CQCN Condition Based Assessment Initial Assessment

Aurizon 2010 Access Undertaking (UT3)

August 2013 Contact For any inquiries related to this report, please contact John Christopherson at (07) 3377 7000 or at [email protected].

Report Team

Assignment Principal John Christopherson Evans & Peck

Assignment Manager Hugh Amos Evans & Peck

Assignment Team Brett Baker Evans & Peck Daniel Bell Evans & Peck Alexander Bellamy Evans & Peck Frank Flinders Evans & Peck Leah Johnson Evans & Peck Stephen Nicholson Evans & Peck Aanush Majoo Evans & Peck Sonia Pupavac Evans & Peck Clara Tetther CMT Solutions Daniel Waters Evans & Peck

Review Frank Sutton Evans & Peck

Disclaimer This report has been prepared in accordance with the Agreement for Consultancy Services between Evans & Peck Pty Ltd and Aurizon Network Pty Ltd dated on or about 14 January 2013. Evans & Peck acknowledges and agrees that the Authority intends to rely on this report for the purposes of the requirements of the Access Undertaking, subject to execution of the Reliance Letter as agreed. Evans & Peck accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever in respect of any use of, or reliance upon, this report by any other organisation or person. Evans & Peck would like to The Queensland Competition acknowledge the support Authority and Aurizon provided by Aurizon Network Network contributed as a and the Queensland member of the Assessment Competition Authority during Liaison Group to provide clear the preparation of this report. guidance and direction within the context of the 2010 Access Aurizon Network provided Undertaking. open access to all systems and relevant staff. Aurizon All parties share the intent Network also facilitated of preserving the assset access to specific areas of the condition in accordance network for field inspections. with good operating and maintenance practice and policies. This intent is to be achieved in the context of agreed operational outcomes while not compromising the asset condition.

Contents

1. Background...... 1 5. Findings...... 47 1.1 Central Queensland Coal Network ...... 1 5.1 CQCN Overall Performance...... 47 1.2 System Overviews...... 3 5.2 Newlands System...... 49 1.3 Regulatory Requirements ...... 11 5.3 Goonyella System...... 51 5.4 Blackwater System...... 55 2. Brief ...... 17 5.5 Moura System...... 57 2.1 General...... 17 2.2 Objective ...... 17 6. Analysis...... 61 2.3 Qualifications and Assumptions...... 17 6.1 CQCN Overall...... 61 6.2 Newlands System ...... 73 3. Asset Management Systems...... 21 6.3 Goonyella System...... 109 3.1 Aurizon Network Systems...... 21 6.4 Goonyella (Vermont)...... 139 3.2 Good Maintenance and Operations Policy...25 6.5 Blackwater System...... 167 3.3 Capital Works...... 29 6.6 Moura System...... 229 4. Methodology...... 35 Evans & Peck Profile...... 271 4.1 Overview ...... 35 4.2 Sequence...... 37 Apendix A......

Appendix B......

Appendix C......

Executive Summary

Evans & Peck has completed the Initial Assessment as part of the Condition Based Assessment of the Aurizon Network CQCN as required by the 2010 Access Undertaking.

This Initial Assessment has been structured on asset element assessments within a framework of operational targets. It provides a baseline for the End of Period Assessment.

Executive Summary i

Background Methodology

The Central Queensland Coal Network is Fundamental to the methodology of this review Australia’s largest export coal rail network. It is the principle that prudent asset management transports a combination of metallurgical and cannot be conducted without consideration of thermal coal for export coal distribution through the agreed operational objectives of the asset and terminals at Bowen, Mackay and Gladstone. It is the context in which the asset or asset system also used to distribute coal to domestic users. operates. Consequently, this review consisted of a detailed review of the performance of individual It consists of approximately 2,713 km of heavy asset elements within a framework of agreed haul railway across the following systems: operational objectives.

•• Newlands The methodology was formulated around the •• Goonyella performance and condition monitoring processes described in Publicly Available Specification for •• Blackwater the optimized management of physical assets (PAS 55) and the draft International Standards •• Moura. Organisation - Asset management standard The Goonyella and Blackwater Systems are (ISO 55000). PAS 55 is the British Standards electrified. Institution’s publicly available specification for the optimised management of physical assets. ISO The Below Rail assets of the Central Queensland 55000 is the international standard developed Coal Network are economically regulated by the from PAS 55 and provisioned for release in Queensland Competition Authority through an February 2014. These asset management agreement between the parties, the 2010 Access standards describe the requirements for reactive Undertaking. and proactive monitoring of an asset. A further description of these requirements is provided The 2010 Access Undertaking requires that below as extracted from PAS 55: Aurizon Network (formally QR National) prepare a Condition Based Assessment which measures •• Reactive monitoring: to identify past the changes in asset condition for the period of or existing nonconformities in the asset the agreement. The Condition Based Assessment management system, and any asset-related consists of an Initial Assessment and an End of deterioration, failures or incidents, leading to Period Assessment to allow for a determination the identification of lagging indicators. of asset deterioration across the period. The agreement requires the valuation of any •• Proactive monitoring: to seek assurance deterioration that can be attributed to a failure that the asset management system and assets to adopt good operating practice and prudent and asset systems are operating as intended. and effective maintenance and asset replacement This shall include monitoring to ascertain policies and practices. that the asset management policy, strategy and objectives are met, the asset management Aurizon Network and the Queensland Competition plan is implemented, and that the processes, Authority appointed Evans & Peck to prepare the procedures or other arrangements to control Condition Based Assessment. It was agreed that asset life cycle activities are effective, leading the Initial Assessment would be based on the asset to the identification of leading indicators. condition using FY 2012 asset records; from July •• Recording of monitoring and 2011 to June 2012. measurement data and results to facilitate subsequent analysis of This report records the Initial Assessment problem causes to assist in determining and establishes a baseline for a deterioration corrective or preventive actions and/or to assessment. The deterioration assessment can be facilitate continual improvement.” completed after the End of Period Assessment is completed and the change in asset condition determined. Threshold Rating System (TRS)

Condition Coding Description

Green Asset performing at or better than specified

Yellow Minor non-conformance

Amber Trend of minor non-conformances

Red Major non-conformance

Grey Unavailable/insufficient data to be able to make an assessment

Evans & Peck, in conjunction with Aurizon OTCI is a comprehensive system of geometric Network and the Queensland Competition track measurements. Aurizon Network has OTCI Authority, identified and agreed upon lagging and target ranges which vary for the type of track leading indicators to assess the condition of the and nature of traffic; a more demanding task of asset. A number of indicators were identified and for a length of track leads to more demanding agreed as being suitable for KPIs. The framework acceptable OTCI target range. operational KPIs were agreed to be: The Below Rail asset elements have been divided •• Below Rail Transit Time (BRTT) into the following disciplines:

•• Overall Track Condition Index (OTCI). •• Track BRTT is a commitment made by Aurizon Network •• Structures to stakeholders that the Below Rail asset can allow trains to travel a certain route in at or better •• Signals and train control systems than a target transit time. The BRTT is based •• Telecommunications on the theoretical cumulative section run times for a particular route. This cumulative figure is •• Traction distribution and traction power factored up by an agreed amount to allow for supply systems. system delays and an allowance for Temporary Evans & Peck assessed asset information from Speed Restrictions (TSR) imposed by Aurizon for databases provided by Aurizon Network. These track condition or maintenance activities. Aurizon databases included, among others, the: Network has internal targets for maximum TSRs. Note that it is possible to achieve the BRTT KPI •• Fixed Asset Register and be outside the internal TSR targets. •• Track Systems Management System •• Rail Infrastructure Management System •• ViziRail train path scheduling and control system. Executive Summary iii

Evans & Peck recognises that the development End of Period Assessment and of the Initial Assessment has relied on existing deterioration assessment data from the Aurizon Network asset monitoring and defect reporting systems. The Evans & The intent is that the End of Period Assessment Peck methodology does not create a parallel is a similar format to this assessment. This would asset management system to Aurizon Network’s allow clear and objective identification of the existing systems. The Aurizon Network data was failure to achieve an operational KPI and a clear supplemented with follow up discussions with identification of any particular asset element Aurizon Network asset managers and focused field indicators that contributed to the failure. inspections. Where appropriate Evans & Peck has commented on the existing systems or the data Investigation of particular asset elements would reviewed. then be triggered and if good operating practice and prudent and effective maintenance and A colour coded rating system was developed to asset replacement policies and practices are not describe asset operational and element condition. evidenced a deterioration valuation will be made.

This system is shown in the table opposite. The The detailed methodology and mechanism for grey indicator is applied where: evaluation of deterioration has been deferred to be finalised during the development of the 2013 •• The assessment requires a relative movement Access Undertaking (UT4). A number of options and consequently cannot be completed until were considered during the Initial Assessment and the End of Period assessment is complete these will provide a platform for these discussions. •• The particularly indicator is not applicable in that specific case Operational KPI Findings •• The data available was not sufficient or in a Evans & Peck assessed that the Central form which could allow an assessment. Queensland Coal Network generally achieved the operational Key Performance Indicators. The Threshold rating system exceptions were the:

This rating system was then applied to the •• BRTT on the Newlands System during the first asset operational and element KPIs and lagging half of FY 2012 indicators measured against agreed thresholds. The agreed thresholds were developed through •• OTCI for parts of the Moura System. alignment workshops and agreed by all parties. The Newlands System operated with periods outside the maximum agreed BRTT target for Leading indicators were discussed qualitatively, to three months over the twelve month period. The provide indications of future expectations of the Moura System has an OTCI above the median of asset. the target range and trending upwards away from the target OTCI.

The Evans & Peck’s findings for operational KPIs are shown in the table opposite. The Blackwater System had TSR levels outside the Aurizon internal threshold for approximately five months out of the twelve month period but these did not impact the BRTT result. Asset Element Findings In regards to specific asset elements by system and discipline; one asset element indicator was The Below Rail asset is one element of the coal assessed as having a major non-conformance. This supply chain. asset element was the signalling and train control systems on the Goonyella (Vermont) section. This Total delays on the coal system in FY 2012 were asset element had a large number of delay minutes approximately 2.6 million minutes according to attributed to it; of note is that over three quarters the ViziRail system. Below Rail factors contributed of the delays caused by this asset element were 22.2 %, or approximately 566,000 minutes, to attributable to lost detection at one particular set these delays. This is shown in the figure opposite. of points. The influence of these Below Rail factors in order of impact is: Aside from this single major non-conformance there were a number of minor non-conformances. •• Signalling 12.8% These were: •• Overhead Traction Wire Equipment 5.5 % •• Newlands System: signalling and train control •• Permanent Way 3.9 % system delays culvert inspections on Goonyella to Abbott Point Expansion (GAPE). Other Below Rail disciplines did not lead to significant delays according to the ViziRail system. •• Goonyella System: delays due to bridges and structures bridge inspections. •• Blackwater System: culvert inspections bridge remaining book life (on the Rolleston Branch specifically) culvert remaining book life (on the Rolleston and Minerva Branches specifically) bridge inspections (on the Rolleston and Minerva Branches specifically). •• Moura System: fluctuations in OTCI culvert remaining book life.

Central Queensland Coal Network summary asset condition dashboard Other 0.8% Network Operations 3.2% Operational KPI Uncontrolled Event 4.1% System Train Crewing 5.2% BRTT OTCI Safety Incident/Accident 5.6% Newlands BRTT: 3 month above BRTT OTCI - overall good condition

Goonyella BRTT: 1 month above BRTT OTCI - overall good condition Network Planning 11.7% Blackwater BRTT: 0 months above BRTT OTCI - overall good condition Moura BRTT: 0 months above BRTT OTCI – above median threshold & trending upwards

Loading 14.3% Executive Summary v

The signals and train control systems on The Moura System has had notable fluctuations the Newlands System were responsible for in its indexed track condition during the period as approximately one fifth of BRTT delays; a level reported through OTCI results although an above crossing protection issue in December 2011 average rainfall in early 2012 may have been a contributed to a significant proportion of this contributor to this track condition. The culverts delay. GAPE culvert inspections occurred between on the Moura System typically have between 3 and 30 and 60 days beyond the scheduled date. 15 years remaining book life.

Approximately 86% of bridge inspections on the A number of areas were unable to be assessed. Goonyella System were conducted greater than 30 This was due to limitations of the Aurizon days beyond the scheduled date. Additionally, on Network data bases or because these indicators the Goonyella System delays as a result of bridge are based on a change in condition. The indicators or structural factors were above the cumulative that are based on a change in the period will target of 360 minutes. be able to be assessed when the End of Period Assessment is completed. Culvert inspections for the Blackwater System were all undertaken at least 30 days beyond the scheduled date with the remaining book life of all structures on the Blackwater (Rolleston) System being less than 15 years. Bridge inspections on the Blackwater (Rolleston) System and Blackwater (Minerva) all occurred between 30 and 60 days beyond the scheduled date.

VizRail total reported delays FY 2012

Signalling 12.8% Other 0.8%

Network Operations 3.2% Total Below Overhead Traction Uncontrolled Event 4.1% Rail Impact Wire Equipment 5.5% 22.2% Train Crewing 5.2% Permanent Way 3.9% Safety Incident/Accident 5.6%

Network Planning 11.7% Rollingstock 32.9%

Loading 14.3%

Executive Summary vii Background

The Central Queensland Coal Network (CQCN) comprises 2,713 km of heavy haul railway and associated infrastructure.

The CQCN has four separate major rail systems; the Newlands, Goonyella, Blackwater and Moura Systems. Port of Abbot Point

Newlands

Port of Hay Point

Goonyella

Port of Gladstone Blackwater

Moura

Figure 1.1: Central Queensland Coal Network Map provided by Aurizon Network to Evans & Peck for the purpose of this assessment

1. Bi-directional refers to the ability of a train to travel in either direction on the specified track. Differentiation primarily refers to the signal capability Background 1

Export capacity expansion projects are currently 1. Background underway. These include the Wiggins Island Rail Projects stages 1 and 2 (WIRP1 and WIRP2). Combined, these two programs of work will add 1.1 Central Queensland Coal approximately 60 Mtpa in capacity to reach the Network Wiggins Island Coal Export Terminal at the Port of Gladstone via the Moura and Blackwater Systems. The Central Queensland Coal Network (CQCN) There is potentially the requirement to provide comprises 2,713 km of narrow gauge heavy haul additional capacity to service terminal expansions railway and associated infrastructure. Aurizon at Abbot Point Coal Terminal (APCT), Hay Point Network manages the Below Rail assets of the Coal Terminal and other locations. CQCN. The majority of the network is provided for the coal export market through the major coal Further to the expansion projects listed above, export terminals at Abbot Point, Mackay and there are projects currently in progress, such as Gladstone; however, a portion of the coal is for the Wotonga Feeder Station, to increase system domestic power generation. reliability and the electrifination of the Bauhinia Branch on the Blackwater system. The CQCN has four separate major rail systems; the Newlands, Goonyella, Blackwater and Moura Systems.

The network comprises both electrified and non-electrified rail segments, with the electrified segments supplied with power from the 132 kV Powerlink Queensland (PLQ) grid to feeder stations located on the railway at intervals of between 40 and 100 km dependent on the power demand to transport the required tonnage. Port of Abbot Point

Abbot Point Merinda Depot Kaili Bowen Depot Buckley Armuna Aberdeen Binbee

Briaba

Collinsville Collinsville Sonoma Birralee

Cockool Havilah Port of Hay Point Newlands

Figure 1.2: Newlands System Map provided by Aurizon Network to Evans & Peck for the purpose of this assessment Background 3

1.2 System Overviews Figure 1.2 shows the location of the Newlands System. The interfaces with Queensland Rail network’s NCL are shown at Kaili on the Kaili- 1.2.1 Newlands System Townsville track section and Durroburra on the Durroburra to Bowen track section. The Newlands The Newlands System is located at the northern System connects to the Goonyella System in the end of the Bowen Basin. It incorporates part of the south via the Northern Missing Link. North Coast Line (NCL) between Durroburra and Kaili and also the line to the APCT. The Northern Missing Link is a new construction 70 km in length and is comprised of concrete The system is single line with passing loops, sleepers with 60 kg/m rail. The track allows for a duplicated at Briaba. It is non-electrified and 26.5 tal at a maximum speed of 80 km/h. services mine balloon loops at the Newlands, Sonoma and McNaughton Mines. The system The Goonyella to Abbot Point Expansion (GAPE) connects to terminals at APCT. was commissioned on 19 December 2012. It connects the Goonyella System to the Newlands The Abbot Point to Collinsville part of the system System. It has been designed to increase capacity is 98 km in length and comprised of concrete on the combined GAPE and Newlands connection sleepers and a combination of 53 kg/m and to the APCT to 50 Mtpa. 60 kg/m rail. The track allows for a 26.5 tonne axle load (tal) at a maximum speed of 80 km/h. Amendments to the Newlands System rules were The Collinsville to Newlands railway track is implemented as a result of the GAPE expansion, 77 km long and is comprised of concrete sleepers including an agreement between Aurizon Network with 53 kg/m rail. and the Access Holders to facilitate the connection to the Goonyella System. The agreement included It should be noted that parts of the system at an increase in the maximum axle loading from Briaba and Euri Creek are the original formation 20 tal to 26.5 tal, with a 30 tal design provision. at 20 tal capacities; these are at duplicated sections and this is managed by only allowing In FY2013 the Newlands System transported unloaded trains to traffic the lower capacity 18.4 million net tonnesof coal. sections. Port of Mackay (Paget) Depot Hay Point Hay Point Dalrymple Crossover Points

Jilanan Depot Hail Creek Yukan Depot Burton North Goonyella Hatfield South Walker Creek Goonyella Riverside Junction Coppabella Wandoo Moranbah North Mindi

Millenium Moorvale Moranbah Depot Poitrel

Villafranca Peak Downs

Saraji Lake Vermont Dunsmure

Dysart Depot Norwich Park Blair Athol Norwich Park Junction

Middlemount Gernan Creek Foxleigh Oaky Creek Gregory

Figure 1.3: Goonyella System Map provided by Aurizon Network to Evans & Peck for the purpose of this assessment Background 5

1.2.2 Goonyella System The system services balloon loops at Goonyella, Riverside, North Goonyella, Moorvale, The Goonyella System is located in Central Millennium, Carborough Downs Isaac Plains, Queensland and services the Bowen Basin. Coal Blair Athol, South Walker and Hail Creek. In is transported to terminals at Hay Point and addition, the line services dual unloading balloons Dalrymple Bay. at Hay Point and triple unloading balloons at Dalrymple Bay. The system is mainly comprised of bi-directional1 duplicated track with crossovers between The Hay Point to North Goonyella line (the main Dalrymple Junction and Wotonga. The remainder trunk route) is comprised of concrete sleepers of the track consists of duplication between generally with 60 kg/m rail, allowing for a Coppabella and Ingsdon. A single line connection maximum 26.5 tal. links the Goonyella System with the Blackwater System via Oaky Creek to Gregory. Figure 1.3 shows the layout of the Goonyella System. The line is electrified by an Autotransformer (AT) system with the overhead line equipment at In FY2013 the Goonyella System transported 25,000 volts, 50 Hz, alternating supply. 96.9 million net tonnes of coal.

1. Bi-directional refers to the ability of a train to travel in either direction on either track. Gregory Port of Kestrel Yongola Coal Siding Yarrabee Glenmore Depot Gladstone Mackenzie Jellinbah East Gracemere Depot Rockhampton Depot Ensham Curragh Midgee Emerald Depot Blackwater Depot Stanwell Powerhouse Comet Dingo Archer Yamala Parnabal Duaringa Depot Gogango Bajool Raglan Kinrola Junction Cook Marmor Gindie Wallaroo Tunnel Aroona Mount Larcom Depot Ambrose Fernlees GladstoneDepot Minerva Kenmare East End

Memooloo

Rolleston

Figure 1.4: Blackwater System Map provided by Aurizon Network to Evans & Peck for the purpose of this assessment Background 7

1.2.3 Blackwater System In addition, it services triple unloading balloons located at Golding, as well as unloading balloons The Blackwater System services coal mines off the at Stanwell Powerhouse, Fishermans Landing, Central Line. Gladstone Powerhouse, Barney Point and Comalco. It transports coal to the Stanwell Power Station, Gladstone Power Station and the Port of The Blackwater System also provides access for Gladstone via the NCL to the export facilities at bulk commodities above rail traffic to the balloon R. G. Tanna Coal Terminal (RGTCT) and Barney loops at Auckland Point, which are managed and Point (BPCT). owned by Queensland Rail.

The system is railway mainly comprising The Blackwater to Gladstone line (the main trunk bi-directional duplicated track with crossovers route) is comprised of concrete sleepers with between Callemondah and Rocklands, Stanwell generally 60 kg/m rail, allowing for a maximum of and Dingo and Bluff and Rangal. The WIRP1 26.5 tal. Some smaller lightly trafficked spurs on projects will complete the duplication of the the system use lighter rail. eastern end of the Blackwater System. Figure 1.4 shows the location of the Blackwater The line is electrified with the overhead line System. equipment operating at 25,000 volts, 50 Hz, alternating supply. In FY2013 the Blackwater System transported 54.8 million net tonnes of coal. It services loading balloon loops at East End, Boonal, Koorilgah, Curragh, Boorgoon, Kinrola, Ensham, Gordonstone, Rolleston, Minerva and Gregory with a spur line at Fairhill for Yongala. Port of Gladstone Callemondah Depot

Calliope Wooderson Mount Rainbow Baralaba Annandale Boundary Hill Greycliff Callide Dakenba Banana Belldeen Biloela Depot Moura Junction

Dawson

Figure 1.5: Moura System Map provided by Aurizon Network to Evans & Peck for the purpose of this assessment Background 9

1.2.4 Moura System Other balloon loops are located at Boundary Hill, Callide Coalfields and Moura Mine. The Moura System services the industrial and rural communities of the Dawson and Callide The Moura System is comprised of concrete Valleys. The transported goods are hauled by sleepers generally 60 kg/m rail, allowing for a diesel electric locomotives to the export facilities maximum axle load of 26.5 tal. at R. G. Tanna Terminal, Auckland Point and Barney Point and to intrastate destinations via the Figure 1.5 shows the location of the Moura NCL. System.

The system is comprised of single line railway with In FY2013 the Moura System transported passing loops. 11.8 million net tonnes of coal.

The Callemondah Yard, Powerhouse and RGTCT balloon loops are electrified with the overhead line equipment operating at 25,000 volts, 50 Hz, alternating supply; however currently only diesel locomotives operate on the Moura System. Table 1.1: RAB asset system boundaries

Boundary Item Asset system Boundary Track section location 1 Newlands Newlands Junction Havilah – Leichardt Range 146.082 Durroburra Durroburra – Bowen 1158.498 Kaili Kaili – Townsville 1164.090 2 GAPE Newlands Junction Newlands Junction – North 146.082 Goonyella Junction North Goonyella Junction Newlands Junction – North 213.828 Goonyella Junction 3 Goonyella (including Yukan Yukan – Sarina 915.980 Hail Creek and Yukan Yukan – Rockhampton 915.980 excluding Vermont) Blair Athol Blair Athol – Clermont 122.340 North Goonyella Junction North Goonyella Junction – 213.828 Eaglefield Creek Lake Vermont Junction Lake Vermont Junction – 85.698 Lake Vermont Gregory Junction Coppabella – Gregory 60.978 Junction 4 Lake Vermont Lake Vermont Junction Lake Vermont – Lake 85.698 Vermont Junction 5 Goonyella (Electric) As for Item 3 6 Lake Vermont As for Item 4 (Electric) 7 Blackwater Gregory Junction Burngrove – Gregory 60.978 (excluding Rolleston Nogoa Burngrove – Emerald 263.110 and Minerva) Boorgoon Rangal – Rolleston 11.250 Rocklands Parana – Rockhampton 632.970 Parana Junction Parana – Rockhampton 522.859 8 Blackwater Boorgoon Boorgoon – Rolleston 11.250 (Rolleston) 9 Blackwater Wurba Junction Wurba Junction – Minerva 42.592 (Minerva) Wurba Junction Nogoa – Springsure 42.592 10 Blackwater (Electric) As for Item 7 11 Moura Baralaba Coal Moura Mainline 183.307 Earlsfield Earlsfield – Koorngoo 0.1265 Dakenba Earlsfield – Biloela 16.080 Graham Stowe – Taragoola 28.590 Background 11

1.3 Regulatory Requirements 1.3.2 Regulated Asset Base Aurizon Network’s RAB includes all rail 1.3.1 Economic Regulation infrastructure required for the operation of coal train services on the regulated network The CQCN is an economically regulated asset. in Queensland. The value of these assets is The regulation is administered by the Queensland an important factor used in determining the Competition Authority (the Authority). This reference tariffs for coal train services. regulation is managed through an agreed access undertaking which allows operational and Each year, Aurizon Network must submit, for the maintenance costs to be negotiated typically every Authority’s approval, a roll-forward of its RAB for four years. each system in the central CQCN. The roll-forward of the asset base takes into account the Authority’s Aurizon Network’s 2010 Access Undertaking approved capital expenditure and calculates other (UT3) came into effect on 1 October 2010 and is components, such as inflation and depreciation, in due to expire in 2013. UT3 sets out the terms and accordance with the methodology set out in UT3. conditions under which Aurizon Network will provide access to rail infrastructure covered by the The RAB divides the CQCN into 11 separate undertaking. It also sets out the process required asset systems. This allows variations in tariffs for an access seeker to negotiate access to the between the users of each specific asset system. infrastructure and how any disputes in relation to The boundaries are similar to the CQCN system access are to be resolved. boundaries described earlier; however there are a number of additional divisions to cater for users of The undertaking requires capital works to meet electric trains and also for users of particular spur prudency requirements and be approved annually lines. for inclusion into the Regulated Asset Base (RAB). The RAB is the basis for the tariff regime. The detailed RAB asset system boundaries are listed in Table 1.1 opposite. The undertaking also has a provision for unplanned events that impact the cost of operating the network; the undertaking refers to these as Review Events, and recent examples are the 2011 and 2013 floods.

Aurizon Network can seek to amend the approved undertaking through the process set out in the Queensland Competition Authority Act 1997 (QCA Act). 1.3.3 Condition Based Assessments The UT3 states: A reqirement of UT3 is for Aurizon Network “If the End of Period to procure, at the cost of Aurizon Network, a Condition Based Assessment (CBA) of the rail Assessment finds that infrastructure in the CQCN within three months of the approval date (the Initial Assessment) and six the condition of the Rail months prior to the terminating date (the End of Infrastructure in the CQCN Period Assessment). has deteriorated between Aurizon Network nominated three independent qualified consultants from whom the Authority the Initial Assessment and has selected the consultant (the Assessor) who must be appointed to conduct both the Initial End of Period Assessment by Assessment and the End of Period Assessment. more than would have been The Assessor has a duty of care to the Authority in the case had good operating the conduct of the Initial Assessment and the End of Period Assessment and, in the event of a conflict practice and prudent and between the Assessor’s obligations to Aurizon Network and its duty of care to the Authority, the effective maintenance and Assessor’s duty of care to the Authority will take asset replacement policies precedence. Evans & Peck has been appointed as the Assessor. and practices been pursued, the QCA will be entitled to 1.3.4 Initial and End of Period Assessment reduce the RAB to reflect the

The Assessor must provide to Aurizon Network additional deterioration.” and the Authority a report on the findings of the Initial Assessment or the End of Period Assessment (as applicable). The End of Period Assessment report must include:

•• Identification of the extent to which the rail infrastructure in the CQCN has deteriorated by more than would have been the case had good operating practice and prudent and effective maintenance and asset replacement policies and practices been pursued •• To the extent such greater deterioration is identified, the value of that deterioration. This report documents the Initial Assessment. Background 13

1.3.5 Deterioration Assessment The detailed methodology and mechanism for evaluation of deterioration has been deferred The intent is that the End of Period Assessment to be finalised during the development of the is a similar format to this assessment. This would 2013 Access Undertaking (UT4). The structure allow clear and objective identification of the of the Initial Assessment is designed to provide failure to achieve an operational KPI and a clear an objective platform for assessment of relative identification of any particular asset element asset condition. A platform for developing a indicators that contributed to the failure. methodology has been provided by the options considered during this Initial Assessment. In the event that the condition of the Rail Infrastructure in the CQCN has deteriorated by more than would be expected over the undertaking 1.3.6 Assessment Liaison Group period the QCA will be entitled to reduce the RAB The Assessment Liaison Group (ALG) constitutes to reflect the additional deterioration. a requirement of the UT3 and comprises members A number of options were considered during of the Assessor (Evans & Peck), Aurizon Network, the Initial Assessment and these will provide a and the Authority. platform for these discussions. These options The ALG serves as a forum to present progress, included discussion of a stage gate mechanism of assessments and recommendations. five stages: The ALG has the authority to make decisions in •• Identification of a potential asset deterioration regard to: •• Initial investigation and Aurizon Network response •• Direction of the CBA •• Detailed Investigation and Aurizon Network •• Scope and depth of analysis of the CBA response •• Timing of deliverables of the CBA. •• QCA decision •• Valuation of adjustment. The ALG does not have authority to make decisions in regard to: The first stage gate would be a trigger to investigate an asset element deeper. This trigger •• Determinations by the Assessor would be based on a failure to reach operational KPIs which was supported by a causal chain of •• Requirements of UT3, or indicators evidenced in the Initial and End of •• Contractual matters between any two of the Period Assessments. This stage would involve a three parties. preliminary investigation and a right of response by Aurizon Network. The second stage gate The ALG Charter is included in Appendix A. would be a preliminary investigation to confirm if the asset element had not been maintained as required by the UT3 or UT4; Aurizon Network would have an opportunity to respond at this point. The third stage would be a more detailed investigation which would inform a QCA decision as to whether a deterioration adjustment should be applied. The final stage would be assessment of the adjustment.

Brief 15 Brief

This report addresses the Initial Assessment and provides a baseline for the End of Period Assessment at the completion of the access undertaking period.

Brief 17

2. Brief 2.3 Qualifications and Assumptions

The assessment assumes: 2.1 General •• Continuation of the current maintenance Aurizon Network and the Authority have engaged regime and plans Evans & Peck to complete the CBA of the Below Rail infrastructure of the CQCN. This task consists •• Continuation of the current supply agreements of: with PLQ •• Rolling stock currently used by CQCN above •• An Initial Assessment rail operators. •• An End of Period Assessment (including a deterioration assessment). The following are excluded from the assessment:

This report addresses the Initial Assessment •• Valuation of assets and provides a baseline for the End of Period •• Buildings Assessment at the completion of the access undertaking period. •• Quarries

The Initial Assessment deliverables consisted of •• Efficiency of above rail operations (including the following: management of yard operations and configuration of yards) •• Conduct of an alignment workshop •• Overall supply chain capacity, characteristics, •• Presentation of a draft report (for the Initial interfaces and limitations. Assessment) •• Presentation of a final report (for the Initial Evans & Peck appreciates that the development Assessment). of the CBA has been heavily reliant upon existing data from Aurizon Network asset monitoring The purpose of the End of Period Assessment is systems and defect reporting systems. It has been to: assumed that all data/information provided to Evans & Peck, in combination with subsequent •• Identify the extent to which the rail discussions with asset managers, provides an infrastructure in the CQCN has deteriorated appropriate reflection of the asset condition of the by more than would have been the case had a CQCN. Where information integrity as warranting good operating practice and maintenance and comment by Evans & Peck, it will be raised with asset replacement policies and practices been the relevant data provisions. pursued •• Determine the value of such deterioration. Field inspections were provisioned to confirm desktop data was reasonably reflective of actual asset condition, not to validate all information 2.2 Objective provided to Evans & Peck. The objective of the Initial Assessment is to provide an evaluation of the condition of the CQCN rail infrastructure. The assessment is to consider the Below Rail infrastructure independently from other supply chain elements.

Asset Management Systems

Aurizon Network has a range of asset management objectives.

To achieve these objectives Aurizon Network has in place standards, procedural documentation, reporting and management systems. Figure 3.1: Aurizon Network governance structure

Legislation

Economic Rail Operations Other Regulation Regulation Legislation

Economic

Board Shareholders (Rail Infrastructure Manager)

Service

Customers Access

Product

Asset

Asset Policy & Strategy

Monitor Assess Invest

Standard Access CETS Stage Gates Undertaking CESS

Systems OTCI Engage Stakeholder PM Team BRTT Assess Evidence IPR Inspection Options

Databases Various databases are used by Aurizon Network Asset Management Systems 21

An overview of the document architecture is as 3. Asset Management follows: Systems Track

3.1 Aurizon Network Systems In general, the interrelated standards are known as Civil Engineering Track Standards (CETS) and the Civil Engineering Structural Standards 3.1.1 Governance (CESS).

Aurizon Network: Traction Distribution and Traction •• Ensures governance practices are in operation, Power Supply Systems with clear assignment of accountabilities and The principle standard provides four interrelated responsibilities standards that manage the safety aspects •• Manages risks through assurance processes of operating and working with electricity. Manufacturer’s requirements and installation •• Assesses and continuously improves the specifications are provided by the manufacturer. effectiveness of asset management practices •• Ensures individuals have the competency and Signals capacity to fulfil their responsibilities The principle standard is supported by seven •• Uses information technology and support operational standards. These standards cover the systems to underpin the above. requirements of the asset through its entire life Aurizon Network manages its network of track cycle. Additional operational requirements and infrastructure to achieve these aims through a installation specifications are provided by the range of: manufacturer.

•• Standards and procedural documentation Telecommunications

•• Reporting and management systems The telecommunications standards have been •• Computer based management systems. designed to the individual component parts that make up the overall asset category. Included in Figure 3.1 provides a summary of the Aurizon the suite of standards are documents for the safe Network governance structure. installation and operations of the asset. Additional operational requirements and installation 3.1.2 Standards specifications are provided by the manufacturer.

Standards have been developed for all technical disciplines, which are supported by a suite of related documents and business instructions. Generally, all standards and related documents are underpinned by relevant Australian Standards and/or Codes of Practice. Level Crossings 3.1.3 Systems

As the geographical footprint of level crossings Aurizon Network has developed and implemented covers the shared land tenure between the road a range of systems to manage and maintain assets. owner and the rail owner, the level crossing Overarching the individual discipline systems is standards are designed on a risk basis to cater for an asset management policy. The policy states that the safe operation of the crossing, while the design Aurizon Network’s aim is to: standard is owned by Aurizon Network. “…manage the physical assets The principle standard is supported by three related documents. The performance of all for which we are responsible crossings is governed by the Australian Level Crossing Assessment Model (ALCAM). to deliver safe, reliable and high-performance rail The above standards are consistent with the rail safety accreditation requirements and have infrastructure services that been authored and approved by a Registered Professional Engineer Queensland. Aurizon meet customer, shareholder Network is aware of the suite of standards being developed by the Railway Industry Safety and and stakeholder expectations.” Standards Board (RISSB) for railway engineering design, construction and maintenance, and the The policy also addresses governance, risk applicable RISSB standard may be adopted into management, continuous improvement and Aurizon Network practices as they are issued. effective use of technology and systems.

The policy is supported by an asset renewal process which is subject to internal independent peer review. This process addresses proposed asset renewal projects in terms of:

•• Alignment with asset strategy •• Outcomes/benefits •• Options •• Priority and timeframes •• Design and standards •• Cost estimates •• Deliverables •• Finance •• Cost Effectiveness.

Asset Management Systems 23

Individual discipline monitoring systems include: The data, information, and reports from the systems and monitoring processes are •• Structures continuously reviewed by the discipline teams and enable Aurizon Network to monitor the − Regular inspections for compliance with performance and condition of its network. CESS − Independent consultant inpections of Based on the evidence from this data, the specific assets. individual discipline teams develop medium to long term plans to correct any deficiencies. •• Track Evans & Peck notes that the systems, to an − Track Recording Car (TRC) results extent, are not integrated, however are aware − Regular inspections for compliance with that Aurizon Network has committed to achieve CETS integration of its systems and processes. Aurizon Network maintains an incident reporting system − Ultrasonic Non Destructive Testing (NDT) that covers all disciplines. − Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) inspection program (under development). •• Signals − Regular inspection and testing − Designed to a Safety Integrity Level of four. •• Traction distribution and traction power supply systems − Oil testing of Transformers − Oil testing of ATs − Aerial surveillance and visual inspections. •• Telecommunications − Two fault recording centres (Brisbane and Rockhampton) − Faults are logged, tracked and cleared through the Track Systems Maintenance System (TSMS) − The telecommunications system has redundancy through alternative means. •• Level crossings − Regular inspection − ALCAM monitoring. Table 3.1: Asset management databases

Document, database or Description Role system

FAR Fixed Asset Register Financial asset database subject to financial and regulatory controls. This database tracks book life of assets. RIMS Rail Infrastructure Management Asset maintenance and works management. System FRS Fault Recording Systems Fault logging, fault recording and system maintenance logging. TSMS Track Systems Management Maintenance task lists, maintenance System scheduling and corrective maintenance. Remedy Equipment identification Specific equipment allocation and equipment schematics/types. TEAR Track Equipment Asset Register Asset and works management. ViziRail ViziRail statistics and monitoring Enhanced rail and supply chain information, system monitoring trains daily, network infrastructure modules. RDMS Rail Defect Management System Asset and works management. Asset Management Systems 25

3.1.4 Databases 3.2 Good Maintenance and Aurizon Network maintains a number of Operations Policy databases with differing levels of detail and scope to suit different objectives. 3.2.1 ISO 55000

To assess the infrastructure on the CQCN, Evans The asset condition review employed a & Peck drew upon the FAR. It is maintained and methodology compliant with Draft International adjusted using a five year rolling stocktaking Standards Organisation - Asset management system for infrastructure (with yearly stocktaking standard (ISO 55000). for other assets such as vehicles). Aurizon Network policy is that an asset that shows one ISO 55000 covers the multiple aspects of asset year remaining life at the time of stocktaking is to management2. In accordance with suggestions in be assessed by the owning business unit in regard ISO 55000, the CBA provided consideration for: to confirmation or revision of remaining life. •• Reactive monitoring to identify past or The FAR is not connected to the maintenance existing nonconformities in the asset systems. The intent is that maintenance management system, and any asset-related feedback is provided through the five year rolling deterioration, failures or incidents, leading to stocktaking system; however Evans & Peck is the identification of lagging indicators unable to comment on the effectiveness of this •• Proactive monitoring to seek assurance that feedback process. the asset management system and assets and asset systems are operating as intended. This An asset’s remaining life in the FAR is based on shall include monitoring to ascertain that agreed asset life and expired years, and not on the the asset management policy, strategy and usage of the asset. This may not always reflect the objectives are met, the asset management condition of the asset; however, it has been used plan is implemented, and that the processes, as a baseline. procedures or other arrangements to control The FAR was established in 1995 and subject asset life cycle activities are effective, leading to a complete review by an external consultant to the identification of leading indicators in 2000/2001. The 2000/2001 review was •• The identification of key performance selectively proofed by the Authority. indicators aggregated from leading and lagging indicators It is likely that there will be inaccuracies in the FAR given the limitations of a five year rolling •• The inclusion of subjective, objective, stocktaking regime. The remaining book life qualitative and quantitative data in the FAR should only be used as a trigger for •• Monitoring the overall effectiveness and operational staff to investigate and confirm the efficiency of the asset management system actual physical remaining life when the book life is less than a minimum. •• Recording of monitoring and measurement data and results to facilitate subsequent •• analysis of problem causes to assist in determining corrective or preventive actions and/or to facilitate continual improvement.”

2. Draft International Standard Approved Early 2013. Final Draft International Standard scheduled to be released December 2013, with final publication February 2014. Table 3.2: Maintenance context

Consideration Comments Climate The CQCN is exposed to tropical seasonal variations, with periods of high rainfall experienced annually between January and April. During this time rainfalls of 400 mm or more can occur. These periods of heavy rain can be challenging to the infrastructure maintainer. Issues such as ballast fouling and poor foundation soils leading to speed restrictions can be aggravated by such heavy rainfall conditions. Cyclonic weather conditions can also impact port operations. This is particularly significant for the Goonyella System where train paths are scheduled to match specific shipping arrangements. Safety The Aurizon Network operates under the ZERO Harm Policy that insures safety and health are priority. Additionally, compliance with the Rail Safety Act and the DTMR Safety Regulator is prerequisite. Residual life Infrastructure is maintained relative to the residual life of the asset. Assets with limited residual life are circumstantially maintained to a lower degree, whilst maintaining acceptable contractual requirements. Force majeure Occurrences such as flood or cyclone that are out of the Aurizon Network’s control can greatly affect the planned maintenance of the asset. Upcoming capital Assets identified and approaching replacement/renewal may be maintained to a expenditure lower degree, whilst maintaining acceptable contractual requirements. Capacity/design Asset maintenance is provisioned for the appropriate purpose or design scope. scope Overloading of wagons, under maintained above rail infrastructure or combinations of increased axle load and speeds of trains increase the maintenance task. Cost allocation Maintenance of assets elements are relative to the allocated budget, and many external factors can fluctuate the cost of maintenance, such as accessibility, general seasonal weather, an ageing asset base, inaccurate life cycle cost calculation, the above rail infrastructure condition and reactive vs. cyclic maintenance. Associated work Reactive spot maintenance on the asset is not always possible and must be coordination coordinated with other associated works. sequences Possession Barriers to entry for maintenance plant and procurement times for plant and planning and equipment influence the maintenance task. availability of plant Commercial risk Track access for maintenance is contracted with the above rail operator and individual mine owners. Type of asset Some components may become obselete and continual maintenance on these components is not always necessary or economically optimal. Similarly, sometimes it is more cost-effective to adopt a run-to-failure strategy for cheap equipment for which failure is easy to detect and which has no effect on the production process, i.e. no health, safety or environmental impacts3. Criticality of asset Where there are alternative routes or track to be utilised, maintenance is able to be delayed, if this maintenance does not coordinate with planned work sequences. Asset Management Systems 27

3.2.1.1 Key Performance 3.2.2 External Considerations and Indicators (KPI) Factors

Evans & Peck identified KPIs as the principal The purpose of maintenance and maintenance indicators to be used to review the asset management is to maximise the production management performance. system availability at minimum costs, by reducing the probability of equipment or A large number of performance indicators, system breakdowns4. The business risk for the including lagging and leading indicators, were infrastructure manager comes into picture required to monitor the implementation and due to non-availability of track or poor track effectiveness of the entire asset management performance5. Whilst reviewing the condition system and the overall asset performance. of the CQCN, it is valuable to acknowledge and analyse not only the uniqueness of the heavy 3.2.1.2 Lagging Indicators haul railway networks consistently high axle loads, narrow gauge construction and partial Lagging indicators were identified from reactive electrification, but also commercial decisions monitoring. Reactive monitoring comprises and climatic influence that have large bearing on structured responses to an indication of a maintenance decisions. deficiency or failure of the asset management system, assets or asset systems. Table 3.2 provides some preliminary context to be considered during the analysis.

3.2.1.3 Leading Indicators Additionally, whilst reviewing the condition of the Below Rail asset, it is important to system wide Leading indicators were identified from proactive interaction and influences understand that this monitoring. Proactive monitoring should be asset is part of a pit to port operations. carried out to determine whether:

•• The asset management system is being operated as intended (i.e. asset management objectives, targets and plans have been set and are achieved) •• The assets and asset systems are functioning as required •• Asset management plans, operational control criteria and applicable legislation, regulatory, statutory, and other asset management requirements are being complied with.

3. Thomas Åhrén, ‘Maintenance Performance Indicators (MPIs) for Railway Infrastructure : Identification and Analysis for Improvement’, 2008.

4. T. M Husband, ‘Maintenance Management and Terotechnology’, 1976.

5. Ulla Espling, ‘Maintenance Strategy for a Railway Infrastructure in a R egulated Environment’, 2007. Figure 3.2 shows the factors that and influence on From Figure 3.2 the top five influences on delays the rail systems performance and delays. in order of impact are:

Below rail factors combined account for 22.2% •• Rolling stock of delays. •• Loading •• Signalling •• Network planning •• Overhead traction wire equipment.

Figure 3.2: ViziRail total reported delays for FY 2012

Signalling 12.8% Other 0.8%

Network Operations 3.2% Total Below Overhead Traction Uncontrolled Event 4.1% Rail Impact Wire Equipment 5.5% 22.2% Train Crewing 5.2% Permanent Way 3.9% Safety Incident/Accident 5.6%

Network Planning 11.7% Rollingstock 32.9%

Loading 14.3%

3.3 Capital Works Gross tonne kilometres (GTK) remain the predominant driver of renewal and maintenance activities. 3.3.1 Asset Renewal Predicted increases in corridor tonnages will Determining the most appropriate balance require more renewal and maintenance activities between investment in asset renewals and to be delivered in the same or fewer closure maintenance is critical to effective asset periods. As described above, renewals investment management. Efficient asset management strategy is not assessed in isolation but within the context involves optimising the timing of renewals of the overall asset management strategy, in order to minimise expensive corrective including maintenance expenditure. maintenance and/or avoid the consequences of early failure subsequently minimising whole of life Evans & Peck has been provided with historic costs. and forecast renewals and expenditures and have identified the following confirmed and unconfirmed renewals projects for consideration in FY 2013 and FY 2014. Asset Management Systems 29

Table 3.3: Trade-off between renewals and maintenance expenditure

High maintenance and deferred renewals High renewals and lower maintenance

Advantages Deferred renewals expenditure keeps access Limits the amount of on-track time required for charges lower in the short term (although this future maintenance. will be offset by higher maintenance costs in the medium to long term). More likely to ensure the safety and integrity of the asset. This is still dependent on an appropriate maintenance regime however the asset should require less maintenance to perform at the required standard.

Reduces the vulnerability of the delivery of the maintenance program to labour shortages (and/or spikes in labour costs).

Reduces technological obsolescence as spare parts should always be readily available for new equipment. Disadvantages Deferring renewals expenditure could lead to A more significant renewals program will increase unsupported systems being relied upon due to access charges for users in the short term; however technological obsolescence. This can also have a this should be offset by lower medium to long term detrimental impact on network performance if maintenance costs. delays are experienced because spare parts aren’t available.

A more intensive maintenance regime will be difficult to implement in a capacity constrained environment. An increase in the number and/ or duration of maintenance possessions will reduce network availability and supply chain performance.

An increased requirement for maintenance in an environment where skilled labour is already scarce may adversely impact the ability to achieve the maintenance plan. Table 3.4: Potential renewal projects

Discipline Confirmed Unconfirmed

•• Newlands culvert upgrade project Track •• Concrete sleeper replacement north •• Blackwater and Goonyella System and south turnout upgrade 2 •• Culvert upgrades north and south •• Callemondah yard turnout •• Turnout replacement north and south upgrade project •• Rock slope upgrade 46.1km Moura •• Callemondah track upgrades line •• Formation renewal – Blackwater and •• Newlands scour remediation at Goonyella Systems 100.39kms •• Contingent works •• Concrete sleeper upgrade – •• Oaky creek balloon loop upgrade Newlands •• Trackside lubricators •• System turnout replacements •• Concrete sleeper upgrade •• Turnouts early supply Goonyella phase 1 •• Sandhurst Creek pier works

•• Digital track circuit upgrade Signals •• Dual telemetry •• Dual telemetry upgrade •• Weighbridges stage 2 •• Track circuit upgrades •• UPS upgrades •• Fraucher axle counter trial •• SST/HBD trials •• S1 - s2 telemetry upgrades •• Main line DED upgrades •• Mt Miller ground frames •• Front of post signal upgrades •• CSEE track circuits •• POSS points condition motors

Electrical assets •• Section insulator renewal •• Blackwater and Goonyella System traction assets •• Electrical equipment renewals (BCM works) •• Pantograph inspection equipment •• Section insulator renewals •• Switching station earth grid inspections •• Neutral section renewals •• Fault locators •• Callemondah fault and current detection •• Designated earthing points •• DBCT feeder station protection upgrades •• Motorised insulators •• Screw anchors •• Vertical insulators •• Dalrymple bay cantilevers Asset Management Systems 31

Discipline Confirmed Unconfirmed

•• Microwave resilience system •• Dr Microwave radio upgrades Tele- upgrades communications •• Ethernet to corners •• Ethernet to corner – SCADA upgrade •• Optic fibre cable upgrades •• Operational network architecture •• OF upgrades – Emerald to Tolmes •• OF upgrades – Moranbah •• Emergency works •• Battery and power supply upgrades •• Blackwater to Norwich Park MI renewal •• OF transmission network upgrades – NCL •• Radio systems upgrades •• DR finalisation with QR •• Microwave resilience upgrade

Corridor assets •• Goonyella System crew change •• CQCN public and private level crossing and stowage location upgrades •• Blackwater System crew change •• Crew change pads and stowage •• Noise mitigation •• Upgrade CQCN fencing (2012-13) •• CQCN fencing and corridor security •• Moura corridor crew change and •• Access roads stowage •• CQCN mine load out signage •• Private – QRN level crossing infrastructure

Methodology

Evans & Peck applied a rigorous methodology within the framework of ISO 55000.

This methodology used KPIs, lagging and leading indicators. These were applied within the framework of operational performance objectives.

Methodology 35

This elemental approach was supplemented by 4. Methodology site visits to establish a level of confidence in the desktop data. The element disciplines used were: 4.1 Overview •• Track •• Structures Fundamental to the methodology of this review is the understanding that prudent asset management •• Signals cannot be conducted without consideration of the agreed operational objectives of the asset and the •• Telecommunications context in which the asset or asset system operates •• Traction distribution and traction power as stipulated in the Undertaking. Consequently, supply systems. this review consisted of a detailed review of the performance of individual asset elements within a The asset condition review employed a framework of agreed operational objectives. methodology compliant with ISO 55000. In accordance with recommendations in ISO 55000, Evans & Peck, in conjunction with Aurizon the CBA provided consideration for: Network and the Authority, identified and agreed upon lagging and leading indicators to assess the •• Reactive monitoring and identification of condition of the asset. lagging indicators •• Proactive monitoring and identification of In consultation, a number of indicators were leading indicators identified. These agreed as being suitable for KPIs. Framework operational KPIs were agreed to be: •• The identification of key performance indicators aggregated from leading and lagging •• Below Rail Transit Time (BRTT) indicators •• Overall Track Condition Index (OTCI). •• Subjective, objective, qualitative and BRTT is a contractual commitment for Aurizon quantitative data Network and OTCI has Aurizon Network internal •• Effectiveness and efficiency of the asset target ranges. management system. In addition to the BRTT and OTCI targets; The Evans & Peck approach for the CBA suggested Aurizon Network also tracks at system level the following phases: Temporary Speed Restrictions (TSR). The •• Phase 1: Data collation and alignment extent of an amount of TSR can be impacted by workshops numerous factors: including construction works and weather. It should be noted that BRTT and •• Phase 2: Conduct the Initial Assessment OTCI objectives can still be achieved even if the and determine medium and high risk asset Aurizon Network internal TSR targets are not met. elements

The elemental analysis of the components and •• Phase 3: Undertake an incremental disciplines of the systems maximised the use of progressive review and monitoring process of the asset management systems already maintained ‘high’ risk elements by Aurizon Network. Individual elements were •• Phase 4: Conduct the End of Period assessed through the interrogation of data from Assessment ViziRail, FAR, RIMS, maintenance regimes, inspection results and other available information. •• Phase 5: Identify and value any deterioration. This report provides the results of Phase 2 of the Condition Based Assessment. It also facilitates discussions over the direction of Phases 3 to 5. Table 3.5: Aurizon Network document databases or systems

Document, database or Description Role system

FAR Fixed Asset Register Financial database of assets owned by Aurizon Network. RIMS Rail Infrastructure Management Asset maintenance and works management. System FRS Fault Recording Systems Fault logging, fault recording and system maintenance logging. TSMS Trackside Systems Management Maintenance task lists, maintenance scheduling System and corrective maintenance. Remedy Equipment identification Specific equipment allocation and equipment schematics/types. TEAR Track Equipment Asset Register Asset and works management. ViziRail ViziRail statistics and monitoring Enhanced rail and supply chain information, system monitoring trains daily, Network infrastructure modules. RDMS Rail Defect Management System Asset and works management.

4.2 Sequence The ALG is formed of the following representatives:

4.2.1 Stakeholder Engagement •• Evans & Peck: three representatives including the chair and secretary To facilitate stakeholder engagement, a forum (the ALG) was established at the commencement •• The Authority: two representatives of the project to enable the three directly involved •• Aurizon: two representatives. parties (Aurizon, the Authority and Evans & Peck) transparency in the Assessment. Methodology 37

The ALG Charter was developed by all parties 4.2.2 Data Collation in collaboration. The role of the ALG is further defined in the ALG Charter included in Evans & Peck obtained a comprehensive data Appendix A. The ALG Charter was collaboratively and information package from Aurizon Network. developed by the member of the ALG. All documents received were recorded and are maintained in a register by Evans & Peck. Evans & Peck facilitated alignment workshops Table 3.5 shows the databases used as part of this early in the Initial Assessment process to align all assessment. parties to the proposed assessment methodology and direction. The objectives of these workshops Data cleansing was conducted to enable more were to: accurate cross-database comparisons. This included system and RAB identification and •• Agree the objectives of the CBA process classification.

•• Agree the methodology and general framework To develop a consistent reference database, to measure and report asset condition all data was refined and analysed to enable •• Agree the application of discipline asset comparative assessment to take place. hierarchy structures Classification involved, but was not limited to: •• Align the Initial Assessment as closely •• Identification of reporting dates and periods as possible with existing monitoring and •• System identification reporting systems •• RAB ownership •• Agree the report structure (including conceptual traffic light hurdles for specific key •• Discipline and asset classification. elements) The ViziRail database was cleansed to allow for •• Formulate an assessment plan based on the the correct identification of incident location above measures. system. This was to ensure that where multiple delays were recorded on varying network systems, In total, five alignment workshops were conducted the correct location of the causing defect was with attendance from Aurizon Network, the identified. The ViziRail data was subsequently Authority and Evans & Peck representatives. discussed with Aurizon Network asset managers These workshops were: to filter misreported line items.

•• Track workshop The TSMS and RIMS databases were used for the defect/fault recording analysis. As the •• Structure workshop performance of the associated maintenance programs was assessed, accurate identification of •• Traction distribution and traction power start, programmed finish and actual finish dates supply systems workshop was necessary. •• Signals and telecommunications workshop As the databases included line items with errors, •• Summary workshop. cleansing was necessary. This was achieved through establishing that where works were ‘completed’ more than 60 days earlier than either their ‘opened’ or ‘programmed’ date, the line item was classed as a ‘Recurring Item Error’. These errors accounted for 26.2% of the data for FY 2012.

Evans & Peck identified some data integrity issues in the data bases and have identified these to Aurizon Networks. Table 3.6: Threshold rating system

Condition Description coding

Green Asset performing at or better than specified level Yellow Minor non-conformance Amber Non-conformance with associated risk Red Major non-conformance Grey Unavailable/Insufficient data

Desktop Review 4.2.3 Analysis

As part of the CBA, Evans & Peck conducted a Upon completion of the data collation, graphical desktop review of the systems, databases and representations and raw data were provided to the policies of Aurizon Network. Evans & Peck discipline teams for comment.

This review was conducted at both a system wide This data was provided for the relevant criteria and discipline specific level. The review disciplines that formed the assessment and enabled a better are as follows: understanding of the asset condition prior to the undertaking of the field verification. •• Track •• Structures 4.2.4 Field Verification

•• Signal and train control systems The field inspections were a series of spot audits •• Telecommunications systems (for each discipline) on an elemental basis to compare the actual condition against the existing •• Traction distribution and traction power recorded condition data made available for the supply systems. purposes of the assessment.

Field inspections were completed for the asset The desktop review included the examination of: disciplines during the period of 11 to 15 February •• Aurizon Network’s engineering standards and 2013. Commentary from these field inspections is Aurizon Network standard’s modules available in Appendix C. •• Systems, processes, procedures and supporting This data was then assessed against three databases used by Aurizon Network for indicators, as follows: the management and maintenance of track infrastructure •• KPIs: indicators identified by the alignment workshops as the principal indicators to be •• Available asset condition reports, audits, used to review the asset and asset management identified defects and trending information performance extracted from Aurizon Network systems and databases •• Lagging indicators: indicators identified that provide data about incidents and/or failures •• Maintenance works undertaken on Below of the asset management systems or the Rail infrastructure, and planned versus actual performance of an asset performed works •• Leading indicators: indicators identified that •• Key work programs for the infrastructure provide data about potential non-compliance •• Planned versus actual performed renewals. with the performance requirements of the asset management systems, assets or indicators, including the KPIs. Methodology 39

The KPIs and lagging indicators were then Table 3.7 describes the KPIs and lagging assessed against a threshold rating system, indicators used for each discipline for the purpose enabling the identification of ‘medium’ and ‘high’ of the CBA, along with the relevant threshold risk elements and identification of potential targets for each indicator. deterioration above what would otherwise be expected.

Table 3.7: KPIs and lagging indicators

KPI or Threshold targets indicator description Green Yellow Amber Red Operational KPI KPIs BRTT 0 months above BRTT 1-2 months above 3-6 months above BRTT More than six months BRTT above BRTT Lagging Indicators TSR >98% of days achieving >90% of days achieving >80% of days achieving <80% of days designated speed designated speed designated speed achieving designated restriction targets restriction targets restriction targets speed restriction targets OTCI OTCI lower than OTCI in median to OTCI in median to OTCI above upper median threshold upper range and upper range and threshold trending downwards trending upwards Track KPIs Normalised Track contribution of Track contribution Track contribution Track contribution of delay <2,000 minutes/1000 of 2, 000 - 4,000 of 4,000 - 6,000 >6,000 minutes/1000 MNTK minutes/1000 MNTK minutes/1000 MNTK MNTK Lagging indicators Average A decrease or no 10% increase in 20% increase in average 30% increase in defects per increase in average average defects per defects per month per average defects per month/track defects per month per month per track km track km as compared month per track km kilometre track km as compared as compared to Initial to Initial Assessment as compared to Initial to Initial Assessment Assessment Assessment Site inspection >70% of sites identified 50-70% of sites 30-50% of sites <30% of sites – Physical as in ‘good’ condition identified as in ‘good’ identified as in ‘good’ identified as in ‘good’ defect condition condition condition identification KPI or Threshold targets indicator description Green Yellow Amber Red Structures KPIs

Bridges and <10 cancellation due to <15 cancellation due to <20 cancellations due to More than 20 culverts. Train structures structures structures cancellations due to cancellations structures for a single structure (bridge or culvert) Bridges and Structures contribution Structures contribution Structures contribution Structures culverts. Total of <360 minutes delay of <480 minutes delay of <600 minutes delay contribution of >600 delay minutes for a single service for a single service for a single service minutes delay for a for a single single service service Lagging indicators Bridges and All assets >15 years <50% of assets with >50% of assets with less >10% of all assets with culverts: Asset remaining book life less than 15 years than 15 years remaining less than three years age remaining book life book life remaining book life Bridges and >50% of structures >50% of structures >50% of structures >50% of structures culverts: inspections on time or inspections <30 days inspections <60 days inspections >60 days Inspection early late late late work orders Bridges and >50% of structures >50% of structures >50% of structures >50% of structures culverts: maintenance on time maintenance <30 days maintenance <60 days maintenance >60 days Maintenance or early late late late work orders Traction distribution and traction power supply systems KPIs Traction Traction distribution Traction distribution Traction distribution Traction distribution distribution – contribution of <4500 contribution of 4500 - contribution of 6750 - contribution of >9000 delay minutes/ minutes/GNTK 6750 minutes/GNTK 9000 minutes/GNTK minutes/GNTK net tonne kilometre (GNTK) Dewirements <12 dewirements 13-15 dewirements 16-20 dewirements >20 dewirements Traction Traction power supply Traction power supply Traction power supply Traction power supply power supply system’s contribution system’s contribution system’s contribution system’s contribution system’s – of <4500 minutes/ of 4500-6750 minutes/ of 6750-9000 minutes/ of >9000 minutes/ delay minutes/ GNTK GNTK GNTK GNTK net tonne kilometre (GNTK) Methodology 41

KPI or Threshold targets indicator description Green Yellow Amber Red Traction <10% of Transformer 10-15% of Transformer 15-25% of Transformer >25% of Transformer power supply oil tests give exceptions oil tests give exceptions oil tests give exceptions oil tests give systems: exceptions Transformer oil test exceptions Traction <10% of AT oil tests 10-15% of AT oil tests 15-25% of AT oil tests >25% of AT oil tests power supply give exceptions give exceptions give exceptions give exceptions systems: AT oil test exceptions Lagging indicators Traction <10% of sites 10-15% of sites <5-25% of sites >20% of sites distribution – inspected with serious inspected with serious inspected with serious inspected with serious site inspection defects or with defects or with defects or with defects or with – physical urgent maintenance urgent maintenance urgent maintenance urgent maintenance defect requirements requirements requirements requirements identification Traction <10% of sites 10-15% of sites 15-20% of sites >20% of sites power supply inspected with serious inspected with serious inspected with serious inspected with serious system’s – site defects or with defects or with defects or with defects or with inspection – urgent maintenance urgent maintenance urgent maintenance urgent maintenance physical defect requirements requirements requirements requirements identification Signals KPIs Normalised Signalling contribution Signalling contribution Signalling contribution Signalling contribution delay of <7,500 minutes/ of 7,500-15,000 of 15,000-20,000 of >20,000 minutes/ GNTK minutes/GNTK minutes/GNTK GNTK Lagging indicators Average faults No increase in average 0-10% increase in 10-20% increase in 20-30% increase in per month per faults per month per average faults per average faults per average faults per track kilometre track km as compared month per track km month per track km month per track km to Initial Assessment as compared to Initial as compared to Initial as compared to Initial Assessment Assessment Assessment Telecommunications KPIs Percentage Telecommunications Telecommunications Telecommunications Telecommunications delay minutes contribution of <200 contribution of 200- contribution of 400-600 contribution of >600 minutes/GNTK 400 minutes/GNTK minutes/GNTK minutes/GNTK Lagging indicators Average faults Decrease or no 0-10% increase in 10-20% increase in 20-30% increase in per month increase in average average faults per average faults per average faults per faults per month as month as compared to month as compared to month as compared to compared to Initial Initial Assessment Initial Assessment Initial Assessment Assessment For the purpose of the Initial Assessment, only a Table 3.8 details the leading indicators used for qualitative assessment of the leading indicators qualitative assessment as part of this Assessment. was conducted, to provide a baseline reference for future assessments. Identification of any threshold values has not been made as part of this assessment.

Table 3.8: Leading indicators

Leading indicator Description

Operational KPI Train path allocations Discusses any change in the number of train path allocations and utilisation rates for the reporting period. Maintenance train path Discusses any change in the number of train paths allocated for the allocation purpose of planned or unplanned maintenance. Track Scheduled maintenance Discusses the performance of the preventative maintenance program. program performance OTCI performance Discusses trends and data of the OTCI. Provides discussion over condition of the asset based upon this index. Structures Scheduled inspections Discusses scheduled inspections as a ratio of asset quantity. Also provides commentary on open vs. closed inspections Closed vs. open maintenance Discusses scheduled maintenance with particular reference to closed orders vs. open maintenance orders. Also provides comment upon total defects against asset quantity. Total open maintenance orders Discusses the total open defects. Methodology 43

Leading indicator Description

Traction distribution and traction power supply systems Corrective work orders Discusses the trends (if any) and the distribution of corrective work orders over the reporting period. Preventative maintenance Discusses the data provided upon the closure of preventative system maintenance work orders through the reporting period. Contact wire and catenary wire Discusses the contact wire and catenary wire replacement policy replacement policy qualitatively. Masts, cantilever rods and Discusses findings from the desktop study and field inspections gantries regarding the expected life of these assets. Feeder and earth wire Discusses findings from the desktop study and field inspections condition regarding the expected life of these assets. Traction power supply system’s Discusses the replacement/refurbishment policy for the traction power renewal and refurbishment supply assets in the CQCN. Transformer refurbishment Discusses the transformer refurbishment program, and the expected program results to the asset condition. AT refurbishment program Discusses the AT condition status qualitatively at the end of the reporting period. Motorised and manual Discusses the expected life of the motorised and manual isolators, isolators based upon field inspections and the desktop study. Neutral section insulators Discusses the replacement program of the neutral section insulators. Switchgear and circuit Discusses the asset condition of the switchgear and circuit breakers on breakers the network. Harmonic filters Discusses the asset condition and any issues of the Harmonic Filters on the network. Signals Preventative maintenance Discusses the performance of the preventative maintenance program. program Corrective maintenance Discusses the performance of the corrective maintenance program. program Telecommunications Preventative maintenance Discusses the performance of the preventative maintenance program. program Corrective maintenance Discusses the performance of the corrective maintenance program. program

Findings

Evans & Peck have developed a simple and effective comprehensive traffic light system based on KPIs, lagging and leading indicators.

The asset condition has been reported as the consolidated CQCN and as individual systems: Newlands, Goonyella, Blackwater and Moura. 5. Findings Signals Delay Signalling and train control systems are responsible for 18.29% of delays on the Newlands 5.1 CQCN Overall Performance System. While this contributes to the majority of Below Rail delays, it is important to consider Table 5.1 summarises the CQCN overall the overall impact on system performance performance. when considering other causes of delays. For example, rolling-stock reported 21.68% of delays Evans & Peck assess that green and yellow and loading delays contributed to 32.08%. The indications are an acceptable operating range Newlands System signalling delay was above the and that red and orange indicators warrant some CQCN average of 12.84%. Upon further analysis commentary. of the ViziRail database, a peak in delays recorded in December 2011 was attributable to a major Grey indicators apply to aspects that either could level crossing protection issue causing a 2,637 not be assessed due to information limitations, minute delay. The amber allocation results from don’t apply or are relative indicators which require the normalised delay due to signals of 18,223 the End of Period Assessment to be completed. minutes/GNTK. Culvert Inspections on GAPE 5.2 Newlands System The amber allocation to the inspection lag for culverts on GAPE was attributed to all inspections Summary occurring between 30 and 60 days late. The Newlands System status is summarised on Table 5.2. The asset status of GAPE is summarised Grey Indicators on Table 5.3. Structures Maintenance The grey allocation to the maintenance lag Red Lights indicator for both bridges and culverts was There were no red lights on the Newlands System. attributed to the large number of open defects at the end of the analysis period. Evans & Peck is unsure if these defects have been inspected and Amber Lights the dates pushed out to reflect the periodic nature Below Rail Transit Time of structure defect maintenance, or if the defects are being monitored before maintenance and the The Newlands System operated through FY 2012 defects being postponed. with three months in excess of the BRTT target (July 2011, August 2011 and December 2011) of Monthly Defects 124%; factors that may have influenced this are The lagging indicator of monthly defects recovery works from the 2011 wet season and is recorded as grey for track, signals, and GAPE construction works. telecommunications. This is to reflect that the defects have been measured as a baseline for There have been no periods of exceeding the BRTT future comparison. post January 2012. Findings 47

5.3 Goonyella System Autotransformer Oil on Goonyella (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) Summary (Electric) In FY 2012 there were 169 oil tests done for the The Goonyella System status is summarised on Goonyella System (Electric) ATs. 114 different Table 5.4. ATs have been tested with 55 being tested twice. This shows that Aurizon Network is increasing Red Lights the testing frequency where required in order to prioritise AT renewal. The testing program is Signals Delay on Goonyella (Vermont) comprehensive in term of coverage of all the ATs. Overall, the signals and train control system is This is good asset management practice. responsible for 39.13% of delays on the Goonyella System (Vermont). When normalised, signals and 21% of ATs have poor oil test results either due train control assets resulted in 37,645 minutes to high Dissolved Gas Analysis (DGA) results, of delay/NTK and are allocated a red rating. high moisture or low dielectric strength. In terms Upon further analysis of the ViziRail database, of the KPI this results in a yellow rating result. it was found that over 75% of the delay minutes Whilst this is not desirable, it must be noted that (1,766 of 2,334 minutes) were attributable to Aurizon Network is dealing with an end of life the lost detection of the 7A/B points (Saraji and condition within budgetary constraints whilst mainline turnout to Lake Vermont). It appeared still maintaining high levels of reliability. There that some of these faults were attributable to is significant redundancy in the 50/25 kV feeding defective or blown fuses, which may be linked system in that failure of a single AT does not to power fluctuations that caused issues with translate to significant train delays or service other points on the system, indicating possible interruption. Aurizon Network must be diligent issues in the underlying power system. Evans with further execution of the AT replacements & Peck recommend further investigations to be as dictated by condition. Analysis of the testing undertaken to ascertain the underlying cause and regime for FY 2012 shows that there has indeed develop possible rectification solutions. been good compliance with the oil testing program.

Amber Lights Aurizon Network has a program to replace the ATs Bridge Delays on Goonyella (including based on condition. The original ATs are 25 years Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) (Electric) old, having predominantly been purchased in 19856. Normally this type of transformer would The amber allocation to bridge delays was have a nominal 40 year life span; however in attributed to incident IR12-06507 (26 June 2012) this case it is generally accepted that there was resulting in 486 minutes delay to service J06M a design fault which has resulted in a reduced resulting in an amber allocation. Whilst viewed lifetime. The reduced lifetime is considered to be as a substantial incident delay, the above incident 25 years. was the only bridge incident causing delay on the Goonyella System (including Hail Creek and excluding Vermont) during FY 2012 and forms less than 1% of system delays.

6. Aurizon Network Strategic Asset Plan 30.1.2012. Grey Indicators 5.4 Blackwater System Structures Maintenance Goonyella (including Hail Creek and excluding Summary Vermont) The Blackwater System status is summarised on The grey allocation to the maintenance lag Table 5.5. indicator for culverts was attributed to the large number of open defects at the end of the analysis Red Lights period. It is unsure if these defects have been inspected and the dates pushed out to reflect the Temporary Speed Restrictions periodic nature of structure defect maintenance, Through FY 2012, the Blackwater System had or if the defects are being monitored before high levels of imposed speed restrictions, with maintenance and the defects being postponed. the system often above the TSR threshold. Bridge Cancellations, Delays and This suggests that there were high levels of Inspections/Maintenance on Goonyella maintenance activities or line sections awaiting (Vermont) maintenance. 40.7% of days were found to be above the threshold value. There are no bridges in this part of the CQCN. Structures Maintenance on Goonyella Amber Lights (Vermont) Structures Asset Age on Blackwater The grey allocation to the maintenance lag (Rolleston) indicator for both bridges and culverts was attributed to the absence of structures defects. The amber allocation to bridge and culvert ages reflects the remaining book life of all structures on Transformer Oil on Goonyella (Vermont) Blackwater (Rolleston) being less than 15 years. (Electric) Bridge and Culvert Inspections There are no transformers on Goonyella System (Vermont) (Electric). The amber allocation to bridge inspections reflects all inspections occurring between 30 and 60 days Autotransformer Oil Goonyella (Vermont) late. (Electric) Bridge Inspections on Blackwater The Goonyella System (Vermont) (Electric) is a (Minerva) 14 km single track 50/25 kV spur line with two ATs. There are oil test records for the AT located The amber allocation to bridge inspections reflects at the TCU. The oil analysis results for this AT the majority of inspections being completed were excellent. The other AT which is located at between 30 and 60 days late. The magnitude of 11 km does not have any recorded results. inspections (11) on Blackwater (Minerva) is small compared to other asset bases and as all bridges Both ATs were put into service in 2009. It would on Minerva are timber, they abide by a separate be very unlikely that this age that this AT would inspection regime with outsourced maintenance. generate any oil test exceptions, nevertheless the fact that there is no result for 50% of the Culvert Asset Age on Blackwater equipment makes it difficult to be certain (Minerva) over allocating a rating and hence the grey The amber allocation to the asset ages of culverts determination and should be rectified. reflects that the majority of culverts have between 3 and 15 years remaining book life. These structures are seen as low risk due to the tonnage associated with Minerva. Findings 49

Culvert Inspections 5.5 Moura System Blackwater (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) Summary Culvert inspection statistics for the Blackwater The Moura System status is summarised on System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) were Table 5.6. average and resulted in an Amber rating, with 243 inspections on time or within 30 days of program Red Lights and 551 over 30 days late. There are no red lights on the Moura System. Grey Indications Structures Maintenance on Blackwater Amber Lights (Minerva) and Blackwater (Rolleston) Overall Track Condition Index The grey allocation to the maintenance lag In FY 2012, the Moura System has had notable indicator for both bridges and culverts was fluctuations in OTCI, peaking at the end of Q4 attributed to the large number of open defects at FY 2012. While above average rainfall in the Q3 the end of the analysis period. It is unsure if these may contribute to this subsequent worsening in defects have been inspected and the dates pushed track condition. It is important to note that the out to reflect the periodic nature of structure Moura System records a higher OTCI score than defect maintenance, or if the defects are being other systems due to the black soil base, which monitored before maintenance and the defects negatively affects the track foundations7. The being postponed. OTCI is shown to be in the medium maintenance band and trending upwards resulting in an amber classification. Moura Culvert Asset Age The amber allocation to the asset age of culverts reflects that the majority of culverts have between 3 and 15 years remaining book life. Depending on forecast utilisation and capital projects, the culverts may require renewal. It is important to note than during the analysis period, culverts on Moura did not result in any delays or cancellations.

Grey Indicators Structures Maintenance The grey allocation to the maintenance lag indicators for both bridges and culverts was attributed to the large number of open defects at the end of the analysis period. It is unsure if these defects have been inspected and the dates pushed out to reflect the periodic nature of structure defect maintenance, or if the defects are being monitored before maintenance and the defects being postponed.

7. 2009/2010 Maintenance Cost Report p11. Table 5.1: CQCN asset performance dashboard

Operational KPI Aurizon internal indicators and controls Aurizon internal indicators and controls System BRTT OTCI TSR RAB Component Discipline KPI Track Delay – A: 3,553 minutes/billion NTK T: <2,000 minutes/billion NTK Bridge Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 Culvert Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 Civil structures Newlands Bridge Delays – A: 0 minutes T: <360 minutes Culvert Delays –A: 22 minutes T: <360 minutes Signals and train control systems Delay – A: 18,223 minutes/billion NTK T: <7,500 minutes/billion NTK BRTT: 3 month above BRTT OTCI - overall good TSR - A: 94% below target Telecommunications Delay – A:160 minutes/billion NTK T: <200 minutes/billion NTK Newlands Note: prior to increase to 160% after condition T: >98% below target Track Delay – A: 627 minutes/billion NTK T: <2,000 minutes/billion NTK GAPE completion Bridge Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 Culvert Cancellations – A:0 T: <10 Civil structures GAPE Bridge Delays – A: 0 minutes T: <360 minutes Culvert Delays – A: 0 minutes T: <360 minutes Signals and train control systems Delay – A: 2636 minutes/billion NTK T:<7,500 minutes/billion NTK Telecommunications Delay – A: 0 T: <200 GNTK Track Delay – A:2,092 minutes/billion NTK T: <2,000 minutes/billion NTK Bridge Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 Culvert Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 Goonyella (including Hail Creek, excluding Civil structures Bridge Delays – A: 486 minutes T: <360 minutes Culvert Delays – A: 0 minutes T: <360 minutes Vermont) Signals and train control systems Delay – A: 7,904 minutes/billion NTK T: <7,500 minutes/billion NTK Telecommunications Delay – A: 470 minutes/billion NTK T:<200 minutes/billion NTK Track Delay – A: 1,790 minutes/billion NTK T: <2,000 minutes/billion NTK Bridge Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 Culvert Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 Civil structures OTCI - overall good TSR – A:98% below target Goonyella (Vermont) Bridge Delays – A: 0 minutes T: <360 minutes Culvert Delays – A: 0 minutes T: <360 minutes Goonyella BRTT: 1 month above BRTT condition T: >98% below target Signals and train control systems Delay – A: 37,645 minutes/billion NTKT:<7,500 minutes/billion NTK Telecommunications Delay – A: 0% T:<200 minutes/billion NTK Delay – 0 minutes T: <4,500 minutes/billion NTK Traction distribution Goonyella (Vermont) (Electric) Dewirement – 0 Traction power supply Delay – A:6,677 minutes/billion NTK T: <4,500 minutes/billion NTK Delay – 2,725 min/billion NTK T: <4,500 minutes/billion NTK Goonyella (including Hail Creek, excluding Traction distribution Dewirement – A: 6 T:<12 Vermont) (Electric) Traction power supply Delay - A: 1065 min/billion NTK T: <4,500 minutes / billion NTK Track Delay – A: 2,658 T: <2,000 minutes/billion NTK Bridge Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 Culvert cancellations – A: 15 T: <10 Civil structures Blackwater (excluding Rolleston & Minerva) Bridge Delays – A: 0 minutes T: <360 minutes Culvert Delays – A: 181 minutes T: <360 minutes Signals and train control systems Delay – A: 6839 T: <7,500 minutes/billion NTK Telecommunications Delay – A: 43 T:<200 minutes /billion NTK Track Delay – A: 284 T: <2,000 minutes/billion NTK Bridge Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 Culvert Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 Civil structures Blackwater (Rolleston) Bridge Delays – A: 0 minutes T: <360 minutes Culvert Delays – A: 0 minutes T: <360 minutes

OTCI - overall good TSR – A: 59% below target Signals and train control systems Delay – A: 3,540 T:<7,500 minutes/billion NTK Blackwater BRTT: 0 months above BRTT condition T: >98% below target Telecommunications Delay – A: 0 minutes/billion NTK T:<200 minutes/billion NTK Track Delay – A: 0 T: <2,000 minutes/billion NTK Bridge Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 Culvert Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 Civil structures Blackwater (Minerva) Bridge Delays – A: 0 min T: <360 minutes Culvert Delays – A: 0 minutes T: <360 minutes Signals and train control systems Delay – A: 1,151 T: <7,500 minutes/billion NTK Telecommunications Delay – A: 0 minutes/billion NTK T: <200 minutes/billion NTK Delay – A: 3,607 minutes/billion NTKT: <4,500 minutes/billion NTK Blackwater (excluding Rolleston & Minerva) Traction distribution Dewirement – A: 12 T: <12 (Electric) Traction power supply Delay – A:1,264minutes/billion NTK T:4,500 minutes/billion NTK Track Delay – A: 645 minutes/billion NTK T: <2,000 minutes/billion NTK Bridge Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 Culvert Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 OTCI – above median TSR: A: 100% below target Civil structures Moura BRTT: 0 months above BRTT threshold trending Moura Bridge Delays – A: 0 minutes T: <360 min Culvert Delays – A: 0 T:<10 T: >98% below target upwards Signal and train control systems Delay – A: 4,621 minutes/billion NTK T: <7,500 minutes/billion NTK Telecommunications Delay – A: 40 minutes/billion NTK T: <200 minutes/billion NTK A: Actual, T: Target, RBL: Remaining Book Life Findings 51

RAB Component Discipline KPI Lagging Indicators Leading Indicators

• Corrective maintenance closure rates are good, with less than 2% of Inspection defects: A: defect closed occurring more than 30 days late Track Delay – A: 3,553 minutes/billion NTK T: <2,000 minutes/billion NTK Monthly defects OTCI indicates excellent track condition. Closer Inspection found all 20.8% T: <30% mainline sections to be in excellent condition. One mine spur above the median threshold during the reporting period. Bridge RBL: 100% >15 yrs Culvert RBL: 100% >15 yrs • Culverts have been braced to allow for increased axle loads. Further Bridge Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 Culvert Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 investigation of these culverts is necessary. Capital replacement may be necessary. Bridge Inspect:100% <30d Culvert Inspect: 97% <30d late Civil structures late Maintenance on time performance is inconclusive and requires Bridge Delays – A: 0 minutes T: <360 Culvert Delays –A: 22 minutes T: <360 addressing. minutes minutes Bridge Maintenance: data Culvert Maintenance: data The proportion of open to closed defects is of concern and suggests a Newlands inconclusive inconclusive systemic issue in recording. • 92.4% completion of preventative maintenance work orders, compared against the KPI of 95%. Signals and train Delay – A: 18,223 minutes/billion NTK T: <7,500 minutes/billion NTK Monthly defects 85% on time completion of corrective maintenance work orders, control systems against the KPI of 95%. Less than 5% completed more than six days late. • 63.2% of work orders were completed less than 30 days late from the programmed date, with 20.9% of these completed on time or early. Telecommunications Delay - A:160 minutes/billion NTK T: <200 minutes/billion NTK Monthly defects Further, 30.0% were between 30-60 days late, and 6.8% greater than 60 days late. • Corrective maintenance closure rates are good, with 100% closed on time or early. Inspection defects: No auditing was conducted Track Delay – A: 627 minutes/billion NTK T: <2,000 minutes/billion NTK • OTCI indicates excellent track condition. Line sections were reported below the lower threshold. Bridge RBL: 100% >15 yrs Culvert RBL: 100% >15 yrs Bridge Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 Culvert Cancellations – A:0 T: <10 Bridge Inspect:100% <30d Culvert Inspect: 100% 30d – 60d • There are a low number of open defects with sufficient inspections Civil structures late late occurring. Bridge Delays – A: 0 minutes T: <360 Culvert Delays – A: 0 minutes T: <360 minutes minutes Bridge Maintenance: data Culvert Maintenance: data GAPE inconclusive inconclusive • 79.7% completion of preventative maintenance work orders, compared against the KPI of 95%. Signals and train Delay – A: 2636 minutes/billion NTK T:<7,500 minutes/billion NTK Monthly defects 77% on time completion of corrective maintenance work orders, control systems against the KPI of 95%. 7.7% of work orders completed more than six days late. • 20.0% of work orders were completed less than 30 days late from the programmed date; however, none were completed on time or early. Telecommunications Delay - A: 0 T: <200 GNTK Monthly defects Further, 53.3% were between 30-60 days late, and 26.7% greater than 60 days late. A: Actual, T: Target, RBL: Remaining Book Life Findings 53

RAB Component Discipline KPI Lagging Indicators Leading Indicators

Inspection defects: A: 11.9% T: • OTCI index indicates an overall good track condition. 48% on time Track Delay – A:2,092 minutes/billion NTK T: <2,000 minutes/billion NTK <30% Monthly Defects closure of defects, 11% 0-30 days late. 37% recurring. Bridge RBL: 100% >15 yrs Culvert RBL: 100% >15 yrs • Bridge inspections quantities have occurred above CESS Bridge Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 Culvert Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 requirements with culvert inspections in line with CESS Bridge Inspect: 86% 30 – 60d Culvert Inspect: 73% <30d late requirements. This is shown by the ‘closed inspections/asset Civil structures late quantity’ column showing results greater than 0.5 and indicating Goonyella Bridge Delays – A: 486 minutes T: trending to an inspection period less than 2 years. The proportion (including Hail <360 minutes Culvert Delays – A: 0 minutes T: <360 minutes Bridge Maintenance: data Culvert Maintenance: data of open to closed defects for both bridges and culverts is Creek, excluding inconclusive inconclusive concerning. Vermont) • 72% completion of closed preventative maintenance tasks. All Delay – A: 7,904 minutes/billion NTK T: <7,500 minutes/billion NTK Monthly defects corrective maintenance work orders are for future periods. 86% on Signals and train time completion of corrective faults, 6% 6 or more days late. control systems Telecommunications • 41% completion of closed preventative maintenance tasks. All Delay - A: 470 minutes/billion NTK T:<200 minutes/billion NTK Monthly defects corrective maintenance work orders are for future periods (4). 75% completion of corrective faults on time, 11% 6 or more days late. Inspection defects: A: 0% • OTCI index indicating a track below the low threshold, indicating Track Delay – A:1790 minutes/billion NTK T: <2,000 minutes/billion NTK Monthly defects good track quality. As expected due to asset age. 44% on-time T: <30% closure of defects; 56% recurring. Bridge RBL: 100% > 15 yrs Culvert RBL: 100% >15 yrs Bridge Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 Culvert Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 • No inspections were carried out during FY 2012 on Goonyella Bridge Inspect: N/A Culvert Inspect: 100% on time Civil structures System (Vermont). This does not indicate non-conformance with CESS however would require all structures to be inspected in the Bridge Delays – A: 0 minutes T: Culvert Delays – A: 0 minutes T: <360 minutes Bridge Maintenance: data Culvert Maintenance: data Goonyella <360 minutes inconclusive inconclusive following FY. (Vermont) • Poor (63%) completion rate of preventative maintenance tasks. No Delay – A: 37,645 minutes/billion NTKT:<7,500 minutes/billion NTK Monthly defects corrective maintenance tasks recorded. 73% on time performance Signals and train for corrective faults. 14% (3) faults rectified 6 or more days late. control systems • Very poor completion of telecommunication system preventative Telecommunications maintenance (18%). (2 done and closed; 9 not done and closed). Delay - A: 0% T:<200 minutes/billion NTK Monthly defects No corrective maintenance recorded. 1 corrective fault repaired on time (100%). Delay – 0 minutes T: <4,500 minutes/billion NTK Traction distribution • See commentary from Goonyella Electric. Assets in this system are Inspection defects A:5% T:10% new and are expected to be in good condition. Dewirement - 0 Goonyella (Vermont) Transformer Oil – no feeder transformers (Electric) • See commentary from Goonyella Electric. Assets in this system are Traction power supply Delay – A:6,677 minutes/billion NTK T: <4,500 minutes/billion NTK Autotransformer Oil – inconclusive new and are expected to be in good condition. Inspection defects A:5% T:20%

Delay - 2,725 min/billion NTK T: <4,500 minutes/billion NTK • Earth wires are suffering a large number of fatigue failures at the mast clamps. • The earth wire breakages are an issue. A new clamp with a design which reduces the stress levels is being introduced. Aurizon Traction distribution Inspection defects A:5% T:10% Network’s response to this issue is satisfactory. Wires are made Goonyella Dewirement – A: 6 T:<12 from an aluminium alloy. Expected life of 60 years. (including Hail • Cantilever rods and gantries are only single dip plated. Rust is Creek, excluding appearing on surface near coastal environments. Shorter life span Vermont) (Electric) than booklife expected.

Transformer Oil: A: 5% T: <10% • 91% of preventative maintenance carried out. High number of future work orders. 159 units are required to be replaced in the next Traction power supply Delay - A: 1065 min/billion NTK T: <4,500 minutes / billion NTK Autotransformer Oil: A: 21% T: <10% 5 years. Further investigation needed over expected lifespan of Inspection defects A:15% T:10% assets. Most asset book life spans are conservative.

A: Actual, T: Target, RBL: Remaining Book Life Findings 55

RAB Component Discipline KPI Lagging Indicators Leading Indicators

A: Actual, T: Target, RBL: Remaining Book Life Table 5.5: Blackwater System summary

RAB Component Discipline KPI Lagging Indicators Leading Indicators

Inspection defects: A: 11.1% • 36% of defects had been closed out by the programmed date Track Delay – A: 2,658 T: <2,000 minutes/billion NTK T: <30% Monthly defects or earlier and 13% were closed out within 30 days. Bridge RBL: 96% > 15 yrs Culvert RBL: 98% >15 yrs Bridge Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 Culvert cancellations – A: 15 T: <10 • Inspection quantities for both bridges and culverts were in Culvert Inspect: 84% 30d – 60d Civil structures Bridge Inspect: 74% <30d late late line or greater than requirements of CESS. The proportion Bridge Delays – A: 0 minutes T: <360 Culvert Delays – A: 181 minutes T: <360 of open defects to closed defects indicates reporting Blackwater minutes minutes Bridge Maintenance: data Culvert Maintenance: data miscommunication. (excluding inconclusive inconclusive Rolleston & • 90.5% of preventative work orders were completed compared Minerva) Signals and train to the KPI of 95%, falling below the target. Potential to cause control systems Delay - A: 6839 T: <7,500 minutes/billion NTK Monthly defects trending increase in the number of faults. 87.2% of corrective work orders completed early below the accepted KPI of 95%. • 73.7% of work orders were completed less than 30 days late from the programmed date, with 30.7% of these completed on Telecommunications Delay – A: 43 T:<200 minutes /billion NTK Monthly defects time or early. Further, 18.9% were between 30-60 days late, and 4.3% greater than 60 days late. • 44% of defects had been closed out by the programmed Track Delay – A: 284 T: <2,000 minutes/billion NTK Inspection defects: No site date or earlier. 12% of defects remain open, and 44% of auditing was conducted Monthly defects defects were recurring or awaiting further information for completion. Bridge RBL: 100% 3 – 15 yrs Culvert RBL: 100% 3 – 15 yrs Bridge Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 Culvert Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 • No culvert inspections were recorded during the period for Bridge Inspect: 100% 30d - 60d FY 2012. Civil structures late Culvert Inspect: data inconclusive Blackwater Bridge Delays – A: 0 minutes T: <360 Culvert Delays – A: 0 minutes T: <360 (Rolleston) minutes minutes Bridge Maintenance: data Culvert Maintenance: data inconclusive inconclusive • 88.7% of preventative work orders were completed compared to the KPI of 95%, falling below the target. Potential to cause Signals and train Delay – A: 3,540 T:<7,500 minutes/billion NTK Monthly defects trending increase in the number of faults. 46.6% of corrective control systems work orders completed early below the accepted KPI of 95%, with 34.5% completed more than 6 days late. Telecommunications Delay – A: 0 minutes/billion NTK T:<200 minutes/billion NTK Monthly defects • No comment. • 40% of defects had been closed out by the programmed date Inspection defects: No auditing or earlier and 20% within 30 days. 3% of defects remain Track Delay – A: 0 T: <2,000 minutes/billion NTK was conducted Monthly defects open, and 45% of defects were recurring or awaiting further information for completion. Bridge Cancellations –A: 0 T: <10 Culvert Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 Bridge RBL: 100% > 15 yrs Culvert RBL: 89% 3 – 15 yrs • Appropriate ratio of inspections to assets for both bridges Civil structures Bridge Inspect: 55% 30d – 60d Culvert Inspect: 100% on time and culverts. The large quantity of defects remaining open on Culvert Delays – A: 0 minutes T: <360 late bridges should be monitored. Bridge Delays – A: 0 min T: <360 minutes minutes Blackwater Bridge Maintenance: data Culvert Maintenance: data (Minerva) inconclusive inconclusive Signals and train • 60% preventative maintenance done and closed. 79% of control systems Delay – A: 1,151 T: <7,500 minutes/billion NTK Monthly defects corrective faults were on time or early.

• The Blackwater System (Minerva) currently does not have any Telecommunications assets, as per an assessment of the Telecommunications Delay – A: 0 minutes/billion NTK T: <200 minutes/billion NTK Monthly defects FAR. Although some faults have appeared in TSMS that are linked to Minerva line sections, there are no associated delay minutes associated with Telecommunications systems.

Delay – A: 3,607 minutes/billion NTK T: <4,500 minutes/billion NTK Blackwater Traction distribution Inspection defects A:5% T:10% • Earth wires are suffering a large number of fatigue failures at (excluding Dewirement – A: 12 T: <12 the mast clamps. A new clamp with a design which reduces the stress levels is being introduced. Aurizon Network’s Rolleston & Transformer Oil: A: 15% T: <10% Minerva) (Electric) response to this issue is satisfactory. Wires are made from an Traction power supply Delay - A: 1,264minutes/billion NTK T:4,500 minutes/billion NTK Autotransformer Oil - A: 15% T: <20% aluminium alloy. Expected life of 60 years. Inspection defects A:5% T:10% A: Actual, T: Target, RBL: Remaining Book Life Findings 57

RAB Component Discipline KPI Lagging Indicators Leading Indicators

• Corrective maintenance closure rates are good, with less than 2% of defect closed occurring more than 30 days late. Track Delay – A: 645 minutes/billion NTK T: <2,000 minutes/billion NTK Extent of Defects: A: 5.5% T: Monthly defects • OTCI indicates excellent track condition. Closer inspection found all <30% mainline sections to be in excellent condition. Two mine spurs recorded track conditions above the median threshold during the reporting period.

Bridge RBL: 100% > 15 yrs Culvert RBL: 70% 3 – 15 yrs Bridge Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 Culvert Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 Culvert Inspect: 77.2% on Civil structures Bridge Inspect:100% <30d late time • There is a large amount of open defects. Moura Bridge Maintenance: data Culvert Maintenance: data Bridge Delays – A: 0 minutes T: <360 min Culvert Delays– A: 0 T:<10 inconclusive inconclusive • 98.7% completion of preventative maintenance work orders, compared against the KPI of 95%. Signal and train control Delay – A: 4,621 minutes/billion NTK T: <7,500 minutes/billion NTK Monthly defects 90.2% on time completion of corrective maintenance work orders, systems against the KPI of 95%. Less than 3% completed more than six days late.

• 87.0% of work orders were completed less than 30 days late from the programmed date, with 28.2% of these completed on time or early. Telecommunications Delay – A: 40 minutes/billion NTK T: <200 minutes/billion NTK Monthly defects Further, 6.3% were between 30-60 days late, and 4.6% greater than 60 days late. A: Actual, T: Target, RBL: Remaining Book Life Findings 59

RAB Component Discipline KPI Lagging Indicators Leading Indicators

Analysis

Evans & Peck commenced with a desktop review of Aurizon systems and databases.

This review was consolidated with interviews of Aurizon asset managers. Based on the desktop review and interviews a program of field inspections was conducted. Figure 6.1: Aurizon Coal Network level crossing numbers by system9

350

300

250

200

ALCAM Score ALCAM 150

100

0 Sep- Oct- Nov Dec Jan- Feb- Mar Apr- May Jun Jul- Aug Sep- Oct- Nov Dec Jan- 11 11 -11 -11 12 12 -12 12 -12 -12 12 -12 12 12 -12 -12 13 Newlands 111 111 111 111 112 112 111 111 111 111 110 101 97 94 93 93 93 Goonyella 324 322 320 313 310 310 306 306 305 309 309 295 300 300 302 304 302 Blackwater 229 229 229 229 229 229 229 229 229 225 225 224 224 223 222 222 222 Moura 159 159 159 159 159 159 159 159 159 159 152 153 147 152 152 149 145

1000

Figure800 6.2: Comparison of ALCAM scores over FY 2012

600

400 ALCAM Score ALCAM

200

0 Jul-12 Oct-11 Sep-11 Oct-12 Dec-11 Jan-13 Jan-12 Sep-12 Feb-12 Apr-12 Nov-11 Jun-12 Dec-12 Aug-12 Nov-12 Mar-12 May-12

Sep- Oct- Nov- Dec- Jan- Feb- Mar- Apr- May- Jun- Jul- Aug- Sep- Oct- Nov- Dec- Jan- 11 11 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 13 Maximum 864 864 864 864 864 864 864 864 864 612 612 612 612 612 594 632 628 Minimum 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 32 32 Average 267 267 267 267 267 267 267 267 267 267 267 267 263 260 242 246 280 Analysis 63

•• Ballast contamination and mud holes were 6. Analysis noted in several locations; however, all districts had programmes in place for the removal of contaminated ballast and mud 6.1 CQCN Overall holes as well as ballast distribution programs •• Vegetation requires attention in all districts 6.1.1 Track and Track Structure with high rainfall having impacted on the vegetation control programs Overview of Systems and Processes •• Resurfacing programs were being completed In regards to track and track structures from a as programmed and completed to the standard network perspective Evans & Peck reviewed: required in CETS •• Further evidence was to be provided on •• The Coal System Audit Report overdue RIMS defects to ensure appropriate •• Level crossing ALCAM reviews actions have taken place within agreed timeframes. •• Compliance with CETS requirements.

In general, the audit reports indicate that the track Coal System Audit Report8 and track structure is generally being maintained in accordance with the CETS and to a satisfactory This report assesses: standard for operational requirements. However, •• Whether minimum safety standards were it is noted that the audit has recommended that achieved further evidentiary information is required on the effective management of RIMS data and •• The condition of the asset. processes. The report also offers recommendations Level Crossings ALCAM Reviews for improvement in relation to civil track infrastructure. Aurizon Network manages 763 level crossings; 160 public and 603 private level crossings. Key points from the audit report are: Figure 6.1 opposite shows the number of level •• All districts were undertaking walking crossings by system. inspections, sleeper testing and prioritising their defects as per the requirements and The standard method of measuring level crossing processes detailed in CETS risk in Australia is the Australian Level Crossing Assessment Model, or ALCAM, which allocates •• At the time of audit, reference material such as a risk rating or score to that individual crossing the track condition report in the form of RIMS based on the specific site characteristics10. was available and up to date in all districts After a major level crossing incident in 2008, •• Top and line of rail was generally in good Aurizon Network initiated a level crossing condition across the areas audited improvement program to improve the ALCAM •• No major issues in relation to sleepers or scores. The ALCAM scores for September 2011 to fasteners were identified January 2013 are shown in Figure 6.2. Over FY 2012 the highest score reduced from 864 to 612; an improvement of about 29%.

8. Asset Assurance Report 01/07/2010 to 31/12/2011, Version 1.3 Final, QR National.

9. Used with Aurizon Network permission.

10. It is generally based on the calculation: “ALCAM Risk Score = Likelihood Factor x Exposure x Consequence”; with a higher score indicating greater risk Compliance with CETS Requirements As a culvert barrel becomes fully blocked the flow path diverts to an available barrel leading to A review of the CETS requirements for monitoring accelerated flow velocities and transverse currents. rail wear and the current grinding and testing This causes erosion issues at the culvert inlet programs was completed. and may result in an undermining of the culvert This review, coupled with discussions with structure. Aurizon Network staff, provided Evans & Peck Downstream drainage path blockages and with confidence that Aurizon Network has reduced outlet capacity reduce flow through a processes in place for monitoring rail wear culvert causing silting which can lead to abrasion matched with programs for controlling rail surface and accelerated deterioration. Additionally, deterioration. These programs appear to have culverts with a large volume of silt do not allow enabled Aurizon Network to increase the amount visual assessment of the culvert and hence any of permissible rail wear and consequently extend deterioration to the concrete cannot be identified. rail life. Over time material in a culvert can compact and The FAR and the OTCI results for each of the solidify to the point where this material will not systems indicate that good maintenance practices be able to be removed by vacuum truck or by are in place. These keep the asset fit for purpose hand; requiring mechanical removal. Mechanical and can extend asset life potentially. removal has a higher risk of damage which in turn can lead to cracking in the concrete or spalling and 6.1.2 Structures increased cost of rectification.

Overview of Systems and Processes In some locations across the CQCN there are corrugated metal pipe culverts (ARMCO) which In evaluating the structures in the CQCN Evans have corroded and had a concrete floor poured & Peck reviewed maintenance programs, design on the bottom half. The concrete floor provides characteristics and monitoring systems for: resistance to abrasion whilst elongating the life of the culvert. •• Bridges Examples of propped and under capacity culverts •• Culverts. were identified. This solution reduces the During the desktop assessment and subsequent capacity of the culvert, traps more debris, creates field inspections, Evans & Peck identified issues of additional maintenance costs and the culvert inaccuracy within the RIMS database including: reinforcement is now acting outside its design criteria. Evans & Peck understand that this is •• Defects found on site without corresponding only used as a temporary measure and will be line items in RIMS confirmed at subsequent inspecitons.

•• Defects entered into RIMS with a recurring The strategy of smaller diameter plastic pipe being 11 nature inserted into the box culvert and grouted into •• Multiple descriptions to describe a similar position was also identified within the CQCN. It is defect12. assumed that hydraulic modelling for capacity was performed prior to these works as the pipes have a smaller cross section compared to the original box culvert cross section.

11. There are instances of defects in RIMS that have remained programmed for some time. Evans & Peck appreciate in many instances these structures defects may not be closed and instead monitored periodically, however the database does not differentiate between defects with a maintenance effort and a defect to monitor, and also allows for dates to be altered (‘pushed out’) without inspection. A threshold value (60 days) was established to classify likely recurring maintenance items.

12. There were many different descriptions used to describe a blocked culvert in RIMS. This unnecessarily elongates the filtered list which increases the risk that certain descriptions can be missed and the defects remain open, and not physically addressed. Analysis 65

6.1.3 Signals and Train Control It is worth noting that the largest item in Figure Systems 6.3 is “no cause found” followed by component failure. Evans & Peck understand that Aurizon In evaluating the signal and train control systems Network has a project to investigate the high in the CQCN Evans & Peck assessed: jpercentage of “no cause found” and this will be reviewed at the end of period assement. •• Fault causation Maintenance Processes •• Maintenance processes The desktop reviews found that there were issues •• Field inspection results. in the undertaking of scheduled maintenance. Asset numbers registered in the FAR varied This was highlighted by the 3 and 12 month significantly to those reported under the TSMS maintenance services found to be overdue at some database. sites. Field Inspection Results Fault Causation During the field inspections it was found that the Overall the signal and train control systems were CQCN had coal fines contamination of ballast at responsible for 12.83% of delays to the operation some locations. It is possible that contaminated of the coal network, totalling 320,503 minutes ballast could be contributing to some of the “no for the reporting period. Signals and train control cause found” faults. systems were the highest Below Rail influence on network operations.

The distribution of signal and train control systems faults is shown in Figure 6.4.

Figure 6.3: Signals – fault causation

Coal Fouling 0.5% Other 12.5% Operator Error 1.9% Rail Flow 2.0% No Cause Found 25.7% Communications Failure 2.2% Power Interruption 3.5% Obstructions 3.7% Lubrication 3.5%

Equipment Damaged 4.0%

Component/Equipment High Resistance 6.0% Failure 23.6% Software Failure 7.0% Out of Adjustment 7.9% 6.1.4 Telecommunications Asset Renewal The approach to telecommunications systems Overview of Systems and Processes maintenance and asset renewal is defined in Aurizon Network’s Asset Policy Maintenance In evaluating the telecommunications systems in and Renewal document, which outlines Aurizon the CQCN Evans & Peck assessed: Network’s methodology to the maintenance of the telecommunications systems on the Aurizon •• Asset renewal Network. •• Fault causation The replacement of ageing telecommunications •• Maintenance processes assets has been a gradual process, with old •• Field inspection results. technology and hardware still in service, which is typically past its book life, as discussed in the asset Evans & Peck found inconsistency with reported background to the relevant systems. However, asset locations. These issues stem from mobile due to the availability of redundant systems telecommunications components operating over and regular maintenance these older systems multiple RAB systems, Goonyella or Blackwater historically have not significantly impacted rail Systems. Where this has been identified, the fault/ operations. delay has been rolled up into the main line system within one Aurizon system; such as the Goonyella One of the older pieces of technology is the or Blackwater Systems. train control radio which is at end of life. The Australian Communications and Media Authority is pursuing a new 400 MHz spectrum plan as a means to increase essential and emergency services interoperability within state and federal agencies. The plan includes a reduction of channel separation to 12.5 kHz and the date for the implementation of this plan was December 2012 with the changes to be complete by December 2018. The impact of this is that Aurizon Network must replace this system (land mobile greater than 30 MHz) as a matter of urgency. Analysis 67

Fault Causation Field Inspections Overall the telecommunications system is It was found that a number of the inspected assets responsible for only 0.39% of overall delays to were in need of asset renewal; highlighted by the the operation of the coal network, totalling 9,663 continual use of the Tait radio system, an asset minutes for the reporting period. that is approaching obsolescence.

The telecommunications system contribution to delay minutes on the network in FY 2012 is almost nonexistent.

The distribution of telecommunications system faults is shown in Figure 6.4. While these faults do not necessarily cause delays, they provide an indication of the breakdown of delay causation.

The major contributor was faults due to component /equipment failure; this is a sign of ageing equipment.

However, while there are issues in an ageing asset, the ViziRail database reported, for the 12 month review period, that the telecommunications system is very reliable. This indicates that redundant systems are in place; either additional fibre or microwave links.

Figure 6.4: Telecommunications system – fault causation

Other 8.6% Coal Fouling 0.9% Power Interruption 2.2% Natural Causes 0.7% Design Error 0.7% Installation Fault 2.2% Component/Equipment Equipment Damaged 2.8% Failure 39.4% Cabling Fault 3.2% Communications Failure

Service Request 7.0%

No Causes Found 19.5% Software Failure 7.8% Table 6.1: Aurizon overhead equipment renewal/refurbishment policy

Refurbishment Equipment or renewal Actual age Comments description frequency (years) (years) Motorised isolator 35 25 Life depends on usage and environment. Manual isolator 35 25 Life depends on usage and environment. Neutral section 25 25 The neutral section insulators are subject insulators to wear and damage for every pantograph pass. Contact wire 30-50 25 Typical wear rates are 11mm2/106 pantograph passes (Ip=150A). If we assume 16x4 header trains/day and 2 passes/ day with 330 days/year then the lifetime would be 71 years. Catenary wire 60 25 Very long life. Feeder wire 60 25 Very long life. Earth wire 60 25 The earth wire suffers fatigue failures. This is an original design issue with the mast clamp design. This is a prevalent failure mode which is being dealt with. Some segments are being replaced. Masts 60 25 Double dip galvanised. Cantilever rods 60 25 Showing initial signs of galvanising failure on the NCL and coastal areas. Support gantries 60 25 Double galvanised.

Table 6.2 summarises the Aurizon Network replacement/refurbishment policy for the traction power supply. Some of these components however have been subject to ongoing renewal and refurbishment.

13.Contact Lines for Electric Railways, Siemens. Analysis 69

6.1.5 Traction Distribution and Renewal Refurbishment Traction Power Supply Systems Table 6.1 summarises the Aurizon replacement/ In evaluating the traction distribution and traction refurbishment policy for traction distribution power supply systems in the CQCN, Evans & Peck equipment. reviewed the: The commissioning of electrification of both •• Renewals and refurbishment program the Blackwater and Goonyella systems occurred during 1986 and 1987. Therefore many of the •• Contact wire and catenary wire replacement component parts have now seen 25 years of policy operational service. Many of these components have been subject to ongoing renewal and •• Masts, cantilever rods and gantries refurbishment. •• Feeder and earth wire condition Table 6.2 summarises the Aurizon Network •• Traction power supply systems renewal and replacement/refurbishment policy for traction refurbishment power supply. In a similar fashion to the traction •• Autotransformer refurbishment program distribution assets many of these components have been subject to ongoing renewal and •• Transformer refurbishment program refurbishment. •• Motorised and manual isolators Contact Wire and Catenary Wire Replacement Policy •• Neutral section insulators The typical contact wear rate for copper silver •• Switchgear and circuit breakers contact rod is 11 mm2 per million pantograph •• Harmonic filters. passes for a pantograph current of 50 to 150 A13. The Aurizon Network copper rod has a cross The actual location of incidents, as reported in sectional area of 107 mm2. The maximum allowed the ViziRail database, was sometimes not clear. wear set by Aurizon Network should be a cross This was especially difficult in areas where sectional area reduction of 33% which equates to systems overlapped, or where an incident affected an area reduction limit of 35 mm. This maximum multiple systems. For example, in the context of cross sectional area reduction is a function of the traction distribution and traction power supply minimum tensile strength requirement under the systems, where a delay may have been reported maximum operating temperatures. on the Blackwater System, the incident may have affected trains on the Moura System, with the Assuming traffic flow in the past consisted of delay categorised as only a Blackwater System 16 trains per day, each train 2 passes, each train delay. This was because the Moura System has no with 4 pantographs and 330 days operation a year; electrified assets and that the delay originated on this equates to approximately 42,000 pantograph the Blackwater System. passes per year or 2,000,000 passes in 50 years. Clearly the contact wire has minimal risk of Further limitations were encountered in the TSMS wearing out. preventative maintenance database where issues relating to the planned dates, completion dates Undoubtedly, there will be areas of increased and closed dates were found. For example, where wear due to particular mechanical dynamics and an item had been completed, but not closed, the as a result small sections will have already been completed date was taken as the closed date. replaced and will continue to be replaced into the future. However, Aurizon Network, at present, does not have a comprehensive measurement and data recording program.

The catenary wire is hard drawn copper which will have a very long lifetime. The 60 year figure quoted by Aurizon Network is reasonable for this material in a normal environment. Table 6.2: Aurizon traction power supply equipment renewal/refurbishment policy

Refurbishment Equipment Actual or renewal Comments description age frequency

Harmonic filters 35 years 25 years The power capacitors and protection relays are items that age and will need replacement as part of ongoing maintenance. When the inductors fail the system can be considered life expired. Traction power 25 years Various The 25 year figure is based on Asset transformers Replacement Policy document QRN. NA.POL.06.6120.04. Some transformers have been refurbished. Autotransformers 25 years Various A significant number of these have been refurbished due to an original design or manufacturing issue. Aux Supply 35 years 25 years These are reliable and low cost items. They are Transformers not critical to operations and can be replaced as required. Feeder station/TSC 30 years 25 years The air insulated VCB based switchgear has switchgear historically been very reliable. However its replacement/refurbishment will need to be addressed in the near future. Replacement of the protection relays will need to be addressed. Analysis 71

Masts, Cantilever Rods and Gantries However the earth wires are suffering a large number of fatigue failures at the mast clamps. The masts, support rods and gantries are the items Aluminium is susceptible to fatigue induced which hold up the contact wire/catenary assembly. by cyclic vibration. This has been a particular These are all galvanised components. problem in the Aurizon Network due to the original clamping arrangement which led to high The masts are double-dipped providing a zinc levels of stress concentration at the clamp when coating thickness of nominally 170 micron. This the wire was subjected to vibration. Vibration level of thickness in a medium to high level is often induced by wind particularly on over– corrosive environment would provide a lifetime tensioned cables. of approximately 60 years before remedial work would need to be done. This is consistent with the The earth wire breakages due to metal fatigue Aurizon Network expectation. Remedial work, if are an ongoing problem which Aurizon Network required, would require either coating affected is dealing with as they occur. A new clamp with areas with galvanising paint or repeating the hot a design which reduces the stress levels is being dip process. retrofitted to the masts.

Based on the field inspections it appears the Autotransformer Refurbishment Program cantilever rods are only single dip plated which results in a lifetime of 25 to 30 years before Autotransformers (ATs) have historically suffered remedial work is required. There is brown rust from localised breakdown of small portions of appearing on the surface of the rods in coastal electrical insulation systems; termed partial areas. This does not signify end of life since the discharge (PD). It is thought this may be due to rods are thick walled and extensive corrosion original manufacturing processes. would need to occur to render them mechanically compromised in terms of the required task. Aurizon Network has been refurbishing the Nevertheless, it is likely the cantilever rods ATs based on condition. However the current lifetime will fall short of the 60 year figure quoted refurbishment scope does not address the original by Aurizon Network. Our estimate would be a problem. Therefore after refurbishment the further 10-20 years which would yield a total PD problem persists and eventually a further lifetime of 35 to 45 years. refurbishment is required. The Aurizon Network AT asset policy states that the refurbishment Feeder and Earth Wire Condition process extends the useful lifetime by seven years15. It also indicates that generally the ATs are The feeder and earth wires are aluminium not refurbished a second time, but instead they are electrical cable. For all aluminium or aluminium replaced by a new unit at a cost of approximately alloy conductors the life expectancy will be of the $300k. The refurbishment cost is approximately order of 60 years based on the consideration of $76k. However the policy document states that 14. This is corrosion rates in normal atmospheres most of the ATs have already been refurbished consistent with Aurizon Network’s own figure. once and that it is not feasible to conduct this treatment a second time. This is a reasonable approach since the insulation system will suffer irreversible damage due to the PD activity.

14. Standard Handbook for Electrical Engineers, H. Wayne Beatty.

15. QRN.NA.POL.06.6120.01. . Table 6.3: Autotransformer condition status as of the end of 2012

Number that Installed Number Number will require number Age Age requiring System refurbished refurbishment <10 years 25 years immediate once in the next 5 refurbishment years

Blackwater* 142 18 124 Approx. 124 4 120 Goonyella 123 63 60 Approx. 60 21 39

* Includes new units in new feeder stations for the Blackwater System

Table 6.3 summarises the AT status at the end of Transformer Refurbishment Program 2012. The lifetime of the traction supply transformers In total, there are 25 units that will require is considered to be 25 years before a major immediate replacement and it would be expected refurbishment is required. A major refurbishment a further 159 units will require renewal in the next is preferred to replacement since the cost is five years. It does not seem likely that many of approximately $260k compared with $800k for these would be candidates for refurbishment given the latter. they have already been refurbished once. Aurizon Network currently has a refurbishment This status is reasonably consistent with the oil program running in the Goonyella System which test result exception analysis where the Goonyella covers 17 transformers which were manufactured System had scored a yellow rating, and the in 1986. Of these 17 units, nine were completed Blackwater System had scored a green status. by early 2013 and the remainder are scheduled However, it can be seen based on the numbers for the latter half of 2013. There are a further six described above that the Blackwater System transformers which were manufactured since (Electric) will also need to be monitored carefully. 2000 that will not require refurbishment for some time. Mitigating the issue above, the ATs have a high level of redundancy in that if one unit fails it can There is no refurbishment program approved for be removed from service and the adjacent units the Blackwater System at the time of writing. As will carry the load without significant impact on the oil test result exception analysis has generated traffic flow. However, if the failure rate increases a yellow rating, indicating a low to medium risk, then there is potential for operational disruption. Aurizon Network may need to act on this in the Aurizon Network appears to be keeping abreast near future. However having said this, there has of this in an effective manner taking into been significant investment in the Blackwater consideration the high cost of total replacement System (Electric) in terms of new feeder stations for their asset. The ATs will, however, represent which provide increased levels of redundancy a significant maintenance cost in the next five at current traffic levels. Therefore, a case could years. The Aurizon Network policy states that be put that transformer refurbishment could be the expected lifetime of the new ATs will be 20 delayed pending increasing traffic levels. years. Evans & Peck’s opinion is that this is a very short lifetime for this class of equipment. Evans & Peck’s expectation is that the lifetime should be 40 years. Analysis 73

Motorised and Manual Isolators Aurizon Network will need to address the scope Aurizon Network has nominated the life of this refurbishment or replacement in the expectancy for both the motorised and manual near future due to expiration of the life of the isolators at 35 years. This would appear to be equipment and also the difficulty in undertaking conservative and we would consider that these the work at higher traffic levels. would be subject to ongoing parts replacement Harmonic Filters and general maintenance which would extend the lifetime well beyond this figure. Aurizon Network has nominated the life expectancy of the harmonic filters at 35 years. The physical inspections carried out as part of the The harmonic filters consist of the following key site audits revealed that the isolators were in very components (life expectancies are in brackets): good condition. •• Power capacitors (20 to 30 years) Neutral Section Insulators •• Power reactors (30 to 40 years) The neutral section insulators are under a replacement program due to superior products •• Protection relays (20 to 30 years) now being available which eliminate failures in •• Outdoor encapsulated protection and these devices. measurement current transformers (CTs) Switchgear and Circuit Breakers (20 to 30 years). Aurizon Network has nominated the life Components related to the harmonic filters are expectancy of the switchgear and vacuum being replaced on an ongoing basis. In this respect circuit breakers to be 30 years. This point is attributing a lifetime to the overall system is not approaching and it potentially involves major relevant to the harmonic filters. It would be a capital investment. Aurizon Network is currently reasonable assertion that once the reactors fail considering the various options that exist for (30 to 40 years) the system would be considered refurbishment or replacement. Upgrading the to be at the end of its life. Until this time other old switchgear to a gas insulated standard, as components would be renewed as required. The implemented in the newer feeder stations, would power capacitors are constructed from many lead to the necessity for larger compounds, smaller units which can be replaced on failure. rearrangement of the structures and likely expansion of the fenced compound. This would The harmonic filter protection relays are need to be implemented with the entire feeder currently suffering from reliability problems station out of service. The newer feeder stations and are obsolete technology. Aurizon Network would need to take over the traffic task. At current has upgraded the protection at Moranbah South traffic levels this would be accommodated. In Feeder Station with the installation of an air the future at forecast tonnages this option may conditioned harmonic filter protection annex, and become more difficult. In this case new feeder this has released some spare parts for use at other stations would need to be built alongside the feeder stations. existing ones and then there would need to be a The CTs have been reliable but show surface cut-over. damage to the epoxy encapsulation due to A refurbishment of the existing equipment electrical tracking. The mechanism involved in would be the other option. This might include this is not known but the effect is widespread. This an extended outage where the switchgear hut is could lead to premature failure of the CTs. essentially removed from site and rebuilt with In summary individual component parts of the new but compatible air insulated equipment off harmonic filters are being replaced on condition site. The protection relays would be updated to and therefore a complete system renewal is not digital types. The vacuum circuit breakers would applicable. be renewed. Figure 6.5: Newlands System – BRTT

180% 160% 140% 120% 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Jul-11 Oct-11 Dec-11 Aug-11 Feb-12 Apr-12 Jun-12

BRTT Actual BRTT Target

Figure 6.6: Newlands System – TSR

3:00:00 180% 2:40:00 160% 2:20:00 140% 2:00:00 120% 1:40:00 100% 1:20:00 80% 1:00:00 60% 0:40:00 40% 0:20:00 20% 0:00:00 0% Jul-11 Oct-11 Dec-11 Aug-11 Feb-12 Apr-12 Jun-12

Newlands System Speed Restrictions Newlands System Speed Restriction Target BRTT Actual BRTT Target Analysis 75

6.2 Newlands System Lagging Indicator - Overall Track Condition Index 6.2.1 Operational Performance The OTCI for the Newlands System is shown in Figure 6.7. Summary The KPIs and lagging indicators for the Newlands Through FY 2012, the Newlands System has System’s operational performance are shown in seen improvements in its OTCI, with the Table 6.4. index remaining in the lower 25% of the lower maintenance band throughout the reporting Key Performance Indicator - Below Rail period. This indicates a high quality track Transit Time condition. The assessment methodology evaluates the OTCI for the Newlands System as a green As shown in Figure 6.5, the Newlands System rating. operated through FY 2012 with three months above the agreed BRTT target of 124%. This evaluates against the assessment methodology as an amber rating.

