§230.17 One thousand four hundred seventy-two (1472) service day inspection.
(a) General. Before any steam locomotive is initially put in service or brought out of retirement, and after every 1472 service days or 15 years, whichever is earlier, an individual competent to conduct the inspection shall inspect the entire boiler. In the case of a new locomotive or a locomotive being brought out of retirement, the initial 15 year period shall begin on the day that the locomotive is placed in service or 365 calendar days after the first flue tube is installed in the locomotive, whichever comes first. This 1472 service day inspection shall include all annual, and 5th annual, inspection requirements, as well as any items required by the steam locomotive owner and/or operator or the FRA inspector. At this time, the locomotive owner and/or operator shall complete, update and verify the locomotive specification card (FRA Form No. 4), to reflect the condition of the boiler at the time of this inspection. See appendices A and B of this part.

(b) Filing inspection reports. Within 30 days of completing the 1472 service day inspection, the steam locomotive owner and/or operator shall, for each steam locomotive inspected, file in the place where the steam locomotive is maintained and with the FRA Regional Administrator for that region a report of inspection (FRA Form No. 3), and a completed FRA Form No.4. See appendix C of this part.

Best,
DC

It was reported here (viewtopic.php?f=1&t=40615&start=30) that the flues were being installed in mid-2017. 1309 is well into it's first 15 year cycle.

I don't quite understand the logic in this requirement, it seems like it would encourage restorations to do the boiler work last rather than get to the most problematic job before everything else. Is it an issue with corrosion on a sitting locomotive? Opinions?

I get your point, but imagine you did all the work, the boiler is on the frame and it looks great except the internal stuff. Then, you started putting flues in and found you needed to remove the boiler from the frame for something you never could have known about before you got the flues back in there...

I guess that sort of is my point, you are doing a $1M dollar restoration and one component only has a clock running for 15 years and 365 days. Wouldn't you be encouraged, where possible, to put the flues in as late as possible so you can maximize the years of use before you need to tear the whole thing apart again? It just seems that the requirement would hurt small operations with volunteers who want to make sure the boiler is right before they start on the running gear, which may take several years itself.

A big part of this, though, is that I think the original planning and critical path was made up assuming the locomotive would be finished on its original schedule, before some of the state payment follies and the bearing-brass stealing spree. It would not surprise me that the tube scheduling was done precisely with the 365-day criterion in mind. Things didn't work out that way.

This fire up is to prove the repairs of the pressure vessel that have been performed to this point. This could also show if there are any other items that may need attention before it is put into service. Since the clock is already running for the 15 years, it will not make a difference to the available time. Who knows, maybe the WMSR may have plans to run the engine frequent enough that it will come due for this inspection because of service days rather than the 15 years.

Ed

I'm not criticizing the WMSR, I am actually criticizing the FRA rule, it doesn't make sense to me, what is it about sitting for 15 years that make the flues suspect? The 1472 days of service rule would seem to be enough to prevent tube failure. I guess it could be to guard against fudging the in service numbers, I can think of operations in the past that would have tried that trick, but not really any now.

It's not about suspect flues - it's about gaining access to the interior of the boiler to determine the extent of deterioration and wear for recalculating the Form 4 and defining any necessary repairs or alterations to bring it back into compliance for another cycle. Unless the flues you pull have problems, you can safe end them and put them right back in again.

Does anybody know of a situation you only learn about when flues are reinstalled? If such happens to you, you might question your ability to competently inspect and repair the boiler in the first place........

But again: there's certainly regulatory incentive to avoid installing tubes and flues until the majority of other heavy work and reassembly is complete. This isn't a technical issue - it's about project management and priorities which, as Bob points out, has been particularly difficult in this instance. I think that once she's in service, she'll get plenty of use and earn her next overhaul nicely.

That makes sense, thanks for the clarification Dave.

The 1472 day limit is 4 years of daily running. 1472 days in 15 years is about 90 "service days" per year. That's more than most preserved steamers will get, except for places like Strasburg or The Valley which operate steam daily.

Has this been announced by the WMSR? I'm just curious. If it has been, then, apparently, I didn't see that. If they do plan do to this, are they also planning to redesign #1309 (as best as they can) to resemble a Western Maryland M-1a class 2-6-6-2?

Can't comment about the number but the tender is masked for the Fireball......

Tim W.

.

.