FNSB CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ECEIVI: OCT O7 2019 2019 Project Nomination Form
Nominations will be accepted from August 12 to October 11. Please fill out the nomin~~X9o~~S OFFICE as completely as possible. If a section does not apply to the project you are nominating, please leave that section blank. Please attach additional relevant information to this nomination packet as appropriate. There is no limit to the number of projects that can be submitted.
Completed nomination forms can be submitted:
In person at: By mail to: Fairbanks North Star Borough Fairbanks North Star Borough Attn: Mayor's Office Attn: Capital Improvement Program 907 Terminal Street PO Box 71267 Fairbanks, AK 99701 Fairbanks, AK 99707
NOMINATOR'S NAME: Patricia Schmidt J~ ~~i~ DATE : Sept 1 2019
ORGANIZATION (IF APPLICABLE): _...;_F..:..:ri.::.;en..:..:d::.::sc..:o:..:..f-=S-=S...:.N..:..:e:..:..n:.:::a.:..:.na;::______
AFFECTED DEPARTMENT: ---..:.P...::a"-'rk=s-=a:;.c.n:..::d..;..R..:..:e:..::c.:..:re:..::ac::.tio::..:n-'------
PHONE : ...._(_9_0_7_.,_) _4_79_-_4_89_1_____ EMAIL: [email protected] ~\!) ~ \o \L--\.~ '\'C()a_~ ~rctbt~ ~ t)ut\-oO\~ .Lav'V\
Name of Proposed Project: __R_e_s_to_ri_n.:::.g_th_e_S_S_N_en_a_n_a ______
Project Scope/Description:
Friends of SS Nenana is working towards the restoration and repair of the SS Nenana currently located at Pioneer Park near the Main entrance. The group is prepared to furnish all labor, materials and supplies and services necessary to complete all aspects of required repairs/restoration as proposed by Paul Zankich, P.E., Principal Naval Architect at Columbia-Sentinel Engineers, Inc., from his detailed inspection completed in Jun 2019.
All work will be consistent with the Code of Ethics and Guidelines for Practice of the American Institute for Conservations of Historic and Artistic Works (AIC) and the Secretary of the Interior's Standard for the Management of Museum Property.
Upon a lease agreement between the North Star Borough and the Friends of SS Nenana, the group will furnish all licensed labor, materials, supplies, and services necessary to complete the conservation treatment of a wooden maritime vessel. When applicable, the group working with consulting conservators will inspect and approve the reopening of the SS Nenana for public use.
The most urgent work needed on the boat has to do with the monkey rudder. It is actively pulling down on the wheel and boat. If not supported before winter it will fail causing extreme damage to the boat and astronomical expense to repair.
Learn more at: www.fnsb.us/CIP Page 1 of 11 FNSB CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
SAFETY AND CODE COMPLIANCE
1. Does the project reduce or eliminate a health or safety risk? Q9 Yes □ No
Please explain:
Yes, as per the Fairbanks North Star Borough Project Number 05-RVBPRJ-03; Riverboat Nenana Condition Inventory Final Report; dated January 23, 2009; Inspection done by Engineer Matthew Reckard Sept 2018 and Inspection done by L. Paul Zankich Naval Architecture and Marine Engineer.
The Riverboat Nenana is in relatively good conditions, but it has some critical areas that must be addressed quickly to prevent further deterioration, such as rot and decay; Our restoration project with the help of Mr. Paul Zankich, a certified Naval Architecture, and Marine Engineer, we will be able to eliminate these safety concerns.
2. In your opinion, what is the current condition of the facility? ~ Poor □ This is a new facility □ Fair □ Good D Excellent
Please explain:
Structural members that are exposed to the elements due to inadequate or deteriorating covering are at risk of further dry rot; to include but not limited to decking, framing, and the historical stern wheel itself. Areas to be addressed included the rotting leader board material at the base of the guardrails, stairs leading to the upper decks, decking, paint, and the stabilization of the historic wheel and monkey rudder.
3. Does the project improve accessibility compliance? (For example: parking lot design, doorway design, counter height, floor access, restroom access, etc.) ~ Yes D No
Please explain:
Yes, restoration and repair projects will address non-slip and visually distinctive handrails and steps, ensuring they comply with code requirements for resisting forces, on-board stairways, exterior wood stairs to the Saloon Deck, exit lighting to meet life safety codes. All repairs will be in compliance with applicable codes including 2006 ICS, MC, UPS, IFC, IEC, and 2008 NEC as per the Borough's final assessment of the current condition of the SS Nenana.
FNSB
Learn mare at: www.fnsb.us/CIP Page 2 of 11
CA:P ICTA L I MP~OVl:IIM .lolTP PAOGIIA.M FNSB CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
FACILITY CONDITION
4. How old is the facility since original construction? Kl 41+ years D This is a new facility D 31 - 40 years D 21 - 30 years D 11- 20 years D O-10 years
5. Does the project replace an existing facility? D Yes 00 No
If yes, please identify the building it would replace and any other supporting information, including the condition of the existing facility (poor, fair, good, excellent):
N/A
PROJECT FUNDING
6. What is the status of project funding? D Fully funded 00 Partially funded D No funding
Please identify the source and amount of any funding that is already secured in support of this project:
At this time, as we are in active discussions with the North Star Borough to lease the SS Nenana, we are relying solely on the generous donations of local community members and businesses corporations. Our current balance is less than $7,000.00.
Our engineer's report will allow us to be able to apply for grants once completed.
FNSB
Learn more at: www.fnsb.us/CIP Page 3 of 11
CA ~P 1C1'AL I MPqOVliNEPITIIP PROGJilAt,11 FNSB CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
7. Are there grant, foundation, sponsorship, or other alternative sources of funding available for this project? U Yes □ No
a. If yes, is there a match requirement? !Kl Yes □ No
b. If a match is required, how much? Please choose the most applicable option. D 1 - 10% match required □ 11 - 20% match required D 21 - 30% match required □ 31 - 40% match required [ii +41% match required to 50%
Please identify the potential funding sources, how the project is eligible for such funds, any work done to commit such funds (i.e ., application or proposal submitted and/or approved), and any additionally relevant information:
The SS Nenana is on the National Register of Historic Places since June 27, 1972. It has been designated a National Historic Landmark since May 5, 1989. She is on the Ten Most Endangered Historic Properties of Alaska for the last two years.
This qualifies the SS Nenana for Historical Grants, State Grants, Marine Grants and much more. Future potential financial support will be applied for once the lease between the Borough and the group is finalized: - National Trust for Historic Preservation Grant- which provides for preservation emergencies and to stabilize property in danger of immediate deterioration. ($500-5,000) (preservationation. org/resources/find-funding/grants/ -Johanna Favrot Fund for Historic Preservation- offers grants to nonprofit organizations for the preservation of historic places that "recapture an authentic sense of place". Projects approved included structural repairs as well as educational programs. ($2,500-10,000) As well as many others offered through Alaska State Historical Society and Federal Maritime Grants
8. If applicable, does your organization plan on contributing any funds? Kl Yes D No
If yes, please identify the amount and source of funds planned in contribution of this project:
We will continue to rely on contributions from the local community and are currently planning on winter Fundraisers, designing of T-shirts to sell on our website, and a yearly membership program based on the design of the Fairbanks Historical Preservation Foundation 1997 concept. Lectors, silent auctions, sale of magazine articles written by our organization. The Group is also prepared to meet above-mentioned grant allocations dollar for dollar as stipulations may require.
FN SB
Learn mare at: www.fnsb.us/CIP Page 4 of 11
CAll'1ICT"-L IMP'tOVliMlifllTIIP PltOC. ltAM FNSB CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
ENVIRONMENTAL
9. Will the project clean up contamination (such as lead, asbestos, fuel contamination, etc.)? ~ Yes □ No
Please explain:
The Friends of SS Nenana and North Star Borough are currently in discussions and are working on the issue of Lead Paint addressed in the Nortech Report dated September 2005. Nortech did note that all lead-based paint in the ground surrounding the Nenana "Can be managed in place unless restoration or renovation projects require disturbing LBP materials." (pg7) There was also noted to be Asbestos Containing Building Materials; however, it is stated in the final reported that the main concern will only be the boiler area, the rest can be managed in place. The group is willing to call in professionals to clean areas noted in the report.
The FNSB is already working on a plan to address the lead paint in the ground around the boat caused by past restorations removing lead pain from the boat.
10. Does the project improve air quality? D Yes [] No
Please explain:
N/A
11. Will the project reduce storm water runoff? D Yes [x] No
Please explain:
N/A
FNSB
Learn more at: www.fnsb.us/CIP Page 5 of 11 lnse rt te CAPlICTA L I Mll'l:,O\ll'IIIM IIIITP PJIOGIIIAM xt h ere FNSB CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
12. Will the project improve groundwater quality? □ Yes IZl No
Please explain:
N/A at this time
13. Will the project improve energy efficiency? □ Yes IXl No
Please explain :
Not at this time but later repairs will make her more energy efficient.
PUBLIC USE
14. Will the project improve the customer experience? e9 Yes □ No
Please explain:
As noted in U.S. News, Travel Guide- Pioneer Park (2017) was rated #8 out of 54 in Best Things to Do in Fairbanks rating an overall value of 3.9. However since the original positing, rating has dropped to 3.1 in overall value with over 25 comments on the current state of the SS Nenana. According to tripadvisor.com, Pioneer Park has dropped to #17. The SS Nenana was a complimentary attraction while tourist finished their meals at the Salmon Bake and while waiting on the Big Stampede Show. The reopening of the SS Nenana will allow visitors an additional spot to visit, increasing the time in the park, and therefore increasing revenue throughout the small businesses.
Learn more at: www.fnsb .us/CIP Page 6 of 11
CAP I TAL IMP~O',l'i M l:flilT Plt0C11AM FNSB CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
15. Is the project served by a fixed transit route? ~ Yes □ No
Please explain:
Currently, there are two bus routes that stop in Front of Pioneer Park- Blue and Red bus routes. There are 15 hotels that are within a 10-mile radius, 5 which are known to have transit service to Pioneer.
16. Will the project improve facility capacity? Kl Yes □ No
Please explain:
The SS Nenana is the number one draw to the park. By having her open again she will bring more people into the park that will be spending money. Based on past records from the Fairbanks Historical Society, the average daily traffic was approx. 75-100 daily on weekends and 10-50 on weekdays when the boat was open to the public.
ONGOING MAINTENANCE COST
17. Will the project reduce utility expenses on a cost per square foot ($/SF)? ~ Yes D No
Please explain:
Wiring the SS Nenana to a separate electrical meter box will reduce cost of total monthly expense of park electric. Currently the boat is wired into the total park electric expense.
FNSB
Learn more at: www.fnsb.us/CIP Page 7 of 11
C Af'.ICJAl IMPROII\l'IMIHPl P'fOCII AM FNSB CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
18. Will the project reduce maintenance expenses on a cost per square foot ($/SF)? !Kl Yes □ No
Please explain:
The project will reduce maintenance expenses that the North Star Borough is currently legally liable to hold due to ownership. At such time that Friends of SS Nenana enter into a legal lease with the Borough for ownership of the vessel, the group will be responsible for maintenance of the vessel.
19. Will the project extend the life of an existing facility? IX] Yes D No
Please explain:
Yes! Without these repairs , she will be lost to history. She is the last remaining stemwheeler in Alaska and one of only two other wooden hauled stemwheelers this size remaining in America.
The SS Nenana, unfortunately, due to budgetary constraints of the North Star Borough and the end of the Fairbanks Historical Preservation Foundation, the vessel's life span has shortened immensely. With the needed repairs and restoration stated in the Jun 2019 engineer report, there is no reason not to believe that the SS Nenana can survive another 150 years.
PLANNING AND DESIGN
20. Does the project have complete designs? Kl Yes □ No
Please explain:
Yes, all original designs and blueprints are currently in the possession of members of the Friends of the SS Nenana and will be used during the restoration period, unless otherwise deemed unsafe to the public.
Friends of SS Nenana is also in possession of all the records of repair done by Fairbanks Historical Preservation Foundation from the last restoration.
FNSB learn more at: www.fnsb.us/CIP Page 8 of 11
C Afl,lCtAL IMll'ltOVl:MIWTIIP PIIOG.AM FNSB CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
21. Have there been any project scope and/or engineering studies done? Kl Yes □ No
If yes, please explain all work that has been done on this project to date. Please attach and submit all relevant information as part of the project nomination packet.
The most recent inspection was done June 2019 by L. Paul Zankich, P.E. , Principal Naval Architect at Columbia-Sentinel Engineers, Inc. We are waiting for the finalized report of this inspection.