The three months that were above the BRTT target were July, August and December 2011, prior to the increase in the BRTT to 160% as a result of a changed operating environment on the Newlands System rules that went into effect in January 2012. The increase considered the lower total cost of ownership of operating larger trains with heavier axle loadings at a higher BRTT than that generated with additional infrastructure (passing loops and track duplication). This changed arrangement was accepted by the Access Holders and Rail Operators and an agreement was made to vary the system performance requirements16.

Table 6.4: Newlands System – operational performance summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI BRTT Amber Lagging indicator TSR Yellow Lagging indicator OTCI Green

16. Agreement with Access Holders upon commencement of GAPE operations. http://www.qca.org.au/files/R- QRNetwork-GAPE-Submission-0912.pdf. Figure 6.7: Newlands SystemNewlands – OTCI System OTCI FY12

40 38 36 34 32 30 28

OTCI Score OTCI 26 24 22 20 Jul-11 Oct-11 Sep-11 Dec-11 Jan-12 Aug-11 Feb-12 Apr-12 Nov-11 Jun-12 Mar-12 May-12

Lower - Median Threshold Range Median - Upper Threshold Range Newlands System

Table 6.5: Newlands System – train path availability and uptake

Train path usage – Coal carrying Q1 FY 2011 Q1 FY 2012 Q2 FY 2012 Q3 FY 2012 Q4 FY 2012 services

Train paths used by 960 793 696 573 555 the relevant services Train paths contracted 616 607 535 535 535 by the relevant services Train paths available 1265 1251 1356 2697 2793 for use by the relevant services Train paths scheduled 1042 888 847 721 629 for the relevant services Analysis 77

Lagging Indicator - Temporary Speed Leading Indicator - Train Path Restrictions Availability and Allocations Through FY 2012, the Newlands System had a Table 6.5 indicates that the Newlands System varied level of speed restrictions applied, with has had a continued decline in train path usage restrictions occasionally above target levels. It through the course of FY 2012. This is reflected was found that on 6.3% of days speed restrictions in the coal haulage figures, which have been exceeded the TSR target as shown in significantly below those forecast, reflecting Figure 6.6. This evaluates against the assessment market conditions. While this drives up methodology as a yellow rating. maintenance costs per GTK, it has a positive effect on the condition of the asset, through reduced track degradation. This is reflected in the OTCI, which decreased over the period, as well as the reduced BRTT, improving the Newlands System’s operational performance.

Table 6.6 shows the distribution of maintenance train paths through the reporting period. Aside from a scheduled delay of Q2 maintenance into Q3, the data shows that maintenance levels are stable.

Table 6.6: Newlands System – maintenance track path allocations

Train path usage – Planned and Q1 FY 2011 Q1 FY 2012 Q2 FY 2012 Q3 FY 2012 Q4 FY 2012 unplanned maintenance Train paths used for 115 129 24 215 119 planned maintenance Train paths used 7 11 6 4 13 for unplanned maintenance Table 6.7: Newlands System – track

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Normalised delay Yellow Lagging indicator Physical defect identification Green Lagging indicator Average defects per month/track kilometre Grey

l) - Asset Age By Acquisition Date Track Structure Figure 6.8: Newlands System - track - asset age by acquisiton date

20 Number Assets of

0 Less than 10 years Between 10 & 15 Between 15 & 20 Between 20 & 30 Great er than 30 years years years years

Track Turnouts Track Support Railway Track Analysis 79

6.2.2 Newlands System The assessment team analysed the FAR to determine the age of track systems on the Track and Track Structures Newlands System. The results of this analysis, shown in Figure 6.8 and Figure 6.9, found that Summary there were two distinct asset age brackets; one The track system status is summarised in with older assets, and one with more recent Table 6.7. acquisition dates with high remaining book life.

Figure 6.9:Newlands Newlands System- Remaining - track - remaining Book Lifebook life Track Structure 80

Number Assets of 20

0 Book Life Reached Between 1 & 3 years Between 3 & 15 years Great er than 1 5 yea rs

Track Turnouts Track Support Railway Track Newlands - Delay Minutes Figure 6.10: Newlands System - trackTrack - delay Structure minutes FY12 4000

3500

3000

2500

2000

1500 Delay Minutes 1000

500

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun On Track Vehicle Issues 000000000000 Track Maintenance and Repair 209 87 0 226 91 3754 0 0 0 0 0 0 Track Defect 632 58 0 18 382 0 200 296 214 46 337 100

Figure 6.11: Newlands SystemTrack - track & - defectsTrack Support Defects 80 68 70 64 60 50

40 34 32 29 29 30 21 23 17 20 14 12 14 Number of Defects of Number 10 0 July May June April March August October January February December November September Analysis 81

Key Performance Indicator - Delay Lagging Indicator - Average Defects per Minutes Month/Track Kilometre

Figure 6.10 details the total delay minutes caused A total of 357 defects were recorded for track by track maintenance and defects on the Newlands systems as shown in Figure 6.11. System over the reporting period. Track assets were responsible for 3.46% of total reported delays Defects were reported consistently through the on the Newlands System. When normalised, track year, except for above average track faults being assets result in 3,553 minutes of delay/NTK. This reported for the months of July and November. Of is evaluated against the assessment methodology the total number of defects: as a yellow rating. •• A total of 298 defects were recorded under It is evident in Figure 6.10 that a major delay track, including: occurred in December 2011. This was due to − Excessively worn track, i.e. squats, congestion at Pring Yard and Abbot Point wheelburn, gauge corner cracking caused by track maintenance and construction resurfacing works at Durroburra. Unfortunately, no further information was available to Evans & Peck at the − Ballast, fouling and/or deficient ballast time of writing. − A total of 34 defects reported on access roads, broken/damaged fencing. Upon investigating the level of defects recorded, with the durations and reasons for the reported •• A total of 54 defects were recorded for delays, it would appear that the current turnouts; mainly worn V crossing, squats or procedures are coping with the operational weld defect demands of the system. Despite the recent increase in axle load from 20 tal to 26.5 tal over •• Insufficient ballast the Abbot Point to Collinsville section, the number •• A total of five defects on level crossings all of defects recorded has not increased significantly of which involved either pothole repairs or over FY 2012 from the previous year, nor has broken signage. the OTCI average deteriorated. Both of these indicators confirm that current maintenance The defects shall be used as a baseline for practices are appropriate. However it is noted that comparison in the End of Period Assessment. this increase in axle load coincided with a decrease in overall tonnage over FY 2012. As a result of the desktop findings above, field inspections were carried through spot auditing The number of defects relating to rail wear and to determine the extent of track defects. The ballast formation indicate a wearing asset which Newlands System had field inspections carried could be considered for re-investment. This re- out on 11 and 12 February 2013. Eight sites investment would improve the overall condition were audited, against six categories. 10 of the of the infrastructure and reduce the maintenance 48 elements (20.8%) were to an unsatisfactory load across the system. Evans & Peck notes standard, satisfying the threshold value for a green that the predicted growth in tonnages on the rating (<30%). system may increase rates of track deterioration, especially considering that much of the section is 53 kg/m rail, and therefore, continued rigorous monitoring of the track condition and geometry is necessary. Newlands - Program Close Figure 6.12: Newlands System - track - corrective maintenance program Out Delays Track & Track Support 100% 90% 80% 70%

60% 54% 50%

40% 33% 30% 20%

Percentage of Work Orders Work of Percentage 11% 10% 1% 0% 1% 0% On time or Less than 30 Between 30 &More than 60 Currently Recurring early days late 60 days late days Late Open Items OR Awaiting Information

Figure 6.13: Newlands SystemNewlands - QTCI - Y 2012 System OTCI FY12

40 38 36 34 32 30 28

OTCI Score OTCI 26 24 22 20 Jul-11 Oct-11 Sep-11 Dec-11 Jan-12 Aug-11 Feb-12 Apr-12 Nov-11 Jun-12 Mar-12 May-12

Lower - Median Threshold Range Median - Upper Threshold Range Newlands System Analysis 83

Leading Indicator - Scheduled Leading Indicator - OTCI Performance Maintenance Program Compliance The Evans & Peck assessment reviewed the As depicted in Figure 6.12, 54% of defects had statistical data from the Track Recording Car for been closed out by the programmed date or the Newlands System for FY 2012. The output earlier, 11% less than 30 days late, and 33% were from this data provides a summary of the overall recurring or awaiting further information for track condition and is shown in Table 6.8. completion. This is considered a low percentage of reported defects being completed more than Overall, with the exception of the Collinsville 30 days late or currently remaining open. This to McNaughton line section, Table 6.8 shows suggests an overall strong performance of the that the OTCI is generally in the lower end of scheduled maintenance program. This conclusion the maintenance band and has decreased (and has been based upon system performance as of the therefore improved) over the period. Figure 6.13 data provision date, 4 December 2012. shows the overall trend over the period for the OTCI for the whole of the Newlands System. The assessment team concluded from this summary that the track priorities for the The OTCI ranges indicated that the track geometry Newlands System largely relate to excessive over the Newlands System is in overall good wear on the track (i.e. sections of ‘rough track’), condition, and has been generally improving over ballast formation and turnouts. These desktop the period. conclusions were confirmed in the site inspection results, where the major issues identified on the Newlands System were rail surface wear.

Further site inspection findings are detailed in Appendix C.

Table 6.8: Newlands System – track – OTCI summary

OTCI Actual Trend Track lower to Section OTCI over Assessment category median range period range

Abbot Point Balloon to 5,6 25-40 25-29  Good, at lower end of Kaili range Durroburra to 5 25-34 25-32  Within required range Collinsville Collinsville to Newlands 5 25-34 26-27  Good, at lower end of range Collinsville to 6 30-40 46-47  Not generally within McNaughton required range Kaili to Durroburra 5 25-34 32-34 Variable Within required range Table 6.9: Newlands System – structures (bridges)

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Cancellations Green KPI Delays Green Lagging indicator Asset age Green Lagging indicator Inspection work order Yellow completion Lagging indicator Maintenance work order Grey completion

Table 6.10: Newlands System – structures (culverts)

Figure 6.14: l) Newlands System System - Asset - structures Age By - assetAcquisition age by acquisiston Date dateCivil Structures

700

600

500

400

300

200 Number Assets of

100

0 Less than 10 years Between 10 & 15 Between 15 & 20 Between 20 & 30 Great er than 30 years years years years

Culverts Bridges Miscellaneous Structures Analysis 85

Structures Key Performance Indicator - Delay Minutes Summary The Newlands System structures had a single The status for bridges and culverts is summarised incident (IR12-03327) which caused 22 minutes in Table 6.9 and Table 6.10. of delay to the system in March 2012. No cancellations were recorded on the Newlands The majority of culverts and bridges on the System. The performance in relation to both Newlands System are between 20 and 30 years cancellations and delays result in a green rating old with a proportion of assets less than 10 years for culverts and bridges. old. The bridges and culverts are shown to have a remaining book life of greater than 15 years. Lagging Indicator - Asset Age

Evans & Peck identified assets with service lives Figure 6.14 and Figure 6.15 shows that all that do not conform to Figure 6.15, including Newlands System bridges and culverts are culverts currently propped due to capacity recorded to have a remaining book life of greater upgrades, and corroding corrugated metal pipes. than 15 years. Evans & Peck is aware that Aurizon Network is currently addressing under Figure 6.14 and Figure 6.15 shows the asset ages capacity culverts and corrugated metal pipes with and remaining book lives of structures on the corrosion issues on Newlands through its renewals Newlands System. program and will be further monitored at the End of Period Assessment.

l) System - Remaining Book Life Civil Structures Figure 6.15: Newlands System - structures - remaining book life

900

800

700

600

500

400

300

Number Assets of 200

100

0 Book Life Reached Between 1 &3 years Between 3 & 15 years Great er than 1 5 yea rs

Culverts Bridges Miscellaneous Structures Figure 6.17: NewlandsNewlands System - structures - Program - culvert defect Close close Out out delays Delays from closed date Bridges 50 41 40

10 4

Number of Work Work of Number Orders 0 0 0 0 0 On Time or Less than 30 Between 30 & More than 60 Currently Recurring Early Days Late 60 days late days Late Open Items OR Awaiting Information

Figure 6.18: Newlands SystemNewlands - structures - -Program bridge defect closeClose out Outdelays Delaysfrom closed date Bridges

100% 91% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 9% Percentage of Work Orders 10% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% On time or Less than 30 Between 30 More than 60 Currently Recurring early days late & 60 days days Late Open Items OR late Awaiting Information Analysis 87

Lagging Indicator - Inspection Lag Lagging Indicator - Maintenance Lag A review of the number of culvert inspections Figure 6.17 shows the Newlands System had only programmed versus actual dates of inspection one culvert defect closed out in RIMS for shows 10 were carried out on time, 604 were FY 2012. Three were awaiting further information carried out less than 30 days late and 10 carried and 76 remained open. The large number of open out more than 60 days late. This is shown in defects is a concern in the longer term should Figure 6.16 resulting in a yellow rating. For bridge existing defects deteriorate. If the works are being inspections, all inspections (three) were carried completed and RIMS is not being updated the out within 30 days of being planned. As per the longer term asset condition may be acceptable, lagging indicator assessment methodology, the however an operational issue could be present bridges evaluate to a yellow rating. with regard to closing out defects. Evans & Peck believes insufficient evidence has been provided to assess confidence in the allocation of performance to maintenance lag. This will be reviewed at the End of Period Assessment.

Figure 6.18 shows there were no bridge defects closed out for the period; however 41 remain open on the Newlands System. There is no specific data to suggest why these defects remain open; however the individuals extending these open defects must be aware of the risk of accelerated deterioration into the future on a case-by-case basis.

Evans & Peck believe insufficient evidence has been provided to assess confidence in the allocation of performance to maintenance lag. Table 6.11: Newlands System – structures – leading indicators

Closed Open Closed Open defect/ Asset inspections/ inspections/ defect/ Asset type asset quantity asset asset asset quantity quantity quantity quantity

Bridge 32 0.09 0 0 1.41 Culvert 777 0.8 0 0 0.1

Table 6.12: Newlands System – signals – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Normalised delay Amber Lagging indicator Average faults per month/ track Grey kilometre Analysis 89

Leading Indicator - Inspections Key Performance Indicator - Delay Minutes Inspection quantities and maintenance are again used as a leading indicator. The columns of The signals and train control system is responsible Table 6.11 will be used to evaluate change between for 17.73% of delays on the Newlands System, of analysis periods. The ‘closed inspections/ asset which a monthly breakdown is shown in quantity’ column below allows insight into the Figure 6.21. closed inspections against CESS requirements. A value greater than 0.5 indicates conformance with When this is normalised against NTK it is provisioned CESS requirements; based on the evaluated against the assessment methodology as average structures inspection period of two years. an amber rating, above the threshold value of less Table 6.11 shows that bridge inspections recorded than 15,000 minutes/NTK for a yellow rating. in FY 2012 do not align with CESS requirements while those for culverts do. Evident in Figure 6.21 is a peak in delays recorded in December 2011. Upon further analysis of The proportion of open to closed defects for the ViziRail database, this was attributable to a bridges of 1.41 is of concern and Aurizon should major level crossing protection issue causing a investigate this further. Culvert inspections 2,637 minute delay. programmed for the period are greater than those required by the CESS. Signals and Train Control Systems Summary The status for signals and train control systems is summarised in Table 6.12.

The approach to signals and train control system maintenance and asset renewal is defined in Aurizon Network’s Asset Policy Maintenance and Renewal document, which outlines Aurizon Network’s methodology to the maintenance of the signals and train control systems.

As a result of the recent GAPE construction and the resulting upgrading of the signal equipment on the Newlands System, much of the equipment is less than 10 years old. As Figure 6.19 shows, the relay interlockings and the half of the level crossing protection systems are greater than 20 years old.

Examining the remaining book life of the Newlands System’s signal and train control equipment as shown in Figure 6.20, there is a number of level crossing protection systems that have an expired book life. It should be noted that book life does not necessarily correlate to serviceable life, especially where good maintenance practices have been used. Newlands - Asset Age By Acquisition Date Signal & Train Figure 6.19: Newlands System - signalsControl - asset age Systems by acquisition date

4 Number of Assets 2

0 Less than 10 years Between 10 & 15 Between 15 & 20 Between 20 & 30 Greater than 30 years years years years

Level Crossing Protection Signal Interlockings – Relay Signal Interlockings – Processor Control Systems (Signal - Non Vital) Train Protection Systems

l) - Remaining Book Life Signal & Train Control systems Figure 6.20: Newlands System - signals - asset age by acquisition date

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 Number of Assets 2 1 0 Book Life Reached Between 1 & 3 years Between 3 & 15 years Greater than 15 years

Level Crossing Protection Signal Interlockings – Relay Signal Interlockings – Processor Control Systems (Signal - Non Vital) Train Protection Systems Analysis 91

CQCN - Delay Minutes Figure 6.21: NewlandsSignal System - &signals Train - delay Control minutes Systems FY12 8000

7000

6000

5000

4000

3000 Delay Minutes

2000

1000

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Wrong Side Signal Failure 15 UTC/DTC Faults 84 184 368 ATP/ATC/AWS Ground Equipment Failure Damage to Trackside Equipment 62 RIFOT 49 RAPAD 12 22 189 50 Level Crossing Failure 70 115 3222 323 144 58 150 Infrastructure Protection Systems 41 82 -80 50 39 133 78 Issues Signal Failure 10 2342 80 1914 219 1674 92 163 138 Telemetry Failure 126 12 3094 250 324 779 252 160 Points Failure 2273 149 113 158 211 842 304 119 571 196 832 98 Track Circuit Failure 1441 838 238 550 100 1014 436 764 1701 562 1453 2051 Figure 6.22: Newlands System – signals – all faults – FY 2012

76 80 67 70 63 64 57 60

50 44 45 40 41 40 34

Number of Faults 20 20

10 2 0 July May June April March August October January February December November September

Newlands - Faults Figure 6.23: NewlandsPoints System - –Signal signals – point& Train faults Control Systems

14 12 12 11 11 11 10 10 9

8 7 7 7

6 4 4 4 Number of Faults of Number

2 0 0 July May June April March August October January February December November September Analysis 93

Lagging Indicator - Faults Leading Indicator - Preventative Maintenance Performance The by month breakdown of signals and train control system faults is shown in Figure 6.22. Figure 6.26 shows the preventative maintenance performance for signals on the Newlands System. A review of the maintenance record during the A KPI target of 95% is set by Aurizon Network 12 month period indicates that the highest signals for preventative maintenance tasks, being work and train control system equipment failures across conducted less than 30 days late. the Newlands System have been due to: Reviewing the overall performance, 84.8% was •• Points carried out (1,203 work orders), with 33.5% of this − with highest the number of faults due to value being completed on time or early. 3.2% were points out-of-adjustment/miscellaneous/ more than 60 days late. component failure/no fault found Leading Indicator - Corrective Maintenance Performance •• Tracks The on-time performance to rectify the faults − with the most faults categorised as no identified in the lagging indicator is detailed in fault found, with next major faults due to Figure 6.27. 85% of work orders were completed component failure and high resistance either on time or early, below the accepted KPI of •• Interlockings and equipment housings. 95%. 4.2% were completed more than six days late. The trends in the failure rates for points, track and housings/crossing/interlockings are shown in Figure 6.23, Figure 6.24 and Figure 6.25. These faults statistics will be used as a baseline over the analysis period. Figure 6.24: Newlands System – signals – track circuit faults

21 20 17 17 16 15 12 12 10 10 10 7 Number of Faults of Number 6 5 2 0 0 July May June April March August October January February December November September

Newlands - Faults Housings/Crossings/Interlockings Figure 6.25: Newlands System – signals – housings/crossings/ interlocking faults Signal & Train Control Systems 12

10 10 9 8 8 7 7 7 6 6 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 Number of Faults of Number 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 July May June April March August October January February December November September

Crossings Housings Interlockings Analysis 95

Telecommunications To identify possible trends as telecommunications assets progress towards the end of their functional Summary and book lives, the FAR was analysed to identify The status for telecommunications systems is age composition of the Newlands System. As seen summarised in Table 6.13. in Figure 6.28, as a result of the recent GAPE construction and the resulting upgrading of the The system is undergoing gradual upgrade and signal equipment on the Newlands System, the performed reliably due to the redundancy built majority of the equipment is less than 10 years into the system architecture. old. As seen in Figure 6.29, very few assets have reached book life, with most with 3 to 15 years book life remaining.

Table 6.13: Newlands System – telecommunications – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Normalised delay Green Lagging indicator Average faults per month/ track Grey kilometre Preventative Maintenance Program Performance For Figure 6.26: NewlandsNewlands System – -signals–Signals preventative & Train maintenance Control program Systems performance 600

515 500

403 400

300 285

200 169 Number of Work Work of Number Orders 100 46 0 0 On Time or Less than 15 Between 15 Between 30 Greater than Open or Early days late days & 30 days days & 60 days 60 days late Recurring Item late late

Newlands - Corrective Fault Performance Signals & Train Control Figure 6.27: Newlands System – signals – corrective maintenance program performance Systems 500 469

450

400

350

300

250

200

150 Number of Work Work of Number Orders

100

50 31 14 23 9 6 1 0 On Time or Early 2 Days Late 3 Days Late 4 Days Late 5 Days Late More than 6 Days Needing More Late Information Analysis 97

l) - Asset Age By Acquisition Date Telecommunications Figure 6.28: Newlands System – telecommunications – asset age by acquisition date

140

120

100

40 Number of Assets

0 Less than 10 years Between 10 & 15 Between 15 & 20 Between 20 & 30 Greater than 30 years years years years

Customer Premises Equipment Linking Network Equipment Data Network Equipment Telephone Exchange Equipment

Newlands - Remaining Book Life Telecommunications Figure 6.29: Newlands System – telecommunications – remaining book life

140

120

100

40 Number of Assets

0 Book Life Reached Between 1 & 3 years Between 3 & 15 years Greater than 15 years

Customer Premises Equipment Linking Network Equipment Data Network Equipment Telephone Exchange Equipment CQCN - Delay Minutes Figure 6.30: Newlands SystemTelecommunications – telecommunications – delay minutes FY12 350

300

250

200

150 Del a y Mi n utes 100

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Communications Failure 10 289

Figure 6.31: Newlands System – telecommunications – faults

9 8 8

6 5 5 5 5 4 4

Number of Faults 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 0 0 July May June April March August October January February December November September Analysis 99

Key Performance Indicator – Delay Lagging Indicator - Faults Minutes The summary of the review of the monthly faults The telecommunications system is responsible for from TSMS for the Newlands System can be found 0.16% of the delays on the Newlands System, of in Figure 6.31, which shows a total of 38 faults for which a monthly breakdown can be seen in the telecommunications systems in the reporting Figure 6.30. period, the majority of faults due to radio systems. There was a peak of eight faults in October; A total of 299 delay minutes was seen over the however, this did not result in any correlated delay reporting period, with the sole fault source being minutes during the period. Further, no seasonal communications failure. Given the small number influence is evident in the number of faults being of delays and the low percentage contribution recorded. of telecommunications delays to the total delay minutes experienced by the Newlands System, the These defects will be used as a baseline for the telecommunications system currently represents a assessment period. This indicator is given a grey low risk of impacting tonnages. rating. In the future, a trend of the average faults per month, compared to this Initial Assessment, When delays are normalised as per the KPI will be used to evaluate the lagging indicator. assessment methodology, telecommunications result in 159.78 minutes delay/NTK. This evaluates to a green rating. Preventative Maintenance Program Performance For Figure 6.32: Newlands System – (Multipletelecommunications Items) –preventative - (All) maintenance program

90 84 81 80

70 59 60

40 37

30 19

Number of Work Work of Number Orders 20

10 0 0 On Time or Less than 15 Between 15 Between 30 Greater than 60 Open or Early days late days & 30 days days & 60 days days late Recurring Item late late Error

Moura - Corrective Fault Performance Signals & Train Figure 6.33: Newlands System – telecommunicationsControl Systems – corrective maintenance program 12 11

6 5

4 3

Number of Work Orders Work Number of 2

0 0 0 0 0 On Time or 2 Days Late 3 Days Late 4 Days Late 5 Days Late More than 6 Needing Early Days Late More Information Analysis 101

Leading Indicator - Preventative Leading Indicator - Corrective Maintenance Program Performance Maintenance Program Performance The preventative maintenance program The corrective maintenance program performance performance for work orders related to for work orders related to telecommunications telecommunications systems on the Newlands systems on the Newlands System is shown System is shown in Figure 6.32. in Figure 6.33. This related directly to the telecommunications faults during the reporting Analysis of the data from TSMS found 63.2% of period, as seen in Figure 6.31. work orders were completed less than 30 days late from the programmed date, with 20.9% of these Analysis of the data from TSMS found 81.6% of completed on time or early. Further, 30.0% were work orders were completed on time or early, between 30 and 60 days late, and 6.8% greater with a further 5.3% two days late, 2.6% four days than 60 days late. This suggests improvement late, 2.6% five days late, and 7.9% over six days in the preventative maintenance performance late. Although this suggests an overall strong for the telecommunications systems is required, performance of the corrective maintenance work, particularly a reduction in work orders more than this does not currently meet the internal KPI set 30 days later than the programmed date. of 95% of scheduled corrective maintenance work orders completed on time during the reporting This does not currently meet the internal KPI set period. of 95% of scheduled preventative maintenance work orders completed less than 30 days late during the reporting period. l) - Asset Age By Acquisition Date Track Structure

Figure 6.34: GAPE – track – asset age by acquisition date

Number of Assets 15

0 Less than 10 years Between 10 & 15 years Between 15 & 20 years Between 20 & 30 years Greater than 30 years

Track Turnouts Track Support Railway Track

Figure 6.35:Newlands GAPE –- Remainingtrack – remaining Book book Life life Track Structure

Number of Assets 15

0 Book Life Reached Between 1 & 3 years Between 3 & 15 years Greater than 15 years Track Turnouts Track Support Railway Track Analysis 103

6.2.3 Goonyella to Abbot Point Lagging Indicator - Average Defects per Expansion (GAPE) Month/Track Kilometre In summary of the review of the RIMS database Track and Track Structures a total of 21 items were included for track in Summary FY 2012, which are in Figure 6.36. All of these occurred in April and May 2012 which coincides The track system status is summarised in with heavy rainfall in the area. Table 6.14. Further breakdown of this number reveals that The FAR was analysed to determine the age most of the defects recorded (13) related to broken composition of the system. The FAR reflects the fences and signage. The remaining defects related recent construct of GAPE, which was completed in mainly to resurfacing of rough track (five defects) 2011 as shown in Figure 6.34 and Figure 6.35. and scouring/landslides due to adverse weather Key Performance Indicator - Delay conditions. One defect related to insufficient crib Minutes ballast on a turnout. Upon analysis of the ViziRail information relating These defects will be used as a baseline for to the GAPE RAB, it was found that 192 minutes comparison with the End of Period Assessment. of delays were attributable to track assets. This Lagging Indicator - Extent of Disruptive contributes to 11.89% of total system delays. It Defects should be noted that the available data pool was small, and therefore, future monitoring of this As the system is a new construction, the system indicator is necessary in determining if this is a was not audited as part of the field inspection. true reflection of the system’s performance. When Although it is expected to score a green rating normalised, the track assets result in 627 minutes against the threshold values, a grey rating has of delay/ NTK. This results in a green assessment been scored. rating.

Table 6.14: GAPE – track – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Normalised delay Green Lagging indicator Physical defect identification Grey Lagging indicator Average defects per month/ track kilometre Grey Figure 6.36: GAPE – track – defects Track & Track Support Defects

12 11 10 10

Number of Defects of Number 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 July May June April March August October January February December November September

Newlands - Program Close Figure 6.37: GAPE – track –Out corrective Delays maintenance Track & program Track Support 100%

90%

80%

70%

60% 56%

50%

40% 38%

30%

Percentage of Work Orders Work of Percentage 20%

10% 6% 0% 0% 0% 0% On time or early Less than 30 Between 30 & 60 More than 60 Currently Open Recurring Items days late days late days Late OR Awaiting Information Analysis 105

Leading Indicator - Scheduled Leading Indicator - OTCI Performance Maintenance Program Compliance Evans & Peck reviewed the statistical data from In the reporting period, 56% of work orders the TRC for GAPE for FY 2012. This section had been closed out by the programmed date of track was completed midway through the or earlier, 6% remained open and 38% were reporting period, and thus, the data provided and recurring or awaiting further information/design analysed as part of this desktop review captures for completion. This compares to a low percentage only the latter half of the reporting period due to of reported defects being completed more than data availability. 30 days late or currently remaining open. This suggests an overall strong performance of the The asset age has been reflected in the reported scheduled maintenance program. This conclusion OTCI, as shown in Figure 6.38, with the reported has been based upon system performance as of score being below the lower threshold of the index. the data provision date, 4 December 2012. This is This indicates that the track geometry over GAPE shown in Figure 6.37. is in very good condition.

Figure 6.38: GAPE – track – OTCI GAPE - Overall Track Condition Index 35 33 31 29 27 25 23 OTCI Score OTCI 21 19 17 15 Jul-11 Oct-11 Jan-12 Apr-12 Lower - Median Threshold Median - Upper Threshold GAPE Figure 6.39:l) System GAPE – -structuresAsset Age – asset By Acquisitionage by acquisition Date date Civil Structures

20 Number of Assets

0 Less than 10 years Between 10 & 15 years Between 15 & 20 years Between 20 & 30 years Greater than 30 years

Culverts Bridges Miscellaneous Structures

l) System - Remaining Book Life Civil Structures Figure 6.40: GAPE – structures – remaining book life

20 Number of Assets

0 Book Life Reached Between 1 &3 years Between 3 & 15 years Greater than 15 years

Culverts Bridges Miscellaneous Structures Analysis 107

Structures Lagging Indicator - Asset Age Summary Figure 6.39 and Figure 6.40 display the recent construction of the GAPE structures. All assets The status for bridges and culverts is summarised are shown to have greater than 15 years remaining in Table 6.15 and Table 6.16. book life. Figure 6.39 and Figure 6.40 show the age and Lagging Indicator - Inspection Lag remaining book life of structures on GAPE. Sixty-one culvert inspections took place, all of The graphs reflect a recent construction with all which were between 30 and 60 days late. Ten assets less than 10 years of age. bridge inspections were carried out, all of which were less than 30 days late. This evaluates as an Key Performance Indicator – Delay amber and yellow rating for the culvert and bridge Minutes assets respectively. No delays or cancellations were experienced as a result of the structures on GAPE. This evaluates against the assessment methodology as a green rating for both culverts and bridges.

Table 6.15: GAPE – structures (bridges) – condition summary

Table 6.16: GAPE – structures (culverts) – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Cancellations Green KPI Delays Green Lagging indicator Asset age Green Lagging indicator Inspection work order Amber completion Lagging indicator Maintenance work order Grey completion Table 6.17: GAPE – structures – leading indicators

Closed Open Closed Asset inspections/ inspections/ defect/ Open defect/ Asset type quantity Asset Asset Asset Quantity quantity quantity quantity

Bridge 13 0.77 0 0 0.38 Culvert 65 0.94 0 0 0

Table 6.18: GAPE – signals – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Normalised delay Green Lagging indicator Average faults per month/ track Grey kilometre

Figure 6.41: GAPE – signals – asset age by acquisition date

4 Number of Assets 2

0 Less than 10 years Between 10 & 15 years Between 15 & 20 Between 20 & 30 Greater than 30 years years years

Level Crossing Protection Signal Interlockings – Relay Analysis 109

Lagging Indicator - Maintenance Lag Signals No culverts defects have been registered on GAPE. Summary No structure defects have been recorded as closed, and only five structure defects remained open at The status for signals and train control systems is 30 June 2012. summarised in Table 6.18. Leading Indicator - Inspections The approach to signalling and control system maintenance and asset renewal is defined in Table 6.17 suggests the quantities of both bridges Aurizon Network’s Asset Policy Maintenance and culvert inspections were better than the CESS and Renewal document, which outlines Aurizon requirements. There are a low number of open Network’s methodology to the maintenance of the defects. signal and control systems on GAPE.

As discussed previously, the GAPE project was completed in 2011. The asset characteristics reflect a newly constructed rail system. This is shown to be the case in Figure 6.41 and Figure 6.42. These works included the construction of approximately 70 km of new track and signalling equipment.

l) - Remaining Book Life Signal & Train Control systems Figure 6.42: GAPE – signals–remaining book life

4 Number of Assets

0 Book Life Reached Between 1 & 3 years Between 3 & 15 years Greater than 15 years

Level Crossing Protection Signal Interlockings – Relay CQCN - Delay Minutes Figure 6.43: GAPE – signals– delay minutes Signal & Train Control Systems FY12 300

250

200

150

100 Delay Minutes 50

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun UTC/DTC Faults ATP/ATC/AWS Ground Equipment Failure Damage to Trackside Equipment Infrastructure Protection Systems 38 Issues Signal Failure 16 Points Failure 100 209 248 46 111 39

Figure 6.44: GAPE – signals– all faults

14 13

10 10

6 5 4

Number of Faults 4

2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 July May June April March August October January February December November September Analysis 111

Key Performance Indicator - Delay Leading Indicator - Preventative Minutes Maintenance Program The GAPE signals and train control assets were Figure 6.45 shows the preventative maintenance found to contribute to 49.97% of total system program performance for signals on GAPE. A KPI delays. The total delays that were attributable of 95% is set by Aurizon Network for prevented to the signals was 807 minutes. This is shown in maintenance tasks to be closed less than 30 days Figure 6.43. When delays are normalised by NTK, late. Reviewing the overall performance, 84.2% this evaluates against the assessment methodology was achieved (48 tasks) with a further 7% more as 2,636 minutes/NTK and as a green rating. than 60 days late. Monitoring of preventative maintenance completion rates on this newly Lagging Indicator - Faults constructed system is recommended, to establish longer term trends for future assessments. The breakdown of signals and train control system faults in FY 2012 is detailed in Figure 6.44. This Leading Indicator - Corrective indicated faults being reported against the asset Maintenance Program base for the period between February and June, The on-time performance to rectify the faults reflecting the commissioning of the system in late identified in the lagging indicator is detailed in 2011. Figure 6.46. 72.7% of work orders were completed either on time or early, below the Aurizon internal This was further broken down into the major KPI of 95%. 15.2% of work was completed more equipment faults, which is shown in Table 6.19. than six days late. No trends could be established due to the size of the data pool.

Table 6.19: GAPE – signals – asset component faults

Month Housings Points Signals March 2 1 3 April 4 1 4 May 1 2 2 June 1 0 2

The above faults will be used as a baseline over the analysis period. Preventative Maintenance Program Performance For Figure 6.45: GAPENewlands – signals– preventative - Signals maintenance & Train program Control Systems 50 46 45

Number of Work Work of Number Orders 10 5 4 5 2 0 0 0 On Time or Less than 15 Between 15 Between 30 Greater than 60 Open or Early days late days & 30 days days & 60 days days late Recurring Item late late

GAPE - Corrective Fault Performance Signals & Train Figure 6.46: GAPE – signals– correctiveControl maintenance Systems program 30

25 24

Number of Work Work of Number Orders 5 5 3 1 0 0 0 0 On Time or 2 Days Late 3 Days Late 4 Days Late 5 Days Late More than 6 Needing Early Days Late More Information Analysis 113

Telecommunications Lagging Indicator - Faults Summary The review of the monthly faults from TSMS for the GAPE found only a single telecommunications The status for telecommunications systems is systems fault for the reporting period. This fault summarised in Table 6.20. did not have any correlated delay minutes.

The FAR was analysed to identify the age Currently, as there is not enough trending composition of telecommunications assets on information, this indicator is given a grey rating. GAPE. It was found that all 16 assets registered In the future, a trend of the average faults per in the FAR (Customer Premises Equipment) were month, as compared to this Initial Assessment, less than 10 years old. These assets were found to will be used to evaluate the lagging indicator. have between 3 and 15 years remaining book life. Key Performance Indicator – Delay Minutes The telecommunications system was found to cause no delay minutes on GAPE for the reporting period, with no telecommunications delay incidents occurring. This is as expected, given the relatively recent construction of GAPE.

As per the KPI assessment methodology, this evaluates to a green rating.

Table 6.20: GAPE – telecommunications system – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Normalised delay Green Lagging indicator Average faults per month/ track Grey kilometre Preventative Maintenance Program Performance For Figure 6.47: GAPE – telecommunications– preventative maintenance program (Multiple Items) - (All) 9 8 8

5 4 4 3 3

Number of Work Work of Number Orders 2

1 0 0 0 0 On Time or Less than 15 Between 15 Between 30 Greater than 60 Open or Early days late days & 30 days days & 60 days days late Recurring Item late late Error

Figure 6.48: Goonyella System BRTT

140% 120% 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Jul-11 Oct-11 Dec-11 Aug-11 Feb-12 Apr-12 Jun-12

BRTT Actual BRTT Target Analysis 115

Leading Indicator - Preventative Corrective Maintenance Program Maintenance Program Performance Performance The preventative maintenance program Due to the relatively recent construction of GAPE, performance for work orders related to there was only a single fault during the reported telecommunications systems on GAPE is shown in period. The corrective maintenance performance Figure 6.47. for this work order was 31 days, which is significantly higher than the set KPI of 95% of Analysis of the data from TSMS found 20.0% of scheduled corrective maintenance work orders work orders were completed less than 30 days late completed on time during the reporting period. from the programmed date; however, none were However, as there is not enough information, completed on time or early. Further, 53.3% were it is difficult to accurately assess the corrective between 30 and 60 days late, and 26.7% greater maintenance performance. This evaluates against than 60 days late. the assessment methodology as a grey rating. This suggests improvement in the preventative maintenance performance for telecommunications systems is required, particularly a required increase in work orders completed within 15 days from the programmed date, and a reduction in work orders greater than 60 days late. No scheduled tasks were completed on time, and only 20.0% of work orders completed less than 15 days late from the programmed date.

This does not currently meet the internal KPI set of 95% of scheduled preventative maintenance work orders completed less than 30 days late during the reporting period. Table 6.21: Goonyella System – operational performance summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI BRTT Yellow Lagging indicator TSR Green Lagging indicator OTCI Green

Table 6.22: Goonyella System – average transit time delays

Transit time delays Q1 FY 2012 Q2 FY 2012 Q3 FY 2012 Q4 FY 2012 The average above rail 8.20 16.89 18.69 14.40 delay The average Below Rail Minutes per 9.89 12.79 20.05 2.79 delay 100 train km The average unallocated 15.32 7.92 12.71 3.12 rail delay

Table 6.23: Goonyella System train path availability and uptake

Train path usage – Q1 FY 2011 Q1 FY 2012 Q2 FY 2012 Q3 FY 2012 Q4 FY 2012 Coal carrying services

Train paths used 2884 2178 2243 2017 2122 by the relevant services Train paths 2164 2154 2164 1936 2124 contracted by the relevant services Train paths 3232 3676 3710 4122 4155 available for use by the relevant services Train paths 3057 2161 2702 2090 2194 scheduled for the relevant services Analysis 117

6.3 Goonyella System Lagging Indicator - Temporary Speed Restrictions 6.3.1 Operational Performance The Goonyella System showed varied speed restrictions as can be seen in Figure 6.49. Summary Generally, restriction levels were well below the The KPIs and lagging indicators for the Newlands target level, indicating strong system performance. System’s operational performance are shown in 1.6% of days were found to have speed restrictions Table 6.21. above the target value. This evaluates against the assessment methodology as a green rating. Key Performance Indicator - Below Rail Transit Time Lagging Indicator - Overall Track Condition Index The BRTT data for FY 2012 shows that the Goonyella System was generally achieving the For FY 2012, the Goonyella System’s OTCI BRTT target of 123% except for July 2011 (at has crept slightly upwards, indicating a slight 127% BRTT), the overall assessment of the system worsening of track conditions. Generally speaking, evaluates to a yellow rating. the condition of the track is good as it has remained under the median threshold value for The average Below Rail delay is shown in the reporting period. This evaluates to a green Table 6.22. It has been, with the exception of Q4 rating against the assessment methodology. FY 2012, high compared to the rest of the CQCN. This is especially notable in Q3 FY 2012. Although The Goonyellla Systems overall results are shown this Q3 increase is possibly attributable to the in Figure 6.50. significant wet weather that occurred, the trend evident in Q1 and Q2 may indicate an underlying cause warranting further investigation. Previous reporting periods (FY 2011) showed reported Below Rail delays more consistent with network averages. Figure 6.49: Goonyella System TSR

3:00:00 140% 2:40:00 120% 2:20:00 100% 2:00:00 1:40:00 80%

1:20:00 60% 1:00:00 40% 0:40:00 20% 0:20:00 0:00:00 0% Jul-11 Oct-11 Dec-11 Aug-11 Feb-12 Apr-12 Jun-12

Goonyella System Speed Restrictions Goonyella System Speed Restriction Target BRTT Actual BRTT Target

Figure 6.50: Goonyella System – OTCI

28 OTCI Score 26

20 Jul-11 Oct-11 Sep-11 Dec-11 Jan-12 Aug-11 Feb-12 Apr-12 Nov-11 Jun-12 Mar-12 May-12

Lower - Median Threshold Range Median - Upper Threshold Range Goonyella System Analysis 119

Leading Indicator - Train Path Table 6.24 indicates that through the reporting Allocations period there has been a trending decrease in planned maintenance undertaken. This may be What is evident in Table 6.23 is that train path an indication of the winding down of response usage, for FY 2012 has remained consistent with maintenance resulting from the 2011 flood event, those paths contracted by the Access Holders. It back to a scheduled works baseline. However, as would be reasonable to assume that any resulting previously noted, the OTCI index rose through track degradation resulting from usage would be the period of FY 2012, indicating that the consistent with that expected, and therefore would maintenance schedule undertaken did not prevent be scheduled accordingly. This differs significantly a slight worsening of the asset conditions. when compared to Q1 FY 2011, where usage of train paths exceeded those that were contracted, increasing the rate of track degradation.

Table 6.24: Goonyella System maintenance train path allocations

Train path usage – Planned and unplanned Q1 FY 2011 Q1 FY 2012 Q2 FY 2012 Q3 FY 2012 Q4 FY 2012 maintenance

Train paths used for planned 1000 740 614 246 213 maintenance Train paths used for 37 23 22 23 11 unplanned maintenance Table 6.25: Goonyella (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) – track –summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Normalised delay Yellow Lagging indicator Physical defect identification Green Lagging indicator Average defects per month/ track Grey kilometre

Figure 6.51: l) Goonyella - Asset SystemAge By (including Acquisition Hail Creek, Date excluding Track Vermont) Structure – track – age by acquisition date

200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 Number of Assets 40 20 0 Less than 10 years Between 10 & 15 Between 15 & 20 Between 20 & 30 Greater than 30 years years years years

Track Turnouts Track Support Railway Track Analysis 121

6.3.2 Goonyella (including Hail Creek, Key Performance Indicator - Delay excluding Vermont) Minutes The graph in Figure 6.53 displays the total delay Track and Track Structure minutes caused by track maintenance and defects Summary over the Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) for the relevant period. Track The track and track structure KPIs and lagging assets were responsible for 2.68% of total reported indicators for the Goonyella (including Hail Creek delays on the system. When normalised, track and excluding Vermont) are shown in Table 6.25. assets result in 2092 minutes of delay/NTK. This evaluates against the assessment methodology as The FAR was analysed to determine the age a green rating. composition of the Goonyella System. Evident in Figure 6.53, a major delay was recorded The results of this, Figure 6.51 and Figure 6.52, in July 2011. This major incident occurred due show a range of asset ages and lifecycles, as is to to necessary track and structure inspections be expected on a large, mature system. following a major mine blast at Moranbah North Mine where delays were experienced whilst waiting for the inspector. A broken joint and track kink (top and line adjustment) were also found during the same month in the same area of the above incident.

Infrastructure delays in January and February over the system were mainly attributable to the identification of track heat buckles in various sections of the system. Evans & Peck reviewed Aurizon Network engineering standards and procedures in relation to hot weather precautions for track stability and the measurement and monitoring of stress free temperature which directly impacts on the tracks predisposition to buckling. Although the review found the procedures and requirements robust, there was little documented evidence that stress free temperatures were being monitored and recorded as per CETS requirements.

It is recommended that the procedures around the monitoring and recording of stress free temperatures across the system are reviewed by Aurizon Network to potentially reduce the risk of buckles and kinks on the system in the future. Additionally, stress free temperature can be a good indication of rail condition and would be a useful performance indicator in future assessments. Figure 6.52:Newlands Goonyella System - Remaining (including HailBook Creek, Life excluding Vermont) – track – remainingTrack book life Structure 250

200

150

100 Number of Assets 50

0 Book Life Reached Between 1 & 3 years Between 3 & 15 years Greater than 15 years

Track Turnouts Track Support Railway Track

Figure 6.53: Goonyella SystemNewlands (including Hail -Creek,Delay excluding Minutes Vermont) – track – delay minutes Track Structure FY12 4000

3500

3000

2500

2000

1500 Delay Minutes 1000

500

Figure 6.54: Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) – track – defects Track & Track Support Defects 500

450 439

400

350

300 288

250 224 228 219 214 205 208 192 200 176 178 Number of Defects of Number 150 117

100

0 July May June April March August October January February December November September Figure 6.55: Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) – track – corrective maintenanceNewlands program -performanceProgram Close Out Delays Track & Track Support 100%

90%

80%

70%

60% 48% 50% 37% 40%

30%

20% Percentage of Work Orders Work of Percentage 11% 10% 1% 1% 1% 0% On time or Less than 30 Between 30 & More than 60 Currently Open Recurring early days late 60 days late days Late Items OR Awaiting Information

Figure 6.56: Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) – track – OTCI Goonyella System OTCI FY12 40

28 OTCI Score 26

20 Jul-11 Oct-11 Sep-11 Dec-11 Jan-12 Aug-11 Feb-12 Apr-12 Nov-11 Jun-12 Mar-12 May-12

Lower - Median Threshold Range Median - Upper Threshold Range Goonyella System Analysis 125

Lagging Indicator - Average Defects per Lagging Indicator - Extent of Disruptive Month/Track Kilometre Defects The summary of the review of the RIMS database, As a result of the desktop findings above, field shown as a monthly breakdown in Figure 6.54, inspections were carried out through spot auditing found a total of 2,688 items were reported for to determine the extent of track defects. The track systems in the reporting period. It was Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, excluding further found that the monthly reports of level Vermont) had field inspections carried out on 12 crossings and civil infrastructure remained rather and 13 February 2013. Seven sites were audited consistent throughout the reporting period, with against six categories. Five of the 42 elements the highest monthly recording of defects occurring (11.9%) were to an unsatisfactory standard, below in track and turnouts in October 2011 (with the threshold value for the green rating (<30%). turnouts reported at approximately five times the Therefore, the track assets in the system are to a reporting period median). This coincided with satisfactory standard and a green rating. high average rainfalls in the catchments around Leading Indicator - Scheduled the rail system. Maintenance Program Compliance Further detail provided through the RIMS analysis In relation to the completion and closing out of included: the defects assessed in the reporting period, 48% of defects had been closed out by the programmed •• A total of 2010 defects were recorded for track, date or earlier, 11% were less than 30 days late, including: less than 1% remained open, and 37% were − Resurfacing (rough track) top and line recurring items/awaiting further information adjustment for completion. This compares against 1.5% of defects being closed more than 30 days late. − Removing and restoring of profiles due This conclusion has been based upon system to mud holes /repairs to scours and sheer performance as of the data provision date, failures of formation. 4 December 2012. This result is shown in Figure 6.55. •• A total of 627 defects were recorded for turnouts, including: − Rough track – resurface − Replacement of broken/damaged components. •• A total of 51 defects on level crossings. Evans & Peck concluded from this summary that the priorities for the Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) in relation to track largely relate to resurfacing requirements, that is, sections of rough track both on track and turnouts, and the deterioration of components on turnouts. It is evident from the reported statistics that wet and adverse weather conditions significantly exacerbate/effect the deterioration rate on this system. This is expected on a system which has high rainfall (with a high number of creek crossings and steep embankments), steep grades, narrow curves through the ranges, and formations formed on areas of black soil.

The defects shall be used as a baseline for comparison. Table 6.26: Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) – track – OTCI performance against lower and median range

OTCI Actual Trend Track lower to Section OTCI over Assessment category median range period range Millennium Balloon Loop 6 30-40 32-33 Variable Good, at lower end of range Carborough Downs Balloon 6 30-40 30-31 Variable Good, at lower end of Loop range Isaac Plains Balloon Loop 6 30-40 31-35  Good, at lower end of range Saraji Junction – Saraji 6 30-40 33-35  Good, at lower end of Mine range Dalrymple Junction – 6 30-40 36-39  Within required range Dalrymple Bay Dalrymple Junction – Hay 6 30-40 40-46  Not generally within Point required range Dalrymple Junction – 6 30-40 33-34  Good, at lower end of Coppabella range South Walker Junction– 6 30-40 30-31  Good, at lower end of South Walker Ck Mine range McArthur Junction 6 30-40 29 Const Good, just below range -McArthur Mine Coppabella - Wotonga 6 30-40 28-30  Good, just below range Burton Mine Junction– 6 30-40 35-36  Within required range Burton Mine Wotonga – North Goonyella 6 30-40 25-28  Below range Moranbah Junction – 6 30-40 28-29  Good, just below range Moranbah Nth Mine Goonyella Junction – 6 30-40 32-36  Within required range Goonyella Mine Riverside Junction – 6 30-40 31-34  Good, at lower end of Riverside Mine range Coppabella – Gregory 6 30-40 28-31  Good, at lower end of Junction range Peak Downs Junction – Pk 6 30-40 41-44  Not generally within Downs Mine required range Norwich Park – Norwich 6 30-40 29-30  Good, just below range Mine German Creek Junction – 6 30-40 37-39  Within required range German Ck Mine Oakey Ck Junction – Oakey 5,6 30-40 38-43  Not generally within Creek Mine required range Wotonga – Blair Athol Mine 6 30-40 23-24  Below range Hail Creek 6 30-40 24-26  Below range Moorvale Balloon Loop 6 30-40 25-27  Below range Analysis 127

Leading Indicator - OTCI Performance Structures The Evans & Peck assessment team reviewed the Summary statistical data from the TRC for the Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) The status for bridges and culverts is summarised for FY 2012. The output from this data provides in Table 6.27 and Table 6.28. a summary of the overall track condition and is The majority of culverts and bridges on the shown in Table 6.26. Goonyella (including Hail Creek, excluding Figure 6.56 shows the track geometry over the Vermont) System are greater than 30 years old Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, excluding with a proportion of assets less than 10 years old. Vermont) is in overall good condition. Although Bridges and culverts are generally shown to have a some deterioration is evident in the figure in Q2, remaining book life of greater than 15 years. reparatory maintenance was undertaken during Figure 6.57 and Figure 6.58 shows the asset that period to ensure that the OTCI was brought ages and remaining book lives of structures on back to the lower end of the required range. the Goonyella (including Hail Creek, excluding This demonstrates prudency in preventative Vermont) System. maintenance works to ensure that the geometry of the track does not deteriorate to a critical Key Performance Indicators – Delay maintenance level. Minutes

The results from this analysis (Table 6.26) Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, excluding substantiate the results from the field inspections Vermont) had two incidents which delayed trains which indicated that the track was in generally for the period. The two recorded incidents were good condition with issues noted mainly in the IR11-25672 (12 November 2011) which caused Dysart to Middlemount section. 341 minutes of delay and IR12-06507 (26 June 2012) which caused 948 minutes of cumulative The breakdown of OTCI per section shown in delay. Table 6.26 indicates that the majority of sections on the Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, Incident IR11-25672 caused service V54M an excluding Vermont) are within required geometry 80 minute delay and incident IR12-06507 had a standards. Of those that do not meet the required maximum delay to a single service of 486 minutes range, only the Dalrymple Junction to Hay Point to service J06M leading to an Amber allocation for is on the main line. bridges.

In summary, the OTCI range indicates that Both incidents did not lead to train cancellations. the track geometry over the Goonyella System Lagging Indicators - Asset Age (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) is in good condition. Figure 6.64 and Figure 6.65 show that the majority of culvert and bridge structures on the Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) have a remaining book life exceeding 15 years. Table 6.27: Goonyella (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) – structures (bridges) – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance

KPI Cancellations Green KPI Delays Amber Lagging indicator Asset age Green Lagging indicator Inspection work order Amber completion Lagging indicator Maintenance work order Grey completion

Table 6.28: Goonyella (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) – structures (culverts) – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Cancellations Green KPI Delays Green Lagging indicator Asset age Yellow Lagging indicator Inspection work order Yellow completion Lagging indicator Maintenance work order Grey completion

Table 6.29: Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) – structures – leading indicators

Closed Open Closed Asset inspections/ inspections/ defect/ Open defect/ Asset type quantity Asset Asset Asset Quantity quantity quantity quantity

Bridge 72 0.82 0 0.03 1.25 Culvert 1216 0.51 0 0.01 0.6 Analysis 129

Figure 6.57:l) System Goonyella - Asset System Age By (including Acquisition Hail Date Creek, Civil Structuresexcluding Vermont) –structures – asset age by acquisition date

800

700

600

500

400

300 Number Assets of Number

200

100

0 Less than 10 years Between 10 & 15 years Between 15 & 20 years Between 20 & 30 years Greater than 30 years

Culverts Bridges Miscellaneous Structures

Figure 6.58: Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) – structures – remaining book life l) System - Remaining Book Life Civil Structures

1200

1000

800

600

400 Number of Assets

200

0 Book Life Reached Between 1 &3 years Between 3 & 15 years Greater than 15 years

Culverts Bridges Miscellaneous Structures Figure 6.59: Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) – structures - culvert inspection close out delays from closed date Newlands - Culvert Inspection Close Out Delays From Closed Date 500 452 450

400

350

300

250

200 167 150 Number of Inspections of Number 100

50 4 0 0 0 0 On Time or Early Less than 30 Between 30 and More than 60 Currently Open Recurring Item days late 60 days late days late OR Abandoned

Figure 6.60: Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) – structures – bridge Newlandsinspection - Bridge close out Inspection delays from closedClose date Out Delays From Closed Date

5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 2 1.5

Number of Inspections of Number 1 0.5 0 0 0 0 On Time or Early Less than 30 Between 30 and More than 60 Currently Open Recurring Item days late 60 days late days late OR Abandoned Analysis 131

Figure 6.61: Goonyella (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) – structures – culvert defect close out delays from closed date Newlands - Program Close Out Delays Culverts 800 722 700

600

500

400

300

200

Number of Work Work of Number Orders 100 5 2 1 0 8 0 On Time or Early Less than 30 Between 30 & 60 More than 60 Currently Open Recurring Items Days Late days late days Late OR Awaiting Information

Figure 6.62: Goonyella (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) – structures – bridge defect close out delaysNewlands from closed date - Program Close Out Delays Bridges 50

Number of Work Work of Number Orders 2 0 0 0 1 0 On Time or Early Less than 30 Between 30 & 60 More than 60 Currently Open Recurring Items Days Late days late days Late OR Awaiting Information Figure 6.63:Newlands Goonyella - Asset System Age (including By Acquisition Hail Creek, Date excluding Signal Vermont) & Train – signals Control – Systems asset age by acquisition date

10 Number of Assets

0 Less than 10 years Between 10 & 15 years Between 15 & 20 Between 20 & 30 Greater than 30 years years years

Level Crossing Protection Signal Interlockings – Relay Signal Interlockings – Processor Control Systems (Signal - Non Vital) Train Protection Systems Signal Interlockings – Mechanical

Figure 6.64:l) - RemainingGoonyella System Book (including Life Signal Hail Creek,& Train excluding Control Vermont) systems – signals – remaining book life

20 Number of Assets

0 Book Life Reached Between 1 & 3 years Between 3 & 15 years Greater than 15 years

Level Crossing Protection Signal Interlockings – Relay Signal Interlockings – Processor Control Systems (Signal - Non Vital) Train Protection Systems Signal Interlockings – Mechanical Analysis 133

Signals and Train Control Systems Key Performance Indicator - Delay Minutes Summary The signals and train control system is responsible The status for signals and train control systems is for 10.12% of delays on the Goonyella System summarised in Table 6.30. (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont). The monthly breakdown of these delays is provided The approach to signal and train control system in Figure 6.65. Over 70% of delays were found to maintenance and asset renewal is defined in be caused by either track circuit or point failure; Aurizon Network’s Asset Policy Maintenance and which may be attributable to asset age. A further Renewal document. 13% of these delays have been attributed to the Figure 6.63 and Figure 6.64 show the asset telemetry on the system. As noted previously, the age and remaining book life of the signals and telemetry assets are over 20 years old. While not train control assets for the Goonyella System shown in Figure 6.65, the number of delaying (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont). The incidents peaked through the period of December characteristics show a system that has undergone to February, with nearly double the number of periodic asset renewal, with relay interlockings track circuit and point failures being reported installed 15 to 30 years ago employed in compared to the yearly average. This indicates combination with recently installed processor that the summer wet season causes issues in the interlockings. system.

