Publication Notices

Notifications of New Publications Released by ERDC

Contact Us

      

  

    866.362.3732

   601.634.2355

 

ERDC Library Catalog

Not finding what you are looking for? Search the ERDC Library Catalog

Results:
Category: Publications: Construction Engineering and Research Laboratory (CERL)
Clear
  • Soil and Vegetation Responses to Amendment with Pulverized Classified Paper Waste

    Abstract: The United States Army produces a significant amount of classified paper waste that is pulverized to a fine consistency unsuitable for recycling. However, cheap, high quality organic materials such as classified paper waste are useful as soil amendments. The objective of this research was to evaluate the utilization of pulverized classified paper waste as a soil amendment to improve soil health and increase establishment of desirable native grasses on degraded Army training lands. Paper was applied at rates of 9 to 72 Mg ha-1 to two soil types at Fort Polk, LA: an alfisol (very fine sandy loam - Fine, smectitic, thermic Chromic Vertic Hapludalfs) and an ultisol (loamy fine sandy - Loamy, siliceous, semiactive, thermic Arenic Paleudults). These are common soil orders found on military training lands nationwide and represent fertile (alfisol) and unfertile (ulitsol) soils. Vegetation and soils were monitored over 2 growing seasons. No increase in heavy metals were observed in soils. Extensive analysis showed very low levels of regulated contaminants in the paper, but most were below detection limits. The ultisol site showed improved soil physical and chemical properties, while desirable vegetation benefitted from nutrient immobilization at the alfisol site. Based on the results of this study, applying pulverized paper waste to soil at a rate of 35.9 Mg ha-1 is recommended. Application of paper waste to soils had no adverse environmental effects, improved soil physiochemical properties, and facilitated establishment of desirable native vegetation.
  • Evaluation of the Wharton & Northern Railroad

    Abstract: The Wharton & Northern Railroad was founded in 1905 and combined a series of existing railroads that carried iron ore from the mines located to the south of Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey. The section of the line north of Picatinny Arsenal was abandoned by Conrail in 1976. The same year, the section of the line south of the Arsenal reverted to Army control and ceased to be utilized. It is the recommendation of the authors of this report that the Wharton & Northern Railroad right-of-way (ROW) is not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) due to the prior demolition of bridges, trestles, yards, and stations throughout. There are certain archaeological sites associated with the railroad that need to be investigated further for Criterion D, such as the Arsenal, Fac-tory, Navy Depot, and Lake Denmark stations. These archeological sites may be eligible for the NRHP due to their association with the Wharton & Northern, but those determinations were beyond the purview of this report.
  • Deconstruction Feasibility Assessment of Warehouse District Facilities at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri

    Abstract: The U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Construction Engineering Research Laboratory (ERDC-CERL) and Fort Leonard Wood, MO, are in the sixth year of efforts to plan and implement a program in support of installation sustainability. As part of this effort, ERDC-CERL personnel supported the Fort Leonard Wood Directorate of Public Works (DPW) by conducting a deconstruction assessment of multiple buildings in the warehouse district. The project delivery team visited Fort Leonard Wood in April 2017 to conduct quantity take-offs of the buildings. An abbreviated interim report that focused exclusively on Bldgs. 2338 and 2339 was pro-vided to the Chief, Master Planning Branch, at that time. These two buildings were representative of the majority of the buildings in the assessment and thus became the model that we describe in detail in the sections below. Differences between the other warehouses and the model are discussed. Several buildings that had configurations different from that of the model were evaluated independently.