Project 12_ Attachment 0016 Scopes_07 Apr 2026.pdf

Project #12: Repair JBLM Railhead

Project: Repair JBLM Railhead

Reference Document: ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06, "Railroad Track InspecƟon and Repair

RecommendaƟons, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Washington" (Dated: March 2021)

Scope: The aƩached "Railroad Track InspecƟon and Repair RecommendaƟons" report is provided to all prospecƟve Contractors for review and to serve as the foundaƟonal basis scope understanding.

The Contractor shall be responsible for conducƟng a thorough review of the Report and addressing all specified defects and repair requirements. The recommendaƟons contained within the Report are to be considered the minimum requirements to be met for project compleƟon.

Joint Base Lewis-McChord (JBLM) encourages Contractors to propose and incorporate innovaƟve soluƟons that may enhance the quality, efficiency, or longevity of the railroad infrastructure. This includes, but is not limited to, the uƟlizaƟon of novel materials, the implementaƟon of advanced or streamlined processes, and the proposal of opƟmized project

Ɵmelines.

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06

Railroad Track Inspection and Repair Recommendations, Joint Base Lewis- McChord, Washington Andy Anderton, Jeremy Beasley March 2021

Geotechnical and Structures Laboratory

Distribution authorized to U.S. Government Agencies only. Other requests for this document shall be referred to the Joint Base Lewis-McChord Garrison Commander, 2027 Liggett Avenue, Fort Lewis, WA 98433-9500 or to Headquarters, U.S. Army Installation Management Command (IMPW), 2405 Gun Shed Road, JBSA Ft Sam Houston, TX 78234-122.

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06

March 2021

Railroad Track Inspection and Repair Recommendations, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Washington

Andy Anderton, Jeremy Beasley

U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center Geotechnical and Structures Laboratory 3909 Halls Ferry Road Vicksburg, MS 39180-6199

Prepared for Headquarters, Installation Management Command, G4 Public Works Division Facilities Management Branch 2405 Gun Shed Fort Sam Houston, Texas 78234-1223

DISCLAIMER: The contents of this report are not to be used for advertising, publication, or promotional purposes.

Citation of trade names does not constitute an official endorsement or approval of the use of such commercial products.

All product names and trademarks cited are the property of their respective owners. The findings of this report are not to be construed as an official Department of the Army position unless so designated by other authorized documents.

DESTRUCTION NOTICE: DESTROY THIS DOCUMENT WHEN NO LONGER NEEDED. DO NOT RETURN IT TO

THE ORIGINATOR.

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 iv

Contents Preface ...........................................................................................................................................................vii

Unit Conversion Factors ........................................................................................................................... viii

Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................................... ix Critical findings .......................................................................................................................... x Inspection meetings ................................................................................................................ xii

1 Introduction Background Objective and scope Description of track network

2 Results and Recommendations Overview of current conditions

Actions Since Last Inspection Rail Fastenings and other track materials (F&OTM) Ties Ballast Drainage/subgrade Drainage is in good condition, both from the track and through culverts. All culverts and drain pipes were at least 75% clear at the time of the inspection Note: While the overall drainage conditions were observed and general recommendations made, detailed determination of drainage repairs such as sizing drainage structures, running levels, etc., and road-crossing grade changes were beyond the scope of this inspection Vegetation Turnouts Road crossings Track geometry Bridges

3 Condition Levels Operating restrictions Condition index

4 Estimate of Maintenance and Repair Costs

5 Summary General summary Summary of recommendations

References

Appendix A: Photos .....................................................................................................................................A1

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 v

Appendix B: Inventory of Joint Base Lewis-McChord Railroad Facilities ....................................... B1

Appendix C: Defects and Recommended Repair ................................................................................ C1