Nortech Report dated September 2005 on the presence of hazardous material in and near the SS Nenana. 05-RVBPRJ-03
Fairbanks North Star Borough Project Number 05-RVBPRJ-03 "Riverboat Nenana Condition Inventory Final Report" dated January 23, 2009. 05-RVBPRJ-03
FNSB 2008 to 2011 Restoration done by David Lyons working as the Riverboat Maintinace Crew Leader.
River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Number 17-RVPRJ-01
BUDGET IMPACT
22. How will the project impact the operation budget for the affected department? D Increase the operating budget ~ Maintain the operating budget □ Decrease the operating budget
Please explain:
By making the SS Nenana more self sufficient she will be able to maintain herself.
Increasing the operating budget will be the final result. This is due to the fact that the SS Nenana is currently not being used by the public. Upon completion of restoration and repairs, an increased in utility cost will be noticed due to essential necessities such as power, water, and wastage. This incurred cost will be handled by the Friends of SS Nenana upon lease approval, until such time by the North Star Borough.
Learn more at: www.fnsb.us/CIP Page 9 of 11 FNSB CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
POPULATION REACHED I 23. What type of population will be served by the proposed project? Kl Regional areawide users IXl Single community Kl Multiple neighborhoods ~ Single neighborhood
Please describe the area, population served, and the need that will be met by this project:
All of the above apply by repairing and opening the SS Nenana to the public again.
The local community has had a diverse interest in the SS Nenana and its place in Pioneer Park. It has been a staple in many local's childhood and it drives tourism.
SUPPORT
24. Please select all applicable form of support this project has: □ Resolutions of support (agencies, governments, etc.) ~ Letters of support (groups, businesses, organizations, etc.) Kl General public support or letters from residents
Please explain levels of support identified above and provide specific examples:
It has the focus of not only the community at large but also the State and Federal government, including its listing on the National Register of Historic Places in 1989, its designation as a National Historic Landmark in 1992, and its inclusion in the Alaska Association for Historic Preservation's list of the State's 10 most endangered historic structures. Under Federal Law, the listing of a property in the National Register places no restrictions on what a non-federal owner may do with their property up to and including destruction unless the property is involved in a project that receives Federal assistance, usually funding or licensing/permitting. There may be state or local preservation laws that the property owner should be aware of before they undertake a project with a historic property. Friends of SS Nenana will contact the AK State historic preservation office (DNR Office of History & Archaeology) before action with a listed property is taken. The SHPO is the state agency that oversees historic preservation efforts in their state. If Federal monies are attached to the property then any changes to the property have to allow the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. (www.achp.gov) to comment on the project.
FNSB
Learn more at: www.fnsb.us/CIP Page 10 of 11
(. AJIiICTAL lfollPffOVIMINTIIP PROCIIAM FNSB CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
25. Does this project meet any goals or objectives that are identified in any Borough plans (such as the Comprehensive Plan)? □ Yes □ No
If yes, please identify which goals and objectives in specific plans that this project meets:
N/A
PROJECT COST
26. What is the estimated project cost? $______
Please explain why this cost is reasonable and should be allocated to this project:
At this time, we are unable to give you an accurate understanding of the full restoration/repair until the latest engineer report is received. However, it is known that taking in the estimate of winterization and the repairs of the wheel, current cost is approx. $4,000.00- $10,000. This is including the much needed repairs of the historic sternwheel that is threating to fall to a dangerous level. The winterization will ensure that we will be able to hold off further damage to the vessel during the icy months and the continued wood rot during the spring thaw.
1·-. FNSB
Learn mare at: www.fnsb.us/ CIP Page 11 of 11
CA!P ICTAL IM P~OVliIIM IENTP PROC.AM r.cl.HtJ Jfam•1as 1'--• Location: Ploa..c:. Pull:, :aaoo Airport Wa:,- ralrb1111ll:a. Alull• Kot- 1 . l"rWn 1 !.L1o'Xl19•a.u. - ori■l ...i,.w.,.1o..,_u,,.~1nopo,ve1,oa - ... 1n• --1ni..w. i. oa."111>,_n1priolq(b11,.1/--.1.a>1Mo11an,-III/I 'J"-.di"&lo, Owno, __ 1M .,,._S....-u ol~bor9t•lla __ ...... ,..lleo_ _.,,,.,prb lo•••,_,.-• ...- l,o .;t)J9a,o 19 ~lt~ll•an _,_., ~ ,1,,_,..,_., XlOll
1.Jbro.._..•..U.--..,.,•_.,,-CIP•-• ..... llo.lolloa-'ioM •-1• •1-'XIII.
nee I L...S Explanation ln.p,,et •II poo,t• ond boom • \:e' h.,,,..,., te", l&ko miltin10 lr ouopci.,..-. 81&urote iwlloo..tlh p'HOftti..,, ond~1irn«tcpalrin&, Jr tcp&hint, eutouttOltofn ni aterial and-r!in new lumber Ml in opay, Rem.,.. e.ioitln1 pain, i;nparo and paint with O.clu:u . wurk oomP9tedln 201 l- Medo tot.. ffrideddue to lack olmalntenonc:e llinoe ccm!Ktian, Repair or tcplM,t ruUod ..-nd p:,ot• behind ,-,:klewheel, either by buw:lin1 lho .,..,..nd poo,t• .-ilh he.,,,. 9hHt motel dompo, or refMCin1tho111wilh-lp::,.a
Rem- 0./1 N1plM.,,I NntH -rin1 an mUn dedi . Whllo open, ln9f)Kt, Nim- a nd ro~ la deddn1 l l'Oli.d. Che<:k 0.>111M -po,M.ian 9hHI bo noath lo dodr.in1,.,. Appll'Onl.,.,..lntopoidoo,lo.lOm,ln ediliticm IOM..,teleicft • pc,1e inl,c,poidloe allaround. ll a.dlwboffleclied,andrepelrandor repiece wllh J>ro,,ido..ddi1anellnan1 ..,....,,.1 and mHtor.n ..;th-ndl15'fod• eiaht.,rin1e •l...,ico.,.nt H docribedlnlhe.cnactural n.aned" llepalr clllmapd~dhaain1 p;,acwith .....np- lla111- e lldl1eri... tedpol11t&umpoo,ta, Mndpoet.oandpalnt•ilh penolfttln1ol lwDtdaou w..ln•alll 11 partially., - ,.p&i,/re)MOO •aln•Ht. Malame11tl• _PP'd.., • d,,....;... u<1m .. 111 the fnt-wvd Hold. !Jw•do Mainme lll DOl'lne<:am e t baM P,,o,tidl no• A°" -_,.iant han>/ lllrem "1n\lncietim, d1n ioeo with edilitianal "nlto IO p-orido fltll..-re.. b p.tblidy -..p..:le,... lien,"" end ,opai:,e ellilllin11'1ar Explanation Clea.a ou1co...,Holdolwood 9he.-inp, . .... oc endothordlbn-. Replece rulOIOd 3/I' .;,. rn-. .,.,.,ndpoet.o10boalln1p»1• with •lnimum 5/8" .,..tHnladwlrw wilh tumbudd•-. Dun.ot he... lly tenol.., -i:..r.i hoalftl .,..• . Pile& 1-boM -'• o.lOpaan, panially-d eMbaM indontodo>ck. Rept1,or,.p1,aoe 111111,- H _ _ .,., J.di MOir IU'ldroeuoch -I• to dodl. w..-11-Flei.ed la:xlll• ...... ,tobo.,.riflecl ... .,.ladlolaalnten....,..;noeaampleti.., ec,,,o., pi,IIIO.., Hou• hmt el-..;...,... . P/ 1 ....taln -.lidoNble Nil ond he" eeued, lndantia1 be dick. J ock tb.lM up. P/8, ,.•-aa4rwfNW-, poo,t• aadd,,dr.in1~-.en1 inn.. 1umber lnopc-, H _ _,,,ioetilllnandelianHouee&un1. Pt-ootidl b-acl"IUN.. irwdundord,dlln 1 tall'O'ftdop"Dp0foemborolmclr- ...... OC1111pleled ln:xlll- noedo tabo..,rill,ddueioledtol malntenanoeolnoe-pledot1. lie•- palnt(l'Dlll pa- np,papnk,ropalrorNplooe,..tenwood unooe-ry, endrei-,inl.