances, and laws. 

Key: A = Acceptable. 

M = Minimally Acceptable; Maintenance is required. U = Unacceptable. N/A = Not Applicable. RODI = Requires Operation During Inspection

For use only during Initial Eligibility Inspections of Non-Federally Constructed Flood Control Works

EVALUATION

Basic Eligibility

RATED ITEM

Flood Protection(A or U only)Project Completion(A or U only)
Appendix C: FCW Inspection Guide 3

Page 1 of 2

A M U N/A LOCATIONS/ REMARKS / RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Minimum Elevation 

(A or U only)(See instructions)

A • Urban Levees and Floodwalls- Minimum elevation corresponding to a flood level 

with 10% probability of occurring in a given year (10-year flood). • Agricultural Levees and Floodwalls- Minimum elevation corresponding to a flood level with 20% probability of occurring in a given year (5-year flood).• Flood Control Channels- Minimum capacity is for a flood with a 10% probability 

of occurring in a given year (10-year flood). Improved channels must additionally provide drainage for at least 1.5 square miles of land and have a capacity of at least 800 cfs. (NOTE: Interior drainage channels within the protected area of a levee system are not flood control channels.)

U The FCW does not meet requirements for minimum elevation, capacity, or drainage 

area.

2. A The physical location, cross section, and other design elements of the FCW are 

sufficient to provide reliable flood protection. The FCW is (or is an element of) a closed system, tied into high ground.

U The FCW was not constructed in an appropriate location, does not have an 

appropriate cross section; is not properly tied into high ground, or has other shortcomings with design elements necessary for providing reliable flood protection.

3. Embankment Fill A Embankment material is suitable to prevent slides and seepage problems.

U Embankment material is unsuitable and is likely to contribute to the development of 

slides or seepage problems.

4. A Fill material is uniform and adequately compacted throughout the entire FCW.

M Fill material is uniform and adequately compacted in 75% or more of the FCW.

U Fill material is not uniform, or there is no compaction and evidence indicates a need 

for compaction.

5. Foundations A Foundation material will not cause piping, sand boils, seepage, or settlements that 

will reduce the level of protection.

M Foundation material may show signs of excessive seepage, minor sand boils, and 

localized settlement.

U Foundation materials are unsuitable and likely to cause excessive uncontrolled 

seepage, sand boils, and / or piping.

N/A The foundation problems described above do not apply to this type of FCW.

6. Primary Levee A In the case of a levee project, the levee is a primary levee or is a secondary levee 

which is designed to protect human life or was designed as a major component of the primary levee system, necessary to assure the flood control protection of the total system. 

U The levee is a secondary levee, and was not designed to protect human life or as a 

major component of the primary levee system.

N/A The FCW is not a levee system.

Key: A = Acceptable. M = Minimally Acceptable; Maintenance is required. U = Unacceptable. N/A = Not Applicable. RODI = Requires Operation During Inspection

FCW Engineering - Continued on Next Page

For use only during Initial Eligibility Inspections of Non-Federally Constructed Flood Control Works

RATED ITEM EVALUATION

Physical Location and Cross Section(A or U only)Embankment Material Uniformity/ Compactness

FCW Engineering
Appendix C: FCW Inspection Guide

4

Page 2 of 2

A M U N/A LOCATIONS/ REMARKS / RECOMMENDATIONS

7.

A Given the level of protection provided by the FCW, interior drainage structures are 

appropriately sized, situated, and constructed to move anticipated runoff and seepage out of the protected area. Pump stations will not become inundated during regular operation and their power system is adequately designed and reliable.

U Interior drainage structures are undersized, poorly constructed, poorly situated, or 

unreliably designed.

N/A The issue of interior drainage does not apply to this type of FCW.

8. Structures

A Structures are capable of performing their designed functions and show no signs of 

failure.

M Structures are performing their design functions but show signs of overtopping and 

bypassing flows.

U Structures are not performing their designed functions or show signs of potential 

structural failure.

9. Erosion Control

A Erosion protection is capable of handling the designed flow velocity for the level of 

protection for the entire FCW. The FCW is protected against bank caving and slides in all necessary areas, and has adequate drainage to protect FCW slopes from runoff erosion.

M Erosion protection is capable of handling the designed flow velocity for the level of 

protection for 75% or more of the FCW.

U Erosion protection measures protect less that 75% of the FCW. Erosion protection is 

not present and there is evidence indicating a need for erosion protection.

Key: A = Acceptable. 

M = Minimally Acceptable; Maintenance is required. U = Unacceptable. N/A = Not Applicable. RODI = Requires Operation During Inspection

For use only during Initial Eligibility Inspections of Non-Federally Constructed Flood Control Works

Interior Drainage System (including culverts, gates, pump stations)

EVALUATION RATED ITEM

FCW Engineering (continued)
Appendix C: FCW Inspection Guide

5

Page 1 of 1

A M U N/A LOCATIONS/ REMARKS / RECOMMENDATIONS

1. A Levee Owner's Manual, ICW O&M Manuals, and/or manufacturer's operating 

instructions are present.

U These manuals are lost or missing.

2. Emergency Supplies and 

Equipment

A The sponsor maintains a stockpile of sandbags, shovels, and other flood fight supplies 

which will adequately supply all needs for the initial days of a flood fight.

M The sponsor does not maintain an adequate supply of flood fighting materials as part 

of their preparedness activities.

3. Flood Preparedness and 

Training (A or M only)

A Sponsor has a solid understanding of how to operate, maintain, and staff the FCW 

during a flood, and has written plans that include information such as low spots or sand boils. The sponsor also has plans that cover short term situations. (For instance, if a culvert through the levee is being replaced, then the sponsor knows how to respond to a flood while the levee integrity is lacking due to the construction.)

M The sponsor maintains a good working knowledge of flood response activities, but 

there are insufficient plans to address project specific features or short term situations, or the knowledge of flood response activities is maintained by a very small number of individuals within the community. Additional planning or training is required to ensure the success of the FCW during a flood event.

Key: A = Acceptable. 

M = Minimally Acceptable; Maintenance is required. U = Unacceptable. N/A = Not Applicable. RODI = Requires Operation During Inspection

General Items for All Flood Control Works

For use during Initial and Continuing Eligibility Inspections of all Flood Control Works

Project Operations and Maintenance Manual(A or U only)

EVALUATION RATED ITEM
Appendix C: FCW Inspection Guide 6

Page 1 of 3

A M U N/A LOCATIONS/ REMARKS / RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Sod Cover A There is good coverage of sod cover over the levee.

M Approximately 25% of the sod cover is missing or damaged over a significant portion 

or over significant portions of the levee embankment. This may be the result of overgrazing or feeding on the levee, unauthorized vehicular traffic, chemical or insect problems, or burning during inappropriate seasons.

U Over 50% of the sod cover is missing or damaged over a significant portion or over 

significant portions of the levee embankment. This may be the result of over-grazing or feeding on the levee, unauthorized vehicular traffic, chemical or insect problems, or burning during inappropriate seasons.

2. Unwanted Vegetation 

Growth

A The levee has a good grass cover with little or no unwanted vegetation (trees, bushes, 

or undesirable weeds) and has been recently mowed. Except in those cases where a vegetation variance has been granted by the Corps, a 5 meter (15') zone, free from all woody vegetation, is maintained adjacent to the landward/ riverside toe of the FCW for maintenance and flood-fighting activities. Additionally, a 1 meter (3') root free zone is maintained to protect the external limits of the levee cross section. Reference EM 1110-2-301 and/or local Corps policy.

M Minimal number of trees (5 cm (2") diameter or smaller) and/or brush present on the 

levee or within the 5 meter (15') zone, that will not threaten the integrity of the project but which need to be removed.

U Tree, weed, and brush cover exists in the FCW requiring removal to reestablish or 

ascertain FCW integrity. (NOTE: If significant growth on levees exists, prohibiting the inspection of animal burrows or other inspection items, then the levee inspection should be ended until this item is corrected.)

3. Depressions/ Rutting A There are no ruts, pot holes, or other depressions on the levee, except for minor 

depressions caused by levee settlement. The levee crown, embankments, and access road crowns are well established and drain properly without any ponded water. 

M Some minor depressions in the levee crown, embankment, or access roads that will 

not pond water and do not threaten the integrity of the levee.

U There are depressions greater than 15 cm (6 inches) deep that will pond water, 

endangering the integrity of the levee.

4. A No active erosion or bank caving observed on the landward or on the riverward side 

of the levee.

M There are areas where active erosion is occurring or has occurred on or near the levee 

embankment, but levee integrity is not threatened.

U Erosion or caving is occurring or has occurred that threatens the stability and integrity 

of the levee. The erosion or caving has progressed into the levee section or into the extended footprint of the levee foundation and has compromised the levee foundation stability.

Key: A = Acceptable. M = Minimally Acceptable; Maintenance is required. U = Unacceptable. N/A = Not Applicable. RODI = Requires Operation During Inspection

Levees - Continued on Next Page

Erosion/ Bank Caving

Levees

For use during all Initial and Continuing Eligibility Inspections of levees

RATED ITEM EVALUATION
Appendix C: FCW Inspection Guide 7

Page 2 of 3

A M U N/A LOCATIONS/ REMARKS / RECOMMENDATIONS

5. A No slides present.

M Minor superficial sliding that with deferred repairs will not pose an immediate threat 

to FCW integrity.

U Evidence of deep seated sliding that threatens FCW integrity. Repairs are required to 

reestablish FCW integrity.

6. Cracking A No cracking observed on the levee greater than 15 cm (6 inches) deep.

M Longitudinal and/or transverse cracking greater than 15 cm (6 inches) deep. No 

evidence of vertical movement along the crack.

U Longitudinal and/or transverse cracking present and exhibits signs of vertical 

movement.

7. Animal Control A Continuous animal burrow control program in place that includes the elimination of 

active burrowing and the filling in of existing burrows. 

M The existing animal burrow control program needs to be improved. Several animal 

burrows present which may lead to seepage or slope stability problems, and they require immediate attention. 

U Animal burrow control program is not effective or is nonexistent. Significant 

maintenance is required to fill existing burrows, and the levee will not provide reliable flood protection until this maintenance is complete. 

8. Encroachments A No trash, debris, excavations, structures, or other obstructions present within the 

project easement area. Encroachments which do not diminish proper functioning of the project have been previously approved by the Corps.

M Trash, debris, excavations, structures, or other obstructions present, or inappropriate 

activities that will not inhibit project operations and maintenance or emergency operations. Encroachments have not been approved by the Corps.

U Trash, debris, excavation, structures, or other obstructions present, or inappropriate 

activities that will inhibit project operations and maintenance or emergency operations.

9. Riprap Revetments & 

Banks

A Existing riprap protection is properly maintained and is undamaged. Riprap clearly 

visible.

M No riprap displacement or scouring activity that could undercut banks, erode 

embankments, or restrict desired flow. Unwanted vegetation must be cleared and sprayed with an appropriate herbicide.

U Dense brush, trees, or grasses hide the rock protection, or meandering and/or scour 

activity is undercutting banks, eroding embankments, or impairing channel flows by causing turbulence or shoaling. 

N/A There is no riprap protecting the levee.

Key: A = Acceptable. M = Minimally Acceptable; Maintenance is required. U = Unacceptable. N/A = Not Applicable. RODI = Requires Operation During Inspection

Levees - Continued on Next Page

Slope Stability

Levees (continued)

For use during all Initial and Continuing Eligibility Inspections of levees

RATED ITEM EVALUATION
Appendix C: FCW Inspection Guide

8

Page 3 of 3

A M U N/A LOCATIONS/ REMARKS / RECOMMENDATIONS

10.

A Closure structure in good repair. Placing equipment, stoplogs, and other materials are 

readily available at all times. Components of closure clearly marked and installation instructions / procedures readily available.

U Closure structure in poor condition. Parts missing or corroded. Placing equipment 

may not be available within normal warning time.

N/A There are no closure structures along the levee.

11. Underseepage Relief 

Wells/ Toe Drainage Systems

A Toe drainage systems and pressure relief wells necessary for maintaining FCW 

stability during flood events functioned properly during the last flood event and no sediment is observed in horizontal system (if applicable). Nothing is observed which would indicate that the system won't function properly during the next flood.

M Toe drainage systems or pressure relief wells are damaged and may become clogged 

if they are not repaired.

U Toe drainage systems or pressure relief wells necessary for maintaining FCW 

stability during flood events have fallen into disrepair or have become clogged.

N/A There are no relief wells/ toe drainage systems along the levee.

Key: A = Acceptable. 

M = Minimally Acceptable; Maintenance is required. U = Unacceptable. N/A = Not Applicable. RODI = Requires Operation During Inspection

Additional issues noted during the inspection:

Closure Structures (Stop Log, Earthen Closures, or Gates)(A or U only)

EVALUATION

Levees (continued)

For use during all Initial and Continuing Eligibility Inspections of levees

RATED ITEM
Appendix C: FCW Inspection Guide 9

Page 1 of 2

A M U N/A LOCATIONS/ REMARKS / RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Concrete Surfaces A Negligible spalling, scaling or cracking. If the concrete surface is weathered, rough 

to the touch, or holds moisture, it is still satisfactory but should be seal coated to prevent freeze/ thaw damage.