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 vi

Figures and Tables

Figures

Figure ES-1. Overview of Joint Base Lewis-McChord track network..................................................... xiii Figure ES-2. Overview of North 1, North 2, North 3, South 1, South 2, South 3, Crossover 3, Main, LC 10, North Wye and South Wye. ............................................................................................. xiv Figure ES-3. Overview of North 1, North 2, North 3, South 1, South 2, South 3, Crossover 1, Crossover 2, Main and LC 10. ................................................................................................................. xv Figure ES-4. Overview of North 1, North 2, North 3, South 1, South 2, South 3, Main, LC 10, Track 1, Track 2, Track 4, Track 6, Track 8, Engine House 1 and Engine House 2. ..................... xvi Figure ES-5. Overview of Main, LC 10, Track 1, Track 2, Track 3, Track 4, Track 5, Track 6, Track 7, Track 8, Engine House 1, Engine House 2, 5 Lead, Upper 4, Lead 2 and Madigan Spur. .............................................................................................................................................................. xvii Figure ES-6. Overview of Main, Track 1, Track 2, Track 3, Track 4, Track 5, Track 6, Track 7, 5 Lead, Upper 4, Upper 6 Lower 4, Lead 2, Lead 1, Lead 3, Drmo lead and Madigan Spur. ............................................................................................................................................................. xviii Figure ES-7. Overview of Lead 2, Lead 1, Lead 3, Crossover 5 and Crossover 6. .............................. xix

Tables

Table ES-1. List of close-to-traffic defects found at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, November 2020. ............................................................................................................................................................... xi Table ES-2. Pre-inspection briefing attendance list. ................................................................................ xii Table ES-3. Post-inspection briefing attendance list. .............................................................................. xii Table 3-1. Definition of operating restrictions Table 3-2. Operating restrictions for Joint Base Lewis-McChord segments Table 3-3. Track structure condition index (TSCI) guidelines Table 3-4. Joint Base Lewis-McChord condition indices Table 4-1. Summary of repair costs at Joint Base Lewis-McChord Table B-1. Joint Base Lewis-McChord General Track Characteristics Table B-2. Joint Base Lewis-McChord Turnouts Table B-3. Joint Base Lewis-McChord Grade Crossings Table B-4. Joint Base Lewis-McChord Track Appliances Table B-5. Joint Base Lewis-McChord Bridges Table B-6. Joint Base Lewis-McChord Curves Table B-7. Joint Base Lewis-McChord Drainage

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 vii

Preface

This report presents the results of an assessment of the condition of railroad track at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA. Users of information from this report include the personnel at Joint Base Lewis-McChord Directorate of Public Works (DPW), train master (locomotive supervisor), and yard master (switchmen and brakemen supervisor).

The Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff (DCS), G-9 is the Headquarters, Department of the Army proponent for the Army Railroad Evaluation Program. The Army Railroad Evaluation Program is sponsored by the Army Dams and Transportation Infrastructure Program (ADTIP) of the Headquarters, Installation Management Command (IMCOM), Arlington, VA. The IMCOM provided funding for this investigation. Questions should be directed to Michael Andres, ADTIP Program Manager, Email:

michael.r.andres.civ@mail.mil, mailing address is as follows:

Michael R. Andres HQ IMCOM, G4 Public Works Division, Facilities Management Branch

2405 Gun Shed Fort Sam Houston, Texas 78234-1223

Personnel of the U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC), Geotechnical and Structures Laboratory (GSL), Vicksburg, MS, performed the assessment. The findings and recommendations presented in this report are based on the detailed visual and ultrasonic internal flaw inspections at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, conducted during November 2020 by Andy Anderton, Jeremy Beasley, and Mike Crawford of the APB, GSL. Andy Anderton prepared this report under the supervision of Mrs.

Anna Jordan, Chief, APB; Mr. Justin S. Strickler, Chief, Engineering Networks and Materials Division; Mr. Charles W. Ertle, Deputy Director, GSL; and Mr. Bartley P. Durst, Director, GSL. At the time of publication of this report, COL Teresa A. Schlosser was the Commander and Executive Director of ERDC, and Dr. David W. Pittman was the Director.

