1989 - Contracts - SCRTD METRO RAIL PROJECT, SAFETY …libraryarchives.metro.net/DPGTL/scrtd/1989-metro-rail... · 2017. 2. 6. · TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION INTRODUCTION CRITERIA

•

• 10/28/88

SCRTD METRO RAIL PROJECT

SAFETY CERTIFICATION PROGRAM CRITERIA CONFORMANCE CERTIFICATION

CONTRACT A620

AUTOMATIC TRAIN CONTROL

MTA LIBRARY

·,·,:

S.C.R.T.D. LIBRARY . ···. . . . , .·.\· .. ,. .. "";:·· ::.~. P'

• .'I .

17211

•

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION

INTRODUCTION

CRITERIA CONFORMANCE VERIFICATION CERTIFICATE

I. DESIGN REVIEW CHECKLISTS

System Safety Train Control Reliability Maintainability Quality Assurance

II. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS

System Assurance & Security - W. Price - 10/08/85 Rolf Jensen & Associates - J. Iazzetta - 10/10/85 System Assurance & Security - M. Ingram - 10/24/85 System Assurance & Security - H. Hunt - 10/29/85 T. Tankee - Legal/Technical - 5/21/87 M. Ingram - Legal/Technical - 5/26/87 E. Pollan - Legal/Technical 5/29/87 Fire/Life Safety Committee - H. Storey - Legal/

Technical - 5/27/87 Fire/Life Safety Committee - L. Boyden - Legal/

Technical - 5/27/87

III. RELATED CORRESPONDANCE

DCC # 84-00235 DCC # 84-13346 DCC # 85-05655 DCC # 85-06390 DCC # 85-06550 DCC # 85-06769 Final Review Comments DCC# 87-02091 SCRTD Memo - H. DCC# 88-00983 DCC # 88-01298 DCC# 88-03131 DCC # 88-03333 DCC # 88-03431

IV. ADDENDA

A620-l A620-2

10/28/88

Storey - Dated 5/29/87

i

t!O. OF PAGES

2

1

6 4 5 5

1 3 2 5 2 3 2

5

1

2 4 4 2 1 1 13 1 1 3 2 8 1 3

2 3

17211

•

•

•

INTRODUCTION

This Criteria Conformance Verification package is submitted for review and compliance assessment in accordance with Rev. 1.1 of the SCRTD Metro Rail Project Safety Certification Plan dated June 1988. The purpose of this package is to document the incorporation of safetyrelated design criteria into the contraci drawings and specifications. This activity is part of a multi-phased program to provide a traceable history of the Metro Rail Project Safety Program.

During design progression, MRTC Safety, Assurance & Security personnel, in conjunction with Rolf Jensen & Associates and the Metro Rail Project Fire/Life Safety Committee, have reviewed design documents at the 60%, 85%, 100%, and Legal/Technical levels. The 100% design review for this document was held in October 198 5. The Legal/Technical Review was performed in May, 1987. At each review level design review checklists were utilized and appropriate design review comments generated. Subsequent reviews were initiated by determining the.resolution status· of comments. Unresolved comments were repeated at each review level until resolution was achieved and verified.

Design review checklists for the Fire/Life Safety, System Safety, Security and System Assurance design criteria were updated in December 1986 to reflect the significant revisions made through the Change Request process. A vertical bar in the Req. I.D. column of the checklist was used to indicate- only those changes which impacted design. For clarity, editorial revisions and clarifications of intent were not indicated on the checklist; however, all revisions were indicated in the text of the design criteria and pertinent Change Requests.

The scope of this contract encompasses the design, furnishing and installation of the Automatic Train Control (ATC) System for MOS-1. The ATC System is composed of main line and vehicular elements that are procured in quantities proportional to the length of the rail system. The work also includes start-up of the ATC System, including testing, training and making ready for full passenger-carrying operation. ·The main line elements include equipment along the trackway (including track switch machines), and in equipment rooms at passenger stations. The Yard elements include the Yard Tower controls, signals, track circuits, switch machines, and bungalows to house Yard train control hardware. The vehicular elements include all the necessary carborn equipment to be supplied to the A650 Contractor. Installation includes all train control cables, trackside equipment, and room equipment along the mainline and in the yard. It also includes installation of the communication cables (except the lossy lines) and gas monitoring tubing in the tunnels. Procurement and installation of the conduit and laying of the 34.5 kV tunnel feed cable in the circular tunnel sections are also provided. Contract A620 also includes installation of wayside ATO equipment furnished under Contract A650 .

The comments included in this package represent the result of the reviews performed at the 100% and Legal/Technical level. The check-

10/28/88 1 17211

~-·

lists included &re the updated checklists applied at the 100% level. Only those portions of checklists containing design criteria requirements directly applicable to this contract, including those for System Safety, Reliability, Maintainability, and Quality Assurance are included in this document.

Design group responses to the comments are included in most cases, as well as resolution verification by MRTC Safety, Assurance, and Security personnel. Supporting correspondence has been included where deemed appropriate.

Addenda have been reviewed to determine impact on the Safety Certification Program. Addenda distribution letters, annotated to indicate results of the review, are included.

This verification package, once audited and confirmed by the SCRTD, will become the primary documentation to allow the SCRTD to issue a Criteria Conformance Certification Certificate. Once issued, the Certificate will be appended to this document.

10/28/88 2 17211

RTD Metro Rail Project.

CRITERIA CONFORMANCE VERiFICATION

.. . "'.: : . :, .;_ ~· ~- :~ .... ··-'. Metro Rail Transit Consultants

DMJM/PBOD/KE/HWA

Safety Certification Program

DESIGN REVIEW CONTRACT NUMBER A620

REVIEWING DISCIPLINE MRTC Safety, Assurance & Security

EXCEPTIONS NOTED:

Legal/Technical Review Comment Ref. No. 7, by T. J. Tanke, dated May 21, 1987 (See Section II) remains partially unresolved. A review of A620 drawings indicate that signals and associated ladders are mounted opposite the tunnel safetywalk in all cases except at the Wilshire/Alvarado double crossover. A Change Request will be initiated by MRTC Systems Design personnel to provide structural niches required at these two locations. This will prevent signal maintenance ladders from encroaching into safetywalk clearances.

This verifies that the specifications and drawings of the above DESIGN REVIEW PACKAGE comply with

the applicable SCRTD DESIGN CRITERIA for safety, fire/ life safety, securit,y and system assurance.

, · ,., .. 1,,1 ,, ,1 ~.(.,) J -71 ·" . / / · Signature ' 1 /7 ,h,·,?v' Date 11 ).) c' c· anager - MRTC Safety, Assurance & Security

//'/,If·) l. J Signature //1 ;J{::,! .:~i\-oate Manager - l\1R1'C :Systems Division

/ I /,'//f,/-;<}r

I I

te:6 . 9.>J SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT - . .

METRO RAIL PROJECT DESIGN REVIEW CHECKLIST CERTIFIABLE ELEMENT: AUTOMATIC TRAIN CONTROL

GROUP: MPTC Safety Assnrance & Security

REVIEWER: R. Harvey

DISCIPLINE: __ S.XSTEM SAFETY

REVIEW REFERENCE: SCRTD Metro Rail System Design

REO.I.D.

3.6

- 3.6.1

3.6.1.A

e 12/15/86 - Rev. 1 SDE7981 A620

Criteria & Standards, Vol. I, Section 3.6,

TRAIN CONTROL, 07/86 Revision 2

REQUIREMENT

TRAIN CONTROL

The Automatic Train Control (ATC) system shall ensure, to the maximum extent possible, life safety for all conditions of train operation.

Automatic Train Protection (ATP)

The ATP subsystem shall provide failsafe control and implementation of safety-critical functions.

The ATP subsystem shall be continuous.

The ATP subsystem shall not be compromised by operation or failure of other systems and subsystems.

Failures which affect operation within the ATP subsystem shall be detectable, but shall not compromise safety.

Train Detection

Track circuits shall be designed, configured and applied to ensure detection of stopped and moving passenger trains and maintenance vehicles.

Continuous detection of broken rail shall be required to the maximum extent possible.

DATE: 07/29/88

CONTRACT No.: _A_6_2_o ____ _

REVIEW LEVEL: _1_0_0_% ____ _

YES NO

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

COMMENT

See TP Articles 1.4.1 &

3. 2 .1

See TP Articles 3.2.2, & 3.3.2. and 8.3.1

See TP Articles 3.1.7.E and 3.3.2

See TP Articles 3.2.2 3.3.2 & 8.3.1.A

See TP Articles 3.2.2 & 3.3.2

See TP Article 3.2.2.B


PAGE_l_ OF_6"--0001.o.o

•• SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT


GROUP: MP'T'IC Safety, Assurance c S.:...1.""urity

REVIEWER: R. Harve

DISCIPLINE: SYSTEM SAFETY


e

•

REO. I.D.

3.6.1.B

3.6.1.B.1

3.6.1.B.2

3.6.1.C

3.6.1.C.l

3.6.1.C.2

12/15/86 - Rev. 1 SDE7981 A620

Criteria & Standards, Vol, I, Section 3.6,


REQUIREMENT

~rain Separation

Block design and safe braking distances shall be based on worst case conditions for track, grade, vehicle, loading, and braking performance.

The design shall ensure that trains on the same track maintain a safe following distance to prevent collisions.

Speed Limit Enforcement

The ATP design shall ensure that trains normally remain at or below safe speeds determined by block design.

Trains shall be given an automatic brake command if the speed limit is exceeded.

Speed limit information shall be transmitted by wayside equipment to equipment on the trains.

The vehicle speed limit transmission decoding logic shall respond only to transmitted signals whose characteristics match those of a valid speed limit transmission signal.

Both transmitted and actual speeds shall be displayed in the cab.

DATE: 07 /29)88


REVIEW LEVEL: 100%

YES NO

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

COMMENT

See TP Articles 3.2.2.D, 3.4.2.A.2 for worst case

See TP Article 3.2.2.C

See TP Articles 3.2.2.C & 8.3.1.B.3

See TP Articles 3.2.2. &

3.4.2.D, 8.3.1.B.3 & 4 & 8.3.2.F thru G

See TP Articles 3.4.2. 5.2.2.C, 8.3.1, 10.3.2.A & 10.3.2.0.1

See TP Articles 3.3.2.H 5.2.2.C, 8.3.2.A.3 &

8.3.2.B.4 & 8.3.2.C

See TP Articles 5.2.1, 8.2.1.B.1 & 10.3.2 Also See Contract A650

PAGE_2_ OF-"-6 __ 0002.0.0

• ~*· SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT


GROUP: MPTC Saf2ty, +tssnranco s: SecJJri t;,

REVIEWER: R. Harvey



e

e

REO. I.D.

3. 6. l .C. 3

3.6.1.C.4

3. 6. l.C. 5

3.6.1.D

3.6.1.D.l

3.6.1.D.2

3.6.1.D.3

12/15/86 - Rev. 1 SDE7981 A620

Criteria & Standards. Vol, I, Section 3,6,


REQUIREMENT

Absence of a valid speed limit transmission shall be interpreted by the vehicle ATC equipment as a zero ~i/hr speed limit.

Automatic actuation of vehicle propulsion and braking shall be implemented to prevent undesired movement and excess speed.

No operation of and failure within the RCC and the SCADA equipment shall compromise the safety assured by the ATP subsystem.

ATP speed enforcement for a fixed restricted speed shall be provided for a submode of manual operation, implemented when no speed limit transmissions are received by the train.

Route Security

Train movements through interlockings shall be protected by ATP.

Trains on crossing/merging of branching routes shall not be permitted to make conflicting moves.

The ATP subsystem shall prevent a train that is operating in automatic mode from entering an interlocking whose status is not vitally determined to be safe.

DATE: Q7129/8S


REVIEW LEVEL: ----'lc::Oc,:O_,,% ____ _

YES NO

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

COMMENT

See TP Articles 8.3.1.B.5 & 8.3.2.F.2

See TP Articles 8.2.2.A 8.3.1.B.3 & 8.3.3.A

See TP Articles 3.2.2 10.8.2.A

See Articles 3.1.7.C &

8.2.2.B.1

See TP Articles 3.2.2.F & 6.1.2.A

See TP Articles 6.1.2.A 6.4.4.A.2 & 6.4.4.C thru D

See TP Articles 3.3.2, 5.2.2.F.3 & 8.3.1.A

PAGE_3_ OF~6 __ 0003.0.0

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT


e

GROUP: MRTC Safetv, Assurance & Security

REVIEWER: R. Harvey


REVIEW REFERENCE: _s_c_R_T_D_M_e_t_r_o_R_a_i_l_s_y_s_t_e_m_D_e_s 1_· g_n __ _



REO. I.D. REQUIREMENT

3.6.1.D.4' The ATP subsystem shall give fail-safe wayside indications of the interlocking status to the train operator.

3.6.1.D.5 The ATP subsystem shall prevent opposing moves between interlockings for trains operating in automatic mode.

3.6.1.E

3.6.1.F

The ATP subsystem shall provide a "STOP" wayside indication to trains operating in manual mode prior to entering.

ATP Cut Out Detection

Cut out of the ATP on any passenger vehicle or train shall require an enabling signal from RCC before ATP bypass can be activated.

ATP may also be cutout by a sealed switch in the cab.

When ATP is bypassed, an alarm in the RCC shall be annunciated.

Vehicle Door Operation

The design shall inhibit manual operation of vehicle side doors by either passengers or employees when the vehicle is in motion.

The design shall prevent the train from starting until all side doors are closed and latched.

12/15/86 - Rev. 1 SDE7981 A620

DATE: 07/29/88

CONTRACT No.: __ A_6_2_o ____ _

REVIEW LEVEL: __ l_O_O_% ____ _

YES NO COMMENT

X See TP Articles 6.4.1.B 6.4.3.B & 6.4.5.D

X See TP Article 6.4.4. &

6.4.5

X

X

X

X

X

X


See TP Article 6.4.4.A thru D

See TP Article 8.2.2.B.,

See TP Article 6.4.5.C.2, 4.4.4.A &

10.8.2.F

See TP Article 3.1.7.J 3. 2. 2 .E

See TP Article 3.2.3.A.