-ith O.ckote. f'I-D.-ido en eddltlm,el M.J ppwt undar •na:'ank et midpDlnL .....Pt-ootidl. eae,....,,. liaht11>1in an,ee thelwill bo opn talhe ..,bile. b...- beU• ri.• e1..in,., .a,,.ldc:,w., lrnotp-o,,i&a&,..,.._,.,d Re•- Hhlln ■ metal iea lfteothin1 rr- ma', both p:,n and 1tut.:.rcl lnlflKI the wond end t.euninp. "1d ,.,_;, or ,.p1aw eo ....,._,,,. DD not Nin-U aelal oheethln1- Rem- lote• and c,th,at flellibloe """lkin1 &am bo-en the hull plankla1 end bilp plank., pert and _,._,..i, Fon,e .,...,.,_ beclt In P-, laek • non-alrti aht...... ,rin1 U"ohrink •••p" _,..,am IOkoop • eletouL Rem"" end repl- rotted aide deck-. While uoa ie opn, lnopc:t ooo.rin1 bludo, fende r and llaertir.ke b- rot anddlteri-tlot1. Repair ond ,.,..._ H nece ... ry, eon.rote with proM,_1;.., and°"""' with "• hrink •••fl'• lien,- all lateacaulkin1 fnxn 9hip. and ,.po.,. •ilh pr-ope, oakum, oouon or Glher i:ir-n n1ariti•e_,jeni.ed01.ulkln1 ln.iellood by a ••ritimeprole-1an.t. Cle..,,prep1,.ondrepalnl-..,do1 G h"Uwltheffll"Ofnetepaintoudl H O.ckoto1. W.m-androplo,,cwportPllnl.., e,-. lnefiK'lendrepair lllafboanll'ltcan ..... ultfl>S-.,- ,..._,,. ••.i,._ot ... - 1. Dunotpaint. OJ,en beerinp,d,o..,, lubricate and,...,... nc•HneCI_,,. JnMOJ,I ne• peeM li1>41e end &ttlnp•• __.,. _ PIiot Hou• ...ii..e end oldie• uo deteriorole11"1dneed"'llni.a.ln1, Rem- and"'fMC" Boor°"""rinp in Pllal tb.lM, Whilo open, In.poet. "'pair eftd/or roplaN deckia1 ea"°"_,,. Jle•- .ti ,.uc1,., ...,.. door&, ond,.polr or "'""'ildtloor-& 1<> lrl>O' uipmenL llopalrend,.eli lft or ..,poc,1 Inc h end.,..rheaduule-, ee .,.qu.lrwd. ,r..,.I• •eOf lodi heopot1 llllcln1 dooraol\erNln--..liOll. l'lvftdl ,..., roa1-rentirw ohip,C-pato coot oln,o,tftnuo in,tial ...,.,... o,1,.1d•ntirw 9hlp,andennval main'-Onanoe ••th $ 2, ◄92 , ◄90 marilimoeo1'MHcltoelin1repo.i..._ Total ol eomplet• project: 14,41:3,664.54 RIVER BOAT NENANA STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION 17-RVBPRJ-01 Purchase Order P0003227 INVESTIGATIVE FINDINGS REPORT March 2018 Prepared for: Fairbanks North Star Borough Department of Public Works 907 Terminal St. Fairbanks, AK 99701 Prepared by: 1028 Aurora Drive ENCINEERS Fairbanks, Alaska 99709 AECC605 ~ . PLAN DESIQN CONSTRUCT 17368FB River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ...... 1 Brief History ...... 1 Construction ...... 1 Current Location ...... 1 Code Considerations ...... 1 Building Codes ...... 1 Building Code Loads ...... 2 Inspection Methods ...... 2 Visual Observations ...... 2 Record Document Review ...... 3 Observations and Conditions ...... 3 General ...... 3 Pilot House Level ...... 3 Texas and Boat Decks ...... 4 Saloon Deck ...... 5 Main Deck ...... 6 Hull Framing ...... 7 Hogging and King Post ...... 7 Limited Structural Analysis ...... 8 Considerations Outside Scope of Report ...... 9 Summary ...... 9 Figures ...... 10 FIGURES Figure 1-Pilot House Floor Water Damage ...... 10 Figure 2-Pilot House Roof Decay ...... 11 Figure 3-Boiler Stack Unattached Cable ...... 11 Figure 4-Texas Deck Over Compressed Wood ...... 12 Figure 5-Texas Deck Splice Separation ...... 12 Figure 6-Saloon Worn Arch Connection ...... 13 Figure 7-Boat Deck Decay ...... 13 Figure 8-Boat Deck Decay ...... 14 Figure 9-Boat Deck Splice Separation ...... 14 Figure 10-Boat Deck Failing Splices ...... 15 Figure 11-Boat Deck Split ...... 15 Figure 12-Boat Deck Removed Decking ...... 16 PDC Engineers River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report Figure 13-Boat Deck Removed Decking Debris ...... 16 Figure 14-Boat Deck Over Compressed Rim ...... 17 Figure 15-Boat Deck Detached Post ...... 17 Figure 16-Boat Deck Broken Rim ...... 18 Figure 17-Saloon Deck Cracking ...... 18 Figure 18-Main Deck Engine Room Frost ...... 19 Figure 19-Main Deck Engine Room Missing Anchor ...... 19 Figure 20-Main Deck Split Post ...... 20 Figure 21-Main Deck Notched Post ...... 20 Figure 22-Main Deck Leaning Post ...... 21 Figure 23-Hull Framing Detached Member ...... 21 Figure 24-Hull Framing Missing Hog Strap ...... 22 Figure 25-Hull Framing Notched Framing ...... 22 Figure 26-Hogging Missing Member ...... 23 Figure 27-Hogging Splits ...... 23 Figure 28-Hogging Splits ...... 24 Figure 29-King Post ...... 24 Figure 30-King Post ...... 25 APPENDICES Appendix A- W.C. Nickum Design Drawings, 1932 Appendix B - 2017 Hull Assessment of Nenana National Historic Landmark, by John C, Pollack, October 2017 Appendix C - National Historic Registration Documents PDC Engineers ii River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report INTRODUCTION The Fairbanks North Star Borough (FNSB) requested a structural condition investigation be performed on the S.S. Nenana located at Pioneer Park. The intent of the investigation is to record the general condition of the boat structure and assist in determining the suitability of the structure for occupancy. This report includes a summary of findings based on meetings with FNSB staff, record document review, and site investigation. BRIEF HISTORY Construction Original design documents were prepared by W.C. Nickum, marine architect, in 1932. The boat was prefabricated in Seattle, Washington, then assembled in Nenana, Alaska. The River Boat Nenana was launched in 1933. At the time of original construction, the boat was considered conservatively built to accommodate cargo and barge towing. However, early in its usage, modifications were made to the hogging system reportedly due to the hull being too flexible. Current Location The Nenana was brought to its current location in 1966 by means of a temporary canal. According the historic registration documents the boat underwent modifications both for functionality and to accommodate placement on land. The hull was supported by cribbing at intervals along its length, which still serves as the foundation. Level of the supporting soil is lower than the adjacent areas of the park, and as such is a natural collection point for rain and snow water accumulation. The boat is accessed at the main deck by means of bridges on the port and starboard sides. CODE CONSIDERATIONS While the Nenana was certainly not built to any modern code, it is assumed to have been designed and constructed in accordance with standards at the time. Limited record information was available at the time of the report; as such, specific structural criteria for loads and materials are unknown. Building Codes The International Building Code (IBC) and related International Code Council (ICC) publications are limited regarding evaluation of the boat as a structure. However, certain provisions within the codes may be utilized to assess the Nenana's usage as a building. For example, code provisions relative to historic structures and amusement structures may be appropriate. Application of code provisions will rely on determinations made by the Building Official and Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ). In its current use, the Nenana would likely be considered an occupancy classification Assembly Group A-3. This occupancy category includes uses such art galleries and museums. PDC Engineers Page 1 