Pier_2,_WFI-MCO-11-00128_Final_Reduced.pdf

WFI-MCO-11-00128

MOTCO Pier 2

Routine Inspection Report

Facility Number: 00128

Military Ocean Terminal Concord, California

Author: Robert A. Weaver, P.E. (KCI Technologies, Inc.)

Inspection Dates: October 24, 2011 – November 10, 2011 Report Date: February 2012

Geotechnical and Structures Laboratory

Distribution authorized to U.S. Government Agencies only. Other requests for this document shall be referred to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and Development Center (CEERD-GS-S), 3909 Halls Ferry Road, Vicksburg, MS 39180.

ii

PREFACE

This report presents an assessment of the condition of Waterfront Facility Number 00128 (Pier 2) at Military Ocean Terminal Concord (MOTCO), California. This report satisfies requirements for Level I (above water) and Level I and II (underwater) inspection established in UFC 4-150-07 (Headquarters, Departments of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force 2001).

The Army Waterfront Inspection Program is sponsored by the Army Transportation Infrastructure Program (ATIP) of the Headquarters Installation Management Command (IMCOM), San Antonio, TX. The IMCOM provided funding for this investigation.

Questions shall be directed to Ali A. Achmar, IMCOM ATIP Program Manager, ali.achmar@us.army.mil.

Contract personnel of KCI Technologies, Inc. (KCI) and Marine Solutions, Inc. (MSI) performed the inspection of above water and underwater elements. The findings and recommendations presented in this report are based on a routine inspection at MOTCO.

The field inspection was performed from October 24 to November 10, 2011. The inspection team consisted of J. Ikaika Kincaid, P.E., Team Leader and Dive Supervisor, John M. Hudacek, P.E., Robert A. Weaver, P.E., Stephen C. Tomsic, P.E., Christopher J.

Luciani, Paul Bernhardt, and Mark Suchan of KCI and Joseph Guthrie of MSI. Diving operations were overseen by Mr. Richard Benoit and Mr. Todd Manny from the USACE Portland District. Quality Control for this report was provided by Mr. Sean Patrick, P.E., of Pennoni Associates, Inc. The Project Manager for the KCI Technologies/Pennoni Associates Joint Venture was Mr. John M. Hudacek, P.E.

Mr. Kevin L. Haskins, StEB-GSL was the Project Lead under the supervision of Mr. Terry R. Stanton, Chief, StEB-GSL; Mr. Bartley P. Durst, Chief, Geosciences and Structures Division; Dr. William P. Grogan, Deputy Director, GSL; and Dr. David W.

Pittman, Director, GSL.

COL Kevin J. Wilson was the Commander and Executive Director of the Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC), and Dr. Jeffery P. Holland was the Director.

The installation POC is Mr. Malcolm Charles, Director DPW, (925) 246-4023, malcolm.charles@us.army.mil.

The numbering convention for reporting purposes is as shown on the drawings in Appendix C. All units of measure in this report are in US (English) units, unless otherwise noted.

mailto:ali.achmar@us.army.mil mailto:malcolm.charles@us.army.mil iii

Table of Contents

PREFACE .......................................................................................................................... ii FIGURES .......................................................................................................................... iv TABLES ............................................................................................................................ iv UNIT CONVERSION FACTORS .................................................................................. v

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................. ES-1

2. PROJECT LOCATION

3. PIER 2 DESCRIPTION

A. GENERAL

B. MAIN APPROACH & PLATFORM

C. SECONDARY APPROACH

D. CONCRETE APPROACH

E. WALKWAY

4. INSPECTION PROCEDURES

5. INSPECTION METRICS AND REPORTING

A. GENERAL

B. FACILITY OPERATIONAL CAPABILITY RATINGS

C. TYPICAL DAMAGE DESCRIPTIONS

D. REPAIR PRIORITY

E. TYPICAL REPAIR DESCRIPTIONS

6. INSPECTION SUMMARY

A. GENERAL

B. MAIN APPROACH & PLATFORM

B.1 Concrete Extension B.2 Fender System

C. SECONDARY APPROACH

D. CONCRETE APPROACH

E. WALKWAY

7. REPAIR COST SUMMARY

Appendices

APPENDIX A - PHOTOGRAPHS

APPENDIX B - FACILITIES INVENTORY AND FUNCTIONALITY REPORT

APPENDIX C - DAMAGE DESCRIPTION DRAWINGS

APPENDIX D - REPAIR COST ESTIMATES

iv

Figures

Figure 2-1 Location Map Figure 2-2 Vicinity Plan Figure 3-1 Pier 2 Site Plan Figure 3-2 Main Approach & Platform Aerial View Figure 3-3 Main Approach Deck (Looking West – East) Figure 3-4 Main Approach Timber Piles, Cross Bracing and Beam Support Figure 3-5 Upper Platform Figure 3-6 Typical Bent in Concrete Extension Section Figure 3-7 Secondary Approach Aerial View Figure 3-8 Secondary Approach Deck (Looking North – South) Figure 3-9 Secondary Approach Typical Pile Bent, Piles and Cross Bracing Figure 3-10 Concrete Approach Aerial View Figure 3-11 Concrete Approach Deck (Looking South – North) Figure 3-12 Typical Concrete Approach Bent Figure 3-13 Walkway Aerial View Figure 3-14 Walkway Deck (Looking South – North) Figure 3-15 Typical Walkway Bent Figure 6-1 Aerial View of Main Approach & Platform Section Figure 6-2 Aerial View of Secondary Approach Section Figure 6-3 Aerial View of Concrete Approach Section Figure 6-4 Aerial View of Walkway

Tables

Table 1-1 Summary of Condition Assessment and Recommended Actions ............... ES-2 Table 1-2 Summary of Critical Areas and Recommended Actions ............................. ES-3 Table 5-1 Routine Facility Condition Ratings (From ASCE 101) Table 6-1 2011 Inspection List for Pier 2 at MOTCO, California Table 6-2 Main Approach & Platform – Summary of Overall Condition Rating and

Facility Operational Rating Table 6-3 Damage and Repair Summary for Main Approach & Platform Section Table 6-4 Concrete Extension – Summary of Overall Condition Rating and Facility