PAGE __ 4 _ OF~-6 __ 0004.0.0

.

• qi• SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT


GROUP: MBTC Saf"ety Assnrance & Security

REVIEWER: R. Harvey



REO. I.D.

3.6.1.G

• 3.6.2

3.6.3

• 12/15/86 - Rev. 1 SDE7981 A620



REQUIREMENT

Station Platform

The ATP subsystem shall prevent a train in the automatic operating mode from proceeding beyond a station platform if propulsion power is not continuously available for the train to berth at the next downstream station platform.

Automatic Train Operation (ATO)

The ATO subsystem shall perform berthing verification at all station platforms, regardless of travel direction.

Berthing verification shall ensure that the train is wholly within a station platform area and that all doors will open to a platform.

Automatic Train Supervision (ATS)

The ATS subsystem shall not directly affect train safety.

The ATS shal~ meet operational objectives without compromising safety.

The ATS subsystem shall include equipment at the RCC for recording alarms and failures/malfunctions, including their time, location and nature, to facilitate proper response to emerqency situations.

DATE: 07/29/SS


RE VIE W LEV EL: ~1...,0'-'0"'%'------

YES NO

X

X

X

X

X

COMMENT

See TP Articles 5.2.2.F, 5.2.2.J & 6.4.5.E

See TP Article 8.2 .l.C.3

See TP Article 8.2.2.A.2

See TP Articles 3.2.1 3. 2. 2

See TP Article 3.2.1

See Contract A640

PAGE_s_ OF-6=----ooos.o.o



•

•

GROUP: MRTC Sa~ety Assurance & Securi tv

REVIEWER: R. Harvey

DISCIPLINE: SYS_TEM SAFETY



REO. I.D.

3.6.4

3.6.4.A

3.6.4.B

3.6.4.C

3.6.4.D


REQUIREMENT

Other Design Features

Signal aspects, indications and terminology shall be consistent

i throughout the ATC system.

The ATC system at wayside shall have an emergency backup power supply system to support train control in the event of power loss.

Manual mimic boards and controls shall be located in the local train control rooms.

I When manual operations of a vehicle without ATP is permitted, adequate operational procedures shall be developed to assure safe operation.

MTA

12/15/86 - Rev. 1 SDE7981 A620

DATE: 07/29/88


REVIEW LEVEL: ---=l:..:Oc...:O..c% ____ _

YES NO

X

X

X

'

COMMENT

See Typical Circuits for terminology. Also see TP Article 7.3

See Contract A740 & TP Articles 3.3.10.A.2 thru A.4 & A.7 4.3.2.A.l & B.l, 4.3.3

See TP Article 4.·4

See TP Articles 8.2.2.B.3 & 16.3.1.A.l

PAGE_6_ OF_6;:.__ 0006.0.0

• 41• SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT


GROUP: MRTC Safety, Assurance & SecJJritv

REVIEWER: R. Harvey

DISCIPLINE: RELIABILITY

REVIEW REFERENCE: METRO PAIT PROTECT SYSTEM DESIGN

Criteria & Standards, Vol. I, Section 5.2

REO.I.D.

5.2.1.B

e

5.2.2.C

5. 2. 2 .D

e 12/16/86 - Rev. 1 SNT7570B A620

REQUIREMENT

Manufacturers of the following system equipment shall be required, by contract, to establish and maintain a Reliability Program and Plan:

Program and Plan:

1. Vehicle 2. Train Control 3. Fare Collection.

Their plans shall be prepared using the SCRTD System Assurance Program Plan as a guide for style, content, and format.

Contractors for the following systems shall be required to prepare and submit a FMECA to identify all critical single point failure modes. The FMECA shall be conducted to the lowest replaceable module.

1. Vehicle 2. Train Control 3. Fare Collection.

Contractor for the Vehicle, Train Control, and Fare Collection systems shall be required to prepare and submit a Reliability Analysis which shall include, as a minimum:

1. System definitions and related assumptions

DATE: 07/29/88

CONTRACT No.: ---'"'-"u._ ___ _

REVIEW LEVEL: 100%

YES NO

X

X

X

X

COMMENT

See Articles 15.1.2 &

15.3.3

See Articles 15.1.3 thru 15.1.8

See Article 15.2.2.B, 15.3.3.C &

15.4.5.D

See Article 15.3.3.A

PAGE_1_ OF_4 __ 0001. 0. 0



-

e

GROUP: MRTC Safety A~sJJrance & Sec11rity

REVIEWER: R. Harvey


REVIEW REFERENCE: W:i:Tli!.O PDII PROTECT SYSTEM DESTGN

Criteria & Standards, Vol. r, Section 5.2

RE 0. I.D. REQUIREMENT

5. 2. 2 .E

2. Functional flow and reliability block diagrams

3. Description of data base and any adjustment factors

4. System and subsystem failure assump tions and predicted MTBF, MTBSF, MCBF, as appropriate

5. Comparison of reliability predictions with allocations in the Reliability Requirements Report (Criteria R4)

6. Impact of operating or design changes on predicted values

7. Definitions of all interfaces, such that every part is identified as being part of a particular subsystem.

The contractors for Vehicle, Train Con trol, Fare Collection, and Vehicle Propulsion systems shall be required to develop Reliability Demonstration Test Plans. The Reliability Test Plan shall include:

1. Criteria to be used by the SCRTD for evaluating the equipment under test

2. The failure reporting procedures to be used by the Contractor

3. The mathematical verification that the test shall demonstrate the required

12/16/86 - Rev. 1 SNT7570B A620

DATE: 07/29/88

CONTRACT No.: --'""""J.t_ ___ _

REVIEW LEVEL: 100%

YES NO COMMENT

X See Article 15.3.3.A.6

X See Artir.le 15.3.3.B

X See Article 15.3.2


X See Articles 15.3.3.C &

15.1.6.D

X See Section 10


X See Articles 15.3.5.D &

15.3.5.H

X See Articles 15.3.5 &

15.3.5.I


P r'.GE _ 2__ 0 F __ 4 __ _ 0002.0.0

~<6 e ~..I SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT


GROUP: MRT.C_Safety Assnrance & Secnri ty

REVIEWER: R. Harvey


REVIEW REFERENCE: Mi:TRQ P,71Ib PP.Q.+i:CT P•6TEU i;ie:gicw


REO. I.D.

5.2.3.A

e 5.2.4

5.2.4.A

5.2.5.A

5.2.5.B

e 12/16/86 - Rev. 1 SNT7570B A620

REOUIRErvlENT

MTBF, MTBSF, MCBF, and failure rates as specified by contract.

Contractors shall be legally bound to ensure that contractual reliability requirements are achieved.

The contractor shall demonstrate the achievement or prove the failure of reliability requirements incorporated into contractor specifications and track system reliability during testing and revenue service.

Contractors shall be required to use the format designed by the SCRTD for reporting failures.

The system elements, as described below, shall be suitable for a lifetime of use in the Southern California environment, with normal maintenance and overhaul, if required, for the number of years as outlined below:

1. Vehicle Body: 30 years 2. Train Control System: 25 years 3. Fare Collection System: 25 years 4. Tunnels: 100 years 5. Trackwork: 30 years.

The system elements shall be capable of being operated, stored, and maintained at specific performance levels without impairment resulting from the impact of

DATE: 07 /29 /Ra

CONTRACT No.: -.;,,..,;!G------

R E \/ IE W LEV EL: ~lc,Oc,,Oc:,%'------

YES NO

X

X

X

X

X

COMMENT

See TP Article 15.3

See TP Article 13.12

See TP Article 15.3.3.A & C

See SP Article 6.0 and GP Article 19.0, also see General Requiremen s Section 3


PAGE_3_ OF_4 ___ _ 0003.0.0



GROUP: MRTC Sa~ety Ass11rance & Sec11rity

REVIEWER: R. Harvey


REVIEW REFERENCE: METRO RZ\IT PROJECT SYSTEM DESIGN


REO. I.D.

-

e 12/16/86 - Rev. 1 SNT7570B A620

REQUIREMENT

the following environmental parameters throughout the indicated range of values:

1. Air temperature: Minimum: 20°F Maximum: 110°F Average: 66°F

2. Relative humidity: 24 hour range: 45% to 85%

3. Rainfall in 24 hours: Maximum re-corded: 6.11"

4. Rainfall in 1 hour: Maximum re-corded: 1.87"

5. Wind speed: Average: 10 mph Maximum recorded: 49 mph

6. Seismic activity: (Reference 11 DESIGN EARTHQUAKE PARAMETERS" and "DESIGN FAULT PARAMETERS" tables of Criteria)

7. Air pollution: 0 Dust Particulates:

Size: 1 to 200 microns Concentration: (max. ) 0. 248 mg/m 3

(avg.) 0.142 mg/m 3

0 Acid Precipitation: pH of 4.41 0 Gases and fumes: (Reference

"Types 11 and 11 Concentrations" table of Criteria)

DATE: 07/29/88

CON TRACT No.: --'"'-"l.L,_ ___ _

REVIEW LEVEL: 100% ---------YES NO

X

X

X

X

X

X

COMMENT

See TP Ar tic le 3.3.3.A

See TP Article 3.3.3.A

See TP Ar tic le 3. 3. 3 .D

See TP Article 3. 3. 3 .B


See TP Article 3.3.3.A.2

PAGE_4 _ OF_4 __ 0004.0.0

• 411:.~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT


GROUP: MRTC Safetl' Assurance & Security

REVIEWER: R. Harvey

DISCIPLINE: MAINTAINABII,ITY

REVIEW REFERENCE: Mi:111-lQ ~'>Ih pi;tQJEGT .6Uls'i'EU OE&ICW


RE0.1.D.

5.3.1.B

e

5.3.2.A

e 12/16/66 - Rev. 1 SNT7570A A620

REQUIREMENT

Manufacturers of the following system equipment shall be required, by contract, to establish and maintain a Maintainability Program and Plan.

1. Vehicle 2. Train Control 3. Communications 4. Fare Collection 5. Traction Power.

Their plans shall be prepared using the SCRTD System Assurance Plan as a guide for style, content, and format.

A detailed Maintenance Concept shall be developed and submitted to the SCRTD by the contractors indicated in 5.3.1.B. The Maintenance Concept shall include a description of how the contractor intends to achieve the maintenance requirements identified in their contract. The Maintenance Concept shall cover the following, as a minimum:

1. Maintenance Levels

a. Sys tern repairs done on SCP.TD property

b. Module and component repairs done on SCRTD property

c. Module and component repairs done at the contractor's facilities.

DATE: 07/29/88

CONTRACT No.:_....,;.,.,_ ___ _

REVIEW LEVEL: 100% ---------YES NO COMMENT

X See Article 15.1.2 & 15.4

X

X

See Article 15.1.2.C, 15.1.3 thru 15.1.8

Eee Article 15.4.4

PAGE_l_ OF_5~--0001.o.o

• ~~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT


GROUP: MBTC Safety Assurance & Securitv

REVIEWER: R. Harvey

DISCIPLINE: MAINTAINABILITY

REVIEW REFERENCE: METRO PAIT PPOIFCT SYSTEM DESIGN


REO. I.D. REQUIREMENT

e

e 5. 3. 2 .B

12/16/66 - Rev. 1 SNT7570A A620

2. Maintenance Tasks

a. Scheduled Maintenance i. Preventive Maintenance ii. Service Maintenance

b. Corrective Maintenance.

3. Shop Facilities

a. Union Station maintenance activities

b. Hollywood maintenance activities

c. Component Repair Facilities.

4. Shop Equipment and Tools

a. Furnished by Vehicle/Train Control/ Fare Collection Contractor

b. Furnished by Shop Equipment Contractor.

5. Spare Part Requirements

a. Expected Part Life

b. Consumables and Repairables.

6. Skill Levels and Mechanics Required.

A Maintenance Analysis shall be developed and submitted to the SCRTD by the Vehicle,

DATE: 07/29/88

CONTRACT No.: --'l.J::>.LJ.J.... ___ _

REVIEW LEVEL: 100%

YES NO COMMENT

X See TP Articles 15.4.4.F 15.4.5.E, 15.4.5.D

X See TP Article 15.4.5

PAGE_2_ OF_5 __ 0002.0.0

• 4'6 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT


GROUP: MBTC Safety Assurance & Security

REVIEWER: R. Harvey


REVIEW REFERENCE: METRO P1\II PROJECT SYSTEM DESIGN


REO. I.D.

•

5.3.4.A

• 12/16/66 - Rev. 1 SNT7570A A620

REQUIREMENT

Train Control, and Fare Collection contractors.

The Maintenance Analysis shall be submitted iteratively (every 90-180 days) as the design develops .

The analysis shall describe all the rnainte-nance tasks SCRTD personnel may be re-quired to perform on the system. The analysis shall include for each maintenance task, as a minimum:

1. Frequency of task

2. Time to perform

3. Test equipment, tools, and facilities required

4. Crew size and skill level

5. Manuals and instructions needed.

All suppliers and contractors shall be required to submit maintenance manuals which contain all the information needed to service, maintain, repair, inspect, adjust, troubleshoot, replace, and overhaul each component or subsystem. Requirements for the maintenance manuals shall include, but not be limited to:

1. Running Maintenance and Servicing Manuals

DATE: 07/29/88

CONTRACT No.: -""'-"'"-----

REVIEW LEVEL: _l_O..c.0_% ____ _

YES NO

X

X

X

COMMENT




PAGE_3_ OF~5'--ooo3.o.o

• ~aj& SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT


GROUP: MBTC Safeh1

' Assnrance & SecPri ty

REVIEWER: R. Harvey


REVIEW REFERENCE: UETRO R11Il. PPOTiCT SY5'TEM DESIGN

REO. I.D.

e 5.3.4.B

5.3.5.A

e 12/16/66 - Rev. 1 SNT7570A A620

Criteria & Standards_.J' Vol. I, Section 5. 3

REQUIREMENT

2. Heavy Repair Maintenance Manuals

3. Parts Catalogs

4. Test Equipment Maintenance Manuals.

The manuals shall be designed for continuous, long term service in a maintenance shop environment.