M Spalling, scaling, and open cracking present, but the immediate integrity or 

performance of the structure is not threatened. Reinforcing steel may be exposed. Repairs/ sealing is necessary to prevent additional damage during periods of thawing and freezing.

U Surface deterioration or deep, controlled cracks present that result in an unreliable 

structure.

2. A There are no significant areas of tilting, sliding, or settlement that would endanger the 

integrity of the project.

M There are areas of tilting, sliding, or settlement (either active or inactive) that need to 

be repaired. The integrity of the structure is not in danger. 

U There are areas of tilting, sliding, or settlement (either active or inactive) that threaten 

the structure's integrity and performance.

3. A No scouring / erosion, or undermining near the structure.

M Scouring / erosion near the footing of the structure but not close enough to affect 

structure stability during the next flood.

U Scouring or undermining at the foundation that has affected structural integrity.

4. Monolith Joints A The monolith joint material is in good condition.

M The monolith joint material is deteriorating and needs to be repaired or replaced to 

prevent spalling and cracking during freeze/ thaw cycles.

U The monolith joint material is severely deteriorated and the concrete has spalled and 

cracked, damaging the waterstop to the point where it will not provide the intended level of protection during a flood.

N/A There are no monolith joints in the floodwall.

5. A No active erosion or bank caving on the riverward side of the floodwall which might 

endanger its stability.

M There are areas where the ground is eroding towards the base of the floodwall and 

efforts need to be taken to slow and repair this erosion, but the erosion has not yet progressed to the point that the floodwall will loose stability during a flood event.

U Erosion or bank caving is occurring or has occurred riverward of the levee which 

threatens the stability of the floodwall.

Key: A = Acceptable. M = Minimally Acceptable; Maintenance is required. U = Unacceptable. N/A = Not Applicable. RODI = Requires Operation During Inspection

Concrete Floodwalls- Continued on the next page 

Erosion/ Bank Caving

Concrete Floodwalls

For use during all Initial and Continuing Eligibility Inspections of concrete floodwalls

RATED ITEM

Tilting, Sliding or Settlement of Concrete and Sheet Pile StructuresFoundation of Concrete and Sheet Pile Structures

EVALUATION
Appendix C: FCW Inspection Guide

10

Page 2 of 2

A M U N/A LOCATIONS/ REMARKS / RECOMMENDATIONS

6. Unwanted Vegetation 

Growth

A A grass-only zone is maintained on both sides the floodwall. All trees, brush, and 

unwanted vegetation have been removed from this zone for maintenance, floodfighting activities, and to protect the floodwall. The grass-only zone extends from the concrete wall to a point 2.5 meters (8') beyond the underground toe and heel of the floodwall. Reference EM 1110-2-30 and/or local Corps policy.

M There are some areas where unwanted vegetation is growing near the floodwall. This 

vegetation must be removed, but does not currently threaten the integrity of the project.

U There is a significant amount of tree, weed, or brush growth near the floodwall, 

which may limit access during flood fight operations or the roots of which may offer accelerated seepage paths under the structure.

7. Encroachments

A No trash, debris, excavations, structures, or other obstructions present within the 

project easement area. Encroachments which do not diminish proper functioning of the project have been previously approved by the Corps.

M Trash, debris, excavations, structures, or other obstructions present, or inappropriate 

activities that will not inhibit project operations and maintenance or emergency operations. Encroachments have not been approved by the Corps.

U Trash, debris, excavation, structures, or other obstructions present, or inappropriate 

activities that will inhibit project operations and maintenance or emergency operations.

8.

A Closure structure in good repair. Placing equipment, stoplogs, and other materials are 

readily available at all times. Components of closure clearly marked and installation instructions / procedures readily available.

U Closure structure in poor condition. Parts missing or corroded. Placing equipment 

may not be available within normal warning time.

N/A There are no closure structures along the floodwall.

9. Underseepage Relief 

Wells/ Toe Drainage Systems

A Toe drainage systems and pressure relief wells necessary for maintaining FCW 

stability during flood events functioned properly during the last flood event and no sediment is observed in horizontal system (if applicable). Nothing is observed which would indicate that the system won't function properly during the next flood.

M Toe drainage systems or pressure relief wells are damaged and may become clogged 

if they are not repaired.

U Toe drainage systems or pressure relief wells necessary for maintaining FCW 

stability during flood events have fallen into disrepair or have become clogged.

N/A There are no relief wells/ toe drainage systems along the floodwall.

Key: A = Acceptable. 

M = Minimally Acceptable; Maintenance is required. U = Unacceptable. N/A = Not Applicable. RODI = Requires Operation During Inspection

Additional issues noted during the inspection:

Closure Structures (Stop Log Closures and Gates)(A or U only)

Concrete Floodwalls (continued)

For use during all Initial and Continuing Eligibility Inspections of concrete floodwalls

RATED ITEM EVALUATION
Appendix C: FCW Inspection Guide

11

Page 1 of 4

A M U N/A LOCATIONS/ REMARKS / RECOMMENDATIONS

1. A Minimal, scattered obstructions or vegetation. The flow is not impeded.

M Log jams, snags, vegetation growth (such as cat tails, bull rushes, bushes, or 

saplings), or other obstructions block approximately 25% of the FCW.

U Log jams, snags, vegetation growth (such as cat tails, bull rushes, bushes, or 

saplings), or other obstructions block approximately 50% of the FCW.

2. Encroachments A No trash, debris, excavations, structures, or other obstructions present within the 

project easement area. Encroachments which do not diminish proper functioning of the project have been previously approved by the Corps.

M Trash, debris, excavations, structures, or other obstructions present, or inappropriate 

activities that will not inhibit project operations and maintenance or emergency operations. Encroachments have not been approved by the Corps.

U Trash, debris, excavation, structures, or other obstructions present, or inappropriate 

activities that will inhibit project operations and maintenance or emergency operations.

3. Riprap Revetments of 

Inlet/ Discharge Areas

A Existing riprap protection is properly maintained and is undamaged. Riprap clearly 

visible.

M No riprap displacement or scouring activity that could undercut banks, erode 

embankments, or restrict desired flow. Unwanted vegetation must be cleared and sprayed with an appropriate herbicide.

U Dense brush, trees, or grasses hide the rock protection, or meandering and/or scour 

activity is undercutting banks, eroding embankments, or impairing channel flows by causing turbulence or shoaling. 

N/A There is no riprap protecting the interior drainage system, or the riprap is discussed 

in another section.

4. A No active erosion or bank caving observed on the landward or on the riverward side 

of the levee.

M There are areas where active erosion is occurring or has occurred on or near the levee 

embankment, but levee integrity is not threatened.

U Erosion or caving is occurring or has occurred that threatens the stability and integrity 

of the levee. The erosion or caving has progressed into the levee section or into the extended footprint of the levee foundation and has compromised the levee foundation stability.

N/A There are no inlet/discharge areas.

Key: A = Acceptable. M = Minimally Acceptable; Maintenance is required. U = Unacceptable. N/A = Not Applicable. RODI = Requires Operation During Inspection

Interior Drainage - Continued on Next Page

EVALUATION

Vegetation and Obstructions

Interior Drainage System

For use during all Initial and Continuing Eligibility Inspections of systems carrying interior drainage through the FCW

Erosion of Inlet/ Discharge Areas

RATED ITEM
Appendix C: FCW Inspection Guide

12

Page 2 of 4

A M U N/A LOCATIONS/ REMARKS / RECOMMENDATIONS

5.

A There is little or no debris, sediment, or vegetation blocking the culverts, inlets, sump, 

or discharge areas. The channel capacity for designed flow is not affected.

M Debris, sediment, or vegetation blocks less than 10 percent of the culvert opening, but 

must be removed.

U Accumulated debris, sediment, or vegetation blocks more than 10 percent of the 

culvert opening, impairing the culvert's capacity and hydraulic effectiveness.

N/A There are no culverts.

6. Culverts

A There are no breaks, holes, cracks in the culvert that would result in significant water 

leakage. Corrugated metal pipes, if present, are in good condition or have been relined with appropriate material, which is still in good condition.

M There are breaks, holes, cracks in the culvert that would result in water leakage and 

need to be repaired, but do not threaten the integrity of the project. Corrugated metal pipes, if present, are showing deterioration but the entire length of pipe is still structurally sound and is not in danger of collapsing.

U Culvert has deterioration and/or has significant leakage such that it threatens the 

integrity of the FCW. Corrugated metal pipes are in danger of collapsing or have already begun to collapse.

N/A There are no culverts.

8. Trash Racks

A Trash racks are fastened in place and properly maintained.

 (non-mechanical)

M Trash racks are in place but are unfastened or have bent bars that allow debris to enter 

into the pipe or pump station. Repair or replacement is required.

U Trash rack is missing or damaged to the extent that it is no longer functional and must 

be replaced.

N/A There are no trash racks.

9.

A Flap gates open and close easily with minimal leakage.

Gates show no corrosion damage and have been maintained.

M Gate will not fully open or close because of obstructions that can be easily removed, 

or has corrosion damage that requires maintenance.

U Gate is missing, has been damaged, or has deteriorated and needs repair.

N/A There are no flap gates.

Key: A = Acceptable. 

M = Minimally Acceptable; Maintenance is required. U = Unacceptable. N/A = Not Applicable. RODI = Requires Operation During Inspection

Interior Drainage - Continued on Next Page

Interior Drainage System (continued)

RATED ITEM

Blockage of Culverts (Inlets, Sump, and Discharge Areas)

EVALUATION

For use during all Initial and Continuing Eligibility Inspections of systems carrying interior drainage through the FCW

Flap Gates/Flap Valves/ Pinch ValvesRODI
Appendix C: FCW Inspection Guide

13

Page 3 of 4

A M U N/A LOCATIONS/ REMARKS / RECOMMENDATIONS

10. Sluice / Slide Gates 

RODI

A Gates open and close freely with minor leakage. Sill is free of sediment and other 

obstructions. Gates and lifters have been maintained.

M Gates have been damaged or have deteriorated, and open and close with resistance or 

binding. Leakage quantity is controllable and is not a threat to project performance. Maintenance is required.

U Gates do not open or close. Gate, stem, lifter and/or guides may be damaged or 

corroded.

N/A There are no sluice/ slide gates.

11. Electric Gate Operators 

for Sluice / Slide Gates RODI

A All electric gate operators are in good working condition and are adequately powered, 

and are capable of opening and closing the gate properly. Preventative maintenance is being performed and the system is tested periodically.

M All electric gate operators are operational with minor deficiencies, but should 

perform through the next period of usage.

U The electric gate operators are not operational, or the power source is not considered 

reliable to sustain operations during flood conditions.

N/A There are no electric gate operators.

12. Manual Operators 

(Backups) for Sluice / Slide Gates 

A All manual gate operators are in good working condition and are capable of opening 

and closing the gate properly. Preventative maintenance is being performed and the system is tested periodically.

RODI M Manual gate operators are operational with minor deficiencies, but should perform 

through the next period of usage.

U Manual gate operators are not operational.

N/A If there are sluice or slide gates, there needs to be means of operating them manually. 

If there are no sluice/slide gates, this item is N/A.

13. A Negligible spalling, scaling or cracking. If the concrete surface is weathered, rough 

to the touch, or holds moisture, it is still satisfactory but should be seal coated to prevent freeze/ thaw damage.

M Spalling, scaling, and open cracking present, but the immediate integrity or 

performance of the structure is not threatened. Reinforcing steel may be exposed. Repairs/ sealing is necessary to prevent additional damage during periods of thawing and freezing.

U Surface deterioration or deep, controlled cracks present that result in an unreliable 

structure.

N/A There are no concrete surfaces.

Key: A = Acceptable. M = Minimally Acceptable; Maintenance is required. U = Unacceptable. N/A = Not Applicable. RODI = Requires Operation During Inspection

Interior Drainage - Continued on Next Page

Concrete Surfaces (Such as gate wells, outfalls, intakes, or culverts)

Interior Drainage System (continued)

EVALUATION

For use during all Initial and Continuing Eligibility Inspections of systems carrying interior drainage through the FCW

RATED ITEM
Appendix C: FCW Inspection Guide

14

Page 4 of 4

A M U N/A LOCATIONS/ REMARKS / RECOMMENDATIONS

14.

A There are no significant areas of tilting, sliding, or settlement that would endanger the 

integrity of the project.

M There are areas of tilting, sliding, or settlement (either active or inactive) that need to 

be repaired. The integrity of the structure is not in danger. 

U There are areas of tilting, sliding, or settlement (either active or inactive) that threaten 

the structure's integrity and performance.

N/A There are no concrete structures.

15.

A No scouring / erosion, or undermining near the structure.

M Scouring / erosion near the footing of the structure but not close enough to affect 

structure stability during the next flood.

U Scouring or undermining at the foundation that has affected structural integrity.

N/A There are no concrete structures.

16. Safety Fencing

RODI

A Safety/ security fencing is in good condition and provides protection against falling or 

unauthorized access. Gates open and close freely, locks are in place, and there is little corrosion on metal parts.

M Safety/ security fencing or gates are damaged or corroded but appear to be 

maintainable. Locks may be missing or damaged.