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 viii

Unit Conversion Factors

Multiply By To Obtain degrees Fahrenheit (F-32)/1.8 degrees Celsius feet 0.3048 meters inches 0.0254 meters miles (U.S. statute) 1,609.347 meters miles per hour 0.44704 meters per second pounds (mass) per yard 0.496054648 kilograms per meter tons (2,000 pounds, mass) 907.1847 kilograms

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 ix

Executive Summary

Personnel of the U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC), Vicksburg, MS, performed on-site assessments of railroad facilities at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA, during November 2020. A schematic of Joint Base Lewis-McChord tracks can be found in Figure ES-

1. The condition of the railroad facilities was determined using visual and ultrasonic internal flaw inspections to identify and delineate apparent defects.

The results of the railroad inspection reveal the following:

a. Table ES-1 lists the close-to-traffic defects found during this inspection.

b. Of the 35 track segments inspected, the operating restrictions of 30 segments are green (no traffic restrictions), 0 are amber (restricted operations), and 5 are red (close-to-traffic). These operating restrictions are shown in Figures ES-1 through ES-7 and listed in Table 3-2.

c. The individual track structure condition indices (TSCI) for all track segments ranged from 98 - 100. The TSCI, listed in Table 3-4, is computed by RAILER. It can be used to assess the overall condition of the track segment and as a comparison with future inspections.

d. The estimated cost of maintenance and repair to render all track segments defect-free at Joint Base Lewis-McChord is approximately

. Repair costs given in this report are estimated national averages and do not allow for variation among different geographical locations.

e. Appendix A has photos of example defects found during the inspection.

f. Appendix B is an inventory of railroad facilities at Joint Base Lewis-

McChord.

g. Defects, recommended rehabilitation procedures, and cost estimates associated with the railroad track facilities at Joint Base Lewis- McChord are listed in Appendix C.

h. Appendix D contains any available information on railroad system work and property activity documentation for Joint Base Lewis- McChord.

i. Appendix E contains a summary of the Joint Base Lewis-McChord Railroad Deficiency Report as stated by HQ IMCOM.

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 x

Critical findings

Critical findings for the detailed visual and ultrasonic internal flaw inspections are defects that place close-to-traffic restrictions on track segments as specified by the UFC 4-860-03 (Headquarters, Departments of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force 2008). These defects should be corrected immediately before operations over the tracks are allowed.

Table ES-1 lists the close-to-traffic defects found at Joint Base Lewis- McChord during the November 2020 inspection.

ER

D C/G

SL APB

AR

R -20-06 xiii

Figure ES-1. Overview of Joint Base Lewis-McChord track network.

C/G

SL APB

AR

R xiv

Figure ES-2. Operating restrictions for North 1, North 2, North 3, South 1, South 2, South 3, Crossover 3, Main, LC 10, North Wye and South Wye.

C/G

SL APB

AR

R xv

Figure ES-3. Operating restrictions for North 1, North 2, North 3, South 1, South 2, South 3, Crossover 1, Crossover 2, Main and LC 10.

C/G

SL APB

AR

R xvi

Figure ES-4. Operating restrictions for North 1, North 2, North 3, South 1, South 2, South 3, Main, LC 10, Track 1, Track 2, Track 4, Track 6, Track 8, Engine House 1 and Engine House 2.

C/G

SL APB

AR

R xvii

Figure ES-5. Operating restrictions for Main, LC 10, Track 1, Track 2, Track 3, Track 4, Track 5, Track 6, Track 7, Track 8, Engine House 1, Engine House

2, 5 Lead, Upper 4, Lead 2 and Madigan Spur.

C/G

SL APB

AR

R xviii

Figure ES-6. Operating restrictions for Main, Track 1, Track 2, Track 3, Track 4, Track 5, Track 6, Track 7, 5 Lead, Upper 4, Upper 6 Lower 4, Lead 2, Lead

1, Lead 3, Drmo lead and Madigan Spur.

C/G

SL APB

AR

R xix

Figure ES-7. Operating restrictions for Lead 2, Lead 1, Lead 3, Crossover 5 and Crossover 6.

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 1

1 Introduction

Background

The Installation Management Command (IMCOM) tasked the U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) to evaluate the railroad track facilities at Joint Base Lewis-McChord during November 2020. Railroad facilities at Joint Base Lewis-McChord were last inspected by the ERDC in 2015.