All manuals shall be in either pocket size (3-1/ 2 11 x 8 11 x less than l II thick) or standard size (8-1/2" wide x 11" high).

All manuals shall be prepared in accordance with normal commer-cial standards, using MIL-M-38784 and MIL-M-15071 as guides for format and technical content, respectively.

Contractors shall be required to provide a comprehensive training program for SCRTD maintenance personnel.

Contractors shall provide the SCRTD with course materials, instructors, training aids, equipment, and all literature required.

The contractor shall train all SCRTD maintenance person-nel to a level of competence such that work performed by these personnel will not void any of the warranties or guarantees in effect.

DATE: 07 /lli88

CONTRACT No.: ~~0~----

REVIE W LEVEL: 100% ---------

YES NO

X

X

X

COMMENT

See TP Article 16.3.1.G

See TP Article 16.3.1.G

See TP Articles 15.4.4.D & 16.5.1

PAGE_4 _ OF_s __ 0004.0.0

• qi& SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT


GROUP: MBTC Safet,, Ass11rance & Sec11rity DATE: 07/29/88

REVIEWER: R. Harvey


REVIEW REFERENCE: Mi:T~O ~AII PPOJECT SYSTEM DESIGN CO NT RAC T No.: -".b..LJl-___ _

REO. I.D.

5.3.6.A

•

e 12/16/66 - Rev. 1 SNT7570A A620

Criteria & Standards, Vol. I, Section 5.3 REVIEW LEVEL: 100% ~~~-----REQUIREMENT YES NO COMMENT

The contractors shall incorporate qualita- X See TP Articles 3.1.1 7 tive features into all equipment whenever & 3.3.7.8.7 feasible. MIL-STD-1472C shall be used as a guide, along with the design features in the 11Maintainability Checklist 11 provided in paragraph 15.3.6 of UMTA Report No. IT-06-0027-A 11 Guideline Specification for Urban Rail Cars 11

, March 1973.

PAGE_5 _ OF_.c,_5 __ 0005.0.0

• ~~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT


•

GROUP: MBTC Saf=etv, Assurance & Securitv

REVIEWER: R. Harvey

DISCIPLINE: QUALITY ASSURANCE

REVIEW REFERENCE: SCRTD Metro Rail Project System

Design Criteria & Standards, Vol. I, Section 5.4,

REQ.1.D.

.4.1.B

REQUIREMENT

QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM PLAN -CONTRACTORS

Manufacturers of the following system elements shall be required by contract to establish and maintain a QA Program and Plan:

1. Facilities 2. Vehicle 3. Train Control 4. Fare Collection 5. Communications 6. Escalators 7. Elevators

f 8. Auxiliary Vehicles

DATE: 08/04/88


REVIEW LEV EL: _l_O_O_% ____ _

YES NO

X

COMMENT

See TP Articles 15.5 &

15.1.2

These plans shall be prepared using the X See TP Articles 15.1.3 thru 15 .1. 8

5.4.2

A.

e 12/15/86 - Rev. 1 SDE13403 A620

SCRTD System Assurance Program Plan and the SCRTD QA Manual as a guide for style, content, and format.

WARRANTIES

Warranty provisions shall be all contracts, both civil

included in and system.

The following additional time warranties shall be included in the vehicle contract:

1. Carbody - 5 years

2. Truck-Structural Elements - 5 years

3. Traction Motors, except brushes - 5 years

X See SP Article 6.1

PAGE 1 OF __ s __ --mrrn..o.o

.... SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT


GROUP: MBTC Safety Assurance & Secnritv DATE: 08/04/88

REVIEWER: R. Harvey





REVIEW LEVEL: ___;;l;.;.O..c.O..c.% ____ _

e

e

REO.I.D. REQUIREMENT

I 4. Gear reducers for propulsion

- 5 years .

YES NO

subsystem

. 4.3 QUALITY PROGRAM CONTENT

A. Receiving Inspection

Contractors shall provide for tion of all incoming material. cal sampling is acceptable.

the inspecStatisti-

X

All material certifications and test re- X ports used as the basis for acceptance by the contractors shall be maintained as quality records.

B. Statistical Sampling Plans

Statistical sampling used in inspection X shall be fully documented and based on generally recognized statistical practices, such as MIL-STD-105 or MIL-STD-414.

c. Changes to Drawings and Specifications

Contractors shall ensure that all inspec- X tion and acceptance test are based on the latest revision or changes to drawings and specifications.

An acceptable configuration management and X control system shall be established and maintained.

The responsibility for control of changes shall extend to suppliers.

X

12/15/86 - Rev. 1 SDE13403 A620

COMMENT

See TP Articles 15.5.2.B, 15.5.11, 15.5.15

See TP Articles 15.5.3 &. 15.5.5



'

See TP Articles 15.5.9. C&D and 15.5.16

PAGE_2_ OF~5:....__ 0002.0.0

• 4* SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT


GROUP:

REVIEWER:

DISCIPLINE:

MBTC Safety. Assurance & Security

R. Harvey

QUALITY ASSURANCE

DATE: 08/04/88




REO. I.D.

•

e 12/15/86 - Rev. 1 SDE13403 A620

REVIEW LEVEL: 100%

REQUIREMENT

D. Identification of Inspection Status

Contractors shall maintain a system for identifying the progressive inspection status of components or materials as to their acceptance, rejection or non-inspection .

E. Shipping Inspection

YES NO

X

Contractors shall provide for the proper X inspection of products to ensure completion of manufacturing and conformance to contract requirements prior to shipment.

F. Quality Assurance Organization

The organization of each contractor's QA X Program shall be well defined.

QA personnel shall have sufficient, X well-defined responsibilities and organizational freedom which encourage the identification and evaluation of quality problems.

Contractors shall have a QA Program that X can verify compliance with contract requirements.

.

G. Qualification of Personnel

Contractor personnel performing inspec- X tions, test or special processes shall be qualified for such work based on prior experience and training.

COMMENT



See TP Articles 15.5.7 & 15.5.2.A


See TP Articles 15.5.2.B & 15.5.1


PAGE_3_ OF_5 __ 0003.0.0

• 4J+ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT


GROUP: MRTC Safety: AssPrance & Secnri h.r , DATE: 08/04/88

REVIEWER: R. Harvey


REVIEW REFERENCE: SCRTD Metro Rail Project System CO NTR ACT No.: _A_5_2_0 ____ _

Design Criteria & Standards, Vol. I, Section 5.4, REVIEW LEVEL: ~l~0--'0--'% ____ _

REO.I.D.

e

e 12/15/86 - Rev. 1 SDE13403 A620

REQUIREMENT YES NO

Records of personnel qualifications shall X be maintained and available for review.

H. In-Process Inspection

The contractor shall ensure that all X machining, wiring, batching, shaping, and all basic production operations, together with all processing and fabricating, shall be accomplished under controlled conditions.

I. Handling, Storage and Delivery

Contractors shall provide adequate work and X inspection instructions for handling, storing, preserving, packing, marking, and shipping to protect the quality of products and to prevent damage, loss, deterioration, or substitution thereof.

J. Corrective Action

Contractors shall establish, maintain, and X document procedures to ensure that conditions adverse to quality are promptly identified and corrected.

K. Nonconforming Material

Contractors shall establish and maintain an X effective system for controlling nonconforming material including procedures for identification, segregation, and disposition.

COMMENT

See TP Articles 15.5.B

See TP Articles 15.5.10.B & 15.5.12




PAGE_4_ OF~5 __ 0004.0.0

• ~w SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT


GROUP: MBTC Safety Assurance & Security

REVIEWER: R. Harvey



Design Criteria & Standards, Vol. r, Section 5.4,

RE0.1.D.

e

e 12/15/86 - Rev. 1 SDE13403 A620

R EOUIR EM ENT

I A Material Review Board consisting of appropriate SCRTD, contractor, QA and design personal shall be established.

DATE: 08/04/88


REVIEW LEVEL: _1_0_0_% ____ _

YES NO

X

COMMENT

See TP Article 15.5.9.I (for procured material only) No mention of Material Review Board for manufactured material. However the need for a Material Review Board may be implied in TP Article 15.5.21. The Contractor 1 s Quality Assurance Program Plan (OAP-003 '1!4.3.2) addresses Material Review Program Plan.

S.C.R.lD. LIBRARY

PAGE_5_ OF_5 __ 0005.0.0

e e Lli?~J METRO RAIL TRANSIT CONSULTANTS o~~JO DMJM/PBQD/Kl:/HWA

DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS

e DATE 1°/ 8 /ss • 1

StlEEf-_QF_~_

REVIEWER l,1/. G Pt2 ICE: .z;r FILE NO. W540A."20 ORGANIZATION.SA:6!1:3/1 fur11i'AtJCF & 5.ECUf'-1

/0() % SUBMITTAL FOR-----------------

REF. PAGE DRAWING NO./ COMMENTS RESPONSE ACTION NO. NO. SPEC. SECTION

I rp_c;_, I q_ /. ~ 1--r.A A),r"n I ,..s. <ha•, /d he cnpr, ·L-,,r./ L..- Se< f-~~1 O..t.,1,e...J ,//.II J) ,_,~ 'IF

o.L. / cJOO 00 0 J, ;,.< . .

~alv, .

A 1--(,EF 77-.·~ C..&"""W\t ....,.1...., R,_c..,~yeML

rP n,,. ., o L., J-1 .• 5 --in 1--e - _ f_ -rl "'_ n .v-+- £:-. r 'tj 7,5 , , _.: .. ,.,./ 1 C ifa t· S .

' d,,'e s - _ .. r-- /P r, , y vp,.,.J·-r,. _,

•-n+- n ,,:;...-~ l,V,' ii. soe_r,'_L~r/ NTEF ~ . . . n -,hn I fJ,,. ·PI ( D. ,/J-,c::.,)

2 rP-/S-, /5. 3 -2. 13 --r),,. , ',,, ,:!, ,,, ~ ,Q/' r ,'.c,;.. rl L v .W . ,1JA ..Jf/

0

,.)0 s., t,~, i<t.J1e. '4,) ~ 1it? ~-

s,·L~AA t? , . .

;~.,1. <:;·,;,.,A j \<Mf9"-5"' , e 1VrPS1VrVl5ib/ 1 Co'M.M..t.Vl,,Y-, l/ . tl, . I II" ',o /c<-YY>ni J'. ,w ,.!.££I5 , 1, .ve nJ'"erl, · 1- -.1 a.:1-

n .o~ -7 .f:.,L;{},_,.,ye.s oe,.y 'I,,. rYI ,/ I d},, h fl • ,. ; • --,-;-tJ. :,,.A

' ,1y-p rf -<:;+~n ~ /;,. ... oaJl_l,_. C: _c._,... MFtt..n::l "'" < ·,.J_;..J. r.l- 70 t>ao//-,;5 /...., .J,,, ',,. .. L.,1;,,.'l....,

~I "'f. 1'-'.SS /1..,. s ~ G. '2-1:o~ '° 2.oc> Cll')O~t

\\._,..J, ./ "/·

e e [irr~ METRO RAIL TRANSIT CONSULT ANTS ~~ DMJM/PBQD/KE/HWA


DA TE '-/0-8SSHEET / Qf_3 __

REVIEWER J' C, IA..7..-Z.£TTA.. FILE NO. j_/?ol/(•7" ,4 1.f /OD "SU BM ITT AL FOR A-lP 'l..D - Au-rt>M ~c; tfZtbAJ4¥(1Z(JL

ORGANIZATION ROLF JENSEN & ASSOCIATES, IN(

RH, rAGE DRAWING NO./ COMMENTS RESPONSE ACTION NO, NO. SPEC. SECTION

I 17P4-l'i fA6l.£"7P4-4- tA13u;- 5 f,l,ws. h,_J..-..,JJ,,--, !Z~'r:.. ~ c,ee.. ~ .. ,'"'\ Kt.V ca.J ~ ,.;-.9$

C'~s.~-L1A.J~~ /-2,t_ v,,, ,,'TIA.I _,,,s '1/vf/L-W-J3/o4,4 11 t:o""'-Mtwl,,,_, R<-~re ... se ()el?.. TP A,. ~IC.I(.._

v./114, 15 77HS? d .s CctffZ~'" 2,-Z.4,/.A , 11' 13 4-. ~ )

17~u,ei: .dL'- tv;tz~ ' z.3.3,4 J 2,4-'>7,":>le.l I

.. AND CA~Lt C,,t? t/rn1t... ATC. IA>l<Jc£ C1ecu1rs

I Coe. .:- - ~ PJ(..'-/ €C;;t>r ,.,. ,z;, J/e"Mc, ;:- =""1a

' C41'!>(~ rn ,o .4"!!> s I€.E€-3!?3 H.,,,_,F TEST

'1-..1p LJ4,,JE" ,vo .c.....JJ. ....,,. C - --. - . ·-r H)D 5

fVlt-vurn, ---r;,> ~ '*' (; l l) /.s? fe /;<Ii>/- --

/Al T7/-r 7>W,c F ,c,,,e ,,_ ~ ~AJi' ,er, I?,,..,,,..., ~--=,J

z 171'4-U ~eTP4-7 hP..,111 /IP.I LITY :5/hut'.h P.4-!SS- .Z::Ecc-~3 se,: ko\.A..l \°< t.V, t."'--7 I i$t4 ,,.,,.~~

J lui..,r:: Nro s 11-~ &e,cutr MJIZ. G"' ,,,,, /,V v;e; Co""~e ......... ~!) ,ile.,, P• .<5 • ( !,<t. TP Arkoe

r:::-/1 ~ ("' --P-. TE"e,,'1 Z, Z • .d.J.A 7 -"-,~ ..d Jl,,,4-3.,7,:,,tP. t:r / 4- A-.!,) I

2, l1P4.z6 4-7 FIL<- ~/J7"E/A .Z, s: -!, , I. -~ U/P'~ 4TC, !>H ~.~\ Kt..J\t..v

MuN·/.....,"-··-- 77) A.= £J~u,.,.,~...;;. '·0 ,m COM#..t.,J<,./>r'"J i{q fV"- ~~

Avm-~c. •' V'(1--Pr . d,n,.. N'P-' '$~,<,) 'd. ,..,

4-7, S' TV 'S.7' / Iv - •~

vnn1 001-01u 11 •'

e e [ll?~l] METRO RAIL TRANSIT CONSULT ANTS ~~ OMJM/PBQD/Kl/HWA


DA TE t./o-8SSHEET Z- Of ?