River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report Building Code Loads The City of Fairbanks, Alaska, has adopted the 2015 IBC. For purposes of evaluation as a building, the current code loads would be subject to local building officials and AHJ. However, the following loads may be appropriate given the indicated assumptions: Risk Category II Live Loads 100psf (Assembly Areas and Corridors) Ground snow 60psf Ct 1.2 Ce 1.0 Wind speed, Vut 110mph Exposure C Partially Enclosed Seismic Design Category D Site Class D Sds 0.729g Sdl 0.414g INSPECTION METHODS Visual Observations Safely accessible areas were inspected to assess general condition of structural elements. Site investigation predominantly occurred Thursday and Friday, February 22-23, 2018. Photographs and notes were taken during the investigation to record general arrangement of the structure, repetitive conditions, noted specific damages and degradation. Equipment used during the condition survey included measuring devices such as tape measures and lasers; ice pick and screw driver for probing; wood moisture meter; and a ladder. Limited snow removal was conducted to safely traverse exterior stairs and decks. No selective demolition or sampling was conducted within the scope of this investigation. Site investigation was limited due snow and ice accumulation. As such, much of the uncovered deck could not be inspected. However, the undersides of decks were viewed where accessible. Temperatures were consistently below freezing during the inspection, which hinders readings from the moisture meter. Frozen moisture can also increase the stiffness of wood members, limiting noticeable deflection and ability to adequately probe for suspected rot. Nearly all of the crew and guest rooms have their doors screwed shut. A few of the rooms were accessible, and the observed conditions are presumed to be consistent throughout the inaccessible rooms. PDC Engineers Page2 River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report Record Document Review Limited documentation is available from the original construction, early modifications, and renovation work. The following documents were reviewed and used in conjunction with the investigation and this report: • W.C. Nickum Design Drawings, dated 1932. (7 digital sheets received) • 2017 Hull Assessment of Nenana National Historic Landmark, by John C. Pollack, Institute of Nautical Archaeology File Report INA-124-2017 /3, dated October 5, 2017. • National Historic Registration Documents, United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service. OBSERVATIONS AND CONDITIONS General Condition of wood members varied greatly. In general, the more exposed to exterior elements, the worse the condition was found to be. Exposure to thermal and moisture changes can contribute to decay and long-term deflection (creep). These conditions can be worsened by wear to the protective coatings, causing exposed wood to become weathered. Many of the wood connections are notched bearing points, which present a moisture accumulation point that cannot be easily maintained. Finishes on steel also vary by exposure and maintenance of coatings. However, in general paint is present on the steel with moderate cracking, peeling, and flaking. The steel itself generally appears in reasonable condition with only surface rust. There are areas in which steel members are clearly missing or disconnected. While leaks were not actively occurring during the inspection due to freezing temperatures, they are known to be a widespread issue throughout the boat. This was noted by FNSB staff, and observable in the field by the presence of water stains and numerous buckets and trash cans placed for water collection. Even where the effects of water leaks did not visibly present deterioration, there are likely unseen negative effects on the structure. Pilot House Level The Pilot House roof is framed with decking over arched joists. The joists appear to be notched through beams on the end walls. All walls have windows, so the roof is supported in the four corners. The floor is supported by joists spanning to the outer walls, creating an interstitial space between the Pilot House and the Texas Deck below. Wood bracing has been added in the interstitial space, though it does not appear to be original construction. Within the Pilot House, water damage is visible at the roof. Paint is peeling and, where exposed, there are darkened water stains on some of the wood. At the time of inspection, condensation droplets were visible on the roof underside. Attempts were made to probe the roof deck underside where paint had peeled off. None of the attempts resulted in appreciable penetration into the wood except at one location where a conduit fastener was missing, which resulted in approximately a ¼-inch penetration at the deck joint. Floor covering in the Pilot House is worn, but generally intact except for small splits at the wheel penetration and a water damaged section in front of the cot; see Figure 1. Floor finishes in front of PDC Engineers Page 3 River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report the cot were cracked, peeling, and stained. The flooring was not removed, though it is suspected the deck topside will be in deleterious condition at this location. Water stains are visible throughout the interstitial space decking materials (walls, floor above, and floor below). Though the water stains are highly visible, there does not appear to be deterioration to the point where wood is rotting apart. Probing wood surfaces did not result in appreciable penetration. Only few instances of small splits were visible in the framing. However, the wood cross-bracing under the floor and at the walls has been partially removed and notched at a few locations. One of the support posts under the wheel framing has been severely notched near its base; the reason for this is unknown but may be attributable to equipment no longer in place. The exterior of the Pilot House has peeling paint and visibly weathered wood. The rake and eaves of the roof are visibly deteriorating. Worst case of deterioration is the southwest corner, where the wood members are separating and rotten; see Figure 2. Exterior wood stairs leading to the Pilot House are also deteriorating and in poor condition. Two metal ladders are outside the Pilot House, one leading to the roof and another on the adjacent stack. There do not appear to be any severe material defects other than worn paint. However, it is not anticipated that these ladders meet modern design or safety standards. The exposed section of boiler stack extends from the deck to above the Pilot House. One of the bracing cables has been disconnected at the boat structure, and is left dangling from the stack; see Figure 3. Limited inspection was performed on the boiler stack, but the only other noted issue was peeling paint. Texas and Boat Decks The Texas Deck consists of crew quarters, raised deck over the Saloon, and the lower Boat deck section. Doors to the individual quarters were screwed shut, with exception of the Captain's room. It is assumed the conditions found in the Captain's room are consistent in the rest of the rooms. Exterior