Objective and scope

The objectives of this investigation were to determine the condition of the railroad track facilities and to identify maintenance and repair requirements for each railroad track segment. Specific objectives were to:

a. Perform detailed visual and ultrasonic internal flaw inspections of all railroad tracks at Joint Base Lewis-McChord in accordance with UFC 4-860-03 (Headquarters, Departments of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force 2008).

b. Mark defective ties, rails, joint bars, and other track material (OTM) that need replacement.

c. Implement the RAILER software for analysis of the rail conditions, develop maintenance and repair recommendations, and provide estimates of quantities and costs associated with the maintenance and repair required to meet defect-free maintenance standards as defined in UFC 4-860-03 (Headquarters, Departments of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force 2008).

d. Identify the condition of track segments according to the operating restrictions and track structure condition indices (TSCI) computed by

RAILER.

e. Make recommendations regarding the surface and alignment of the track, grade crossing enhancements, turnout geometry, track layout, and other items to improve the overall operating conditions of the railroad facilities.

f. Identify hazardous conditions that require closure or restriction of tracks.

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 2

The results of this study can be used to:

a. Correct critical defects that require closure or restriction of tracks to traffic to meet defect-free maintenance standards as defined in UFC 4- 860-03 (Headquarters, Departments of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force 2008).

b. Assist in identifying and forecasting maintenance and repair work.

c. Determine the repairs needed to sustain current levels of railroad track operations.

Chapter 2 of this report contains a summary of the results of the detailed visual and ultrasonic internal flaw inspections, including critical defects requiring immediate repair. Chapter 3 includes operating restrictions and the overall condition index for each track segment. Chapter 4 summarizes the estimated costs to bring all of the tracks back to full compliance.

Conclusions and recommendations are summarized in Chapter 5.

Appendix A has photographs of examples of defects found during the inspection. Appendix B lists the current inventory of the Joint Base Lewis- McChord railroad facilities as determined by this inspection. Appendix C lists all defects found during the inspection by track segment, the rehabilitation procedures recommended for the railroad track facilities at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, and their estimated costs.

Description of track network

Joint Base Lewis-McChord has 15.24 measured miles of active track. There is also an estimated 2 miles of inactive track that has been disconnected from active track. There is also additional track covered by vegetation and debris that is unable to be measured. The estimated mileage was gathered using measurement tools on satellite imagery. Joint Base Lewis-McChord real property records show a total of 25.2 miles of active track and 7 miles of inactive track. The track network consists of two wye tracks that connect to the serving railroad (BNSF), two classification yards, storage tracks, engine house tracks and loading ramp tracks. The two classification yards are both contained behind gates, with one yard's tracks ending at concrete end ramps.

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 3

2 Results and Recommendations

Overview of current conditions

This chapter discusses the results of the evaluation of the current railroad network condition at Joint Base Lewis-McChord. Defects found for each component are discussed. All defects that have been found and noted in the report should be repaired or replaced in accordance with UFC 4-860- 03 (Headquarters, Departments of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force 2008).

During the inspection, the ERDC inspection team implemented a custom designed, GPS mobile application to digitally record inventory and inspection items of the track system. The Electronic Railroad Inspection Database System (ERIDS) stores data on a GPS device which synchronizes with a local internet server. Various post processing tools enable the user to increase the accuracy and stationing of the track structure, track components, and defects. This data is housed in an Enterprise GeoDatabase that can be exported and consumed by RAILER software for detailed report generation.

Inventory and distress data for the inspection are managed using the RAILER software developed by the ERDC, Construction Engineering Research Laboratory (CERL), Champaign, IL (U.S. Army ERDC 2008).

RAILER is utilized to develop maintenance and repair recommendations and to provide estimates of quantities and costs associated with the maintenance and repair required to meet defect-free standards as defined in UFC 4-860-03 (Headquarters, Departments of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force 2008).

Defects are categorized into maintenance and safety/operating standards.