U Safety/ security fencing and gates are damaged or corroded to the point that 

replacement is required, or potentially dangerous project features are not secured.

N/A There are no features of the internal drainage system that require safety fencing.

17. Other Metallic Items

A All metal parts are protected from corrosion damage, and show no rust, damage, or 

deterioration that would cause a safety concern.

M Corrosion seen on metallic parts appear to be maintainable.

U Metallic parts are severely corroded and require replacement to prevent failure, 

equipment damage, or safety issues.

N/A There are no other significant metallic items associated with the interior drainage 

system.

Key: A = Acceptable. 

M = Minimally Acceptable; Maintenance is required. U = Unacceptable. N/A = Not Applicable. RODI = Requires Operation During Inspection

Interior Drainage System (continued)

For use during all Initial and Continuing Eligibility Inspections of systems carrying interior drainage through the FCWAdditional issues noted during the inspection:

EVALUATION RATED ITEM

Tilting, Sliding or Settlement of Concrete and Sheet Pile Structures (Such as gate wells, outfalls, intakes, or culverts)Foundation of Concrete Structures (Such as gate wells, outfalls, or culverts)
Appendix C: FCW Inspection Guide

15

Page 1 of 4

A M U N/A LOCATIONS/ REMARKS / RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Pump Stations Operating 

Log(A or U only)

A Operation and maintenance log is present at the pump station and is being used and 

updated, and personnel have been trained in pump station operations. Names and last training date shown in the log book.

U No operating log present, or refresher training for personnel has not been conducted.

2.

A Operation and Maintenance Manual and/or posted operating instructions are present 

and adequately cover all pertinent pump station features.

U Operation and Maintenance Manual missing or sponsor is unsure of location.

3. Plant Building

A The building is in good structural condition, with no major cracks in concrete or 

brick. The roof is not leaking, exhaust fans are operational, there are no exposed electrical components, and the working environment is safe.

M There is significant cracking in the building structure, or the building is damaged in 

other ways such that it needs repair but does not threaten pumping operations.

U The structural integrity or stability of the building is threatened, or there is other 

damage to the building such a that pumping operations can not be performed as intended.

4.

A A telephone, cellular phone, two-way radio, or similar device is available to pump 

station operator and maintenance personnel.

U A telephone, cellular phone, two-way radio, or similar device is not available to pump 

station operator and maintenance personnel.

5. Safety

(A or U only)

A Exhaust fans, vents/louvers are working properly. Fuel storage / distribution meets 

state / local requirements. Fire extinguishers of sufficient quality, quantity, and type are on hand and are properly charged. Safety hardware (hand rails, grates for wetwells, etc) is installed. Required safety items used (hearing, eyes, etc).

U Safety issues exist that could cause injury or loss of life.

6. Safety Fencing

RODI

A Safety/ security fencing is in good condition and provides protection against falling or 

unauthorized access. Gates open and close freely, locks are in place, and there is little corrosion on metal parts.

M Safety/ security fencing or gates are damaged or corroded but appear to be 

maintainable. Locks may be missing or damaged.

U Safety/ security fencing and gates are damaged or corroded to the point that 

replacement is required, or potentially dangerous project features are not secured.

N/A There are no features in or around the pump stations that require safety fencing.

Key: A = Acceptable. 

M = Minimally Acceptable; Maintenance is required. U = Unacceptable. N/A = Not Applicable. RODI = Requires Operation During Inspection

Pump Stations - Continued on Next Page

RATED ITEM

Pump Stations

Communications(A or U only)

For use during all Initial and Continuing Eligibility Inspections of pump stations

EVALUATION

Pump Station Operations and Maintenance Manual (A or U only)
Appendix C: FCW Inspection Guide

16

Page 2 of 4

A M U N/A LOCATIONS/ REMARKS / RECOMMENDATIONS

7. Cranes

RODI

A Crane operational, and have been inspected and load tested in accordance with OSHA 

requirements.

M Crane has not been inspected or operationally tested with the past year, or there are 

visible signs of corrosion, oil leakage, etc, requiring maintenance.

U Crane not operational, or tagged out of service.

N/A There are no cranes.

8. Pumps A All pumps are properly maintained and lubricated. Systems are periodically tested, 

and there is no evidence of cavitation, vibrations, or unusual sounds.

M Minor deficiencies exist which need to be closely monitored or repaired, such as the 

presence of minor vibrations or the corrosion of the pump shaft housing. However, the pumps are operational and are expected to perform through the next period of usage.

U One or more of the pumps are not operational, or the pump capacity has degraded to 

the point where project performance is in question.

9. Power

(A or U only)

A The power source is adequate, safe, and reliable. Backup generators are on hand or 

there is a reliable backup power plan in place. Backup units are properly sized, operational, periodically exercised, and properly maintained.

U Power source not considered safe or reliable to sustain operations during flood 

conditions.

10. Insulation Megger 

Testing

A Results of megger tests show that the insulation meets manufacturer's or industry 

standards. Tested within the last 2 years.

M Results of megger test show that insulation resistance is lower than manufacturer's or 

industry standard, but can be corrected with proper application of heat, or megger testing not conducted with the last 2 years.

U Megger tests not conducted within past three years or indicate that insulation 

resistance is low enough that the equipment will not be able to meet design standards of operation; or evidence of arching or shorting is detected visually. 

11. Motors, Engines, Fans 

and Gear Reducers

A All items are operational. Preventative maintenance and lubrication is being 

performed and the system is periodically subjected to performance testing. Instrumentation, alarms, and auto shutdowns are operational.

M Systems have minor deficiencies, but are operational and will function adequately 

through the next flood.

U One or more of the primary motors or systems is not operational.

Key: A = Acceptable. M = Minimally Acceptable; Maintenance is required. U = Unacceptable. N/A = Not Applicable. RODI = Requires Operation During Inspection

Pump Stations - Continued on Next Page

Pump Stations (continued)

RATED ITEM EVALUATION

For use during all Initial and Continuing Eligibility Inspections of pump stations
Appendix C: FCW Inspection Guide

17

Page 3 of 4

A M U N/A LOCATIONS/ REMARKS / RECOMMENDATIONS

12. Pump Control Systems A Operational and maintained free of damage, corrosion, or other debris.

M Operational with minor discrepancies.

Will function adequately during the next flood event.

U Pump controls not operational.

May not function adequately during the next flood event.

13. Sumps / Wet well A Clear of excessive debris, sediment, or other obstructions. Procedures are in place to 

remove debris accumulation during operation.

M Debris, sediment, or other obstructions are present and must be removed, but the 

sump/ wet well will function as intended during the next flood. Procedures are in place to remove debris accumulation during operation.

U Large debris or excessive silt present which will hinder or damage pumps during 

operation, or no procedures have been established to remove debris accumulation during operation.

14. A Drive chain, bearing, gear reducers, and other components are in good operating 

condition and are being properly maintained.

M The trash rake is in need of maintenance, but is still operational.

U Trash rake not operational or deficiencies will inhibit operations during the next 

flood event.

N/A There are no mechanical trash rakes.

15. Trash Racks A Trash racks are fastened in place and properly maintained.

 (non-mechanical) M Trash racks are in place but are unfastened or have bent bars that allow debris to enter 

into the pipe or pump station. Repair or replacement is required.

U Trash rack is missing or damaged to the extent that it is no longer functional and must 

be replaced.

N/A There are no non-mechanical trash rakes.

16. Sluice / Slide Gates

RODI

A Gates open and close freely with minor leakage. Sill is free of sediment and other 

obstructions. Gates and lifters have been maintained.

M Gates have been damaged or have deteriorated, and open and close with resistance or 

binding. Leakage quantity is controllable and is not a threat to project performance. Maintenance is required.

U Gates do not open or close. Gate, stem, lifter and/or guides may be damaged or 

corroded.

N/A There are no sluice/slide gates.

Key: A = Acceptable. M = Minimally Acceptable; Maintenance is required. U = Unacceptable. N/A = Not Applicable. RODI = Requires Operation During Inspection

Pump Stations - Continued on Next Page

Trash Rakes (Mechanical Operations)RODI

Pump Stations (continued)

For use during all Initial and Continuing Eligibility Inspections of pump stations

RATED ITEM EVALUATION
Appendix C: FCW Inspection Guide

18

Page 4 of 4

A M U N/A LOCATIONS/ REMARKS / RECOMMENDATIONS

17.

A All electric gate operators are in good working condition and are adequately powered, 

and are capable of opening and closing the gate properly. Preventative maintenance is being performed and the system is tested periodically.

M All electric gate operators are operational with minor deficiencies, but should 

perform through the next period of usage.

U The electric gate operators are not operational, or the power source is not considered 

reliable to sustain operations during flood conditions.

N/A There are no electric gate operators.

18. Manual Operators 

(Backups) for Sluice / Slide Gates 

A All manual gate operators are in good working condition and are capable of opening 

and closing the gate properly. Preventative maintenance is being performed and the system is tested periodically.

RODI

M Manual gate operators are operational with minor deficiencies, but should perform 

through the next period of usage.

U Manual gate operators are not operational.

N/A If there are sluice or slide gates, there needs to be means of operating them manually. 

If there are no sluice/slide gates, this item is N/A.

19.

A All metal parts are protected from corrosion damage, and show no rust, damage, or 

deterioration that would cause a safety concern.

M Corrosion seen on metallic parts appear to be maintainable.

U Metallic parts are severely corroded and require replacement to prevent failure, 

equipment damage, or safety issues.

N/A There are no other significant metallic items associated with the pump stations.

Key: A = Acceptable. 

M = Minimally Acceptable; Maintenance is required. U = Unacceptable. N/A = Not Applicable. RODI = Requires Operation During Inspection

Pump Stations (continued)

For use during all Initial and Continuing Eligibility Inspections of pump stationsAdditional issues noted during the inspection:

RATED ITEM EVALUATION

Electric Gate Operators for Sluice / Slide Gates (Intake/ Discharge) RODIOther Metallic Items (Equipment, Ladders, Platform Anchors, etc)
Appendix C: FCW Inspection Guide

19

Page 1 of 2

A M U N/A LOCATIONS/ REMARKS / RECOMMENDATIONS

1. A There are minimal obstructions or vegetation blocking the FCW. 

M The channel is obstructed by minor log jams, snags, or vegetation. Less than 20% of 

the channel is obstructed.

U Obstructions or vegetation growth have obstructed over 20% of the river or channel.

2. Shoaling

A No shoaling present.

M Non-aquatic grasses present on shoal. No trees or brush is present on shoal, and 

channel flow is not impeded.

U Shoaling is well established, stabilized by trees, brush, or other vegetation. Shoals 

are diverting flow to channel bank causing bank erosion and undercutting.

3. Encroachments

A No trash, debris, excavations, structures, or other obstructions present within the 

project easement area. Encroachments which do not diminish proper functioning of the project have been previously approved by the Corps.

M Trash, debris, excavations, structures, or other obstructions present, or inappropriate 

activities that will not inhibit project operations and maintenance or emergency operations. Encroachments have not been approved by the Corps.

U Trash, debris, excavation, structures, or other obstructions present, or inappropriate 

activities that will inhibit project operations and maintenance or emergency operations.

4. Riprap Revetments & 

Banks

A Existing riprap protection is properly maintained and is undamaged. Riprap clearly 

visible.

M No riprap displacement or scouring activity that could undercut banks, erode 

embankments, or restrict desired flow. Unwanted vegetation must be cleared and sprayed with an appropriate herbicide.

U Dense brush, trees, or grasses hide the rock protection, or meandering and/or scour 

activity is undercutting banks, eroding embankments, or impairing channel flows by causing turbulence or shoaling. 

N/A There is no riprap protecting the channel.

5. Erosion

A No head cutting or horizontal deviation observed.

M Head cutting and horizontal deviation evident, but is less than 30 cm (1 foot) from the 

designed grade or cross section. 

U Apparent head cutting and horizontal deviation of more than 30 cm (1 foot) from the 

designed grade or cross section. Corrective actions required to stop or slow erosion.

Key: A = Acceptable. 

M = Minimally Acceptable; Maintenance is required. U = Unacceptable. N/A = Not Applicable. RODI = Requires Operation During Inspection

Vegetation and Obstructions

Earthen (Excavated) Flood Control Channels

For use during all Initial and Continuing Eligibility Inspections of excavated flood control channels

Earthen Flood Control Channels - Continued on Next Page

RATED ITEM EVALUATION
Appendix C: FCW Inspection Guide

20

Page 2 of 2

A M U N/A LOCATIONS/ REMARKS / RECOMMENDATIONS

6. Concrete Surfaces

A Negligible spalling, scaling or cracking. If the concrete surface is weathered, rough 

to the touch, or holds moisture, it is still satisfactory but should be seal coated to prevent freeze/ thaw damage.

M Spalling, scaling, and open cracking present, but the immediate integrity or 

performance of the structure is not threatened. Reinforcing steel may be exposed. Repairs/ sealing is necessary to prevent additional damage during periods of thawing and freezing.

U Surface deterioration or deep, controlled cracks present that result in an unreliable 

structure.

N/A There are no concrete structures associated with the flood control channel.

7.

A There are no significant areas of tilting, sliding, or settlement that would endanger the 

integrity of the project.

M There are areas of tilting, sliding, or settlement (either active or inactive) that need to 

be repaired. The integrity of the structure is not in danger. 