REVIEWER J' C' 1A..7..-Z.E:T7A, FILE NO. /l)(Vi/ ,4 /, ?n /f "'· /

/00 "'SU BM ITT AL FOR A-4, -z..o - Au-rt>"" ":[le ,,&u...,G111UZ4L ORGANIZATION ROLF JENSEN & ASSOCIATES, JNC

RH. PAGE DRAWING NO./ COMMLNTS RESPONSE ACTION NO. NO. SPEC. SECTION

4- l~-z_ </.z ,Z ,,4. r/4. .,_ r _L, ~ z_s. 3,1 .e.e-r.,u,2~ //Tc s. ~ ,=., .... a..l Ret.11 e W

AuJ.JblluJw~ -JtJ J3 ;:- p ~ Ii I l:;¥::h 1,1177-1 (th\\M.ev'-~~ R..<..,f'tl"-S.f

fL 1 TO ,u A-11c. SP,e,;i;r::u:;·~-c • t:r 2.L\.

'6' TPII-Z/ ,j; P.>us- TPI I-L ''v' ape"*- ;e; .-.c mr ...rc0"/ -::,..-t::,t:,-s Z4 ,, S,e. F, o\c,_ < Qc1.11c."'-' IY t?.Jll C,{, e, TP I

C,1/,,i(J( l) - •I ,c-V,-F 7,?t.7 .J::ff"e- ~.!j> ~ I\ A,uh C:::..ow\lt\Q..""',J....., .?~sPo,s~ i V Arl,,11 11:1.3. C...1

,, l:t 3 3 ! :5/kJ () l l> /N[)k·" ~- P,-H,s. AN l> #19vC- IV a

:s,,,he,- Ctr eu ,r~ ~~ S ,.-1 IIJ V TFl. "

lj) IP/t-zS TA131,,- TPI !- 3 J:jl;"WI P"<J- •_:::;;., 0 Yr 4 AJCP#f17o,J - F /L '!.. Ce, ,-g~,4 .Jr, f<"//n,./_,;

z. 4. 2- "?:> IZ-~-3././ _,,(.'"°,& t'J(/1~·,-: A $e< F, 1-'\A,l ,, • ..,, .. v

AAA/ nr Z£>o .4, A.,i,, •AJ. Po1-<JT .&r.P °t.o\ll\Me,.....,½ Q.._,c~~~· i ~ -· ,LI'. .4,-,, IAN'·, r/ A/n,U ,..,_,~/,41~ ,Hpl)e:: - 1-i H,

fu.Jh AlnT -'>-Z.~ ;1'}5, -- ,II"-- 1 1N ~,,._

,, ,,

VOOI -001-0114 I I

• e llr?~IJ METRO RAIL TRANSIT CONSULT ANTS L~~ DMJM/1'8QD/Kl/HWA


1u.:v1EwER J' C' IA..7..-Z.E:TTA FILE NO. ,;;o,,/ ,,; & / 0 //. J. I

/00 'I' SUIIMITT AL FOK A-lP 'Z.O - Au-rn"" ~S:: '&tz,._,4;,V'Q4L

KU, PAGE OKAWING NO./ COMMLNTS NO. NO. SPEC SlCT ION

• OAT[ /O-/o-es-SHEET 3 OF --;

OkGANllA TION ROLF JENSEN & ASSOCIATES, IN(

K[Sl'ON~[ ACTION

7 -/.J iJOZ/8 D, !=>Tl\>JC<c.$ i3 c-7W t: °f:A.I Ceos:.s. - P~s.A6ES :,u t, ..... ' ;?c:..i.Jt e"" . 1..(....- n OZ--i...~ $ l/01,)A.) /JA J T,;1/7-s.t'-- }°,T> A_ 1.vh C /---X ~ ·61) s ce ... .-t,.,d.., Re~an,is.e 'J,-Z., (; <iL'> ~ 1 ·"Hl=- ~- I ,,..,.,,, .. /'IIVM A-tlnwE'D F3Y /L">- tr 7:F -z_. 4- (;) ni.4 B, dv~TFJH~ ;,' • r-"_;, • 4 ,. 4-

i i

I I

' '

V. • c-: !::,o-• --1 • c:.:, •

• e. Li[?~ METRO RAIL TRANSIT CONSUL f ANTS ~f§lfj DMJM/PBQD/KE/HWA

Csa.,,s R~ce,e «.l

Se.t:.-ho..... ill Oc.c."' '8,. o"7 b 'I

e DATE /0 -24. -gS SHEET / OF .... 2...--


REVIEWER M I,,,~(?A/"I FILE NO. IA/pol /.1620 ,4..9. / I DD % su BM ITT AL Fo R ..,_,4.L..J<& ... 2.:c.O_--LAL.TL-'C...____.()L-"'w"-iJ~.a....:..· ____ _

ORGANIZATION ... Sc.-,, .... A.,__4_,5,"----"'Q1LA.L.-. _____ _ 1

REF. PAGE DRAWING NO./ COMMENTS RESPONSE NO. NO. SPEC. SECTION

ACTION

l . II~ n 11c- 1 MA-<T MOUAIT/:Yl 11/vY> 11,JALl JVin,u,-,£() 5~4. F,"1.a. I 1~ev1~,.u \<<LI. v~~ 033>

'I,~·

' Af"J(){:-¥'><: MU.<;T (DMPJ_ y WJT H <£t'.T/Oft) C.o.w.«l""' +-"> K.e.5ft,,t,,e

1'2?77 1=1>ii:n 1Lt)nf:1>.S /).{: TITJl=fl CVfl- rt tl 3

/UJ.~ f-~p 7 (,.f;.A11=::u, 'tA/ii;.;~-rP1AL CAFFT I

Oi'D£1'.'<;. . , r-1,·, .f . 1< ~/'Ull/tfC#IJ• -- .., ... ···~ •• - . ~ Jv.,. r. +l.c. f/C-"/, lrs,;,.,... ,;:,,;-1,·:. ' . -

z 120 0 -/2d T'1FKI!; ; s ..... ( Fe- f ID;, r r A- o·~ /-J, ~ .,.,/Aµ_ /,.,.vf ,, !

v rw, 1,.,--~f3

uo <'.c. I,();., (_ D,.,- J.J. C .J ..,,,. • ..SJ. .. ,IJ .·'f. 1o:C I(<~ (Fl&>f!~C(; J ft, fl,," 5,.,,.J..--,., (" 0 •./ Q-}19?

SPEC I FICATJOAI..S

?, TP·C-,. $,').J-/1..I, I/ •. 1 S'. I . r - v~-:.f' r -f.o ARJ,,j& 2,S. s ... f,--._\ PcJ1evV ,fo .4 1J" r, -,-. ", '?,

' c"~me11 b K~,/.,r1!,i!!: a;, e,

4- TP..&A J< '3,, I - h 'v€k. .C, ,Rrc r - - ·" - J A .. .J::. I ,r;- i. d. £ n rA/J !c_._e,e. F, o\W4,. \ n,t:..,,1!...v AJI, .. ,-~.., (4,::r.1 · .- .,.,....J.3 '. .,,tl,[,L/, cL-JJ L.r A I ~ • ;/

. I • • ,C CoM.,....t. .... ~., ~c:,0 .. 11'"•~ 2. J I t I '· .. .

c- T P-JO.-: 10.?,.7 ·r:_ J ,, ... J~,_P,~ t,.,:, , .(. Arr ,,cl.7c /,.. =u,~.:c v+ ,;;, - x• f,,w.\ ~t\}1tiJ ylJ-# '• •; • V

- ... I , • • • I

,, f'h· ,:~r;: J ./-., h€ .(cJ,,,..;.;1,,;.J . <.Lo-,11 I• \i,G ~Q...";:i\l,o\\.<;e tt'2.f>

L,.,, ,.,J ,J_ .J +~ cnr>J, '

• Ll!?W METRO RAIL TRANSIT CONSULTANTS ~~ DMJM/PBQD/KE/HWA


• e DATE /0 ,z4-g5'"' SHEET G OF 7

REVIEWER /\1. ~«'At1 FILE NO. W()()fd/,ttJ ,4,9,{ ORGANIZATION G~/ Act.$ -QA: /oo % su BM ITT AL FOR _,_A:u,.b""'"201L....~A:CL..I.V ... t-~---------

REF. PAGE DRAWING NO./ COMMENTS NO. NO. SPEC. SECTION

RESPONSE ACTION

{_ TP-11-2 T.4LI., rP-11-1.. /Vo.J.A-.J ,o;, .C:¥tl 1 • • ·•.t ,o: .. f- J,., t,J...,.. .. fl. .,, ...,,, ,c - "'.)ce C, .... 11.\ R 1.J,t....,

-,,-,,._2 4 1" .,.l.1,r T p ./1-"- l"I . .. 1,/:,i .J.: .. 1.,.,J..s ,l.uJJ J. /. ' I •r J) " ~ •.•. M; - WO A, ,UN.Mt!...., .l, S Ji?c-,j%,., S't. jJ

:, ~3 S

'7 f P..lJ..S" 1i. 4. I TL.r: r,.,J~-·;.. ,.,,,.J- ~c-,p4t ,.~,,•J. -1-o 1, ,<;' J' <.I L. -)(lf.. '·"'--\

Re"1"-....J

... ~ ./-.J.,,. j fl,A,,/.J £..i: 4.A '! I ftl • "' ~ ..... !l~ a~~ /l:)PI_. c..o ...... ~"...._+-, Ka.,po"'"1~ 44-

R TP-/'-27 /'l,.1/ A.,,c,...J .f-o ;,.1J.:. 1- ('V>I?/ :.J..,._ Jo l.,,... '~ ,o,vrc.,,J

,~: l-l, (h~I 1"-1-- A/,.. b ~. I •

<) TP-1,;-4- Jr;.,. ft Tn i.c rn~-1..-/,c .,..,J rA ... :,1-,::~/- A-.},J ,, [l.,l.:L, ::,<' Q f . ...,G<.\ Qc,Jl,..; ,,J.,...~,-S"·~;

Ll.lv"'""''E-' fl""- 0 ·- ,, ./-., fhE=- .{(li,,.,..J.;, {.,. l.r-AJ!!.. . ,t. r-. Me......,V'> ~P!J11.Se. lJ..1

A •, .\ -/-1..r. .(';"~./. rr:: I ., o~ I!;'",,_ <J •

ID -· '.:"x/.71.·1 A VF ( - . l"C f'- Ow ... ,. - t: .I -./- N.,.s. n.,, •.. ,. :,_ '

N,s:. LI .,.l Vl-~~ T:f/,,-,. 1A/~ If ~ ,=,., • :~ \IF,,.." L', ~ A t,o· u

""" v ...{,:nr, .:.._ f-,~ :, 11 ~ r .. ~:-1.·l:..; ~ l' .. ,v-L- .. ..J. .i .... ~ /,',._ .C{.

' ..., .. ..

I

e e C ,05S JC<'- (e,c ~<-~ DATEl!'l,85 Lil?~ METRO RAIL TRANSIT CONSULTANTS

~~ DMJM/PBQD/KE/HWA .5~"""'""" TJ1 Oc.c. ti. ~5"- OC. Jr. 9

SHEET __.._OF,£ -,


REVIEWER ½ A)?,J fu ill: F 1. LE NO. --~~J ~CO=_,_I --:..A.,_lo~-Z-=-==O::..._ __ ORG AN I ZATION __ S_t..._~_-___:~_ ....... .c_~_~.........::~::...=:::=----

\.Q) % SU BM ITT AL FOR _:1-\_,__..::S:::C:.....>...:-..., __ ___,_A-'--'<o"'-"'2,~Q'-------

REF. PAGE DRAWING NO./ COMMENTS NO. NO. SPEC. SECTION

RESPONSE ACTION . l l5- c, 15.2.Z..J,..1. f"HANC.L: " $ •I u\-,£ " !+A.?'. 4/Z.O A -=1..vs."",c " ...,,..., ~ . .,_ I=',., £c, I t?c-•· • .. • c.J}-.,,Yf,(,k-

trvi.-----, - ~~A.«.,.O IA - - 1 .. 1(.,c l\ .-c Co ......... 1 ,....,+ Ko..$4'011.S e. ,-··- ....__ • C.~VV\ rD Sc"TD S-=• tt: 49

J

'l. \1-l:l ~"-\.'::: TP-11- I b.. <:)'"' C..O,., L'• f'.=.cJa... '"ffi i:::-.s 1: Cl_• = I.."' C 1,:, ~ .. i=. '1.&<. l l<c.v11.W I ""'\i. ,· ~J_.