paint on the quarters is peeling. The exposed wood is weathered and grey. Much of the exposed hardware and fasteners are also corroded. At the northwest exterior, near the Captain's room, there is a section of broken siding. This appears to have been caused by impact damage. Inside the Captain's room, paint is in fairly good condition over the wood members. There was condensation frost on the ceiling. Limited water and rust staining was also visible on the underside of the roof deck above, and paint has separated some at the decking joints. Other than some staining, and rusted fastener heads, there was limited observable damage. It is suspected that some level of moisture has accumulated in the ceiling deck assembly. The raised section of the Texas walking deck is supported by the Saloon roof framing and an exposed overhang section. Other than directly in front to the crew quarters, the raised deck does not have a guardrail. The entirety of the raised deck, and most of the stairs, were covered by deep snow and ice at the time of inspection. Underside of the raised deck is visible where it overhangs the unraised Boat deck portion. The overhang deck joists have peeling paint, and members appear to have limited crushing at the pipe supports; see Figure 4. The rim board for this deck has some severely weathered sections. It also appears that a number of the wood joists have splices, which have begun to separate; see Figure 5. PDC Engineers Page4 River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report Wooden stairs at numerous locations access the raised deck. Judging by the construction, it appears that some of the stairs had been replaced or rebuilt. In either case, the paint is in poor condition. Exposed wood is weathered, and limited splitting is visible. The Boat Deck was visible underneath the raised deck overhang and underneath the lifeboat. Where visible, sections of the deck finish had chipped and peeled, exposing the wood underneath. It was noted by FNSB staff there is a "soft" area of deck near the southwest. Wherever the deck coating has been compromised, water will infiltrate the decking, further increasing deterioration overtime. Saloon Deck There are generally three types of areas on the Saloon Deck: interior, exterior covered walkways, and the uncovered stern deck area. Water staining and blisters on the paint are present throughout the Saloon ceiling framing and decking. Water spots are also visible on the floor and a ceiling panel near the north end is visibly warped presumably from water infiltration. Most of the paint is still present, and limited wood surfaces are visible. The exception is around the high windows, where it is assumed that condensation and moisture infiltration have worsened the wear to paint and wood. Throughout the walkthrough of the interior, there did not appear to be signs of splitting or excessive deformation of the ceiling framing. However, some of the arched members are showing wear at their wall framing connection, with some having worn paint and separation from the wall, Figure 6. Most of the visible deterioration on the Saloon Deck is the ceiling framing and decking of the covered walkway. This framing supports the Boat Deck. Much of the paint is peeling, and there are sections of very rotten wood; see Figure 7 and Figure 8. There are several spliced joist members with splice joints separating, and some are clearly failing; see Figure 9 and Figure 10. There were also noted instances oflongitudinal splits in the framing members such as those seen in Figure 11. Near the southwest a section of decking underside had been removed, and remnants of the wood decking is on the floor; see Figure 12 and Figure 13. Splits are present in the rim where it has been notched to receive the joists. Much of the rim exterior is weathered. Pipe support posts to the rim are generally in fair condition with some problems with their finishes. Some of the support fasteners are rusted or missing, and the rim member appears to have been over-compressed at some locations; see Figure 14. One pipe support was not fastened to the rim at all; see Figure 15. A section of the rim has failed at the north side; see Figure 16. Exposed fastener components are rusting. Framing around the stairs to the deck above is in poor condition, with rusted fasteners and split and degrading wood. The stairs themselves have peeling paint, weathered wood, and limited splits. The covered section of exterior walkway was generally free of snow. Varied floor deck conditions were observed. Probably the worst condition is around the north end of the saloon exterior, where the finishes are cracked and peeling and there are uneven surfaces. One section of the deck appears to have been repaired or replaced, but is now in poor condition; see Figure 17. PDC Engineers Pages River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report Main Deck The main deck includes the cargo area (now used as a display area for visitors), the engine room, and the exterior bow deck. Finishes in the cargo area have been well maintained in comparison to the rest of the boat. Frost was present throughout the engine room, worse nearer the exterior walls and the rear of the engine room outside the Saloon footprint above; see Figure 18. Most of the paint has worn away on the wood; however, the wood doesn't appear to have been consistently wet. It appears a number of framing members have been added or replaced, likely due to supporting of engine room equipment. A number of members have been notched or drilled through for equipment and supports. Quite a few of the studs in the wall separating from the cargo area have been deeply notched or cut. Though the engine room wood framing is aged and worn from lack of protection, there didn't appear to be widespread or large splits. There are remnants of the truss rod system, which braces the longitudinal beams. In their current condition, the rods are not likely performing their structural function. These rods were not present at all in the cargo area of the main deck despite the rest of the structural framing layout being similar. Surface of the engine room floor deck is worn but fairly intact. Several metal posts span from the deck to the interior beams. Metal posts along the sides of the engine room span from the equipment support beams to the ceiling beams. At least one of the posts was missing an anchor; see Figure 19. Many of these posts appear to have been added after original construction, and their spacing is closer than in other areas of the boat. Wood framing in the cargo area is laid out in a similar and repetitive manner as the engine room. However, the paint has been maintained with limited peeling observed. Five longitudinal beams support the joist framing for the deck above. These beams have been enclosed with painted wood, such that the beams themselves are not visible. The beams themselves are bowed with the contour of the boat; however, there is an observable level inconsistency in the vertical curvature. Some of the beam lengths also have horizontal misalignment, or sway. The beams are supported by metal pipe posts, wood posts, and connections to the hogging members. There is