Operational Rating Table 6-5 Damage and Repair Summary for Concrete Extension Section Table 6-6 Fender System – Summary of Overall Condition Rating and Facility

Operational Rating Table 6-7 Damage and Repair Summary for Fender System Section Table 6-8 Secondary Approach – Summary of Overall Condition Rating and Facility

Operational Rating Table 6-9 Damage and Repair Summary for Secondary Approach Section Table 6-10 Concrete Approach – Summary of Overall Condition Rating and Facility

Operational Rating Table 6-11 Damage and Repair Summary for Concrete Approach Section Table 6-12 Walkway – Summary of Overall Condition Rating and Facility Operational

Rating Table 6-13 Damage and Repair Summary for Walkway Section Table 7-1 Recommendations and Cost Estimate for Pier 2 v

Unit Conversion Factors

Multiply By To Obtain acres 4,046.873 square meters acre-feet 1,233.5 cubic meters cubic feet 0.02831685 cubic meters cubic feet per second (cfs) 0.02831685 cubic meters per second cubic inches 1.6387064 E-05 cubic meters cubic yards 0.7645549 cubic meters feet 0.3048 meters gallons (U.S. liquid) 3.785412 E-03 cubic meters hectares 1.0 E+04 square meters inches 0.0254 meters miles (U.S. statute) 1,609.347 meters miles per hour 0.44704 meters per second mils 0.0254 millimeters square feet 0.09290304 square meters square inches 6.4516 E-04 square meters square miles 2.589998 E+06 square meters square yards 0.8361274 square meters yards 0.9144 meters

ES-1

PIER 2 AT MOTCO

(MILITARY OCEAN TERMINAL CONCORD, CA)

2011 ROUTINE INSPECTION

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

General Project Description KCI Technologies and its subconsultant Marine Solutions, Inc. (MSI) performed a visual and tactile inspection of the above-water and underwater features of Pier 2 at MOTCO, located at Port Chicago, California from October 24 through November 10, 2011. Pier 2 is located along Kinney Boulevard, west of Pier 3. The summary condition assessment is presented below.

KCI and MSI performed a full above water visual / tactile Level I inspection on all structural elements, and a Level I Inspection (visual / tactile inspection) on the submerged structural elements at Pier 2, and a Level II Inspection (detailed inspection with partial cleaning) on 10% of the submerged structural elements of this facility.

Underwater inspection was performed on piles, underwater cross bracing, and underwater portions of firewalls. This included inspection of most of the timber piles under Pier 2 with the exception of 39 bents in which piles were above the waterline or in shallow water (less than 4' deep). The turbidity of the water prevented the divers from taking underwater photographs as the visibility was less than one foot.

The focus of this inspection was to assess and report the conditions of the structure and report damage and deterioration of the above-water and underwater portions of the structure. The 2007 Inspection Report was available and referenced during the inspection.

In accordance with UFC-4-150-07, damage locations and extents of damage were determined and CAD drawings were produced showing locations and extent of deterioration. These drawings are based solely on field measurements, since no professional survey was performed under the Scope of Work. These drawings are included as part of the inspection documentation and are presented in Appendix C.

Pier 2 is separated into four individual sections (Main Approach & Platform, Secondary Approach, Concrete Approach, and Walkway) for simplicity of assessment and reporting.

Detailed descriptions of each area are given in Section 3 of this Report. A summary of the Condition Rating, Recommended Action, Quantity and Estimated Cost for each repair for each section is shown in Tables 1-1 and 1-2.

The Operations Building on the main platform was used for staging and storage of inspection equipment.

ES-2

Structure Condition and Recommendations

Table 1-1 below shows the Overall Condition Rating, Recommended Actions to remediate the problems, and an Estimated Cost for each section of Pier 2.

**Note: The Recommended Actions in Tables 1-1 and 1-2 are intended to restore the functionality of Pier 2 as it exists on its current footprint. However;

this may not meet the current needs of the installation. In order for MOTCO to bring Pier 2 up to full operational use, dredging, installing cranes, and other upgrades may be necessary; however, these costs are not included herein.

Table 1-1. Summary of Condition Assessment and Recommended Actions

Structure ID Condition Rating Recommended Action Quantity Estimated

Cost

Concrete Extension

(Bents 1E, 2E, 1-116)

(See Section 6.B.1)

Satisfactory 5

1. Repair cracks at Bent 39 mooring fitting. Prohibit use of mooring fitting until cracks are repaired.

2. Repair the spalls in the concrete curbs and utility enclosures.

3. Fill the hollow mooring bollard with grout.

4. Repair or replace the broken utility hatch covers.

5. Repair the broken utility conduits.

6. Remove the broken sewer pipe.

7. Install new fender along the north face of the pier at Bents 115-116.

8. Repave the wearing surface.

TOTAL

10 LF

15 CY

1 EA

4 EA

LS

18,000 SF

$1,000

$45,000

$1,000

$4,000

$500 $2,000

$25,000

$90,000

$168,500

Fender System (Bents 1E, 1-115)

(See Section 6.B.2) Fair 4

1. Repair Fender Piles 25 and 26.

Prohibit berthing loads on Fender Piles 25 and 26 until then.

2. Tighten hardware on the loose fender chains.

2 EA

$15,000

$250

$15,250

Concrete Approach (Bents 1E-48E)

(See Section 6.D) Fair 4

1. Repair spalls in curbs, pier caps, and underside of deck.

2. Replace missing inlet drain covers.

3. Repair electrical conduits with exposed wiring.

4. Repave the wearing surface.

5. Install new fender along the north face of the pier at Bents 1E-2E.

2 EA

32,000 SF

$160,000

$211,000

TABLE 1-1 SUBTOTAL $394,750

ES-3

Critical Findings: Table 1-2 below outlines the Critical Areas of each structure and provides Recommended Action to remediate the problems. The table also provides an Estimated Cost for each structure ID.

Table 1-2. Summary of Critical Areas and Recommended Actions

Structure ID Condition Rating Recommended Action Quantity Estimated

Cost

Main Approach & Platform

(Bents 1-199) (See Section 6.B)

Serious 2

1. Replace the timber sections of

Pier 2 with concrete.

Also, as interim measures:

2. Enclose or otherwise protect the exposed transformers in the electrical room.

3. Turn-off/shut-off and lock-out water and electricity to the broken and leaking utilities.

4. Stabilize or remove the leaning and loose light poles.

5. Prohibit rail traffic and other heavy loads from the entire Pier.

6. Prevent vehicular traffic from travelling over the timber portion at the west end of the upper platform.

150,000 SF

3 EA

N/A

$75,000,000

$8,000

$2,000

$3,000

$75,013,000 Secondary Approach

(Bents 1A-61A) (See Section 6.C)

Poor 3 1. See Main Approach & Platform Recommendations. N/A N/A

Walkway (Bents 1W-21W) (See Section 6.E)

Critical 1

1. Close the walkway to all traffic with a permanent barrier. In addition, close the walkway around the perimeter of the operations building from the northwest corner of the building to the small gate at the main walkway.

N/A N/A

TABLE 1-2 SUBTOTAL $75,013,000

FACILITY TOTAL COST $75,407,750

Future Inspection The next periodic inspection of Pier 2 at MOTCO should be performed in November 2015 (on 4 year cycle), in accordance with the requirements of UFC 4-150-7 for the appropriate type of infrastructure.

ES-4 – REVISED 07-24-2012

Life Expectancy Pier 2 is structurally inadequate to handle missions, due to load restrictions. Although minor repairs have been completed since original construction in 1944, the majority (approximately 95%) of the timber piles appear to be original, and there is widespread marine borer damage. Immediate action is required in order to restore its intended structural capacity.

2. PROJECT LOCATION

Figure 2-1 Location Map

Figure 2-2 Vicinity Plan

PIER 2 N

3. PIER 2 DESCRIPTION

A. GENERAL

See Table 6-1 for a list of inspected structures. Figure 3-1 shows the locations of the features inspected (see also Drawing No. A-0 in Appendix C). See Sections 3B through 3E for structure descriptions.

Figure 3-1 Pier 2 Site Plan

CONCRETE

APPROACH

MAIN

APPROACH

WALKWAY

SECONDARY

APPROACH

MAIN

PLATFORM

MOTCO Pier 2

Owner: Federal Government – MOTCO County: Contra Costa, California IMCOM Region: Central Structure Name: Pier 2 at MOTCO Structure Number: 00128 Location: Concord, California Latitude: 38° 03' 30.45"N

Longitude: 122° 01' 29.45"W Installation POC: Malcolm Charles, DPW Director Installation POC Phone Number: (925) 246-4023 Date of Previous Inspection: October 2007 Inspected By (Above Water): Team Leader: John M. Hudacek, P.E.

Inspectors: Robert A. Weaver, P.E., Stephen C.

Tomsic, P.E., and Christopher J. Luciani

Inspected By (Underwater): Team Leader: J. Ikaika Kincaid, P.E.

Inspectors: Paul Bernhardt, Mark Suchan, and Joseph Guthrie

Date of Inspection: October 24 – November 10, 2011

B. MAIN APPROACH & PLATFORM

Figure 3-2 Main Approach & Platform Aerial View

Main Approach Section: The Main Approach & Platform of Pier 2 consists of the original timber structure which was built in 1944. The pier is constructed of timber deck planking above longitudinal timber beams (joists), supported by transverse timber beams at pile bents. The pile bents are numbered from 1-199, starting at the east end at the junction with the concrete approach section. The deck has timber curbing and hand railings surrounding the edge of the entire structure. There is also an asphalt wearing surface and several railroad tracks run the length of the pier. The pier has electrical power, a fire suppression system, water, sewer, and lighting. Abandoned compressed air and steam lines are also in place throughout. An operations building is located on the pier and contains a forklift garage, office space, workshop, and restroom facilities.

In 1966, a 1,150' long elevated concrete extension section was added to the north end of the main pier structure. This section has concrete piles, concrete bent caps, and a concrete deck. The timber fender system along the north face of the pier was replaced in 2002 with a concrete fender system, and new timber camels were installed in early 2011.

Construction Date: 1944/1966 Reference Drawings: Appendix C: Drawings 2.1-1 through 2.1-7 (Underdeck) Drawings 2.1-13 through 2.1-19 (Deck) Drawings 2.1-28 through 2.1-34 (Utilities)

CONCRETE

EXTENSION N

OPERATIONS

BUILDING

FENDER

SYSTEM

MAIN APPROACH

MAIN

PLATFORM

Figure 3-3 Main Approach Deck (Looking West – East)

Figure 3-4 Main Approach Timber Piles, Cross Bracing and Beam Support

Figure 3-5 Upper Platform

Figure 3-6 Typical Bent in Concrete Extension Section

C. SECONDARY APPROACH

Figure 3-7 Secondary Approach Aerial View

Secondary Approach Section: The Secondary Approach Section of Pier 2 is part of the original construction in 1944. The pier is constructed of timber plank decking above longitudinal timber beams (joists), supported by transverse timber beams at pile bents.

The piles at the bents are 12 – 16 inch diameter timber piles with timber cross-bracing.

The deck has timber curbing surrounding the edge of the entire structure with timber hand railings. There is also an asphalt wearing surface and a single railroad track runs the length of the approach to the main pier section. The approach has electrical power, lighting, and a fire suppression system. The bents are numbered from 1A to 61A, starting at the north end. An abandoned pumping station is located on the east side near Bent 13A.

Construction Date: 1944 Reference Drawings: Appendix C: Drawings 2.1-4 and 2.1-8 (Underdeck) Drawings 2.1-16 and 2.1-20 (Deck) Drawings 2.1-31 and 2.1-35 (Utilities)

N

SECONDARY

APPROACH

Figure 3-8 Secondary Approach Deck (Looking North – South)

Figure 3-9 Secondary Approach Typical Pile Bent, Piles, and Cross Bracing

D. CONCRETE APPROACH

Figure 3-10 Concrete Approach Aerial View

Concrete Approach Section: The Concrete Approach Section of Pier 2 was built in 1966 and consists of concrete piles and bent caps supporting concrete beams. A single railroad track runs the length of the approach. The bents are numbered from 1E to 48E, starting at the west end.