Maintenance standards provide limits for defects and should be used as a guideline to determine when maintenance is recommended. Although maintenance standards do not impose any traffic restrictions on the track, repair is still recommended so that the defect does not deteriorate and cause a safety/operating restriction. Maintenance standards are subdivided into A and B categories. Maintenance A standards are recommended for Category A track, and Maintenance B standards are recommended for both Category A and B track.

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 4

Safety/operating standards provide the minimum safe operating limits for defects. Safety/operating standards are subdivided into 10 MPH, 5 MPH, and close-to-traffic operating restrictions.

Photos of example distresses at Joint Base Lewis-McChord can be found in Appendix A. Inventory is listed in Appendix B. All defects found during the inspection are listed in Appendix C alphabetically by track segment name.

Actions Since Last Inspection

Crosstie replacement and other routine maintenance was performed and the track network was brought in to full compliance.

Rail

All rail inspected at Joint Base Lewis-McChord is 115 lb/yd rail and is full compliance. Prior to the detailed track inspection, an internal flaw analysis of the track was conducted. Internal flaw analysis was accomplished with a hi-rail truck equipped with an ultrasonic testing unit (NORDCO Testing and Rail Services) and operated by an ERDC personnel certified in Level 2 UT inspection. This ultrasonic testing device was able to test both rails at a rate of approximately 5 MPH. The testing apparatus is capable of detecting the following defects: (1) rail head defects and rail web defects inside and outside the joint bar area; (2) centrally located transverse defects in the rail head and elsewhere in the rail; (3) bolt hole cracks; (4) head and web separations; (5) vertical/ longitudinal defects in the head or web; (6) torch cut bolt holes; and (7) torch cut rail ends. No internal rail defects were found during this inspection.

Fastenings and other track materials (F&OTM)

The fasteners and materials inspected within the track network are in full compliance, with the exception of some loose or missing bolts and small rail end mismatches. These defects are most likely a result of the longitudinal movement during thermal expansion and contraction of the rail. This movement can be minimized with the use of rail anchors. Rail anchors are discussed in the UFC 4-860-03, Section 6-5, and it is recommended to install a minimum of eight anchors, four in each direction (boxed), per 39-foot rail or 16 anchors per 80-foot rail.

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 5

Ties

There are approximately 45,720 crossties in the Joint Base Lewis- McChord track network with only 230 crossties, or 0.5%, were found to be defective. This is well below the normal average of 1-3 percent of defective crossties found in a nominal condition track network. This can be credited to an excellent tie replacement program. One isolated 5 crosstie defective cluster was found at the end of Madigan Spur, which is a closed- to-traffic defect.

Ballast

The ballast of any track network plays a significant role in proper drainage which further increases the usable life of crossties. Ballast is a select angular material placed on the subgrade to provide adequate drainage, restrain the track laterally, longitudinally, and vertically under the dynamic loads imposed by trains and the thermal stresses induced in the rails by changing temperature, and distribute the load of the track and trains to prevent overstressing the subgrade. There are sections of ballast fouled with dirt and other fine materials throughout the track network.

Pumping crossties were found on Track 1, Track 2 and Track 4. Pumping is the periodical up and down movement of crossties under a train movement. This can cause the deterioration of crossties at a much faster rate. Pumping occurs more often in wet climates and is considered a Maintenance A defect.

Drainage/subgrade

Drainage is in good condition, both from the track and through culverts.

All culverts and drain pipes were at least 75% clear at the time of the inspection.

Note: While the overall drainage conditions were observed and general recommendations made, detailed determination of drainage repairs such as sizing drainage structures, running levels, etc., and road-crossing grade changes were beyond the scope of this inspection.

Vegetation

Vegetation is growing in the drainage ditches along the sides of the track but has been controlled on all tracks and is in full compliance.

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 6

All vegetation should be sprayed 8 ft to both sides of the track centerline.

Spraying a larger area will be more effective at controlling vegetation.

Areas that have been encroached by vegetation should be sprayed with herbicide in accordance with AR 420-1, TM 5-629, and TM 5-630.