It should be noted that 29% of equipment When normalised against NTK, signalling recorded in the FAR is over 20 years old. This and train control system delays resulted in creates an issue in that the remaining book life 7,904 minutes/NTK and against the assessment indicates a signal legacy upgrade issue in the methodology, the system evaluates to a yellow mid-term at the 3 to 15 year period. While the rating. book life does not indicate the serviceable life of signals and train control assets, especially where good maintenance practices are employed, it provides an area of concern. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the telemetry system used on the system is over 20 years old.

Table 6.30: Goonyella (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) – signals – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Normalised delay Yellow Lagging indicator Average faults per month/ track Grey kilometre Figure 6.65: Goonyella System (includingCQCN Hail - Delay Creek, excludingMinutes Vermont) – signals – delay minutes Signal & Train Control Systems FY12 30000

25000

20000

15000

Delay Minutes Delay 10000

5000

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Wrong Side Signal Failure UTC/DTC Faults 45 24 144 ATP/ATC/AWS Ground Equipment 167 51 809 Failure Damage to Trackside Equipment 49 RIFOT 27 122 532 77 78 51 43 33 132 RAPAD 190 3349 70 63 60 82 22 145 99 278 103 Level Crossing Failure 189 1352 39 177 89 5 718 154 107 Infrastructure Protection Systems 570 132 1404 470 829 274 631 837 240 388 15 89 Issues Signal Failure 854 224 501 62 46 565 232 196 115 9 119 79 Telemetry Failure 5961 1197 369 66 1685 1132 3191 654 155 2222 56 1310 Points Failure 3381 2600 6270 903 4824 6339 6743 3477 1191 1162 3793 5349 Track Circuit Failure 4595 1788 3727 1278 2905 15508 5854 8210 1638 2563 6140 5286 Analysis 135

Lagging Indicator - Faults Figure 6.68 shows the rates of point failures through FY 2012. The underlying cause of the The total number of signals and train control equipment failure may be life-expired equipment system faults for the Goonyella System (including or the availability of spares. It may also be Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) is shown in attributable to either the lubrication schedule or Figure 6.66. It can be seen that there is a seasonal the impact of coal dust contamination. influence on the number of faults being recorded. This influence is highlighted in Figure 6.67 which There also appears to be a trend in failures of shows the track and signal faults on the system the contactors in M23A (Mk1 and Mk2) point respectively. This peak in faults being recorded machines. Anecdotal evidence suggests that can be correlated to the increase in delays being this machine appears to be a preference of the recorded in the KPI. Aurizon Network maintenance staff, as they have the perception of being very reliable, however, as As part of the review of the maintenance records the internal contactors are no longer able to be during the 12 month period, the highest signalling procured, legacy issues have arisen. and train control equipment failures across the Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, excluding Signalling fault levels have varied seasonally Vermont) have been: through FY 2012. The majority of faults are being caused by either component failure or no cause •• Points: a number of faults to points caused by found. out-of-adjustment, obstructions, lubrication or component failure. Need to consider age of During the assessment, an area for concern was equipment and general maintenance practice. highlighted in that the telemetry system widely There are a high number of faults with no used on the Goonyella System (including Hail attributable cause Creek, excluding Vermont) is over 20 years old and life expired, with spares difficult to source. •• Track: most faults categorised as no cause found; next highest due to ‘component failure’, This will be an area of risk to the operation of ‘high resistance’ or ‘software failure’ trains and may lead to a possible increase in delays and cancellations. However, there are •• Signals: signals have shown seasonal variation currently processes in place that will allow trains through the reporting period. The majority to keep running at a reduced capacity if there is a of faults caused by ‘component failure’ or ‘no signalling equipment fault. The telemetry is based cause found’. on the Westinghouse Brake and Signal Westronic Track circuits caused the greatest number of faults S2 field units that are over 20 years old and spares in the signals and train control asset group. The and parts for electronic equipment of this age may breakdown of track faults is shown in Figure 6.65. be difficult to source.

A high number of these faults were attributable to The remaining signal and train control assets the ML track circuit (402 of 796). The failure areas on the Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, of the ML track circuit that may be associated with excluding Vermont) varied in age but performs in equipment age are: an acceptable manner. The only concern regarding this equipment is to ensure sufficient spares are •• high resistance available in case of failures and maintenance is continued in line with manufacturers’ and Aurizon •• out of adjustment Network‘s requirements. This result is shown in •• no fault found Figure 6.69. Over 75% (317 of 402) of ML circuit faults were Evans & Peck suggest that Aurizon Network attributed to “no fault found”. investigate and resolve this high occurance of nonattributable faults. Figure 6.66: Goonyella (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) – signals – all faults

332 350

290 280 300 270 244 233 250 214 207 205 197 200 168

150

Number of Faults 100

50 19

0 July May June April March August October January February December November September

Figure 6.67: Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) – signals – track circuit faults

120 113

97 100

81 81 78 80 69 62 58 57 60 52 48

40 Number of Faults of Number

0 0 July May June April March August October January February December November September Analysis 137

Goonyella (exc Vermont) - Faults Figure 6.68: Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) –signals – point faults Points - Signal & Train Control Systems 120

97 100 88

80 74 69 65 65 62 59 60 49 45 40 36 Number of Faults of Number

1 0 July May June April March August October January February December November September

Figure 6.69: Goonyella SystemGoonyella (including (exc Hail Creek, Vermont) excluding Vermont)- Faults – signals – signal asset faults Signals - Signal & Train Control Systems 25 22 21 20 19 18 17 15 15 14 13 12

10 8

Number of Faults of Number 6 5

0 0 July May June April March August October January February December November September Figure 6.70:Preventative Goonyella System Maintenance (including Hail Creek, Program excluding Vermont) Performance – signals – preventativeFor maintenanceNewlands program - Signals performance & Train Control Systems 600 515 500

403 400

285 300

200 169 Number of Work Work of Number Orders 100 46 0 0 On Time or Less than 15 Between 15 Between 30 Greater than Open or Early days late days & 30 days & 60 60 days late Recurring days late days late Item

Figure 6.71: NewlandsGoonyella System - Corrective (including Hail FaultCreek, excluding Performance Vermont) – signalsSignals – corrective & maintenance program performance Train Control Systems 2500 2251

2000

1500

1000

Number of Work Work of Number Orders 500 167 108 56 40 35 1 0 On Time or 2 Days Late 3 Days Late 4 Days Late 5 Days Late More than 6 Needing Early Days Late More Information Executive Summary 139

Leading Indicator - Preventative Telecommunications Maintenance Program Summary Figure 6.70 shows the preventative maintenance program performance for the signals on the The status for telecommunications systems is Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, excluding summarised in Table 6.31. Vermont). A KPI of 95% is set by Aurizon The telecommunications systems for the Network for maintenance tasks. Reviewing the Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, excluding overall performance, 77.0% of work orders were Vermont) is a system undergoing gradual upgrade completed less than 30 days late. This falls below and performs reliably due to the redundancy built the target levels set internally by Aurizon Network. into the system architecture. This has the potential to cause a trending increase in the number of faults, and subsequent delays The FAR was analysed to identify the age being recorded on the system. A further 7.7% of composition of telecommunications on the work orders were found to be closed more than Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, excluding 60 days late. Vermont). As seen in Figure 6.72, 63% of the Leading Indicator - Corrective assets are less than 10 years old, with 12% between Maintenance Program Performance 10 and 15 years old, 5% between 15 and 20 years old, and the remaining 21% more than 20 years The on-time performance to rectify the faults old. identified in the lagging indicator through FY 2012 is detailed in Figure 6.71 - 84.7% of work orders The renewal of linking network equipment needs were completed either on time or early, below to be taken note of, as 40% was found to be older the accepted internal KPI of 95%. 6.3% were than 15 years (81% older than 20 years) and 45% completed more than six days late. having reached book life. Remaining book life is shown in Figure 6.73.

Note that while this is not a performance indicator for the assessment of the system, it does provide some level of insight into the expected condition of the assets.

Table 6.31: Goonyella (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) – telecommunications system – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Normalised delay Yellow Lagging indicator Average faults per month/ track Grey kilometre l) - Asset Age By Acquisition Date Figure 6.72: Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) – telecommunications systemTelecommunications – asset age by acquisition date

10 Number of Assets 5

0 Less than 10 years Between 10 & 15 years Between 15 & 20 years Between 20 & 30 years Greater than 30 years

Customer Premises Equipment Linking Network Equipment Data Network Equipment Telephone Exchange Equipment

FigureNewlands 6.73: Goonyella - Remaining System Book (including Life Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) – telecommunications Telecommunicationssystem – remaining book life

10 Number of Assets 5

0 Book Life Reached Between 1 & 3 years Between 3 & 15 years Greater than 15 years

Customer Premises Equipment Linking Network Equipment Data Network Equipment Telephone Exchange Equipment Analysis 141

Delay Minutes Leading Indicator - Preventative Maintenance Program The telecommunications system is responsible for 0.60% of the delays on the Goonyella System The preventative maintenance program (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont), of performance for work orders related to which a monthly breakdown can be seen in telecommunications systems on the Goonyella Figure 6.74. System (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) is as shown in Figure 6.76. Analysis of the data A total of four faults resulting in 8,455 delay from TSMS found 62.3% of work orders were minutes were seen over the reporting period, completed less than 30 days late, with 38.0% of with the sole fault source being communications these completed on time or early. Further, 22.6% failure. Given the small number and variation were between 30 to 60 days late. 27.7% of work of delays, as seen in Figure 6.74 and the low orders were closed greater than 60 days late with percentage contribution of telecommunications 2.4% of items currently still open, or deemed to delays to the total delay minutes experienced be recurring items (Evans & Peck assessed these by the Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, items to be part of a data integrity issue with excluding Vermont), the telecommunications TSMS). system currently represents a low risk of impacting tonnages into the future. This does not currently meet the internal KPI set of 95% of scheduled preventative maintenance When normalised as per the KPI assessment work orders completed less than 30 days late methodology, telecommunications result in during the reporting period. 470 minutes of delay/NTK. This evaluates to a yellow rating. Leading Indicator - Corrective Maintenance Program Performance Lagging Indicator - Faults The corrective maintenance program performance The summary of the review of the monthly faults for work orders related to telecommunications from TSMS for the Goonyella System (including systems on the Goonyella System (including Hail Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) can be found in Creek, excluding Vermont) is shown in Figure 6.75, which found a total of 190 faults for Figure 6.77. telecommunications systems in the reporting period, with the majority of faults due to radio Analysis of the data from TSMS found 62.1% of systems (41.6%) and transmission (41.1%). There work orders were completed on time or early, with were peaks of 31 and 29 faults in September and a further 5.3% two days late, 4.2% three days late, October respectively; however, this did not result 1.6% four days late, 1.6% five days late, and 25.3% in any correlated delay minutes during the period. over six days late. This suggests improvement Only a minor seasonal influence is seen, with in the corrective maintenance performance upward trends in the December to March wet for telecommunications systems is required, months. particularly a reduction in work orders more than six days later than the programmed date. Currently, as there is not enough trending information, this indicator is given a grey rating. This does not currently meet the internal KPI set In the future, a trend of the average faults per of 95% of scheduled corrective maintenance work month, as compared to this Initial Assessment, orders completed on-time during the reporting will be used to evaluate the lagging indicator. period. CQCN - Delay Minutes Figure 6.74: Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) – telecommunications system – delay minutesTelecommunications FY12 7000

6000

5000

4000

3000 Delay Minutes Delay 2000

1000

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Communications Failure 2216 37 320 5882

Figure 6.75: Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) – telecommunications system – faults 35 31 30 29

25 24 21 20 19 16 15 14 12 9 Number of Faults 10 8 6 5 1 0 July May June April March August October January February December November September Analysis 143

Figure 6.76:Preventative Goonyella System Maintenance (including Hail Creek, Program excluding Vermont) Performance – telecommunications For system – preventative(Multiple maintenance Items) program performance - (All) 300 265 251 250 239

200

144 150 135

100 Number of Work Work of Number Orders 50 25

0 On Time or Less than 15 Between 15 Between 30 Greater than Open or Early days late days & 30 days days & 60 days 60 days late Recurring Item late late Error

Figure 6.77:Goonyella Goonyella System (exc (includingVermont) Hail -Creek,Corrective excluding Vermont) Fault Performance – telecommunications system – correctiveSignals maintenance & Train program Control performance Systems 140

118 120

100

60 48

40 Number of Work Orders Work Number of 20 10 8 3 3 0 0 On Time or 2 Days Late 3 Days Late 4 Days Late 5 Days Late More than 6 Needing More Early Days Late Information l) - Asset Age By Acquisition Date Track Structure Figure 6.78: Goonyella (Vermont) System – track – asset age by acquisition date

2 Number of Assets 1

0 Less than 10 years Between 10 & 15 Between 15 & 20 Between 20 & 30 Greater than 30 years years years years

Track Turnouts Track Support Railway Track

Newlands - Remaining Book Life Figure 6.79: Goonyella System (Vermont) – track – remaining book life Track Structure 5

2 Number of Assets 1

0 Book Life Reached Between 1 & 3 years Between 3 & 15 years Greater than 15 years

Track Turnouts Track Support Railway Track Analysis 145

6.3.3 Goonyella (Vermont) Lagging Indicator - Extent of Disruptive Defects Track and Track Structures As a result of the desktop findings above, a Summary field inspection was carried out through spot auditing to determine the extent of track defects. The track and track structures status is The Goonyella System (Vermont) had this field summarised in Table 6.32. inspection carried out on 13 February 2013. One site was audited against six categories and The FAR was analysed to determine the age it was found none of the six elements were to composition of the system. The FAR reflected the an unsatisfactory standard. This is below the recent construction of the Lake Vermont spur, threshold value for the green rating (<30%). which was completed in 2009, as shown in Therefore, the track assets in the system are to a Figure 6.78 and Figure 6.79. satisfactory standard. Key Performance Indicator - Delay Leading Indicator - Scheduled Minutes Maintenance Program The track assets contributed to 1.06% of total In relation to the completion and closing system delays. This was made up of five reported out of the defects assessed in the reporting incidents over the reporting period, as broken period, 44% of defects had been closed out down in Figure 6.80. When normalised, this within the programmed date or earlier and results in 1790 minutes of delay/NTK and 56% were recurring items/awaiting further evaluates against the assessment methodology as a information or design as shown in Figure 6.82. green rating. It was further noted that these minor This nominally suggests a strong performance delays often were attributable to wet weather as no defect closures were reported delayed. causes. However, it is important to note the size of Lagging Indicator - Average Defects per the dataset (nine defects) may not provide an Month/Track Kilometre accurate representation of the asset condition. This conclusion has been based upon system The Lake Vermont spur recorded a total of nine performance as of the data provision date, defects for track over the reporting period. This 4 December 2012. is shown in Figure 6.81. These were distributed evenly over the period. Further breakdown of this total figure showed that all of the nine defects reported were for track. These defects mainly consisted of adjustments to top and line, and replacement of clips and fasteners. No defects were recorded for turnouts.

Table 6.32: Goonyella System (Vermont) – track – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Normalised delay Green Lagging indicator Physical defect identification Green Lagging indicator Average defects per month/ track kilometre Grey Figure 6.80: Goonyella System (Vermont) – track – delay minutes

30 Delay Minutes 20

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Track Maintenance and Repair Track Defect 14 6 61 30

Figure 6.81: Goonyella SystemTrack (Vermont) & Track – track Support – defects Defects 5

4 3 3 2 2 2 1 1

Number of Defects of Number 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 July May June April March August October January February December November September Analysis 147

Leading Indicator - OTCI Performance The asset age is reflected in the recorded OTCI data, with the score being well below the lower Evans & Peck reviewed the statistical data threshold. It should be noted that while the data from the TRC for the Lake Vermont spur of the provided is trending upwards (and therefore Goonyella System for FY 2012. The output from indicating a worsening of the asset condition); this data provides a summary of the overall track it is trending towards the long term expectation condition and is shown in Figure 6.83. of condition. This reported track condition was Evans & Peck notes that this section of track was substantiated in the field inspections where the completed in 2009. track conditions were in good condition without any major issues noted.

In consideration of all the influencing factors, it is Evans & Peck’s opinion that the track systems overall are in good condition on the Lake Vermont Spur of the Goonyella System.

Newlands - Program Close Figure 6.82: Goonyella SystemOut (Vermont)Delays –Track track – &corrective Track maintenance Support program 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 56%

50% 44% 40% 30% 20% Percentage of Work Orders Work of Percentage 10% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% On time or Less than 30 Between 30 & More than 60 Currently Recurring early days late 60 days late days Late Open Items OR Awaiting Information Figure 6.83: Goonyella System Goonyella(Vermont) – track System – OTCI (Vermont) 40

30 OTCI Score

20 Jul-11 Oct-11 Sep-11 Dec-11 Jan-12 Aug-11 Feb-12 Apr-12 Nov-11 Jun-12 Mar-12 May-12

Below Lower Threshold Value Lower - Median Threshold Value Goonyella System (Vermont)

Figure 6.84: Goonyellal) System System - Asset (Vermont) Age By – structures Acquisition – asset Date age by acquisitionCivil Structures date

Number of Assets 2

0 Less than 10 years Between 10 & 15 Between 15 & 20 Between 20 & 30 Greater than 30 years years years years

Culverts Miscellaneous Structures Analysis 149

Structures Lagging Indicator - Inspection Lag Summary One culvert inspection was carried out (on time) during the period. There are no bridges for There are no bridges on the Lake Vermont spur inspection on Goonyella System (Vermont). and consequently no KPIs or lagging indicators for the Goonyella (Vermont) bridges. A summary of Lagging Indicator - Maintenance Lag results for culverts is shown in Table 6.33. No structures defects were listed for rectification All structures on Goonyella System (Vermont) on Goonyella System (Vermont). have greater than 15 years remaining book life. Leading Indicator - Inspections Key Performance Indicator - Delays Table 6.34 shows no inspections were carried out No delays were found to have occurred due during FY 2012 on Goonyella System (Vermont). to structural faults on the Goonyella System This does not indicate non-conformance with (Vermont). Against the assessment methodology, CESS; however the CESS requires all structures to a green rating is achieved. be inspected in the following financial year. Lagging Indicator - Asset Age All structures on Goonyella System (Vermont) are shown to have greater than 15 years remaining book life. The asset age is shown in Figure 6.84 and remaining book life in Figure 6.85.

Table 6.33: Goonyella System (Vermont) – structures (culverts) – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Cancellations Green KPI Delays Green Lagging indicator Asset age Green Lagging indicator Inspection work order completion Green Lagging indicator Maintenance work order completion Grey

Table 6.34: Goonyella System (Vermont) –structures – leading indicators

Closed Open Closed Asset inspections/ inspections/ defect/ Open defect/ Asset type quantity Asset Asset Asset Quantity quantity quantity quantity

Culvert 8 0 0 0 0 Table 6.35: Goonyella System (Vermont) – signals – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Normalised delay Red Lagging indicator Average faults per month/ track Grey kilometre

Figure 6.85: l)Goonyella System System - Remaining (Vermont) – Book structures Life – remainingCivil Structures book life

Number of Assets 2

0 Book Life Reached Between 1 &3 years Between 3 & 15 years Greater than 15 years

Culverts Miscellaneous Structures Analysis 151

Signals and Train Control Systems Key Performance Indicator - Delay Minutes Summary Overall, the signals and train control system is The status for signals and train control systems is responsible for 39.13% of delays on the Goonyella summarised in Table 6.35. System (Vermont). The monthly breakdown of these delays is provided in Figure 6.86. When The approach to signalling and control system normalised, signals and train control assets maintenance and asset renewal is defined within resulted in 37,645 minutes of delay/NTK and are the Aurizon Network Asset Policy Maintenance allocated a red rating. Upon further analysis of the and Renewal document, which outlines Aurizon ViziRail database, it was found that over 75% of Network’s methodology to the maintenance of the the delay minutes (1,766 of 2,334 minutes) were Signal and Train Control systems on the Goonyella attributable to the lost detection of the 7A/B Saraji System (Vermont). side mainline turnout points. It appeared that Upon analysis of the FAR, it was found that the some of these faults were attributable to defective Goonyella System (Vermont) was found to have or blown fuses, which may be linked to power two signals and train control assets in the register. fluctuations that caused issues with other points These assets were found to be less than 10 years on the system, indicating possible issues in the old, with between 3 and 15 years of remaining underlying power system. book life. As the system is relatively new, Evans & Peck believe that the assets should not present an issue for system performance in the foreseeable future.

Figure 6.86: Goonyella System (Vermont) – signals – delay minutes

1400

1200

1000

800

600

Delay Minutes Delay 400

200

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Damage to Trackside Equipment RAPAD 30 27 Infrastructure Protection Systems Issues Telemetry Failure 8 Points Failure 1179 471 378 209 Track Circuit Failure 32 Figure 6.87: Goonyella System (Vermont) – signals – faults

8 7

6 5 4 4 4 3

Number of Faults of Number 2 2

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 July May June April March August October January February December November September

Figure 6.88: Goonyella System (Vermont) – signals – preventative maintenance program

50 47 45

15 12

Number of Work Work of Number Orders 9 10 7 5 5 3

0 On Time or Less than 15 Between 15 days Between 30 Greater than 60 Open or Early days late & 30 days late days & 60 days days late Recurring Item late Analysis 153

Lagging Indicators - Faults Leading Indicator - Preventative Maintenance Program The total number of signals and train control system faults for the Goonyella System (Vermont) Figure 6.88 shows the preventative maintenance is shown in Figure 6.87. program performance for the signals and train control system on the Goonyella System There were issues with the weighing systems on (Vermont). An internal KPI of 95% is set by the load out, with 14 defects reported in FY 2012. Aurizon Network for maintenance tasks to be Further issues included five track faults and two completed less than 30 days late. Reviewing the point faults. overall performance, 77.1% of closed work orders were completed. This falls below the target levels It is worth noting that the delay noted in set by Aurizon Network. A further 8.4% of work September 2011 does not appear to have a orders were more than 60 days late. respective fault reported in the TSMS database. Evans & Peck suggest this may have resulted from Leading Indicator - Corrective database integrity issues. Maintenance Figure 6.89 shows 72% of work orders were completed either on time or early, below the accepted internal KPI of 95% with 16% completed more than six days late. It is noted, however, that as this system is a mine spur and the impact this performance has on the operations of the CQCN is not as significant as mainline track.

Figure 6.89: Goonyella System (Vermont) – signals – corrective maintenance program

20 18 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 4 3 Number of Work Work of Number Orders 2 0 0 0 0 0 On Time or 2 Days Late 3 Days Late 4 Days Late 5 Days Late More than 6 Needing Early Days Late More Information Table 6.36: Newlands System – telecommunications system – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Normalised delay Green Average faults per month/ track Lagging indicator Grey kilometre

Figure 6.90:Preventative Goonyella System Maintenance (Vermont) – telecommunications Program Performancesystem – preventative For maintenance program performance(Multiple Items) - (All) 10 9 9

4 3 3 2 2 Number of Work Work of Number Orders 2

1 0 0 0 On Time or Less than 15 Between 15 days Between 30 Greater than 60 Open or Early days late & 30 days late days & 60 days days late Recurring Item late Error Analysis 155

Telecommunications Leading Indicator - Preventative Maintenance Program Summary The preventative maintenance program The status for telecommunications systems is performance for work orders related to summarised in Table 6.36. telecommunications systems on the Goonyella System (Vermont) is as shown in Figure 6.90. The FAR was analysed to identify age composition of telecommunications on the Goonyella System Analysis of the data from TSMS found 25.0% of (Vermont). The system currently has only two work orders were completed less than 30 days late telecommunications system assets, which are from the programmed date, with 50.0% of these under 10 years old and neither has reached book completed on time or early. Further, 56.3% were life. between 30 and 60 days late with 18.8% of items Key Performance Indicators – Delay currently still open, or were deemed to be recurring Minutes items (Evans & Peck assessed these items to be part of a data integrity issue with TSMS). This suggests The telecommunications system was found to improvement in the preventative maintenance cause no delay minutes in the Goonyella System performance for telecommunications system is (Vermont) for the reporting period. This is as required, particularly a reduction in open work expected, given the relatively smaller number of orders and a reduction in work orders greater than telecommunications assets in the system. 30 days later than programmed date. As per the KPI assessment methodology, this This indicator does not currently meet the KPI set evaluates to a green rating. of 95% of scheduled preventative maintenance Lagging Indicators - Faults work orders completed less than 30 days late during the reporting period. The summary of the review of the monthly faults from TSMS for the Goonyella System (Vermont) Leading Indicator - Corrective found only a single telecommunications fault in Maintenance Program February; a fault in the radio systems. As discussed in the lagging indicator, only a single Currently, as there is not enough trending telecommunications fault during the reported information, this indicator is given a grey rating period was reported. The corrective maintenance against the assessment methodology. In the performance for this work order was on time, future, a trend of the average faults per month, as meeting the set KPI of 95% of scheduled corrective compared to this Initial Assessment, will be used maintenance work orders completed on time to evaluate the lagging indicator. during the reporting period. However, as there is not enough information, it is difficult to accurately assess the corrective maintenance performance. Table 6.37: Goonyella System (Electric) – traction distribution – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Delay Green KPI Dewirements Green Lagging indicator Infrastructure inspection Green

Goonyella - Delay Minutes Figure 6.91: Goonyella System (Electric) – traction distribution– delay minutes Traction Distribution & Power Supply FY12 20000

18000

16000

14000

12000

10000

8000 Delay Minutes Delay 6000

4000

2000

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Trips 26 514 504 474 95 6075 820 1888 1719 549 13 Obstruction/Damage/Failure/Malfun 14464 962 9446 353 2635 11705 2161 2339 608 1786 2516 ction of OHTWE Analysis 157

6.3.4 Goonyella (Electric) Lagging Indicator - Dewirements There were six dewirements from all causes on Traction Distribution the Goonyella System (Electric) for FY 2012. This Summary is under the threshold of 12 for a green rating. The causes of all dewirements on the Goonyella The KPIs and lagging indicators for the Goonyella System (Electric) are shown in Figure 6.92. System (Electric)’s traction distribution are shown in Table 6.37. Some of these items such as high vehicles clashing with the traction distribution system are outside Key Performance Indicator – Delay Aurizon Network’s control. No insulator and Minutes wildlife related failures occurred in the Goonyella As the tonnage carried by the system increases System (Electric); however some did occur in the the number of faults may slightly increase. The Blackwater System (Electric). There was one case delay minutes attributed to electrical overhead of a stagger related failure in the Goonyella System faults will increase proportionally simply due to (Electric). The main overall cause of delays being the involvement of more trains. This KPI can be hardware failure. normalised by dividing by NTK; this would then allow for the impact of increased traffic. This may For FY 2012 the applicable dewirements for the be partly mitigated as a proportion of the faults Goonyella System (Electric) after removal of the are the result of wildlife and therefore as traffic vehicle incident are six; as stated earlier, this is density increases there will be a natural deterrent within the green threshold of twelve. Details of to enter the corridor. these dewirements are shown in Table 6.38.

The total delay for the Goonyella System Dewirements show an increasing trend during (Electric) due to traction distribution factors is the summer months of FY 2012; partially due to 48,975 minutes. This is normalised to net tonne increased faults generated by wildlife. kilometres by dividing by 17.97 NTK17 resulting in 2,725 minutes per NTK. The result is under the A case could be argued that the effects of wildlife threshold of 4,500 minutes per NTK required for a are outside Aurizon Network’s control, Evans & green rating. Peck have retained them as part of the KPI as Aurizon has some control through vegetation Figure 6.91 shows the distribution of delays for management and physical measures. There is the Goonyella System (Electric) for FY 2012. a precedence of control measures being put in place to reduce wildlife induced faults for example (PVC drainage pipes inserted in masts to prevent the building of crow’s nests). Wildlife generated faults cause significant disruption and therefore there is merit in generating innovative solutions to reduce the problem. Allowance may need to be made for the inclusion of wildlife if it is considered seasonal factors have played a role in increasing the frequency of occurrences.

17. The figure of 18.5 GNTK (109 net tonne kilometres) provided by Aurizon for both the Blackwater System (Electric) and Goonyella System (Electric) for FY2012. Figure 6.92: Goonyella System (Electric) – dewirement analysis

12.5% Hardware Wildlife 12.5% Stagger

Operational 12.5% Rollingstock 75% Vehicle 12.5% Insulator

75.0% Analysis 159

Table 6.38: Goonyella System (Electric) – traction distribution – dewirement records*

Date Section Location Description Details Comments 19/09/2011 241 Coppabella Overhead trip 241 Distance Midpoint anchor 14:25 FS – Red – no trains, no protection trip. failure. Catenary Mountain TSC reports Double trip. Track split through dead circuits failed near end. Large fire ME 13/14 signals caused by wire down 13/09/2011 251 Coppabella Overhead trip EV51 at Isaac 22:48 FS – Wotonga Plains reported no TSC problems. 0500 – 14.9 E700 reported wire hanging 2 masts in front of BL 14P signal approx. 153.6km 10/01/2012 211 Wandoo FS – Overhead trip Double trip after 4:44 Balook TSC train went through intersection 4/02/2012 241 Coppabella Overhead trip Double trip 241 12:01 FS – Red section Mountain TSC 7/03/2012 331 Norwich Park Overhead trip Double distance Removed 21:17 FS – German protection trip overhead from Creek TSC 331 section. U586 Bad Order Siding reports no troubles German Creek at Bundoora and Balloon Loop. EF44 reports Also straighten possible flash in overhead wire on German Creek main line Balloon Loop

* The sixth dewirement caused by a high vehicle has not been counted against the target Table 6.39: Goonyella System (Electric) – Traction Distribution - earth wire failure records

Date Location Comments 26/07/2011 Norwich Park FS – Saraji TSC NP321 tripped distance protection. EMERGENCY ISOLATION completed. 27/08/2011 Moranbah South FS – Wotonga TSC 401 distance protection trip. 4/09/2011 Moranbah South FS – Wotonga TSC Earth wire broken. 12/09/2011 Norwich Park FS – Saraji TSC Broken earth wire found at OC 82.778 km. 16/09/2011 Norwich Park FS – Saraji TSC Wire down at 81.792 km. Stay foundation pulling out of ground has applied tension to the earth and feeder. Bird has contacted both wires causing earth to burn down. 4/01/2012 Bolingbroke FS – Black Mountain TSC 601 double trip. Attempted a reclose – tripped again. Earth wire repaired. 21/01/2012 Bolingbroke FS – Black Mountain TSC Broken earth wire at GA 54.170 U km mark. 31/01/2012 Wandoo FS – Braeside TSC Broken feeder wire tie. Excessive carbon build up. 20/02/2012 Wandoo FS – Braeside TSC Crow’s nest in vicinity of fault. 3/03/2012 Oonooie FS – Grasstree TSC Broken earth wire and chips on Portal Insulator possibly animal. 23/03/2012 Oonooie FS - Black Mountain TSC Earth wire down at GA 29.830U. Snake found hanging from feeder insulator. 3/04/2012 Bolingbroke FS – Black Mountain TSC Snake on top tube insulator caused broken earth wire at GA 45.87 U. 12/04/2012 Mount McLaren FS - Villafranca TSC Earth wire down at BA 51.925 caused by a snake shorting from feeder wire to earth wire. 30/04/2012 Peak Downs FS – Saraji TSC Emergency isolation required for repairs to be carried out (replacement of 140 metres of earth wire). 13/05/2012 Oonooie FS – Black Mountain TSC Found earth wire down at GA 34.203U caused by a possum. 15/05/2012 Wandoo FS - Braeside TSC Earth wire damaged at GA 97/ 084 U. 15/05/2012 Wandoo FS – Braeside TSC Broken earth wire repaired. 20/06/2012 Jilalan Emergency Isolation Form B issued at 1355, Recovered at 1802hrs, a great effort from all concerned. 22/06/2012 Bolingbroke FS – Black Mountain TSC Broken earth wire at GA 52.958 U caused by a possum. Analysis 161

Lagging Indicator - Infrastructure Lagging Indicator - Earth Wire Failures Inspection Earth wire failures are shown in Table 6.39. A field inspection was carried out through spot auditing to determine the extent of traction Earth wire failures are reasonably common due distribution defects. 5% of sites were found to to vibration induced fatigue issues. The proximity have defects. This is below the threshold value of the earth wire to the feeder wire often results for the green rating (<10%). Therefore, the in wildlife being able to bridge the two and cause traction distribution assets in the system are to a a fault. This tends to inflict electrical erosion satisfactory standard. Details of field inspections damage to the conductors. The earth wire, which can be found in Appendix C. is aluminium and has a smaller diameter, is most affected by this damage. The initial electrical erosion acts as an initiator to further vibration induced fatigue failure. Therefore, under the category of earth wire failures there is both simple hardware failure and wildlife initiated failure.

An earth wire failure will more than likely cause a short circuit fault as it is likely to drop on to the opposite polarity feeder wire; however, it does not normally lead to the contact or catenary system being pulled down.

The majority of earth wire failures are due to hardware failure but a significant number are still attributed to wildlife causing arcing faults. The hardware failure in many cases is related to fatigue failure of the aluminium cables at the mounting points on the masts. The cables in the Goonyella System (Electric) have been installed with significant tension which makes them susceptible to wind induced resonant vibration. This vibration leads to mechanical fatigue. The Goonyella System (Electric) recorded 10 hardware allocated failures and eight wildlife allocated failures. Table 6.40: Stagger rectification targets

Type of Immediate No Electric Maintenance Severe exception rectification Trains Stagger 450-480mm 480-530mm 530mm and above 550 mm During routine 7 days 24 hrs ASAP Timescales to maintenance rectify

Figure 6.93: Goonyella System (Electric) – traction distribution - closing out TRC stagger

12 11 11 Less than 1 day

10 Between 2 & 4 days 10 Between 5 & 7 days

8 Between 8 & 14 days Between 15 & 28 days

6 Greater than 28 days 5

4 Number of Faults 3

2 0 0 Analysis 163

Lagging Indicator - TRC Alignment The work orders are opened in TSMS (traction power) as an ‘Electrical Overhead’ issue; however, The key condition monitoring tool for the traction as mentioned above, very often the problem is distribution system is the TRC. The TRC operates related to track movement which is a civil issue a throughout the electrified networks a minimum result of track movement. A separate work order is of twice per year. The TRC measures a number of opened in the civil system, RIMS. In many cases it overhead line equipment parameters: appears that the original work order in the TSMS •• Contact wire heights system is not always closed off after the civil issue is corrected. This is a deficiency in the Aurizon •• Staggers Network work order systems in that they are, in some cases, not integrated. Evans & Peck tracked •• Contact wire gradient the orders through both systems to determine the •• Voltage efficiency in closing them off.

•• Horizontal and longitudinal acceleration. The rationale behind this approach is that it is our The output from the TRC is analysed by opinion that the number of stagger exceptions suitably qualified personnel, in particular the is mainly a function of track movement which Track Recording Officer (traction power) for is related closely to weather conditions which is electric traction purposes. All traction overhead out of Aurizon Network’s control. The indicator exceptions are reported to the maintenance of importance is how quickly they are being provider and to Aurizon Network, electrical assets. inspected and rectified if required and the work orders closed out. Stagger violations are by far the most prevalent exception which the TRC detects. More often Figure 6.93 shows the work order close out time than not the stagger violation is the result of track distribution for the Goonyella System (Electric). movement which whilst being undesirable is a There were 40 severe stagger exceptions which fact of life in a railway system. Excessive stagger were identified in the Goonyella System (Electric). can result in the rolling stock pantograph carbon However 35% of the work orders were not closed running off the wire. This causes damage to both off within the seven day period required by the the wire and the pantographs and in some cases Aurizon Network business instruction. The the problem escalates to a dewirement. Aurizon majority were closed off in two weeks with none Network has strict limits on the maximum exceeding 28 days. 28% of the exceptions closed alignment deviation as shown in Table 6.40. off within one day. The rectification process The most common exception is the severe level however in many instances is taking longer than and Aurizon Network business instruction dictates the Aurizon Network target; which is likely due to that the resulting work order must be closed out the civil repairs which are required. within seven days18.

18. Aurizon Network business management system, business instruction, NET-ELE-BI-5179. Figure 6.94: Goonyella System (Electric) – traction distribution – corrective fault work orders – FY 2012 Overhead Faults Per Month - Goonyella (Exc Vermont) 140

120

100

Number of Faults of Number 40

0 July May June April March August October January February December November September

Environment Accidents/Operational Deficient Maintenance Equipment Failure

Figure 6.95: GoonyellaPreventative System (Electric)Maintenance – traction Program distribution Performance – preventative maintenance For program performance(Multiple Items) - (All) 250 232

200 186 191 189

150

100 92

58 Number of Work Work of Number Orders 50

0 On Time or Less than 15 Between 15 Between 30 Greater than Open or Early days late days & 30 days days & 60 days 60 days late Recurring Item late late Error Analysis 165

Leading Indicator - Corrective Work Leading Indicator - Preventative Orders Performance Maintenance Performance Figure 6.94 shows the distribution of faults over The Aurizon Network scheduled (routine the year for Goonyella System (Electric). maintenance) work orders are generated automatically at appropriate periods for each There is a clear trend of increasing numbers of particular piece of equipment. This maintenance faults in the summer months (November through requirement for each piece of equipment is to February). These faults have been categorised documented in QA system registered inspection into the following areas: sheets. These inspection sheets are comprehensive documents, the content of which has been recently •• Equipment failure reviewed19. Evans & Peck has reviewed the •• Environment (wildlife and vegetation) inspection sheets and agree that they are fit for purpose. •• Potential deficient maintenance Once the work orders are automatically opened, •• Accidents/operational. the task is assigned to a tradesperson and The bar graph shows that the increasing trend executed. The inspection details are recorded on in failures in the summer months is by far the sheets with any simple remedial work carried predominantly due to environmental causes. out and more involved repairs scheduled by This effect will be likely due to the greater opening a corrective work order. In some cases activity of animals in the summer months. This the tradesperson may elect to close the work order is particularly true in the case of snakes which without carrying out the work if in his judgement are relatively inactive in the winter months. the inspection is not essential at the time. This Snakes that climb on insulators associated with could occur if there is other high priority work and the contact wire registration arms or the feeder there are finite resources available. wires are a common occurrence. The next most dominant category is operational and accidents. Figure 6.95 shows the relative distribution of preventative maintenance work orders which have Equipment failure and potential deficient been completed or programmed. Approximately maintenance were found to relate to a small 12% of preventative maintenance work orders are fraction of the total number of faults. This shows completed on time or early for Goonyella System that, currently, equipment maintenance and (Electric) traction distribution. replacement is adequate to maintain these faults. Investing resources in reducing faults due to Aurizon Network needs to examine the reasons equipment failure and deficient maintenance why the preventative maintenance tasks for the would be ineffective. However, it must be overhead system are apparently being delayed. emphasised that deficiencies in these areas are The recent review by Aurecon was designed in often a leading indicator which may translate to part to address this issue, however, this study increased faults in the future. postdates the maintenance review period. Aurizon Network has recognised that there are deficiencies in the preventative maintenance program and are acting to correct this situation.

19. Planned maintenance optimisation, Aurecon review of Aurizon Network routing maintenance. Table 6.41: Goonyella System (Electric) – traction power – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Delay Green KPI Transformer oil Green KPI AT oil Yellow Lagging indicator Infrastructure inspection Yellow

Table 6.42: List of Goonyella System (Electric) feeder transformers

km Goonyella System (Electric) feeder stations 1 76.432 Mt McLaren FS T43 2 76.432 Mt McLaren FS T42 3 19.976 Moranbah South FS T41 4 19.976 Moranbah South FS T40 5 105.13 Norwich Park FS T33 6 105.13 Norwich Park FS T32 7 41.976 Peak Downs FS T31 8 41.976 Peak Downs FS T30 9 2.314 Coppabella FS T25 Points(145.55) 10 2.314 Coppabella FS T24 11 2.314 Coppabella FS T23 12 116.22 Mindi FS T28 13 116.22 Mindi FS T27 14 87.219 Wandoo FS T22 15 87.219 Wandoo FS T21 16 54.87 Bollingbroke FS T61 17 54.87 Bollingbroke FS T60 18 23.644 Oonooie FS T20 19 23.644 Oonooie FS T90 20 1.689 Dalrymple Bay FS T91 Analysis 167

Traction Power Supply Systems Lagging Indicator - Transformer Oil Analysis Summary The Goonyella System (Electric) asset system has The KPIs and lagging indicators for the Goonyella 20 feeder stations. The complete list of feeder System (Electric)’s traction power are shown in transformers is shown in Table 6.42. Table 6.41. The percentage of Feeder Transformers with Key Performance Indicator – Delay oil analysis exceptions was one in 20 (5%) for Minutes the Goonyella System (Electric). A green rating applies since this figure is less than 10%. Similar to the overhead traction there is a strong case to normalise the delay minutes to the The normal practice would be to schedule nettonne-km since as traffic increases each fault the transformers for oil refurbishment. The will cause more delay minutes. Further to this, a transformers also should be inspected for large percentage of faults are still due to wildlife gasket or bushing leaks and the integrity of the which is to a large extent out of Aurizon Network’s conservator dryer. control. Figure 6.96 shows the distribution of traction distribution and traction power supply system delays for Goonyella System (Electric) for FY 2012.

The total delay for the Goonyella System (Electric) due to traction power supply system factors is 19,155 minutes. Normalising this to net tonne kilometres by dividing by 17.97 NTK20 results in a measure of 1,065 minutes per NTK, under the threshold of 4,500 minutes per NTK required for a green rating.

20. The figure of 18.5 GNTK (109 net tonne kilometres) provided by Aurizon for both the Blackwater System (Electric) and the Goonyella System (Electric) for FY2012. Figure 6.96 Goonyella SystemGoonyella (Electric) – traction - Delay distribution Minutes and traction power supply systems – delayTraction minutes Distribution & Power Supply FY12 20000

18000

16000

14000

12000

10000

8000 Delay Minutes Delay 6000

4000

2000

Lagging Indicator - Autotransformer Oil It was noted that there were a significant number Analysis of transformers which were decommissioned and replaced during FY 2012. 24% of the ATs in the The Goonyella (Electric) System asset system has Goonyella System (Electric) were 115 ATs. The complete list of ATs identified in the de-commissioned22 in FY 2012. 89% were removed system during FY 2012 is listed in Table 6.43. on the basis of oil test result exceptions and the balance had good oil test results. The condition Aurizon Network has a program to replace the ATs indicator is predominantly high Hydrogen (H ) based on condition. The original ATs are 25 years 2 levels found by the DGA. Accompanying this is old with the purchase being predominantly in significant but much lower levels of Methane 198521. Normally this type of transformer would (CH ). Other dissolved gas levels are generally have a nominal 40 year life span, however in 4 below the thresholds of concern. The low ratio this case it is generally accepted that there was of CH to H is indicative of ‘corona discharge’23. a design fault which has resulted in a reduced 4 2 Table23.44 shows the DGA analysis results for lifetime. The lifetime is considered to be 25 years. the ATs which have been de-commissioned in In FY 2012 there were 169 oil tests done for the the Goonyella System (Electric). The hydrogen Goonyella System (Electric) ATs. 114 different levels exceed the threshold limit of 200ppm by ATs have been tested with 55 being tested twice. substantial margins. This shows that Aurizon Network is increasing Aurizon Network has investigated the corona the testing frequency where required in order discharge problem during AT refurbishment to prioritise AT renewal. The testing program is and have determined that it is occurring due to a comprehensive in term of coverage of all the ATs. manufacturing/design problem which is not easily Analysis of the testing regime for FY 2012 shows rectified. The corona discharge has resulted in that there has indeed been good compliance with further deterioration of the insulating materials to the oil testing program. 21% of ATs have poor the extent that refurbishment more than once is oil test results either due to high Dissolved Gas not a viable solution. Analysis (DGA) results, high moisture or low dielectric strength. From the point of view of the lagging indicator the de-commissioned units need to be excluded from In terms of the target this results in a yellow the analysis since new units would have replaced result. Whilst this is not desirable, it must be them within the period. considered from the perspective that Aurizon Network is dealing with an end of life condition A field inspection was carried out through spot within budgetary constraints whilst still auditing to determine the extent of traction power maintaining high levels of reliability. There is defects. The Goonyella System (Electric) had this significant redundancy in the 50/25 kV feeding field inspection carried out on 14-15 February system in that failure of a single AT does not 2013. 14% of sites were found to have significant translate to significant train delays or service defects. This is above the threshold value for the interruption. green rating (<10%). Therefore, the traction power assets in the system are allocated a yellow rating.

Details of field inspections can be found in Appendix C.

21. Aurizon Network Strategic Asset Plan 30.1.2012.

22. In the test results these are characterised by having had a Poly Chlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) analysis conducted, which is a requirement prior to disposal. Transformer oil containing PCB’s was imported into Australia prior to 1975 at which time it was banned. This predates the production of these ATs, but nevertheless a test is still required.

23.“A Guide to Transformer Analysis”, I.A.R. Gray Transformer Chemistry Services. Table 6.43: Goonyella System (Electric) – ATs

km Track Sites ATs km TSC ATs km Feeder Stations ATs

77.223 Oaky Creek 1 136.433 German Creek 1 76.432 Mt McLaren 1 TSC T19 FS T43 126.2 Norwich 2 136.433 German Creek 1 76.432 Mt McLaren 1 Park - TSC T33 FS T42 Bundoora 115.4 Norwich 2 71.271 Saraji TSC T32 1 19.976 Moranbah 1 Park - South FS T41 Bundoora 94.202 Dysart - 1 71.271 Saraji TSC T31 1 19.976 Moranbah 1 Norwich South FS T40 Park 83.1 Saraji - 1 19.438 Red Mountain 1 105.126 Norwich Park 1 Dysart TSC T30 FS T33 64.3 Saraji Yard 1 19.438 Red Mountain 1 105.126 Norwich Park 1 and Turn out TSC T24 FS T32 to Saraji 53.04 Peak Downs - 1 44.967 Villafranca TSC 1 41.976 Peak Downs 1 Saraji T42 FS T31 30.017 Winchester 1 44.967 Villafranca TSC 1 41.976 Peak Downs 1 Passing Loop T41 FS T30 11.02 Ingsdon 1 175.149 Wotonga TSC 1 2.314 Coppabella 2 Passing Loop T40 FS T25 Points(145.55) 8.55 Wotonga - 2 175.149 Wotonga TSC 2 2.314 Coppabella FS 2 Moranbah T26 T24 28.702 Moranbah to 1 175.149 Wotonga TSC 2 2.314 Coppabella FS 2 Villafranca T25 T23 37.432 Moranbah to 1 127.1 South Walker 2 116.221 Mindi FS T28 2 Villafranca TSC T23 55.501 Villafranca – 1 127.1 South Walker 3 116.221 Mindi FS T27 2 Mt.McLaren TSC T28 65.965 Mt.McLaren 1 103.038 Braeside TSC 2 87.219 Wandoo FS 2 to Blackridge T27 T22 85.494 Blackridge 1 103.038 Braeside TSC 2 87.219 Wandoo FS 2 T22 T21 94.488 Blackridge to 1 71.253 Balook TSC T21 2 54.87 Bollingbroke 2 Blair Athol FS T61 103.585 Blair Athol 1 71.253 Balook TSC T61 2 54.87 Bollingbroke 2 FS T60 15.335 Praguelands 2 35.483 Black 2 23.644 Oonooie FS 2 Mountain TSC T20 T60 Analysis 171

km Track Sites ATs km TSC ATs km Feeder Stations ATs

45.225 Black 2 35.483 Black 2 23.644 Oonooie FS 3 Mountain Mountain TSC T90 T20 65.933 Bollingbroke 2 22.36 Jilalan TSC 0 1.689 Dalrymple Bay 2 - Balook T90 FS T91 76.783 Balook 2 9.6 Grass Tree TSC 1 T90 94.963 Wandoo - 2 9.6 Grass Tree TSC 1 Waitara T91 111.058 Braeside - 2 Mindi 123.032 South Walker 2 - Mindi FS 41.174 Hail Creek 1 30.068 Hail Creek 1 Branch 18.106 Hail Creek 1 Branch 6.286 Hail Creek 1 Branch 135.512 Tootoolah 2 154.174 Broadlea 2 160.915 Coppabella– 2 Mallawa TO Carborough Downs 168.178 Mallawa. TO 2 Burton 184.836 Wotonga - 1 Moranbah N. 195.508 TO Goonyella 1 199.389 TO Riverside 1 Gap in OH wiring 212.15 TO North 1 Goonyella 50 32 33 Total 115 Figure 6.97:Overhead Goonyella System Faults (Electric) Per Month– corrective - workGoonyella orders – FY (Exc 2012 Vermont) 14

Number of Faults of Number 4

0 July May June April March August October January February December November September

Environment Equipment Failure Deficient Maintenance Accidents/Operational

Figure 6.98:Preventative Goonyella System Maintenance (Electric) – traction Program power supply Performance – preventative maintenance For program performance(Multiple Items) - (All) 1200

1000 960

800

600 509 419 386 400 251 Number of Work Work of Number Orders 200 106

0 On Time or Less than 15 Between 15 Between 30 Greater than Open or Early days late days & 30 days days & 60 days 60 days late Recurring Item late late Error Analysis 173

Leading Indicator - Corrective Work Leading Indicator - Preventative Orders Performance Maintenance

Figure 6.97 shows the traction power corrective Figure 6.98 shows the distribution and number work orders for Goonyella System (Electric) of preventative maintenance work orders which broken down to categories on a monthly basis. have been programmed and completed during Corrective work order fault quantities and FY 2012. In the case of the traction power supply categories shall be monitored over the analysis system in the Goonyella System (Electric), 15% period. of the preventative maintenance work orders were executed on time or early. These results are very similar to what was found for the overhead system.

In this analysis the work orders associated with the new feeder stations and TSCs which were being commissioned during this assessment period have been removed from the data. Whilst work orders may be opened for equipment at these sites, the inspection would not have been necessary during this assessment period. Table 6.44: DGA for ATs which have been de-commissioned

H2 CO CO2 CH4 C2H6 C2H4 C2H2 C2H2 / CH4 / C2H6 / C2H4 / (mg/ (mg/ (mg/ (mg/ (mg/ (mg/ (mg/ TC C2H4 H2 CH4 C2H6 kg) kg) kg) kg) kg) kg) kg) Serial 200 750 150 150 100 10000 No. 254820 14000 230 260 1700 350 2 0 16282 0.12 0.21 0.01 0.00 254862 510 13 640 220 53 5 0 801 0.43 0.24 0.09 0.00 254883 2300 130 1200 420 91 1 0 2942 0.18 0.22 0.01 0.00 254884 8800 21 290 2600 410 2 0 11833 0.30 0.16 0.00 0.00 270694 5100 58 270 560 72 0 0 5790 0.11 0.13 0.00 0.00 254852 5600 150 560 500 72 6 0 6328 0.09 0.14 0.08 0.00 254873 7800 190 2600 580 88 1 0 8659 0.07 0.15 0.01 0.00 254866 1000 110 330 660 280 5 3 2058 0.66 0.42 0.02 0.60 254894 20000 17 550 3900 870 4 0 24791 0.20 0.22 0.00 0.00 254867 18000 280 870 2300 400 6 3 20989 0.13 0.17 0.02 0.50 254900 340 370 3300 57 15 9 1 792 0.17 0.26 0.60 0.11 270695 25000 31 300 2800 450 7 0 28288 0.11 0.16 0.02 0.00 254888 25000 14 930 2100 320 1 0 27435 0.08 0.15 0.00 0.00 254871 43000 110 120 11000 2100 3 26 56239 0.26 0.19 0.00 8.67 254870 8200 110 440 2100 680 1 0 11091 0.26 0.32 0.00 0.00 252079 3000 210 380 1100 120 770 490 5690 0.37 0.11 6.42 0.64 254819 1400 80 460 190 200 21 4 1895 0.14 1.05 0.11 0.19 254838 23000 11 230 2500 560 7 0 26078 0.11 0.22 0.01 0.00 254861 900 96 5200 130 26 0 0 1152 0.14 0.20 0.00 0.00 254840 25000 57 400 4700 950 5 0 30712 0.19 0.20 0.01 0.00 254818 13000 120 410 1900 260 3 1 15284 0.15 0.14 0.01 0.33 254882 3300 170 480 530 130 2 0 4132 0.16 0.25 0.02 0.00 254843 520 45 1200 80 87 10 0 742 0.15 1.09 0.11 0.00 254854 2100 30 110 230 76 1 0 2437 0.11 0.33 0.01 0.00 254842 14000 34 470 2500 420 4 0 16958 0.18 0.17 0.01 0.00 Average 0.19 0.28 0.30 0.44 Ratios Analysis 175

6.3.5 Goonyella (Vermont) (Electric) Lagging Indicator – Inspection A field inspection was carried out through spot Traction Distribution auditing to determine the extent of traction Summary distribution defects. The Goonyella Vermont System (Electric) had this field inspection carried The KPIs and lagging indicators for the Goonyella out on 14 February 2013. Minor sites were found System (Electric)’s traction distribution are shown to have defects. This is below the threshold in Table 6.45. value for the green rating (<10%). Therefore, the Key Performance Indicator – Delay traction distribution assets in the system are to a Minutes satisfactory standard. Details of field inspections can be found in Appendix C. The 14 km Lake Vermont spur line is considered as a separate system. There are no delay minutes associated with the Vermont spur generated by traction distribution in FY 2012. Lagging Indicator – Traction Distribution Dewirements The Lake Vermont spur line did not record any dewirements in FY 2012.

Table 6.45: Goonyella System (Vermont) (Electric) – traction distribution – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance Asset KPI Delay Green Asset KPI Dewirement Green Lagging indicator Infrastructure inspection Green Table 6.46: Goonyella System (Vermont) (Electric) – traction power supply

Assessment Indicator Performance

Asset KPI Delay Yellow Asset KPI Transformer oil Not applicable Asset KPI AT oil Grey Lagging indicator Infrastructure inspection Green

Figure 6.99: Blackwater System – operational performance – BRTT

140%

120%

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0% Jul-11 Oct-11 Dec-11 Aug-11 Feb-12 Apr-12 Jun-12 BRTT Actual BRTT Target Analysis 177

Traction Power Supply Systems Lagging Indicator – Autotransformer Oil Analysis Summary The Goonyella System (Vermont) (Electric) is a The KPIs and lagging indicators for the Goonyella 14 km single track 50/25 kV spur line with two System (Vermont) (Electric)’s traction power are ATs. shown in Table 6.46. Key Performance Indicator – Traction There are oil test records for the AT located at Power Delay Minutes the TCU. The oil analysis results for this AT were excellent. There were 120 minutes delay attributed to this spur (April 2012). This is likely to be one event The other AT which is located at 11km does not associated with the TCU which has generated have any recorded results. Both ATs were put a two hour delay to one train on this spur line. into service in 2009. It would be very unlikely at When normalised, 6,677 minutes of delay/NTK this age that this AT would generate any oil test resulted from traction power supply systems, exceptions, nevertheless the fact that there is no resulting in a yellow rating. result for 50% of the equipment makes it difficult to be certain over allocating a rating. Lagging Indicator – Transformer Oil Analysis Lagging Indicator - Infrastructure Inspection There are no Feeder Transformers associated with the Goonyella System (Vermont) (Electric). A field inspection was carried out through spot auditing to determine the extent of traction power defects. The Goonyella System (Vermont) (Electric) had this field inspection carried out on 14 February 2013. Minor sites were found to have defects. This is below the threshold value for the green rating (<10%). Therefore, the traction power assets in the system are to a satisfactory standard. Details of field inspections can be found in Appendix C. Table 6.47: Blackwater (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) – operational performance summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI BRTT Green Lagging indicator TSR Red Lagging indicator OTCI Green

Table 6.48: Blackwater System – operational performance – average transit time delays (minutes per 100 train km)

Transit time delays Q1 FY 2012 Q2 FY 2012 Q3 FY 2012 Q4 FY 2012 The average above rail delay 29.02 27.94 21.00 23.40 The average Below Rail delay 4.62 1.41 0.56 4.50 The average unallocated rail delay 14.60 14.63 14.40 11.28

Figure 6.100: Blackwater System – TSR

3:00:00 128%

2:40:00 126%

2:20:00 124% 122% 2:00:00 120% 1:40:00 118% 1:20:00 116% 1:00:00 114% 0:40:00 112% 0:20:00 110% 0:00:00 108% Jul-11 Oct-11 Dec-11 Aug-11 Feb-12 Apr-12 Jun-12

Blackwater System Speed Restrictions Blackwater System Speed Restriction Target BRTT Actual BRTT Target Analysis 179

6.4 Blackwater System Lagging Indicator - Temporary Speed Restrictions 6.4.1 Operational Performance Figure 6.100 provides a summary of the TSR.

Summary Through the FY 2012 reporting period, the The KPIs and lagging indicators for the Blackwater Blackwater System had high levels of imposed System’s operational performance are shown in speed restrictions, with the system often above the Table 6.47. speed restriction target. 40.7% of days were found to be above the threshold value. This evaluates Key Performance Indicator - Below Rail against the assessment methodology as a red Transit Time rating, indicating major non-conformance. The BRTT data for FY 2012 has indicated that Lagging Indicator - Overall Track the Blackwater System was consistently below Condition Index the UT3 target of 127%. This evaluates against the assessment methodology as a green rating. Figure 6.101 provides a summary of the OTCI It should be noted, however, over a longer results. For FY 2012, the Blackwater System has timeframe, the BRTT has trended upwards, scored consistently around 31 on the OTCI index. indicating a worsening of network operations. This indicates a high quality track condition, This has not been considered as part of this especially when considering the overall age and assessment. Figure 6.100 shows the TSR results. design of the system. With no considerable change in the OTCI over the reporting period, and the two Also important for analysis, in its influence financial years previous, it would be expected that on BRTT, is that of the average delays that Below Rail delays are to remain consistent with are attributable to above rail and Below Rail current levels, and that there would be no undue causes. The average Below Rail delay has been change in the BRTT as a result of track conditions. significantly less than delays attributed to above Against the assessment methodology, the system rail causes. These delays re shown in Table 6.48. scores a green rating.