'2~ \. l~ L_ . .,.A,.·· 1h._ ...._,._ r,_ - . - t..: I" Co11.4114 en+- ~15/0,..se ~ 'l. . t I'""""' "'C = l. p~,,~r.a.A"" lS. '2. 2: A

\:""rM · · • A-_._ As. >~~- -~._..,._ { 3 <:...op~-.u

~Cl,t£)7Ul..€ [de. A,~ f=t'>!Z • FAc.i /r . -

fl->="""C).u,,t.,;"

:)_ '9 -'.)_ ':,, Vl.r, ,s\-1=~-- U-.,.-z_,..,-,n A~=L'1 c:c 5,,. F,,,1..r:., ( l<tv1 e,.,J

• ~ ~.,·,f) V

' . "'0 "27 (.o,'4,~t.-v'- Rc~(){)Ni<:!. ttH

0=·· •·•Ll. IS. 2, -i - A I- .•.•• \.- ~ ~-r-.r.-- /~ r,,o;i,;.s

C' --~ b""'(..U5 /'4c A~ =.-..o /fl,-pf'.AA-L. • J').-- l,1"'~ ,,

• • LJ[F~ METRO RAIL TRANSIT CONSULTANTS ~:4!0 DMJM/PBQD/KE/HWA

• DAT£ \o/2q_ !es SHEET -z_ OFS::'


REVIEWER d\-A-a.\J &Nt- Fl LE NO. ___________ ORGANIZATION -~-'--'----~_ .... ffi:.'-"-'----A-'-"'-'-" ---\ 'QO % SUBMITTAL FOR .....1:k~o::~C-=--.!:.A:!..lo!:..:'2-0=::::::__ _____ _


v:.. ~ r,,o f:-OA+,"v {\_,,._, -n I>. - \,.ic:r ~L>J,c....; ~OL F,l'\c...l

., 88 ' Ji '-l 6:ivi I '

. "" COIW,11\C!.••·--' Kc90ASE'. ~.r.e,s

'PA.i I'\ C:,IZ A(lf.J l '5. 2_ '2. A

l=clZ ~~J- A'> '$ Dk"~c,1=~ (< CVf'\i=-C:

Sc.1~ --• .::- /1ao--h- I>,'\ ~no .... ';, ~~ ... " /

r.,;,. --n.,~ \- 9LC.N

2..<i- "'"' ft.. 1.-~eyz_ "li\ .\-i" l,C +v \ ;e-\-, ~ r. ' ' ~ !>t .. Ro.\'. (\)05. ~ s .,-~e, <:; 6_:;J "'-~+.,:; cno,',.. ' 'TO IA < ,~ 2." 2.b 2. (...

~1C'Ec..~C11 r t tv? /\., 1 ·~1 -\-,--.,r- ,~. ?A12.~r.Po11 oi

vs. '2. -z, It-,,. 1·e.

I. I •. ..\=.,, ,::.llc.t= \.\-Az,.,.,n ,A __ ,,"" It.,'\' ,

i::- D '2.. ~ ~Ac., rdY2-

P,ppn···L_

~tTEtJ • . C. .• - • -. i-:1:. c.. ti (l . ..' . \ )?c, .. 'le, \'2-'<::,:,..'()

.. •.

rr.,, - - - - - - -M-~l'I:: ( IS.2.'l..># J.~ ,p/,. Pi!fl..lFl'tc., tn:-~r I

' ArJOAA_, '2-~D

• e /:wW METRO RAIL TRANSIT CONSULTANTS ~~ DMJM/PBQD/KE/HWA


DATE !2-'\ 1·85-SIIEET _3 OF ~::S

REv1EwER -\-tA-aA +-\-vd FILENo ___________ oRGAN1zAT10N c;;;F¼=' - A..-~ iCX2 % susMrrTAL FoR p,. Co z..o ~~c


3 .:- 6 3. 3. 1-. L C. \.\-nN lo c£ ,, R -=~<c 12.E" NC..lc° : ;,,. .,.L. c.. L., • ~ I"- . .., .-n 5"_L ,::."~' Rc111e..u

qie.-= e,.•-4 •. A ... .\-, r L· I.:=._ 7 11 ,-·~-~ ·~-~ L-..;.F- Res.Pti ... ,t.. tr ,.. 6-~--~e,

4 I!.. - ::, \lo- 3. \ .n II.. 0 I) •c::~= ''. . ·"' P.l""'°\'.A • I I

I W "'-11\l.' ·' , c. II

A. "'D......2..~~ia:T"' - (l_=-\--~j C • II A-lttl ~ L !..:-. \

~--( l • A--;: .-.:... ' ~, D ~ /" fJr.. rh AA I I\)~~ - - - ~\I JO \_.l • I Addcc.J ..

11$..11.}d~d ,,.u..(1)11

\ -~ ' 1 C\.~l,c:...(,la I<,

e,;'.C:,V ,,_ 11, "" €t.o..C.,l'\

tOP• c... ·•

c" I ki-'l IL.1 t>..o o ~, ,.s...,,.. <;,b"Y'v~c..,=-

,, "\',\-\2 "s.<= ,.C.. s"~ :;,., ~~ < ··~ •• ~" e. ~,.1\4..l \(e.v,e.uJ

,p,,t;::· n,; l ,..,; ()/\·, ,1- .. ,. V co ... .,,.~~ ~~--.~~ ,± 5?

-t"\.\,, \J.. r.o<J$ - - (L.\ '\> IU)r\'.:; r &: - "°"" I 1 .,: , ,\--

t,...)' ·- .. ·"' '-.(L_ cF- S ,pi:-,-, "'L ,~ (,,,. ~U\~~

c.A.-~ , • ....ab'N A i)H--\~; "'!!,, l." \..\,.. c.." . ;)

(o \5-,o I

(<'. -cw 14 \-'= !Ai , ,rJ; \5. /,,_t,,..fo / "'s. 'F Q\., \.<.W.S. •. ,, ~e, t=. <\(;(,,\ £'c..1}1(."1

L~-30 L 3..t'Z.. \ \ U ~ ~ ~V.SI"-'""-I/ f:~• -"'- l'I,?!,\- t..O''-:"'OUIZ.b~ ' Co".,..q,""+ Rc,po,s e. 11'

N..11 S-t y L...,•A.,,A~ ,. r.... ;, 0~ ll .;:;; SI -

. . .

• • Li[?~ METRO RAIL TRANSIT CONSULTANTS ~~H DMJM/PBQD/KE/HWA

-()J\/£ \0 ( ?...'\ /~-SHEET ___1::_ OF _5"


REVIEWER __ -\ __ \~\ _(1>,_,P-_V_~l:\u~_k---'-__ F ILE NO. ___________ ORGANIZATION $fl~ - s:~ - A>J. \/({..kJt'J Le \CO% SUBMITTAL FOR -~~~-~~'2....c:>----~~~\_c..-____ _

REF. PAGE DRAWING NO./ COMMENTS RESPONSE ACTION NO. ~O. SPEC. SECTION

(_{ frl . ,t--) u;, ~to A,2... ~ I ' ~I=: (. L1 8:_.\t_'~ - ~ - . . ~ \.l t::::s..

f->12.-oc.~ ( "" "'nnv."\ c LL."'--0 > ":='N s ' "2_>-=c P,.f\J • l - 'Id- .... ;.~--.- 1"\1-,'(Y'\ ..... 1-

<J rs-,o IS. 4-, "pn @ A 12- "c, ;2.A <> u -

' I \5"'\.r'... \ n_l..,,,_.,',\a_M"'~l.;\ ,t;. - ~(COt<:.t~,\;ti .r¼' •. .-. 'lrt> 5:?c... F, """'t R,.J,e,u

. Co1AA~to11,,.i 5 ,(e.:sf't"d-<..

I>. -~dl..-\-~ r AA O "-\s ,.rr. \.\ ; A • ,... s z.

V\o.- \ • ij \,"l.t . h ,b· ·- l 11r. • • t\ /ti\ C C.,Y\AII \a.J,__

I'". \l 1nl-l•«::,,,.\ ,, 1=~ C,,,..,:\-.',.,.,.\L. \ ' \ (.{

• \ ~ • er .'0.o.. (\r • a : "tk ...,.,_ .. " \.\.: r. -.. "' -~ (_ ~,~,-~ .. ~t .. ·,nlor~\11,-,-- (.~ ~

) -cl.~ \ ~ ~ ,.J· \,_. ,-,1 •• ~c.:-Ml..· ,h.V.,.,"-,.ty". l - .,

---· - .. -- -· ~ \ I V .

I £,. kc.r>c...~,\,.; \ ,\-•• \· ,., ,.,,,Lt'Y\ o \~ - • -.t"s '- ..SEE <; uf- , '; +oi:l Jhc h/

I ~ \... " ~ \ r, .. -. .. ,,..l:" 1 , • "'\ I \ <;c_ V -, ~.11 "il. ••-·I""'\ \ f'?~« t/ '""O o?J.I · \ p _ ,'<:;: -- ·,_ ,. ~ ),, -1;;:: )..,., ,.. .\ ,. r >. " • "

I ) V

11/~)Ar '- J\1I .. ··-· - I I .

-'\U-£Sc A~ r .i/, ~~"\ -\,o \

~ (\<. ' , ' <n."' I~..!... .... ; ~Q' I~{.. , '

\

e e e LJ[?~ METRO RAIL TRANSIT CONSULTANTS ~~ DMJM/PBQD/KE/HWA


DATE IJ-S' ~8S: SHEET [;"" OF 5"°

REVIEWER H. 11._.~/,11. r,.,, ltA('l FILE NO. _W.,__,,Q'-"O"'l-'-A-"'6"'2"-'o'----'-'A.__,_.. 9c..:. ..... / -- 0 RG AN I z AT I ON -->:;.,,. ... A.L...;.f_,,5,__ _______ _ I OD % SUBM ITT ;\L FOR JA~b~2~Q_-~A:~I~(_~--------

REF. PAGE NO. NO.

C

DRAWING NO./ SPEC. SECTION

,~. 4

COMMENTS RESPONSE ACTION

E' S<!IC. ,P 3.3.'1.13

e e e [II?~ METRO RAIL TRANSIT CONSULTANTS ~~ DMJM/PBQD/KE/HWA

c,.,,ss R,le="'"'"":::i.Q.c,J·-10 "4. /.IT lk<- t:t. l3 7 -c,2.09 I

DAlE-~-~-v_Z_l+,-L~t-nSHEET I Of~2-


-----..J ------REVIEWER / • · / ,q,.t;:.c Fl LE NO. _____________ ORG ANI ZA TION __ S__,_>'..c:~c:.-;"-~'-""'---------

L-£<=%.,.# % SUBMITTAL FOR ;:J 6.:1 0

REF. PAGE DRAWING NO./ COMMENTS RESPONSE ACTION NO. NO. Sl'EC. SECTION

I ,3 Q -003), ~, -,..,...,..,.,,,L '

... ~ ,.I,:: £ _.. " -- - ',t!! l). • 1 I •l.Cj ~ .. ,.) .. / ,,'"- f,~\~J ,'i; tT

-- - J vma-• -., ..... -r-U£ ' ~ - _.. .::r Rf< L/ ,r . .<r -r;t;,£ <:"LAI - ~,s ~ _, _,,,, .,,,,r, J - ~ ="'- ..,

~.,..,,,~ <"'~a-:<" . ,,,,.,-,- '-7'7,/,;- ./ c:,~ ..,,-:,-...,..G',./.. .s"~6~--

C"61 -- A ''7 4.,,/ - /4 -r.a - . ,,,,,, __ ,._

~ ~v ~ ..i/ ~,,... w-

c--= /. A

2. 7 0-<"?07C:. <:,rL A/o~/ ""/ D:tt~Lhi,t,(..;_ D..<,\;t~(l,t ~ti..tJ>tl.·1f -t.1Z', - -

3 e aLJOB h ~-, ,../...,~.I!" #'j 0 u ~.-\ "'"" ~(~ ~.'t c, ,;1 /

~-.,).) . . c,v •' ei .1v ·1.

.

.,J. '" - '-lo

0-0/"{i) ..,,,.,., .S c)G<St,ST m..,-,_,,c ~ ,_ --• ~.,,.<&S -,...Ai',,_ _ _,.,,.$ s .. no\< Ii 2. Gl -007 18\tiJ !'J10·VV -,.., -o</t'> 'b /,J";)t(,9' 77,</., -n,,c A;/L/<1:.J,.,WAM' H"1,c hrJ7' 81'.r,v -

P,,qs-r W1t-SH1,ec /4.,.v,9.-.-0 .

5 ?~ f)-06~ 'h 3t/,: C L-c.--;- ./- - w" _,,,,._ --ss -:P") ??,'~ ...,-n!!

E.,.,, , =.c:s ,,oe~.,,.,.,, "'1°b>/llt!.#Alr~ -r.uE

:A/ZS-r /'>i,c,..,~I dK ,1;7' 7Z> -=• - ~--..-". - -,.,0,C< ~h-r - ~,. Su- - CC'""*'"' /.

""7&> /7:?,<1/,Ah-,fl',J -- ,. - - r 7D /?GJ.t-v,?? /

v11111.rm1.11111.111

• • e [ff~ METRO RAIL TRANSIT CONSULTANTS p~~ DMJM/PBQD/KE/HWA .

DA TE /!'kv '2 1 l'f-"i'Z • SHEET 2- OF z..


REVIEWER -z;-'V (dA(¥< FILE NO. ------~------ORCANIZATION __ S.~Y.~~~~~---------t-/f",:;L?ffl'.i % SU BM I TT AL FOR _Ac...;.:G=¢:....;;.O __ ---=,q'-T2'--'~=----------

REF. PACE DRAWINC NO./ COMMENTS RESPONSE ACTION NO. NO. SPEC. SECTION

,,::. 16'} CJ·06'7 --;7#/.:S ·z:.o ,<J /0A/ L S-/'IChls .v-,c,,), - R~~,,/S rd~ ~\\ .,t c'omA?v.,.,J,,_-._ . .. ,~ ~di~). .4 t.. ,,'/ot/,:;,'I A/oT _,,<) 7J./"

' ~~ ,~. ,<ln! ~,,;772"'- _, - ,,LC::,~ , "'/ T#'..< c::;· ,.,_,,

d-<7.c"/< R~oe~s ~r c"..?.!. ~S.UA PA"A h ...., -";j _'}¢,,./

/1/,0,t!~,vpJ --"-o«-:!'2! ,;,,,4 ~.i-A:'Si P.,c,r,<1..-,c eco ~•,,d,4~

"7-r-~ wr=' ..,.~ 'r'.:.,.,.. .... ...,:: ... ,,,r.p ,40,.,,r,,,,,_ 0"1~-~

l-7?> ,P,e,:, ,/,>,/J .,; ..,,, ? c' ,!. ,IT' ,.,,e ...,,, ,i? ,c,e,., .-/ - -

7 //-'j O·//.S'C -;;-:;/< a,,N'.-.u.v'~ .S#?Jw.s ,,; 'J:>L7i6'/ ,I! ~,.? Lv,fl.<.L, . r»,()(,/,t/;-',O, su, lfl ,us -'17,v'o -'17 ~= L.,<:rz, ~e.