Turnouts

The turnouts of any track network are considered the most critical portion.

The majority of turnouts were found to be in full compliance with the exception of some turnouts on tracks LC 10, Main, Track 6 and Lead 2.

These turnouts were found to have loose switch rods, which is a closed-to-traffic defect. Turnout 45, on Lead 2, will need a new point rail to replace the current point rail or the point rail should be ground to compliance.

This will help keep wheels from climbing the point and riding out of the rails resulting in a derailment.

Road crossings

All road crossings at Joint Base Lewis-McChord are in full compliance.

Road crossings were recently upgraded and installed and remain in good condition. It is important to ensure that all safety signs, lights, and road markings are clearly visible. All crossing signs, signals, and/or warnings shall conform to the requirements of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), Part VIII, “Traffic Control Systems for Railroad-Highway Grade Crossings”.

Track geometry

Track geometry at Joint Base Lewis-McChord is in full compliance. It is recommended that all tracks be resurfaced and aligned every 5 years as the condition of the track system may change on jointed track due to thermal expansion and contraction of the tracks.

Resurface and align any tracks that are not within tolerances stated in UFC 4-860-03 (Headquarters, Departments of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force 2008). Although not required, a minimum of 1-in. superelevation is recommended on any curve greater than 4 degrees for best results.

Bridges

For track inspection purposes, bridges are only inspected from the stringers up which includes the bridge ties and the components resting on

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 7

them. There are no bridges in the Joint Base Lewis-McChord track network.

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 8

3 Condition Levels

Track segment conditions are quantified using two different methods, the operating restrictions and Track Structure Condition Indices (TSCI) computed by RAILER.

Operating restrictions

The operating restrictions are based on the safety and maintenance standards defined in UFC 4-860-03 (Headquarters, Departments of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force 2008). Table 3-1 defines the operating restrictions.

The operating restrictions for all of the Joint Base Lewis-McChord tracks are illustrated in Figures ES-2 through ES-7 and are also listed in Table 3-

2. Close-to-traffic defects are listed in Table ES-1 in the Executive Summary.

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 11

Condition index

The condition index was developed by the ERDC, Construction Engineering Research Laboratory (CERL), Champaign, IL. The condition index is a separate indicator of track condition from the operating restriction. The condition index ranges from 0 to 100 and is based on the inspection results. The condition index serves two major purposes:

a. It describes the overall condition and reflects the maintenance and rehabilitation required.

b. It documents the condition of the track segment over time to determine the deterioration rate.

While the operating restriction deals strictly with the track standards and illustrates the compliance of each track segment to the safety/operation and maintenance standards described in the UFC 4-860-03, the condition index is a broader measure of the track condition. One defect could result in a close-to-traffic operating restriction for a track segment, even though the track is otherwise in good condition. On the other hand, if there are many defects throughout the track segment, the resulting condition index would be poor even though none of these defects fall below the full compliance level of the UFC 4-860-03 standards. The condition index can serve as a measure of track quality from inspection to inspection as well as a measure of maintenance requirements.

The overall condition index, TSCI, is the average of the condition indices of three track component groups: rail, joints, and fastenings (RJCI);

crossties and switch ties (TCI); and ballast, subgrade, and roadway (BSCI).

Each track-component group index reflects its capability of supporting typical military, short line, or industrial traffic. These indices are determined from the type, severity, and density of the distresses found during the inspection.

The TSCI can be placed into one of seven condition categories. Table 3-3 lists these categories and the TSCI ranges to which they correspond. This table also gives the general description for each category.

RAILER was used to calculate the condition indices. Table 3-4 lists the condition indices for all track segments at Joint Base Lewis-McChord.

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 12

More information about development of the condition indices is given in Uzarski (1993a, 1993b).

Table 3-3. Track structure condition index (TSCI) guidelines.

TSCI Category Condition Description1

86-100 Excellent Very few defects. Track function is not impaired. No immediate work action is required, but routine or preventative maintenance could be scheduled for accomplishment.

71-85 Very Good

Minor deterioration. Track function is not impaired. No immediate work action is required, but routine or preventive maintenance could be scheduled for accomplishment.