Figure 6.101: Blackwater System –Blackwater OTCI System OTCI FY12

28 OTCI Score OTCI

20 Jul-11 Oct-11 Sep-11 Dec-11 Jan-12 Aug-11 Feb-12 Apr-12 Nov-11 Jun-12 Mar-12 May-12

Below Lower Threshold Range Lower - Median Threshold Range Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston & Minerva) Table 6.49: Blackwater System – operational performance – train path availability and uptake

Train path usage – coal carrying services Q1 FY 2011 Q1 FY 2012 Q2 FY 2012 Q3 FY 2012 Q4 FY 2012

Used by the relevant services 2130 1807 1805 1592 1826 Contracted by the relevant 1514 1538 1457 1510 1510 services Available for use by the 3648 3210 3267 3257 3010 relevant services Scheduled for the relevant 2367 2142 2211 2097 2169 services

Table 6.50: Blackwater System – operational performance – maintenance track path allocations

Train path usage – planned and unplanned Q1 FY 2011 Q1 FY 2012 Q2 FY 2012 Q3 FY 2012 Q4 FY 2012 maintenance

Used for planned 413 731 698 617 1140 maintenance Used for the unplanned 16 45 90 39 72 maintenance Analysis 181

Leading Indicator - Train Path Allocations However, the data critically shows that demand has reduced from the previous financial year, Table 6.49 shows the train path statistics for the which is reflected in the haulage statistics, Blackwater System. which similarly reflected reduced demand. This mismatch is attributable to Access Holders Evident in the data is the differences between contracting train paths below their forecast levels, used, contracted and scheduled paths. Also and meeting demand through uncontracted evident is the reduced uptake of train paths when requests. compared to Q1 FY 2011. Train path usage is shown to be above levels that were contracted, Table 6.50 shows not just the increase in planned indicating that Access Holders were seeking paths maintenance post 2011 floods to rectify formation above their weekly entitlement. The implication defects and mud holes, but an increase in planned for the Below Rail network is that through the maintenance in Q4 FY 2012. increased traffic, there is an increased risk of track degradation, and therefore an increased risk of Below Rail delays. Table 6.51: Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) – track

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Normalised delay Yellow Lagging indicator Physical defect identification Green Lagging indicator Average defects per month/ track Grey kilometre

Figure 6.102: Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) – track – asset age by acquisition l)date - Asset Age By Acquisition Date Track Structure

250

200

150

100 Number of Assets 50

0 Less than 10 years Between 10 & 15 Between 15 & 20 Between 20 & 30 Greater than 30 years years years years

Track Turnouts Track Support Railway Track Analysis 183

6.4.2 Blackwater (excluding Rolleston These figures show a range of asset ages, as is to and Minerva) be expected on a large mature system. Of note, however, are the large majority of assets that are Track and Track Structures due to be replaced in the next 15 years. While this was not a performance indicator for the Summary assessment of the system, it provides a level of insight into the expected condition of the assets. The track and track structures status is summarised in Table 6.51.

The FAR was used to determine the indicative remaining service life for assests on the Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva). The results of this are shown in Figure 6.102 and Figure 6.103.

Figure 6.103: Newlands Blackwater System - Remaining (excluding Rolleston Book Life and Minerva) – track – remaining book life Track Structure 200

160

120

80 Number of Assets 40

0 Book Life Reached Between 1 & 3 years Between 3 & 15 years Greater than 15 years

Track Turnouts Track Support Railway Track Blackwater - Delay Minutes Figure 6.104: Blackwater System (excludingTrack StructureRolleston and Minerva) FY12 – track –delay minutes – FY 2012 14000

12000

10000

8000

6000

Delay Minutes 4000

2000

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun On Track Vehicle Issues 139 174 Track Maintenance and Repair 372 1145 32 262 87 121 241 820 160 Track Defect 610 1640 1111 2154 5946 1165 1995 5856 5440 720 8170 11904

Figure 6.105: Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) – track – defects Track & Track Support Defects 300 243 250 196 200 171 158 164 137 144 140 150 119 124 108 100 48 Number of Defects of Number 50

0 July May June April March August October January February December November September Analysis 185

Key Performance Indicator - Delay Lagging Indicator - Defects Minutes A total of 1,752 defects were recorded under track The graph in Figure 6.104 details the total delay systems for the Blackwater System (excluding minutes caused by track maintenance and defects Rolleston and Minerva). Figure 6.105 summarises over the Blackwater System for the relevant the monthly recorded defects and shows the period. defects recorded were relatively consistent throughout the period. This graph shows several distinct peaks through the reporting period, indicating possible major A breakdown of the total number of defects gives: events. Through further analysis, it was found that these delays were attributable to the following •• A total of 1,386 defects were recorded for track issues: for the period, including: − •• Broken rail at Gracemere (3,911 minutes in Resurfacing (rough track) June) − Broken rails •• Driver request to reduce speed limit from − Defective sleepers, fasteners and fishplates 40 kmh along the Fairfield section to 15 kmh top and line adjustment. (3,246 minutes in June), a further delay of 146 minutes was experienced on the same •• Total of 313 defects were recorded for section as the line was closed to allow track turnouts, including: machines to repair the track − Surface wear – gauge corner cracking, •• Rough track and reported broken rail excessive wear on switchblade (3,572 minutes in November) − Gauge spread •• Broken rail at Umolo (4,275 in March). − Replacement of worn components. It was concluded from this summary that the •• A total of 53 defects on level crossings. priorities for the Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) in relation to track largely The above defects will be used as a baseline for the relate to issues with excessive wear on turnouts, analysis period. rough track/broken rails and defective track support systems (damaged sleepers and fasteners inclusive). This suggests either an older system or a system that supports large coal tonnages, both of which is a true for this system. This is reflected in a high 6.48% of reported delays being attributable to track issues. When normalised, track assets are allocated 2,658 minutes of delay/NTK. This evaluates against the assessment methodology as a yellow rating. Newlands - Program Close Figure 6.106: Blackwater OutSystem Delays (excluding Track Rolleston & and Track Minerva) Support – track – corrective maintenance 100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40% 36% 29% 30% 20% 20%

Percentage of Work Orders Work of Percentage 13% 10% 1% 1% 0% On time or Less than 30 Between 30 & More than 60 Currently Open Recurring early days late 60 days late days Late Items OR Awaiting Information

Figure 6.107: Blackwater SystemBlackwater (excluding Rolleston System and Minerva) OTCI FY12– track support – OTCI 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 OTCI Score OTCI 26 24 22 20 Jul-11 Oct-11 Sep-11 Dec-11 Jan-12 Aug-11 Feb-12 Apr-12 Nov-11 Jun-12 Mar-12 May-12

Below Lower Threshold Range Lower - Median Threshold Range Median - Upper Threshold Range Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston & Minerva) Analysis 187

Lagging Indicator - Extent of Disruptive Leading Indicator - OTCI Performance Defects The OTCI results for Blackwater System As a result of the desktop findings above, field (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) are shown inspections were carried out through spot auditing in Figure 6.107 and listed in Table 6.52 below. to determine the extent of track defects. The The track geometry over the Blackwater System Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) is in an overall Minerva) had these field inspections carried out good condition with sections found to not be on 14 February 2013. Six sites were inspected, within required range not located on the main against six categories where it was found that line. four of the 36 elements (11.1%) were to an unsatisfactory standard, below the threshold value The results from the OTCI substantiate the site for the green rating (<30%). Therefore, the track inspection assessment in that the track was found assets in the system are to a satisfactory standard. to be in overall good condition with issues mainly noted in the Taurus-Koorilgah diversion area. Leading Indicator - Scheduled Maintenance Program The Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) corrective maintenance performance is shown in Figure 6.106.

As at 4 December 2012, 36% of defects had been closed out by the programmed date or earlier and 13% were closed out within 30 days. 29% of defects were either recurring items or awaiting further information/design. However, 20% of defects were still open as of the data provision date, 4 December 2012, high when compared against the network. However, when further analysis was conducted upon defects due for completion in the reporting period, no open defects were reported. Overall, the data reported 2% of defects closed more than 30 days late. Table 6.52: Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) – track – OTCI performance against lower and median range

OTCI lower Track Actual OTCI Trend over Section – median Assessment category range period range

Boonal (Yarrabee) 7 34-46 62  Not generally Balloon Loop within required range Callemondah and 9 43-58 48-49  Within required Golding range Rocklands to 6 30-40 30-32 Variable Good, at lower end Burngrove of range Stanwell House 7 34-46 32 Cons Good, just below Balloon loop range Burngrove – 6 30-40 24-26  Below required Gregory range Gregory Junction 6 30-40 31-34  Good, at lower end – Gregory Mine of range Balloon Ensham Mine 6 30-40 24-26 Variable Below required Balloon Loop range Kestrel Balloon 6 30-40 28-29  Good, just below Loop range Blackwater – 7 34-46 38-44  Within required Taurus range Taurus – 7 34-46 60-62  Not generally Koorilgah within required range Gladstone – 9 43-58 31-32  Below required Auckland Point range Sagittarius – 5 25-34 29-32  Good, at lower end Curragh of range Rangal – Kinrola 6,7 30-46 31-32  Good, at lower end Mine of range Boorgoon 7 34-36 55-60  Not generally Junction – within required Boorgoon Mine range Comalco Balloon 6 30-40 32-42  Generally within Loop required range Mt Miller – 6 30-40 33-39  Within required Fishermans range Landing Burngrove – 6 30-40 25-30  Good, just below Nogoa range Analysis 189

Structures The causes of this failure need to be reviewed against the maintenance of that culvert; Summary particularly any open defects that were not closed The status for bridges and culverts is summarised out. The large number of defects not being closed in Table 6.53 and Table 6.54. out in RIMS each year could lead to a repeat incident if they are not being inspected at the time Key Performance Indicator – Delay the close out date is pushed into the future. Minutes The other incidents were minor; IR11-25468 led to The Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston 35 minute delay in total and IR12-03477 led to a and Minerva) had three incidents causing delay, three minute total delay. of which, incident IR11-24249 led to 609 total minutes of delay and fifteen train cancellations. The longest individual service delayed in this incident was F63M which was delayed 181 minutes. This incident was the cause of a collapsed culvert which required temporary repair although no specific details on the cause of culvert failure were made available to Evans & Peck.

Table 6.53: Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) – bridges

Table 6.54: Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) – culverts

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Cancellations Yellow KPI Delays Green Lagging indicator Asset age Yellow Lagging indicator Inspection work order Amber completion Lagging indicator Maintenance work order Grey completion Figure 6.108:l) SystemBlackwater - Asset System Age (excluding By Acquisition Rolleston and DateMinerva) Civil – structures Structures – asset age by acquisition date

1200

1000

800

600

400 Number of Assets

200

0 Less than 10 years Between 10 & 15 Between 15 & 20 Between 20 & 30 Greater than 30 years years years years

Culverts Bridges Miscellaneous Structures

Figure 6.109: Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) – structures – remaining book life l) System - Remaining Book Life Civil Structures

1600

1400

1200

1000

800

600

Number of Assets 400

200

0 Book Life Reached Between 1 &3 years Between 3 & 15 years Greater than 15 years

Culverts Bridges Miscellaneous Structures Analysis 191

Lagging Indicator - Asset Age Lagging Indicator - Maintenance Lag Figure 6.108 and Figure 6.109 reflects the age Figure 6.112 shows the Blackwater System and periodic renewals of the Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) had 167 open (excluding Rolleston and Minerva). The majority culvert defects at 30 June 2012 and twelve closed of structures are shown to have greater than for the period. Seven of those defects were later 15 years remaining book life with 18 culvert and than 30 days and a further 17 defects are awaiting two bridges shown to have between 3 and 15 years further information or are recurring items. remaining book life. Figure 6.113 below shows six bridge defects were Lagging Indicator – Inspection Lag closed on time or within 30 days of program Figure 6.110 shows culvert inspection statistics for and three were closed later than 30 days after the Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and program. Again, a large number of defects were Minerva) were average with 243 inspections on still open, 83 at the end of the period. time or within 30 days of program and 551 over Leading Indicators - Inspections 30 days late. The unknown detail is that some of the 152 that were over 60 days late cannot be Table 6.55 shows inspection quantities for both traced to a date of inspection. There is a likelihood bridges and culverts were in line or greater that multiple inspections may have been rolled than requirements of CESS. The proportion of into a single larger inspection; however the data is open defects to closed defects indicates possible inconclusive for this assessment. reporting inconsistencies.

Figure 6.111 shows bridge inspections performed better than culvert inspections with 48 carried out on time or less than 30 days late (73.8%), five carried out 30 to 60 days late, and 12 carried out later than 60 days after being programmed.

Table 6.55: Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) – inspections

Closed Open Closed Asset inspections/ inspections/ defect/ Open defect/ Asset type quantity asset asset asset quantity quantity quantity quantity

Bridge 99 0.64 0 0.09 0.86 Culvert 1375 0.58 0 0.01 0.13 Figure 6.110: BlackwaterBlackwater System (excluding(exc Rolleston Rolleston and & Minerva) – culvert - Culvert inspection close out delaysInspection from closed Closedate Out Delays From Closed Date 450 399 400

350

300

250

200 176 152 150

100

Number of Inspections of Number 67 50 0 0 0 On Time or Less than 30 Between 30 More than 60 Currently Open Recurring Item Early days late and 60 days days late OR Abandoned late

Figure 6.111: Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) – structures – bridge inspection closeBlackwater out delays from (exc closed Rolleston date & Minerva) - Bridge Inspection Close Out Delays From Closed Date 40 34 35

15 12 12

10 Number of Inspections of Number 5 5 0 0 0 On Time or Less than 30 Between 30 and More than 60 Currently Open Recurring Item Early days late 60 days late days late OR Abandoned Analysis 193

Figure 6.112: Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) – structures– culvert defect close out delays from closed date Blackwater - Program Close Out Delays Culverts 180 167 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 17 Number of Work Work of Number Orders 20 2 3 3 4 0 On Time or Less than 30 Between 30 & More than 60 Currently Open Recurring Early Days Late 60 days late days Late Items OR Awaiting Information

Figure 6.113: Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) – structures – bridge defect close out delays from closed date Newlands - Program Close Out Delays Bridges 90 83 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 6 Number of Work Work of Number Orders 0 2 1 2 0 On Time or Less than 30 Between 30 & More than 60 Currently Open Recurring Early Days Late 60 days late days Late Items OR Awaiting Information Figure 6.114:Newlands Blackwater -SystemAsset (excluding Age By Rolleston Acquisition and Minerva) Date –Signal signals –& asset Train age by acquisition date Control Systems 45

15 Number of Assets 10

0 Less than 10 years Between 10 & 15 Between 15 & 20 Between 20 & 30 Greater than 30 years years years years Level Crossing Protection Signal Interlockings – Relay Signal Interlockings – Processor Control Systems (Signal - Non Vital) Train Protection Systems Electric Signalling Signal Interlockings – Mechanical

Figure 6.115:l) -BlackwaterRemaining System Book (excluding Life Rolleston Signal and& Train Minerva) Control – signals systems – remaining book life

20 Number of Assets

0 Book Life Reached Between 1 & 3 years Between 3 & 15 years Greater than 15 years

Level Crossing Protection Signal Interlockings – Relay Signal Interlockings – Processor Control Systems (Signal - Non Vital) Train Protection Systems Electric Signalling Signal Interlockings – Mechanical Analysis 195

Signals and Train Control Systems Figure 6.114 and Figure 6.115 show the asset age and remaining book life of the signals Summary and train control assets for the Blackwater The status for signals and train control systems is System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva). The summarised in Table 6.56 below. characteristics show a system that has undergone some asset renewal in the past 10 years; however, The approach to signals and train control system a large majority of the assets are also over 15 years maintenance and asset renewal is defined within old. Eight level crossing protections, 11 processor the Aurizon Network’s Asset Policy Maintenance interlockings and 17 train protection systems were and Renewal document. found to have an expired book life. Further, a large number of other signal assets have less than five years remaining book life. However, as previously noted, a well maintained asset can extend its serviceable life beyond the stated book life. Continued monitoring, management and, where necessary, asset renewal is necessary for these expired and near expired book life assets for the continued reliable operations of the system.

Table 6.56: Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Vermont) – signals – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Normalised delay Green Lagging indicator Average faults per month/ track Grey kilometre CQCN - Delay Minutes Figure 6.116: Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) – signals – delay minutes Signal & Train Control Systems FY12 30000

25000

20000

15000

10000 Delay Minutes

5000

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Wrong Side Signal Failure UTC/DTC Faults 86 31 268 ATP/ATC/AWS Ground Equipment 78 69 356 3 159 58 17 110 Failure Damage to Trackside Equipment 84 23 63 RIFOT 24 220 196 29 277 345 47 195 43 59 RAPAD 141 41 128 36 358 555 253 407 229 924 73 Level Crossing Failure 482 504 847 64 483 110 377 217 240 444 Infrastructure Protection Systems 1411 627 752 801 398 789 1655 567 795 20 1349 1611 Issues Signal Failure 23 1518 317 77 21 1006 331 784 84 41 830 3472 Telemetry Failure 877 2653 762 2839 2168 1767 2947 2160 977 4566 378 4599 Points Failure 1737 996 2344 3338 3642 2949 2692 968 1072 1248 1563 2971 Track Circuit Failure 2107 2611 3472 3007 1736 17466 5641 1347 3175 896 2305 4297 Analysis 197

Key Performance Indicator - Delay This has been provided due to these asset types Minutes reporting the highest number of faults. Further details upon the causes of these faults provided as The signals and train control assets are follows: responsible for 16.90% of delays on the Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva). The •• Points: a large proportion of the faults caused monthly breakdown of these delays is provided in by out-of-adjustment, obstructions or no cause Figure 6.116. found and a higher number of obstructions are occurring during summer wet season, Over 50% of delays are being reported due to indicating some climatic influence either track circuit or point issues, lower than what was reported on the other large system, the •• Track: a high proportion of faults being Goonyella System (including Hail Creek, excluding reported as either no cause found or Vermont). No large seasonal variation of reported component failure track circuit or point caused delays was noted. Figure 6.116 shows a major track circuit incident •• Crossings/housings/interlockings: the highest that caused significant delay in December 2011. proportion of faults being reported was caused This highlights the impact a single incident by component or equipment failure. may have on the system. When normalised and The System’s signals and train control assets re valuated against the assessment methodology, the generally in good condition and performing in an system returns 6,839 minutes/NTK and achieves a acceptable manner; although the high proportion green rating. of “no faults found” faults warrant further Lagging Indicator - Defects investigation by Aurizon Network. The total number of signal and train control Leading Indicator - Preventative system faults for the Blackwater System Maintenance (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) is shown in Figure 6.121 shows the preventative maintenance Figure 6.117. performance for the signals on the Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva). While there is some seasonal variation in the number of faults being reported, noted through Reviewing the overall performance, 90.5% of the period of October to March, the correlation closed work orders were completed. This falls does not seem as strong as the other major below the target levels set by Aurizon Network system, the Goonyella System (including Hail of 95%. Creek, excluding Vermont). A further breakdown of points, track and housing/crossing/interlocking Leading Indicator - Corrective asset types is provided in Figure 6.118, Figure Maintenance 6.119 and Figure 6.120 respectively. The on-time performance to rectify the faults through FY 2012 is detailed in Figure 6.122.

87.1% of work orders were completed either on time or early, below the accepted KPI of 95%. Figure 6.117: Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) – signals – all faults

350

294 291 300 281 257 250 238 219 207 213 200 168 173 174

150

Number of Faults 100

50 29

0 July May June April March August October January February December November September

Figure 6.118: BlackwaterBlackwater System (excluding(exc Rolleston Rolleston and & Minerva)Minerva) – signals - Faults – point faults Points - Signal & Train Control Systems 70 66

60 52 51 50 50 48 40 40 37 37 34

30 25 23

Number of Faults of Number 20

10 3 0 July May June April March August October January February December November September Analysis 199

Figure 6.119: Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) – signals – track circuit faults 90 81 81 78 80 80 74 71 70 62 61 59 60 53 51 50

30 Number of Faults of Number

10 6

0 July May June April March August October January February December November September Blackwater (exc Rolleston & Minerva) - Faults Figure 6.120: BlackwaterHousings/Crossings/Interlockings System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) – signals –housing/crossing/ interlocking faults Signal & Train Control Systems

40 37 35

30 26 25 25 22 21 21 20 16 15 14 15 15 13 13 12 12 10 10 11

Number of Faults of Number 9 10 8 6 7 4 5 4 4 5 5 2 2 3 2 3 3 3 1 0 1 0 July May June April March August October January February December November September

Crossings Housings Interlockings Figure 6.121:Preventative Blackwater System Maintenance (excluding Rolleston Program and Minerva) Performance – signals – preventative For maintenanceNewlands program - Signals performance & Train Control Systems 4000

3411 3480 3500

3000

2500

2000 1619 1500 1255 976 1000 Number of Work Work of Number Orders

500 51 0 On Time or Less than 15 Between 15 Between 30 Greater than Open or Early days late days & 30 days days & 60 days 60 days late Recurring Item late late Analysis 201

Blackwater (exc Rolleston & Minerva) - Corrective Fault Figure 6.122: Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) – signals – corrective maintenancePerformance program performance Signals & Train Control Systems 2500 2215

2000

1500

1000

Number of Work Work of Number Orders 500

119 98 63 33 15 1 0 On Time or 2 Days Late 3 Days Late 4 Days Late 5 Days Late More than 6 Needing Early Days Late More Information

Figure 6.123:l) - BlackwaterAsset Age System By (excludingAcquisition Rolleston Date and Minerva) – telecommunications system – asset Telecommunicationsage by acquisition date

10 Number of Assets 5

0 Less than 10 years Between 10 & 15 Between 15 & 20 Between 20 & 30 Greater than 30 years years years years

Customer Premises Equipment Linking Network Equipment Data Network Equipment Telephone Exchange Equipment Figure 6.124:Newlands Blackwater -SystemRemaining (excluding Book Rolleston Life and Minerva) – telecommunications system – remainingTelecommunications book life

10 Number of Assets 5

0 Book Life Reached Between 1 & 3 years Between 3 & 15 years Greater than 15 years

Customer Premises Equipment Linking Network Equipment Data Network Equipment Telephone Exchange Equipment

CQCN - Delay Minutes Figure 6.125: Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) – telecommunications systems – delay minutes Telecommunications FY12 700

600

500

400

300 Delay Minutes 200

100

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Communications Failure 50 666 60 48 Analysis 203

Telecommunications Lagging Indicators - Faults Summary The summary of monthly faults from TSMS for the Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and The status for telecommunications systems is Minerva) can be found in Figure 6.126. summarised in Table 6.57. A total of 319 faults were reported with peaks The FAR was analysed to identify of 44 and 53 faults in September and October telecommunications asset age on the Blackwater respectively, however; only the fault in October System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva). As resulted in additional delay minutes; with the seen in Figure 6.123, 69% of the assets are less majority of faults due to radio systems (56.7%) than 10 years old, with 16% between 10 and and transmission (32.3%). 15 years old, 5% between 15 and 20 years old, and the remaining 10% more than 20 years old. Although no assets exist in the FAR for the Blackwater System (Rolleston) and the Blackwater As seen in Figure 6.124, although the majority System (Minerva), faults associated with the of assets (58.1%) have a remaining book life of relevant line sections from the systems were between 3 and 15 years, 17.4% have currently found. Evans & Peck has incorporated this data reached their book life, with an additional 23.3% into the main Blackwater System. Of this, the with a remaining book life of between one and Blackwater System (Rolleston) accounted for one three years. Linking network equipment is seen fault and the Blackwater System (Minerva) for six to be the biggest contributor of the above, with faults during the reporting period. 68.3% with a remaining book life of three years or less (24.4% have already reached their book life). A trend of the average faults per month, as Key Performance Indicators – Delay compared to this Initial Assessment, will be used to evaluate the lagging indicator after the End Of Minutes Period Assessment. The telecommunications system is responsible for 0.11% of the delays on the Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva), of which a monthly breakdown can be seen in Figure 6.125.

A total of five faults resulted in 824 delay minutes over the reporting period, with the sole fault source being communications failure. Given the small number of delays and the low contribution of telecommunications delays to total delay the telecommunications system currently represents a low risk of impacting tonnages into the future.

When normalised as per the KPI assessment methodology, telecommunications delay results in 44 minutes of delay/ NTK. This evaluates to a green rating.

Table 6.57: Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) – telecommunications

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Normalised Delay Green Lagging indicator Average faults per month/ track Grey kilometre Figure 6.126: Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) – telecommunications system – faults

51 50 42 40 32 29 28 28 30 26 22 20 18 18 Number of Faults 11 10 3

0 July May June April March August October January February December November September

Figure 6.127: Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) – telecommunications system – Preventativepreventative maintenance Maintenance program performance Program Performance For (Multiple Items) - (All) 700

593 600

500

400 400 335 312 300

200 Number of Work Work of Number Orders 77 100 54

0 On Time or Less than 15 Between 15 Between 30 Greater than Open or Early days late days & 30 days days & 60 days 60 days late Recurring Item late late Error Analysis 205

Leading Indicator - Preventative Leading Indicator - Corrective Maintenance Maintenance Program Performance As discussed in the section above, the Blackwater The corrective maintenance program performance System (Rolleston) and the Blackwater System for work orders related to telecommunications (Minerva) have been incorporated into the main systems on the Blackwater System (excluding Blackwater System due to data integrity issues. Rolleston and Minerva) is as shown in Figure 6.128. This related directly to the Analysis of the data from TSMS found 73.7% of telecommunications faults during the reporting work orders were completed less than 30 days late period, as seen in Figure 6.126. As discussed from the programmed date, with 30.7% of these in previous sections, the Blackwater System completed on time or early. Further, 18.9% were (Rolleston) and the Blackwater System (Minerva) between 30 and 60 days late, and 4.3% greater have been incorporated into the main Blackwater than 60 days late, with 3.0% of items currently System due to data integrity issues. still open, or were deemed to be recurring items (Evans & Peck assessed these items to be part of a Analysis of the data from TSMS found 78.4% of data integrity issue with TSMS). work orders were completed on time or early, with a further 5.6% two days late, 4.1% three days Although this suggests a relatively strong late, 2.5% four days late, 1.3% five days late and performance of the scheduled maintenance 8.2% over six days late. Although this suggests program, this does not currently meet the KPI set an overall strong performance of the corrective of 95% of scheduled preventative maintenance maintenance work, this does not currently work orders completed less than 30 days late meet the KPI set of 95% of scheduled corrective during the reporting period. maintenance work orders completed on time during the reporting period. The preventative maintenance program performance for work orders related to telecommunications systems on the Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) is shown in Figure 6.127.

Figure 6.128:ltiple Blackwater Items) System - Corrective (excluding Rolleston Fault and Performance Minerva) – telecommunications Signals & system – corrective maintenanceTrain program Control performance Systems 300

250 250

200

150

100

Number of Work Orders Work Number of 50 26 18 13 8 4 0 0 On Time or 2 Days Late 3 Days Late 4 Days Late 5 Days Late More than 6 Needing Early Days Late More Information l) - Asset Age By Acquisition Date Track Structure Figure 6.129: Blackwater System (Rolleston) – track – asset age by acquisition date

Number of Assets 2

0 Less than 10 years Between 10 & 15 Between 15 & 20 Between 20 & 30 Greater than 30 years years years years Track Turnouts Track Support Railway Track

Figure 6.130: Newlands Blackwater System - Remaining (Rolleston) Book– track Life– remaining book life Track Structure 5

2 Number of Assets 1

0 Book Life Reached Between 1 & 3 years Between 3 & 15 years Greater than 15 years

Track Turnouts Track Support Railway Track Analysis 207

6.4.3 Blackwater (Rolleston) Lagging Indicator - Average Defects per Month/Track Kilometre Track and Track Structures In summary for the Blackwater System (Rolleston) Summary section, a total of 52 defects were recorded for track, track support systems and civil The track and track structures status is infrastructure, which has been shown in summarised in Table 6.58. Figure 6.131.

To identify possible trends as assets progress Defects were reported consistently throughout the towards the end of their functional life, the major part of the period, with the only exceptions assessment team analysed the FAR. Evans & Peck being April, May and June 2012 where zero expected the FAR to reflect the recent construct of defects were recorded. the Rolleston spur, which was completed in 2005. These expectations were realised upon analysing A further breakdown of the total number of the results, shown in Figure 6.129 and Figure defects gives: 6.130. While these results are not a performance indicator for the assessment of the system, •• A total of 45 defects recorded for track they provide a level of insight into the expected •• A total of five defects recorded for turnouts conditions of the assets. •• A total of two defects recorded on level Key Performance Indicator - Delay crossings. Minutes Three incidents causing delays were reported against the track assets on the Blackwater System (Rolleston) for FY 2012. This cumulated to 90 minutes of total delays, or 1.54% of total system delays. This evaluates against the assessment methodology as a green rating and 283 delay minutes/NTK.

Table 6.58: Blackwater System (Rolleston) – track – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Normalised delay Green Lagging indicator Physical defect identification Grey Lagging indicator Average defects per month/ track Grey kilometre Figure 6.131: Blackwater System (Rolleston) – track – defects Track & Track Support Defects

12 11

10 9

8 7 7 6 6 6 4 4

Number of Defects of Number 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 July May June April March August October January February December November September

Newlands - Program Close Figure 6.132: Blackwater System (Rolleston) – track – corrective maintenance program Out Delays Track & Track Support 100% 90% 80% 70% 60%

50% 44% 44% 40% 30% 20%

Percentage of Work Orders Work of Percentage 12% 10% 0% 0% 0% 0% On time or Less than 30 Between 30 & More than 60 Currently Open Recurring early days late 60 days late days Late Items OR Awaiting Information Analysis 209

Lagging Indicator - Extent of Disruptive OTCI Performance Defects Evans & Peck reviewed the statistical data from Although Evans & Peck performed a field TRC for the Blackwater System (Rolleston) section inspection of the Blackwater System, no formal or the period July 2011 to June 2012. The output spot audit was performed on the track assets from this data provides a summary of the overall for the Rolleston Section. The system has been track condition and is shown in Figure 6.133. evaluated a grey rating against the assessment criterion. The OTCI range indicates that the track geometry over Blackwater (Rolleston) section is in overall Leading Indicator - Scheduled good condition. Maintenance Program The implementation of the Blackwater System (Rolleston) corrective maintenance program is shown at Figure 6.132.

In relation to the completion and closing out of the defects assessed in the reporting period, 44% of defects had been closed out by the programmed date or earlier. 12% of defects remain open, and 44% of defects were recurring or awaiting further information for completion. No defects were reported as being closed late. This suggests a strong performance of the scheduled maintenance program on the Rolleston spur. This conclusion has been based upon the system performance as of the data provision date, 4 December 2012.

Figure 6.133: Blackwater System (Rolleston) – track support – OTCI

26 OTCI Score

20 Jul-11 Oct-11 Sep-11 Dec-11 Jan-12 Aug-11 Feb-12 Apr-12 Nov-11 Jun-12 Mar-12 May-12

Below Lower Threshold Range Lower - Median Threshold Range Blackwater System (Rolleston) Table 6.59: Blackwater System (Rolleston) –bridges

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Cancellations Green KPI Delays Green Lagging indicator Asset age Amber Lagging indicator Inspection work order completion Amber Lagging indicator Maintenance work order completion Grey

Table 6.60: Blackwater System (Rolleston) –culverts

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Cancellations Green KPI Delays Green Lagging indicator Asset age Amber Lagging indicator Inspection work order completion Grey Lagging indicator Maintenance work order completion Grey

Table 6.61: Blackwater System (Rolleston) – structures – leading indicators

Closed Open Closed Asset inspections/ inspections/ defect/ Open defect/ Asset type quantity asset asset asset quantity quantity quantity quantity

Bridge 19 1.05 0 0 0.58 Culvert 110 0 0 0.01 0.04

Table 6.62: Blackwater System (Rolleston) – signals – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Normalised delay Green Lagging indicator Average faults per month/ track Grey kilometre Analysis 211

Structures Signals

Summary The approach to signals and train control system The status for bridges and culverts is summarised maintenance and asset renewal is defined within in Table 6.59 and Table 6.60. the Aurizon Network’s Asset Policy Maintenance and Renewal document. Key Performance Indicator – Delay Minutes Figure 6.138 and Figure 6.139 show the asset age and remaining book life of the signals and No culvert or bridge delays or cancellations train control assets for the Blackwater System were recorded for Blackwater (Rolleston). This (Rolleston). evaluates against the assessment methodology as a green rating. The characteristics show a system that is Lagging Indicator - Asset Age comparatively new. This is reflective given the nature of the Rolleston branch. It would be All bridges and culverts on Blackwater (Rolleston) expected that these assets reported in the FAR, were shown to have between 3 and 15 years as well as assets not included, would be in good remaining book life. The assets were less than condition. The relay interlocking reported as 10 years old, reflecting the recent construction. between 15 and 20 years may be considered an inaccurate data entry, due to the 2005 This is illustrated in Figure 6.134 and commissioning of the system. Figure 6.135. Key Performance Indicator - Delay Lagging Indicator - Inspection Lag Minutes Only one culvert inspection was programmed for The monthly breakdown of these delays is FY 2012 for Blackwater (Rolleston). Evans & Peck provided in Figure 6.140. believe insufficient evidence has been provided to enable confidence in the allocation of performance Overall, the signals and train control system is to this inspection lag. responsible for 12.29% of delays on the Blackwater System (Rolleston). When normalised, signals Twenty bridge inspections were performed in contribute 3540 minutes/NTK and are assessed FY 2012, all of which were between 30 and 60 with a green rating. days late during the period. This evaluates against the assessment methodology as an amber rating. Lagging Indicators - Faults Lagging Indicator – Maintenance Lag The total number of signals and train control system faults for the Blackwater System Figure 6.136 below shows only one out of five (Rolleston) is shown in Figure 6.141. culvert defects were closed out on time or less than 30 days late. Through the data analysis, it was found a large number faults were being caused by issues from Figure 6.137 shows no bridge defects were the weighing systems, shown in Figure 6.142. recorded as closed out for the period. Eleven Further investigation indicated failures of the defects remain recorded as open. Evans & Peck asset components with the issues rectified under believe insufficient evidence has been provided to warranty. enable confidence in the allocation of performance to maintenance lag. Leading Indicators – Inspections Table 6.61 indicates conformance with CESS for bridges however no inspection were recorded during the period for FY 2012. This does not imply non-conformance of CESS, however, should be monitored into FY 2013. Open defects are higher than closed defects for the period. l) System - Asset Age By Acquisition Date Civil Structures Figure 6.134: Blackwater System (Rolleston) – structures – asset age

120

100

40 Number of Assets

0 Less than 10 years Between 10 & 15 Between 15 & 20 Between 20 & 30 Greater than 30 years years years years Culverts Bridges Miscellaneous Structures

l) System - Remaining Book Life Civil Structures Figure 6.135: Blackwater System (Rolleston) – structures – remaining book life

120

100

40 Number of Assets

0 Book Life Reached Between 1 & 3 years Between 3 & 15 years Greater than 15 years

Culverts Bridges Miscellaneous Structures Analysis 213

Figure 6.136: Blackwater System (Rolleston) –structures – culvert defect close out Newlands - Program Close Out Delays Culverts 5 4 4

2 1 1

Number of Work Work of Number Orders 0 0 0 0 0 On Time or Less than 30 Between 30 & More than 60 Currently Open Recurring Items Early Days Late 60 days late days Late OR Awaiting Information

Figure 6.137: BlackwaterNewlands (Rolleston) –structures - Program – bridge Close defect Out close Delays out Bridges 20

15 11 10

Number of Work Work of Number Orders 0 0 0 0 0 0 On Time or Less than 30 Between 30 & More than 60 Currently Open Recurring Items Early Days Late 60 days late days Late OR Awaiting Information Newlands - Asset Age By Acquisition Date Signal & Train Figure 6.138: Blackwater System (Rolleston)Control – signals Systems – asset age by acquisition date 12

4 Number of Assets

0 Less than 10 years Between 10 & 15 Between 15 & 20 Between 20 & 30 Greater than 30 years years years years

Level Crossing Protection Signal Interlockings – Relay Train Protection Systems

l) - Remaining Book Life Signal & Train Control systems Figure 6.139: Blackwater System (Rolleston) – signals – remaining book life

4 Number of Assets

0 Book Life Reached Between 1 & 3 years Between 3 & 15 years Greater than 15 years

Level Crossing Protection Signal Interlockings – Relay Train Protection Systems Analysis 215

Figure 6.140: Blackwater System (Rolleston) – signals – delay minutes – FY 2012 900

800

700

600

500

400

300 Delay Minutes 200

100

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Damage to Trackside Equipment 302 Infrastructure Protection Systems 92 Issues Signal Failure Telemetry Failure 722 137 102 Points Failure 45 323 23 30 36 Track Circuit Failure 11 79 20

Figure 6.141: Blackwater System (Rolleston) – signals – all faults

10 9 9 8 8 8 7 7

6 5 5 5 4 4 4 4

3 Number of Faults 2 2 2 1 1

0 July May June April March August October January February December November September Blackwater (Rolleston) - Faults Figure 6.142:Weighing Blackwater System Systems (Rolleston) - Signal – signals & – Train weighing Control system faults Systems 6

5 5

4 4 4

3 3

2 2 2 2 Number of Faults 1 1 1

0 0 0 0 July May June April March August October January February December November September

Figure 6.143:Preventative Blackwater System Maintenance (Rolleston) – signals Program – preventative Performance maintenance program For performanceNewlands - Signals & Train Control Systems 120 111

100

60 60

40 29

Number of Work Work of Number Orders 18 20 12 7

0 On Time or Less than 15 Between 15 Between 30 Greater than 60 Open or Early days late days & 30 days days & 60 days days late Recurring Item late late Analysis 217

Leading Indicator - Preventative Telecommunications Maintenance The Blackwater System (Rolleston) currently does Figure 6.143 shows the Preventative Maintenance not have any Telecommunications assets, as per Program performance for the signals on the the FAR. Although some faults have appeared in Blackwater System (Rolleston). TSMS that are linked to Rolleston line sections, there are no associated delay minutes associated A KPI of 95% is set by Aurizon Network for with telecommunications systems. Evans & Peck maintenance tasks to be completed less than 30 has thus assessed these faults with the main days late. Reviewing the overall performance, Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston and 84.4% of preventative maintenance tasks achieved Minerva), and deemed them to be a data integrity this requirement. This falls below the levels set by issue. Aurizon Network, indicating possible issues in the renewal program. 5.1% of work orders were more Due to the above, the KPIs, lagging and leading than 60 days late. indicators associated with telecommunications Leading Indicator - Corrective systems on the Blackwater System (Rolleston) is Maintenance rated as grey. The on-time performance to rectify the faults identified in the lagging indicator through FY 2012 is detailed in Figure 6.144.

Only 46.6% of work orders were completed either on time or early, less than half the accepted KPI of 95%. 34.5% of work orders were completed more than six days late. This indicates issues in the corrective maintenance regime in this system. While it is noted that the coal volumes on this system are low, further monitoring of this indicator is necessary.

Newlands - Corrective Fault Performance Signals & Figure 6.144: Blackwater System (Rolleston)Train Control – signals – Systems corrective maintenance program performance 30 27

20 20

10 Number of Work Work of Number Orders 5 3 3 3 2 0 0 On Time or 2 Days Late 3 Days Late 4 Days Late 5 Days Late More than 6 Needing Early Days Late More Information l) - Asset Age By Acquisition Date Track Structure Figure 6.145: Blackwater System (Minerva) – track – asset age by acquisition date

4 Number of Assets

0 Less than 10 years Between 10 & 15 Between 15 & 20 Between 20 & 30 Greater than 30 years years years years

Track Turnouts Track Support Railway Track

Figure 6.146:Newlands Blackwater System - Remaining (Minerva) –Book track –Life remaining book life Track Structure 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 Number of Assets 4 2 0 Book Life Reached Between 1 & 3 years Between 3 & 15 years Greater than 15 years

Track Turnouts Track Support Railway Track

24. http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/current/month/qld/archive/201205.summary.shtml Analysis 219

6.4.4 Blackwater (Minerva) truck or with an excavator, this method of controlling the coal spill has been found to Track and Track Structures be effective in controlling the risk of coal obstructing blade or other component function Summary in the turnout The track and track structures status is •• Two defects were recorded for level crossings. summarised in Table 6.63. Lagging Indicator - Extent of Disruptive Defects Figure 6.145 and Figure 6.146 show the varied age characteristics of this system. Although Evans & Peck performed a field inspection of the Blackwater System (Minerva), Key Performance Indicator - Delay no formal spot audit was performed on the track Minutes assets. Visual evidence suggested that the track No delays were recorded over the reporting was of a high quality. Due to the lack of formal period, FY 2012, against the track assets on the assessment data, however, the system has been Blackwater (Minerva) Section. This evaluates awarded a grey rating against the assessment against the assessment methodology as a green criterion. rating. Leading Indicator - Scheduled Lagging Indicator - Defects Maintenance Program Reported track defects on the Blackwater System In relation to the performance of the completion (Minerva) are shown in Figure 6.147, a total of 234 and closing out of the defects assessed in the reported for FY 2012. reporting period, shown in Figure 6.148, 40% of defects had been closed out by the programmed Significantly higher numbers of defects were date or earlier and 20% within 30 days. 3% of recorded in May 2012, which coincided with high defects remain open, and 45% of defects were rainfall in Northern Queensland in May 201223 recurring or awaiting further information for and August 2011. The major part of the defects completion. 1.5% of defects were reported more recorded/programmed and completed in the than 30 days late. August period was the replacement or removal of damaged clusters of timber sleepers on the Nogoa Leading Indicator - OTCI Performance to Wurba section. The OTCI for the Blackwater System (Minerva) section for FY 2012 is shown in Figure 6.149. Further, a breakdown of the data provided the following information: The OTCI range indicates that the track geometry over Blackwater System (Minerva) section is in •• A total of 208 defects consisted of a variety of overall good condition. It is noted that although faults including excessive vegetation, repairs the Springsure branch component of the track is to a track buckle and wheelburn and clearing above the median threshold, the System’s OTCI of debris score would fall below this threshold value. This •• A total of 22 defects were recorded for substantiates the site inspection assessment which turnouts; some of the defects involved the noted no major issues over the section. clearing of coal spillage either using the Vac

Table 6.63: Blackwater System (Minerva) – track – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Normalised delay Green Lagging indicator Physical defect identification Grey Lagging indicator Average defects per month/ track Grey kilometre Figure 6.147: Blackwater System (Minerva) – track – defects 60 56

50 43 40 34

30 21 20 15 15 12 Number of Defects of Number 10 10 10 8 8 2 0 July May June April March August October January February December November September

Newlands - Program Close Figure 6.148: Blackwater SystemOut Delays (Minerva) Track – track – & corrective Track maintenance Support 100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50% 40% 40% 35%

30% 20% 20% Percentage of Work Orders Work of Percentage

10% 3% 1% 0% 0% On time or Less than 30 Between 30 & More than 60 Currently Open Recurring early days late 60 days late days Late Items OR Awaiting Information Analysis 221

Figure 6.149: Blackwater System (Minerva)Blackwater – track – OTCI Minerva 50

OTCI Score 30

20 Jul-11 Oct-11 Sep-11 Dec-11 Jan-12 Aug-11 Feb-12 Apr-12 Nov-11 Jun-12 Mar-12 May-12

Lower - Median Threshold Range Median - Upper Threshold Range Wurba Junction - Minerva Mine Nogoa - Wurba Junction

Figure 6.150: l)Blackwater System System - Asset (Minerva) Age By – structures Acquisition – asset Date age Civil Structures

4 Number of Assets 2

0 Less than 10 years Between 10 & 15 Between 15 & 20 Between 20 & 30 Greater than 30 years years years years Culverts Bridges Miscellaneous Structures l) System - Remaining Book Life Civil Structures Figure 6.151: Blackwater System (Minerva) – structures – remaining book life

4 Number of Assets 2

0 Book Life Reached Between 1 & 3 years Between 3 & 15 years Greater than 15 years

Culverts Bridges Miscellaneous Structures Analysis 223

Figure 6.152:Newlands Blackwater System - Bridge (Minerva) Inspection – structures –Close bridge inspection Out Delays close out From Closed Date 6 5 5

4 3 3 2 2 1 Number of Inspections of Number 1 0 0 0 On Time or Less than 30 Between 30 and More than 60 Currently Open Recurring Item Early days late 60 days late days late OR Abandoned

Figure 6.153 Blackwater SystemBlackwater (Minerva) – (Minerva) structures – culvert - Program defect close Closeout Out Delays Culverts

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20%

Percentage of Work Orders 10% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% On time or Less than 30 Between 30 More than 60 Currently Recurring early days late & 60 days days Late Open Items OR late Awaiting Information Table 6.64: Blackwater System (Minerva) –bridges

Table 6.65: Blackwater System (Minerva) – culverts

Table 6.66: Blackwater System (Minerva) – structures – leading indicators

Closed Open Closed Asset inspections/ inspections/ defect/ Open defect/ Asset type quantity asset asset asset quantity quantity quantity quantity

Bridge 5 1.8 0.4 1.6 11.6 Culvert 9 0.67 0 0 1.0

Table 6.67: Blackwater System (Minerva) – signals – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Normalised delay Green Lagging indicator Average faults per month/ track Grey kilometre Analysis 225

Structures Signals and Train Control Systems Summary Summary The status for bridges and culverts is summarised The approach to signals and train control system in Table 6.64 and Table 6.65. maintenance and asset renewal is defined within the Aurizon Network’s Asset Policy Maintenance Key Performance Indicator – Delay and Renewal document. Minutes No service delays or cancellations were recorded Upon analysis of the FAR, it was found that the for the Minerva branch. This evaluates against the Blackwater System (Minerva) had three assets assessment methodology as a green rating. registered, namely, a relay interlocking and two level crossing protections. The level crossing protections were less than 10 years old, with more Lagging Indicator - Asset Age than 15 years remaining book life, whereas the The Minerva branch contains the only remaining relay interlocking was between 15 and 20 years timber bridges in the CQCN. The majority of old. This asset had 3 to 15 years remaining book culverts are shown to have between 3 and 15 years life. remaining book life, with the majority of bridges Key Performance Indicator - Delay shown to have greater than 15 years remaining Minutes book life. Overall, the signals and train control system is Lagging Indicator - Inspection Lag responsible for 6.84% of delays on the Blackwater Six culvert inspections were performed on the System (Minerva). This is a result of one incident Blackwater System (Minerva), all of which were (149 min) being reported in February 2012. on time or early. This evaluates against the This results in 1151 minutes of delay/NTK and assessment methodology as a green rating. evaluated against the assessment methodology, the system achieves a green rating. However, Figure 6.152 shows that one bridge inspection was due to the small pool of data available, further performed on time or early, three inspections less monitoring of this indicator is necessary in future than 30 days late with five inspections between 30 Assessments. and 60 days late. Two inspections remained open Lagging Indicators - Faults at completion of the period. This evaluates against the assessment methodology as an amber rating. The total number of signals and train control system faults for the Blackwater System (Minerva) Lagging Indicator - Maintenance Lag is shown in Figure 6.155. Through the data Figure 6.153 and Figure 6.154 show either open analysis, it was found that the major cause of defects or insufficient data to provide comment faults being reported were component/equipment upon for the Blackwater System (Minerva). Evans failure. However, due to the number of faults & Peck believe that assess a grey rating. being reported, no accurate trends or conclusions could be established. Leading Indicator - Inspections Table 6.66 shows an appropriate ratio of inspections to assets for both bridges and culverts. The large quantity of defects remaining open on bridges should be monitored. Figure 6.154: TitleBlackwater System (Minerva) – structures – bridge defect close out

1 1 1

Number of Work Work of Number Orders 0 0 0 0 0 On Time or Less than 30 Between 30 & More than 60 Currently Open Recurring Items Early Days Late 60 days late days Late OR Awaiting Information

Figure 6.155: Blackwater System (Minerva) – signals – all faults

5 5

4 4 4

3 3

2 2 2 2 Number of Faults of Number 1 1

0 0 0 0 0 July May June April March August October January February December November September Analysis 227

Leading Indicator - Preventative Telecommunications Maintenance The Blackwater System (Minerva) currently does Figure 6.156 shows the Preventative Maintenance not have any telecommunications assets, as per an Program performance for the signals on the assessment of the FAR. Although some faults have Blackwater System (Minerva). appeared in TSMS that are linked to Minerva line sections, there are no associated delay minutes A KPI of 95% is set by Aurizon Network for associated with telecommunications systems. maintenance tasks to be completed less than Evans & Peck has thus assessed these faults with 30 days late. Reviewing the overall performance, the main Blackwater System (excluding Rolleston 86.2% of work orders achieved this requirement. and Minerva), and deemed them to be a data This falls below the levels set by Aurizon Network. integrity issue. Further monitoring of this indicator is necessary to ensure that no long term negative trends occur. Due to the above, the KPIs, lagging and leading Leading Indicator - Corrective indicators associated with telecommunications Maintenance systems on the Blackwater System (Minerva) is rated as grey, not applicable. The on-time performance to rectify the faults identified in the lagging indicator through FY 2012 is detailed in Figure 6.157. 65.2% of work orders were completed either on time or early, less than the accepted KPI of 95%. 13% of work orders were completed more than six days late. Further monitoring and improvement of this indicator is necessary to prevent future issues arising in this system. Preventative Maintenance Program Performance For Figure 6.156: BlackwaterNewlands System (Minerva) - Signals – signals & Train – preventative Control maintenance Systems 70 64

60 55

40 37

20 20 Number of Work Work of Number Orders

10 5 0 0 On Time or Less than 15 Between 15 Between 30 Greater than 60 Open or Early days late days & 30 days days & 60 days days late Recurring Item late late

Newlands - Corrective Fault Performance Signals &

Figure 6.157: Blackwater System (Minerva)Train Control – signals – correctiveSystems maintenance

16 15

4 3 3 Number of Work Work of Number Orders 2 1 1 0 0 0 On Time or 2 Days Late 3 Days Late 4 Days Late 5 Days Late More than 6 Needing Early Days Late More Information Analysis 229

6.4.5 Blackwater (Electric) Lagging Indicator - Dewirements In consultation with Aurizon Network, Evans & Traction Distribution Peck have chosen to make the target for achieving Summary a green rating no more than 12 dewirements a year. This corresponds to an average of one The KPIs and lagging indicators for the Blackwater dewirement per month. Causes of dewirements System’s traction distribution are shown in for the Blackwater System (Electric) are shown in Table 6.68. Figure 6.159. Key performance Indicator - Delay The main overall cause is hardware failure. There Minutes was one case of a stagger related failure. Figure 6.158 shows the distribution of delay minutes for the Blackwater System (Electric). There is an increasing trend during the summer months; partially due to increased faults There was approximately 45,000 minutes delay generated by wildlife. Two of the dewirements in in December 2011. During this month three December have been attributed to animals causing dewirements were recorded in the Blackwater damage to hardware; at a later time this damaged System (Electric). hardware has caused a pantograph to conflict with the contact wire leading to dewirement. The total annual delay attributed to the overhead contact system was 58,407 minutes. The For FY 2012 the applicable dewirements for the requirement to normalise this figure by accounting Blackwater System (Electric) after removal of for traffic by considering NTK has been discussed vehicles and earth wire faults were twelve. earlier. Based on the average NTK figures, the normalised and rounded thresholds are shown The Blackwater System (Electric) achieves a green Table 6.69. A green result is achieved for the rating. Blackwater System (Electric). Details of these dewirements are shown in Table 6.70.

Table 6.68: Blackwater System (Electric) – traction distribution – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Delay Green KPI Dewirement Green Lagging indicator Infrastructure inspection Green

Table 6.69: Blackwater System (Electric) – results and delay minute categories

NTK Results Green delay Yellow delay Amber delay Red delay (FY 2012) minutes/ minutes/ minutes/ minutes/ minutes/ average GNTK GNTK GNTK GNTK GNTK

18.5 GNTK 3,157 Green < 4500 4500≤ amber < 6750 ≤ amber Red ≥ 9000 6750 < 9000 Figure 6.158: Blackwater System(Multiple (Electric) Items) – traction - distributionDelay Minutes and traction power supply systems – delayTraction minutes Distribution & Power Supply FY12 50000

45000

40000

35000

30000

25000

20000

Delay Minutes 15000

10000

5000

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Trips 408 1472 1525 1130 2991 1050 602 10 169 2073 5871 Obstruction/Damage/Failure/Malfu 112 247 7951 92 874 44371 1055 103 945 124 404 2209 nction of OHTWE

Figure 6.159: Blackwater System (Electric) – dewirement analysis

Insulator 21.4% Hardware 35.7%

Vehicle 14.3%

Wildlife 21.4%

Stagger 7.1% Analysis 231

Table 6.70: Blackwater System (Electric) - Dewirement records

Date Location Comments 7/10/2011 Callemondah FS – Mount Overhead trip. Excessive cant on track, Larcom TSC damage to overhead equipment, 2 x cantilevers, 3 x spans of droppers, contact wire damage. 17/11/2011 Rangal FS – Bluff TSC Overhead trip. 6/12/2011 Hay Point During track maintenance work, a front end loader contacted a mast and broke it away from its foundation. Power was deenergised. Repairs are being affected. 7/12/2011 Callemondah FS – Parana Composite insulator failed at fixed anchor. 16/12/2011 Callemondah FS – Mount Overhead Trip. Larcom TSC 28/12/2011 Callemondah FS – Mount Double trip on electrical section. Larcom TSC Isolation taken out for 521A, B Ambose – Mt Larcom Up Road. Repairs made to feeder wire and insulator replaced. Tyco insulator cover installed to prevent further bird contact. 15/01/2012 Rocklands FS – Rockhampton Double trip on electrical section. Isolation taken out to isolate damaged insulator. Overheads energised overnight. Repairs carried out the following day and the faulty insulator replaced. 20/01/2012 Rangal FS – Bluff TSC Broken catenary at 180.293. 26/01/2012 Rocklands FS – Rockhampton Double trip on electrical section. Isoflon Insulation in catenary failed No. 5 Marshalling Rd Rockhampton. Isolation was taken out on 26/1/12 to make O/H safe. Repairs were completed on 27/1/12. 5/03/2012 Rocklands FS – Bajool TSC Overhead trip. Catenary wire burnt down at buffer earth on 553 B at N636.618. DUE TO FAILURE OF SECTION INSULATOR 551 D ---553 B. 13/03/2012 Mount Larcom TSC – Raglan FS Grader driver hit and broke back guy and caused severe damage. 14/05/2012 Callemondah FS – Mount Overhead trip. Larcom TSC 15/05/2012 Bajool TSC - Raglan FS Isolation taken out and repairs made. 3/06/2012 Bajool TSC – Raglan FS Double trip on electrical section Figure 6.160: Blackwater System (Electric) – traction distribution - effectiveness in closing out TRC stagger exceptions

9 8 8

5 4 4

3 Number of Faults of Number 2 2 1 1 1 0 0 Less than 1 day Between 2 & 4 Between 5 & 7 Between 8 & 14 Between 15 & Greater than 28 days days days 28 days days Analysis 233

Lagging Indicator - Infrastructure Hardware failure in many cases is related to fatigue Inspection failure of the aluminium cables at the mounting points on the masts. A field inspection was carried out through spot auditing to determine the extent of traction Table 6.71 describes the Blackwater System distribution defects. The Blackwater System (Electric) earth wire failures for FY 2012. (Electric) had this field inspection carried out on 1213 February 2013. 5% of sites were found Lagging Indicator - TRC Alignment to have significant defects. This is below the Figure 6.160 shows the work order close out time threshold value for the green rating (<10%). distribution for the Blackwater System (Electric). Therefore, the traction distribution assets in the In the case of the Blackwater System (Electric) system are to a satisfactory standard. Details of there were only 16 exceptions resulting in opening field inspections can be found in Appendix C. of work orders. The significant difference to the Lagging Indicator - Earth Wire Failures Goonyella System (Electric) could be due to the variation in prevailing weather conditions during As previously mentioned earth wire failures do the period. Whilst there were 63% of work orders not generally lead to a disruptive failure and not closed off within the seven day period, with the are relatively easy to repair. Therefore they are majority exceeding 28 days this only represented not included in the KPI. Earth wire failures in an absolute number of 11 exceptions. Nevertheless, the Goonyella System (Electric) are twice as any stagger issue left untreated represents a prevalent as the Blackwater System (Electric). For dewirement risk. Blackwater System (Electric), the majority are due to hardware failure (8) but some are attributed to wildlife (2) causing arcing faults.

Table 6.71: Blackwater System (Electric) - earth wire failure records

Date/time Location Comments 9/08/2011 Red Rock TSC – Burngrove Earth wire failed at GG 20.4 Km. Junction 23/09/2011 Rangal FS – Bluff TSC Overhead trip. Albatross hit. 12/01/2012 8:29 Rocklands FS – Kara TSC A track worker reported a broken overhead earth 31/01/2012 16:12 Wandoo FS – Braeside TSC Broken feeder wire tie. Excessive carbon build up. 11/02/2012 4:37 Grantleigh FS – Westwood TSC Overhead trip 20/02/2012 2:20 Wandoo FS – Braeside TSC Overhead trip. Crow’s nest in vicinity of fault. Mark on feeder insulator adjacent to were the earth wire broke. 12/04/2012 10:38 Mount McLaren FS – Villafranca Earth wire down at BA 51.925 TSC caused by a snake shorting from feeder wire to earth wire. 30/04/2012 11:45 Peak Downs FS – Saraji TSC Earth wire damage/failure 15/05/2012 4:13 Wandoo FS – Braeside TSC Earth wire damaged. 15/05/2012 9:15 Wandoo FS – Braeside TSC Broken earth wire repaired Overhead Faults Per Month - Goonyella (Exc Vermont) Overhead Faults Per Month - Goonyella (Exc Figure 6.161:140 Blackwater System (Electric) –Vermont) traction distribution – faults

100 120 90 80 100 70 80 60 50 60 40

30 Faults of Number 40 Number of Faults of Number 20 20 10 0 0 July July May May June June April April March March August August October October January January February February December December November November September September

Environment Accidents/Operational Deficient Maintenance Equipment Failure Environment Accidents/Operational Deficient Maintenance Equipment Failure

Preventative Maintenance Program Performance For Figure 6.162: Blackwater System (Electric)(Multiple – traction Items) distribution - (All) – preventative maintenance 500 475

450

400

350

300 269 250

200

150 96 Number of Work Work of Number Orders 100

50 29 24 12 0 On Time or Less than 15 Between 15 Between 30 Greater than 60 Open or Early days late days & 30 days days & 60 days days late Recurring Item late late Error Analysis 235

Leading Indicator – Corrective Work Leading Indicator - Preventative Orders Performance Maintenance Performance Figure 6.161 shows the distribution of faults over Figure 6.162 shows the distribution of the year for the Blackwater System (Electric). preventative maintenance work orders which have been completed or programmed during FY 2012. These faults have been categorised for each month Approximately 3% are executed on time or early, into the following areas: with greater than 50% completed greater than 60 days late. •• Equipment failure •• Environment These results may suggest that there potentially is a level of under resourcing which is leading to •• Deficient maintenance routine maintenance being omitted.