a lack of consistency in the wood post sizes, wood post locations, and how beams are connected to the hogging. Based on the 1932 drawings, it appears that the metal pipes are original and the wood posts were added later. Several of the wood posts have longitudinal splits on multiple sides; see Figure 20. Several of the wood posts were also notched out at one point possibly for a J-box or similar; see Figure 21. A few of the wood posts are visibly leaning; see Figure 22. Combined with the beams above curving horizontally and vertically, this may be indicative of overall movement of the structure. The ceiling joists appear to be in fairly good condition, with only limited splits noted. There are locations of water staining on both the deck underside and joists. This appears to be worst at the Saloon exterior wall, where water may be infiltrating at the deck joint. Knee braces are present at intervals along the joist-wall interface. They are located at posts in the wall and larger ceiling joists. Many of the wooden knees are splitting, and the truss rod bracing shown at these locations in the original drawings is not present. In the joist space, there are posts that extend down from the deck above. Metal connectors are located at these post locations, though nearly all appear to be disconnected. If these connectors PDC Engineers Page 6 River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report were intended to provide uplift resistance for the structure above, that capacity has been severely compromised or eliminated. Snow and ice covered the entirety of the bow deck. This section of deck was replaced in 1988. Two stairways connect the bow to the Saloon deck above. Hull Framing There are several access hatches from the main deck to the inner hull area. During the inspection, only two of the access doors could be opened, both of which are near the center of the boat near the reception desk. One access hatch leads to an insulated, heated space containing the fire suppression wet-side components. The other hatch leads to hull framing space, which is generally traversable for most of the boat length. The hatches are recommended to receive maintenance to ensure that they are operable. Some of the observed hardware and fasteners were in poor condition. Both of the fixed access ladders used should be considered for repair or replacement due to deterioration. Inspection was somewhat limited due to framing congestion, limited light, and presence of insulation in some areas. Overall, the observed conditions appeared repetitive and generally consistent in the accessed areas. While the port and starboard outer walls were observed through openings, physical inspection of these walls was not completed. In general, there was not widespread visible signs of water staining or rot at the more interior areas. However, some water staining on wood was observed on framing members, particularly at locations where a penetration is present in the member or nearby. Larger wood timbers were observed to have checks and longitudinal splits, while only minor, and limited, cases of splits were seen in smaller lumber framing. Towards the outer framing trusses and hull, there were more widespread signs of moisture. Frost was present on the wood, many members had darkened water stains, and insulation appeared to have been wet and sagging. These areas were visible through access holes but not physically reached for probing. Throughout the hull there are gaps to the exterior in both hull bottom and sides. There is also evidence of modifications made potentially with the hogging revisions or when the boat was placed on the foundation cribbing. In one instance, there was an approximately 7-foot long timber laid across the subframing. This member had clearly been disconnected somewhere and abandoned; see Figure 23. Some members had been notched, and in other cases there was a physically marked location of a missing hog strap; see Figure 24. Some of the notching occurs at the bottom of floor joists, such as seen in Figure 25 for conduit installation. Notching at the bottom of a beam or joist will reduce its flexural capacity. Hogging and King Post Probably the largest change from the original design drawings is the hogging system and king post. This system cannot be compared against record documents. Therefore, the condition survey is exclusively limited to observations. It does appear that the hogging system as it exists now is asymmetrical from port to starboard. This condition is not expected to have been intentional with the initial installation. There are missing members noted at the main deck level. Additionally, there are connection points without members. PDC Engineers Page7 River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report Where there are "empty'' connectors symmetric about the boat, they may be unused remnants of the original system; see Figure 26. As with most other components on the boat, the hogging system components vary in condition throughout. Exterior members are losing the paint finish, and exposed wood appears weathered. Exterior steel components are also flaking paint and showing signs of surface rust. Some of the longer steel rods appear to be bowing, which may be a result of how the boat is supported. In general, steel components don't appear to be severely deteriorated. It is possible that some of connections and braided wire rope have worse corrosion where moisture is trapped but not visible. Wood components in some areas have severe longitudinal splits on multiple sides; see Figure 27 and Figure 28. Due to the large splits and poor paint condition, moisture will have made its way into the wood core. Repeated water infiltration and freezing may result in rot and deterioration inside the member not otherwise present near the surface where drying can occur. There is a single king post approximately at the forward third point of the boat. Similar to the wooden hogging members, the post has varied degrees of splitting and weathering along its length. As the post penetrates multiple decks, it is a point of water penetration. The post is visibly splitting and weathered along its length. At the Saloon Deck, one of the king post splits was probed several inches deep. The paint is peeling and delaminating from the wood. One exposed section of wood was clearly water-stained and had a soft surface; see Figure 29. It is reasonable to assume that decay is present underneath the paint at all levels. Above the Saloon exterior, the wood appears to be weathering as splits persist and paint deteriorates; see Figure 30. LIMITED STRUCTURAL ANAL VSIS A few typical deck framing joists were reviewed by calculation. The members evaluated include the Boat Deck, Saloon Deck, and Main Deck floor joists. The analysis is heavily based on assumptions derived from the record documents and site observations; as such, the intent is to determine the magnitude of demand-capacity ratio (D/C). Since the grade and species information was not available, the joists were evaluated using Western Cedar #1 wood properties. Additional assumptions used in the evaluation: • Members are two-span • Members are not spliced • Posts above are framed directly