Construction Date: 1966 Reference Drawings: Appendix C: Drawings 2.1-10 through 2.1-12 (Underdeck) Drawings 2.1-22 through 2.1-24 (Deck) Drawings 2.1-37 through 2.1-39 (Utilities)

CONCRETE APPROACH

Figure 3-11 Concrete Approach Deck (Looking South – North)

Figure 3-12 Typical Concrete Approach Bent

E. WALKWAY

Figure 3-13 Walkway Aerial View

Walkway Section: The Walkway Section of Pier 2 is part of the original 1944 construction. The pier is constructed of timber plank decking above longitudinal timber beams (joists), supported by transverse timber beams at pile bents. The piles at the bents are 12 – 16 inch diameter timber piles with timber cross-bracing. The deck has timber curbing surrounding the edge of the entire structure with timber hand railings along both sides running north to south. A sewer line and an abandoned steam line run along the length of the walkway. A section of the walkway on the east side has been abandoned and is closed off with a timber railing. The pile bents are numbered from 1W-21W, starting at the north end at the junction with the operations building on the main platform.

Construction Date: 1944 Reference Drawings: Appendix C: Drawing 2.1-9 (Underdeck) Drawing 2.1-21 (Deck) Drawing 2.1-36 (Utilities)

WALKWAY

Figure 3-14 Walkway Deck (Looking South – North)

Figure 3-15 Typical Walkway Bent

4. INSPECTION PROCEDURES

A detailed visual Level I (no removal of marine growth or testing) above-water and underwater inspection was performed on all accessible portions of Pier 2, as required in the Scope of Work. Level II (removal of marine growth in three bands) underwater inspection was performed on 10% of the accessible portions of submerged elements of Pier 2.

Pier 2 was accessible from the land for inspection of the top deck and perimeter sides.

Access to inspect the pier underdeck, support piles, bracing systems, and firewalls was accomplished using small floating platforms. Inspection of the underwater portions of the piles, bracing systems, and fenders was conducted simultaneously with the above-water inspection.

All accessible above-water areas of Pier 2 were visually inspected (Level I), by taking notes and recording the conditions of the structures, measuring locations of problem areas, relating the locations to pier plan measurements and taking photographs of significant damage areas.

The underwater inspection of Pier 2 was performed by a USACE compliant 4-person dive crew experienced in underwater inspection and included a registered Professional Engineer for direction and supervision. All inspection operations were conducted in accordance with USACE Safety Manual; EM 385-1-1. All exposed portions of the submerged structural elements were visually inspected. Where visibility was limited, tactile examinations were used to obtain structural data. The work included a Level I Inspection (no removal of marine growth or testing) on the entire submerged structure, combined with a Level II Inspection (removal of marine growth in three bands) on 10% of the structural elements. The underwater visibility during the inspection was less than one foot which prevented underwater photographic documentation of defects.

ASCE defines three levels of underwater inspection efforts. During the course of this project, the Level I inspection required by the Scope of Work was augmented by the use of Level II efforts to gather information not attainable with visual inspection only. In addition, this level of effort allowed for a more accurate development of the existing typical condition of the structure with which to conduct the remainder of the inspection.

Level I A close visual examination or a tactile examination above water and underwater; sometimes using large sweeping motions of the hands where visibility is limited underwater. This effort is detailed enough to detect obvious major damage or deterioration caused by overstress or other severe deterioration. It confirms the continuity of the deterioration within the discovered zones of all members and detects undermining or erosion along the mudline of the structural elements.

Level II A detailed inspection that requires marine growth to be removed from portions of the structure below water. Cleaning is time consuming, hence the need to base the inspection on a representative sampling of components. For piles, a 12-in. high band is cleaned near the low waterline, at the mudline, and midway between the low waterline and mudline. On retaining structures, a 1-ft. x 1-ft. area is cleaned at the same three elevations. This inspection is intended to detect and identify damaged and deteriorated areas that may be hidden by surface biofouling or built up corrosion product.

Level III A detailed inspection that involves nondestructive testing, conducted to detect the extent of corrosion by measuring the remaining steel thickness using ultrasonic testing. This level of inspection is limited to key structural areas required to determine a representative sampling of the remaining sheet pile thickness. For timber structures, this level of inspection may include extraction of material samples using an increment borer to examine the piles for internal damage or decay. It may also include measurement of remaining cross-section by use of ultrasonic testing.

Oversight of diving operations was provided by Mr. Richard Benoit and Mr. Todd Manny from the USACE Portland District.

5. INSPECTION METRICS AND REPORTING

The following inspection ratings are taken from ASCE 101 (Underwater Condition Assessment Ratings) and have been modified slightly to apply to overall structural conditions exhibited at MOTCO Pier 2.

Table 5-1

Routine Facility Condition Ratings (From ASCE 101)

Rating Description

Good

No visible damage or only minor damage noted.

Structural elements may show very minor deterioration, but no overstressing is observed.

No repairs are required.

Satisfactory

Limited minor to moderate defects or deterioration are observed, but no overstressing is observed.

No repairs are required.

Fair

All primary structural elements are sound, but minor to moderate defects or deteriorations are observed.

Localized areas of moderate to advance deterioration may be present but do not significantly reduce the load-bearing capacity of the structure.

Repairs are recommended, but the priority of the recommended repairs is low.

Poor

Advanced deterioration or overstressing is observed on widespread portions of the structure but does not significantly reduce the load-bearing capacity of primary structural components.

Repairs may need to be carried out with moderate urgency.

Serious

Advance deterioration, overstressing, or breakage may have significantly affected the load bearing capacity of primary structural components.

Local failures are possible and loadings restrictions may be necessary.

Repair may need to be carried out on a high-priority basis with urgency.

Critical

Very advance deterioration, overstressing, or breakage has resulted in localized failure(s) of primary structural components.

More widespread failures are possible or likely to occur, and load restrictions should be implemented as necessary.

Repairs may need to be carried out on a very high priority basis with strong urgency.

B. FACILITY OPERATIONAL CAPABILITY RATINGS

The Facility Operational Ratings are defined as:

C-1 Facility Operational: These facilities are in good condition, with no limitations on the original live load or berthing capacity. However, routine maintenance repairs may be required.

C-2 Facility Mostly Operational: These facilities typically have moderate deterioration or defects, but the load capacity is unaffected at present. Further deterioration may result in the downgrading of the load capacity in the future, if maintenance repairs are not performed. Facilities that have broken or missing fender systems are also rated as C-2, because vessel berthing is limited.