U There are areas of tilting, sliding, or settlement (either active or inactive) that threaten 

the structure's integrity and performance.

N/A There are no concrete structures associated with the flood control channel.

8.

A No scouring / erosion, or undermining near the structure.

M Scouring / erosion near the footing of the structure but not close enough to affect 

structure stability during the next flood.

U Scouring or undermining at the foundation that has affected structural integrity.

N/A There are no concrete structures associated with the flood control channel.

9.

A Flap gates open and close easily with minimal leakage.

Gates show no corrosion damage and have been maintained.

M Gate will not fully open or close because of obstructions that can be easily removed, 

or has corrosion damage that requires maintenance.

U Gate is missing, has been damaged, or has deteriorated and needs repair.

N/A There are no flap gates.

Key: A = Acceptable. 

M = Minimally Acceptable; Maintenance is required. U = Unacceptable. N/A = Not Applicable. RODI = Requires Operation During Inspection

Earthen (Excavated) Flood Control Channels (continued)

Additional issues noted during the inspection:

Flap Gates/Flap Valves/ Pinch ValvesRODI

EVALUATION RATED ITEM

Tilting, Sliding or Settlement of Concrete StructuresFoundation of Concrete Structures

For use during all Initial and Continuing Eligibility Inspections of excavated flood control channels
Appendix C: FCW Inspection Guide

21

Page 1 of 2

A M U N/A LOCATIONS/ REMARKS / RECOMMENDATIONS

1. A No obstructions, vegetation, debris, or sediment accumulation within the channel. 

Channel joints and weep holes are also free of grass and weeds.

M Sediment and debris present, but not to the degree that it supports vegetation. 

Obstructions/ debris have not impaired the channel flow capacity. Sediment and debris removal recommended.

U Sediment shoals are well established and support vegetation, or there are obstructions 

or accumulated debris that have impaired the channel flow capacity. Sediment and debris removal required to re-establish flow capacity.

2. Shoaling A No shoaling present.

M Non-aquatic grasses present on shoal. No trees or brush is present on shoal, and 

channel flow is not impeded.

U Shoaling is well established, stabilized by saplings, brush, or other vegetation. Shoals 

are diverting flow to channel walls. Channel flow capacity is reduced and maintenance is required.

3. Concrete Surfaces A Negligible spalling, scaling or cracking. If the concrete surface is weathered, rough 

to the touch, or holds moisture, it is still satisfactory but should be seal coated to prevent freeze/ thaw damage.

M Spalling, scaling, and open cracking present, but the immediate integrity or 

performance of the structure is not threatened. Reinforcing steel may be exposed. Repairs/ sealing is necessary to prevent additional damage during periods of thawing and freezing.

U Surface deterioration or deep, controlled cracks present that result in an unreliable 

structure.

4. A There are no significant areas of tilting, sliding, or settlement that would endanger the 

integrity of the project.

M There are areas of tilting, sliding, or settlement (either active or inactive) that need to 

be repaired. The integrity of the structure is not in danger. 

U There are areas of tilting, sliding, or settlement (either active or inactive) that threaten 

the structure's integrity and performance.

5. A No scouring / erosion, or undermining near the structure.

M Scouring / erosion near the footing of the structure but not close enough to affect 

structure stability during the next flood.

U Scouring or undermining at the foundation that has affected structural integrity.

Key: A = Acceptable. M = Minimally Acceptable; Maintenance is required. U = Unacceptable. N/A = Not Applicable. RODI = Requires Operation During Inspection

Vegetation and ObstructionsTilting, Sliding or Settlement of Concrete Structures

RATED ITEM

Concrete Lined Flood Control Channels

Foundation of Concrete Structures

EVALUATION

For use during all Initial and Continuing Eligibility Inspections of concrete lined flood control channels

Concrete Lined Channels - Continued on Next Page
Appendix C: FCW Inspection Guide

22

Page 2 of 2

A M U N/A LOCATIONS/ REMARKS / RECOMMENDATIONS

6. Monolith Joints

A The monolith joint material is in good condition.

M The monolith joint material is deteriorating and needs to be repaired or replaced to 

prevent spalling and cracking during freeze/ thaw cycles.

U The monolith joint material is severely deteriorated and the concrete has spalled and 

cracked, damaging the waterstop to the point where it will not provide the intended level of protection during a flood.

N/A There are no monolith joints.

7.

A Flap gates open and close easily with minimal leakage.

Gates show no corrosion damage and have been maintained.

M Gate will not fully open or close because of obstructions that can be easily removed, 

or has corrosion damage that requires maintenance.

U Gate is missing, has been damaged, or has deteriorated and needs repair.

N/A There are no flap gates.

Key: A = Acceptable. 

M = Minimally Acceptable; Maintenance is required. U = Unacceptable. N/A = Not Applicable. RODI = Requires Operation During Inspection

Additional issues noted during the inspection:

RATED ITEM EVALUATION

Flap Gates/Flap Valves/ Pinch ValvesRODI

Concrete Lined Flood Control Channels

For use during all Initial and Continuing Eligibility Inspections of concrete lined flood control channels
Appendix C: FCW Inspection Guide

23

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS.

The following terms and definitions are used when determining the rating for each item and/or component in the flood control work.

DETERMINATION OF OVERALL PROJECT CONDITION CODE:

The lowest single rating given for a rated item will determine the overall condition of the project:1. If all items are rated as Acceptable, the overall project condition will be rated as Acceptable.2. If one or more items are rated as Minimally Acceptable, the overall project condition will be rated Minimally Acceptable. 3. If one or more item is rated as Unacceptable, the overall project condition will be rated as Unacceptable.

PROJECT CONDITION AND ELIGIBILITY FOR PL84-99 ASSISTANCE:

3. Projects rated as Unacceptable are immediately put in an "Inactive" status and are not eligible for PL84-99 post flood or storm damage rehabilitation assistance from the Corps of Engineers. The

project will remain in an inactive status until the project sponsor presents the Corps with proof that all of the required repairs/maintenance has been completed. (This includes any repairs/ maintenance 

1. The sections of this report labeled "Basic Eligibility" and "FCW Engineering" only need to be completed during Initial Eligirequired for project features rated minimally Acceptable, as well as those rated Unacceptable.)

bility Inspections.

2. Determination of Minimum Elevation for Levees and Floodwalls (#1 under FCW Engineering):Depending on available data and local Corps policy, the minimum elevation required may be calculated using traditional methods, with the addition of 1 foot of freeboard in agricultural areas and 2 feet of freeboard in urban areas, or using annual exceedance probability, which numerically accounts for the natural variation and uncertainty when estimating discharge-probability and stage-discharge functions so that additional requirements for elevation are based on the level of risk in the data.3. All other sections of this guide that correspond to project features in the Flood Control Work must be fully completed during every Continuing and Initial Eligibility Inspection.

4. RODI stands for "Requires Operation During Inspection". Items marked "RODI" will be rated based on the way they work during the inspection.5. Additional areas for inspection will be incorporated by the inspector into this guide if the layout or physical characteristics of the project warrant this. Appropriate entries will be made in the REMARKS block.A - Acceptable: The rated item is in satisfactory condition, with no deficiencies, and will function as designed and intended during the next flood event.

M - Minimally Acceptable: This rated item has minor deficiencies that need to be corrected. The minor deficiencies will not seriously impair the functioning of the item during the next flood event. 

The overall reliability of the project will be lowered because of the minor deficiency.U - Unacceptable: The deficiencies are serious enough that the rated item will not adequately function during the next flood event, compromising the project's ability to provide reliable flood protection.1. Projects rated as Acceptable are considered "Active" and eligible for PL84-99 post flood or storm damage rehabilitation assistance from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

2. Projects rated Minimally Acceptable are considered "Active" and eligible for PL84-99 rehabilitation assistance during the time that it takes to make needed corrections. This timeframe will be agreed 

upon between the project sponsor and Corps inspector at the time of the inspection (or shortly thereafter). If the project sponsor does not present the Corps with proof of completion of the repairs/maintenance by the end of this timeframe, then the project will be "Inactive" and will be ineligible for PL84-99 rehabilitation assistance.

RATINGS OF INDIVIDUAL ITEMS: 

Instructions for the Inspection Guide
Appendix C: FCW Inspection Guide

24

This page intentionally left blank. 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

1

APPENDIX D: Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees 

Appendix D Contents 

1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 2

2. OVERTOPPING....................................................................................................... 3

2.1 Options for Raising a Levee ....................................................................................... 3 

2.2 Raising a Levee with Earthen Fill............................................................................... 5 

2.3 Raising a Levee with Sandbags .................................................................................. 9 

2.4 Raising the levee with Flashboards or Lumber and Sack Cappings......................... 14 

3. SEEPAGE................................................................................................................ 15

3.1 Effects of Underseepage ........................................................................................... 15 

3.2 Sandboils................................................................................................................... 16 

3.3 Sloughs...................................................................................................................... 19 

3.4 Floating Soil Conditions ........................................................................................... 20 

3.5 Other Seepage Related Considerations..................................................................... 20 

4. EROSION................................................................................................................ 21

4.1 Wave Wash ............................................................................................................... 21 

4.2 Scours........................................................................................................................ 23 

4.3 Ice and Floating Debris............................................................................................. 24 

Plates 

Plate 1: Emergency Earth Capping 

Plate 2: Sand Bag Capping 

Plate 3: Lumber and Sack Capping 

Plate 4: Method of Draining Levee Slope 

Plate 5: Sack Revetment 

Plate 6: Polyethylene Levee Protection 

Plate 7: Placement of Polyethylene Sheeting in the Wet 

Plate 8: Emergency Wave Wash Protection 

Plate 9: Movable Wave Wash Protection 

Plate 10: Deflection Weir, Type A 

Plate 11: Deflection Weir, Type B 

Plate 12: Emergency Crevasse Closure 

Plate 13: Plank Road 

Plate 14: Plank Runway 

Plate 15: Miscellaneous Details
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

2

1. Introduction 

If a well-constructed levee of correct cross section is properly maintained and is not 

overtopped, it should hold throughout any major flood event. However, the levee is still in 

potential danger whenever there is water against it. The danger increases with the height of 

water, the duration of the flood stage, the intensity of the current, and the wave action against 

the levee face. There are three primary factors that lead to levee failures. 

1. Overtopping 

2. Seepage problems such as sandboils or slides 

3. Erosion from the current or waves 

Potential levee failures may be prevented if prompt action is taken and proper methods of 

treatment are employed. This appendix describes some of the general actions that should be 

taken to raise the crown of a levee or to respond to sandboils, seepage problems, or wave wash 

if these problems are identified during a patrol. The methods described have been developed 

from many years of experience in dealing with problems that arise as a result of high water, 

and should be followed as closely as possible. (The intent of this isn’t to destroy personal 

initiative when dealing with unusual emergencies. On the contrary, if a dangerous situation 

occurs along a levee line, immediate action is demanded using the materials and labor at hand. 

However, an emergency is not a time in which to experiment, and these proven methods 

should be employed wherever possible.) Conditions and problems may arise which are not 

adequately covered by the suggestions provided or if there’s any doubt as to the proper 

procedure that should be taken, the local U.S. Army Corps of Engineers district Emergency 

Management Office should immediately be consulted for advice and assistance. 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

3

2. Overtopping 

A levee is overtopped when water flows over the levee crown. Low reaches in the levee crown 

must be identified as early as possible and raised to a uniform level. If the stream is predicted 

to approach or exceed the height of the existing levee, immediate attention should be given to 

raising the levee crown. 

On the other hand, if the stream is likely to crest many feet beyond the elevation of the levee, 

the best approach may be to simply allow the levee to overtop, so that flood fight efforts can 

be redirected to other areas. If this is the case, low reaches in the levee crown need to be 

raised, leveled or otherwise prepared so that it overtops uniformly, to keep the damage to a 

minimum. Ideally, the levee should be allowed to overtop uniformly along the downstream 

portion of the system, so the protected area is "backfilled" with flood water. If the levee is 

breached due to the overtopping along the downstream portion of the FCW, it prevents the full 

force of the river's current from flowing into the protected area. An upstream breach will allow 

the river current to bring in much more debris (for example, entire trees), and would possibly 

cause much more scouring damage to the protected area than a downstream overtopping 

breach. It’s very important that you contact the Corps district office when faced with decisions 

relating to the overtopping of a levee, as the Corps has a great deal of experience with flood 

fighting and can provide technical assistance and guidance as needed. 

Generally, emergency barriers are constructed 2 feet above the current predicted river crest. 

For example, if the river is predicted to rise 1 1/2 feet beyond the elevation of the levee, then a 

3 1⁄2 foot capping would be necessary in order to maintain two feet of freeboard as a factor of 

safety. If the crest prediction increases during construction, additional height must be added. 

2.1 Options for Raising a Levee 

There are a number of ways that the levee crown can be raised. Provided the work is done well 

in advance of the high water, in areas where there is sufficient space for construction and with 

the proper equipment, the most efficient means of raising low stretches of the levee is to 

scarify the surface, haul in fill material and compact it in place, as discussed in section 2.2, 

below. However, this is not always possible. No heavy equipment should be used on a levee 

when water is near the top, as the vibration may cause a failure. In no case should such 

equipment be allowed on an earthen levee after the levee has commenced to seep. For these 

reasons, raising the elevation with compacted earthen fill may not be an option. The levee 

crown may alternately be raised with a sandbag capping or with flashboard structures. Jersey 

barriers have also successfully been converted into floodwalls during emergency situations. 