•• Accidents/operational. Aurizon Network needs to examine the reasons The environment encompasses faults cause by why the preventative maintenance tasks for the wildlife and vegetation. overhead system are being delayed. The recent review by Aurecon was designed in part to address In the Blackwater System (Electric), there is a this issue, however this study postdates the clear trend of increasing numbers of faults in the maintenance review period. Aurizon Network summer months. The bar graph shows that the has recognised that there are deficiencies in the increasing trend in failures in the summer months preventative maintenance program and are acting is by far predominantly due to environmental to correct this situation. causes. This effect will be likely due to the greater activity of animals in the summer months. This is particularly true in the case of snakes which are relatively inactive in the winter months. Snakes that climb on insulators associated with the contact wire registration arms or the feeder wires are a common occurrence.

Equipment failure and deficient maintenance are only a small fraction of the total number of faults. This shows that at this point in time equipment maintenance and replacement is adequate to maintain these fault categories at levels where they are not significant in overall terms.

The pattern of faults occurring in the Blackwater System (Electric) is similar to the Goonyella System (Electric) in terms of a drop off in those due to environment in the winter months. Table 6.72: Blackwater System (Electric) – traction power – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance Asset KPI Delay Green Asset KPI Transformer oil Yellow Asset KPI AT oil Green Lagging indicator Infrastructure inspection Green

Table 6.73: Blackwater System (Electric) feeder transformers

km Blackwater feeder stations 1 537.143 Callemondah FS T51 2 537.143 Callemondah FS T52 3 1.56 Rocklands FS T53 4 1.56 Rocklands FS T10 5 63.803 Grantleigh FS T11 6 63.803 Grantleigh FS T12 7 133.288 Dingo FS T13 8 133.288 Dingo FS T14 9 194.974 Rangal FS T15 10 194.974 Rangal FS T16 11 194.974 Rangal FS T17 12 66.066 Gregory FS T18 13 66.066 Gregory FS T19

Table 6.74: Oil test results for Rocklands and Dingo Feeder Transformers (prior FY 2012)

TC H2 CH4 C2H6 Water Water (>30kV) Test date Test (<35ppm) Dielectric Comment (<150ppm) (<150ppm) (<200ppm) Transformer (<10000ppm)

T53 24/01/2011 68kV 6ppm 3 2 1 98 Good T10 24/01/2011 69kV 6ppm 0 2 0 94 Good T13 No record ______Refurb, ex Moranbah T14 No record ______Unknown Analysis 237

Traction Power Supply Systems There are no oil sample records in the assessment period for Rocklands feeder station T53/T10 or Summary Dingo feeder station T13/T14. Given that there The KPIs and lagging indicators for the Blackwater are two exceptions in 13 transformers 15%, the System (Electric)’s traction power are shown in threshold for obtaining a green rating is exceeded. Table 6.72. The rating becomes yellow. The fact that not all the transformers were sampled in this period Key Performance Indicators - Delay introduces a degree of uncertainty. Aurizon Minutes Network will need to ensure that the condition Figure 6.163 shows the distribution of delays for monitoring program is executed according to the the Blackwater System (Electric) throughout the 12 monthly plans on all the transformers and that year. oil reconditioning is carried out as dictated by these results. The reasons for moisture ingress The total delay minutes in the Blackwater System need to be identified since neglect in this respect (Electric) due to traction power supply is 23,396 will result in accelerated ageing of the cellulose minutes. A normalised result of 1,264 minutes insulation system. per NTK evaluates to a green rating against the assessment methodology. To reduce this uncertainty caused by the lack of oil analysis results, the previous test result (outside the analysis period) is examined with the results Lagging Indicator – Transformer Oil summarised in Table 6.74. The Rocklands T53 and Analysis T10 transformers were found to be in excellent The Blackwater System (Electric) has 13 feeder condition at the beginning of 2011. It would transformers as listed in Table 6.73. be unlikely that they would have deteriorated significantly after a further six months. There was Records for nine of these transformers exist for no previous data found for the Dingo transformers the assessment period in the oil analysis database. T13 and T14 in FY 2011. These transformers have As illustrated in Figure 6.164. however been physically inspected and T14 shows a minor oil leak down the front and the silica gel Two feeder transformers yielded exceptions in dryer required attention. the FY 2012 assessment period. These were T15 and T17 which are both at Rangal feeder station. The oil analysis showed a dielectric strength of 22 kV and 23 kV respectively. Further to this, the water content was found to be over the limit at 36 and 47 ppm. This appears to be a similar problem to the unit found in the Goonyella System (Electric). As discussed previously the normal practice would be to schedule the transformers for oil refurbishment. The transformers also should be inspected for gasket or bushing leaks and the integrity of the conservator dryer. (Multiple Items) - Delay Minutes Figure 6.163: BlackwaterTraction System Distribution (Electric) –power supply& Power delay minutes Supply FY12 50000

45000

40000

35000

30000

25000

20000

Delay Minutes 15000

10000

5000

Figure 6.164: Blackwater System (Electric) – feeder transformer oil analysis

Blackwater - Number of transformers without exceptions - 7

Blackwater - Number of Feeder Transformers not sampled 11/12 - 4 Blackwater - Number with significant exceptions - 2 Analysis 239

Lagging Indicator – Autotransformer Oil Therefore the Blackwater ATs are being replaced Analysis due to the Aurizon Network policy rather than failing condition. Part of the reason for this may There are 96 ATs in the Blackwater System be that during FY 2012 there were significant (Electric) (Table 6.75), of which a total of 74 system upgrade projects in the Blackwater had oil analysis testing conducted. Six of these System (Electric) which would have required transformers had repeat tests due to exceptions. the movement of a number of ATs. Rather than There were 22 ATs that did not receive tests. moving old units which were due to replacement, This is due to units being renewed during the it would have been more efficient to simply install period and therefore testing has not been deemed new units. necessary. Based on the oil analysis results, 15% of the ATs in During FY 2012 ATs were being de-commissioned Blackwater yielded exceptions during the period. in the Blackwater System (Electric), albeit at The AT KPI for the Blackwater System (Electric) is a slightly less rate compared to the Goonyella therefore satisfactory (green rating). A proportion System (Electric). In the Blackwater System over 20% would be required to yield a yellow (Electric), 17% of ATs were de-commissioned. rating which is the case in the Goonyella System However, when the test results are examined for (Electric). these units it is evident that 88% did not generate exceptions. Table 6.75: Blackwater System (Electric) – Autotransformers

km Track sites ATs km TSC ATs km Feeder stations ATs 545.187 Yarwun 2 582.506 Raglan TSC T52 2 537.143 Callemondah FS T51 2 555.875 Aldoga 2 582.506 Raglan TSC T53 2 537.143 Callemondah FS T52 2 565.135 Mt Larcom 2 33.426 Wycarbah TSC T10 2 1.56 Rocklands FS T53 3 574.01 Ambrose 2 33.426 Wycarbah TSC T11 2 1.56 Rocklands FS T10 2 594.9 Marmor 2 103.219 Duaringa TSC T12 2 63.803 Grantleigh FS T11 2 604.93 Bajool 2 103.219 Duaringa TSC T13 2 63.803 Grantleigh FS T12 2 615.165 Archer 2 173.207 Bluff TSC T14 2 133.288 Dingo FS T13 2 624.379 Midgee 2 173.207 Bluff TSC T15 2 133.288 Dingo FS T14 2 12 Gracemere 2 42.14 Red Rock TSC T16 1 194.974 Rangal FS T15 4 22.794 Warren 2 42.14 Red Rock TSC T18 1 194.974 Rangal FS T16 1 37.2 Wycarbah Station 2 194.974 Rangal FS T17 1 45.694 Westwood 2 66.066 Gregory FS T18 1 55.093 Windah 2 66.066 Gregory FS T19 1 74.975 Tunnel 2 84.476 Edungalba 2 94.855 Aroona 2 111.074 Duaringa-Wallaroo 2 117.072 Wallaroo 2 125.714 Tryphinia 2 140.896 Dingo Station 2 152.171 Umolo 2 162.202 Walton 2 179.448 Yarrabee (Boonal) 2 187.613 Blackwater 2 12.675 Taurus (Koorilgah 1 Branch) 202.5 Burngrove TCU 1 10.56 Crew 1 25.556 MacKenzie 1 0.118 YanYan TCU 1 53 18 25 Total 96 Analysis 241

Leading Indicator - Corrective Work Order This is expected since the feeder stations, ATs Performance and TSCs contain a larger number of individual items of complex electrical equipment which Figure 6.165 shows the traction power supply will by its nature be more prone to component corrective work orders for the Blackwater System failure. In this case it would be beneficial to (Electric) broken down to categories on a monthly both examine the effectiveness of the routine basis. maintenance and also methods of reducing the Faults due to the environment still dominate the susceptibility to faults caused by animals. From totals (61%), but the winter to summer trend is the routine maintenance perspective Aurizon less pronounced. In this case equipment failure Network has already conducted a detailed review and deficient maintenance make up 27% of the of planned maintenance which was facilitated by 25. The outcome was that some total faults which is a larger proportion compared external consultants activities were removed and some added. to the overhead system which had 10%.

Overhead Faults Per Month - Goonyella (Exc Figure 6.165: Blackwater System (Electric) –powerVermont) supply– corrective work orders 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 Number of Faults of Number 2 1 0 July May June April March August October January February December November September

Environment Equipment Failure Accidents/Operational Deficient Maintenance

25. Planned Maintenance Optimisation, Aurecon Australia Pty Ltd. Preventative Maintenance Program Performance For Figure 6.166: Blackwater System (Electric)(Multiple –power Items) supply - preventative- (All) maintenance program 1200

1000 960

800

600 509 419 386 400 251 Number of Work Work of Number Orders 200 106

0 On Time or Less than 15 Between 15 Between 30 Greater than 60 Open or Early days late days & 30 days days & 60 days days late Recurring Item late late Error

Figure 6.167: Moura System – operational performance – BRTT

140%

120%

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0% Jul-11 Oct-11 Dec-11 Aug-11 Feb-12 Apr-12 Jun-12 BRTT Actual BRTT Target Analysis 243

Leading Indicator - Preventative Table 6.76 shows a summary of the AT condition Maintenance at the end of FY 2012 based on Aurizon Network’s Figure 6.166 shows the distribution of analysis. In total, there have been four units preventative maintenance work orders which that will require immediate replacement and it have been programmed and completed during would be expected a further 120 units will require FY 2012. In the case of the traction power supply renewal in the next five years. It does not seem system in the Blackwater System (Electric), 19% likely that many of these would be candidates of the preventative maintenance work orders for refurbishment given they have already been are executed on time or early with 10% being processed once. This table includes new units in performed greater than 60 days late. new feeder stations. The work orders associated with the new This status is reasonably consistent with the oil feeder stations and TSCs which were being test result exception analysis where the Goonyella commissioned during this assessment period have System (Electric) had scored a yellow status, been removed from the data. Whilst work orders whilst the Blackwater System (Electric) had scored may be opened for equipment at these sites the a green status. However, it can be seen based on inspection would not have been necessary during the numbers described above that the Blackwater this assessment period. System (Electric) will also need to be monitored carefully.

Table 6.76: Blackwater System (Electric) – AT condition status as of the end of 2012

Number Number that Number Installed Age <10 Age requiring will require refurbished number years 25 years immediate refurbishment in once refurbishment the next 5 years

142 18 124 Approx. 124 4 120 Table 6.77: Moura System – operational performance summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI BRTT Green Lagging indicator TSR Green Lagging indicator OTCI Amber

Table 6.78: Moura System – operational performance – average transit time delays

Transit time Q1 FY 2012 Q2 FY 2012 Q3 FY 2012 Q4 FY 2012 delays

The average Above Minutes per 22.22 27.41 25.37 28.62 Rail delay 100 train km The average Below 6.80 2.14 7.17 -4.96 Rail delay The average 14.82 13.78 22.61 17.98 Unallocated Rail delay

Table 6.77: Moura System – train path availability and uptake

Train path usage – Q1 FY 2011 Q1 FY 2012 Q2 FY 2012 Q3 FY 2012 Q4 FY 2012 coal carrying services

Train paths used by the 597 670 654 509 599 relevant services Train paths contracted by 531 518 531 504 504 the relevant services Train paths available 1449 1384 1347 1334 1306 for use by the relevant services Train paths scheduled for 707 738 752 619 685 the relevant services Analysis 245

6.5 Moura System Lagging Indicator - Moura Overall Track Condition Index 6.5.1 Operational Performance For FY 2012, the Moura System has had notable fluctuations in its indexed track condition, peaking Summary at the end of Q4 FY 2012. While above average The KPIs and lagging indicators for the Moura rainfall in the Q3 may represent this subsequent System’s operational performance are shown in worsening in track condition, it also suggests Table 6.77. that the system may be prone to worsened BRTT in future reporting periods. It is important to Key Performance Indicator - Below Rail note that the Moura System records a higher Transit Time OTCI score than other systems due to the black The BRTT data for FY 2012 has indicated that the soil base, which negatively affects the track 26 Moura System has been performing consistently foundations . The OTCI is shown to be in the to the levels that are required in the UT3 (130%). medium maintenance band and trending upwards This may indicate that any continued speed resulting in an amber classification. The OTCI restrictions and maintenance works eventuating results are shown in Figure 6.168. from the 2010/2011 wet season have had minor Leading Indicator - Train Path Allocations influence on Below Rail delays. The BRTT results are shown in Fugure 6.168. Table 6.77 indicates that through FY 2012, the Moura System experienced requests from Access Evident in Table 6.78, Below Rail issues make up Holders for train paths above their weekly only a minor component of the Moura System’s entitlement, demonstrating that demand was at or transit delays. above forecast levels.

Lagging Indicator - Temporary Speed Table 6.78 indicates that for FY 2012, there were Restrictions fewer train paths were utilised for maintenance During FY 2012, the Moura System did not have purposes on a per system basis (taken as a any days where the TSR peaked above the target. percentage total train paths, with consideration This is shown, compared against the BRTT, in of haulages). This may reflect that the system had Figure 6.168. fewer reactive maintenance requests resulting from the 2011 flood event, and may have been able to meet required scheduled works. While there has been an increase on previous years, this can be more attributed to machinery availability27 than targeted increases in maintenance provision.

26. 2009/2010 Maintenance Cost Report p11.

27. Aurizon Networks 2011/2012 Annual Maintenance Cost Report. Table 6.78: Moura System – maintenance track path allocations

Train path usage – planned Q1 FY 2011 Q1 FY 2012 Q2 FY 2012 Q3 FY 2012 Q4 FY 2012 and unplanned maintenance

Train paths used for 0 61 92 35 95 planned maintenance Train paths used for the 2 6 12 4 10 unplanned maintenance Analysis 247

Figure 6.168: Moura System – operational performance – TSR 140% 2:00:00 120% 1:40:00 100% 1:20:00 80% 1:00:00 60% 0:40:00 40%

0:20:00 20%

0:00:00 0% Jul-11 Oct-11 Dec-11 Aug-11 Feb-12 Apr-12 Jun-12 Moura System Speed Restrictions Moura System Speed Restriction Target BRTT Actual BRTT Target

Figure 6.169: Moura System – operational performance – OTCI – FY 2012 Moura System OTCI FY12 40

30 OTCI Score 25

20 Jul-11 Oct-11 Sep-11 Dec-11 Jan-12 Aug-11 Feb-12 Apr-12 Nov-11 Jun-12 Mar-12 May-12 Lower - Upper Threshold Range Median - Upper Threshold Range Moura System Moura - Asset Age By Acquisition Date Track Structure Figure 6.170: Moura System – track – asset age by acquisition date

20 Number of Assets

0 Less than 10 years Between 10 & 15 Between 15 & 20 Between 20 & 30 Greater than 30 years years years years

Track Turnouts Track Support Railway Track

Figure 6.171: MouraMoura System - Remaining – track – remaining Book Life book life Track Structure 80

Number of Assets 20

0 Book Life Reached Between 1 & 3 years Between 3 & 15 years Greater than 15 years

Track Turnouts Track Support Railway Track Analysis 249

6.5.2 Moura System Asset Element Key Performance Indicator - Delay Performance Minutes The graph in Figure 6.172 shows the total delay Track and Track Structures minutes caused by track maintenance and defects Summary over the Moura System for the reporting period. The track and track structures status is Two incidents of note stood out; where in summarised in Table 6.79. February 2012 a 574 minute delay was recorded due to a driver reporting a broken rail, imposing To identify possible trends as assets progress a speed restriction causing delays. Only a broken towards the end of their functional life, Evans plate was located, which was subsequently & Peck analysed the FAR to determine the risks repaired. Further, another incident was recorded to the system. As the Moura System is an older, in July 2011, where track defect repairs prevented albeit smaller, system, it was expected that the access to the provisioning roads. These defect data would provide a diverse range of asset ages. repairs contributed 260 minutes. However, This has been shown in Figure 6.170 and Figure on a system wide basis, permanent way delays 6.171. While these results are not a performance contributed 1.68% of the overall delays on the indicator for the assessment of the system, Moura System. When normalised, track assets they provide a level of insight into the expected result in 645 minutes of delay/NTK and therefore conditions of the assets. scores a green rating against the assessment criterion.

Table 6.79: Moura System – track– condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance

KPI Normalised delay Green Lagging indicator Physical defect identification Green Lagging indicator Average defects per month/ track Grey kilometre Figure 6.172: Moura System – trackMoura – delay minutes - Delay Minutes Track Structure FY12 700

600

500

400

300 Delay Minutes 200

100

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Track Maintenance and Repair 147 26 Track Defect 260 17 13 111 4 53 65 574 18 44 32 6

Figure 6.173: Moura SystemTrack – track - &defects Track Support Defects

60 54 55

50 45 44 38 38 40 34 29 31 29 30

20 13 11 Number of Defects of Number 10

0 July May June April March August October January February December November September Analysis 251

Lagging Indicator - Defects Lagging Indicator - Extent of Disruptive Defects In summary for the Moura System, a total of 421 defects were recorded for track assets, and As a result of the desktop findings above, field is shown in Figure 6.173. Defects were reported inspections were carried out through spot consistently throughout the major part of the auditing to determine the extent of track defects. period, with the only exceptions being September The Moura System had these field inspections 2011 and May 2012 where fewer defects were carried out on 15 February, 2013. Three sites recorded than other months. were audited, against six categories, where it was found that one of the 18 elements (5.5%) were A further breakdown of the total number of to an unsatisfactory standard. This is below the defects provides the following information: threshold value for the green rating (<30%), indicating a satisfactory standard of the track •• Total of 335 defects were recorded for track, assets. for the period, including: Leading Indicator - Scheduled − Resurfacing (rough track) Maintenance Program Compliance − Broken rails In relation to the performance of the completion − Top and line adjustment and closing out of the defects assessed in the reporting period, shown in Figure 6.174, 49% of − Clearing vegetation. defects had been closed out by the programmed date or earlier and 6% within 30 days. 1% of defects remain open, and 32% of defects were •• Total of 53 defects were recorded for turnouts recurring or awaiting further information including: for completion. 2% of defects were reported − Replacement of timber bearers more than 30 days late. This suggests a strong performance of the scheduled maintenance − Replacement of worn components (mainly program on the Moura System. This conclusion Vee bolts). has been based upon the system performance as of the data provision date, 4 December 2012. •• A total of 33 defects on level crossings.

Table 6.80: Moura System – maintenance track path allocations

Train path usage – planned and Q1 FY 2011 Q1 FY 2012 Q2 FY 2012 Q3 FY 2012 Q4 FY 2012 unplanned maintenance Train paths 0 61 92 35 95 used for planned maintenance Train paths 2 6 12 4 10 used for the unplanned maintenance Moura- Program Close Figure 6.174: Moura SystemOut – track– Delays corrective Track maintenance & Track program Support 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 49% 50% 40% 32% 30% 20%

Percentage of Work Orders Work of Percentage 11% 10% 6% 0% 2% 0% On time or Less than 30 Between 30 & More than 60 Currently Open Recurring early days late 60 days late days Late Items OR Awaiting Information

Figure 6.175: Moura System – trackMoura – OTCI System OTCI FY12 40

30 OTCI Score 25

20 Jul-11 Oct-11 Sep-11 Dec-11 Jan-12 Aug-11 Feb-12 Apr-12 Nov-11 Jun-12 Mar-12 May-12 Lower - Upper Threshold Range Median - Upper Threshold Range Moura System Analysis 253

OTCI Performance The Evans & Peck assessment team reviewed the statistical data from track recording car for It is demonstrated in Figure 6.175 that the track the Moura System for FY 2012. The output from geometry over the Moura System is in overall this data provides a summary of the overall track reasonable condition. condition and is shown in Table 6.82. The Moura System’s OTCI values fluctuated In summary the OTCI range indicates that the substantially over the period, whilst the values track geometry over the Moura System as a whole improved during the year the final values were is in overall good condition. This substantiates the slightly higher than the starting value indicating site inspection assessment which noted no major an overall slight deterioration in track condition issues over the section. over the period.

Table 6.81: Moura System – track– condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Normalised delay Green Lagging indicator Physical defect identification Green Lagging indicator Average defects per month/ track Grey kilometre

Table 6.82: Moura System – track– OTCI

Section Track OTCI lower- Assessment Actual OTCI Trend over category median range period range Parana – Moura 6 30-40 29-32 Variable Good, towards Junction lower end of maintenance band Moura Junction 6 30-40 38-45  Generally not to Moura Mine within required range Annandale – 8 39-52 55-63  Generally not Boundary Hill within required Mine range Earlsfield – 6 30-40 36-39  Within required Callide Coalfields range Taragoola – 9 43-58 58 Cons Within required Graham range Barney Point 9 43-58 45 Cons Within required range l) System - Asset Age By Acquisition Date Civil Structures Figure 6.176: Moura System – structures – asset age by acquisition date

600

500

400

300

200 Number of Assets

100

0 Less than 10 years Between 10 & 15 Between 15 & 20 Between 20 & 30 Greater than 30 years years years years

Culverts Bridges Miscellaneous Structures

Figure 6.177: l)Moura System System - Remaining– structures – remainingBook Life book Civil life Structures

400

350

300

250

200

150

Number of Assets 100

0 Book Life Reached Between 1 & 3 years Between 3 & 15 years Greater than 15 years

Culverts Bridges Miscellaneous Structures Analysis 255

Structures Lagging Indicator - Inspection Lag Summary Figure 6.178 shows that the majority of culvert inspections were performed on time or early over The status for bridges and culverts is summarised the analysis period. in Table 6.83 and Table 6.84 . Key Performance Indicator – Delay Figure 6.179 shows that all (11) bridge inspections were performed less than 30 days late. Minutes Lagging Indicator - Maintenance Lag There were no recorded delays or cancellations on the Moura line due to structural failure. Figure 6.180 shows drainage defects were poorly addressed on the Moura System with 100% (six in This evaluates against the assessment total) being over 60 days late and 131 remaining methodology as a green rating. open for the period. Lagging Indicator - Asset Age Figure 6.181 shows bridge defects are again highly Figure 6.176 and Figure 6.177 above show the influenced by open defects. majority of culverts to have between 3 to 15 years remaining book life. All bridges are shown to have greater than 15 years remaining book life.

Table 6.83: Moura System – bridges – condition summary

Table 6.84: Moura System – culverts – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Cancellations Green KPI Delays Green Lagging indicator Asset age Amber Lagging indicator Inspection work order Green completion Lagging indicator Maintenance work order Grey completion Moura- Culvert Inspection Close Out Delays From Figure 6.178: Moura System –structuresClosed – culvert inspection Date close out delays

160 146 140

120

100

60 39 40 Number of Inspections of Number 20 4 0 0 0 0 On Time or Less than 30 Between 30 and More than 60 Currently Open Recurring Item Early days late 60 days late days late OR Abandoned

Newlands - Bridge Inspection Close Out Delays From Closed Date Figure 6.179: Moura System –structures – bridge inspection close out delays

12 11

3 Number of Inspections of Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 On Time or Less than 30 Between 30 and More than 60 Currently Open Recurring Item Early days late 60 days late days late OR Abandoned Analysis 257

Figure 6.180: MouraMoura System - Program – structures -Close culvert defectOut closeDelays out delays Culverts 140 131

120

100

Number of Work Work of Number Orders 6 0 0 0 3 0 On Time or Less than 30 Between 30 & More than 60 Currently Open Recurring Early Days Late 60 days late days Late Items OR Awaiting Information

Figure 6.181: Moura SystemNewlands – structures - Program- bridge defect Close close out Out delays Delays Bridges

20 18

5 1 1 1 1

Number of Work Work of Number Orders 0 0 On Time or Less than 30 Between 30 & More than 60 Currently Open Recurring Items Early Days Late 60 days late days Late OR Awaiting Information Table 6.85: Moura System – structures – leading indicators

Asset type Asset Closed Open Closed Open defect/ quantity inspections/ inspections/ defect/ quantity asset asset asset quantity quantity quantity Bridge 27 0.41 0 0.11 0.7 Culvert 528 0.36 0 0.01 0.25

Table 6.86: Moura System – signals – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Normalised delay Green Lagging indicator Average faults per month/ track Grey kilometre Analysis 259

Leading Indicator - Inspections Key Performance Indicator - Delay Minutes Table 6.83 below reflects a ratio of inspections to assets for both bridge and culverts below The monthly breakdown of these delays is CESS requirements. This does not imply non- provided in Figure 6.184. conformance with CESS, however should be monitored into FY 2013. There are a large Overall, the signals are responsible for 8.99% of numbers of open defects. delays on the Moura System in FY 2012. Figure 6.185 shows the number of delaying incidents Signals reported on the Moura System. 55% of reported delay minutes occurred due to track circuit and Summary point failures. As can be seen, there is a seasonal peak in the number of reported incidents during The status for signals and train control systems is the summer wet season. This indicates that summarised in Table 6.86. management of the asset is critical through this Figure 6.182 and Figure 6.183 show the asset age period of the year, to avoid issues being caused. and remaining book life of the signals and train However, as the proportion of track circuit and control assets for the Moura System. point delays are not indicative of a system being affected by asset fatigue, the system appears to be The characteristics show a system that has in good condition. undergone periodic renewal over the lifecycle of the System. Further, the data shows a capital Normalised signals delays result in 4,621 minutes/ investment in the signals infrastructure 15 to 20 NTK and are evaluated against the assessment years ago. A number of these assets have now methodology as a green rating. reached the end of their book life. While book life is not a measure of serviceable life, with signals and train control assets being able to operate long after this period, increased monitoring and management of these assets is necessary. Newlands - Asset Age By Acquisition Date Signal & Train Figure 6.182: Moura System – signals – assetControl age by Systemsacquisition date 14

4 Number of Assets

l) - Remaining Book Life Signal & Train Control systems Figure 6.183: Moura System – signals –remaining book life

Number of Assets 4

0 Book Life Reached Between 1 & 3 years Between 3 & 15 years Greater than 15 years

Level Crossing Protection Signal Interlockings – Relay Signal Interlockings – Processor

Control Systems (Signal - Non Vital) Train Protection Systems Electric Signalling

Mechanical Signalling Analysis 261

Moura - Delay Minutes Figure 6.184: Moura SystemSignal – signals & Train – delay minutesControl Systems FY12 2000

1800

1600

1400

1200

1000

800 Delay Minutes 600

400

200

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun UTC/DTC Faults ATP/ATC/AWS Ground Equipment 5 14 50 Failure Damage to Trackside Equipment 129 RIFOT 152 49 20 16 33 56 33 RAPAD 22 16 26 29 90 19 Level Crossing Failure 19 50 19 12 28 Infrastructure Protection Systems 8 142 Issues Signal Failure 154 46 69 32 66 53 Telemetry Failure 1053 164 116 420 372 347 470 Points Failure 101 151 6 16 605 493 43 277 14 Track Circuit Failure 222 799 194 550 98 313 237 572 101 248 109 257 Figure 6.185: Moura System – signals – delaying incidents

10 Delay Incidents 5

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun UTC/DTC Faults ATP/ATC/AWS Ground Equipment 1 1 1 Failure Damage to Trackside Equipment 1 RIFOT 3 1 2 2 1 2 3 RAPAD 1 1 1 3 2 1 Level Crossing Failure 1 1 1 1 1 Infrastructure Protection Systems 1 1 Issues Signal Failure 2 1 1 2 1 3 Telemetry Failure 2 3 3 5 2 2 4 Points Failure 2 3 1 1 4 4 2 4 1 Track Circuit Failure 2 9 4 11 2 7 6 7 3 5 2 3

Figure 6.186: Moura System – signals – all faults

45 42 42 38 40 36 35 31 30 24 24 25 22 19 20 20 18 15 10 Number of Faults 5 3 0 July May June April March August October January February December November September Analysis 263

Lagging Indicators - Faults Leading Indicator - Preventative Maintenance The total number of signals and train control system faults for the Moura System is shown in Figure 6.190 shows the preventative maintenance Figure 6.186. program performance for the signals on the Moura System. Seasonal variation in the number of faults being reported through the summer wet season were A target of 95% is set by Aurizon Network for noted. maintenance tasks to be completed less than 30 days late. Reviewing the overall performance, The breakdown of point, track circuit and signals, 88.7% of preventative maintenance tasks were provided in Figure 6.187, completed within this timeframe. This does not Figure 6.188 and Figure 196 respectively, indicate achieve the indicator target, indicating a working points and signals are most influenced by the Preventative Maintenance Program. climatic conditions.

This emphasises the need to ensure asset monitoring programs during this period of the year. However, the faults reported do not indicate an asset suffering from fatigue, as would have been expected given the age of the asset. This may result from the low coal volumes on the system allowing for good maintenance programs to be conducted. Although no trends could properly be established, it appeared a large number of faults were caused by either component failure or had no cause attributed.

As expected, the majority of faults were detected on MA420 and MA421, the main line sections between Annandale and Graham.

The Moura System’s signals are generally in good condition, performing to an acceptable manner and will continue to do so if continual monitoring and maintenance is undertaken where required. Figure 6.187: Moura System – signals –point faults

8 7 7 7 6 6 5 4 3 3 3 3 2 2

Number of Faults of Number 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 July May June April March August October January February December November September

Figure 6.188: Moura System – signals – track faults

25 20 20 17 17 14 15 13 11 10 10 8 8 7 7

Number of Faults of Number 5 0 0 July May June April March August October January February December November September Analysis 265

Moura - Faults Signals - Signal & Train Control Systems Figure 6.189: Moura System – signals – signal faults

7 6 6 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 2 Number of Faults 1 1 0 0 0 0 July May June April March August October January February December November September

Preventative Maintenance Program Performance For Figure 6.190: MouraNewlands System – signals - Signals – preventative & Train maintenance Control program Systems 800 739

700

600

500

400 295 300 227 200 Number of Work Work of Number Orders 128 100 22 33 0 On Time or Less than 15 Between 15 Between 30 Greater than Open or Early days late days & 30 days days & 60 days 60 days late Recurring Item late late Newlands - Corrective Fault Performance Signals & Figure 6.191: Moura System – signalsTrain – corrective Control maintenance Systems program

300 283

250

200

150

100 Number of Work Work of Number Orders 50 15 7 8 1 5 0 0 On Time or 2 Days Late 3 Days Late 4 Days Late 5 Days Late More than 6 Needing Early Days Late More Information

l) - Asset Age By Acquisition Date Figure 6.192: Moura SystemTelecommunications – telecommunications– asset age by acquisition date 8

Number of Assets 2

0 Less than 10 years Between 10 & 15 Between 15 & 20 Between 20 & 30 Greater than 30 years years years years Linking Network Equipment Data Network Equipment Telephone Exchange Equipment Analysis 267

Leading Indicator - Corrective Telecommunications Maintenance Program Performance Summary The on-time performance to rectify the faults The status for telecommunications systems is identified in the lagging indicator through FY 2012 summarised in Table 6.87 below. is detailed in Figure 6.191. To identify possible trends as telecommunications 88.7% of work orders were completed either on assets progress towards the end of their functional time or early, less than the accepted KPI of 95%. and book lives, the FAR was analysed to identify Less than 3% of work orders were completed more risks to the Moura System. As seen in Figure than six days late. 6.192, 62.5% of the assets are less than 10 years old, with 25% between 10 and 15 years old, and the remaining 12.5% between 20 and 30 years old.

As seen in Figure 6.193, all assets have a remaining book life of less than 15 years, with 31.3% reached book life, 25% with one to three years remaining book life and 43.8% with 3 to 15 years remaining book life.

Linking network equipment is the biggest contributor to telecommunications assets on the Moura system, with 33% reaching book life, and a further 34% with a remaining book life of one to three years, signifying a possible need for replacement in the near future.

Note that while this is not a performance indicator for the assessment of the system, it does provide some level of insight into the expected condition of the assets.

Table 6.87: Moura System – telecommunications – condition summary

Assessment Indicator Performance KPI Normalised Delay Green Lagging indicator Average faults per month/ track kilometre Grey Figure 6.193: Newlands Moura System - –Remaining telecommunications Book –remaining Life book life Telecommunications 5

2 Number of Assets 1

0 Book Life Reached Between 1 & 3 years Between 3 & 15 years Greater than 15 years

Linking Network Equipment Data Network Equipment

Telephone Exchange Equipment

Figure 6.194: Moura System – telecommunications – delay minutes

Delay Minutes Delay 30

0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Communications Failure 85 Analysis 269

Key Performance Indicators – Delay Lagging Indicators - Faults Minutes The summary of the review of the monthly faults The telecommunications system is responsible for from TSMS for the Moura System can be found 0.08% of the delays on the Moura System, with a in Figure 6.195, which found a total of 19 items single communications failure causing a delay of for telecommunications systems in the reporting 85 minutes in February, as seen in Figure 6.194. period.

Given the small number and variation of The majority of faults are due to radio systems delays, and the low percentage contribution of (57.9%). Currently, as there is not enough trending telecommunications delays to the total delay information, this indicator is given a grey rating. minutes experienced by the Moura System, the In the future, a trend of the average faults per telecommunications system currently represents a month, as compared to this Initial Assessment, low risk of impacting tonnages into the future. will be used to evaluate the lagging indicator.

When normalised as per the KPI assessment methodology, telecommunications result in 40 minutes of delay/NTK. This evaluates to a green rating.

Figure 6.195: Moura System – telecommunications – faults

6 5 5

3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 Number of Faults 1 0 0 0 0 July May June April March August October January February December November September Preventative Maintenance Program Performance For Figure 6.196: Moura System – telecommunications(Multiple Items) – preventative - (All) maintenance program 180 163 160

140

120 102 97 100

Number of Work Work of Number Orders 40 26 19 20 11

0 On Time or Less than 15 Between 15 Between 30 Greater than 60 Open or Early days late days & 30 days days & 60 days days late Recurring Item late late Error

Moura - Corrective Fault Performance Signals & Train Figure 6.197: Moura System – telecommunications – corrective maintenance program Control Systems

12 11

6 5

4 3

Number of Work Orders Work Number of 0 0 0 0 0 On Time or 2 Days Late 3 Days Late 4 Days Late 5 Days Late More than 6 Needing Early Days Late More Information Analysis 271

Leading Indicator - Preventative Leading Indicator - Corrective Maintenance Maintenance The telecommunications preventative The corrective maintenance program performance maintenance program performance for work for work orders related to telecommunications orders related is as shown in Figure 6.196. systems on the Moura System is as shown in Figure 6.197. This related directly to the Analysis of the data from TSMS found 87.0% of telecommunications faults during the reporting work orders were completed less than 30 days late period, Figure 6.195. from the programmed date, with 28.2% of these completed on time or early. Further, 6.3% were Analysis of the data from TSMS found 57.9% of between 30 and 60 days late, and 4.6% greater work orders were completed on time or early, with than 60 days late, with 2.2% of items currently a further 15.8% two days late and 26.3% over six still open, or were deemed to be recurring items days late. (Evans & Peck assessed these items to be part of a data integrity issue with TSMS). This does not currently meet the KPI set of 95% of scheduled corrective maintenance work orders Although this suggests a strong performance of completed on time during the reporting period. the scheduled maintenance program, this does not Illacepe rehenis et exerem. Et volestestio quo in currently meet the KPI set of 95% of scheduled pa vid qui denture mpores dolecto tatibus ipsam il preventative maintenance work orders completed molupta sum facere non nonet et velit everae. Uda less than 30 days late during the reporting period. et perupta quibus et mos de nus.

Fero volor a vel ipis reritius, estorum resequatquis provide latur, conserore se volupta ereriatius, ea id etum solesequo doloris cullupta cum evellam, inctem. Itatist, ipiduci atemporemqui aut explabo rumquas que adis eum eius reptatque rehendi alitet ut anda alit excest plicae niminum, qui del ma sit a sinimus es am faccum rero berae simpeditatis veniatis dolorem quid milis ilitiatem erum is dolo blam facest ium quationsedi odisci omnime ratia parcitin ra dolore inus.

Gent aut quuntiures estrunte conecus cor repro to quiatistisi dolupit quatur, si unt quosaero con ex et pro con re vides ditium rem. Andam quiam ut es quatur molorrovit arciae volutenimin prore volut lignimus net eaquidemque nat is anto beaquiatur si tem fuga. Henisit et as utet doluptam int autemporro iuntiatur samet de cus, officium hillitiae. Nam, cuscit doluptia doloratur, ommodis enim facerio inti tem. Ibus.

Consenima qui debisque ommos sit quo ma audanis modi in niendae occus ides nobitat emodit que nus eos eum et fugit deniet, nem nobit ullignimus, sum et facea porupitio modi corum endella boritinit vel moluptam hit ma autat.

Ces esciduntist fugias conet expeliq uundus endipiet labo. Ne venihicab ipsam fugia volecta dentur aut ent et quunt.

Nam exerit utatius re, volo dolorer ionsequo maximpe es dolor re nonsequunt esto blaborepre, alique porpor sam, optur? Estenis quae ped Project Strategy & Policy Development Planning Delivery Operations Client

National Alliance Contracting Australian Federal Government Policy and Guidelines Guidance Note No. 6: ECI and other Australian Governments Austral- collaborative contracting models ia-wide Tender strategies to improve D&C Australian Governments infrastructure delivery outcomes Best Practice Guidelines for projects Australian Governments

State Infrastructure Strategy, Review of Infrastructure NSW Project Cost Estimates and Cost Planning Best Practice Cost Estimating Standard for Federal Department of Infrastructure Publicly Funded Road and Rail Construction and Transpor North West Rail Link & South West Rail Link Transport for NSW NSW Sydney Airport Terminal 1 Redevelopment Sydney Airport Corporation Port Botany Container Terminal Sydney Ports Corporation Cross City Tunnel, Lane Cove Tunnel, RTA Western Sydney Orbital

Melbourne Metro Rail Tunnel Victorian Department of Transport / Public Transport Victoria

VIC V/Line State Projects V/Line Expert advice on public sector skills and competencies, performance of selected Victorian Parliamentary Inquiry into projects and governance models for PPPs Major Infrastructure Projects

Project Management System Review Brisbane Airport Corporation Western Basin Dredging and Disposal Gladstone Port Corporation Limited QLD Gateway Upgrade Project Queensland Motorways Limited Legacy Way Brisbane City Council QR National Reviews and Studies QR National (now Aurizon)

Dampier Marine Services Facility Dampier Port Authority WA Bunbury Port Expansion Bunbury Port Authority GADL (JV between GMR and Malaysian Maldives Malé International Airport Redevelopment Airports)

Mass Transit Railway Mass Transit Railway Corporation Hong Kong Reference Class Forecasting Study & Hong Kong Government Development Framework for major highway projects Bureau

Nanjing Metro Line 2 Nanjing Metro Company China Kunming Metro Kunming Metro Transit Company

Colombia Guajira Thermal Coal Project CCX (formerly MPX Colombia) Evans & Peck Profile 273

Evans & Peck Profile We provide value-adding services throughout a project lifecycle from developing business cases and feasibility studies to providing operational Who We Are support. We support key players of the rail Evans & Peck is a global advisory firm that industry across Australia and in Asia – providing provides project and business solutions to clients commercial and technical advice to various public who develop, operate and maintain physical assets and private sector organisations, and investment in the infrastructure and resources sectors. We houses. support clients throughout the world, drawing Major clients and projects to which we have on a network of expert consultants from our provided advisory services include: permanent bases in Australia, Asia and Europe. This means that collaboration is at the heart of •• National Alliance Contracting Policy our operations, and deep, collective thinking at Guidelines / Australian Federal Government the forefront of our services – resulting in the best Evans & Peck resources providing innovative, •• North West Rail Link & South West Rail / leading-edge solutions for our clients. Transport for NSW (NSW, Australia)

As an independent, wholly owned subsidiary of •• Melbourne Metro Rail Tunnel (VIC, Australia) WorleyParsons, Evans & Peck provides clients •• Project Management System Review / with a vast advisory network through the Group’s Brisbane Airport Corporation (QLD, Australia) combined presence in more than 40 countries worldwide. •• Legacy Way / Brisbane City Council (QLD, Australia) We understand the whole-of-life needs of physical •• Mass Transit Railway (Hong Kong) assets across the infrastructure and resources sectors intimately because we employ people •• Guagira Thermal Coal Project / CCX who have first-hand knowledge from working in (Cambodia). these sectors as business leaders, contractors and consultants. This means our people provide real Providing Services in the Rail Industry world experience and advice, combined with a detailed understanding of the theory and design of Evans & Peck support clients carrying out these asset classes. challenging tasks in delivering rail projects and managing their assets. We have recently Importantly, we understand the specific supported Aurizon Network by providing commercial, technical and collaboration assistance with condition-based assessment and challenges involved in the infrastructure and management of their assets and review of capital resources sectors. This allows us to provide and operational expenditure submissions to the advice on capital and operational performance Queensland Competition Authority. improvements, resulting in clarity to our clients on how to create and sustain long-term value in Case studies of our relevant experiences in the developing and managing these assets. industry are attached:

Our people focus on six primary sectors – •• Rail Operations and Maintenance Outsourcing Minerals & Metals, Hydrocarbons, Social •• Adelaide Rail Revitalisation Infrastructure, Power, Water, and Transport. •• South West Rail Link Our Experience in Transport Sector •• Regional Rail Link. In Transport Sector, we operate across all transport modes: roads, ports, airports and rails. Our transport team specialises in the development and execution of strategies to deliver projects.

Appendix A

Assessment Liaison Group Charter

1 Background 1) The Access Undertaking between the Authority and Aurizon Network (UT3) requires the completion of initial and final Condition Based Assessments (CBA).If the End of Period Assessment finds that the condition of the rail infrastructure in the Central Queensland Coal Region (CQCR) has deteriorated between the Initial Assessment and End of Period Assessment by more than would have been the case had good operating practice and prudent and effective maintenance and asset replacement policies and practices been pursued, the Authority will be entitled to reduce the Regulatory Asset Base to reflect the additional deterioration.

2) Evans & Peck (Assessor) will have a duty of care to the Queensland Competition Authority (Authority) in the conduct of the Initial Assessment and the End of Period Assessment and, in the event of a conflict between the Assessor’s obligations to Aurizon Network and its duty of care to the Authority, the Assessor’s duty of care to the Authority will take precedence.

3) UT3 has a requirement to establish an Assessment Liaison Group (ALG) to assist this process. The ALG will comprise members of the three parties engaged in the CBA process: the Authority, Aurizon Network and the Assessor.

2 Objective 1) The objective of the ALG is to provide a forum that allows key stakeholders visibility of the progress of the CBA and insight into the key factors related to the maintenance of the asset.

2) The ALG serves as a forum to present progress, assessments and recommendations. It provides Aurizon Network with an opportunity to be made aware of, and take appropriate action to address, any concerns identified by the assessments.

3) The ALG has the authority to make decisions in regards to:

• Direction of the CBA

• Scope and depth of analysis of the CBA • Timing of deliverables of the CBA.

4) The ALG does not have authority to make decisions in regard to:

• Determinations by the Assessor • Requirements of UT3, or

• Contractual matters between any two of the three parties. 3 Structure The ALG consists of:

• Chair (provided by the Assessor)

• Two QCA Representatives

• Two Aurizon Network Representatives

• Secretary (provided by the Assessor)

• Assessor Technical Representative • Aurizon Network discipline leads (if required for specific agenda items)

• Assessor Discipline Leads (if required for specific agenda items).

4 Roles and Responsibilities 4.1 General The ALG is intended to act in a collaborative manner. Decisions of the ALG are to be made jointly and a concerted effort is to be made to achieve consensus for all decisions.

4.2 Queensland Competition Authority The role of the Authority is to advise the ALG on regulatory constraints and requirements.

4.3 Aurizon Network 1) Aurizon Network will provide the Assessor with:

• All relevant information

• Access to land or sites, as reasonably required by the Assessor for the purposes of conducting an Initial Assessment and or the End of Period Assessment.

2) The Aurizon Network members of the ALG are to act as a conduit to the wider Aurizon Network organisation to encourage an open and frank approach to monitoring and reporting on assets.

3) The Aurizon Network members of the ALG are to assist in identifying and recommending opportunities for alignment of the Assessor’s reporting with existing Aurizon Network systems and reporting.

4) The Aurizon Network members of the ALG are to determine the timing and scope of any reviews (Intervention) additional to the requirements of UT3. Aurizon Network may decide to not conduct additional reviews.

4.4 Assessor 1) The Assessor provides the Chair for the ALG. The Chair is to coordinate the ALG to assist in achieving an accurate and objective assessment of asset condition. The Chair is to encourage open and frank discussion of asset condition subjects.

2) The Assessor must provide to Aurizon Network and the Authority a report on the findings of the Initial Assessment and the End of Period Assessment, with the report of the End of Period Assessment including:

• Identifying the extent to which the rail infrastructure in the CQCR has deteriorated by more than would have been the case had good operating practice and prudent and effective maintenance and asset replacement policies and practices been pursued

• To the extent such greater deterioration is identified, the value of that deterioration.

3) Prior to commencing an Initial Assessment or End of Period Assessment, the Assessor must agree an assessment plan with Aurizon Network, document that assessment plan and obtain the Authority’s approval of that assessment plan.

4) Provide a weekly report to all members of the ALG on progress of the Initial Assessment and End of Period Assessment.

5) Align, as far as possible, asset monitoring and reporting systems with existing Aurizon Network systems.

6) The assessment plan will: • Consist of a proposed work program for the execution of the Initial Assessment or End of Period Assessment (as applicable) including the costs which shall be payable by Aurizon Network

• Provide for the establishment of an ALG, comprising the Assessor, Aurizon Network and the Authority, during the course of the Initial Assessment and the End of Period Assessment (as applicable) to provide a forum for the resolution of any issues that arise

• Propose a methodology for assessing track condition to be agreed between Aurizon Network and the Authority. For the End of Period Assessment the Assessor will develop a plan for valuing the amount of any deterioration in the rail infrastructure.

7) Maintain the records of the ALG. 5 Goals and Milestones 1) The following initial milestones are agreed:

• Draft Assessment Plan to Aurizon Network for approval: 18 January 2013

• Aurizon Network to agree the assessment plan: 22 January 2013

• The Authority to review and approve the assessment plan: 25 January 2013

• Complete the Initial Assessment by: 29 March 2013

• Complete the End of Period Assessment by: 31 March 2017.

2) The ALG may amend any milestones.

6 Risk Management The Assessor see the greatest risk to achieving this aligned objective is a situation at the end of the Undertaking period where there is significant disagreement within the ALG over the extent and root cause of deterioration of the asset. Proposed risk mitigation measures are:

• Yearly review of high and moderate risk asset elements

• Provide the opportunity for Aurizon Network to table any additional asset elements that should be reviewed.

7 Dispute and Issue Resolution 7.1 Issues Issues are to be resolved at the lowest level possible. The escalation steps are:

• Aurizon Network and the Assessor Discipline Leads attempt to resolve the issue

• One Aurizon Network member and one Assessor ALG member attempt to resolve the issue • Full ALG attempts resolution by consensus

• A mutually agreed arbiter or industry expert is commissioned.

7.2 Findings Disputes 1) If a dispute arises, the parties must, prior to the initiation of any legal proceedings, use their best efforts in good faith to reach a reasonable and equitable resolution of the dispute.

2) If a dispute arises, the dispute must be referred to a panel (Panel) for resolution. Each party must nominate two representatives for the Panel (at least one of which must be a senior representative) within 14 days of the referral to the Panel. If a party fails to nominate a senior representative for the Panel, it will be deemed to have nominated its chief executive officer (or Managing Director) as its senior representative for the Panel.

7.3 Contractual Disputes 1) There are three agreements in place:

• UT3

• The Contract between Aurizon Network and the Assessor

• The Reliance Letter between the Authority and the Assessor.

2) The ALG has no role in disputes related to these agreements.

8 Review This Charter may be reviewed at the request of any member of the ALG.

9 Confidentiality 1) To the extent Aurizon Network is requested to provide confidential information to the Assessor, the Assessor will be required to enter into a confidentiality deed with Aurizon Network in relation to any information provided by Aurizon Network, to the effect that it must keep the information confidential and only use that information for the purpose of conducting the Initial Assessment and the End of Period Assessment and completing the assessment report.

2) Any reports or documentation related to reviews additional to those required by UT3 commissioned by Aurizon Network will be Aurizon Network intellectual property.

10 Ring-fencing The provisions of UT3 in regards to ring-fencing apply to all matters covered by the ALG.

11 Definitions Item Term Description

1 Asset The asset is the Central Queensland Coal Network (CQCN), Asset System comprising the below rail infrastructure within the asset systems of Newlands, Goonyella to Abbot Point Expansion (GAPE), Asset Element Goonyella (inc Hail Creek and excl Vermont), Goonyella (Vermont), Goonyella Electric, Goonyella (Vermont) Electric, Blackwater (exc Rolleston and Minerva), Blackwater (Rolleston), Blackwater (Minerva), Blackwater Electric and Moura. It incorporates the network assets including, but not limited to; Track and Civil, Structures, Signals and Rail Control Systems, Traction Power Supply and Distribution, and Telecommunications. An asset system is a set of assets that interact and/or are interrelated so as to deliver a required business function or service. An asset element is a discrete component of the greater asset system that enables assessment of the asset system.

2 Condition Based Assessment The CBA comprises the initial assessment and the end of period (CBA) assessment. The CBA aims to identify the extent to which the Rail Infrastructure in the Central Queensland Coal Region (CQCR) has deteriorated by more than would have been the case had good operating practice and prudent maintenance and asset replacement policies and practices been pursued. The End of Period Assessment is a CBA performed at the end of the Access Undertaking. The End of Period Assessment must: • Identify the extent to which the Rail Infrastructure in the CQCR has deteriorated by more than would have been the case had good operating practice and prudent and effective maintenance and asset replacement policies and practices been pursued • Identify the value of that deterioration.

3 Central Queensland Coal The CQCR comprises the sub-regions of Mackay, Fitzroy and Region (CQCR) Central West and the coal-bearing basins of Bowen and Galilee. Currently, there are approximately 50 coal mines operating in the CQCR.

Central Queensland Coal The CQCN refers to the coal rail network operated by Aurizon Network (CQCN) Pty Ltd comprising the asset systems of Newlands, Goonyella to Abbot Point Expansion (GAPE), Goonyella (inc Hail Creek and excl Vermont), Goonyella (Vermont), Goonyella Electric, Goonyella (Vermont) Electric, Blackwater (exc Rolleston and Minerva), Blackwater (Rolleston), Blackwater (Minerva), Blackwater Electric and Moura.

4 Deterioration Physical deterioration is the loss in the physical efficiency of an asset as it ages. Efficiency in this context refers to the asset's ability to produce a quantity of capital services for a given amount of inputs. (Reference: OECD Glossary of Statistical Terms.) Deterioration must be considered in the light of the operational context of the asset, its original design requirements and changes to its intended usage.

5 Discipline A discipline refers to the grouping of asset elements by their technical characteristics. The five disciplines for the purposes of the Condition Based Assessment include: Track and Civil,

Item Term Description

Structures, Signals and Rail Control Systems, Traction Power Supply and Distribution and Telecommunications. The Assessor discipline leads are the relevant technical experts from Evans & Peck for the above mentioned disciplines. The Aurizon Network Discipline Leads are the head of disciplines serving under the General Manager for network assets.

6 Good operating practice Good Operating Practice is a strategy for management of activities to produce a desired outcome; in line with industry benchmarks or standards.

7 Prudent and effective Policies and practices that aim to maintain the asset at as close maintenance policies and as possible to predetermined benchmarks or standards. practices

8 Prudent and effective asset Policies and practices that identify assets requiring replacement replacement policies and within predetermined timeframes and prior to unacceptable practices levels of deterioration.

9 Key Performance Indicators KPIs, in the context of the CBA, are the principal indicators used (KPI) to review asset performance An operational KPI is an indicator of performance against provisioned service agreements, train service entitlements, and any other indicator that can be directly attributed and reflected to/in train service disruption. An asset KPI is an indicator of an element of the asset as an engineering function. KPIs are to be agreed by all parties and documented in the Assessment Plan.

10 Lag Performance Indicator Lagging indicators provide data on performance results, such as the frequencies and severities of undesirable events; for example, incidents or failures of the asset management system or asset elements.

11 Lead Performance Indicator Leading performance indicators provide data on compliance or non-compliance with the performance requirements of asset management plan(s) and compliance or non-compliance with the organization’s asset management system. They provide warning signs of potential problems, either before they occur or before they become significant.

12 Representative An organisation’s Representative is a senior executive member of the specific organisation.

13 Train Service Entitlement An Access Holder’s entitlement under an access agreement to operate a specified number and type of train services over the rail infrastructure within a specified time period and in accordance with specified scheduling constraints for the purpose of either carrying a specified commodity or providing specified transport service.

Appendix B

Aurizon Network Pty Ltd Condition Based Assessment Central Queensland Coal Region Below Rail Infrastructure

Assessment Plan

July 2013

Table of Contents

1 Introduction ...... 1

2 Methodology ...... 2 2.1 Considerations ...... 2 2.1.1 Assessment Liaison Group ...... 2 2.1.2 Safety ...... 2 2.1.3 Progressive Review and Monitoring Process ...... 2 2.1.4 ISO 55000 ...... 2 2.2 Overview ...... 3 2.3 Phase 1: Data Collation and Alignment Workshops ...... 6 2.4 Phase 2: Initial Assessment ...... 8 2.5 Phase 3: Incremental Reviews ...... 9 2.6 Phase 4: End of Period Assessment ...... 9 2.7 Phase 5: Valuation of Deterioration ...... 9

List of Appendices Appendix A Draft Asset Dashboard Appendix B Track & Track Support Appendix C Civil Structures Appendix D Signals and Train Control Systems Appendix E Telecommunications Appendix F Traction Distribution and Traction Power Supply Systems

1 Introduction

Aurizon Network Pty Ltd (Aurizon) constructs and maintains the below rail assets of the Central Queensland Coal Network (CQCN). These below rail assets are not subject to competition and are consequently regulated by the Queensland Competition Authority (QCA). The regulatory framework is provided by an access undertaking; the undertaking currently operational is the 2010 Access Undertaking (UT3). The QCA has divided the CQCN into 11 different asset systems; reflecting 11 different tariff regimes applicable to specific individuals or groups of Access Holders. These asset systems are: • Newlands • Goonyella to Abbot Point Expansion (GAPE) • Goonyella (including Hail Creek and excluding Vermont) • Goonyella (Electric) • Goonyella (Vermont) • Goonyella (Vermont) (Electric) • Blackwater (excluding Rolleston & Minerva) • Blackwater (Electric) • Blackwater (Rolleston) • Blackwater (Minerva) • Moura.

UT3 specifies that a Condition Based Assessment (CBA) is to be procured at the start (Initial Assessment) and at the end (End of Period Assessment) of the Undertaking period. The current Undertaking period commenced on October 2010 and is due for completion in June 2013. The Initial Assessment was due in early 2011, however, due to administrative reasons, approval to commence has only recently been granted. As it is now well into the UT3 period, Evans & Peck understands there will be only one assessment in UT3, with the End of Period Assessment towards the end of the next undertaking (UT4) period (circa 2017). The End of Period Assessment will include the provision to supply Aurizon and the QCA a report on the following:

“Identifying the extent to which the Rail Infrastructure in the CQCN has deteriorated by more than would have been the case had good operating practice and prudent and effective maintenance and asset replacement policies and practices been pursued”

“To the extent such greater deterioration is identified, the value of that deterioration”

UT3 requires the agreement of QCA to an Assessment Plan. This document describes the methodology that the Assessor will utilise to assess the asset condition. This Assessment Plan is subject to the ring-fencing requirements that exist between Aurizon Network and Aurizon Operations.

Page 1 Commercial in Confidence

2 Methodology 2.1 Considerations

2.1.1 Assessment Liaison Group UT3 requires the creation of an Assessment Liaison Group (ALG) (Appendix A of the CBA). The ALG responsibilities and obligations are covered in the ‘ALG Charter’. This document is collaboratively prepared by the ALG. The ALG consists of representatives of the following members: • The Assessor (Evans & Peck) • QCA • Aurizon Network.

The ALG is chaired by the lead member of the Assessor’s team.

2.1.2 Safety All assessment activities are to be undertaken in line with Aurizon’s Zero Harm safety policy. Constraints of accessing and inspecting operational rail assets are to be managed through a flexible approach with the aim to achieve no compromise on safety and no impact on rail operations.

2.1.3 Progressive Review and Monitoring Process Aurizon has the option of adopting a risk mitigation process through the incorporation of interim reviews for elements that may be considered medium and high risk. This process would establish regular dialogue between members of the ALG and has the advantages of: • Establishing a collaborative and ‘no surprises’ culture • Identifying early warning of asset trends • Creating an opportunity for Aurizon to address any significant asset deterioration before the End of Period Assessment.