C-3 Facility Partially Operational: These facilities typically have areas or elements with severe deterioration that have caused load restrictions on the structure.

C-4 Facility Not Operational: These facilities typically have areas or elements with severe deterioration that has dramatically reduced its structural integrity or resulted in localized, partial or total collapse of the structure.

C. TYPICAL DAMAGE DESCRIPTIONS

The following damage descriptions are to be used in conjunction with the damage columns of the tables shown in Section 6 and Appendix B of this report.

BRK: Breakage - Broken member.

OSC: Overstressing Cracks – Cracking as a result of crushing or overstressing of the member.

ABS: Abrasion Damage – Damage due to repetitive rubbing or due to impact from vehicles, vessels, debris, or other objects.

SPL: Split – Lengthwise separations along the grain and across the annual growth rings.

This includes major checks wider than ½″.

FUN: Fungal Decay (or Rot) – Deterioration of timber due to decay-producing fungi, characterized by a softening and disintegration of the wood.

MBD: Marine Borer Damage – Teredo (shipworm) infestation resulting in the hollowing of the member, leaving just the outer shell. Small holes and grooves along the surface of the member are evidence of marine borer infestation.

FDT: Fastener Deterioration – Section loss on fasteners due to corrosion. Also includes broken fasteners, hardware, and other connections.

UND: Undermining – Void due to missing fill, typically a result of erosion.

FD: Fire Damage – Fire has reduced the cross-section and thus the capacity of a timber member.

LS: Loose – Member is not connected or fully tightened. Elements may be unstable or not in full contact with each other.

PCR: Pattern Cracking – Block, map or alligator cracking.

SNK: Sinkhole – A cavity below the ground or other surface caused by loss of subgrade material, typically resulting in a depression in the surface.

CRK: Crack – Any crack wider than hairline (1/16″ or wider)

LSC: Loose Connection – Member is not fully connected. Also includes loose or detached utility connections.

STL: Settlement – Depression in pavement or other surface or element, including differences in elevation between surfaces or elements.

PTH: Pothole – An area where the bituminous/asphaltic pavement (wearing surface) is missing or broken up.

CCS: Closed Corrosion Spall – Delaminated concrete with no exposed reinforcing steel.

OCS: Open Corrosion Spall – Concrete spall with exposed reinforcing steel.

LCR: Longitudinal Crack – Cracking in the longitudinal direction.

HCR: Horizontal Crack – Cracking in the horizontal direction.

VCR: Vertical Crack – Cracking in a vertical direction.

COR: Corrosion – Rust on a steel member.

BL: Bearing Loss – Condition where an element is not in full contact with its supporting element below, typically due to deterioration or a construction flaw.

Examples may include loss of bearing between pile and pile cap, or between pile cap and beam, usually expressed as a % of the surface area that is not in contact.

D. REPAIR PRIORITY

The following Repair Priority descriptions are to be used in conjunction with the Repair Priority columns of the tables shown in Section 6 and Appendix B of this report. Each description below will elaborate on the urgency of the repair listed in the tables.

M – MONITOR:

The damage should be monitored during regularly scheduled future inspections and any repair requirements should be re-assessed then.

L – LOW PRIORITY REPAIR:

The damage should be repaired, but the urgency of this repair is very low.

There will not be any continued deterioration or any further damage to the structure if this repair is not carried out.

H – HIGH PRIORITY REPAIR:

The damage should be repaired in a timelier manner than the low priority repairs, as these damages will continue to deteriorate and may accelerate further damage to the structure until repaired.

There is no safety or structural capacity concerns for these damages.

U – URGENT REPAIR:

The damage should be repaired immediately.

Monitoring of these locations until repairs can be completed is recommended.

There is either safety or structural capacity concerns for these damage locations.

R – REPLACEMENT:

The damage is extensive and is structurally unsound for the intended use.

These structures should be replaced in their entirety before removing load restrictions.

E. TYPICAL REPAIR DESCRIPTIONS

The following repair descriptions are to be used in conjunction with the general findings and recommendation summaries and the repair column of the tables shown in Section 6 of this report.

Replace Pier:

Replace the timber sections of the pier with a new concrete structure. These recommended repairs are intended to restore the functionality of Pier 2 as it exists on its current footprint. It includes replacement of the main approach, main platform, secondary approach walkway, and operations building as well as the timber firewalls in the concrete extension. The new concrete structure(s) should tie into the existing concrete portions of the pier.

Repair Spalls:

Saw-cut a rectangular area (1” deep) around the perimeter of the deteriorated concrete, remove and properly dispose of all damaged or deteriorated concrete until sound concrete is reached. Clean and apply an epoxy coating to any exposed reinforcing steel prior to patching the spall. Concrete spalls shall be repaired with cast-in-place concrete, pneumatically-applied mortar, non-shrink grout, or other cementitious material. Remove all formwork after spalls have been repaired.

Repair Cracks:

Cracks which are open 1/8″ and wider shall be repaired by epoxy injection.

Repave:

Remove the existing wearing surface from the deck and repave with a bituminous asphalt wearing surface. A bituminous binding coat shall be applied after the original pavement has been removed and the deck surface has been cleaned, prior to applying the new wearing surface.

Repair Fender Pile:

Saw-cut, remove, and properly dispose of any damaged or deteriorated concrete from the pile. Clean and apply an epoxy coating to any exposed reinforcing steel prior to patching the spall. Concrete spalls shall be repaired with cast-in-place concrete, pneumatically-applied mortar, non-shrink grout, or other cementitious material. Remove all formwork after spalls have been repaired. This repair may also include installation of a steel or grouted fiberglass splice jacket to reinforce the pile.

Install New Fender:

Remove and properly dispose of the damaged fender piles and hardware. Attach a new fender system to the concrete face of the pier with proper anchoring hardware. The new fender system may consist of timber (or synthetic timber) piles and wales, neoprene bumpers, or ultra-high molecular weight wearing pads, or some combination of these.

Fill Mooring Bollard with Grout:

Remove the trash, debris, and water from the interior of the bollard. Ensure that the interior of the bollard is clean and dry, then fill the bollard with a nonshrink grout.