Additionally, there are a large number of contemporary technologies that may be used to raise 

an emergency levee; including bladders, structurally supported membranes, and lightweight 

shells that are filled with sand from a bucket loader. The Corps’ Engineer Research and 

Development Center has recently completed a rigorous and impartial study on several of these 

flood fight technologies. You are encouraged to visit http://chl.erdc.usace.army.mil/ffs for 

details on the tests and products, since this site will have the Corps’ most current information 

on the subject, and the website will be updated as additional products are tested. 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

4

With so many options available for raising a flood barrier, there are several things you should 

consider as you decide how to best protect your community: 

a. Cost of materials and labor 

The materials for sandbag construction are generally much less expensive than the 

alternatives. Sandbag construction is very labor intensive, but at the same time, 

volunteer labor is often readily available during high water. 

b. Available time 

Flashboards or contemporary options are better suited to conditions when there is little 

time available for the construction, because they typically require less labor and can be 

put in place much faster than sandbag levees. 

c. Allowable seepage 

Most construction methods will allow some degree of seepage through the structure. 

As is the case with sandbags, modifications may be made to the basic designs so that 

the seepage is reduced, but these modifications usually take additional time to 

construct. 

d. Suitability for construction in the given area 

Sandbags are extremely versatile and sandbag structures can be constructed almost 

anywhere. Sandbags can be used to close small roads or to fill gaps, or can be built into 

long stretches of levees if there is adequate time and manpower. Flashboards and 

newer technologies are generally not as versatile, but depending on the technology and 

the construction, they are typically well suited for raising the elevation over longer 

stretches. 

e. Equipment requirements 

Sandbag structures can be built without heavy machinery, which may be required for 

some other options. There are a number of situations where it’s not possible to use 

even light earthmoving machinery. For example, there might not be enough space for 

the machinery, or the foundations might be too unstable. Also, individual landowners 

may object to the use of machinery over their properties. 

f. Necessary elevation 

Though sandbag levees are best suited for elevations of 3 feet or less, they have 

successfully been used to raise elevations by 20 feet or more in extreme flooding 

situations. Flashboards are typically only built to a maximum of 3 feet, and the 

elevation provided by other technologies varies. In deciding between the various 

options, it’s important to consider how reliably they can forecast the crest height of the 

river. If the river stage might rise several feet beyond what is currently predicted, a 

sandbag levee could be raised higher, while it would be much more difficult to raise 

something like a flashboard or Jersey barrier structure. 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

5

g. Disposal 

Burlap sandbags are biodegradable and relatively easy to remove and dispose of. Other 

options typically take much longer to remove and create more waste. Some are 

reusable. 

Situations may arise when one of the more contemporary products may be readily available 

and appropriate for the given conditions, when there would be insufficient workers available 

to protect the area with sandbags or when time was extremely limited; and in these situations 

the cost of using these products may be justified. While it would be prohibitively expensive 

for the Corps to stockpile enough inventories to adequately address all problems that might be 

faced across the country, the Corps may purchase such items and make them available for 

public sponsors if conditions warrant. However, in the majority of situations, sandbags are 

almost always preferred and recommended during flood fights when construction with earthen 

fill is not possible. The following sections provide specific guidance on raising levees using 

earthen fill, sandbags, and flashboards. 

2.2 Raising a Levee with Earthen Fill 

a. Borrow Area and Haul Road 

Borrow material can become a critical item of supply in some areas due to long haul, 

project isolation, or for other reasons. The two prime requisites for a borrow area are 

that adequate material be available and that the site be accessible at all times. The 

quantity estimate plus an additional 50 percent should provide the basis for the area 

requirement, in order to provide suitable materials for levee construction as covered 

below. The area must be located so that it will not become isolated from the project by 

high water. Local contractors and local officials are the best source of information on 

available borrow areas. In undeveloped areas, the area should be cleared of brush, 

trees, and debris, with topsoil and humus being stripped. In early spring, it will 

probably be necessary to rip the area to remove frozen material. An effort should be 

made to borrow from the area in such a manner that the area will be relatively smooth 

and free draining when the operation is complete. The haul road may be an existing 

road or street, or it may have to be constructed. To mitigate damages, it is highly 

desirable to use unpaved trails and roads, or to construct a road if the haul distance is 

short. In any case, the road should be maintained to avoid unnecessary traffic delays. 

The use of flagmen and warning signs is mandatory at major crossings, such as 

highways, near schools, and at major pedestrian crossings. It may become necessary to 

stockpile material near anticipated trouble areas. 

b. Equipment 

One of the important considerations in earthwork construction is the selection of 

proper equipment to do the work. Under emergency conditions, obtaining normally 

specified earthwork equipment will be difficult and the work will generally be done 

with locally available equipment. It may be wise to call for technical assistance in the 

early contract stage to ensure that proper and efficient equipment use is proposed. If 

possible, compaction equipment should be used in flood barrier construction. This may 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

6

involve sheepsfoot, rubber-tired, or vibratory rollers. Scrapers should be used for 

hauling when possible because of speed (on short haul) and large capacity. Truck haul, 

however, has been the most widely used. A ripper is almost essential for opening 

borrow areas in the early spring. A bulldozer of some size is mandatory on the job to 

help spread dumped fill and provide some compaction. 

c. Foundation preparation 

One of the primary differences in the construction of emergency levees and the 

construction of permanent levees lies in the preparation of the foundation. Prior to any 

embankment construction, it’s very important that the foundation is prepared, 

particularly if the levee is to be left in place. For emergency construction during spring 

flooding, the first item of work will probably be snow removal. The snow should be 

pushed riverward so as to decrease ponding when it melts. Any trees that might be 

present should be cut and the stumps removed. If at all possible, any obstructions 

above the ground (brush or similar debris) should be removed. The foundation should 

then be stripped of topsoil and surface humus. (Clearing and grubbing, structure 

removal and stripping should be performed only if time permits.) Stripping may be 

impossible if the ground is frozen, and in this case, the foundation should be ripped or 

scarified, if possible, to provide a tough surface for the material to bond to. Every 

effort should be made to remove all ice or soil containing ice lenses. Frost or frozen 

ground can give a false sense of security in the early stages of a flood fight. It can act 

as a rigid boundary and support the levee, but when it thaws, the soil strength may be 

reduced sufficiently for cracking or the development of slides. The ice also forms an 

impervious barrier to prevent seepage. This may result in a considerable build-up in 

pressure under the soils landward of the levee and, upon thawing, pressure may be 

sufficient to cause sudden blowouts. If this condition exists, it must be monitored, and 

one must be prepared to act quickly if sliding or boiling starts. If stripping is possible, 

the material should be pushed landward and riverward of the toe of levee and 

windrowed. After the flood, this material can be spread on the slopes to provide topsoil 

for vegetation. 

d. Materials 

Earth fill materials for emergency levees will come from local borrow areas. An 

attempt should be made to utilize materials which are compatible with the foundation 

materials as explained below. However, due to time limitation, any local materials may 

be used if reasonable construction procedures are followed. The materials should not 

contain large frozen pieces of earth. 

i. Clay 

Clay is preferred because the section can be made smaller (steeper side slopes). 

Also, clay is relatively impervious, and has relatively high resistance to erosion 

when it’s compacted. A disadvantage in using clay is that adequate compaction is 

difficult to obtain without proper equipment. Additionally, the water content in 

impervious fill can impact the compaction needs. Efforts are typically made at the 

borrow site to obtain material with the optimal moisture; otherwise, if that is not 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

7

possible, more time may be required for compaction. Another disadvantage is that 

the clay may be wet and sub-freezing temperatures may cause the material to 

freeze in the borrow pit and in the hauling equipment. Weather could cause delays 

and should definitely be considered in the overall construction effort. 

ii. Sand 

If sand is used, the section should comply as closely as possible with 

recommendations in the paragraph titled Levee Section, below. Flat slopes are 

important, as steep slopes without poly coverage will cause seepage through the 

levee to outcrop high on the landward slope, and may cause the slope to slump. 

iii. Silt 

Material that is primarily silt should be avoided, and if it is used, poly facing must 

be applied to the river slope. Silt, upon wetting, tends to collapse under its own 

weight and is very susceptible to erosion. 

e. Levee Section 

In standard levees, the foundation soils and available construction materials generally 

dictate the design configuration of the levee. Therefore, even under emergency 

conditions, an attempt should be made to make the embankment compatible with the 

foundation. Information on foundation soils may be available from local officials or 

engineers, and it should be utilized. The three foundation conditions and the levee 

sections cited below are classical and idealized, and usual field conditions depart from 

them to various degrees. However, they should be used as a guide so that possible 

serious flood fight problems might be lessened during high water. In determining the 

top width of any type of section, consideration should be given as to whether a revised 

forecast will require additional fill to be placed. A top width adequate for construction 

equipment will facilitate raising the levee. Finally, actual levee construction will in 

cases, depend on time, materials, and right-of-way available.

i. Sand Foundation 

If the foundation material under the emergency levee is sand or some other 

pervious material, the following guidance is provided: 

− If the levee section is to be made of sand, use a minimum of 1V (Vertical) 

on 3H (Horizontal) river slopes. A 1V on 4H river slope is preferable, and 

will be less susceptible to erosion, but a 1V on 3H slope is considered an 

adequate minimum for emergency purposes. Use 1V on 5H for the 

landward slope, and 10-foot top width. 

− If the levee section is to be made of clay, use 1V on 2 1/2 H for both slopes. 

1V on 3H slopes are preferable, but 1V on 1 1⁄2 H is an acceptable minimum 

for emergency purposes. The bottom width should comply with creep ratio 

criteria; i.e., L (across bottom) should be equal to C x H; where C=9 for 

fine gravel and 15 for fine sand in the foundation, and H is levee height. 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

8

This criteria can be met by using berms either landward or riverward of the 

levee. Berm thickness should be 3 feet or greater. Berms are used mainly to 

control or to relieve uplift pressures and will not reduce seepage 

significantly. 

ii. Clay Foundation 

If the foundation material under the emergency levee is clay, the following 

guidance is provided: 

− If the levee section is to be made of sand, it should be constructed with 1V 

on 3H for the river slope. Again, a 1V on 4H is preferable, but the steeper 

slope is considered adequate for emergency purposes. Use 1V on 5H for the 

landward slope, and a 10-foot top width, as described in the previous 

section. 

− If the levee section is to be made of clay, use 1V on 2 1/2 H for both slopes. 

1V on 3H slopes are preferable for clay levees, but 1V on 1 1⁄2 H is an 

acceptable minimum for emergency purposes. With a clay foundation, there 

is no need to construct additional berms. 

iii. Clay Layer over a Sand Foundation 

If the foundation material is such that there is an impervious clay layer resting over 

a pervious sand layer, the following guidance is provided: 

− If the levee section is to be made of sand, use a minimum of 1V (Vertical) 

on 3H (Horizontal) river slopes for emergency purposes. A 1V on 4H slope 

is preferable, if this construction is possible. 1V on 5H landward slope, and 

10-foot top width. In addition, a landside berm of sufficient thickness may 

be necessary to prevent rupture of the clay layer. The berm may be 

constructed of sand, gravel, or clay, but since berms made of clay generally 

need to be wider and thicker than those made of pervious materials, it 

would probably reduce the construction effort to build the berm with sand 

or gravel, if these materials were available. Standard design of berms 

requires considerable information and detailed analysis of soil conditions. 

However, prior technical assistance may reduce berm construction 

requirements in any emergency situation. 

− If the levee section is to be made of clay, use 1 V on 2 1/2 H for both 

slopes. Again, 1V on 3H slopes are preferable, but 1V on 1 1⁄2 H is an 

acceptable minimum for emergency purposes. Additionally, a berm may be 

necessary to prevent rupture of the impervious top stratum. 

f. Placement 

Layers should be started out to the full width of the embankment base, and subsequent 

lifts shall be placed so that the tops are substantially horizontal. In general, the levee 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

9

section should be homogeneous. However, when materials of varying permeability are 

encountered in the borrow area, the more pervious material should be placed on the 

landside of the embankment. 

g. Compaction 

As stated above, obtaining proper compaction equipment for a given soil type will be 

difficult. It is expected in most cases that the only compaction will be from that due to 

the hauling and spreading equipment, i.e., construction traffic routed over the fill. It is 

to be realized that even the minimum requirements may not be possible or feasible, 

and, if situation demands, material should be placed and compacted in any way 

possible and the levee observed closely for signs of distress. A construction engineer 

should ideally oversee the design of emergency levees. Use of these guidelines should 

not be taken as a guarantee that a safe structure will be constructed. 

i. Pervious Fill 

Material shall be placed in layers not more than 12 inches in thickness prior to 

compaction. In emergency situations, each layer should be compacted at the very 

minimum by one pass of the hauling equipment. However, whenever time, cost and 

availability of equipment will permit, a much safer structure will result if each 

layer gets compacted by a minimum of 3 complete passes of a crawler-type tractor, 

or by 2 passes of a vibratory roller. 

ii. Impervious Fill 

Fill material shall be placed in layers not exceeding 9 inches prior to compaction. 