_, __ ,-

'#? /,.,,,, /t' .,,,;-rrs --zy...,- .s1,:;,,,/;u .. /¥7,/<r ,er ,,r?'xh?:T.b

~o,<? #Al.L.,l:'_.,./,ov ,Q,,vJ:, J/C,,u,,./ ~ C°L.d,A1.<7A1a.

-X~.L .u<'J.,,,... ,?r, ...1"- i'. ~, ~~'"b,to -- ' u

?" -r,y,r /A/.au_, /# --Z,,r ,tt.· - ,<

/ (9 c'/Jrk .1) ,;:,,./ ,I(} ,./,al. ,.,,_,,.y ~ ,,,~,,,,.,, P/tlAJ-r>ed_Q#:

'7" /NTO ·- ,. , ",v~ ~/,2,.a S ti C,;. ,C:,7 ,

,,., - /,5/.-V~ /o--rr - .... _.._ ,;.,-,/~ ,,t.. V n-. :s ,d ' L

/V / (*,..,, L' ,_/ 77'~ h/..a~ -~,e -r,vL .? A 'l) ~ IC "'

h/~,t/',, ~o, v.r p""" ,6 ,<.,£,-' DL.L,9.s,r ~a =>v~~

h/,-rN -r, -,;., ~Ir;.. ,· 5-,-,,,, v ~vdr s-

VOOl·OOl·!UH·l/1

•

e e C..f\o'S s 1?c:...C.e"'cv1...c.-c e [Jrr~ METRO RAil TRANSIT CONSUl T ANTS o~~ DMJM/PBQD/KE/HWA

S..tZ..c..f..,o#(_ (!J

\:lee,. J::r 97-ozct/ DATE r;;JU,}',t) I I

SHEET / OF >


REVIEWER /11. Ic<Bf<'AI"' FILE NO. ~ 1 IO!tb'20)f{J87.- ORGANIZATION l'11?TC S.,115 '

L / [ % SU BM ITT AL FOR -<..Al.Jl:,.,_.2,:.>De__..,_A_._._[....:C...=--------

RIT. PAGE DRAWING NO./ COMMENTS RESPONSE ACTION NO. NO. Sl'EC. SECTION

I SC- 4 c; . I Cor?~n+ f,mo ,;_, J,q.sf /,:.,,,. - " . , ,..),= I I In ,,,., V .S .S, • Sc.c.\,o,.. f'cwr-.~ H.11\. ~t··s-e!'l .. . I ,J . I/ .... c ,::s •

2 I P-11-1... f,,bll!' f P-/7- I (VAA EIZ.1- A .J J <NO. .J-. CDl<L /-ti,, fll<' DI'. E ..J u 11> If fa ,.. R~ v,e,cd S'" CDR l IDfl

t A -,cl],;:,., 4 : . .'.J.AJJ.J,c;, ,.C .C; !.,.,-~ on},; r.l.Ji=( fl}Jl'll, ,17,1/,'o

, .,,_11~J oui- ,;.., 5n,=r_ (o,..,J . ,4.,,+. I o.D . •

" roe. ii; /'2. /;, 7- 4 , 5' 1< V c l. ,, "J J bG ,-L. -d -1-o 3S- KV l<evc S,c.cJ J}¾JA 0-19-~v

tu o~ov·-~,,, OAJC,-...-1-f:~, .... ,-JJ, --ftll?/1,ftAj,./nr.d v.J.rz,J j,., • rf SEc /1()-.., .s

, -, I /2 /s 4 Jg.

4 -p-J-3 1,4.2-R \/,n.,;f.,, ro,J.s·,c+f'"'U w:I-J.. Or,r'"ll?At,;,"' Pf.AN ...,,.fL '<e.t.ltSe c( .,.i,,, (l}f. ?, ' ,0 'q,,:,

"'"{ n:, ~ io I S\/ c ) "'- CJoE~.4 f1;,a See. ~'n· \ \ c • .\ t. Cf?o.u-ovicies.

P/.o:.., rlAt!!d v,-1,,bEQ. /C)~{.. ;;;,i .~-+ ... s . .J.L,cr;:- , \.1,,1.·I>

rloul)i= r110«-011f"IE'S S, f"<' ~Ac,(.: 2 - 7, / ,~ r>AR.,o.

"J..I ExL:L·+ 2 -1 . ' V ( '

~ iP-t;>- 2. C), I, 2- /.J./JS I l':,7, 4b - r -s~tl-- ./.-L,, wo<>J '' Pn,, . .c.., ,,

l<ev,:,e.l ,JI., p;. Al/,

bt? t ~"r ~ '' L.,n '' ,,_ ,J d \\ + I tf"~ If • 0 ,,~, V

.

vn111.rn11-1nR.111

e [Ii?~ METRO RAIL TRANSIT CONSULTANTS [[~~ DMJM/PBQD/KE/HWA


e e DATE s/2t/Y2

/ I

SHEET 2- OF _l

REVIEWER t1, I"'jr?AI"' FILE No. ,S 4Q0 ;1£2°:>rof?..... ORGANIZATION ft(?TL 5,{1~ S l.,/ r % su BM 1rT AL FOR _,_,A='-z"'"v__,_A .... r.....::cc:;._ ________ _

REF. PAGE DRAWING NO./ COMMENTS RESPONSE ACTION NO. NU. SPEC. SECTION -b T P-//-1 I I I. I AAIS I C Vt1, 4. • AA ·-E_,.,+L j,A ( ht:F-~ ,..} ;, • .,.J . {;},,,. ,,_cf &l'fjj}, .,A,·" u

1,r-d. IJ.:: .. ;.c ,./J '>..Jr: A~1...DcJ1>P1',.-lc AIF••• ,,~f,~, 'CF • , ' '

t TP-/1-1 II. I. I A.5T/'? A/21. - (o 0 "t:cf -I: .J-.J 1; - " .s .(, I, •ou. oR . ·" 'l,;,c C Hvf ·D,:n G--lv·AtvJ?t'd ) G • .J.,)Q< tJN I,:,v,- Rc.vi,e o '7 ~0-•~·v

I\ .,,J Sf,=-,,J PRorJur-lc ., . .

g 1 P1J· 'L I I. I , I LJ.5, T 11 01 q9 D~70 D<,3f f)l,')5, c D 2240 - R~v, ;c.,:/ Jl-~11,-1'!J·VU

F, ·-1-' , 0(2. Co_,,. c··.=µcv f - , /~' " ,;,~.,,,,f- " T£.<+ f1 ~Jh.,J .L.,, ,. : ,, .::. , r_ f o+- fkic /.,)/,,, o-f' I:~(_ I.. c-l,./V'dA,rd.

. CJ TP·/1-Z. }I. I. I A_<;TH 079D - J.AJffD+ ,, U/J1>1C1:,fo,.,,t= 1 A,...J \<ev,,ed· ,Y'-',j,.,.,IJ·'O"

()-." f.,.,,f'.J" /. cJwf:Fc• ",..(" ..... .J '1 0/ ... ~J,;c'1 • . .

ID TP·/1-2.. II. I, I A<.T/'1 l)/ 49 - (o-~lr-J,~ J;f}F h\/ AJJ,.;,. 1?w,su:f o>-"(J,<o,,0 ~ V

'' A+ (oMMEl'lC1Al Po:,_,,,cp F~t:,,ut:Nt,',:-< 11 A-(]1;~ "T .,,,).+,_;,., ;11,,.+,.,;,;,.} s 11 • •

,

1, rp.//- 4 /1./.J IV [/vlA- 5T? D ,4 DflA= .,.JI., J..A ~ J,,,c.c~ d, uo',,,/,. ~ .. ,,.) \lc:o.'£., A../rl ,-;-J.;' A",,"'";,,,;,.,fl!' .,,;-..., l?F.{F~- ,- .

VUOl lHJl-11\H,l /l ' . . .

e [Ji?~ METRO RAIL TRANSIT CONSULTANTS ~~o DMJM/PBQD/KE/HWA


e

REVIEWER /1, It(f) (?Al"> FILE NO. S 44-0 dbZO KO g2--.l/-I--% 5 u BM I TT AL FOR ~ftu..,:b.::.2.;;..0_AU-LT.=C.,:;__ ________ _

REF. I PAGE NO. NO.

DRAWING NO./ Sl'EC. SECTION

COMMENTS

e DATE s

52~)f 7

SHEET -----"'- OF 3

ORGANIZATION bRT<- 5, /2 <1 S ?

RESPONSE ACIION ~

) '&- lre-ll::Ll 11. I, z_ Ll,V~L B)I, > - T,-,se:,d fbra: wo,e J . " R~+u,,",;ie,,'' K_!\}1":,«C( y ~ ,I g :ij U

- - /

b Ji,, '' p .) J ., \ • V) • . ,, If f'Eµl? J?t) C::LJr:1 A/V'cl. rn2fNO, • J

11 ITP)3-/ I 13. /. z /11 J t,, - f. - l,o 5 ! - F#« c ot.Js,~ h"''"' c. h w/1/"i v Of_lj,e,~i,,..J,o;., £oQo,.., ''US'• +,;' 11 /'11l~~c ''

-.2. ~,;.s«,:J ~A)},- ~ -10 ·011

vno I-IHI 1-11"\ll,I 11

tC.R.T.D. LIBRARY

;/ ' .' i HTO 81-1

• ~FF 3/84 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT

-Reviewer

METRO RAIL PROJECT· REVIEW / COMMENT SHEET

[ {oLLf?µ FIie No. ____ · ____ _

Dept. / Section

REF PAGE DRAWING NO. I NO. NO. DOCUMENT SECT

I

e

T? ill.~ F 6-l,J

COMMENT'

p~ r""" ;L .,,,_ct, I le,-., ;;_

{..,," ,7 !,, ;,., / ,A'lva.<-~o - a,_, ~ f'- i" d J-1

a..--.t i'Nie jCv JZ,y.;/~ 7/1,,..,_,_ Ir

kc .1 / ,;:,, "6 Jl.cd .U.. IJ (J7 ~-P/31)

14 ;:_,, I'-< t> /"_ /. /..J R-tcl T, ~,,.:.,,,;"' 7e To

C',4-t fvf'-.C.70- !...,,..,,., /{re -? /.

W/-e,"vt r,,,:C~T/ : /,t- J<, .. :f«-U.. ,, I..

.f7

J ;,a,~ _..;,, cc?.-J• ... w "'-t(

, I 1,,,,.,,.,, ,µv, 7;,,, ,.,,_ ti .. M{ ~~~-

,r'j,'_,...I, v-u ,,... i dew>< <'"t,. I~<

c,,,-. .,,.__._ f -r ( .r,, ~ ,r /,.,,_,_;/ /J, · I",,

'A~; & -oor!)): }fe_t~ -1. ('~ ,.;..._J /,,,._f< ~ ,,_, -1~uc,t. e..J

7'- A13., ;?,ryz,,='-J. ~ of11

(',,,,,...,,._._-i/,,.. (1e~ /.,,,,,.v,,c.i, Ir ef'7 ~ • . !-- (??,,~ A, (~~). #.: il

-/d,,( t"cJ.f - c,,, .r ') ;_ o. (,, -,,i

PU"; <r -oof)} cA,eu f/,, I c.,,~

<',;-/le,., r~ w. 5//f' ,,,,..._o_

Date ..:1;'i£_ 198L

Sheet _/_ of _l::_

RESPONSE I ACTION

rVo·f ;,,u j:;e '/

f? r -f~. '.J ' -'-

( .,, ,· ·\. ": i

s<:"<' 7),.w,;'l q- o-4-3

WklC,i,, 1,J,w-f(.$

caff Ot1 ~~,,_fs

~\ ~,q0 l \, f

ATC 81-1 EFt= 3:'84

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT I

METRO RAIL, PROJECT RTO

Date -»z 198 ;z_ 9evie~er #£ -~Fl'~IEW ~ll~~~~~~~HEET Dept. / Section ~i()/-1--- ~~~~:'~~~e0• _______ Sheet L_ of S--

Design Review / Submittal Title /4,~¢"' ;i;,____, C°# 0i"~3c--/ L / R:F NO.

/

PAGE DRAWING NO. / NO. DOCUMENT SECT

1/-'- J? ],J) -; . •

'f'-..J .J. f. J o/ -?

;7-.) -?jJ -'J _;. .

COMMENT RESPONSE / ACTION

/

RTO E 1·1' EFF ,;_ 'St.

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT I •

METRO RAIL PROJECT

-eviewer ,/ ~ '~EVIE"'{ ~il?~~~EG~~ SHEET

Dept. / Se ct ion _,.)"---'-~-'_:J;::o"Ac,...f'------Submittal No. and/or Date

Date¼ 198,2._.

Sheet 2- of ~

Design Review/ Submittal Title /4£c;.,/4 :z,? &;71{4 L;{_//4J{ J'J-v .

REF PAGE DRAWING NO./ NO. NO. DOCUMENT SECT

1 'J'!. .J 3 J'.l.A -i

COMMENT •

3/ :U-J A- .. J,,,qtvv; <;P/7/.,-",...

p c, w~/" p,, ,.,,,,,,-, e~ //

J/5~~ ,~c~A /~ . )'§. -~d;,..q' ..rc,,-~/,_r/,/; .,-.,.~ c'...,-J..-:

~ ,~;c O C<""C~f:J; c.-,:« .re'~~ . I .::... __ 4,,,.. ~,.,rlr .z-7 ,?/.L~ 6,,,/~ ,.)-:,~c;::-,.//s;;,:,,_;=. /--,

< (f' ;,[r,.,efJc.-'11,;;1- c:..,,,-"7/,

c?s-?(;"/C,6',,r R /I~ fa'd'/e .A,,..,,, £ ,.,~ T ft-/(.'_,..,;:.L,~ (Pi.,,,

Cd'.,,, ;r~-,.,... ,',,-, (./';,?/'~ ~ $.A- L. -A / t<'c c/"~ /r. / CZ1 ::Jr

,(. --7 /4/{1/2/ ?:--/p ;/ C:,........../e: '- t

RESPONSE / ACTION

---.) ,/ S 6

1.r--o. •.-t'J Q.rL

1\.0 (. s+-o~dl

\ '- A<ti'f" .nloe,.l(

Fl.TD 31.1 E'F 3.-'SJ


', METRO RAIL PROJE1CT

,//£ , ezZ~VIEW ~11~~~ME;;~dS~EET

De;:,t. I Section J,57 J& Submittal No. =--;,,c____;,CL__.L ____ and/or Date ______ _ .

