Microtunnels vs. EPB Risk-Based Selection

INTRODUCTION The Ballard Siphon was built in 1935 and consists of two 91.4 cm (36-inch) diameter wood-stave pipes. These pipes convey sewer flowsunder the Ship Canal from northwest Seattle and the Ballard Regulator to the North Interceptor and the West Point Treatment plant. The siphons were constructed using open cut construction, are now buried in the sediment on the floor of the canal, and have severely limited ability to be dewatered, inspected, or cleaned. The existing siphon is 394.7 m (1,295 feet) long from the junction structure on the southern shoreline to the regulator structure on the north. The location of the Ballard Siphon is shown in Figures 1 and 2. The area around the Ballard Siphon has become more populated and developed since the siphon was built. Additionally, the Ballard Siphon is subject to high flows that are greater than the capacity of the pipelines. This has resulted in predict-able Combined Sewer Overflows(CSO?s) whenever a large, long duration rain event occurs. The aged pipeline of uncertain viability has become a critical piece of the sewer system infrastructure. Because of the age of the pipelines and their importance, a sonar survey was completed on both barrels of the Ballard Siphon in December of 2005. The sonar images appeared to indicate crown intrusion of the wood-stave pipes, which suggested that the pipes were in imminent danger of collapse. As a result, an Emergency Declaration was executed by King County and the Ballard Siphon Replacement Project was initiated. Staheli Trenchless Consultants was retained to perform feasibility studies to deter-mine the viability of using microtunneling and horizontal directional drilling (HDD) for replacement of the Ballard Siphon. For the evaluations, the preferred site location was determined to be at or near the site of the existing Ballard Siphon in order to minimize the ancillary sewer work which would accompany moving to a new site. To meet flow demands and hydraulic requirements, the replacement siphon needed a mini-mum equivalent diameter of 182.9 cm (72 inches). This could be accomplished with a number of different siphon diameters and configurations including, but not limited to, three 106.7 cm (42-inch) diameter pipelines, two 152.4 cm (60-inch) pipelines, or two 91.44 cm (36-inch) pipelines and a 121.9 cm (48-inch) pipeline.