In emergency situations, each layer should receive at least one complete coverage 

of the track or wheel of the placing equipment or equivalent. However, whenever 

time, cost and availability of equipment will permit, a much safer structure will 

result if each layer gets compacted by a minimum of 4-6 complete passes of a 

tamping type roller or 4 complete passes of a rubber-tired roller. 

2.3 Raising a Levee with Sandbags 

a. Sandbags 

Sandbags are available in plastic and in burlap. The preferred bags are untreated, close 

weave burlap sacks available at feed or hardware stores. Empty bags should be 

stockpiled for emergency use, and can be stored for approximately 8 years in a rodentfree environment with low humidity. Don’t fill the bags ahead of time, because they 

will deteriorate quickly. Commercial polypropylene sandbags are also effective in a 

flood fight, but since plastic bags are not readily biodegradable, burlap bags will allow 

more options for disposal if the bags are not going to be reused. (No sandbags should 

be left in place after the flood fight, regardless of whether they are burlap or plastic.) 

Do not use garbage bags, as they are too slick to stack; and don’t use feed sacks, as 

they are too large to handle. Experience shows that bags work well if they are 

approximately 14 inches wide and 24 inches deep. 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

10

Figure D.1 This two-person team is 

positioned properly for sandbag 

filling.

b. Fill Material 

A sandy soil is most desirable for filling sandbags, as it’s easiest to shovel, and the 

bags can most easily be shaped as needed. Fine sand tends to leak through the weave in 

the bag, and if it is used it should be double bagged. Silty soils also tend to leak 

through the bags, and both silty soils and clays are difficult to shape into place. 

Gravelly or rocky soils are generally poor choices for sandbag structures because of 

their permeability, though rocks and gravel may be used in sandbags in order to divert 

water flows, to fill holes, or to hold objects in position. However, any usable material 

at or near the site has definite advantages. Material should generally not be removed 

from within 500 feet of the landward toe of a levee, except for in extreme emergency 

situations. 

c. Sandbag Filling 

Filling sandbags manually requires two people. One 

member of the team folds the throat of the bag 

outward to form a collar, and holds it open so that 

the other person can shovel in material. The one 

holding the bag should hold it between or slightly in 

front of his or her feet, either crouching with his 

elbows resting on his knees or standing with his 

knees slightly flexed, while keeping his head and 

face as far away from the shovel as possible. Both 

people should be wearing gloves to protect their 

hands, and safety goggles may also be desirable, 

especially on dry or windy days. 

If they are available during large-scale operations, 

bag-holding racks and power loading equipment can 

expedite the operation. Sandbag filling machines can 

be very effective if they are functioning correctly. Alternately, some people have 

reported success with improvised sandbag filling devices during a flood response. 

Inverted traffic cones or large metal funnels have been placed into holes in a table, and 

feeding bins with doors in their bases have been used to pour sand into bags. 

Regardless of what method you use to fill them, bags should be filled between one-half 

(1/2) to two-thirds (2/3) of their capacity. This keeps the bag from getting too heavy, 

but more importantly, sandbag structures do not seal or keep out water as well if the 

bags are more than 2/3 full. Be very careful not to overfill or under fill the bags. 

d. Tied vs. Untied Bags 

Although tied sandbags are generally easier to handle and stockpile, untied sandbags 

are recommended for most situations, because untied bags make a better seal when 

they’re stacked. Since the bags aren’t more than 2/3 full, they can be transported 

almost as easily whether they’re tied or untied. Tied sandbags should be used only for 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

11

special situations when the bags need to be pre-filled and stockpiled, or for specific 

purposes such as filling holes or for holding objects in position. 

e. Preparing the Ground 

Any debris must be removed from the area before the bags are laid in place. Typically, 

flat headed shovels are used to scrape up (“scarp”) the sod or gravel where they are to 

be laid, to get down to the solid ground where the bags are to be laid. Do not scarp the 

ground beyond the area directly under the sandbags, because the sod cover in other 

areas is needed to protect the ground from erosion. 

Before laying the bags along the entire length of an area to raise the levee, it’s 

important that you first fill in any low areas with sandbags or with tightly packed earth, 

so that subsequent sandbag layers will be kept level. 

f. Sandbag Placement 

When laying the sandbags, the open end of the unfilled portion of the bag is folded 

over to form a triangle. If tied bags are used, flatten or flare the tied end. Place the 

partially filled bags lengthwise and parallel to the direction of flow, so the bottom of 

the bag faces downstream and the folded end faces upstream. (This positioning reduces 

the chance that floating debris will snag on the tucks and open the bags.) 

Tuck the flaps under, keeping the unfilled portion under the 

weight of the sack. Overlap the next bag slightly over the one 

before it, so that the top of that sandbag layer can be flattened 

without leaving any gaps between the bags. Once a bag is 

placed, it’s very important that you then walk over it, stomp on 

it, or maul it into place to eliminate voids and form a tight seal. 

When succeeding layers are added, stagger the bags like bricks, so that each one is 

placed over the gap between the two below it. This ensures that each seam is 

interlocked between bags and strengthens the structure. (There should never be less 

than 1/3 the length of a bag overlapping with the ones beneath it.) When placed 

properly, each bag should raise the elevation of the structure by 4 inches. 

Figure D.2 Sandbag placement – tucking in the flaps.

Figure D.3 Sandbag 

placement – compacting 

bags together. 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

12

g. Sandbag Levees 

Sandbags can be used to raise the height of an existing levee or can be used over open 

ground to protect an area with no levee at all. Any time a sandbag levee will be 

constructed over one layer high; the bag should be stacked in a pyramid structure to 

ensure stability. The basic rules of thumb in constructing these structures is that they 

must be approximately three times as wide as they are high, and the sandbags should 

be staggered within each layers just as they are staggered from one layer to the next. 

The directions of the bags (transverse or longitudinal) may be alternated, as long as no 

loose ends are left exposed. Use this rule of thumb in determining the dimensions of 

the pyramid: 

− 1 bag in length equals about 1 foot 

− 3 bags in width equals about 2 1⁄2 feet 

− 3 bags in height equals about 1 foot 

When building these structures on top of an existing levee, the bags should begin 1 

foot from the riverward crown (shoulder) of the levee. Where space is extremely 

limited on the levee crown, this distance may be reduced but the structure should never 

be built less than 6 inches from the edge of the levee crown. Stamp each bag in place, 

overlap sacks, maintain staggered joint placement, and tuck in any loose ends. 

Figure D.4 Pyramid sandbag placement. 

Bags Required Per 100 

Linear Feet of Levee 

Height of 

Sandbag Levee 

Bags 

Required 

1 foot 

2 feet 

3 feet 

4 feet 

600* 

2100 

4500 

7800 

* Single width course 1 foot high 

requires 300 bags per 100 linear feet. 

TYPICAL PYRAMID SANDBAG PLACEMENT 

 0 ft 2.5 ft 5 ft 7.5 ft 10 ft 

1 ft Width of Sandbag Base 

Minimum 

 0 ft 

 1 ft 

 2 ft 

 3 ft 

 4 ft 

Height of Sandbags 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

13

h. Material, Tools, and Labor Requirements for Sandbag Levee 

Listed below are the materials, tools, and labor required to construct 100 linear feet of 

sandbag levee, two feet high, with a haul distance of 1 mile round trip. 

i. Materials and Tools 

1,800 Sandbags 

10 Shovels 

27 Flash lights 

10 Tons sand (approx) 

2 Emergency light sets 

2 Radios or cell phones (one at filling site; one at laying site) 

6 Pickup trucks 

ii. Labor Requirements: 

10 Filling sandbags 

5 Loading 

6 Hauling 

5 Laying 

2 Foremen (1 at sandbag filling site, 1 at work site) 

28 People required, total 

 

iii. Time Requirements: 

With given resources, the time for completion is estimated at 2 1⁄2 hours, from start 

to finish. 

i. Bonding Trench and Plastic Sheeting 

Seepage through a sandbag structure can be kept to a minimum if the structure is built 

carefully using untied bags. One method that’s been successfully used to reduce the 

seepage through a sandbag levee and to increase the horizontal stability is to construct 

a bonding trench under the structure before the sandbags are laid in place, as pictured 

below. An additional precaution is to build the structure over some plastic sheeting, 

which is pulled up and over the structure once it’s complete. 

Figure D.5 Sketch of a typical levee raise with bonding trench. 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

14

While it’s always recommended at least to scarp the ground before the bags are laid, 

the decision to dig this trench or use the plastic sheeting depends on local conditions, 

as well as on the expected height of the structure and the time that’s available to build 

it. One of the primary concerns when considering bonding trenches and/or plastic 

sheeting is the amount of time that’s available. If there’s sufficient time and adequate 

material, the seepage can be reduced, but if there is very little time available, the 

ground should be scarped and a typical sandbag structure constructed with no bonding 

trench at all. An additional concern is whether the sandbag levee would have to be 

raised in the future, because any plastic sheeting has to be removed before the structure 

can be raised. 

If plastic sheeting is to be used in conjunction with the sandbag levee, begin by 

digging a bonding trench 2 sandbags wide and one sandbag deep. The edge of the 

plastic is placed in the hole and weighed down with sandbags, with most of the plastic 

laying out in the direction of the river. It’s very important that the plastic is never laid 

across the entire width of the sandbag levee base. Sandbag levees are held together by 

frictional forces between the bags and with the ground surface; sandbag structures are 

much less stable when wrapped with plastic, and can slide apart under high water. 

Construct the sandbag levee over the sheeting, pull the plastic up and overtop of the 

structure and weigh it down with sandbags on the landward side. Always work from 

downstream to upstream so that the upstream plastic seams all overlap the ones 

downstream, in order to prevent debris from snagging the plastic and pulling the 

sandbag levee apart. 

2.4 Raising the levee with Flashboards or Lumber and Sack Cappings 

If it appears that the levee raise would have to hold back more than 18 inches of water, 

consideration should be given to use of a lumber and sack capping or a flashboard capping. A 

lumber and sack capping is shown in plate 3, which may be used as a guide to estimate the 

materials required for a levee raise of about 3 feet. A flashboard structure is very similar, but 

the face of the structure is constructed of plywood instead of boards. These wooden facings 

provide a more positive control against excessive through seepage than is provided by 

sandbags alone. Either structure can be supported from behind with either sandbags or with 

compacted earthen fill, depending on how accessible the crown of the levee is to earthmoving 

machinery. 

Additionally, plastic sheeting may be installed on the riverside face of the plywood or 

flashboards, to protect the wood and reduce seepage through the flashboards. Flashboards do 

tend to leak a little, depending on how they are constructed and how the boards expand when 

they’re wet; though these structures are never constructed without a sandbag backing. If 

plastic sheeting is to be used, it should extend 1' riverward from the riverside bottom of the 

plywood/flashboard. A row of sandbags should then be stamped into place along the riverside 

bottom edge of the plywood/flashboards to help prevent seepage under the flashboard system. 

The plastic is brought up the riverside of the plywood/flashboards and over the top to the 

landside supports and held in place by sandbags or nails where necessary. Field conditions, the 

available time, and the availability of materials would dictate the actual requirements. 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

15

3. Seepage 

As a river or stream rises, the hydrostatic pressure against a levee slope increases significantly 

and can force water into and under the levee embankment. Even when a levee is properly 

constructed and of such mass to resist the destructive action of flood water, this seepage tends 

to push its way through regions of least resistance (such as sandy layers under the levee or 

animal burrows) out to the surface on the landward side of the structure. If there isn’t 

sufficient pressure on the landward side to hold back the seepage water, it will break through 

the ground surface on the landward side, in the form of bubbling springs, which erode and 

carry soil particles from under the levee. 

Seepage is almost impossible to eliminate and attempt to do so may create a much more 

severe condition. Seepage is generally not a problem unless 1) the landward levee slope 

becomes saturated over a large area, 2) seepage water is carrying material from the levee, or 3) 

pumping capacity is exceeded. Pumping of seepage should be held to a minimum, and 

ponding should be allowed during high water to the extent that it doesn’t cause damages. 

Several levees were endangered during past floods by attempts to keep low areas pumped dry, 

and additional time and effort were expended in controlling sandboils caused by pumping. 

Therefore, seepage should be permitted if no apparent ill-effects are observed and if adequate 

pumping capacity is available. 