to beams below, or additional framing was added to transfer the load • Notched connections are½ of the main member width • Snow Load - SO psf (City of Fairbanks minimum roof snow load) without drifts The live load was evaluated at both SO psf and 100 psf for comparison. These loads are used for comparison of potential occupancies. The demand-capacity ratio is used to determine the critical load's usage of the member's capacity. Therefore, a D/C ratio of 1.0 would indicate the evaluated loading is using 100% of the capacity. Any value greater than 1.0 indicates a member is over capacity at the assumed loading. It is not a common practice for new structural elements to be designed near the 1.0 D/C ratio. PDC Engineers Pages - River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report D/C Scenario Summary Location(1) Scenario Shear Bending+ Bending- Boat Deck 3 1/4 X 1 3/4@ 20" l00psf 1.97 4.29 5.08 Boat Deck 3 1/4 X 13/4@ 20" S0psf 1.04 2.24 2.67 Saloon Deck Edge 5 1/2 X 1 3/4 @ 24" lO0psf 0.97 1.74 1.87 Saloon Deck Edge 5 1/2 X 1 3/4 @ 24" S0psf 0.51 0.91 0.99 Saloon Deck Center 5 1/2 X 1 3/4@ 24" l00psf 1.04 2.01 2.67 Sa loon Deck Center 5 1/2 X 13/4@ 24" S0psf 0.55 1.05 1.41 Main Deck Center 2 3/4 X 3 3/4@ 16" l00psf 1.15 2.16 2.87 Main Deck Center 2 3/ 4 X 3 3/4@ 16" S0psf 0.6 1.13 1.52 (1) See Appendix A for deck locations. Results are useful in understanding the magnitude of loads as they would be if this were a b uilding structure. The assumed loading application may be different than the original design, the a ctual wood species and grade may be different than assumed, and any composite effect of the de eking increasing the joist capacity is not considered. Even given the potential variables, however, it is unlikely these members will meet current snow or assembly occupancy live loads. CONSIDERATIONS OUTSIDE SCOPE OF REPORT The purpose of this report is to provide information and considerations regarding the struc tural condition of the S.S. Nenana. However, with regards to occupancy of the structure it may be advisable to further consider and address: • Occupant egress • Trip hazards and uneven walking surfaces • Fall hazards and guardrail heights • Mold • Ventilation SUMMARY Condition of the inspected elements varies greatly, with the Main Deck area appearing to be in the best condition and having received the most maintenance. Wood decay is visible at various locations throughout the boat, and it is likely additional decay could be found between deck ing plies, behind walls, inside connections, or in other concealed locations. Quite a bit of the wo od is losing protective paint and has become weathered. Wood splitting is present as a result of checkering, stress, or damage. These conditions will affect the structural capacity of the wo od, which will continue to worsen over time if not addressed. Steel components have generally held up better than the wood. The Boat Deck floor framing had the most observed decay and damage. By analysis, this fra ming is likely the most subject to overloading as well. Considering this deck is subject to snow, drifts, and potential occupancy for accessing many areas on the boat, it has an increased potential for receiving loads as compared to interior spaces of the upper decks, which are seldom occupied. PDC Engineers Page 9 River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report Observed vertical and horizontal alignment irregularities in the Saloon Deck floor longitudinal beams could be the result of deformation or deflection of the structure overall. When also considering the unconnected metal connectors to posts above, missing truss rods, and the several inconsistent modifications made to posts and hogging, deformation of the overall structure is plausible. The end effects of this may have changed load paths within the structure or potentially removed load paths originally intended. The overall structure as a whole was not analyzed within the scope of this study, and it would likely be difficult to accomplish due to complexities and inconsistencies in the load paths. A quantitative seismic analysis would also be difficult to perform, and seismic loads were almost certainly not considered in the original construction. To provide a detailed list of deficiencies and thorough recommendations for rehabilitation of the River Boat as an occupied structure, it is recommended that a specialty consultant versed in repair and restoration of boats be paired with local architects and engineers. This endeavor could include more extensive site investigation, as-builting, sampling, testing, and analysis. An approach to monitoring the boat structure may be to perform a horizontal and vertical survey of various points of the boat. These points could be checked in the future to better understand overall movement or deflection of the structure. FIGURES Figure 1-Pilot House Floor Water Damage PDC Engineers Page 10 River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report Figure 2-Pilot House Roof Decay Figure 3-Boiler Stack Unattached Cable PDC Engineers Page 11 River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report Figure 4-Texas Deck Over Compressed Wood Figure 5-Texas Deck Splice Separation PDC Engineers Page 12 River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report Figure 6-Saloon Worn Arch Connection Figure 7-Boat Deck Decay PDC Engineers Page 13 River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report Figure 8-Boat Deck Decay Figure 9-Baat Deck Sp lice Separation PDC Engineers Page 14 River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report Figure 10-Boat Deck Failing Splices Figure 11-Boat Deck Split PDC Engineers Page 15 River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report Figure 12-Boat Deck Removed Decking Figure 13-Boat Deck Removed Decking Debris PDC Engineers Page 16 River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report Figure 14-Boat Deck Over Compressed Rim Figure 15-Boat Deck Detached Post PDC Engineers Page 17 River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report Figure 16-Boat Deck Broken Rim Figure 17-Saloon Deck Cracking PDC Engineers Page 18 River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report Figure 18-Main Deck Engine Room Frost Figure 19-Main Deck Engine Room Missing Anchor PDC Engineers Page 19 River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report Figure 20-Main Deck Split Post Figure 21-Main Deck Notched Post PDC Engineers Page 20 River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report Figure 22-Main Deck Leaning Post Figure 23-Hull Framing Detached Member PDC Engineers Page 21 River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report Figure 24-Hull Framing Missing Hog Strap Figure 25-Hull Framing Notched Framing PDC Engineers Page22 River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report Figure 26-Hogging Missing Member Figure 27-Hogging Splits PDC Engineers Page 23 River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report Figure 28-Hogging Splits Figure 29-King Post PDC Engineers Page 24 River Boat Nenana Structural Investigation March 2018 Investigative Findings Report Figure 30-King Post PDC Engineers Page 25