~i\ RTO

Date -1/?2 198,,Z_

SheetL of s' Design Review / Submittal Title /47'5.-,,,,.7,c..,"' Z ... :::z C~y /4-/dJf J:J

.., 7

R::F PAGE DRAWING NO./ NO. NO. DOCUMENT SECT

1/PJ .}0

• •

/ j/ ~ ,,_ J. /_, 2, '

COMMENT

,;; a c.;;;f- L1 /4 c./£ .6',,.u _,d,,J

/4 Jr ,.;-,-,.,,~-«- /J c.v 4--7 $c"'7 c,ri,??•~ c/-c--p/'• • . · -r;r= d.,·,_,-,,;:b-z ~-,.7 <:U 7.

/2Je,,,.- ft v¼/,,......_ //4~,,.....,;_,,,' __ -

~,, .,.~ ro ~,., c/41~~ ~ C"/,?f-? ~ vP:75""' ~ ~ ,c,""~ ,d{,...,e. /','/' ... : . -;{. ~ fl'7 ....YS-/Y'/4/' rn ,,,,,«a. S? TC_ ~-yt,~ 7t, Jv' fi ,.,/ //7/ ... ~,,,...,, ~,,._

</,/'J/e'-. ~ J ).=£?/ /,?~~

/7 (; C. 4:u.'v ;a....., o/S-r'-7 ,,,/4,_,,. /J/c.«-. 50 ;;{,eT ,7L t..-v-( u,cJ/j

Ci ..r4v./ ~~ /4, "7S- .....,.../,,,,(

o,c./u /',,.(/~ ,..."~?:,, ~~" c"'-':/:.c4 ~ cL~ J/,.,--tij? b?~·<--"7 /!u -/4,,...;7...,,_ /e,.,., . ./4,,..., c.:.r/2~ ,-:..~ //~

RESPONSE / ACTION

I .tn111u5 so WooJJ J .f ,/ I

b e. W d I lJe r;;,,_ r ( <t t-Corl\A.

.f'.' ~i ,J. ,Qi \ t,

e

RTO 81·1 ':.FF 3/84

·, '


METR01

RAIL PROJECT , . . REVIEW / COMMENT SHEET

Reviewer ,b-. ~s--j File No. A trcJ.CJ Date .S-/2.z 198,).

Submittal No. d Dept, / Section S7'J;4 and/or D~te _______ Sheet _7_ of ~

Design Review/ Submittal Title A,,,/4,-.,;{ :,:z::,,, C#,, £;~~ J:...f!--,


8 77'-_? J. 'j(.-:,)_ // '-.).-? , ~

I

i i

COMMl;NT

M Jh--• .,k( A.~ d../ a /~/.,... /-;k,-;-,; /J /?~- ~{''V-v V/4~ '*/--::,,7 ~/t"'~ TJ-1 A - .)-. Tr] .

/?~~ />-f'.i ,.,.,;7'[1/ .. -q!vn,

RESPONSE / ACTION

()1) 51 l'I ;J IA p

• 15 1.>11as,, 61'-

W / ,4i'P Stjha/

k"",r

:;~ i~'! SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT

METRO RAIL PROJECT

-eviewer /(~-~j REVIEW ~11?~~~!~~ f HE ET Submittal No.

Dept. I Section _5~F~J.~A~---- and/or Date


1 7f2.d

-:r • •

/0 7P-/.J /J, I. 3 2

/ / -rl'-/.3 /J. G. ~

-/Z-

COMMENT ~

'S\ RTO

Date ½Z 19¥---__,

Sheet 5 of _ 6 _

RESPONSE / ACTION

N0 -f /Jcce55a. ')'

..fc, ·+e.s+ . .for ..

RTOSr-1 -,EFF J .. '34

SOUTHE~N CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT

METRO RAIL PROJECT

~eviewer <.L.._/_·---=~~=----E-V_, IE_W_ ~11?~~MENT SHEET

Dept./ Section _$:,__...,.~_f,.._-4~----Submittal No. and/or Date

~~ RTC

Date f'-) 7 1982_

Sheet_/_ of _i_ • ' I

Design R evl ew / Sub mitt al Tit I e _L._A~.:::b..=L{J::o.,'----..;.,/l,=riT~•:.cc,,,.,_.c::IJ'f,'-'-'-"1c.'----,<,L<:.,RA=-,1~;._,_r;~~t:_,.,Tl?=;l..=---~L,:o,,,~1,,;i..fL~lfi~~:.:":...:.J ____ _

REF PAGE DRAWII-IG HO. I COMMENT NO. NO. DOCUMENT SECT • RESPONSE / ACTION

r,:,.,,:' f'"/1 l'i"°·?·1. B J_oc,d fu /rtTtF r",( f,-,/cc&ct'1N1 )():,0 ~-r5 I ,...

/l'?N-,. (,,;,rue /f AS 51""( 1,,/,-'=! . I

cfc:.·/s J (.-( .~t''/ • I ) I I

L'J:C'5!'iA1' 1PJve,;-~ 5"/tJ ?~10 /1''"''"'"'"". I J ... ,. :- , I

'J,i11J£h'-7 '},Vf/ct<" &~:;.· µ.,vv// L, /t"'/11,,u,6/t ,(

- .. : ~ . , · !'.v, c.{

Jn ....L !o.

-~

' •.

I I I I

I

---· ···--

~~ Mil RO RAif lRAN~fl CON~IJllANl~ l>MJM/l'fl(JIJ'~l /lfWA.

MEMORANDUM

Jnnuary 12, 19114

TO

FROM

SUBJECT:

FILE

P. M. Bur~ess

D. J. Coury \JC, SAFE BRAKING DISTANCE MODELS

W542A620

';j ij - 0 C '2.... .3 ':,-

The attached table was prepared in an attempt to compare safe braking distance models used by other properties. This was done as part of the action item pertaining to safe braking distance that resulted from the Automatic Train Control Design Review meeting. The table compares the various worst case models by showing whether or not they include some of the important features that a typical model might have. The table also gives the brake rate that is used once full braking is established. The distances shown have been calculated as though ev~ry property has a 40 mph ATP speed limit for the sake of comparison.

A fail-safe power cut or service brake is assumed if these functions occur when called for without the intervention of the brake assurance function. It is interesting to note that Baltimore and Miami have the same carborne equipment, but different models. The BART Model indicates partial brake assurance which means that a derated value of .9 mphps is used for a given period of time before further action is taken to achieve 1.2 mphps. This represents a partial failure of the service brakes. The brake rate given for BART is for exposed track. BART uses 1.6 mphps for covered track. This table is only a generalized comparison but it is a step towards defining our own worst case model.

DJC/Ilm attachment

cc: C. R. Fisher M. S. Patel DCC(2)

•J • ·~ Accef r:.-a-+,~.,,

F.,; I S"c:i.+e Fo; { 511 tc Er-!). k e .13ro.ke $ +of f'.,,9 '

'f>OvJel"' Serv,c~ Ass!.A<O'IIC.~ R°'+c b1s"tc,11cf.'S ('_ I.,\ t- i3,-,,-ke. (MF>4PS) (40 l'ff"H) , .

BART yes yes yes pnr+;,:,\ I. J.. / 2 3 0'

WMATA yes I. ~S (o -soj ye.s yes f\/0 12so'

/. )4 (70)

MARTA '/°-S yes yes liO 1.5" /24(" I

Boston ves 'Ip ... NO y ~ .s I. rS /.f 50 I

- .:,

' (/'130)

Bo /f,'more yes /\/0 yes I.S /4SO ' yes

M ,'om; yes l'-10 110 \-' r. s I

I. s IG7o'

Tl',BL.t: o,r wo.i:- s T CAS r ,~/11N ~0/)E"L s

•

METRO RAIL TRANSIT CONSULTANTS DMJM/PBQO/kl/HWA

MEMORANDUM

December 18, 1984

TO

FROM

SUBJECT

FILE

P. M. Burgess

D. J. Coury bjC.. SAFE BRAKING DISTANCE MODEL

W542A620

This memo concerns the current status of the ATC specification as it applies to safe braking distance (SBD). The worst case or SBD model currently specified will result in distances which are neither too conservative nor too risky. The attached graph compares the model with two others which represent the upper and lower bounds of industry practice. The model is however inconsistent and does not accurately represent the equipment specified. But if these inconsistencies were corrected, the resultant distances would remain approximately the same.

The document submitted to the operations committee by Boaz Allen & Hamilton entitled "Operational Impacts of the Safe Braking Distanci; Model", points out the large difference between the safe braking d:.stance and the nominal braking distance. This difference must exist for safety and does not impose unreasonable constraints on operation. MARTA, for example, has a design headway of 83 seconds. The diffi;=enc cannot be as low as 50 feet to allow automatic operation into a terminal such as Wilshire/Alvarado unless some type· of retarder is used along with a certain amount of risk the District must accept for that particular block.

The SBD model as currently specified has certain inconsistencies that should be corrected so that it more accurately reflects a worst case train:

O<'·'r~oc.~-0&:

A. The Boaz Allen & Hamilton paper recognizes that something can be done about the acceleration during propulsion runa.:ay, yet the pa;:,er does no:: address the fact that an overspeed condition will result in the opening of the BRK mode change trainline. The equipment is specified to perform this function, but the model reflects no benefit from it .

An overspeed condition occurs whenever there is a reduction in ATP speed limit in MTO or ATO mode. This is a common and frequent occurance. The response to an overspeed condition is the de-energization of

e MEMORANDUM TO: P. M. Burgess December 18, 1984 Page Two

the vital underspeed relay. Contacts of this relay are shown on the ATC Contract Drawing Q-100. As this drawing shows and as specified in Section 16 of the ATC Specification, the BRK mode change trainline is opened by these contacts in a vital manner. A back contact of the underspeed relay applies energy to the P signal generator in a non-vital manner to cause the fixed service brake rate to be applied.

The SBD model should not include 1007. acceleration in propulsion runaway because once the BRK trainline is opened, multiple failures would be required to achieve it.

B. The brake assurance reaction time is excessive· in light of the fact that the jerk limit rate is specified as 2. 7 5 mphpsps. The reaction time is preset to a value that will allow service brakes to build up· to the level to which the accelerometer is set (1.6 mphps). With a jerk limit rate of 2.75 mphpsps, minimum reaction time would be the sum of the follo~in 1 times:

Remove tractive effort Transistion to brake Apply service brakes

3 mphps/2.75 mphpsps=l.09se, .5 sec 1.6 mphps/2.75 mphpsps=.58s,

Therefore, the brake assurance reaction time must be greater than 2.17 seconds. The current SBD model uses 3.0 seconds. Since this time should be minimized to reduce propulsion runaway, a preset time of 2.5 second, is recmmnended.

C. As the Boaz Allen & Hamilton paper points out,the brak, rate used by the SBD model should be equal to or less than the brake assurance accelerometer setting which is specified as 1.6 mphps. The SBD model specified uses a brake rate of 1.9 mphps. It is conceivable for a train to have a delayed service brake that just barely satisfies brake assurance, but exceeds the safe braking distance as specified.

Since the specified rate of 1.6 ~phps is based on a possible minimum rate when considering low adhesion, the reco=ended rate for the SBD model is 1.6 mphps. This rate is more in line with industry practice.

MEMORANDUM TO: P. M. Burgess December 18, 1984 Page Three

SUIIllllary:

A combination of the recommendations in A, B, and C above will result in approximately the same distances; however, it will increase the slope of the attached graph. Low speed distances would most likely decrease. The SBD model would be more consistent and would better reflect the equipment specified.

DJC/es attachment

cc: A. M. Dale W. L. Lucci M. S. Patel R. S. Rodda DCC(2)

SBP

I 3000 -

)ooo 1 -

, 1000 -

0

i;J - /'11AM I

0 - .SC,?TD

;,\- M~RTA

/0

• SBD v:s SPEED LIMIT

/!]

)c\ 1 () so 76

e

•

,v1ETRO RAIL fR1\NSIT CONSULTANTS Q,,1/M.:PBQD, KE:H\'\i.-\

MEMORANDUM

August 15, 1985

TO /"1

Distribution / /

A. M. Dale/~, FROM

SUBJECT MEETING AGENDA -- PREFINAL DESIGN REVIEW CONTRACT A620 - AUTOMATIC TRAIN CONTROL

FILE

DATE

TIME

PLACE

W001A620 A.9.1

August 23, 1985

9:00 A.M.

MRTC 7th Floor Conference Room

MEETING AGENDA

Introductory Remarks ........•.••.......................

Summary of Previous Action Items resolutions ......... .

W. J. Rhine

~l. S. Patel

Discussion of Item raised by Attendees ............... .vi. Becher/M. Patel

Summary of Assigned Action Items ..................... . A. M. Dale

AMD/MSP/es

() .. 111-,.,:.,,~~ <

[fl?~ ~1§£]

METRO RAIL TRANSIT DMJM I PBQD / KE / HWA

CONSULTANTS 1,.::..1_..:.. ::.:._ ·-

,_,

MINUTES OF MEETING S.