3.1 Effects of Underseepage 

Underseepage can produce three distinctly different effects on a levee, depending upon the 

condition of flow under the levee. 

a. Piping Flow 

In extreme conditions of excessive underseepage, the movement of seepage water 

erodes the foundation materials, and a clearly defined pipe or tube develops under the 

levee. Unless corrective actions are taken, water continues to erode and enlarge this 

pipe, so that a cavern develops under the levee, and levee material collapses to fill in 

the void. In an advanced state, piping under the levee can be identified by a slumping 

of the levee crown, and the levee can quickly fail if it’s overtopped through this low 

spot. To prevent this condition from developing, any boils found to be transporting soil 

material need to be treated as early as possible. 

b. Non-Piping Flow 

In this case, seepage water flows under the levee without following a well-defined 

path, and results in one or more boils outcropping at or near the landside toe. The flow 

from these boils tends to undercut and ravel the landside toe, resulting in sloughing of 

the landward slope. Sloughing is the movement of small amounts of soils from the 

embankment slopes. Sloughing may also occur if the levee embankment becomes 

saturated as a result of prolonged high creek stages. Evidence of this type of failure is 

found in undercutting and raveling at the landside toe. 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

16

c. Saturating Flow 

In this case, numerous small boils, many of which are scarcely noticeable, outcrop at 

or near the landside toe. While no boil may appear dangerous in itself, a group of boils 

may cause significant damage. The flowing water may erode away supporting material 

and/or keep the area saturated and cause flotation ("quickness") of the soil, reducing 

the shearing strength of the material at the toe (where maximum shearing stress occurs) 

which could lead to slope failure. In a slope failure condition, a substantial section of 

the levee embankment breaks away along a clearly defined crack and slides away from 

the levee. The displacement of the soil will result in a reduction in the cross sectional 

area of the levee and poses a major threat to the integrity of the structure. 

3.2 Sandboils 

a. Identification of Sand Boils 

Sandboils usually occur within 10 to 300 feet from the landside toe of the levee and, in 

some instances, have occurred up to 1,000 feet away. Boils will have an obvious exit 

(such as a rodent hole), but the hole may be very small. When material is carried 

upward through a boil, it is deposited in a circular pattern around the exit location, and 

is comparable to an ant hill or volcano. Alternately, sandboils may exit into standing 

water. In this case, they may be difficult to identify, especially if the hole is small and 

the water cloudy from siltation. If you see any movement in what appears to be 

standing water on the landward side of the structure, this may be the exit point for a 

sandboil. Carefully approach the site, disturbing the water as little as possible, and let 

the water settle in order to look for the exit point. If there is no distinct hole, the water 

flow is not a threat. All boils should be conspicuously marked with flagging so that 

patrols can locate them without difficulty and observe changes in their condition. 

You can tell how serious a boil is by the color of the water that is coming out. If the 

water is relatively clear, it means that there is relatively little material being eroded 

away through the boil. The site should be monitored regularly for changes, but nothing 

else should be done to treat the clear boil. If it’s dark or muddy, then it’s full of 

material that’s been eroded away from under the levee, and must be treated 

immediately. Boils may quickly grow very large, and boils, which are discharging 

clear water, may suddenly begin to discharge soil materials along with the seepage 

flows. For this reason, any boil, whether the flow is clear or muddy, can potentially 

lead to the failure of the levee and must be monitored closely. 

b. Treatment of Sandboils 

The most common and accepted method of treating sandboils that are displacing soil is 

to construct a ring of sandbags around the boil(s) as illustrated in Figure D.7. The 

purpose of the ring is to raise a head of water over the boil to counterbalance the 

upward pressure of the seepage flow. The height of the water column is adjusted so 

that the water exiting the boil runs clear and no longer removes soil from the levee 

foundation. It’s extremely important that the flow of water is never stopped 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

17

completely, as this may cause additional boils to break out nearby. Treated areas 

should be kept under constant surveillance until the water recedes. 

The diameter and height of the ring will 

depend on the actual conditions at each 

sandboil. The base width should be at 

least 11⁄2 times the contemplated height, 

and the inner ring of sandbags should 

begin between one and three feet from 

outer edge of the sandboil. "Weak" or 

"quick" ground near a boil should be 

included within the sack ring to prevent 

these areas from developing into new 

boils when the active boil is treated. 

Where several sandboils develop in a 

localized area, a ring levee of sandbags 

should be constructed around the entire 

area. The ring should ideally be of 

sufficient diameter to permit sacking 

operations to keep ahead of the flow of 

water. When a sandboil is located near 

the levee toe, the sandbag ring may be 

tied into the landside slope of the levee, 

as shown in Figure D.8. 

The base or foundation for the sack ring 

should be cleared of debris and scarified 

to provide a reasonably watertight bond between the ground surface and the sandbags. 

The ring is constructed with sacks filled approximately two-thirds (2/3) full of sand, 

and tamped firmly into place. Do not tie the ends of the sacks. When adding 

subsequent layers, the joints should be staggered for stability and water tightness. The 

untied ends of sandbags should be laid towards the inside of the ring and folded under. 

The height of the sack ring should be only sufficient to slow the flow until the water 

Figure D.8 Sketch of ring levee tied to a levee 

slope, with spillway. Construction against the 

levee slope results in a U-shaped sandbag 

“chimney.”

Figure D.7 Sketch of a typical ring levee with 

spillway.

Figure D.6 To treat the sandboil, the pressure of the seepage water is counterbalanced by hydrostatic 

pressure from the column of water in the ring levee.
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

18

exiting the boil runs clean. Never place sandbags directly over the sandboil or attempt 

to completely stop the flow through the boils, as this may result in other boils 

developing nearby. 

A spillway or exit channel should be constructed on the top of the sack ring so that the 

level of the water in the ring levee can be adjusted, and the overflow water can be 

carried a safe distance from the boil, away from the direction of the levee. Because the 

height of the water is the critical factor in adjusting the rate of flow through the boil, 

the spillway will require constant monitoring and adjustment once the sandbag ring 

levee is filled with water. This spillway is normally constructed of sandbags, but 

alternately, a V-shaped drain can be constructed of two boards; or PVC pipe, plastic 

sheeting, or other materials may be helpful in building the spillway. 

c. Material, Tools, and Labor Requirements for Sandbag Ring Levee: 

Materials, tools, and labor required to construct a Sandbag Ring Levee 21⁄2 feet high 

and 10 feet in diameter with a haul distance of 1 mile round trip. 

i. Materials and Tools: 

1,125 Sandbags 

5 Shovels, long or short handle 

9 Tons of sand (approximately) 

5 Pick up trucks 

2 Radios or cell phones (one at filling site; one at laying site) 

2 Emergency light sets 

15 Flashlights 

15 Pairs of work gloves 

ii. Labor Requirements: 

4 Filling sandbags 

3 Loading/ carrying 

5 Hauling to work site 

3 Laying (placement) 

2 Foremen (1 at sandbag filling site 1 at work site) 

17 People required, total 

iii. Time Requirements: 

With given resources, time for construction is estimated to be 1-1⁄2 hours from start 

to finish. 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

19

d. Alternate Methods of Treating Sandboils 

An alternate method of ringing sandboils is by use of 

corrugated sheet-steel piling, as shown in Figure D.9. 

The area is cleared of debris, and the piling is driven 

about 1-1⁄2 feet into the ground around the boil. This 

method accomplishes the same task faster than 

sandbagging, but is limited in use by the availability 

of material, equipment, and the location and 

foundation condition of boils. Expedient methods can 

be improvised in other ways, to include using sections 

of corrugated metal piping. Special care must be 

taken with the design of these structures to make sure 

there is a reliable means for adjusting the water level, 

so the water column doesn’t completely stop the flow 

of water through the boil. 

Alternately, it may sometimes be possible to locate the inlet side of a boil under the 

water on the riverward bank of the levee. A swirl may be observed in the water at this 

point, or the location of the entry point may have been identified after a previous high 

water event. Sometimes, because of the current, the swirling vortex appears on the 

water’s surface slightly downstream of the actual opening. If the opening is located, it 

may be possible to block the seepage flow at its entry point, since blocking the entry 

point may take much less time than constructing a sandbag ring levee. If the entry 

point is located, it can be blocked by anchoring a sheet of plastic over the area, using 

rope and sandbags. It may sometimes be possible to plug a flooded animal burrow by 

placing a mixture of manure and straw or dry hay into the water at the burrow 

entrance. If the entry point is blocked, both the blockage and the location of boil need 

to be closely monitored for any changes. 

3.3 Sloughs 

If seepage causes saturation and sloughing of the landward slope, the slope should ideally be 

flattened to 1V (vertical) on 4H (horizontal) or flatter. Material for flattening should be at least 

as pervious as the embankment material. If any sloughs develop in the levee, all soft areas 

should be thoroughly drained by excavating shallow ditches in the side slopes, as shown in 

Plate 4. Contact your Corps district office before undertaking this method. 

Figure D.9 A ring of steel-sheet 

piling can alternately be used to ring 

the boil, if conditions permit.
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

20

3.4 Floating Soil Conditions 

When seepage exits landward of the levee toe at a pressure that creates a sensation like the soil 

is fluid, the levee and foundation become susceptible to sliding and/or sloughing which can 

lead to an embankment failure. A fluid soil condition is an indicator that soil particles or the 

soil mass is floating, and the soil's ability to support a load such as a vehicle or heavy 

equipment and/or the levee embankment itself has been reduced. When this condition is 

observed, the safety, health and welfare of those individuals who are responding to the flood 

fight and/or those who live within the protected area must come first. Consideration must be 

given to evacuating the area. If the sod layer appears to pop loose or lift up, evacuate the area 

immediately. In a past flood, this condition was observed and successfully solved with the 

placement of clean, free-draining sand fill, classified as SP medium to fine sand, with less than 

5 percent fines passing the number 200 sieve. The sand was brought in from another location 

(away from the levee), and a bulldozer was used to push the sand over the area, creating a 

blanket some 3 feet in thickness and some 20 feet in width. The thickness and width necessary 

may vary depending on the observed conditions. 

3.5 Other Seepage Related Considerations 

Any basement or similar depression near the levee should be closely watched for heaving of 

floors, caving of walls, and boil activity. It may become necessary to support basement walls 

or weight down basement floors by intentionally flooding the basement with clean water, to 

prevent walls from caving in, piping, or excessive seepage. 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

21

4. Erosion 

4.1 Wave Wash 

During high water, continuing wave action against a levee slope can erode wide terraces along 

the length of the levee. This causes scour or beaching along the riverward slope of the levee 

and reduces the cross sectional area, which can potentially lead to a failure. This type of 

damage doesn’t typically arise during short (hour-long) storms, especially if the slope has 

good sod cover. However, during longer periods of high water, especially during windy or icy 

conditions, the damage can develop very rapidly. The section leader should study the levee 

beforehand to assess the potential for wave wash. All potential trouble areas should be located 

well in advance, and section leaders should assemble a reserve supply of materials (filled 

sandbags, lumber, stakes, plastic sheeting, rock, etc) close to locations most likely to 

experience such damage. During periods of high wind and high water, when waves attack a 

levee, ample labor should be assembled and experienced personnel should patrol the areas to 

identify the beginnings of scour, washouts, or breaching. Because wave wash damage can 

spread rapidly, it is important that damaged areas are treated as soon as they are identified. 

There are a number of accepted methods of protecting a levee against wave wash. 

a. Sandbags 

In emergency situations, the preferred treatment method is to place sandbags in to the 

cut as shown in Plate 5. The filled sacks should be laid in sections of sufficient length 

to give protection well above the anticipated rise. 

b. Plastic Sheeting and Sandbags 

Experience has shown that a combination of plastic sheeting and sandbags is one of the 

most expedient, effective and economical methods of combating slope attack in a flood 

situation. Other materials such as snow fence, cotton, or burlap have successfully been 

used in place of the plastic in the past. Poly and sandbags can be used in a variety of 

combinations, and time becomes the factor that may determine which combination to 

use. Ideally, poly and sandbag protection should be placed in the dry. However, many 

cases of unexpected slope attack will occur during high water, and a method for 

placement in the wet is covered below. See Plates 6 and 7 for recommended methods 

of laying poly and sandbags. Plate 8 shows a minimal configuration for emergency 

use. Since each flood fight project is generally unique (river, personnel available, 

materials, etc.), specific details of placement and materials handling will not be 

covered, though some guidelines are provided below. Field personnel must be aware of 

resources available when using poly and sandbags. 

i. Dry Placement 

Anchoring the poly along the riverward toe is important for a successful job. It may 

be done in three different ways: 1) after completion of the levee, a trench excavated 

along the toe, poly placed in the trench, and the trench backfilled; 2) poly placed 

flat-out away from the toe, and earth pushed over the flap; 3) poly placed flat-out 

from the toe and one or more rows of sandbags placed over the flap. The poly 

should then be unrolled up the slope and over the top enough to allow for 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

22

anchoring with sandbags. Poly should be placed from downstream to upstream 

along the slopes and overlapped at least two feet. The poly is now ready for the 

"hold-down" sandbags.

 

It is mandatory that poly placed on levee slopes be held down along the slopes as 

well. An effective method of anchoring poly is a grid system of sandbags, unless 

extremely high velocities, heavy debris or a large amount of ice is anticipated. 