2.1.4 ISO 55000 ISO 55000 (draft) is a recognised international standard covering the terminology utilised in the field of asset management, specifications for an efficient and integrated system for asset management and guidance on how to deliver such a system. This standard is to be provisioned to be released in February 2014.1 Further development of the methodology has been formed with PAS55, the British standard from which ISO 55000 (draft) is being developed from. The methodology used to conduct the condition based assessment will comply with ISO 55000 (draft) as summarised below. As suggested by ISO 55000, the CBA process shall provide for the consideration of: • The use of reactive monitoring to identify past or existing nonconformities in the asset management system, and any asset-related deterioration, failures or incidents

1Draft International Standard (DIS) is currently under comments resolution. Final Draft International Standard to be released in December 2013, with publication to occur in February 2014.

Page 2 Commercial in Confidence

• The use of proactive monitoring to seek assurance that the asset management system and assets and asset systems are operating as intended. This shall include monitoring to ascertain that the asset management policy, strategy and objectives are met, the asset management plan is implemented, and that the processes, procedures or other arrangements to control asset life cycle activities are effective • The use of leading performance indicators to provide warning of potential non-compliance with the performance requirements of the asset management system and the assets and asset systems • The use of lagging performance indicators to enable detection of, and to provide data about, incidents and failures of the asset management system, and for incidents, failures or deficient performance of assets and asset systems both qualitative and quantitative measures.

The CBA will contain a well-formulated combination of objective, subjective, quantitative and qualitative data types as forms of performance measurement: • Objective data: data which is detached from an assessor’s personal judgement • Subjective data: data which could have been influenced by those doing the measuring • Quantitative data: data which describes numbers and recorded on a scale • Qualitative data: data which describes conditions or situations that cannot be recorded numerically.

A combination of lagging indicators, leading indicators and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) will be employed within the Assessment. The QCA, Aurizon and the Assessor will identify KPIs as the principal indicators to be used to review asset management performance. A number of performance indicators, including lagging and leading indicators, will be required to monitor the implementation and effectiveness of the asset management system and overall asset performance. This range of performance indicators will be aggregated into KPIs. The KPIs selected will be appropriately reduced in terms of relevance and quantity to enable an optimum level of information to be represented. The KPIs and lagging indicators will be agreed by all parties before the completion of the Initial Assessment.

2.2 Overview This assessment methodology establishes a framework for the CBA based on an operational and elemental analysis of disciplines of each of the 11 discrete RABs. The methodology is founded on the concept of leading and lagging indicators and KPIs as described in the ISO 55000 Asset Management standard currently in draft status. The assessment methodology comprises the following phases: • Phase 1: Data collation and alignment workshops • Phase 2: Conduct the Initial Assessment and determine medium and high risk asset elements • Phase 3: Undertake an incremental progressive review and monitoring process of ‘high’ risk elements • Phase 4: Conduct the End of Period Assessment • Phase 5: Identify and value any deterioration.

Figure 1 below describes the process up to the completion of the Initial Assessment.

Page 3 Commercial in Confidence

Figure 1: Assessment process up to completion of Phase 2 Initial Assessment

Page 4 Commercial in Confidence

2.2.1.1 Assessment Team The assessment team resourced to achieve Phases 1 and 2 is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Team structure and responsibilities

The Management Team was responsible for the coordination, management and consolidation of the assignment works and the deliverable report, including cost tracking and weekly reporting. The provision of data from Aurizon to the discipline leads was the responsibility of the Management Team. The Management Team’s ‘Report Consolidator’ was responsible for coordination of the report deliverables, and for ensuring reporting consistency across the various reporting disciplines. The Technical Coordinator ensures the technical specifics of each discipline were maintained in the consolidation process. Discipline leads ensured delivery of the scope required within each discipline, and ensure budgeted hours and scope are managed and reported to the Management Team in association with this plan. The Supporting Expert Panel provided consultation for discipline leads and were utilised as required.

Page 5 Commercial in Confidence

2.3 Phase 1: Data Collation and Alignment Workshops The methodology maximises the use of asset management and operations systems already in place. The Assessment undertook an analysis of relevant governing Aurizon asset management standards, systems, databases, and the Aurizon ViziRail system. The data collation required access to the Aurizon systems and records typically described in Table 1.

Table 1: Aurizon asset management governance requirements

Information Type Description Comments

Access Undertaking • Aurizon 2010 Access Undertaking • Regulatory compliance requirements

Network Information • Detailed network maps • Detailed network configuration, Packs and Maps • Coal supply chain information characteristics, and geometry packs (by major coal system) • UT3 Yearly tonnages by coal system

Policy • Aurizon Safety Rules and Policies • Assess underlying asset • Maintenance and Renewal Asset management and maintenance Management Policy principles • • Capital Works Policy Benchmark against industry norms based on knowledge and • Signalling Maintenance Standards experience • Overhead Maintenance Standards

Previous Asset Condition • 2010 Asset Condition Report prior • Provides guidance for level of Reports the IPO investigation of a range of assets.

Asset Management • Civil Engineering Track Standards • Governing asset management Standards (CETS) standards • Civil Engineering Structural • Establish type and frequency of Standards (CESS) inspections and response actions • Signalling Standards and Quality • Benchmark against industry Procedures and Manufacturing norms based on knowledge and Specifications experience • Integrated Quality Management Systems (IQMS) – Power • Track Systems Maintenance Systems • Safety Management System Standard – Level Crossing Safety

Work Programs • Maintenance • Determine breakdown and focus • Capital (renewal/replacement) areas for maintenance and replacement of infrastructure • Maintenance work summary • analysis reports Analyse planned versus percentage of works achieved • Graph trends

Where data cannot be obtained for the analysis, the criticality of this will be discussed with Aurizon and the QCA, and an appropriate way forward will be developed based on the experience and expertise of the team. Each RAB will comprise a number of disciplines to be assessed. Table 2 below identifies disciplines to be assessed for each asset system.

Page 6 Commercial in Confidence

Table 2: Disciplines to be assessed for each Regulated Asset Base

Regulated Asset Base Discipline

Newlands • Track and track support • Civil structures • Signals and train control systems • Telecommunications

GAPE • Track and track support • Civil structures • Signals and train control systems • Telecommunications

Goonyella (including Hail Creek and excluding • Track and track support Vermont) • Civil structures • Signals and train control systems • Telecommunications

Goonyella (including Hail Creek and excluding • Power systems Vermont) (Electric) • Traction distribution

Goonyella (Vermont) • Track and track support • Civil structures • Signals and train control systems • Telecommunications

Goonyella (Vermont) (Electric) • Power systems • Traction distribution

Blackwater (excluding Rolleston & Minerva) • Track and track support • Civil structures • Signals and train control systems • Telecommunications

Blackwater (Electric) • Power systems • Traction distribution

Blackwater (Rolleston) • Track and track support • Civil structures • Signals and train control systems • Telecommunications

Blackwater (Minerva) • Track and track support • Civil structures • Signals and train control systems • Telecommunications

Moura • Track and track support • Civil structures • Signals and train control systems • Telecommunications

Page 7 Commercial in Confidence

Alignment Workshops A series of Assessor-facilitated alignment workshops early in the Initial Assessment process occurred in late January to align all parties to the proposed assessment methodology and direction. The objectives of this workshop were for the parties to: • Agree to the objectives of the CBA process • Agree to the methodology and general framework to measure and report asset condition • Agree to the application of discipline asset hierarchy structures • Align to the Initial Assessment as closely as possible with existing monitoring and reporting systems • Agree to the report structure (including conceptual traffic light hurdles for specific key elements) • Agree to a general framework for the valuing of any asset deterioration • Based on the above measures, finalise an agreement of the assessment plan.

KPIs were divided into the following categories: • Operational • Asset.

Operational KPIs reflected the commitment made by Aurizon to stakeholders in regard to performance of the system. Asset KPIs will be identified to allow objective reporting based on agreed target results or limits.

2.4 Phase 2: Initial Assessment Upon developing the assessment methodology through the alignment workshops, and the data collated through Aurizon’s systems, processes and databases, the Initial Assessment commenced. The outputs of the initial desktop review were used to determine the focus for the site verification process. This enabled Evans & Peck to audit and assess the findings of the desktop analysis in the field. It was considered impractical and not cost effective to inspect the entire CQCN, therefore, the specific inspection sites were determined on risk based considerations in consultation with the QCA and Aurizon. Inspections were carried out in consultation with Aurizon staff to ensure no impact on rail operations and compliance with Aurizon’s safety management system requirements. An Aurizon supplied Track Protection Officers was present at all times when accessing the rail corridor. The condition of the rail system was categorised and provided in layers of increasing detail ranging from executive summary and dashboard reporting, through to detailed discipline analysis. A draft format for a summary reporting dashboard is included in Appendix A. The final format will be further developed as assessments are finalised. Evans & Peck made an evaluation on the condition of the asset based on the interpreted risk to the coal system’s ability to meet client demands, and colour code asset elements as detailed in Table 3.

Page 8 Commercial in Confidence

Table 3: Provisional condition colour coding system

Condition Coding Description

Green Asset performance is at or better than the level specified

Yellow Minor failures in asset performance

Amber Trend of minor failures in asset performance

Red Major Asset Failure

Grey Unavailable/Insufficient Information

Detailed assessment reporting and assessment rating rationale are provided in: • Appendix B Track and track support • Appendix C Civil structures • Appendix D Signals and train control systems • Appendix E Telecommunications • Appendix F Traction distribution and traction power supply systems.

2.5 Phase 3: Incremental Reviews The incremental reviews would be conducted in a similar manner to the Initial Assessment and be reported to the ALG in a similar format. These incremental reviews do not form part of the required assessments under the Undertaking, however they facilitate the following advantages: • Establishing a collaborative and ‘no surprises’ culture • Identifying early warning of asset trends • Creating an opportunity for Aurizon to address any significant asset deterioration before the End of Period Assessment.

2.6 Phase 4: End of Period Assessment The End of Period Assessment would be conducted in a similar manner to the Initial Assessment and be reported to the ALG in a similar format. However, unlike the Initial Assessment, which identifies asset components at risk, the purpose of this Assessment is to facilitate the valuation of any identified deterioration, as described in Phase 5.

2.7 Phase 5: Valuation of Deterioration The methodology and mechanism for evaluation of deterioration been deferred to be finalised during the development of 2013 Access Undertaking (UT4) prior to the End of Period Assessment.

Page 9 Commercial in Confidence

Appendix A Draft Asset Dashboard

Page 10 Commercial in Confidence

Operational System Operational KPI RAB Discipline KPI Lagging Indicators Indicators

Track Delay – A: 3.76% T: <5% Defect -

TSR: 94% below target Cancellations – A: 0 T: <10 Str Inspect: 97% <30d l Str Maint: 100% <30d l BRTT: 3 month above BRTT Civil & Structures Newlands nb: prior to increase to 160% Newlands Delays – A: 22min T: <360 min Clt Inspect: 100% <30d l Clt Maint: none recorded target OTCI: overall good condition Signal & Control Systems Delay - Defect - Telecommunications Delay - Defect

Track Delay – A: 0% T: <5%

TSR not measured Cancellations – 0 Str Inspect:100% <30d l Str Maint: 100%

Civil & Structures Clt Inspect: 100% 30d-60d Delays - 0 Clt Maint: 100% GAPE BRTT not measured GAPE late OTCI below lower threshold Signal & Control Systems Delay - Defect - Telecommunications Delay - Defect -

Track Delay – A:2.84% T: <5% Defect -

Str Inspect: 14% <30d l Cancellations – 0 Str Maint: 100% Civil & Structures 86% 30-60 d late Goonyella (excluding Vermont) Delays – 486 min T: <360 min Clt Inspect: 73% <30d l Clt Maint: 86% TSR: 98% below target Signal & Control Systems Delay - Defect -

Telecommunications Delay - Defect -

Track Delay – A: 0.56% T: <5% Defect-

Cancellations - 0 Str Inspect: N/A Str Maint: N/A Civil & Structures Goonyella (Vermont) Delays – 0 min T: <360 min Clt Inspect: 100% <30d l Clt Maint: N/A Goonyella BRTT: 1 month above BRTT Signal & Control Systems Delay - Defect -

Telecommunications Delay - Defect -

Delay – 0 minutes T: <4,500m /gntk Earth-wire failures - 0 Overhead Contact System OTCI: overall good condition Dewirement - 0 TRC – not measured. See Goonyella Electric Goonyella (Vermont) (Electric) Transformer Oil – no feeder transformers Traction Power Supply Delay – A: min/Gntk T: Auto-Transformer Oil - inconclusive

Delay - 2,054min/Gntk T: <4,500min /gntk Earth-wire failures – A: 19 T: <12 Overhead Contact System Dewirement – A: 6 T:<12 TRC – 63% within 7 days Goonyella Electric Transformer Oil: A: 5% T: <10% Traction Power Supply Delay - A: 690 min/Gntk T: Auto-Transformer Oil: A: 21% T

Track Delay – 6.73% T: <5% Defect -

Cancellations – 15 Str Inspect: 74% <30d l Str Maint: 42% Civil & Structures Blackwater (excluding Rolleston Delays – 181 mins T: <360 min Clt Inspect: 31% <30d l Clt Maint: 67% & Minerva) Signal & Control Systems Delay - Defect -

TSR 41% above target Telecommunications Delay - Defect -

Track Delay – 0% T: <5% Defect -

Cancellations – 0 Str Inspect: 0% <30d l Str Maint: 42% Civil & Structures Blackwater Rolleston Delays – 0 min T: <360 min Clt Inspect: 100% <30d l Clt Maint: 67% Signal & Control Systems Delay - Defect -

Blackwater BRTT: 0 months above BRTT Telecommunications Delay - Defect -

Track Delay – 1.06% T: <5% Defect -

Cancellations – 0 Str Inspect: 44% <30d l Str Maint: 100% Civil & Structures Blackwater Minerva Delays – 0 min T: <360 min Clt Inspect: 100% <30d l Clt Maint: N/A OTCI: overall good condition Signal & Control Systems Delay - Defect - Telecommunications Delay -

Delay – A: 3,607min/Gntk T: <4,500 min/gntk Defect - Overhead System Dewirement – A: 12 T: <12 TRC - 63% within 7 days Blackwater Electric Transformer Oil: A: 15.3% T: <10% Traction Power Supply Delay - Auto-Transformer Oil - A: 15%

Track Delay – 1.68% T: <5% Defect -

TSR: 100% below target Cancellations – 0 Str Inspect: 100% <30d l Str Maint: 33% Civil & Structures Moura BRTT: 0 months above BRTT Moura Delays – 0 min Clt Inspect: 98% <30d l Clt Maint: 0% OTCI: overall good condition Signal & Control Systems Delay - Defect - Telecommunications Delay - Defect -

Page 1 Commercial in Confidence

Appendix B Track and Track Support

Commercial in Confidence

Figure 3 describes the asset hierarchy for the track and track support system.

Figure 3: Track and track support asset hierarchy

Table 4 shows the anticipated discipline specific desktop reference materials that will be utilised through the assessment process for track and track support.

Table 4: Desktop reference material – track and track support

Information type Description Output

Suite of Civil • CETS1: Track Monitoring • Determine inspection type and Engineering Track • CETS2: Rail Management frequency applied (patrol, general Standards and detailed, including track • CETS3: Sleepers and Fastenings recording car) and maintenance • CETS4: Ballast standards for the track system • CETS5: Rails for Special • Benchmark against industry norms Applications based on knowledge and experience • CETS6: Points and Crossings • CETS7: Track Structure • CETS8: Track Alignment • CETS9: Track Geometry • CETS10: Track Stability

Safety Standard – • Safety Management System • Determine inspection and Level Crossings Standard – Level Crossing Safety assessment regime applied • Benchmark against industry norms based on knowledge and experience

Page 1 Commercial in Confidence

Information type Description Output

Field tests • Rail: Non-destructive (NDT) • Analysis of defects (number, type, • Percentage Void Contamination profile) (PVC) • Graph trends • Ground Penetration Radar (GPR)

Management • Rail Inspection Management • Profile age, remaining life and Databases System (RIMS) component breakdown of track • Track Geometry Recording Car infrastructure (graphs and data over UT3 period) • Profile age and remaining life of • Ultrasonic testing database level crossing protection • Breakdown of track categories, track condition index, and track condition trends (network-wide, major coal system and line sections) • Breakdown, profile and trend in rail defects

The summary reporting sheet for track systems is shown in Table 5.

Page 2 Commercial in Confidence

Table 5: Assessment methodology for track and track support

Region CQCN Condition Based Assessment for track and track support

Leading Indicators (Qualitative Reliability Drivers) Lagging Indicators Key Performance Indicator These are indicators that have been identified as potential drivers of system reliability. These are analysed in a These are Reliability Based Condition Indicators qualitative manner as a guide to maintaining good reliability. Item MAINTENANCE PERFORMANCE PERFORMANCE Physical Inspection Defects Delays minutes (Due to infrastructure Scheduled Maintenance Measures of assets functionality Measures the performance of Results – Extent of Disruptive Number of Defects reported against Track & faults) Program Compliance relative to purpose improvement programs across the Defects Track Support (Lag KPI ) network

Track and This assesses the compliance with OTCI – Assessment of actual OTCI ALCAM – Risk reduction ratings • This encompasses track, • Number of Defects recorded over the • Total delays caused by infrastructure defects, track support the Preventative Maintenance range in relation to required range (Level crossings) (Network only) track support systems and period for specified components as reported in ViziRail, against specific train Plan for railway track for track category associated civil • Indicator has not been assessed as part services: components. of the Initial Assessment, however, the – Delays caused by speed restrictions Measurements on site will change in number of defects/track imposed due to infrastructure faults include factors such as: kilometre will be assessed at the End of – Delays caused by infrastructure failure • General visual condition Period Assessment to determine the Delays caused by track maintenance of ballast (including extent of defects – profile, fouling, etc.) • General visual inspection of rail, where possible gauge and top will be checked. Rail profile will be also visually inspected for signs of excessive side wear • Where sleepers are cracked and/or fasteners are loose or missing this will be recorded Assessment Qualitative only Qualitative only Qualitative only <30% <50% <70% >70% No 10% 20% >20% Total Total Total Total of of of of increase increase increase increase contribut- contributio contribut- contribut- sites sites sites sites in in in in ion <5% n <7.5% ion <10% ion >10% average average average average defects/k defects/k defects/k defects/k m m m m

External • Low utilisation of some routes • Defects due to asset age and • Defects due to asset age and • Defects due to asset age • Defects due to asset age and type (i.e. • Defects due to asset age and type (i.e. influencing • Weather Events type (i.e. accelerated type (i.e. accelerated and type accelerated deterioration due to life accelerated deterioration due to life cycle or conditions deterioration due to life cycle deterioration due to life cycle • cycle or material deficiencies) material deficiencies) • Planned renewals/overhauls Weather Events or material deficiencies) or material deficiencies) • Defects due to coal dust • Defects due to coal dust • Criticality of the asset • • Defects due to coal dust Increased usage/traffic/ • Weather Events • Weather Events • loading Weather Events • Planned renewals/overhauls • Planned renewals/overhauls • Planned renewals/overhauls • Legacy design (i.e. sections on old • Legacy design (i.e. sections on old formation) • Legacy design (i.e. sections on formation) • Increased usage/traffic/loading old formation) • Increased usage/traffic/loading • Faulty or damaged rolling stock • Increased • Faulty or damaged rolling stock usage/traffic/loading • Driver errors • Driver errors • Faulty or damaged rolling stock • Driver errors

Page 3 Commercial in Confidence

Appendix C Civil Structures

Commercial in Confidence

The figure below describes the asset hierarchy for civil structures.

Figure 4: Civil structures asset hierarchy

Civil Structures

Structures - Track Culverts misc

Concrete Rail Reinforced Cattle Bridges Concrete Pipe Underpasses

Small Timber Rail Corrugated Bridges Metal Pipes Retaining Walls <2000 mm dia Large Steel Rail Corrugated Bridges Metal Pipes <2000 mm dia

Concrete Reinforced Concrete Box Footbridges Culverts

Steel Unreinforced Footbridges Concrete Pipe

Concrete cast insitu arch

The Assessment will be based on the assessed quality from a selective sample of assets. The process will involve analysis of: • The age of assets from the FAR • Maintenance records (RIMS), both planned, unplanned and not performed, to determine those assets that are vulnerable to environmental factors or performance factors (increase in coal train loadings) • Defect statistics per asset grouping to identify trends in defect identification and rectification. • Analysis of delays due to structural failure or maintenance • Supplementary documentation available to determine those assets requiring inspection on the field trip.

The Assessment will be supported by further study of the various asset databases and subsequent findings of this analysis in conjunction with the findings of the assessment components for track, ballast and rail to determine any irregularities in their deterioration which may be a result of the civil and structures. Table 6 shows the anticipated desktop reference materials that will be utilised through the assessment process for structures.

Page 1 Commercial in Confidence

Table 6: Desktop reference material – civil structures

Information type Description Review output

Suite of Civil • Relevant standards as required • Determine inspection type and Engineering Structural frequency applied Standards • Review existing maintenance reports and inspection checklists • Benchmark against industry norms based on knowledge and experience

Maintenance Records • Statistics of unplanned • Check for seasonal fluctuations maintenance and high frequency • Review against industry norms and of asset maintenance comment on high levels of maintenance

Management • Rail Inspection Management • Profile age, remaining life and Databases System (RIMS) component breakdown of civil and • ViziRail structures • Review speed restrictions and whether a particular asset is the cause • Review logged maintenance requests verses actual maintenance completed

Furthermore, the following frequencies of inspections are taken from the Asset Policy – Maintenance and Renewal and are used as a basis in the CBA. The summary assessment methodologies for Civil Structures are shown in Table 7 and Table 8.

Page 2 Commercial in Confidence

Table 7: Assessment methodology for bridges

Region CQCN Condition Based Assessment of bridges

Qualitative Reliability Drivers Infrastructure Inspection Key Performance Indicators These are indicators that have been identified as potential drivers of Lagging Indicators These are Reliability Based Condition Indicators system reliability. These are analysed in a qualitative manner as a guide to maintaining good reliability.

Item Number of blocked Closed vs. open Tracking of new Number of inspections carried Defect Closure Rate Asset Age • Cancellations due to • Delays (min) caused by culverts to be cleared maintenance orders defects per period out per period structural failure structural failure (to a per period • (per RAB) single service) • (per RAB) Bridge Discusses scheduled Discusses scheduled Discusses the total This assesses the compliance Remaining book life will be This indicator assesses, on a This indicator assesses, on a structures inspections as a ratio maintenance with open defects with the Preventative used as an indicator for system-wide basis, train services system-wide basis, the of asset quantity. Also particular reference to Maintenance Plan for the structure risk. This utilises the that are cancelled due to bridge impact of delays on system provides commentary closed vs. open Bridge structures, to determine FAR to determine ‘at risk’ assets structure failure performance over a given on open vs. closed maintenance orders. the performance of inspections period inspections Also provides carried out. The metric is comment upon total percentage of maintenance defects against asset inspections carried out a period quantity compared to those programmed

Assessment Qualitative only Qualitative only Qualitative only >90% >75% >50% <50% >90% >75% >50% <50% 100% <50% >50% >10% <10 <15 <20 >20 <360 <480 <600 >600 <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 with with with with min min min min days days days days days days days days >15 <15 <15 <3 late late late late late late late late years years years years

External Weather Weather Weather • Weather events • Weather events • Planned renewals/ influencing • Access availability to asset • Vehicle accidents overhauls conditions • • Legacy design Increased usage/loading • Increased loadings • Weather events • Faults due to coal dust

Page 3 Commercial in Confidence

Table 8: Condition assessment methodology for culvert structures

Region CQCN Condition Based Assessment of Culverts

Qualitative Reliability Drivers Infrastructure Inspection Key Performance Indicators These are indicators that have been identified as potential Lagging Indicators These are Reliability Based Condition Indicators drivers of system reliability. These are analysed in a qualitative manner as a guide to maintaining good reliability.

Item Number of Closed vs. open Tracking of new Number of inspections carried Number of defects closed out Asset Age Cancellations due to structural Delays (min) caused by structural blocked culverts maintenance defects per period out per period per period failure (per RAB) failure (to a single service)(per to be cleared per orders RAB) period Culverts Discusses Discusses Discusses the total This assesses the compliance This indicator assesses the Asset age will be used as an This indicator assesses, on a system- This indicator assesses, on a scheduled scheduled open defects with the Preventative compliance with the Corrective indicator or structure risk wide basis, train services that are system-wide basis, the impact of inspections as a maintenance with Maintenance Plan for the Maintenance Plan for Culvert cancelled due to culvert failure delays on system performance over ratio of asset particular Bridge structures, to determine structures, to determine the a given period quantity. Also reference to closed the performance of inspections on-time performance of defect provides vs. open carried out. The metric is maintenance. The metric is the commentary on maintenance percentage of maintenance delay recorded for open vs. closed orders. Also inspections carried out a maintenance to be closed out, inspections provides comment period compared to those when compared to their upon total defects programmed program date against asset quantity Assessment Qualitative only Qualitative only Qualitative only >90% >75% >50% <50% >90% >75% >50% <50% 100% <50% >50% >10% <10 <15 <20 >20 <360 <480 <600 >600 <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 with with with with min min min min days days days days days days days days >15 <15 <15 <3 late late late late late late late late years years years years External Weather Weather Weather • Weather • Weather • Asset age • Asset Age influencing • Geotechnical conditions • Access availability • Weather • Weather conditions • Landslip/earthworks • Lack of contractors to • Vehicle accident • Geotechnical conditions failure carry out additional works • Geotechnical conditions • Landslip/earthworks failure • Landslip/earthworks failure

Page 4 Commercial in Confidence

Appendix D Signals and Train Control Systems

Commercial in Confidence

The signals and train control systems asset hierarchy is shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5: Signals and train control system asset hierarchy

Signals and Train Control Systems

SCR (Signalling Signals and Train Detection Crossings Track Control Control Centre Control) Indication Systems

UTC Solid State Audio Freq. Boom Point Interface/ Interlocking Main Signals Track Circuit Barriers Machines Telemetry (SSI) TX/RX Equipment

AC/DC Power Track Circuit Supplies, UTC Tuned Circuits/ Batteries, Shunt Signals Impedance Road Signals Catch Points Computer Battery Bonds System Chargers

Relay Track Circuit Interlocking Junction Control Power Rail Signals Derailers and Indicators Mimic Panel Supplies Interposing

AC/DC Termination Point Axle Strike In Ground Power Racks Indicators Counters Detection Frames Supply

Telemetry to Marker Boards Cabling Cabling Cabling Universal and other DC Track (Power/ (Power/ (Power/ Traffic signalling Circuits Control) Control) Control) Control related signs

Trackside Cables Cables Power/ (Control/ (Control/ Control Power) Power) Cabling

The CBA is based on a network performance approach that will look for unsupported, obsolescent or near life expiry equipment that is affecting the performance of any particular system. Additionally, transmission media such as fibre optic, copper cable and microwave equipment will be assessed as grouped data for its physical condition and performance. Power supplies will be likewise assessed. Table 9 reflects the desktop reference material that will be utilised to assess the signals and train control systems.

Page 1 Commercial in Confidence

Table 9: Desktop reference material – signals and train control systems

Information Type Description Review Output

Network Information • Detailed network maps • Signalling arrangement Packs and Maps • Signalling arrangement diagrams diagrams will be used to compare against asset database and site visit results

Policy • Signalling system maintenance and • Underlying Signalling/Control renewal asset management policy principles • Signalling asset replacement plan • Benchmark against industry • Compliance with Safety Management norms based on, compliance System (Safe Working principles) with agreements, knowledge and experience

Remote Control • Remote Control Signalling (RCS/CTC) • Determine inspection type and Signalling Engineering system maintenance standards, frequency applied for the Standards and procedures and drawings Signalling/Control system Procedures • Principles for Signalling of Trains • Benchmark against industry Standard norms based on knowledge • RCS inspection manuals and experience • Access to schematic diagrams if required

Previous Asset • Signalling/control condition assessment • Assess variations in condition Condition • Specific reports detailing the component • Assess changes in value Assessments life investigations e.g. Track circuit tuned units and RX/TX

QRN’s Condition • Track circuit routine drop shunt test • Analysis of defects (number, Monitoring records type, profile) • Record of receiver gain settings (Trend • Compliance with stated effects of ballast fowling) maintenance policy • Wayside vital processor interlocking • Comparison with normal performance verification industry testing methods and • Motorised point machines operating frequency integrity • Graph trends • UTC fault records • Telemetry error rate monitoring

Management • Signalling system/control inspection • Profile age, remaining life and databases check sheets component condition of major • Maintenance scheduling database. electrical/electronic Reporting on Scheduled and Non- components scheduled maintenance • Profile age and remaining life • Monthly/annual failure and delay of Track Circuit Equipment statistics and KPIs • Percentage of maintenance not • Right/wrong side signalling failure performed to the plan statistics (signals passed at danger due • Trend delays and cancellations to signalling faults) due to signalling faults • Trend right side failures

The summary assessment methodologies for signalling and control systems and telecommunications systems are shown in Table 10 and Table 12.

Page 2 Commercial in Confidence

Table 10: Assessment methodology for signals and train control systems

Region CQCN Condition Assessment of the signal and train control systems

Qualitative Reliability Drivers Lagging Indicators Key Performance Indicator These are indicators that have been identified as potential drivers of system reliability. These are analysed in a These are Reliability Based Condition Indicators qualitative manner as a guide to maintaining good reliability.

Item Scheduled Maintenance Corrective Work Orders Due to Faults Occurrence of Faults Delays minutes (Due to signal and train control system Program Compliance Faults/GNTK) (Lag KPI )

Signals and This assesses the compliance with the Preventative Corrective work orders are initiated due to maintenance This encompasses the range of signalling and control system Every signalling and control system component, particularly train control Maintenance Plan for the signalling and control system requirements or equipment faults. The absolute number components, in particular points, tracks and telemetry to be for train detection, interlockings, telemetry and points faults systems including its components. The metric is a percentage of and percentage due to faults out of the total corrective surveyed across the network. The results obtained from the that affect the flow of trains including both Electric and scheduled maintenance work orders completed which work orders should be considered in maintenance Initial Assessment are to be used as a baseline for future Diesel. The number of faults needs to be minimised and were opened inFY 11/12 policy. Assess number of faults reported, number of Assessments there must be efficient response to limit train delays faults fixed plus number of faults remaining

Assessment Qualitative only Qualitative only No increase 10% increase 20% increase >20% <7,500 <15,000 <20,000 >20,000 in average in average in average increase in min/GNTK min/GNTK min/GNTK min/GNTK faults/km faults/km faults/km average faults/km

External • Low utilisation of some routes • Faults due to equipment age Weather Events • Rolling stock influencing • Weather Events • Faults due to coal dust • Weather Events conditions • Planned renewals/overhauls • Faults due to obstructions • Gross Tonne Km • Weather Events • Faults due to coal dust • Equipment numbers • Faults due to obstructions • Faults due to equipment age • Obsolescence with electronic equipment

Page 3 Commercial in Confidence

Appendix E Telecommunications

Commercial in Confidence

The telecommunication systems asset hierarchy is shown in Figure 6.

Figure 6: Telecommunications asset hierarchy

Telecommunications

Digital Microwave Train Pulse Code Power Supply PABX Cables Radio (DMR) Communications Modulation

Train Control Incoming Supply Small Systems Track System PCM Network Copper Radio (TCR)

Maintenance Replacement Wiring Large Systems Supervisory Radio Fibre Optic Network (MSR)

Mobile Phone Batteries Network

Rectifier Chargers

The CBA is based on a network performance approach that will look for unsupported, obsolescent or near life expiry equipment that is affecting the performance of any particular system. Additionally, transmission media such as fibre optic, copper cable and microwave equipment will be assessed as grouped data for its physical condition and performance. Table 11 reflects the desktop reference material that will be utilised to assess the Telecommunications system.

Page 1 Commercial in Confidence

Table 11: Desktop reference material – telecommunications infrastructure

Information Type Description Review Output

Telecommunications • Telecommunications • Determine scope, cost , Engineering Standards and maintenance standards, inspection type and frequency Procedures procedures and drawings applied general and detailed and • Telecommunications maintenance standards for the equipment inspection manuals Telecommunications system • • Access to schematic diagrams Benchmark against industry if required norms based on knowledge and experience

Safety Management System • Telecommunications Safety • Determine inspection and Standards – Management System assessment regime applied and Telecommunications Work Standards compliance to requirements Practices • Internal Telecommunications • Benchmark against industry audit reports norms based on knowledge and experience

Aurizon’s Field Tests • Quality of Service testing • Analysis of defects (number, • Analogue/Digital service type, profile) performance testing • Compliance with stated service • Life cycle testing and maintenance policy requirements • Conformance & • Interoperability testing Comparison with normal industry testing methods and • Out of Service & In Service frequency testing • Graph trends • Network interconnection testing • Telemetry error rate monitoring • Optical tests: spectral loss, attenuation, polarisation, dispersion • Other: microwave transmission testing, cable testing, etc.

Management Databases • Fixed Asset Register (FAR) • Profile age, remaining life and • Track and Equipment Register component condition of major (TEARS) electrical components • • Telecommunications Profile age and remaining life of inspection check sheets overhead contact wire • • Maintenance scheduling Percentage of maintenance not database. Reporting on performed to the plan Scheduled and Non-scheduled • Trend delays and cancellations maintenance due to electrical faults • Monthly/annual Out of • Trend circuit breaker trips Service, failure & delay statistics and KPIs

System Loading • Systems usage statistics • Establish the systems utilisations and capacities

Page 2 Commercial in Confidence

Table 12: Condition assessment methodology for telecommunications

Region CQCN Condition Assessment of the telecommunication systems

Qualitative Reliability Drivers Lagging indicators Key Performance Indicator These are indicators that have been identified as potential drivers of system reliability. These are analysed in a These are Reliability Based Condition Indicators qualitative manner as a guide to maintaining good reliability.

Item Scheduled Maintenance Corrective Work Orders Due to Faults Occurrence of Faults Delays minutes (Due to telecommunication system Program Compliance Faults/GNTK) (Lagging KPI )

Signals and This assesses the compliance with the Preventative Corrective work orders are initiated due to maintenance This encompasses the range of the telecommunication All telecommunication system components. The number of train control Maintenance Plan for the signalling and control system requirements or equipment faults. The absolute number systems. The results obtained from the Initial Assessment faults needs to be minimised and there must be efficient systems including its components. The metric is a percentage of and percentage due to faults out of the total corrective are to be used as a baseline for future Assessments response to limit train delays scheduled maintenance work orders completed which work orders should be considered in maintenance were opened in FYFY11/12 policy. Assess number of faults reported, number of faults fixed plus number of faults remaining

External • Low utilisation of some routes • Faults due to equipment age Weather Events • Weather Events Influencing • Weather Events • Faults due to coal dust • Gross Tonne Km Conditions • Planned renewals/overhauls • Faults due to obstructions • Faults due to obstructions • Weather Events • Faults due to equipment age • Equipment numbers • Obsolescence with electronic equipment

Page 3 Commercial in Confidence

Appendix F Traction Distribution and Traction Power Supply Systems

Commercial in Confidence

The figure below describes the asset hierarchy that forms the traction distribution and traction power supply system.

Figure 7: Traction distribution and traction power supply system asset hierarchy

Traction Power Supply and Distribution

Traction Power Traction Supply Distribution

AC/DC Switchyard Switchgear Auxiliary Equipment Power Supply

Caternary/ Protection Batteries Traction Insulators Arms Relays Transformer Contact Wire

Battery Section Harmonic Harmonic Surge Droppers Insulator Monitoring Chargers Filters Arrestors Overlaps

Supply Wiring Underground Auto Stager Insulators Transformers Cables Transformers

Voltage Structures Fences Alignment Isolators Transformers

Mid Point Turn Outs/ Current Bunding Earthing and Transformers Bonding Connections Crossovers

Tension Bushings Weights

The desktop review will require access to Aurizon Network systems and records. The table below shows the anticipated desktop reference materials that will be utilised through the assessment process.

Table 13: Desktop reference material – traction distribution and traction power supply systems

Information Type Description Review Output

Policy • Electrical entity documentation • Underlying electrical infrastructure • Electrical system maintenance management and maintenance and renewal asset management principles policy • Benchmark against industry norms • Electrical asset replacement plan based on electrical entity documentation, compliance with • Connection agreements agreements, knowledge and compliance experience

Page 1 Commercial in Confidence

Information Type Description Review Output

Traction power supply • Power system/distribution • Determine inspection type and and traction maintenance standards, frequency applied (patrol, general Distribution procedures and drawings and detailed, including track Engineering • Power system/distribution recording car) and maintenance Standards and inspection manuals standards for the power supply and Procedures distribution system • Access to electrical schematic • diagrams if required Benchmark against industry norms based on knowledge and experience

Safety Standard – • Power system Safety Management • Determine inspection and Electrical Work System Standards assessment regime applied Practices • Internal electrical safety audit • Benchmark against industry norms report based on knowledge and experience • External electrical safety audit report

Previous Asset • Traction power supply and • Assess variations in condition Condition traction distribution condition • Assess changes in value Assessments assessment • Specific reports detailing the component life investigations e.g. autotransformers

Aurizon’s field tests • Insulation resistance testing • Analysis of defects (number, type, • Low resistance testing rail bonds profile) • • Low resistance testing circuit Compliance with stated maintenance breakers policy and entity requirements • • Transformer electrical testing Comparison with normal industry testing methods and frequency • Feeder station/TSC earth grid • testing Graph trends • Earthing and bonding testing • Capacitance measurements • Protection relay and CB testing • Contact wire wear measurements • Overhead wire alignment and stagger checking (rail test car)

Management • Power system/distribution • Profile age, remaining life and databases inspection check sheets component condition of major • Maintenance scheduling database. electrical components Reporting on Scheduled and Non- • Profile age and remaining life of scheduled maintenance overhead contact wire • Transformer oil analysis database • Percentage of maintenance not • Monthly/annual failure and delay performed to the plan statistics and KPIs • Trend delays and cancellations due • SCADA circuit breaker trips, short to electrical faults circuits, overloads • Trend circuit breaker trips

System loading • Coal system tonnages • Establish electrical and mechanical • Feeder station electrical loading loading on electrical equipment. In profile particular the duration of the peak feeder station loading. • Feeder station energy usage The summary assessment methodologies for traction distribution and traction power supply systems are shown in Table 14 and Table 15.

Page 2 Commercial in Confidence

Table 14: Assessment methodology for traction distribution systems

Region CQCN Condition Assessment of the traction distribution system

Qualitative reliability drivers Lagging indicators Key Performance Indicators (leading indicators) These are reliability based condition indicators These are indicators that have been identified as potential drivers of system reliability. These are analysed in a qualitative manner as a guide to maintaining good reliability. Item Scheduled Corrective Overhaul Recording car contact alignment exceptions Earth wire failures Physical inspection results – extent of Delays minutes (due to contact system Dewirements maintenance work and serious and disruptive defects faults)/annum (lag KPI ) /annum (excluding program orders due renewal external factors) (lag compliance to faults program KPI)** compliance Traction This assesses Corrective This assesses The contact system alignment is continually This indicator monitors earth-wire This encompasses the range of traction Every electrical fault/circuit breaker trip Apart from de- distibut-ion the compliance work orders the changing often due to track movement. The failures, a possible precursor to distribution system components surveyed disrupts the flow of trains including both railments with the are initiated compliance recording car measures the alignment dewirements. across the network. If serious defects are Electric and Diesel. The number of faults needs dewirements are the Preventative due to with the Asset exceptions. These exceptions will always be evident or component maintenance is to be minimised and there must efficient most disruptive Maintenance maintenance Renewal Plan Plan for the or faults. The for the occurring. However it is imperative that there urgently required at any site this is recorded. response to control train delays. A large failure in the traction absolute traction is a quick response. Therefore this leading The indicator is the total percentage of sites proportion (50%) of electrical protection trips electrified railway distribution number and distribution indicator measures the response rather than with serious defects. are due to wildlife system. The system percentage system the existence of issues. There are documented dewirement rate is a including its due to faults including all polices dealing with the required response reflection of the components. out of the its times. contact system The metric is total components. performance percentage of corrective For example including schedule work orders there are maintenance should be criteria for maintenance of work orders considered in maximum rollingstock completed maintenance wear on the standards. which were policy contact wire. opened in The contact FYFY11/12. wire should This includes A, be measured B and C periodically inspections throughout which are the system analysed and replaced separately but as required. are combined as the one indicator.

Assessment Qualitative Qualitative Qualitative >95% of >80% of >60% of <60% of <12 <15 <20 >20 <10% of <15% of <20% of >20% of <4,500 <6,750 <9,000 >9,000 <12 <15 <20 >20 only only only TRC TRC TRC TRC earth- earth- earth- earth- sites sites sites sites min/GNTK min/GNTK min/GNTK min/GNTK exceptions exceptions exceptions exceptions wire wire wire wire inspected inspected inspected inspected closed in 7 closed in 7 closed in 7 closed in 7 failures failures failures failures with with with with serious days days days days serious serious serious defects defects defects defects

External • Low • Faults due Coal • Weather Events • Rollingstock • Weather Events • Rolling stock • Rollingstock Influencing Industry utilisation to • Industrial Action • High Vehicles • Weather Events • High Vehicles Conditions of some Wildlife Growth • Track movement • Gross Tonne Km • Gross Tonne Km • Gross Tonne Km routes • Faults due • Weather to Tumble • Faults due to Wildlife Events Weed • Faults due to tumble weed • Trips due to Rolling stock

Page 3 Commercial in Confidnece

Table 15: Assessment Methodology for traction power supply systems

Region CQCN Condition Assessment of the traction power supply systems

Qualitative Reliability Drivers (Leading Indicators) Lagging Indicators Key Performance Indicators These are indicators that have been identified as potential drivers of system reliability. These are These are both Reliability Based analysed in a qualitative manner as a guide to maintaining good reliability. Condition Indicators and Physical Measurement Based Condition Indicators

Item Scheduled Maintenance Corrective Work Orders Due to Overhaul and Renewal Program Physical Inspection Feeder Transformer Oil Auto Transformer Oil Analysis Delays minutes (Due to Traction Program Compliance Faults Compliance Results – Extent of Serious and Analysis Trends and Exceptions Trends and Exceptions Power Supply Faults)/annum Disruptive Defects (Lag KPI) (Lag KPI) (Lag KPI)

Traction Power This encompasses the Traction Corrective work orders are This assesses the compliance This encompasses the range of • The Feeder Transformers are • The Auto Transformers Every electrical fault/circuit breaker Supply Power Supply electrical initiated due to maintenance or with the Asset Renewal Plan for Traction power components key components. Whilst a (AT) is key components. trip disrupts the flow of trains equipment across the network. faults. The absolute number and the Traction Power Supply surveyed across the network. If failure of one feeder Whilst a failure of an AT including both Electric and Diesel. If serious defects are evident or percentage due to faults out of System including all its serious defects are evident or transformer, due to the does not disrupt traffic for The number of faults needs to be component maintenance and the total corrective work orders components. For example there component maintenance is inherent system redundancy, an extended period, they minimised and there must efficient renewal is required extensively should be considered in are criteria for maximum wear urgently required at any site does not disrupt traffic for an have high capital cost and response to control train delays throughout the network this will maintenance policy on the contact wire. The contact this is recorded. The Indicator is extended period, this there are many units attract a low score wire should be measured the total percentage of sites with equipment has a very high • Oil Analysis parameter periodically throughout the serious defects capital cost absolute values or trends system and replaced as required • Oil Analysis parameter which are creating absolute values or trends exceptions. which are creating exceptions

Assessment • Qualitative Only • Qualitative Only Qualitative Only <10% <15% of <20% >20% <10% <15% <25% >25% <10% <15% <25% >25% <4,500 <6,750 <9,000 >9,000 of sites sites of sites of sites with with with with with with with with min/ min/ min/ min/ inspect inspect inspect inspect except- except- except- except- except- except- except- except- GNTK GNTK GNTK GNTK ed with ed with ed with ed with ions ions ions ions ions ions ions ions serious serious serious serious defects defects defects defects

External • Low utilisation of some • Faults due to Wildlife Coal Industry Growth Weather Events • Gross Tonne Km Influencing routes • Faults due to Tumble Weed • Faults due to Wildlife Conditions • Weather Events • Faults due to Rolling stock • Faults due to tumble weed

Page 4 Commercial in Confidnece

Australia Asia Europe

Adelaide Beijing London Level 30, Westpac House 6/F Building A1 Parkview, Great West Road Brentford, Middlesex TW8 9AZ 91 King William Street Beijing Electronic Technology Zone United Kingdom Adelaide SA 5000 No.9 Jiuxianqiao East Road Telephone +44 (0)208 326 5347 Telephone: +618 8113 5359 Chaoyang District, Beijing, People’s Republic of China Brisbane Telephone: +8610 5908 3000 Level 2, 555 Coronation Drive Fax: +8610 5924 5001 Toowong QLD 4066 Telephone +617 3377 7000 Hong Kong

Level 32, 248 Queen’s Road East Fax +617 3377 7070 Wanchai, Hong Kong Melbourne Telephone: +852 2722 0986 Level 15, 607 Bourke Street Fax: +852 2492 2127 Melbourne VIC 3000 Telephone: +613 9810 5700 Kunming Fax: +613 9614 1318 Room B2901, Yinhai SOHO

612 Beijing Road

Perth Kunming 650011 Level 6, 600 Murray Street Telephone: +86 871 319 6008 West Perth WA 6005 Fax: +86 871 319 9004 Telephone +618 9485 3811 Fax +618 9481 3118 Shanghai C/- WorleyParsons, 8/f Sydney No. 686 Jiujiang Road

Level 6, Tower 2 Huangpu District Shanghai 200001

475 Victoria Avenue People’s Republic of China Chatswood NSW 2067 Telephone +86 21 6133 6892 Telephone: +612 9495 0500 Fax +86 21 6133 6777 Fax: +612 9495 0520

Evans & Peck Group Pty Ltd ABN50 098 008 818 E: [email protected] W: www.evanspeck.com Appendix C

Aurizon Network Pty Ltd Condition Based Assessment of Rail Infrastructure in the CQCN

Signal & Train Control System Preliminary Site Inspection Notes for Aurizon Network Comment

July 2013

July 2013 Page Commercial in Confidence

Table of Contents

1 Introduction ...... 4 1.1 Objective ...... 4

1.2 Context ...... 4

2 Newlands ...... 5 2.1 Introduction ...... 5

2.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 5

2.3 Identified Issues ...... 5

3 Goonyella to Abbot Point Expansion (GAPE) ...... 7 3.1 Introduction ...... 7

3.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 7

3.3 Identified Issues ...... 7

4 Goonyella (including Hail Creek and excluding Vermont) ...... 8 4.1 Introduction ...... 8

4.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 8

4.3 Identified Issues ...... 9

5 Goonyella (Vermont) ...... 15 5.1 Introduction ...... 15

5.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 15

5.3 Identified Issues ...... 15

6 Blackwater (Excluding Rolleston and Minerva) ...... 16 6.1 Introduction ...... 16

6.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 16

6.3 Identified Issues ...... 17

July 2013 Page i Commercial in Confidence

7 Blackwater (Rolleston) ...... 19 7.1 Introduction ...... 19

7.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 19

7.3 Identified Issues ...... 19

8 Blackwater (Minerva) ...... 20 8.1 Introduction ...... 20

8.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 20

8.3 Identified Issues ...... 20

9 Moura ...... 21 9.1 Introduction ...... 21

9.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 21

9.3 Identified Issues ...... 21

July 2013 Page ii Commercial in Confidence

List of Figures Figure 1: Signs of rust and deterioration on the outer housing of the backup generator at Briaba microwave site Figure 2: Heavy contamination adjacent to signal at Sonoma Figure 3: Heavy coal contamination at Hail Creek Figure 4: Unprotected hoses running over ballast to control box Figure 5: Deterioration of outer protective sheath Figure 6: Outer protective sheath Figure 7: Typical older telecommunication equipment Figure 8: Tait Radio Equipment Figure 9: Older mk1 points machine Figure 10: Old mast retrofitted with LED upgrade. Other signals still utilised incandescent lights Figure 11: Cable deterioration Figure 12: Internal bracing of the SER indicating the building is in need of replacement Figure 13: Level Crossing on the Blackwater System. Generally in good condition Figure 14: Broken bond - CH144.527 Figure 15: Older point machine currently in use on the Blackwater System at Yamala - CH242.540 Figure 16: Protective hose pulled back from termination point of cable - Yamala - CH242.520 Figure 17: Possible lubrication required on slide plates – Yamala - CH242.520 Figure 18: Axle counter on the Moura System

July 2013 Page iii Commercial in Confidence

1 Introduction 1.1 Objective This report describes preliminary results from the site inspections conducted for the signal and telecommunication assets on the CQCN, as part of the Condition Based Assessment for Aurizon Network. The document raises comments and defects as registered during the site visit carried out by the assessment team during the week ending 15 February 2013, and invites for Aurizon Network’s subject matter expert to provide comment. The report should, under no circumstances, be viewed as Evans & Peck’s final assessment of the asset, containing non-comprehensive, preliminary notes upon the viewed assets.

1.2 Context Aurizon Network manages the below rail assets in the CQCN. These below rail assets are not subject to competition and are consequently regulated by the Queensland Competition Authority (QCA). The QCA has divided the CQCN into 11 different asset systems; reflecting 11 different tariff regimes applicable to specific individuals or groups of Access Holders. These asset systems are:

• Newlands • Goonyella to Abbot Point Expansion (GAPE) • Goonyella • Goonyella Electrification • Blackwater • Blackwater Electrification • Vermont • Vermont Electrification • Rolleston/Bauhinia • Minerva • Moura.

During the site inspection, time was spent at the Moranbah Maintenance Depot reviewing the signalling’s REMEDY maintenances system with a staff member of Aurizon Network.

Noted points from the discussion include the following:

1) Monthly reports are produced by the Planning division from Mackay detail KPI performance (refer Appendix A)

2) KPI target for Preventative Maintenance is 95%

3) Currently experiencing a labour shortage; performance is down (stats low) but showing signs of improvement. Difficult to attract resources to western regions as same money offered on the coast

4) REMEDY is used to manage Preventative, Corrective maintenance as well as Corrective Faults

5) The REMEDY system is used by signalling, OH traction and telecommunication groups and is a separate system to RIMS.

July 2013 Page iv Commercial in Confidence

2 Newlands 2.1 Introduction The Newlands System is the northernmost of the four main systems, connecting Newlands with Abbot Point Coal Terminal. The System contains approximately 203 km of single, non-electrified track with passing loops. The System has recently been expanded as part of the Goonyella to Abbot Point Expansion (GAPE) project.

2.2 Overview of Asset Conditions The Signals and Telecommunication assets in the Newlands System were, generally speaking, in good condition. As a result of the recent works relating to the GAPE project, there has been a renewal of signal infrastructure on the System. This has helped lead to the overall good condition of the asset. However, as likely noted by other discipline sections, the issue of ballast contamination remains an issue in the Newlands System, and has been identified in 2.3.

It was noted that some of the telemetry systems used through the System are due for replacement, causing increased risk for future delays. These systems are based on Westinghouse Brake & Signal Westronic S2 field units, and being over 20 years old, with increasing difficulty in sourcing spares.

The sites inspected all demonstrated up to date maintenance for the date visited.

2.3 Identified Issues There were signs of rust and deterioration around the backup diesel generator at Briaba Microwave Site. This is shown in Figure 1. This is unlikely to impact upon network operations, however, should be rectified to avoid any worsening.

Figure 1: Signs of rust and deterioration on the outer housing of the backup generator at Briaba microwave site

Ballast contamination of track ballast, as shown in Figure 2 was identified. This was not an uncommon occurrence through the System and demonstrates the issues relating to ballast contamination through the Network, an issue not unique to the Newlands System. This has the possibility to cause issues with the track circuit.

July 2013 Page v Commercial in Confidence

Figure 2: Heavy contamination adjacent to signal at Sonoma

July 2013 Page vi Commercial in Confidence

3 Goonyella to Abbot Point Expansion (GAPE) 3.1 Introduction The GAPE System, also known as the Northern Missing Link, connects the Goonyella System at North Goonyella to the Newlands System at Newlands. The connection is approximately 70 km long. Completed in December 2011, the expansion has been designed to increase capacity to Bowen Basin miners via the Abbot Point Coal Terminal. The System permits an axle loading of 26.5 tal.

The GAPE System was completed when the first train ran in December 2011 and is considered new infrastructure.

3.2 Overview of Asset Conditions As part of the desktop study, it was determined that an inspection of the asset would not be required. This is due to the age and recent construct of the system. Prior site inspections were performed by Evans & Peck in mid-2012, with the asset reported in excellent condition.

3.3 Identified Issues Not applicable.

July 2013 Page vii Commercial in Confidence

4 Goonyella (including Hail Creek and excluding Vermont) 4.1 Introduction The Goonyella (including Hail Creek and excluding Vermont) System is the largest coal export rail network in Australia, comprises approximately 924 km of track to transport coal to Hay Point Coal Terminal and Dalrymple Bay Coal Terminal. The Goonyella System operates west of Mackay in Central Queensland and connects to the Newlands System at the North Goonyella Junction and to the Blackwater System via Gregory and the Oakey Creek branch.

The asset system is electrified; however, the traction distribution and power systems are handled as a separate asset system.

The Goonyella System was constructed in the mid 1980’s.

4.2 Overview of Asset Conditions Generally speaking, the condition of the assets inspected in the Goonyella System, while poorer than those inspected in the Newlands System, were in good condition. This may be a result of the somewhat older installations, typical of a more mature, complex system. However, this is not to say that the condition of the assets on the Goonyella System were poor. While the assets may be approaching their book-life, the evidence from the field staff and maintenance regime indicates an asset that will perform longer than those predicted by the book-life. It also indicated an asset in a better condition than that expected from the original desktop study.

As noted on the Newlands System, heavy coal contamination of ballast material is present throughout the system, causing potential issues with track circuits. This contamination is shown in Figure 3. This is not dissimilar to conditions experienced in other asset systems in the CQCN. This has the potential to reduce the serviceable life of the asset and options should be explored to reduce the future impact it will have on the network.

Figure 3: Heavy coal contamination at Hail Creek

One key issue of the telecommunication assets is that the Tait radio communication system, which is an older system, is approaching obsoleteness. To repair this system, parts would need to be sourced from non-traditional suppliers, increasing complications. Evans & Peck understand that

July 2013 Page viii Commercial in Confidence

there are plans are to replace it, especially due to the ACMA 400MHz band issues. This is likely to occur gradually with replaced equipment used to supplement remaining system in service.

Other issues were noted at the Coppabella microwave site and reflect generally poor upkeep of the site. These issues are discussed in more detail in 4.3. Further issues were identified with the age of the fibre optic transmission system, which may have difficulties in integration with future installations.

Issues were also identified at the Peak Downs installation, where issues were identified relating to the age of the asset. There were issues with the point machines, signal masts, deteriorated protection for track leads, missing labels of point clip boxes and cable deterioration of track leads. Further, the SER building was in a poor state, with bracing of the building constructed to keep brick work in place. The building was also internally braced to support the roof. This suggests that the building is of poor workmanship, and may require replacement.

4.3 Identified Issues As discussed in 4.2, there was heavy coal contamination throughout the System. This has the potential for future issues in the track system. Further issues were identified at Hail Creek including hoses running unprotected over ballast to the control box, shown in Figure 4, and the deterioration and damage of the outer protective sheaths shown in Figure 5 and Figure 6.

July 2013 Page ix Commercial in Confidence

Figure 4: Unprotected hoses running over ballast to control box

Figure 5: Deterioration of outer protective sheath

Figure 6: Outer protective sheath

July 2013 Page x Commercial in Confidence

Issues identified at the Coppabella microwave site include poor housing, which was noted through the number of spider webs and spiders inside of the equipment room. The maintenance desk was also in an unkempt state.

Further indications include poor service records, notably with the 12 month and three (3) month services overdue. It was also noted that there was no indication that there was anything recorded in the preventative maintenance system for the required scheduled services. Also, due to the batteries being installed in 2000, they are at the end of their lifecycle and therefore require replacement. This was due to the battery bank sitting in the Asset register but the nominal ten (10) year capital replacement does not come through the system as a maintenance task. This had not occurred.

Further issues were identified with the age of the fibre optic transmission system. An example of the equipment is shown in Figure 7.

Figure 7: Typical older telecommunication equipment

The Tait radio system was also identified on the Goonyella System as still being in use, an example of which is shown in Figure 8. This system is approaching obsoleteness.

July 2013 Page xi Commercial in Confidence

Figure 8: Tait Radio Equipment

Further issues were identified at the Peak Downs system, an old installation which causes issues with end of life faults. The installation included old style point machines, shown in Figure 9, old masts that have been retrofitted with some LED upgrades, shown in Figure 10, and a lack of protection and cable deterioration of track leads, shown in Figure 11.

Figure 9: Older mk1 points machine

July 2013 Page xii Commercial in Confidence

Figure 10: Old mast retrofitted with LED upgrade. Other signals still utilised incandescent lights

Figure 11: Cable deterioration

Also noted was missing labels of point clip boxes and the poor state of the SER. This was exemplified by the bracing that has been retrofitted to support the external brickwork and the roof structure. This has been shown in Figure 12, and is not supported by Evans & Peck over the long term.

July 2013 Page xiii Commercial in Confidence

Figure 12: Internal bracing of the SER indicating the building is in need of replacement

Other issues at Peak Downs included the observation of the old Tait radio equipment in use, and the room still contained decommissioned equipment.

July 2013 Page xiv Commercial in Confidence

5 Goonyella (Vermont) 5.1 Introduction The Goonyella System includes a balloon loop which connects exclusively to the Lake Vermont mine-site. This section has been assessed on an individual basis as a result of the tariff premium that is included on top of the access tariffs normally paid by the Access Holders. This 16.4 km section allows an axle loading of 26.5 tal and caters for trains running at a maximum of 60km/h.