6. INSPECTION SUMMARY

This section contains inspection results, Structure Condition Rating and Repair Recommendations for Pier 2 at MOTCO described by feature. A Facilities Inventory and Functionality Report is presented in Appendix B, and Repair Cost Estimates for repairs are presented in Appendix D.

Table 6-1

2011 Inspection List for Pier 2 at MOTCO, California

Waterfront Facility Title and Description

Property Record Number

Year Built/ Modified

Approx.

Length (feet)

# of Piles Material Level I

Piles Level II

Piles

6.B Main Approach & Platform 00128 1944 1,934 3,856 Timber 3,856 386

6.B.1 Concrete Extension 00128 1966 1,150 136 Concrete 136 13

6.B.2 Fender System 00128 2002 1,150 118 Concrete 118 11

6.C Secondary Approach 00128 1944 683 524 Timber 524 52

6.D Concrete Approach 00128 1966 1,085 244 Concrete 244 24

6.E Walkway 00128 1944 252 134 Timber 134 13

Each Damage and Repair Summary Table contains the following columns:

Drawing/Photo # - The number before the slash indicates the Drawing Number in Appendix C where the damages label can be found. The number after the slash represents the photo number within Appendix A.

Repair Priority - See Section 5-D for the explanation of this column.

Damage Description –The description portion of this column may contain any of the narrative previously defined in Section 5-C, and where necessary, will be more descriptive.

Repair Description – This will contain a brief description of the required repair for each associated damage description. Many will contain “Typical” repair descriptions, which can be found in Section 5-E. If a typical or brief explanation of repair is not possible, this column will refer to a ‘Note’, which will immediately follow the table, and will describe the damage repair in the appropriate detail.

Additional information is provided in the Facilities Inventory and Functionality Report in Appendix B and the Repair Cost Estimates in Appendix D.

B. MAIN APPROACH & PLATFORM

CONDITION RATING – 2 (SERIOUS)

Figure 6-1 Aerial View of Main Approach & Platform Section

General Findings and Recommendations:

The Pier 2 Main Approach Section is in SERIOUS condition overall with multiple severe defects to the piles and superstructure. Due to the severity of the defects, it is strongly recommended that all trains and heavy trucks be prohibited from the pier. In addition, all vehicle traffic should be prohibited from travelling over the timber portion at the west end of the upper platform.

Due to the extent of deterioration in the timber piles and other structural elements, it is recommended that the timber sections of Pier 2 be completely rebuilt with a new concrete structure.

A summary of the GPS coordinates, Overall Condition Rating, and the Facility Operational Rating for Pier 2 Main Approach Section is presented in Table 6-2.

Table 6-2

Main Approach & Platform – Summary of Overall Condition Rating and Facility Operational Rating

FACILITY

NAME LOCATION OVERALL CONDITION

RATING

FACILITY OPERATIONAL

RATING

Main Approach

& Platform

N 38º 03’ 30.42” 2 Serious C-3 Facility Partially

Operational W 122º 01’ 35.20”

MAIN APPROACH N

CONCRETE EXTENSION

MAIN PLATFORM

DECK

The asphalt overlay has multiple potholes and random transverse and longitudinal cracks throughout. The majority of the cracks were found along the concrete/timber pier interface and over the pile caps. There is up to 3” of settlement along the longitudinal joint on the Upper Platform between Bents 106-109. The steel railroad rails exhibit minor corrosion with no significant loss of section.

The timber curbing on the inboard edge of the elevated platform is severely deteriorated due to fungal decay.

Though utility inspections are beyond the scope of this report, during the course of the inspection it was noted that the majority of the light pole and light pole foundations have significant deterioration due to fungal decay. In addition, the Operations Building is in a general state of disrepair and there are exposed high-voltage transformers in the electrical room.

SUPERSTRUCTURE

A longitudinal timber beam has failed due to rot along the west end of the upper platform. This failed beam is located near the top of the ramp to the upper platform and is adjacent to the longitudinal joint with the concrete section of the upper platform. The platform pavement has settled approximately 3″ above this failed beam. Vehicles should be prohibited from using the west end of the upper platform near the ramp. Several utilities along the underside of the pier are in serious condition, with broken hardware, leaks, and/or sections missing.

Approximately two-thirds of the timber pile caps on the elevated portion of the pier exhibit splits. The timber pile caps on the lower portion of the pier exhibit overstressing cracks and bearing failures beneath the rail girders, resulting in reduced capacity of these members.

Cracking and subsidence of the bituminous wearing surface above the deteriorated stringers is evident in several areas. No significant defects were found on the interior stringers on the upper and lower portions of the pier.

SUBSTRUCTURE

There is widespread general deterioration of the substructure and significant marine borer damage in the timber piles and cross-members. Numerous areas of damage were discovered through our visual/tactile inspection, but numerous additional areas of internal damage are suspected as well. The marine borer damage reduces the pile section, causing reduced structural capacity.

There is significant hardware corrosion and random missing hardware throughout. There is fire damage throughout Bents 1 to 16 at the east end of the main platform.

Due to the deficiencies and severe defects to the piles, the structural components have a reduced load capacity.

Many of the timber piles have 12 in. diameter by 4 ft. long steel pipe splices from an older vintage repair (or from original construction). The steel pipes typically exhibit heavy corrosion and moderate loss of section, some with holes. The condition of the timber inside the splice is unknown.

The concrete firewalls have isolated spalls, typically located at the ends. The longitudinal and transverse timber bracing elements have significant deterioration due to a combination of marine borer, fungal decay and fastener corrosion. Approximately 95% of the bracing fasteners within the tidal zone were found to have severe deterioration due to corrosion.

The timber fender piles on the inboard side of the main pier have significant deterioration, primarily due to marine borers and fungal decay. The timber utility supports also have significant marine borer damage.

Table 6-3

Damage and Repair Summary for Main Approach & Platform Section

DRAWING/

PHOTO NO.