Then, a solid blanket of bags over the poly should be used. A grid system can be 

constructed faster and requires fewer bags and much less labor than a total 

covering. Various grid systems include vertical rows of lapped bags, two-by-four 

lumber held down by attached bags, and rows of bags held by a continuous rope 

tied to each bag. Poly has been held down by a system using two bags tied with 

rope and the rope saddled over the levee crown with a bag on each slope.

ii. Placement in the Wet 

In many situations during high water, poly and sandbags placed in the wet must 

provide the emergency protection. Wet placement may also be required to replace 

or maintain damaged poly or poly displaced by current action. Plate 7 shows a 

typical section of levee covered in the wet. Sandbag anchors are formed at the 

bottom edge and ends of the poly by bunching the poly around a fistful of sand or 

rock, and tying the sandbags to this fist-sized ball. Counterweights consisting of 

two or more sandbags connected by a length of 1/4-inch rope are used to hold the 

center portion of the poly down. The number of counterweights will depend on the 

uniformity of the levee slope and current velocity. Placement of the poly consists 

of first casting out the poly sheet with the bottom weights and then adding 

counterweights to slowly sink the poly sheet into place. The poly, in most cases, 

will continue to move down slope until the bottom edge reaches the toe of the 

slope. Sufficient counterweights should be added to insure that no air voids exist 

between the poly and the levee face and to keep the poly from flapping or being 

carried away in the current. For this reason, it is important to have enough 

counterweights prepared prior to the placement of the sheet. 

iii. Overuse of Plastic Sheeting 

In past floods, there has been a tendency to overuse and in some cases misuse poly 

on slopes. For example, on well-compacted clay embankments, in areas of 

relatively low velocities, use of poly would be excessive. Plastic should never be 

used on the landward slopes, as it holds through-seepage against the levee slope. A 

critical analysis of a situation should be made before poly and sandbags are used, 

with a view toward less waste and more efficient use of these materials and 

available manpower. However, if a situation is doubtful, poly should be used rather 

than risk a failure. Critical areas should have priority. 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

23

c. Moveable Panels 

Wave wash may also be effectively checked by the use of movable panels constructed 

of lumber. These panels are anchored in place on the levee slope with stakes and are 

weighted down with sandbags or stone as shown on Plate 9. A portable bulkhead 

constructed with lumber and staked into placed is another alternate type of wave wash 

protection. 

d. Miscellaneous Measures 

Several other methods of slope protection have been used. Straw bales pegged into the 

slope were successful against wave action, as was straw spread on the slope and 

overlain with snow fence.

4.2 Scours 

Scouring occurs when the current velocity against the levee is adequate to remove levee 

embankment materials. Once scouring begins to occur, the protective sod cover is damaged or 

destroyed and additional scour may develop very quickly. Careful observation should be made 

along the entire length of the riverside of the levee during high water periods, and especially in 

locations where the current flow is two feet per second or more. Scouring will most likely 

develop at road crossing ramps and at locations where pipes, sewers, and other structures 

penetrate the levee. It may also develop in ditches, excavations or building basements near the 

levee, around riverside stability berms, or in other locations where there is an obstruction to 

the smooth flow of water along the levee face. If any scour is observed, soundings should be 

taken if possible to determine the extent of damage and the amount of treatment required. 

a. Deflection Weirs 

Deflection weirs (also known as bendway weirs), extending 10 feet or more into the 

channel have been effective in deflecting current away from the levees. These 

emergency structures can be constructed using lumber, stakes, brush, sandbags, and 

stone, and are tied in place as shown on Plates 10 and 11. Snow fence, plain riprap, 

compacted earth or any other substantial materials available may also be used; even 

old car bodies have been used in the past. Preferably, the weirs should be placed in the 

dry at locations where severe scour may be anticipated, because construction during 

high water will be very difficult. A series of weirs may be needed to protect the area, 

or a longer weir may be constructed in the water parallel to the levee. Care should be 

given in the placement of weirs, because haphazard placement may be shift the current 

towards other banks and lead to even worse scouring. Hydraulic technical assistance 

should be sought if questions arise in the use of emergency weirs. 

b. Plastic Sheeting 

Plastic sheeting may be useful in protecting the embankment from scouring, as 

described under the previous section on wave wash. 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

24

c. Other Protection 

If scour begins to take place after water is up on 

the levee, a protective berm should be constructed 

over the entire scour area using stone, slag, or 

other durable material with sufficient size and 

weight withstand the erosive velocity of the 

current. Construction of this berm will generally 

require equipment capable of operating from the 

levee crown. Riprap has been used to provide 

slope protection where erosive forces were too 

large to be effectively controlled by other means. 

Objections to using riprap when flood fighting 

include the cost and the large quantities that are 

typically necessary to protect a given area. It’s 

usually very difficult to control the placement of 

the riprap, particularly during times of high water, 

but careful use of an excavator has been effective 

even in difficult conditions. 

4.3 Ice and Floating Debris 

Sometimes ice conditions are such that protection provided by the methods outlined above 

will not be totally effective. The primary method for protecting a levee slope from debris or 

ice attack is to construct a floating boom parallel to the levee embankment. Logs, driftwood, 

or any available timber are cabled together end to end and moored to the ground in such a way 

that they float out in the current about 15 feet from the water's edge. Depending on the size of 

the logs, the boom will deflect floating objects. Since a detailed discussion of ice jams lies 

beyond the scope of this manual, please refer to the references in Appendix I for additional 

information. 

Figure D.10 Placement of Riprap. 

Careful use of an excavator may allow 

for more accurate placement than is 

shown above.
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

25

Plate 1 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

26

Plate 2 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

27

Plate 3 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

28

Plate 4 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

29

Plate 5 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

30

Plate 6 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

31

Plate 7 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

32

Plate 8 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

33

Plate 9 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

34

Plate 10 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

35

Plate 11 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

36

Plate 12 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

37

Plate 13 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

38

Plate 14 
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

39

Plate 15
Appendix D- Flood Fighting Techniques on Levees

40

This page intentionally left blank. 
Appendix E- Rehabilitation Request Form

1 

APPENDIX E: REHABILITATION REQUEST FORM 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, ________ District Date of 

Request:_______________ 

ATTN: Emergency Management Branch 

Street Address 

City, State ZIP+4 

Dear Sir: 

The purpose of this letter is to request Rehabilitation Assistance from the Corps of Engineers under 

Public Law 84-99 for the repair of the ________________________ levee (or other type of flood 

control project) that was damaged by (flood)(high waters) during ___________________ 20___. 

The project is Active in the Rehabilitation and Inspection Program, and was last inspected by the 

Corps of Engineers on __________________. The location of the levee and a brief description of 

the damage are as follows: 

Project Identification Number______________ River or Stream _______________________ 

Bank (circle): Left, Right, Both 

Description of Damage _________________________________________________________ 

____________________________________________________________________________ 

City______________________ County ________________State ______________ 

Section_________________ Township ___________________Range___________________ 

Public Sponsor Point of Contact: 

 Name_________________________________________________________ 

 Address____________________________________ City______________ State_____ 

 Telephone (W) ______________________ (H)________________________________ 

If this project is eligible for PL 84-99 Rehabilitation Assistance, I further request that the Corps of 

Engineers take all necessary steps to accomplish the appropriate repairs. It is agreed that the 

required items of local cooperation will be provided should the levee be eligible for Rehabilitation 

Assistance under PL 84-99 and the repair work is accomplished by the Corps of Engineers. 

I hereby certify that the right-of-way which is required for any authorized repair work is presently 

available, and this letter constitutes permission for the Government and its agents to enter and use 

said right-of-way in undertaking authorized repair work. 

 Sincerely, 

 ______________________________________________
Appendix E- Rehabilitation Request Form

2 

This page intentionally left blank. 
Appendix F- Cooperation Agreement for Rehabilitation of Non-Federal Flood Control Works

1

APPENDIX F: Cooperation Agreement for Rehabilitation of NonFederal Flood Control Works 
Appendix F- Cooperation Agreement for Rehabilitation of Non-Federal Flood Control Works

2
Appendix F- Cooperation Agreement for Rehabilitation of Non-Federal Flood Control Works

3
Appendix F- Cooperation Agreement for Rehabilitation of Non-Federal Flood Control Works

4
Appendix F- Cooperation Agreement for Rehabilitation of Non-Federal Flood Control Works

5
Appendix F- Cooperation Agreement for Rehabilitation of Non-Federal Flood Control Works

6
Appendix F- Cooperation Agreement for Rehabilitation of Non-Federal Flood Control Works

7
Appendix F- Cooperation Agreement for Rehabilitation of Non-Federal Flood Control Works

8
Appendix G- Cooperation Agreement for Flood Fight Assistance

1

APPENDIX G: COOPERATION AGREEMENT FOR FLOOD 

FIGHT 

COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and 

__________________________________________________ 

for 

EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE (FLOOD or COASTAL STORM) 

THIS AGREEMENT, entered into this ____ day of _______________, 20___, by and between THE DEPARTMENT OF THE 

ARMY (hereinafter referred to as the "Government") acting by and through the District Engineer, _____________ District, U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers, and the _________________________________________________[PUBLIC SPONSOR], 

(hereinafter referred to as the "Public Sponsor"), acting by and through ___________________________ [TITLE OF PERSON 

SIGNING THIS AGREEMENT]. 

WITNESSETH THAT: 

 WHEREAS, Public Law 99, 84th Congress, approved 28 June 1955, authorizes the Chief of Engineers to flood fight and 

perform rescue operations. 

 WHEREAS, the Public Sponsor has requested assistance under Public Law 84-99, and the Public Sponsor qualifies for 

assistance in accordance with the established policies of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 

NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: 

 1. The Government will perform the work described in its scope of work (attached) that is made part of this agreement. 

 2. The Public Sponsor agrees, in consideration of the Government providing assistance, to fulfill the requirement of nonFederal cooperation required by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regulations, to wit: 

 a. Provide without cost to the Government all lands, easements, rights-of-ways, borrow material, and disposal areas 

necessary for the authorized work, for the use of borrow areas and/or spoil areas, and for access to and from the site(s) of the 

structure(s) or work area(s), the borrow sites, and spoil areas. 

 b. Hold and save the Government free from damages due to the authorized work, except damages due to the fault or 

negligence of the Government or its contractors. 

 c. Maintain and operate the completed work in a manner satisfactory to the Government. 

 3. The Public Sponsor further agrees to remove, at no cost to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, all temporary work 

constructed by the Government; and, 

 a. (Add others as applicable) 

 4. Additional obligation under the terms of this agreement terminates when the authorized work performed by the 

Government is completed. 

 5. ATTACHMENTS: 

 a. Exhibit A - Government Scope of Work. 

 b. (Add others as applicable) 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement of the day and year first above written. 

THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY THE [NAME OF PUBLIC SPONSOR]
Appendix G- Cooperation Agreement for Flood Fight Assistance

2

This page intentionally left blank. 
Appendix H- Cooperation Agreement for Advance Measures Assistance

1

APPENDIX H: COOPERATION AGREEMENT FOR 

ADVANCE MEASURES ASSISTANCE 
Appendix H- Cooperation Agreement for Advance Measures Assistance

2
Appendix I- Useful Internet Addresses

1

APPENDIX I: USEFUL LINKS 

Organizations: 

http://www.usace.army.mil 

Homepage of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. All districts and divisions are linked through 

this page, and can be accessed through alphabetical listings and through clicking on a map of 

the United States. Emergency Management Offices are accessible through division and district 

home pages. 

http://www.fema.gov 

Homepage of the Federal Emergency Management Agency. 

http://www.nws.noaa.gov/

National Weather Service Website. If you click on the “Rivers” tab, you can view river gage 

information. 

Laws and Regulations: 

http://uscode.house.gov/

Searchable database of the US Code (Public Laws) 

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/index.html

The Code of Federal Regulations Main Page 

http://www.usace.army.mil/inet/usace-docs/

Publications of the Army Corps of Engineers Headquarters. There are a number of Corps 

publications that may provide additional guidance in the operation, maintenance or preferable 

design of flood control works. Some specific references are listed in Chapter 1 of this manual. 
Appendix I- Useful Internet Addresses

2

Other Useful Information: 

http://www.nwk.usace.army.mil/local_protection/guidance.html This site has a lot of 

information that the Corps’ geotechnical engineers have assembled for public use. It gives 

more detailed guidance on many topics, such as running utilities over and through a levee, 

power poles, slope protection, gates, and a number of other related topics. 

http://www.nws.usace.army.mil/PublicMenu/Menu.cfm?sitename=em&pagename=Floodfi

This Corps site has presentations and brochures on sandbagging. 

http://chl.erdc.usace.army.mil/ffs This website, “Laboratory and Field Testing of Temporary 

Barrier Type Flood Fighting Products,” provides information the Corps has gathered on 

alternative flood fight technologies. There are several innovative flood fight products that the 

Corps has tested, and the results are publicly available on this site. 

http://www.crrel.usace.army.mil/icejams/index.htm

This Corps site provides information on ice jams. 

http://www.gnb.ca/0009/0369/0004/

While this website is specific to New Brunswick, Canada, it is another very good source of 

information on ice jams. 

http://chl.wes.army.mil/research/hydstruc/bankprotect/scm_guide_screen.pdf

The Kansas River and Stream Corridor Management Guide presents some good general 

information on channels, erosion control measures, and other topics related to watershed 

management. 

http://www.fema.gov/fima/

Of particular note on the FEMA webpage is the Mitigation Division homepage. This page has 

a lot of useful information on flood insurance and grant programs. It also includes a 

searchable database of best practices and case studies, 

http://www.fema.gov/mitigationss/sstory_find_gui.do If you select “Flooding” as a hazard, 

and “Flood Control” as a category, you can find a number of success stories of flood control 

works from around the country. This database also includes some good examples of 

relocations and non-structural alternatives to flooding problems. 

US Army Corps 

of Engineers 

®