5.2 Overview of Asset Conditions No inspection of the Lake Vermont spur of the Goonyella System was undertaken. Due to the recent construction of the spur, with works being completed in late 2008, it is anticipated that the asset conditions are to be in excellent condition. Confirmation of asset conditions were discussed with other discipline sections to whom inspected the site. The result of these discussions confirmed the initial opinion of the asset condition, that being of a well maintained asset.

5.3 Identified Issues Not applicable.

July 2013 Page xv Commercial in Confidence

6 Blackwater (Excluding Rolleston and Minerva) 6.1 Introduction Operating westwards of Rockhampton in the southern Bowen Basin, The 994 km Blackwater System carries coal product to the R.G. Tanna and Barney Point Coal Terminals in Gladstone. The System connects to the Goonyella System at Gregory, and the Moura System at Callemondah yard. The Blackwater System is bi-directional track with crossovers between Callemondah and Rocklands, between Stanwell and Dingo and between Bluff and Rangal, with the remainder being single line.

The Blackwater System has both diesel and electric traffic.

The Blackwater System was constructed in the mid 1980’s; however some sections of track are recently completed through an incremental duplication program.

6.2 Overview of Asset Conditions The Blackwater signalling system is generally in good condition and performs in an acceptable manner and will continue to do so if continual maintenance is undertaken and sufficient spares are available. Some minor issues were noted through the site investigation by Evans & Peck, notably around the age of the existing assets. It should be noted, however, that the assets are not showing the signs of age related fatigue as those inspected on the Goonyella system. This was not unexpected through previous visits to the system by Evans & Peck. There have been some signs of asset deterioration around bonding cable insulation. This has been discussed in 0. Figure 13 shows a typical level crossing on the Blackwater System, where it was found that the condition of the signalling infrastructure was good.

Figure 13: Level Crossing on the Blackwater System. Generally in good condition

As noted on the other systems, heavy coal contamination of ballast material is present throughout the system, causing potential issues with track circuits. There is the potential that this will reduce the serviceable life of the signal & train control assets.

July 2013 Page xvi Commercial in Confidence

6.3 Identified Issues A broken bond was discovered at CH144.527 on the system, and will require rectification. This is shown in Figure 14.

Figure 14: Broken bond - CH144.527

Through the Blackwater System it was identified that there was still the usage of older style points machines. An example of this is shown in Figure 15. This may require replacement in the near future.

Figure 15: Older point machine currently in use on the Blackwater System at Yamala - CH242.540

Issues were also noted on hoses and cables, including damage on the protective hose at Yamala which was pulled back from the termination point of cable. This is shown in Figure 16.

July 2013 Page xvii Commercial in Confidence

Figure 16: Protective hose pulled back from termination point of cable - Yamala - CH242.520

Further issues were uncovered where there is the possible need for lubrication on the slide plates. This is shown in Figure 17.It is unsure whether this is a common requirement through the system.

Figure 17: Possible lubrication required on slide plates – Yamala - CH242.520

July 2013 Page xviii Commercial in Confidence

7 Blackwater (Rolleston) 7.1 Introduction The Blackwater System includes a section of track between Kinrola Junction and Rolleston, and consists of single track with passing loop at Memooloo and a balloon loop at Rolleston. This section has been assessed on an individual basis as a result of the tariff premium for this track section that is included on top of the access tariffs normally paid by Access Holders. The maximum loading is 26.5 tal at 80 km/h.

7.2 Overview of Asset Conditions No inspection of the Rolleston section of the Blackwater System was undertaken due to access and time constraints during the inspection period. It is anticipated that this spur would be in good condition, as this section of track was completed in late 2005.

7.3 Identified Issues Not applicable.

July 2013 Page xix Commercial in Confidence

8 Blackwater (Minerva) 8.1 Introduction The Blackwater System includes a balloon loop which connects to the Minerva mine-site, operated by Sojitz Coal Mining. This section has been assessed on an individual basis as a result of the tariff premium for this track section that is included on top of the access tariffs normally paid by Access Holders. This section used to be part of the Central West System, however, because of changed traffic tasks; the system is now incorporated as part of the Blackwater System.

8.2 Overview of Asset Conditions The signals and telecommunications for the Blackwater (Minerva) System were generally in good condition with consideration for asset age and utilisation.

8.3 Identified Issues Not applicable.

July 2013 Page xx Commercial in Confidence

9 Moura 9.1 Introduction The Moura System connects with the Blackwater System at Callemondah and is serviced by diesel locomotives over approximately 301 km of track. The Moura System operates westwards of Gladstone, connecting five mine sites with the RG Tanna Coal Terminal, Auckland Point and Barney Point Coal Terminal. The System is a single line system, with passing loops. The System has a reference train that includes an axle loading of 26.5 tal.

The Moura System was originally constructed in the 1960’s with completion in 1968. The age and original engineering of this system influences current maintenance requirements.

9.2 Overview of Asset Conditions The Moura signalling system is generally in good condition and performs in an acceptable manner and will continue to do so if continual maintenance is undertaken and sufficient spare are available. While some of the equipment appeared to be in need of renewal, it is anticipated that these would be replaced in the near future. It should be noted that the assets were in a good condition, indicating that the serviceable life is higher than the booklife.

While minor issues were noted through the site inspections, these were not considered major enough to warrant further discussion. Some of the equipment has been recently replaced, as exemplified in Figure 18.

Figure 18: Axle counter on the Moura System

Issues relating to coal contamination of track ballast were present through the System, as was the case throughout the system, and may cause issues with track circuits if not maintained properly. It should be noted, however, that the system carries low tonnages and any issues are not likely to severely impact the supply chain. As previously mentioned, Aurizon Network need to explore options to reduce the impact that this will cause, especially with forecast tonnages to increase in future years.

9.3 Identified Issues Not applicable.

July 2013 Page xxi Commercial in Confidence

Australia Asia Europe

Fax +617 3377 7070 Level 32, 248 Queen’s Road East Wanchai, Hong Kong Melbourne Telephone: +852 2722 0986 Level 15, 607 Bourke Street Fax: +852 2492 2127 Melbourne VIC 3000 Telephone: +613 9810 5700 Kunming Fax: +613 9614 1318 Room B2901, Yinhai SOHO

612 Beijing Road

Level 6, Tower 2 Huangpu District Shanghai 200001

475 Victoria Avenue People’s Republic of China Chatswood NSW 2067 Telephone +86 21 6133 6892 Telephone: +612 9495 0500 Fax +86 21 6133 6777 Fax: +612 9495 0520

Evans & Peck Group Pty Ltd ABN50 098 008 818 E: [email protected] W: www.evanspeck.com

July 2013 Page xxii Commercial in Confidence

Aurizon Network Pty Ltd Condition Based Assessment of Rail Infrastructure in the Central Queensland Coal Region Preliminary Site Inspection Notes Structures

July 2013

Condition Based Assessment of Rail Infrastructure in the Central Queensland Coal Region Commercial in Confidence I Page 1 of 19 July 2013

Table of Contents

Table of Contents ...... 2

List of Figures ...... 3

1 Introduction ...... 4 1.1 Objective ...... 4 1.2 Context ...... 4

2 Newlands ...... 5 2.1 Introduction ...... 5 2.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 5 2.3 Identified Issues ...... 7

3 Goonyella to Abbot Point Expansion (GAPE) ...... 9 3.1 Introduction ...... 9 3.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 9 3.3 Identified Issues ...... 9

4 Goonyella (including Hail Creek and excluding Vermont) ..... 10 4.1 Introduction ...... 10 4.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 10 4.3 Identified Issues ...... 11

5 Goonyella (Vermont) ...... 12 5.1 Introduction ...... 12 5.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 12 5.3 Identified Issues ...... 12

6 Blackwater (Excluding Rolleston and Minerva) ...... 13 6.1 Introduction ...... 13 6.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 13 6.3 Identified Issues ...... 14

7 Blackwater (Rolleston) ...... 15 7.1 Introduction ...... 15 7.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 15 7.3 Identified Issues ...... 15 Commercial in Confidence I Page 2 of 19 July 2013

8 Blackwater (Minerva) ...... 16 8.1 Introduction ...... 16 8.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 16 8.3 Identified Issues ...... 16

9 Moura ...... 17 9.1 Introduction ...... 17 9.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 17 9.3 Identified Issues ...... 18

List of Figures

Figure 1: Newlands Bridge 1 Figure 2: Newlands Culvert 1 Figure 3: Newlands Culvert 2 Figure 4: Newlands Culvert 3 Figure 5: Newlands Culvert 4 Figure 6: Newlands Culvert 5 Figure 7: Newlands Culvert 6 Figure 8; Goonyella (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) Bridge 1 Figure 9: Goonyella (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) Culvert 1 Figure 10: Vermont Bridge 1 Figure 11: Blackwater (Excluding Rolleston and Minerva) Bridge 1 Figure 12: Blackwater (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) culvert/cattle underpass 1 Figure 13: Blackwater (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) Bridge 2 Figure 14: Blackwater (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) Culvert 2 Figure 15: Blackwater (Minerva) Bridge 1 Figure 16: Moura Culvert 1 Figure 17: Moura Culvert 2

Commercial in Confidence I Page 3 of 19 July 2013

1 Introduction 1.1 Objective This report describes preliminary results from the site inspections for the structures discipline. The document raises comments and defects as registered during the site visit carried out by the assessment team during the week ending 15 February 2013, and invites for Aurizon’s subject matter expert to provide comment. It should, under no circumstances, be viewed as Evans & Peck’s final assessment of the asset and is non-comprehensive, preliminary notes.

Commercial in Confidence I Page 4 of 19 July 2013

2 Newlands 2.1 Introduction The Newlands System is the northernmost of the four main systems, connecting Newlands with Abbot Point Coal Terminal. The system contains approximately 203 km of single, non-electrified track with passing loops. The system has recently been expanded as part of the Goonyella to Abbot Point Expansion (GAPE) project. The system operates with a reference train that has an axle loading of 26.5 tonnes axle load (tal) and 106 tonne wagons. This reference train is a recent outcome of the negotiations relating to the GAPE project, where the reference train increased from the previous 20 tonne axle loading. This development was a joint realisation between the Access Holders/Rail Operators and Aurizon Network at a reduced Total Cost of Ownership through the lifecycle of the system. The recent upgrade of the system (from 25 mtpa to 50 mtpa and 20 tal to 26.5 tal) and likely future upgrade (potentially to 75 mtpa) led to a number of value management/value engineering decisions. The specific relevant decisions are that: • some sections of original track (specifically Euri Creek and Briaba) were left at 20 tal while the new track was constructed to 26.5 tal, with operations ensuring that only unloaded traffic used the 20 tal section; and • the replacement of some culverts that would normally have been replaced has been deferred to be included in the future upgrade.

2.2 Overview of Asset Conditions The structures for the Newlands system were generally in good condition. (Figure 1: Figure 2)

Figure 1: Newlands Bridge 1

Commercial in Confidence I Page 5 of 19 July 2013

Figure 2: Newlands Culvert 1 Concrete lined CMPs which have corroded and had a concrete liner poured on the bottom half. The photo below taken from CH 84.87 on the Newlands system is a typical example of this type of treatment. The concrete liner provides resistance to abrasion whilst elongating the life of the culvert and is supported by Evans & Peck as a defect close out action.

Figure 3: Newlands Culvert 2 Further culvert works were identified on the Havilah loop at CH 128.57 where existing culverts have had a smaller diameter plastic pipe inserted into the box culvert and grouted into position. Figure 4: below show the works. It is assumed that hydraulic modelling for capacity was performed prior to these works as the pipes have a smaller cross section compared to the original box culvert cross section. From the site inspection it was evident that several culverts in the area were being treated in the same manner.

Commercial in Confidence I Page 6 of 19 July 2013

Figure 4: Newlands Culvert 3

2.3 Identified Issues Many culverts are in average condition, with culverts identified which are blocked from silt, debris and branches. The random inspection of parts of the Newlands System identified the following specific issues at these locations: • A culvert at CH 94.9 • A culvert at CH 100.39 • A culvert at CH 125.94. Figure 5: is the culvert outlet at CH 94.9 which is partially blocked from a large silt bank. This bank has been established for a lengthy period of time to allow it to now be fully grassed.

Figure 5: Newlands Culvert 4 Figure 6: shows the culvert at CH 100.390 on the Newlands system, where the culvert is now under capacity due to the increase in axle loads from 20tal to 26.5tal in 2011 when the GAPE system opened.

Commercial in Confidence I Page 7 of 19 July 2013

This solution has now created a trap for debris as shown below and will contribute to increasing maintenance costs into the future as maintenance staff now have a confined space with restricted access to maintain.

Figure 6: Newlands Culvert 5

Figure 7: below shows significant blocking of a culvert a CH 125.94 on the Newlands System which requires unblocking and the inlet regraded to the culvert invert.

Figure 7: Newlands Culvert 6

Commercial in Confidence I Page 8 of 19 July 2013

3 Goonyella to Abbot Point Expansion (GAPE) 3.1 Introduction The GAPE system, also known as the Northern Missing Link, connects the Goonyella system at North Goonyella to the Newlands system at Newlands. The connection is approximately 70 km long. Completed in December 2011, the expansion has been designed to increase capacity to Bowen Basin miners via the Abbot Point Coal Terminal. The system permits an axle loading of 26.5 tal. The GAPE system was completed when the first train ran in December 2011 and is new infrastructure.

3.2 Overview of Asset Conditions No inspection of the asset was required due to the age and recent construction and inspections of the asset. Prior site visits were performed by Evans & Peck in mid-2012 on the recently completed asset.

3.3 Identified Issues Not applicable.

Commercial in Confidence I Page 9 of 19 July 2013

4 Goonyella (including Hail Creek and excluding Vermont) 4.1 Introduction The Goonyella (including Hail Creek and excluding Vermont) system is the largest coal export rail network in Australia, comprises approximately 924 km of track to transport coal to Hay Point Coal Terminal and Dalrymple Bay Coal Terminal. The Goonyella system operates west of Mackay in Central Queensland and connects to the Newlands system at the North Goonyella Junction and to the Blackwater System via Gregory and the Oakey Creek branch. The asset system is electrified; however the traction distribution and power systems are handled as a separate asset system. The Goonyella system was constructed in the mid 1980’s.

4.2 Overview of Asset Conditions The structures for the Newlands system were generally in good condition as seen at CH 63.34 Figure 8. Localised damage due to recent weather events was apparent.

Figure 8; Goonyella (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) Bridge 1

Commercial in Confidence I Page 10 of 19 July 2013

4.3 Identified Issues The random inspection of parts of the Goonyella System identified a specific issue at a culvert at CH 94.9

Figure 9: (CH 43.60) shows vegetation up to 1.0m tall growing on a heavily silted culvert. This defect was first entered into RIMS on 11 October 2007 as job number 944303 by Steve Craig. Its current programmed date is 3 October 2013 and has a Y2 priority. Such a large volume of silt in a major culvert does not allow visual assessment of the culvert and hence any deterioration to the concrete cannot be identified.

Figure 9: Goonyella (including Hail Creek, excluding Vermont) Culvert 1

Commercial in Confidence I Page 11 of 19 July 2013

5 Goonyella (Vermont) 5.1 Introduction The Goonyella system includes a balloon loop which connects exclusively to the Lake Vermont mine-site. This section has been assessed on an individual basis as a result of the tariff premium that is included on top of the access tariffs normally paid by the Access Holders. This 16.4 km section allows an axle loading of 26.5 tal and caters for trains running at a maximum of 60km/h.

5.2 Overview of Asset Conditions The structures for the Goonyella (Vermont) system were all in good/excellent condition. The only bridge on the system is shown in Figure 10 however, is not a network structure (haul road owned by the miner)..

Figure 10: Vermont Bridge 1

5.3 Identified Issues No issues were identified.

Commercial in Confidence I Page 12 of 19 July 2013

6 Blackwater (Excluding Rolleston and Minerva) 6.1 Introduction Operating westwards of Rockhampton in the southern Bowen Basin, The 994 km Blackwater system carries coal product to the R.G. Tanna and Barney Point Coal Terminals in Gladstone. The system connects to the Goonyella system at Gregory, and the Moura system at Callemondah yard. The Blackwater System is bi-directional track with crossovers between Callemondah and Rocklands, between Stanwell and Dingo and between Bluff and Rangal, with the remainder being single line. The Blackwater System has both diesel and electric traffic. The Blackwater System was constructed in the mid 1980’s; however some sections of track are recently completed through an incremental duplication program.

6.2 Overview of Asset Conditions The structures for the Blackwater (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) system were generally in good condition as seen at CH105.43Figure 11 and 48.91 Figure 12 . Localised damage due to recent weather events was apparent.

Figure 11: Blackwater (Excluding Rolleston and Minerva) Bridge 1

Commercial in Confidence I Page 13 of 19 July 2013

Figure 12: Blackwater (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) culvert/cattle underpass 1

6.3 Identified Issues The random inspection of parts of the Newlands System identified the following specific issues at these locations: • An abutment at CH 105.430 • A Culvert at CH 570.130.

Mining of the abutment was identified at CH105.430 Figure 13

Figure 13: Blackwater (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) Bridge 2

Drainage interference and culvert siltation was identified at CH 570.310 on the North Coast Line. Figure 14

Commercial in Confidence I Page 14 of 19 July 2013

Figure 14: Blackwater (excluding Rolleston and Minerva) Culvert 2

7.2 Overview of Asset Conditions No site inspection of Blackwater (Rolleston) was conducted due to access and time constraints during the inspection period.

7.3 Identified Issues Not applicable.

Commercial in Confidence I Page 15 of 19 July 2013

8.2 Overview of Asset Conditions The structures for the Blackwater (Minerva) system were generally in good condition with consideration for asset age and utilisation.

Figure 15: Blackwater (Minerva) Bridge 1

8.3 Identified Issues No issues were identified.

Commercial in Confidence I Page 16 of 19 July 2013

9 Moura 9.1 Introduction The Moura System connects with the Blackwater system at Callemondah and is serviced by diesel locomotives over the approximate 301 km of track. The Moura system operates westwards of Gladstone, connecting five mine sites with the RG Tanna Coal Terminal, Auckland Point and Barney Point Coal Terminal. The system is a single line system, with passing loops. The system has a reference train that includes an axle loading of 26.5 tal. The Moura System was originally constructed in the 1960’s with completion in 1968. The age and original engineering of this system influences current maintenance requirements.

9.2 Overview of Asset Conditions The structures for the Moura system were generally in good condition. Limited access to the Moura system due to recent flooding restricted the inspection. Figure 16: CH 39.42 contains a culvert which has had the invert concrete lined at some point. This is supported to ensure the culvert meets the design life and from the site inspection the culvert was performing adequately without any obvious defects present.

Figure 16: Moura Culvert 1

Commercial in Confidence I Page 17 of 19 July 2013

9.3 Identified Issues The random inspection of parts of the Newlands System identified a specific issue at a culvert at CH 94.9.

Figure 17: shows CH 39.3 culvert requiring repair. This culvert is not in the RIMS defects register however was reported to the Aurizon faults line during the inspection. There is evidence of recent disturbance to the area with a topsoil stockpile blocking one of the culvert cells.

Figure 17: Moura Culvert 2

Commercial in Confidence I Page 18 of 19 July 2013

Australia Asia Europe

612 Beijing Road

Level 6, Tower 2 Huangpu District Shanghai 200001

475 Victoria Avenue People’s Republic of China Chatswood NSW 2067 Telephone +86 21 6133 6892 Telephone: +612 9495 0500 Fax +86 21 6133 6777 Fax: +612 9495 0520

Evans & Peck Group Pty Ltd ABN50 098 008 818 Commercial in Confidence I Page 19 of 19 E: [email protected] July 2013 W: www.evanspeck.com

Aurizon Network Pty Ltd Condition Based Assessment of Rail Infrastructure in the Central Queensland Coal Region

Preliminary Site Inspection Notes Track Systems

March 13

Table of Contents

1 Introduction ...... 4 1.1 Objective ...... 4 1.2 Context ...... 4

2 Newlands ...... 5 2.1 Introduction ...... 5 2.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 5 2.3 Identified Issues ...... 5

4 Goonyella to Abbot Point Expansion (GAPE) ...... 8 4.1 Introduction ...... 8 4.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 8 4.3 Identified Issues ...... 8

5 Goonyella (including Hail Creek and excluding Vermont) ...... 9 5.1 Introduction ...... 9 5.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 9 5.3 Identified Issues ...... 9

6 Goonyella (Vermont) ...... 12 6.1 Introduction ...... 12 6.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 12 6.3 Identified Issues ...... 12

7 Blackwater (Excluding Rolleston and Minerva) ...... 14 7.1 Introduction ...... 14 7.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 14 7.3 Identified Issues ...... 14

8 Blackwater (Rolleston) ...... 16 8.1 Introduction ...... 16 8.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 16 8.3 Identified Issues ...... 16

9 Blackwater (Minerva) ...... 18 9.1 Introduction ...... 18

Commercial in Confidence Page 2 of 21 July 2013

9.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 18 9.3 Identified Issues ...... 18

10 Moura ...... 19 10.1 Introduction ...... 19 10.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 19 10.3 Identified Issues ...... 19

List of Figures Figure 1 Collinsvale 98.700 Figure 2 Irregularities in top and line at bridge approach, Dysart Figure 3 Despite recent rains, access was generally reasonable and fencing was good Figure 4: Level Crossing, Goonyella (Vermont) Figure 5: Ballast fouling due to access constraint Figure 6: Worn switchblade, Comet Figure 7: Moura Site 30

Commercial in Confidence Page 3 of 21 July 2013

1 Introduction 1.1 Objective This report describes preliminary results from the site inspections for the track systems disciplines. For each system the goal was to assess a minimum of 2-3% of the whole section, for small systems such as Minerva and Vermont this amounted to an assessment of one/two sections of track, randomly selected. As it was not always possible to access the track for measurement purposes, wherever possible visual inspection over lengths of track were taken and comments noted. Notes were also recorded of the condition of the asset travelling to and from along the railway access roads to selected sites. By adopting this method it is considered that an approximate 2% has been observed and general issues noted. Site sheets were developed for the sites where measurements and photographs could be taken, written notes and observations were taken for sites visually assessed only. All sites visited were assessed for smoothness in top and line, with gauge and cant measurements taken over a section wherever possible. Where irregularities were noted follow up checks were made to ensure that defects had been effectively noted and that the appropriate actions were being taken and followed. The summary of the site sheets (Appendix A) and visual observations is given in the following sections.

Commercial in Confidence Page 4 of 21 July 2013

2.2 Overview of Asset Conditions The Newlands system’s track assets are, generally speaking, in reasonable condition and fit for current purpose. All irregularities observed on the system were recorded and found to be within tolerances set for operational requirements.

2.3 Identified Issues As a result of the site-visit undertaken by Evans & Peck, the assessment team surmised the following in relation to the track and civil asset condition1.

Track In general the track top and line (vertical and horizontal alignment) was found to be reasonable for operational purposes and within specified maintenance parameters (CETS & OTCI limits). The surface condition and transverse profile of the rail was visually inspected at several curved and straight track locations. No rail was found close to its wear limits. Grinding stone marks were observed on the rails at most of the sites assessed and in some areas short (less than 10 mm long) rolling contact fatigue cracks were seen on the gauge corner of the rails. In three of the nine sites assessed some irregularities in vertical alignment were recorded. These sections were then checked against desktop data in order to confirm that contamination had been recorded by GPR results, vertical misalignments by the appropriate TRC testing results, and where applicable references made in RIMS for maintenance. Where possible irregularities were checked against OTCI parameters and found to be within tolerances for the operational requirements.

1 Refer Appendix A for site sheets, relevant photographs and details on findings.

Commercial in Confidence Page 5 of 21 July 2013

In view of the level of rainfall/flooding which occurred prior to the site visits and the general soil types and legacy foundation in the system it is assessed that the level of irregularities in top found is considered reasonable. From discussions with QR staff and the desktop follow up the assessor is confident that the appropriate monitoring and testing of these sections is taking place through regular inspections and TRC results, however it is noted that there was a lack of reference to these issues in RIMS. The main issue noted in this particular system was the deterioration in some areas of the rail surface. Although no rail was found close to its rail limits, one instant of potential wheelburn (Site 7 Collinsvale), several instances of grinding stone marks/checking (Site 6,7 & 9) and one instant of possible squats (TBC) (Site 9) were observed and noted. This is consistent with the type of rail used mainly in the section (53Kg/m rail), the operational usage and the current rail grinding program necessary to control rail surface damage and maintain rail profile.

Track Support Systems Sleepers and fasteners were generally in good condition with no issues noted at any of the inspection sites. Ballast profile and condition was found to be reasonable with no issues noted other than at the Collinsvale site (98.700 km). Ballast at this site seemed to be in a relatively deteriorated condition with no future ballast cleaning programmed (Figure 1). However, a check with the recent GPR results over the section indicates that overall the section is currently within tolerances and no immediate action is required.

Figure 1: Collinsvale 98.700

Drainage Despite heavy rainfall prior to the site visits relatively few drainage issues were observed at the sites assessed. Slight pumping was observed at the structure approach at Collinsvale (84.87), however it was not possible to confirm the reasons for this as access was restricted across the structure due operational requirements during the visit.

Fencing Fencing was generally found to be adequate and in reasonable condition, no issues were noted.

Commercial in Confidence Page 6 of 21 July 2013

Signage Signage was generally found to be adequate and in reasonable condition, no issues were noted.

Access Access was generally found to be adequate, however many of the sites were accessible by 4WD only. As there had been heavy rainfall prior to the visits some rutting and water logging was expected. However some 30% of the access roads were heavily overgrown with vegetation and no note appeared on this work in RIMS, it is noted that no roads were found to be completely inaccessible.

Level Crossings Level crossings were generally found to be in reasonable condition, with clear visible signage as required by regulatory standards for the type of crossing and level of service of the road.

Commercial in Confidence Page 7 of 21 July 2013

4 Goonyella to Abbot Point Expansion (GAPE) 4.1 Introduction The GAPE system, also known as the Northern Missing Link, connects the Goonyella system at North Goonyella to the Newlands system at Newlands. The connection is approximately 70 km long. Completed in December 2011, the expansion has been designed to increase capacity to Bowen Basin miners via the Abbot Point Coal Terminal. The system permits an axle loading of 26.5 tal. The GAPE system was completed when the first train ran in December 2011 and is new infrastructure.

4.2 Overview of Asset Conditions As this is a relatively new section of track and has recently been inspected by the Evans & Peck team in late 2012, at this point in time a visual assessment only was made over this section. In conclusion the Goonyella to Abbot Point Expansion (GAPE) assets are, generally speaking, in reasonable condition and fit for current purpose.

4.3 Identified Issues

Track In general the track top and line (vertical and horizontal alignment) was found to be reasonable for operational purposes and within specified maintenance parameters (CETS & OTCI limits).

Track Support Systems Sleepers and fasteners were generally in good condition with no issues noted at any of the inspection sites.

Drainage Drainage was assessed as being reasonable with no obvious signs of sub-optimal drainage observed.

Fencing No issues were noted with fencing.

Signage Where relevant signage was generally found to be adequate and in reasonable condition, no issues were noted.

Access Access was generally found to be adequate and in reasonable condition, no issues were noted.

Commercial in Confidence Page 8 of 21 July 2013

5 Goonyella (including Hail Creek and excluding Vermont) 5.1 Introduction The Goonyella (including Hail Creek and excluding Vermont) system is the largest coal export rail network in Australia, comprises approximately 924 km of track to transport coal to Hay Point Coal Terminal and Dalrymple Bay Coal Terminal. The Goonyella system operates west of Mackay in Central Queensland and connects to the Newlands system at the North Goonyella Junction and to the Blackwater System via Gregory and the Oakey Creek branch. The asset system is electrified; however the traction distribution and power systems are handled as a separate asset system. The Goonyella system was constructed in the mid 1980’s.

5.2 Overview of Asset Conditions The Goonyella system’s track assets are, generally speaking, in reasonable condition and fit for current purpose. With the exception of the turnout inspected at Winchester (Site 10) all irregularities observed on the system were recorded and found to be within tolerances set for operational requirements.

5.3 Identified Issues As a result of the site-visit undertaken by Evans & Peck, the assessment team surmised the following in relation to the track and civil asset condition2.

Track In general the track top and line (vertical and horizontal alignment) was found to be reasonable for operational purposes and within specified maintenance parameters (CETS & OTCI limits). Issues with vertical alignment were found in three of the sites that were inspected, all three sites were located along the Coppabella to Dysart section. The most severe faults to be recorded were at the “Dysart” loop turnout and at the approach to the bridge at Dysart. Faults recorded at the turnout included a worn V and some small gauge corner cracking (less than 10mm) of the diversion line. All other componentry was in reasonable condition and all turnout fastenings appeared tight. Noticeable “kinks” (Figure 2) were observed on the approach to the Dysart bridge, however a review of the previous TRC recording for this section revealed that the alignment to the approach of this bridge has previously shown irregularities in top and line but remains within the parameters specified for the track category and system operational requirements. Unfortunately the assessment team could not access the section due to limited access over the bridge and inability to gain a track block over the section at that time. It is recommended therefore that due to the recent heavy rainfall and issues noted with the bridge under this section that further inspection is carried out on this section within the next 3 months.

2 Refer Appendix A for site sheets, relevant photographs and details on findings.

Commercial in Confidence Page 9 of 21 July 2013

Figure 2: Irregularities in top and line at bridge approach, Dysart

The process of undertaking inspections, TRC inspections, and taking regular rail profile and other measurements was discussed with QR depot maintenance staff. Despite findings that the maintenance issues did not appear to be always specified in RIMS the assessor was satisfied with the knowledge and experience of the QR staff and their understanding of the need for multiple and frequent measurements, monitoring and maintenance requirements. With the exception of the turnout on the Dysart loop the Evans & Peck assessment team considered that generally the condition of the turnouts on the Goonyella system main line were reasonable. Of those checked all components were in place and the fastenings appeared to be tight.

Track Support Systems Sleepers and fasteners were generally in good condition with no issues noted at any of the inspection sites. Only one section at Middlemount was recorded as having moderate to severe contamination, and it was noted that this had been already identified in the GPR testing undertaken. Through this GPR assessment this area has been provisioned for upcoming ballast cleaning maintenance in late 2013.

Drainage Drainage was generally found to be adequate and no cess pooling or other signs of sub-optimal drainage were observed.

Fencing Fencing was generally found to be adequate and in reasonable condition, no issues were noted.

Commercial in Confidence Page 10 of 21 July 2013

Signage Where relevant signage was generally found to be adequate and in reasonable condition, no issues were noted.

Access Access was generally found to be adequate, however many of the sites were accessible by 4WD only. As there had been heavy rainfall prior to the visits some rutting and water logging was expected. However some 20% of the access roads were heavily overgrown with vegetation and no note appeared on this work in RIMS, it is noted that no roads were found to be completely inaccessible.

Figure 3 Despite recent rains, access was generally reasonable and fencing was good

Commercial in Confidence Page 11 of 21 July 2013

6 Goonyella (Vermont) 6.1 Introduction The Goonyella system includes a spur and balloon loop which connects exclusively to the Lake Vermont mine-site. This section has been assessed on an individual basis as a result of the tariff premium that is included on top of the access tariffs normally paid by the Access Holders. This 16.4 km section allows an axle loading of 26.5 tal and caters for trains running at a maximum of 60km/h.

6.2 Overview of Asset Conditions The Goonyella (Vermont) system’s track assets are, generally speaking, in good condition and fit for current purpose.

6.3 Identified Issues

Track In general the track top and line (vertical and horizontal alignment) was found to be reasonable for operational purposes and within specified maintenance parameters (CETS & OTCI limits).

Track Support Systems Sleepers and fasteners were generally in good condition with no issues noted at any of the inspection sites.

Drainage Drainage was assessed as being reasonable with no obvious signs of sub-optimal drainage observed.

Fencing Fencing was found to be reasonable new over the section and in good condition. .

Signage Where relevant signage was generally found to be adequate and in reasonable condition, no issues were noted.

Level Crossings Level crossings were generally found to be in good condition, with clear visible signage as required by regulatory standards for the type of crossing and level of service of the road.

Commercial in Confidence Page 12 of 21 July 2013

Figure 4: Level Crossing, Goonyella (Vermont)

Commercial in Confidence Page 13 of 21 July 2013

7 Blackwater (Excluding Rolleston and Minerva) 7.1 Introduction Operating westwards of Rockhampton in the southern Bowen Basin, The 994 km Blackwater system carries coal product to the R.G. Tanna and Barney Point Coal Terminals in Gladstone. The system connects to the Goonyella system at Gregory, and the Moura system at Callemondah yard. The Blackwater System is bi-directional track with crossovers between Callemondah and Rocklands, between Stanwell and Dingo and between Bluff and Rangal, with the remainder being single line. The Blackwater System has both diesel and electric traffic. The Blackwater System was constructed in the mid 1980’s; however some sections of track are recently completed through an incremental duplication program.

7.2 Overview of Asset Conditions The Blackwater system’s track assets are, generally speaking, in reasonable condition and fit for current purpose. With the exception of the turnout inspected at Comet (Site 20) all irregularities observed on the system were recorded and found to be within tolerances set for operational requirements.

7.3 Identified Issues 8.3.1 Track (including turnouts and special track work) In general the track top and line (vertical and horizontal alignment) was found to be reasonable for operational purposes and within specified maintenance parameters (CETS & OTCI limits). The most severe and only issue recorded in this section was the turnout at Comet at the Koorilgah balloon diversion. Both the V and the switch blade at this turnout were found to be severely worn, with evidence of a previous recent derailment indicated by significant wheel burns on the check rails. This fact was confirmed through latter discussions with the track inspector. It is noted that this turnout was not listed in RIMS as defective but had been previously inspected and its condition noted by the inspector. With the exception of the above turnout the Evans & Peck assessment team considered that generally the condition of the turnouts on the Blackwater system main line was reasonable. Of those checked all components were in place and the fastenings appeared to be tight. Additionally, although it was noted that in several locations there was moderate coal contamination in the ballast, the points, nose and operating rods of individual turnouts were always found to be clear of coal. The overall condition of the rail surface and vertical and horizontal alignment on the sections assessed was generally found to be reasonable. 8.3.2 Track Support Systems With the exception of the ballast supporting the turnout identified above and a small section of track in Westwood which was not able to be ballast cleaned due to the proximity of adjacent traction infrastructure, sleepers and fasteners were generally in good condition with no issues noted at any of the inspection sites. It is noted that some contamination was apparent at all of the sites inspected, however the level of contamination was generally found to be within acceptable parameters for track operations.

Commercial in Confidence Page 14 of 21 July 2013

Figure 5: Ballast fouling due to access constraint

As can be noted this line has been recently ballast cleaned up to the edge line of the adjacent power centre (note colour change of ballast adjacent to “orange” marker), this small section of line (approximately 70m length) will have to cleaning using an alternative method to the Automatic Ballast Cleaner (ABC)

Drainage Drainage was generally found to be adequate and no cess pooling or other signs of sub-optimal drainage were observed.

Fencing Broken fencing was noted at Site 20 (Comet, turnout to Koorilgah Balloon), other than this fencing was generally found to be adequate and in reasonable condition,.

Signage Where relevant signage was generally found to be adequate and in reasonable condition, no issues were noted.

Access Access was generally found to be adequate, however many of the sites were accessible by 4WD only. No roads were found to be overgrown or inaccessible.

Commercial in Confidence Page 15 of 21 July 2013

Figure 6: Worn switchblade, Comet

8 Blackwater (Rolleston) 8.1 Introduction The Blackwater System includes a section of track between Kinrola Junction and Rolleston, and consists of single track with passing loop at Memooloo and a balloon loop at Rolleston. This section has been assessed on an individual basis as a result of the tariff premium for this track section that is included on top of the access tariffs normally paid by Access Holders. The maximum loading is 26.5 tal at 80 km/h.

8.2 Overview of Asset Conditions The Blackwater (Rolleston) system’s Civil assets are, generally speaking, in reasonable condition and fit for current purpose.

8.3 Identified Issues

Track In general the track top and line (vertical and horizontal alignment) was found to be reasonable for operational purposes and within specified maintenance parameters (CETS & OTCI limits). The condition of the turnouts on the Rolleston system was reasonable. No significant wear was noted on blades of V’s and all the components were in place and the fastenings were tight

Track Support Systems Sleepers and fasteners were generally in good condition with no issues noted at any of the inspection sites.

Commercial in Confidence Page 16 of 21 July 2013

Drainage Drainage was assessed as being reasonable with no obvious signs of sub-optimal drainage observed.

Fencing No issues were noted with fencing.

Signage Where relevant signage was generally found to be adequate and in reasonable condition, no issues were noted.

Commercial in Confidence Page 17 of 21 July 2013

9 Blackwater (Minerva) 9.1 Introduction The Blackwater System includes a balloon loop which connects to the Minerva mine-site, operated by Sojitz Coal Mining. This section has been assessed on an individual basis as a result of the tariff premium for this track section that is included on top of the access tariffs normally paid by Access Holders. This section used to be part of the Central West System, however, because of changed traffic tasks; the system is now incorporated as part of the Blackwater System.

9.2 Overview of Asset Conditions The Blackwater (Minerva) system’s track assets are, generally speaking, in reasonable condition and fit for current purpose.

9.3 Identified Issues

Track In general the track top and line (vertical and horizontal alignment) was found to be reasonable for operational purposes and within specified maintenance parameters (CETS & OTCI limits). The condition of the turnouts on the Blackwater (Minerva) line was reasonable. All the components were in place and the fastenings were tight

Track Support Systems Sleepers and fasteners were generally in good condition with no issues noted at any of the inspection sites.

Drainage Drainage was assessed as being reasonable with no obvious signs of sub-optimal drainage observed.

Fencing No issues were noted with fencing.

Signage Where relevant signage was generally found to be adequate and in reasonable condition, no issues were noted.

Access Access was generally found to be adequate, however many of the sites were accessible by 4WD only. No roads were found to be overgrown or inaccessible during the visit.

Commercial in Confidence Page 18 of 21 July 2013

10 Moura 10.1 Introduction The Moura System connects with the Blackwater system at Callemondah and is serviced by diesel locomotives over the approximate 301 km of track. The Moura system operates westwards of Gladstone, connecting five mine sites with the RG Tanna Coal Terminal, Auckland Point and Barney Point Coal Terminal. The system is a single line system, with passing loops. The system has a reference train that includes an axle loading of 26.5 tal. The Moura System was originally constructed in the 1960’s with completion in 1968. The age and original engineering of this system influences current maintenance requirements.

10.2 Overview of Asset Conditions The Moura system’s track assets are, generally speaking, in reasonable condition and fit for current purpose.

10.3 Identified Issues

Track In general the track top and line (vertical and horizontal alignment) was found to be reasonable for operational purposes and within specified maintenance parameters (CETS & OTCI limits). The condition of the turnouts on the main lines was very good. All the components were in place and the fastenings were tight Track Support Systems Sleepers and fasteners were generally in good condition with no issues noted at any of the inspection sites.

Drainage With the exception of some minor rutting and run off on one of the access roads drainage was assessed as being reasonable with no obvious signs of sub-optimal drainage observed.

Fencing No issues were noted with fencing.

Signage Where relevant signage was generally found to be adequate and in reasonable condition, no issues were noted.

Access Some rutting was experienced along the access road however as clearance was good this did not block access. Access was by 4WD only and no roads were found to be overgrown or inaccessible during the visit.

Commercial in Confidence Page 19 of 21 July 2013

Figure 7: Moura Site 30

Commercial in Confidence Page 20 of 21 July 2013

Australia Asia Europe

612 Beijing Road

Level 6, Tower 2 Huangpu District Shanghai 200001

475 Victoria Avenue People’s Republic of China Chatswood NSW 2067 Telephone +86 21 6133 6892 Telephone: +612 9495 0500 Fax +86 21 6133 6777 Fax: +612 9495 0520

Evans & Peck Group Pty Ltd ABN50 098 008 818 E: [email protected] W: www.evanspeck.com

Commercial in Confidence Page 21 of 21 July 2013

Aurizon Network Pty Ltd Condition Based Assessment of Rail Infrastructure in the Central Queensland Coal Region

Preliminary Site Inspection Notes Traction Distribution and Power Systems

July 2013

Commercial in Confidence Page 1 of 16 July 2013

Table of Contents

1 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Objective ...... 1 1.2 Context ...... 1

2 Goonyella Electric ...... 3 2.1 Introduction ...... 3 2.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 3 2.3 Identified Issues ...... 4

3 Goonyella Vermont Electric ...... 7 3.1 Introduction ...... 7 3.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 7 3.3 Identified Issues ...... 7

4 Blackwater (Electric)...... 9 4.1 Introduction ...... 9 4.2 Overview of Asset Conditions ...... 9 4.3 Identified Issues ...... 10

5 Concluding Remarks ...... 12

List of Figures Figure 1: Wotonga - 2 types of neutral section in good condition Figure 2: Norwich Park FS Electrical damage at AT connection box Figure 3: Peak Downs overhauled feeder Tx Figure 4: Wotonga TSC Vegetation control poor and earth bond not connected to Isol Figure 5: Typical section of Lake Vermont Overhead. Note: OPGW connection box in foreground Figure 6: Lake Vermont TCU - Some vegetation evident Figure 7: Minor AT oil leaks. Drain valve in front and butterfly valve in rear Figure 8: Traction Tx Rangal oil leak and silica gel in need of attention Figure 9: Erosion at Yarwun AT site Figure 10: Surface corrosion of cantilever arms - Callemondah Neutral Section

Commercial in Confidence July 2013

1 Introduction 1.1 Objective This report describes preliminary results from the site inspections for the traction discipline. The document raises comments and defects as registered during the site visit carried out by the assessment team during the week ending 15 February 2013 for Aurizon’s traction expert to provide comment upon. It should, under no circumstances, be viewed as Evans & Peck’s final assessment of the asset.

1.2 Context Aurizon Network manages the below rail in the Central Queensland Coal Region. These below rail assets are not subject to competition and are consequently regulated by the Queensland Competition Authority (QCA). The QCA has divided the CQCR into 11 different asset systems; reflecting 11 different tariff regimes applicable to specific individuals or groups of Access Holders. These asset systems are: • Newlands • Goonyella to Abbot Point Expansion (GAPE) • Goonyella • Goonyella Electrification • Blackwater • Blackwater Electrification • Vermont • Vermont Electrification • Rolleston/Bauhinia • Minerva • Moura. This report investigates the Goonyella Electrification, Blackwater Electrification and Vermont Electrification asset systems which are the Aurizon systems that include the Traction Power and Overhead Electrical Wiring assets. The Traction Power (TP) and Overhead Electrical Wiring (OHW) site visit itinerary was very ambitious in that it proposed to visit all Feeder Stations (FS), Track Sectioning Cabins (TSC), Track Connection Units (TCU), Auto Transformer sites and Overhead Electrical Sections. This level of inspection to approximately 170 sites required good weather and good site access. Rain in the preceding weeks made some of the along track roads impassable and some modification to the itinerary was inevitable. • The only Feeder Station not visited was Bolingbroke. This a new feeder station and has been visited by E&P within the last 2 years and is thought to be in good condition. It will not impact the assessment. • To save time as the road along the rail line was cut between Burngrove and Red Rock which meant driving around via Emerald and coming back onto the track at Gregory to retrace the track back to Red Rock TSC the new TSCs at Westwood, Edungalba and Wallaroo were not visited as a representative sample of the new TSCs had been achieved. In addition time did

Commercial in Confidence Page 1 of 16 July 2013

not permit Red Mountain TSC to be viewed in the Goonyella system as the road along the track was wet. • 85% of the 62 AT sites were visited the exceptions being: Aroona, Omolon, Burngrove(TCU) due to access problems, Crew and Mackenzie due to the road along the track to Gregory being cut, Winchester, Ingsdon, Blackridge, and North Goonyella due to difficult access and time constraints. • A sample of all electrical sections was viewed. The TP & OHW assessment was not compromised by the modification to the site visit schedule as the vast majority of sites were visited. Of the sites not visited many were new.

Commercial in Confidence Page 2 of 16 July 2013

2 Goonyella Electric 2.1 Introduction The Goonyella (including Hail Creek and excluding Vermont) system is the largest coal export rail network in Australia, comprises approximately 924 km of track to transport coal to Hay Point Coal Terminal and Dalrymple Bay Coal Terminal. The Goonyella system operates west of Mackay in Central Queensland and connects to the Newlands system at the North Goonyella Junction and to the Blackwater System via Gregory and the Oakey Creek branch. The Goonyella system was constructed in the mid 1980’s. The Goonyella System is electrified by an auto transfer system with the overhead line equipment operating at 25 000 vollts, 50 Hertz, alternating supply (25kV 50 HZ, ac). Distribution is via a contact wire suspended from a catenary wire and these two wires are held in place by supporting structures to maintain ideal pantograph/contact wire interaction. Typically, in the Goonyella System, the traction system uses both rails for return current.

2.2 Overview of Asset Conditions Generally speaking, the Goonyella Electrical system was in average condition. While there is some renewal of systems currently being undertaken, issues still remain. Goonyella has two relatively new feeder stations at Mindi and Bolingbroke, evidence of infrastructure expenditure in the system. An issue was identified at Mindi and has been discussed in more detail in 2.3. New harmonic filter protection equipment has been installed at Moranbah South FS. It is comprised of elements used for filter protection and monitoring at other newer feeder stations and is contained within an air conditioned annex to the main building. The protection appears to be working well releasing some of the older components for spares. Issues were identified at Norwich Park FS, Wotonga FS and Dalrymple Bay FS, all of which have been discussed in 2.3. Further issues were noted at Wandoo-Waitara AT site and the Peak Downs-Saraji AT site, in addition to minor issues relating to oil levels and sensor indicators. These issues have been discussed in 2.3. Vegetation control in and around electrical compounds is generally very poor across the whole of the Goonyella system, and has been discussed in further detail in 2.3. Hail Creek capacitor bank was inspected and found to be in good condition, however, it must be noted that this capacitor bank is working in automatic mode and is hardly used. E&P observed a loaded train accelerating hard from the Hail Creek provisioning area with no effect on the OHL Voltage. The ECO confirmed that he could only remember a few cases when the Capacitor Bank had operated, confirming the condition of the asset.

Commercial in Confidence Page 3 of 16 July 2013

Figure 1: Wotonga - 2 types of neutral section in good condition

The overhead wiring is in good condition with both gaps & all neutral sections, as shown in Figure 1, were working very well, trains were viewed travelling at full track speed through the Macarthur Mine Gap. Although reducing in number bird nests are still evident throughout the network.

2.3 Identified Issues One traction transformer was cut out at Mindi due to a voltage transformer failure. One spare VT was awaiting installation at Mindi but it is believed that both VTs in the circuit were electrically stressed and a second VT is required. One AT at Norwich Park FS has been awaiting electrical repairs for some time due to a CT being left open circuited. This has been shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Norwich Park FS Electrical damage at AT connection box

At Wotonga FS an earth bond was found left off an isolator mast, the only earth to the mast was through the hold down bolts and concrete. This bond had not been connected from installation works and could have had potentially lethal consequences. Aurizon’s representative on the site visit organised repairs immediately.

Commercial in Confidence Page 4 of 16 July 2013

Dalrymple Bay FS was not feeding the network with Oonooie feeding through Grasstree TSC to the Dalrymple Bay bus. A surge arrestor failed on 23/12/2012 and had not been repaired. Upon investigation only two circuit breakers were closed to the network from Dalrymple Bay bus with most switching being performed at track isolators. Comment made about DB indicated this FS has not fed the network for a very long time since commissioning. Overhauled traction transformers have been arriving in the Goonyella system at a rate of approximately one per month with units installed at: 2 x Oonooie, 3 x Coppabella, 1 x Moranbah South, 2 x Peak Downs, and 1 x Norwich Par, as shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3: Peak Downs overhauled feeder Tx

The overhaul increases the rating of these transformers from 30MVA to 36MVA by adding two heat exchangers and two cooling fans. At the Wandoo-Waitara AT site (94.96km) AT2 (252147) is defective out of service and earthed. The Peak Downs-Saraji AT site (53.04km) is not secure or safe as the fence wire at the back of the AT site is not attached to the posts or rails and offers little resistance to entry. Again battery backup and battery charger replacement is an issue, with many AT sites having the Ni-Cad batteries disconnected and using the communications lead acid batteries for this task.

Commercial in Confidence Page 5 of 16 July 2013

A significant number of ATs in this system require additional transformer oil as the levels are low; many indicate 0°C to 10°C when the ambient was in the high 30s and the transformer oil temperature in the mid-40s. Minor oil leaks are evident on the ATs throughout the network with the major leak sites being butterfly valves, sight glass seals, bottom valves and breathers for some of the Alstom & Areva units.

Figure 4: Wotonga TSC Vegetation control poor and earth bond not connected to Isol

As shown in Figure 4, the vegetation control the Goonyella system is poor. In particular German Creek TSC is very overgrow with open electrical pits only visible by using a vertical marker and old cable & parts stored in the long grass. The extent of the growth and quantity of organic matter in the surface aggregate will substantially alter the surface resistance within the electrical compounds and therefore impact the step, touch and transfer potentials produced under fault conditions. This is a serious issue and should be addressed quickly.

Commercial in Confidence Page 6 of 16 July 2013

3 Goonyella Vermont Electric 3.1 Introduction The Traction Power and 14km of Overhead wiring to Lake Vermont coal loader is relatively new with completion of construction works on the Lake Vermont spur being completed in 2009. The system is connected to the Oaky Creek line via a section insulator to the North at 85.697km and an overlap to the south at 87.017km, an isolator shorts the overlap to provide 50kV supply to the system. This network is comprised of a very substantial TCU which utilises SF6 switchgear and underground XLPE cables, an Auto-transformer site at 11km which is the terminus for the 50kV supply and approximately 3 km of 25 kV overhead to the loader and balloon loop.

3.2 Overview of Asset Conditions As described in 3.1, the Lake Vermont section of the Goonyella system is relatively new, and therefore is, generally speaking, in excellent condition. For example, the bunding at the AT site is innovative in that the auto transformer sits on a raised concrete plinth and a membrane is installed under the enclosure’s aggregate surface to catch any transformer oil leaks, which is subsequently fed into a tank.[ The exterior concrete under the fence forms the boundary of the bund. Minor issues include concrete cracking in several places around the sides, and an effort should be made to ensure that the integrity of the bunding has not been compromised. A typical section of the Lake Vermont Overhead has been shown in Figure 5. Note that the figure shows the system in good condition.

Figure 5: Typical section of Lake Vermont Overhead. Note: OPGW connection box in foreground

Generally speaking, apart from poor vegetation control at the TCU, the electrical network on the Lake Vermont spur is in excellent condition.

3.3 Identified Issues As raised in 3.2, some minor issues were identified. These relate to the concrete cracking and the possible associated compromised effectiveness of the bunding and some poor vegetation management, also shown in Figure 6.

Commercial in Confidence Page 7 of 16 July 2013

Figure 6: Lake Vermont TCU - Some vegetation evident

Commercial in Confidence Page 8 of 16 July 2013

4 Blackwater (Electric) 4.1 Introduction Operating westwards of Rockhampton in the southern Bowen Basin, The 994 km Blackwater system carries coal product to the R.G. Tanna and Barney Point Coal Terminals in Gladstone. The system connects to the Goonyella system at Gregory, and the Moura system at Callemondah yard. The Blackwater System is bi-directional track with crossovers between Callemondah and Rocklands, between Stanwell and Dingo and between Bluff and Rangal, with the remainder being single line. The Blackwater System was constructed in the mid 1980’s; however some sections of track are recently completed through an incremental duplication program The Blackwater System is electrified by an autotransformer system with the overhead line equipment operating at 25 000 volts, alternating supply (25 kV, 50 Hz, ac). Distribution is via a contact wire suspended from a catenary wire and these two wires are held in place by supporting structures to maintain ideal pantograph/contact wire interaction. Typically in the Blackwater System the traction system uses both rails for return current.

4.2 Overview of Asset Conditions The AT sites although have some issues are in reasonable condition for their age. Some issues include: minor transformer oil leaks (mainly butterfly valve to heat exchanger or bottom valve, Figure 4), faded signage, and minor fence corrosion. Most AT site have had the distance protection upgraded from the TSUDA system to QRFL. The Blackwater System has a substantial amount of new TP infrastructure with four new feeder stations at Raglan, Wycarbah, Duaringa & Bluff and eight new track sectioning cabins at Mt Larcom, Majool, KAbra, Westwood, Edungalba, Wallaroo, Umolo & Blackwater. In nearly all cases this new infrastructure has replaced pre-existing TSCs and AT sites. In the course of this capacity upgrade project a substantial amount of major infrastructure replacement has been carried out. However, an issue was discovered at Wycarbah, and has been discussed in 4.3. Where new infrastructure has not replaced older feeder stations, there have been some minor issues, which are also discussed in 4.3. The surface of most feeder stations is also average to poor. It was also noted that there are some minor oil leaks and the silica gel on some need replacing. There are minor leaks on many ATs. Further discussion of this is discussed in 4.3, It was also noted that the surface at most feeder stations were in average to poor condition. There were some minor issues noted at the Callemondah FS, which has been discussed in 4.3. Only one older TSC remains in this system Red Rock (42.14km) and other than faded signs, a poor surface, poor vegetation control and bird nests in the masts is performing reasonably. Other than the issue identified at Red Rock, vegetation management is generally not an issue in the Blackwater System. There were erosion issues identified at the Yarwun AT site, which has been discussed in further detail in 4.3. The overhead wiring is generally in good condition. Investigation and inspection has indicated that there is substantial life left in the contact wire. The droppers and drapes are in good condition. Appropriate stagger is evident at all locations. Neutral sections do not show burning or insulator degradation and all track magnets are in place. Insulators, section insulators, isolators, mid-point

Commercial in Confidence Page 9 of 16 July 2013

connections and weights appear to be in good condition. However, issues relating to the earth wire were identified and have been discussed in 4.3. The masts in the Blackwater System are in excellent condition, except for some issues along the coastal section, which has been discussed in 4.3.

4.3 Identified Issues Of the new installations the most apparent issue is the failure of a harmonic filter inductor at Wycarbah and the subsequent disconnection of its traction transformer from feeding the network. With a 9 month lead time on this component it highlights the issue of having a unique design for the harmonic filters at each new feeder station and the difficulty in carrying spares. In this case Wycarbah T81 is not heavily loaded and T82 can feed both sections supplied from Wycarbah FS, which illustrates the systems inherent redundancy and robustness. Of the older feeder stations, there have been some minor oil leaks, shown in Figure 7, and the silica gel on some ATs need replacing, as shown in Figure 8. There are minor leaks on many ATs and oil levels need topping up at some locations.

Figure 7: Minor AT oil leaks. Drain valve in front and butterfly valve in rear

Commercial in Confidence Page 10 of 16 July 2013

Figure 8: Traction Tx Rangal oil leak and silica gel in need of attention

The fence at Callemondah FS is in poor condition the fence is in need of replacement, partial work has started at the rear. Pit covers are broken. Gate earth braids are in need of replacement and the signage has faded. Replacement of backup batteries and chargers is a looming issue as is bunding of the transformers. Yarwun AT site (546.187) has suffered erosion, to the trench carrying the cables to the track (new work), from recent rain. This has uncovered the orange conduit and left a 600mm deep drench and is shown in Figure 9.

Figure 9: Erosion at Yarwun AT site

One issue with the overhead wiring is the condition of the earth wire. In some places the earth wire seems over tensioned and repair joins are visible at some masts. It is apparent that earth wire clamps are being replaced with the new design when access to the track is given for maintenance and bird nest modification installation and that many more clamps are to be fitted.

Commercial in Confidence Page 11 of 16 July 2013

Figure 10: Surface corrosion of cantilever arms - Callemondah Neutral Section

The masts in this system are in excellent condition however along the coastal section of the Blackwater system it is evident, from brown surface corrosion seen on most Top arms, Struts and Registration arms that the galvanising is expired on the Cantilever system shown in Figure 2. In addition when the Callemondah to Rocklands sections were viewed at approximately 27°C the along track movement of many cantilevers were at too great an angle to the track.

5 Concluding Remarks

Much of the traction power equipment is approaching the end of its life. However the overhaul of 9 traction power transformers in the Goonyella system, the replacement of ATs on condition or failure across the network and the introduction of some new Harmonic Filter protection is ensuring the system is kept functional.

The older feeder stations and TCUs often have poor surface condition. The bunding is intact for all traction and auto transformers and the switchgear buildings are in reasonable condition. Harmonic filters are operational at all of the older feeder stations.

Many auto transformer sites are in need of attention across the networks with: minor oil leaks, low oil levels, poor battery condition, poor lighting, building deterioration, cracked concrete, corroded or bent fences, faded signage and poor vegetation control. Bunding is generally not available at any of the older sites. In addition, some AT sites do not have isolators fitted and are therefore not easily disconnected from the network in the event of equipment failure.

Of concern is the assessment of key parameters which should be applied to measurements taken during maintenance. For example, Circuit Breaker contact resistance, insulation resistance to earth (IR) and high voltage testing across the open contacts are being performed however the results are not being interpreted or recorded in a central database/spreadsheet for analysis by technical staff. The information sighted on the circuit breakers during the site inspections has been disregarded as erroneous.

It is apparent that a substantial amount of OPGW (earth wire) has been rolled out particularly in the Goonyella system. This has replaced fatigued overhead earth wire in many places. Observation of the contact wire through binoculars from the ground indicates that a substantial percentage of the life of this cable remains, exact measurements proved difficult to obtain.

Commercial in Confidence Page 12 of 16 July 2013

Significant redundancy with feeder station equipment allows the network to easily function under N-1 contingency events. The time to repair major faults from failure seems significant with many major pieces of equipment out of service particularly in the Goonyella system.

Commercial in Confidence Page 13 of 16 July 2013

Australia Asia Europe

612 Beijing Road

Level 6, Tower 2 Huangpu District Shanghai 200001

475 Victoria Avenue People’s Republic of China Chatswood NSW 2067 Telephone +86 21 6133 6892 Telephone: +612 9495 0500 Fax +86 21 6133 6777 Fax: +612 9495 0520

Evans & Peck Group Pty Ltd ABN50 098 008 818 E: [email protected] W: www.evanspeck.com

Commercial in Confidence Page 14 of 16 July 2013