(The following story by Steve Hymon appeared on the Los Angeles Times website on December 22.)
LOS ANGELES — In recent weeks, U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein has been keeping a close eye on Metrolink and the commuter rail carrier’s efforts to improve safety. Today, Feinstein sent a letter asking some tough questions to two members of the peer review panel that the Metrolink Board of Directors appointed to look at safety issues.
In particular, Feinstein says that Metrolink is looking to deploy an old version of the automatic train stop — a decades-old device that can stop trains. According to Feinstein, the system wouldn’t even stop a train that ran a red signal. Excerpt:
“I understand that Metrolink is deploying an antiquated system designed to slow trains that exceed speed limits. Unlike the system currently functioning in San Diego and the Northeast Corridor, this Automatic Train Stop system will not be linked to the signaling system and will not stop Metrolink trains that run red signals. Does the Peer Review Panel consider this an adequate, useful, and effective crash avoidance technology?”
The senator also wants to know if there’s any research showing that having a camera in the cab of locomotives facing the engineer really improves safety.
The safety panel presented some of its findings this month (here’s a link to a story about it in The Times), calling for top-to-bottom organizational changes at Metrolink. The panel said more oversight was needed of Metrolink’s contract employees and that the Board of Directors — the part-timers appointed by counties to oversee the agency — needed to get more involved in ensuring safety improvements are made.
* * *
December 22, 2008
Mr. Don Sepulveda
Mr. Peter A. Cannito, Sr.
Lead Panel Members
SCRRA Commuter Rail Safety Peer Review Panel
C/O Metrolink
700 South Flower Street, Suite 2600
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Dear Mr. Sepulveda and Mr. Cannito:
I am writing to pose questions in response to the initial conclusions of the SCRRA Commuter Rail Safety Peer Review Panel, as presented to my staff on December 12. I thank you for your efforts to improve the safety of passenger rail in Southern California, and I would greatly appreciate you taking these concerns into consideration as you finalize your recommendations.
·Automatic Train Stop: The Peer Review Panel presentation did not comment on the appropriateness and effectiveness of Metrolink’s proposal to deploy an Automatic Train Stop system on part of its rail system as an interim step before deploying Positive Train Control. I understand that Metrolink is deploying an antiquated system designed to slow trains that exceed speed limits. Unlike the system currently functioning in San Diego and the Northeast Corridor, this Automatic Train Stop system will not be linked to the signaling system and will not stop Metrolink trains that run red signals. Does the Peer Review Panel consider this an adequate, useful, and effective crash avoidance technology?
·Hours of Service: In repeated communications with SCRRA leadership, I have raised serious concerns regarding the hours train operators work and the frequent use of split shifts. What staffing policies and practices does the Peer Review Panel recommend to reduce train operator fatigue?
·Cameras: The Peer Review Panel plans to recommend that Metrolink add inward facing cameras that would allow it to monitor engineers. The Panel believes this would be more effective than two engineers in each train. Is there research that demonstrates that a second engineer in the cab does not improve safety? Is this a safety policy that has proven successful in other rail systems? What steps would be necessary to protect privacy?
·Unique Safety Challenges: Metrolink operates in a particularly challenging safety environment, but Metrolink’s safety policies are similar to systems that operate in far less challenging environments. What specific safety policies are appropriate for Metrolink that might be unnecessary in other circumstances?
·Jobs: Congress is considering investing in America’s infrastructure in an attempt to stimulate economic activity. To what extent would the safety proposals of the Peer Review Panel require capital investments, how quickly could these investments be made, and to what degree would such steps produce employment?
Thank you again for your dedication to making California’s passenger rail system as safe as possible. I look forward to seeing your final report.
Sincerely,
Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator