Greater Greater Washington

Transit


How has Metro responded to NTSB recommendations?

WMATA has had a few rough months with worker deaths and bus-pedestrian collisions, and with the June 22 Metro accident still fresh in our minds, the agency has come under fire for its safety record. Dave Stroup recently wrote the second installment in his "Price of Safety" series looking at WMATA's safety culture. Some of the comments there wondered about WMATA's track record in terms of NTSB recomendations.


Investigators near Fort Totten. Photo by the author.

The goal of the National Transportation Safety Board is to improve safety in our transportation system. Sometimes issues stretch beyond the agency where an accident occured. When this happens, they often issue recomendations to all the applicable agencies. A crash in Chicago in January 1976, over two months before Metro opened, resulted in a set of recomendations to WMATA (issued in August 1976, after the system had opened). WMATA and other agencies were responsible for responding to NTSB by either complying or giving reasons why they would not do so.

Since 1970, the NTSB has issued 81 recommendations to WMATA. The vast majority of the closed recommendations are considered to be acceptable responses by NTSB. The 81 recommendations are associated with 11 events, but only 7 events took place on WMATA's rail system.

Of the 81 recommendations:

  • 55 (68%) are "Closed-Acceptable Action"
  • 4 (5%) more are "Closed-Acceptable Alternative Action"
  • 6 (7%) are "Closed-Unacceptable Action"
  • 1 was superseded by a different recommendation.
  • 15 (19%) are currently open

Let's take a look at the 7 events which happened on the WMATA system, totaling 73 recommendations.

Smithsonian Derailment, 1/13/1982

This accident claimed 3 lives and destroyed one railcar at the interlocking (crossover) between Smithsonian and Federal Triangle. To date, this accident resulted in the most NTSB recommendations to WMATA - 34. Of those recommendations, 30 are considered acceptably closed by the NTSB. The four that were closed unacceptably by WMATA are:

  • R-82-058: Modify the overspeed control on the Metrorail cars to enforce speed commands of the Automatic Train Protection subsystem to and including zero miles per hour. author's note:WMATA's correspondence with NTSB indicates that this modification was rejected because it would make 'rescue' trains and yard moves more difficult.
  • R-82-059: Change the identification numbers of interlockings and interlocking signals to eliminate possible misunderstandings which could result in a train improperly passing a restricting signal. author's note: WMATA informed NTSB that it regarded re-identifing all of the interlockings and signals in the system was infeasible. However, they did switch to using the NATO phonetic alphabet for letters.
  • R-82-071: Equip each Metrorail car with an adequate number of self-contained, battery-powered emergency lights which will automatically illuminate the car interior in the event the car's auxillary and emergency power is lost. author's note: The agency chose not to implement this recommendation because it regarded the auxillary and emergency power systems in each railcar in combination with subway tunnel lighting as sufficient.
  • R-82-073: Retrofit existing Metrorail cars with derailment detector devices which will apply the brakes in emergency when a car wheel leaves the rail. Require that all new cars be so equipped. author's note: According to the correspondence on record, WMATA looked at other transit systems in the United States. At that time, only BART used such technology and reported significant maintenance problems and passenger delays due to a breakdown of the derailment detectors. WMATA chose not to implement the technology.

CSX Derailments in Takoma Park and Silver Spring, 6/19/1987, 9/5/1987, 9/17/1987

A series of right-of-way incursions due to freight railcar derailments in 1987 resulted in 3 recommendations by the NTSB. In two of the cases, freight trains derailed into the WMATA right-of-way. The third case was caused when vandals parked a backhoe on the CSX tracks. When struck, the backhoe violated WMATA's right-of-way, causing damage to a parked Metro train. Systems designed to stop trains functioned properly, but WMATA sought additional safety systems. Of the three recommendations to both CSX and WMATA, 2 were closed acceptably. A third was close with an unacceptable action by WMATA and CSX.

  • R-88-015: Until permanent solutions to joint corridor occupancy are implemented and their safety effectiveness is assessed, develop and implement a plan to control the access of WMATA transit trains and CSX freight trains into the common transportation corridor where WMATA trackage lies between the two tracks of CSXT so that CSXT freight trains and WMATA transit trains do not simultaneously occupy this corridor. author's note: In this case, NTSB wanted it to be impossibe for a Metro train to be on either track between Rhode Island Avenue and Silver Spring if a CSX train was in the same stretch on either of its tracks. CSX found the proposal untenable. Therefore, the NTSB found the actions unacceptable.

Shady Grove Collision, 1/6/1996

On a snowy night in January, a Red Line train overshot the platform at Shady Grove and crashed into a parked train north of the station, killing the operator of the striking train. After the collision, the NTSB sent WMATA 20 recommendations. All but one of these recommendations are classified as "Closed-Acceptable Action." The other was superseded by a later recommendation.

Woodley Park Collision, 11/3/2004

This collision occurred when an out-of-service train rolled backwards into Woodley Park from the direction of Cleveland Park, crashing into a Red Line train servicing the platform. Luckily there were no deaths. The NTSB issued three recommendations, one of which is currently open. Another is closed with "Acceptable Action." WMATA failed to satisfy NTSB recommendations on the final recommendation.

  • R-06-002: Either accelerate retirement of Rohr-built railcars, or if those railcars are not retired but instead rehabilitated, then the Rohr-built passenger railcars should incorporate a retrofit of crashworthiness collision protection that is comparable to the 6000-series railcars. author's note: As has been pointed out in the aftermath of June's crash, WMATA did not follow through on this recommendation due to lack of funding. At the time the NTSB issued its recommendation, the 1000 series (Rohr-built) cars made up almost one-third of the fleet. With no money to replace them, rail service would be forced to take major cuts.

Mount Vernon Square Derailment, 1/7/2007

In this derailment, a Green Line train derailed on the crossover immediately south of Mount Vernon Square during single-tracking. Currently, the six NTSB recommendations issued in the wake of this derailment are all still open. Two are considered to be open with "Unacceptable Action." Recommendation R-07-027 was for better lubrication practices, especially during single-tracking operations. WMATA's response to NTSB was not considered to be a strong enough action. The other recommendation which NTSB is not satisfied is being accomplished properly is their admonishment to add guard rails at all interlockings with a certain sharp-radius turn. NTSB feels that WMATA's efforts are not moving quickly enough.

Striking of wayside workers at Dupont Circle and Eisenhower Avenue

The four recommendations from these incidents are currently all regarded as "Open-Acceptable Action."

Fort Totten Collision, 6/22/2009

So far, NTSB has issued three urgent recommendations to WMATA. All are "Open-Await Response." NTSB's report on the incident will likely not be complete before summer 2010. It is very likely that more recommendations will be issued at that time.

A full list of WMATA's NTSB recommendations can be found by searching for "Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority" in the "Addressee" field at NTSB's Safety Recommendation Query page.

While these nunbers indicate that WMATA is very good at responding to NTSB criticisms, that does not necessarily indicate the presence of a "safety culture." In fact, in some cases, the sheer volume of recommendations could indicate that the agency had left quite a bit to be desired in terms of fixes. In the cases where NTSB considers WMATA's actions to be insufficient, some problem resolutions that are expensive or complex, but still important seem to have fallen by the wayside.

Of course, WMATA can only do so much with limited resources. NTSB is not responsible for locating funding for necessary fixes, and their recommendations often place a large burden on the agency. One of the unfulfilled recommendations issued by NTSB called for the retirement of the 1000-series railcars as soon as possible. But pulling almost one-third of the fleet is not something any transit agency can do without major repercussions to service and reliability. As I pointed out shortly after the June 2009 crash, the recommendations from NTSB to retire the 1000 series came in March 2006. Even if Metro had ordered railcars on the day of the recommendation, they would still be being produced. In fact, it is likely that even if cars had been ordered on the day of the Woodley Park crash in 2004, they'd still be in production.