REPAIR

PRIORITY DAMAGE DESCRIPTION REPAIR

DESCRIPTION

2.1-1/1 R Typical Fire Damage to Piles between Bent 1 and Bent 16 Replace Pier

2.1-2/2 R Rot in Longitudinal Cross Bracing Replace Pier

2.1-2/3 R Severe Rot in Timber Pile Replace Pier

2.1-3/4 R Rot in Longitudinal Beam Replace Pier

2.1-4/5 R Severe Rot in Beam Replace Pier

2.1-4/6 R Broken Longitudinal Cross Bracing Replace Pier

2.1-4/7 R Marine Borer Damage Replace Pier

2.1-5/8 R Rot in Beam Replace Pier

2.1-5/9 R Split in Pile Cap Replace Pier

2.1-6/11 R Marine Borer Damage Replace Pier

2.1-6/12 R Split in Piles Replace Pier

DRAWING/

PHOTO NO.

REPAIR

PRIORITY DAMAGE DESCRIPTION REPAIR

DESCRIPTION

2.1-7/13 R Bearing Loss between Pile and Pile Cap Replace Pier

2.1-7/14 R Corrosion on Steel Splice Replace Pier

2.1-7/15 R Split in Pile Cap Replace Pier

2.1-7/16 R Splits in Pile Cap Spacer Blocks Replace Pier

2.1-13/17 R Spalled Asphalt over Joint Replace Pier

2.1-13/18 R Cracked Asphalt over Longitudinal Joint Replace Pier

2.1-13/19 R Split in Timber Curb Replace Pier

2.1-13/20 R Rotten Timber Deck Curb Replace Pier

2.1-15/21 R Broken Concrete Patch around Drain Cover Replace Pier

2.1-15/22 R Rotten Timber Walkway Planks Replace Pier

2.1-15/23 R Split in Timber Deck Curb Replace Pier

2.1-15/24 R Rotten Timber Siding on Operations Building Replace Pier

2.1-15/25 R Spall in Asphalt Replace Pier

2.1-17/26 R Settlement along Longitudinal Joint Replace Pier

2.1-19/27 R Settled Pavement at Track Switch Replace Pier

2.1-19/28 R Broken Pavement along Rails Replace Pier

2.1-19/29 R Impact Damage to Timber Curb Replace Pier

2.1-19/30 R Settlement in Approach Pavement Replace Pier

2.1-29/31 H Leaning Light Pole Stabilize/remove loose/leaning light poles

REPAIR

PRIORITY DAMAGE DESCRIPTION REPAIR

DESCRIPTION

2.1-29/32 R Exposed Wiring and Loose Connections at Top of Light Poles Replace Pier

2.1-30/33 H Exposed Transformers in Electrical Room

Enclose or otherwise protect the exposed transformers in the electrical room

2.1-31/34 R Broken Utility Pipe Replace Pier

2.1-31/35 R Top of Light Pole Broken off Replace Pier

2.1-32/36 R Exposed Electrical Wiring Replace Pier

2.1-33/37 H Leaking Water Pipe Shut Off Water

2.1-33/38 R Broken Utility Pipe Support Replace Pier

Note: Due to the extent of deterioration, it is recommended that the timber sections of

Pier 2 be completely replaced.

B.1 Concrete Extension

CONDITION RATING – 5 (SATISFACTORY)

General Findings and Recommendations:

The Concrete Extension Section of the Main Approach is in SATISFACTORY condition overall.

A summary of the GPS coordinates, Overall Condition Rating, and the Facility Operational Rating for the Concrete Extension of the Main Approach Section is presented in Table 6-4.

Table 6-4

Concrete Extension – Summary of Overall Condition Rating and Facility Operational Rating

FACILITY

NAME LOCATION OVERALL CONDITION

RATING

FACILITY OPERATIONAL

RATING

Concrete Extension

N 38º 03’ 31.39” 5 Satisfactory C-2 Facility Mostly

Operational W 122º 01’ 30.14”

DECK

The concrete utility enclosures along the outboard curb typically have cracks and spalls.

The mooring foundations on the concrete extension have minor cracking and spalls. The mooring foundation at Bent 39 was found to have cracking through the base. It is recommended to prohibit use of the mooring fitting located at Bent 39.

SUBSTRUCTURE

Below water, the concrete piles have no significant deterioration. One pile has minor cracking and spalling with no signs of corrosion of the steel reinforcement.

The timber firewall extensions exhibit moderate marine borer activity.

Table 6-5

Damage and Repair Summary for Concrete Extension Section

DRAWING/

PHOTO NO.

REPAIR

PRIORITY DAMAGE DESCRIPTION REPAIR

DESCRIPTION

2.1-5/10 R Rotten Fender Piles Install New Fender

2.1-1/39 M Map Cracking in Underside of Deck Monitor

2.1-1/40 M Efflorescence Staining on Pile Cap Monitor

2.1-2/41 M Cracks and Delamination in Pile Cap Monitor

REPAIR

PRIORITY DAMAGE DESCRIPTION REPAIR

DESCRIPTION

2.1-13/42 M Surface Rust on Mooring Fittings Monitor

2.1-13/43 L Spalls in Concrete Curb Above Pile Cap Repair Spalls

2.1-13/44 L Spalls in Concrete Curb Above Pile Cap Repair Spalls

2.1-14/45 H Cracks in Concrete Pedestal at Mooring Cleat Repair Cracking

2.1-14/46 L Mooring Bollard is Hollow Fill Bollard with Grout

2.1-16/47 L Broken Utility Hatch Covers Repair or Replace the Broken Covers

2.1-16/48 L Spalling at Empty Utility Enclosure Repair Spalls

2.1-28/49 L Spalled Utility Enclosure Repair Spalls

2.1-28/50 L Broken Utility Conduit Replace broken conduit

2.1-30/51 L Broken Sewer Pipe Remove the broken pipe

B.2 Fender System

CONDITION RATING – 4 (FAIR)

General Findings and Recommendations:

The Fender System is in FAIR condition overall, with several broken concrete fender piles along the front fender.

A summary of the GPS coordinates, Overall Condition Rating, and the Facility Operational Rating for the Fender System is presented in Table 6-6.

Table 6-6

Fender System – Summary of Overall Condition Rating and Facility Operational Rating

FACILITY

NAME LOCATION OVERALL CONDITION

RATING

FACILITY OPERATIONAL

RATING

Fender System

N 38º 03’ 31.62” 4 Fair C-2 Facility Mostly

Operational W 122º 01’ 29.96”

SUBSTRUCTURE

Below water, the concrete piles have no significant deterioration. The concrete Fender Piles at Bents 25 and 26 have severe impact damage within the tidal zone. It is recommended to prohibit berthing loads on Fender Piles 25 and 26 until they can be repaired/replaced.

Table 6-7

Damage and Repair Summary for Fender System Section

DRAWING/

PHOTO NO.

REPAIR

PRIORITY DAMAGE DESCRIPTION REPAIR

DESCRIPTION

2.1-2/52 H Spalling and cracking in Fender Pile Repair the Fender Piles

2.1-13/53 L Loose Fender Chain Connection Tighten the loose hardware on the fender chain

C. SECONDARY APPROACH

CONDITION RATING – 3 (POOR)

Figure 6-2 Aerial View of Secondary Approach Section

The Pier 2 Secondary Approach Section is in POOR condition overall with multiple defects to the deck and substructure.

It is recommended that the Secondary Approach be replaced along with the other timber sections of Pier 2.

A summary of the GPS coordinates, Overall Condition Rating, and the Facility Operational Rating for the Secondary Approach Section is presented in Table 6-8.

Table 6-8

Secondary Approach – Summary of Overall Condition Rating and Facility Operational Rating

FACILITY

NAME LOCATION OVERALL CONDITION

RATING

FACILITY OPERATIONAL

RATING

Secondary Approach

N 38º 03’ 28.47” 3 Poor C-3 Facility Partially

Operational W 122º 01’ 36.32”

SECONDARY APPROACH

The asphalt overlay has several potholes and random transverse and longitudinal cracks throughout. The steel railroad rails exhibit minor corrosion with no significant loss of section.

SUPERSTRUCTURE

Several timber pile caps exhibit overstressing cracks, crushing, and bearing failures beneath the steel railroad rails, resulting in reduced capacity of these members.

SUBSTRUCTURE

There is widespread general deterioration of the substructure and significant marine borer damage in the timber piles.

The concrete firewalls have isolated spalls, typically located at the ends. The horizontal and longitudinal timber bracing has significant marine borer damage as well as areas of fungal decay. There is significant hardware corrosion and random missing hardware throughout. Approximately 95% of the bracing fasteners within the tidal zone are severely corroded.

Table 6-9

Damage and Repair Summary for Secondary Approach Section

DRAWING/

PHOTO NO.

REPAIR

PRIORITY DAMAGE DESCRIPTION REPAIR

DESCRIPTION

2.1-8/54 R Split in Pile Replace Pier

2.1-8/55 R Large Checks in Pile Cap Replace Pier

2.1-8/56 R Marine Borer Damage Replace Pier

2.1-8/57 R Gap between Pile and Pile Cap Replace Pier

2.1-35/58 R Damaged Fire Pipe Encasement Replace Pier

2.1-35/59 R Broken Utility Supports, Broken Conduits, and Exposed Wiring Replace Pier

D. CONCRETE APPROACH

CONDITION RATING – 4 (FAIR)

Figure 6-3 Aerial View of Concrete Approach Section

General Findings and Recommendations:

The Concrete Approach Section of Pier 2 is in FAIR condition overall.

Operational Rating for the Concrete Approach is presented in Table 6-10.

Table 6-10

Concrete Approach – Summary of Overall Condition Rating and Facility Operational Rating

FACILITY

NAME LOCATION OVERALL CONDITION

RATING

FACILITY OPERATIONAL

RATING

Concrete Approach

N 38º 03’ 30.78” 4 Fair C-2 Facility Mostly

Operational W 122º 01’ 15.46”

CONCRETE APPROACH

The concrete curb typically has cracks and spalls at the closure pours over the pile caps.

The undersides of the concrete deck planks have isolated spalls due to corrosion deterioration.

The expansion joints on the concrete approach typically have minor spalling.

SUPERSTRUCTURE

The concrete pile caps on the concrete approach have isolated spalls and cracks.

SUBSTRUCTURE

The concrete piles on the concrete approach have isolated spalls and cracks.

Table 6-11

Damage and Repair Summary for Concrete Approach Section

DRAWING/

PHOTO NO.

REPAIR

PRIORITY DAMAGE DESCRIPTION REPAIR

DESCRIPTION

2.1-10/60 M Vertical Crack in Exterior Fascia Monitor

2.1-10/61 R Rotten Fender Piles Install New Fender

2.1-10/62 L Spall in Underside of Pile Cap Repair Spalls

2.1-11/63 L Spalls in Deck Soffit Repair Spalls

2.1-11/64 L Spalls in Pile Cap Repair Spalls

2.1-22/65 L Missing Drain Inlet Cover Replace Drain Inlet Cover

2.1-23/66 L Heaved Pavement along Railroad Tracks Repave

2.1-24/67 L Broken Asphalt along Rails at Joint Repave

2.1-24/68 L Spall in Concrete Curb Repair Spalls

2.1-24/69 L Transverse Cracking in Pavement Repave

2.1-24/70 M Erosion Hole at Southwest Corner Monitor

2.1-38/71 L Exposed Wiring at Light Pole Repair Broken Conduit

E. WALKWAY

CONDITION RATING – 1 (CRITICAL)

Figure 6-4 Aerial View of Walkway

The Pier 2 Walkway Section is in CRITICAL condition overall with multiple severe defects to the piles and superstructure. Due to the severity of the defects, the walkway has been closed to all vehicular and pedestrian traffic.

It is recommended that the Walkway be replaced along with the other timber sections of Pier 2.

Operational Rating for Pier 2 Main Approach Section is presented in Table 6-12.

Table 6-12

Walkway – Summary of Overall Condition Rating and Facility Operational Rating

FACILITY

NAME LOCATION OVERALL CONDITION

RATING

FACILITY OPERATIONAL

RATING

Walkway N 38º 03’ 28.95”

1 Critical C-4 Facility Not Operational W 122º 01’ 29.18”

WALKWAY

The majority of the deck is weathered with severe checking, warping, section loss and rotten deck boards. The handrails are completely rotten throughout.

SUPERSTRUCTURE

The pile bent caps and longitudinal beams supporting the deck are typically non-bearing, out of line or have total failure.

SUBSTRUCTURE

The timber piles have loss of bearing, section loss, checking, and abandoned hardware holes.