56-70 Good Moderate deterioration. Track function may be somewhat impaired.

Routine maintenance or minor repair may be required.

41-55 Fair Significant deterioration. Track function is impaired, but not seriously.

Routine maintenance or minor repair is required.

26-40 Poor Severe deterioration over a small percentage of the track. Less severe deterioration may be present in other portions of the track. Track function is seriously impaired. Major repair is required.

11-25 Very Poor

Critical deterioration has occurred over a large percentage or portion of the track. Less severe deterioration may be present in other portions of the track. Track is barely functional. Major repair or less than total reconstruction is required.

0-10 Failed Extreme deterioration has occurred throughout nearly all or the entire track. Track is no longer functional. Major repair, complete restoration, or total reconstruction is required.

1Taken from FM-93-13 (Uzarski 1993a).

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 13

Table 3-4. Joint Base Lewis-McChord condition indices.

Segment Segment

Stations (ft) Track Structure

Condition Track Component Group Indices

Index Category RJCI (Rail and Joints)

TCI

(Tie)

BSCI

(Ballast and Subgrade)

5 Lead 0+00 - 34+50 98 Excellent 98 99 99 Crossover 1 0+00 - 2+11 100 Excellent 100 100 100 Crossover 2 0+00 - 2+12 100 Excellent 100 100 100 Crossover 3 0+00 - 2+08 100 Excellent 100 100 99 Crossover 4 0+00 - 2+09 100 Excellent 100 100 100 Crossover 5 0+00 - 3+17 100 Excellent 100 100 99 Crossover 6 0+00 - 1+69 99 Excellent 100 100 99 Drmo Lead 0+00 - 8+92 99 Excellent 100 99 99

Engine House

0+00 - 5+86 100 Excellent 100 100 99

Engine House

0+00 - 3+18 100 Excellent 100 100 100

Lc 10 0+00 - 48+04 99 Excellent 99 99 99 Lead 1 0+00 - 36+15 99 Excellent 99 99 99 Lead 2 0+00 - 47+88 99 Excellent 99 99 99 Lead 3 0+00 - 35+27 99 Excellent 100 99 99 Lower 4 0+00 - 16+40 98 Excellent 98 99 99

Madigan Spur 0+00 - 47+21 98 Excellent 100 97 99 Main 0+00 - 52+47 99 Excellent 99 99 99

North 1 0+00 - 23+84 99 Excellent 99 99 99 North 2 0+00 - 26+16 99 Excellent 99 100 99 North 3 0+00 - 29+82 99 Excellent 99 99 100

North Wye 0+00 - 18+63 98 Excellent 99 98 99 South 1 0+00 - 26+13 99 Excellent 99 100 99 South 2 0+00 - 23+13 99 Excellent 99 100 99 South 3 0+00 - 29+83 99 Excellent 99 100 99

South Wye 0+00 - 18+40 98 Excellent 100 98 99 Track 1 0+00 - 30+06 99 Excellent 100 99 99 Track 2 0+00 - 30+99 99 Excellent 99 99 99 Track 3 0+00 - 23+79 100 Excellent 100 100 99 Track 4 0+00 - 31+63 99 Excellent 99 99 99 Track 5 0+00 - 24+11 98 Excellent 97 99 99 Track 6 0+00 - 32+71 99 Excellent 100 99 99 Track 7 0+00 - 24+45 100 Excellent 100 100 99 Track 8 0+00 - 30+96 99 Excellent 100 99 99 Upper 4 0+00 - 11+14 99 Excellent 100 99 99 Upper 6 0+00 - 19+56 99 Excellent 100 99 99

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 14

4 Estimate of Maintenance and Repair Costs

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 16

5 Summary

General summary

This report presents the results of the detailed visual and ultrasonic internal flaw track inspections at Joint Base Lewis-McChord. It provides repair requirements for the track, turnouts, grade crossings, and drainage facilities. Component conditions are given according to the operating restriction and RAILER-computed condition indices. The proposed repairs, if performed, will improve railroad operations and reduce long-term maintenance. Cost estimates are based on estimated national average prices and include materials, equipment, and labor. The repairs indicated are required to upgrade the Joint Base Lewis-McChord railroad facilities to meet the standards as defined in UFC 4-860-03 (Headquarters, Departments of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force 2008) and to ensure that the track can be maintained at these levels for the foreseeable future with routine maintenance.

Summary of recommendations

Based on this railroad track inspection, the ERDC team recommends the following:

a. All close-to-traffic defects should be repaired immediately and before any train operations are resumed on those tracks with such defects.

b. The repairs listed alphabetically in Appendix C by track segment should be performed in the near term.

c. Continue a program of routine track inspections and preventive maintenance to protect the track-repair investment.

d. Continue the current crosstie replacement program.

e. Continue to closely monitor all turnouts and adjust as needed.

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 17

References

Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. 2003.

Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways.

Washington, D.C.

Headquarters, Departments of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force.

2004a. Railroad design and rehabilitation. Unified Facilities Criteria 4- 860-01FA. Washington, D.C.

_____. 2008. Railroad track maintenance and safety standards.

Unified Facilities Criteria 4-860-03. Washington, D.C.

Uzarski, D.R. 1993a. Development of condition index for low volume railroad track. Report FM-93/13. Champaign, IL: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center.

_____. 1993b. Condition index for low volume railroad track: Condition survey inspection and distress manual. Report FM-93/14. Champaign, IL: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center.

U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. 2008. RAILER Engineered Management System.

<http://www.erdc.usace.army.mil/pls/erdcpub/WWW WELCOME.NAVI GATION PAGE?tmp next page=5384>.

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 A1

Appendix A: Photos

Examples of defects found during the inspection at Joint Base Lewis- McChord are shown in the following photos.

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 A2

Figure A1. Turnout 37 under evaluation on 5 Lead.

Figure A2. Track 5 Leading into yard tracks.

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 A3

Figure A3. Storm drain along Lead 3 causing heavy vegetation and potentially causing washouts.

Figure A4. Gate leading to Lead 1, Lead 2 and Lead 3.

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 A4

Figure A5. View down Main and LC10 toward the North and South tracks.

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 B1

Appendix B: Inventory of Joint Base Lewis- McChord Railroad Facilities

The inventory of Joint Base Lewis-McChord railroad facilities is presented in this appendix. It includes general track characteristics, turnouts, grade crossings, track appliances, curves, drainage, and bridges.

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-06 C1

Appendix C: Defects and Recommended Repair

Defects, repair recommendations, and cost estimates for Joint Base Lewis- McChord are shown in this appendix in alphabetical order by segment name.

Each table consists of the list of defects for one segment. At the top of the table, general information, including the area, track, begin location, end location, and track category, for the segment is provided. Defects are listed by their component. The components include the ties, rail, fastenings and other track materials (F&OTM), ballast/subgrade, drainage, geometry, appliances, turnouts, and grade crossings. The total cost to repair the segment to a defect-free standard is shown at the end of each table.

Each defect is described further to assist in locating and repairing the defect. The “Station (ft)” column is the location of the defect. If defects are found repeatedly for a segment, the individual stations are not provided; instead, the station will reflect the length of the segment, and the defect quantity will be provided. The “Rail” column refers to which side (right, left, or both) of the track the defect was found. The “Standard” column refers to the maintenance and safety standards listed in UFC 4- 860-03. The “Work Action” column lists the recommended plan of action for repairing the defect found. Measurements for the defect (i.e., track gauge or switch point gap) are listed in the “Meas (in.)” column. The quantity of the defect found (i.e., number of defective crossties) is listed in the “Quant” column. The unit of measure for the defect is listed in the “UM” column. Units of measure include the following: each (EA), linear foot (LF), and track foot (TF). The unit cost is listed in the “Unit Cost” column. The total/extended cost is the unit cost multiplied by the quantity and is represented in the “Ext. Cost” column. Any notes for the defects are listed in the last column.

ERDC/GSL APB ARR-20-6 E1