It is clear that WMATA still needs to work on safety. And it is very likely that the accidents that have happened over the past several months will spur some improvement. Metro's record shows a good history of responding favorably to NTSB. But for a true safety culture to develop, WMATA needs to be able to anticipate potential problems and address them before accidents occur.

Matt Johnson has lived in the Washington region since mid-2007. He has a Master's degree in Community Planning from the University of Maryland and a BS in Public Policy from Georgia Tech. He has worked in the planning field since 2006 and lives in Greenbelt, where he serves on the city's Advisory Planning Board. 

Comments

Add a comment »

I might be wrong but when referring to a collision ("bus-pedestrian collisions") doesn't that imply two things coming at each other with near or equal force?

Can a pedestrian and a bus/car truly collide?

by Jazzy on Oct 22, 2009 1:11 pm • linkreport

@Jazzy,
According to the American Heritage Dictionary, Collide is a verb meaning 1)to come together with violent, direct impact, or 2) to meet in opposition; conflict.

Nothing seems to indicate that both objects have to be moving. Drivers often collide with telephone poles and bridge abutments, and those are usually fixed in place.

Is there a word you would prefer be used to refer to the Fort Totten, Woodley Park, or Shady Grove collisions?

by Matt Johnson on Oct 22, 2009 4:10 pm • linkreport

Matt Johnson:

I prefer to use the word "wreck".


There is no mention in this article of R-87-59-60 (223 KB PDF file) which touches on the same issue mention in the paragraph quoted from R-88-015.

by Sand Box John on Oct 22, 2009 10:26 pm • linkreport

There's a culture of safety, and then there are safety bureaucrats who never have to get anything real done, like run a railroad or move passengers or freight. To wit, R-88-015 is absolutely absurd. Even mid-day, the Red Line sees a train, on average, every 3 minutes (every 6 minutes each way): they want the trains to hold for the 10 minutes or so it'd take a freight to clear the zone? Or they want CSX to only run trains during the 5 hours that Metro's not running? (And what of MARC's Brunswick line, or the Capitol Limited?) Did they count how many trains CSX needs to move each day, and how far they go, and whether they're subject to other restrictions on other sections of their trip?

Metro's come under a lot of scrutiny for the NTSB recommendations it didn't follow, but NTSB is hardly infallible. How do WMATA's responses compare with other transportation entities investigated by NTSB?

by thm on Oct 22, 2009 10:53 pm • linkreport

@Sand Box John,
NTSB recommendations to WMATA
R-87-59: Raise the Intrusion Detection Warning System to a uniform height above the rail, and
R-87-60: Modify the Intrusion Detection Warning System so that all signals on WMATA and CSX tracks display a STOP aspect when intrusion is detected,
were both closed acceptably. That's why they weren't specifically mentioned.

For a full list of recommendations, closed or open, including background and correspondence between the agencies, visit the NTSB Safety Recommendation Query, linked in the post.

by Matt Johson on Oct 22, 2009 11:05 pm • linkreport

Matt Johson:

Thank you.

What CSX and WMATA did, that was also mentioned in R-87-59-60, but not recommended by the NTSB, basically rendered the need to embargo metrorail trains from the corridor unnecessary.

What I found interesting was the recommendation to install a intrusion detection system was made before WMATA began construction in the corridor. As I recall the intrusion detection system hardware was not installed and put on line until years after the line actually opened. The same thing happen with the installation of the intrusion detection system on both ends of the Orange line.

by Sand Box John on Oct 23, 2009 9:38 am • linkreport

i think that driving is safer then rails because the train can always loose chontroll of the bracks.

by amber on Oct 30, 2009 1:15 pm • linkreport

Add a Comment

Name: (will be displayed on the comments page)

Email: (must be your real address, but will be kept private)

URL: (optional, will be displayed)

Your comment:

By submitting a comment, you agree to abide by our comment policy.
Notify me of followup comments via email. (You can also subscribe without commenting.)
Save my name and email address on this computer so I don't have to enter it next time, and so I don't have to answer the anti-spam map challenge question in the future.

or