AUTOMATIC TRAIN CONTROL PREFINAL DESIGN REVIEW

ATTENDEES: M. c. Becher, SCRTD A. M. Dale R. L. Beuerrnann, SCRTD C. R. Fisher L. Boyden, SCRTD M. Ingram I. Cohen, SCRTD w. L. Lucci F. R. Di Bugnara, SCRTD M. s. Patel L. s. Durrant, SCRTD F. Rutty J. Sandberg, SCRTD R. Shirley B. Blakesley T. Tanke P. M. Burgess G. L. Elliott, BAH D. J. Coury w. Robertson, PDCD

PREPARED BY: w. L. Lucci~#-

DATE & PLACE: August 23, 1985, 9:00AM, 7th Floor Conference Room

FILE: W539A620 A.9.5

AGENDA

The meeting agenda was distributed via memorandum dated August 15, 1985, copy attached.

INTRODUCTORY REMARKS

Mr. Becher opened the design review meeting by briefly describing the status of overall ATC design at approximately 85 percent. He reported that design review comments had been discussed with reviewers individually and an in-progress edition of responses publication was distributed to them.

PREVIOUS ACTION ITEM RESOLUTIONS

Train-to-Wayside Communications (TWC): Mr. Patel reported that all operational functions of the TWC subsystem were transferred from the ATC contract to the communications contract, thereby eliminating any hardware and interface requirements by the ATC contractor. Mr. Becher added that hereafter these functions are implemented as part of the two-way radio subsystem (TWR), wholly contained within the communications contract.

3183 0001.0,;.1183

ATC Prefinal Design Review Meeting Minutes 08/27/85 Page 2

Slow Speed Orders: Mr. Patel reported that, per Mr. Rhine's memorandum dated July 22, 1985, the implementation of slow speed orders by zone from local control panel and RCC has been deleted.

ISSUES RAISED

Mr. Patel opened the meeting to attendees' concerns.

Station Run-Through Speed: Mr. Rutty questioned at-station passenger safety because of air-rush and flying debris with the specified run-through train speed of 45 miles per hour. He had raised the issue previously by comment to lower the specified speed.

Messrs. Durrant, Dale and Patel supported the current ATC specification with the following:

o Speed is comparable to other operating properties;

o Slower speed would increase train run times;

0 Implementing slower speed operational impact would and thus, extra cost.

automatically with require extra track

minimal circuits

o Station run-through cannot be achieved automatically, therefore, it must be done with the train in manual mode. Train speed in manual mode will be governed by operating rule.

Mr. Tanke suggested an operating rule should be established to govern station run-through speed and the response to Mr. Rutty's comment should state that. All agreed, and the issue was closed. No change to the specification is required.

Vehicle-Mounted Trip Cock: F. Rutty proposed that a means to automatically check the height adjustment of the vehicle-mounted trip cock be incorporated into the ATC specifications. The design would require furnishing and installing of a wayside device by the ATC contractor.

Mr. Becher agreed that such a device may be desirable and further study of information to be provided by Mr. Rutty was in order. This item was assigned as a "business as usual'' item.

Systems Assurance: Mr. Rutty observed that no definitive responses had been given to comments pertaining to systems assurance and management and support issues of the specifications.

Mr. Patel responded that a meeting was being planned to include appropriate personnel from SCRTD and MRTC to resolve the issues.

•

ATC prefinal Design Review Meeting Minutes 08/27/85 Page 3

Mr. Dale suggested that date and time be set immediately. The meeting was set for Monday, August 26, 1985 at 9:00AM.

Vehicle Clearance: Mr. Tanke suggested that a statement be added to the response of a comment concerning wayside signal installation in the tunnel areas. The statement should confirm that clearance criteria will be met all agreed.

Materials in Tunnels: Mr. Tanke pointed out that cation requires fiberglass materials for conduit boxes, which do not meet fire/life safety criteria. that a meeting be set up to resolve if necessary.

the and He

specifijunction

suggested

Mr. Patel responded by stating the issue would be resolved per SCRTD direction.

Schedule: Mr. Sandberg inquired if the present schedule stands for work remaining on the ATC design package.

Mr. Dale responded affirmatively and that the final submittal date for the ATC package is September 30, 1985.

Action Items: No action i terns were assigned . journed at 9:40AM.

WLL/llrn attachment

cc: DCC(2)

The meeting ad-

METRO RAIL TRANSIT CONSULTANTS OMJM/PBQD/KE/HWA

MEMORANDUM

September 30, 1985

TO

FROM

DISTRIBUTIO~

A. M. Dale µ/II~

SUBJECT: FINAL DESIGN REVIEW -- AUTOMATIC TRAIN CONTROL CONTRACT A620

FILE W001A620 A.9.l

Attached are the final specification and contract drawings for the subject contract. There have been no significant changes in the design since the prefinal submittal.

Prefinal design review comments have been incorporated into the documents. Any comments should be submitted to Mahesh Patel (with a copy to T. Cook, Systems Integration) no later than October 30, 1985.

~ AMD/MSP/llm attachments

0010-002-()863

MRTC

H. Chaliff *

H. Kivett * G. Cofer * A. Srnithsuvan J. Valencia

A. Dale N. Brown M. Burgess D. Coury C. Fisher B. Lucci

TRAIN CONTROL (A620)

Design Review Distribution

TSO

R. Murray J. Strosnider

J. Crawley N. Tahir*

J. Christiansen B. Brown I. Cohen P. Schneider

W. Rhine (full size)

D. Mahapatra (2 full) .M. Becher (6)

D. Gary M. Patel ( 2 0) A. Sanderson

T. Cook T. Tanke (11:;/l full) B. Vance

M. Kenney * K. Garms/M. Orr

K. Murthy ( 2)

* w/o attachments

cc: DCC (2) Chron Subject

( 2)

Design Review Log

J. Sandberg R. Wood (2½/2 full size)

OTHER

L. Elliott (Booz-Allen and Hamilton) M. Polacek (PDCD) (5)

2290 10/01/85

•

Rolf Jens en & Associates, Inc. Fire Protection Engineers Building Code Consultants

85-06550

RECEIVED

OCT 1 8 1985 'n~e.-c.

October 17, 1985 FEDERAL EXPRESS

Mr. Malcolm Ingram Metro Rail Transit Consultants 548 South Spring Street, Eleventh Floor Los Angeles, California 90013

A620; AUTOMATIC TRAIN CONTROL 100% DESIGN REVIEW

Malcolm:

Enclosed are our design review comments in regards to the subject review package. Please note that our five (5) 85% review comments of August 6, 1985 were not included in the document of Prefinal Design Review Comment responses.

Sincerely,

Christopher L. Vollman, P. E.

CLV:pkj - H3275 - Automatic Train Control

Enclosures

cc: Dan Bloomfield

7015 West Tidwell Road, Suite 101. Houston. Texas 77092-2019, 1713) 462-1840

e

e

METRO RAIL TRANSIT CONSULTANTS OMJM I PBQD / KE / HWA c..~, , •• ~:

Sec.Lo~ a: -

TRANSMITTAL ~~·'i A 1'-c.iJltuJ <.o*""'""""s, d,..L....I 10-•~- ~,-

lo- 6 · 1'> I o-14 .e,,;-

REVIEW COMMENTS TRANSMITTAL

DATE: I/- f -is TO: /1/A-ht::s~ P"l"+f ! FROM: J. /V. 8Rvw,v' J.,7) /~ SUBJECT: /00°/0 ()Esi'cyv !?e:v,;yv -,,4620-Av-to. T"/i',41',.., (o,vfrv/

FILE NO.: i 400 /t620>(082-

In resi:onse to A . DA /E '.s mat0 of ':l -JcJ -8' S-reg~ the 51.lbject mentioned {Originator) {Date) • .

above, attached are review ccmnents by Se{tcf-1 _ Auu,rMJcf d ~c ue,f..; r(Departllent) I

If you have any questions, please rontact /vi , I;,v~ €'Al" X: 71 .34-(Narre & Extension)

Attachnents

cc:

000,-4, .. 1,u

(w/attachrent) T. Cook T - < - , L----.OT>'"\

I? ,., .. ,;;j-Y\

Ll n~ C, . j\,J o':'.·:r·.s- OA~

Y) re

w/o attachrent) nee Ch rf'"~ ( I • ~JD

F,1;.

D~,,~,., ixcv,<"-7

C..o'"M e. ""..J. ".> D 4..+u:f /0,Z'i·f3:,-

~t4-

..... -.-·--· ... ....., ..... ,._ ....... ·- .... --- . - "' -·,----- ....................... ----· , _______ . ----- -. '

e

e

FIRM/REVIEWER

PDCD

Bo Hansson

F. Rutty

4 F. Rutty

llarv Hunt

6 F. Rutty

09/2<J/Ht,

DRA\.llNG NO./

SPEC. SECTION

General

Pro11hlon9

1.3.4.B

).1. 5

). ). 2.1{

l. l. 2. L

l. ). ).A

PAGE

TP-1-2

TP-3- 7

TP-3-8

TP- J-8

COMMENT

sarro ~U'l'O~!J.!1C TR~H! COITTROI. SPEC!Flc:A!IONS

FINAL REVl EW COMMENTS

Comment9 on Syiitem9 Contract General Provlslon9 were

submitted by PDCD letter 01-HR·96S of October 17, 198S,

and are not repeated here.

Constructibility review was confined to verification of

Incorporation of responses to the BS'\ review cOIWllents.

Those responses which have not been accompllshell are \ Isled below by reference to the Sequ,·nce NU111ber 111 the

MRTC Paragraph Order Document of Augu:;t 16, l9HS; and

arc referenced to the new page and parngrnpll or drawing

number. The actual collllllents and responses are not

rc1,eat~d here.

Change ''Traction Power Cabling" to "34.S kV Power

Cables."

Contractor·furnlshed .-quipmeut lnclude9 also speed

governors ll!Ounted on truck.

(Hulty comment #45 on Preflnal.) S,,lety wlrln!( should be

In s,ipar.ite ducts .;n<1 In distinctive color.

C)1;,11ge "l<elerence; Article IS.1" to "l<,ife1-ence;

Article 15.]" Incorrect ref,•rence.

Temperature doe9 not fall to 2S"F and lu U,islgn for

this unreilllstfc value adds co::1t.

5e.c.,1',v"" .[[

RJ-'.SF'ONSE

Noted.

As per comments 1 toted.

Agree - for consistency.

No, speed sensors are DFE

by vehicle contractor.

lsoliithm of safety wiring pre

c;h1tlons taken, f.M[ cons1<1eratlons st.ited, color coding may be done on

vehicle.

Agree.

ACTION

None.

Aa per comments listed.

Change wording in Speclflcat Ion~

Article l.].4.B to "]4.5 kV

i'ower Cables."

None.

None.

C,irrect reference to: "Artlclt"

IS.]" In Spedflcation Article

1.3.2.L.

Considering climatic variations In None.

Southern CA. and design tolerances

and margins, we feel that 2S°F ts very reasonable.

FIRM/REVIEWER

F. Rutty

F. Rutty

9 F. Rutty

lO F. Rutty

11 F. kuttY

12 F. Rulty

J.C. Jpzzetta

J.C. Iazzetta

ORA\./ ING NO. I

SPEC. SE(.i'ION

). ). ). B

3.4.1.C

).4.2.A.2.b

3.4.2.D.2

General

). ). 9

Table TP·4-4

Table TP-4-7

TP-)·14

TP-3-16

TP-)-21

TP-4-l 9

TP-4-24

COMMENT

Are gases NO & SO Intended as sums of nl lrous and

sulphur dloxfdes/1D~noxides? Clarify.

Headway of 90 s {].4.1) Is design targtit. \./Ill

B·ml le/hr speed limit at No. Hollywood prt'Vt'nt 90 s

being achieved?

Acceleration may exceed 110\. If all* variables are

favorable. Train performance should be calculated

for these conditions.

* I.Int' voltage, wheel diameter, train 'olt.'lghts 111<.>tor

charnCtt"rlsttc.

TYPO " ... crossovers IS as follows:"

Each interlocking must be capable ot lll·lng locally manu

ally controlled for loss of control lines and testing.

Test t'qulpment must have a battery condition Indicator.

T.ilile sl1owii flammaLlllty rt'qulremNltei for cross-llnkt'd

poly.,J.,fln ;IS ''MIJ.-\./-fll0,.4" 1.1,at IH tl,l,a'/ FS Criteria

2.2.4.1.4, 2.).3.4 & 2.4-3.7.3(11) rcqulrt' all wire and

,;aLh, f<,r vital ATC, power dr,;u\tii for 1,mergency

t><JUlpment, Hild vehicle poWPr caliles to 1,aiiei IEH:-)11)

Flam,, Test and have no short circuit for ';, minutes.

Tiils iilwuld have so indicated In tt .. , taLle for cross

llnk,:d 1,olyolel In.

F!dlfllll.1blllly should pass TEEE·)B) and hav,, no iihort

circuit for 5 111!nutes; Fl.S Criteria 2.2·4.I.4,

2.).).4 & 2.4.).7.)(8)

RESPONSE

Yes, no clarification neCt'i<i<ary.

No, tail tracks at No. llollywoud

are assu=d unoccupied for design

ht'adway as stated in Artie!.,

).4. 2 .c.

These considerations art' lntrlo

stcally accounted for In the

derivation of 110\. aCCt'leratlon

par8111t'ter.

Agree.

Agree, each tnterlod.l11g Iii;

as stated in Artklt>s 4.4 am1

7. 2 .1.11.

T,•st t'qulpment Is not bt'lng

sprclfled here; however, will

specify with test equipment.

TI1ls ls referring to th.: llam

ni.,blltty rf'<Julremf'nlei p~r lhf' ....l!J military specifications. "fl/'>-

Agree, ls requlrt'd per

4.6.

ACTION

None.

Nooe.

None.

Add "Is" to Specifications

Artlcle ).4.2.D.2

None.

Incorporate Into Artlclt'

16.6.).A.

O,an~" to "Pa$S'', rt'ferrlog

to IF.EE-Jfl1 ln Table 4-4.

Rt'fer to HF.E )8) require

ments In Tdblt' lo-7

SOU'llh

NO. FT RM/REVIEWER

J.C. Iazzetta

16 James l.oo

17 W. RobertsQn

M. Ingram

19 Bo Hansson

10 W. l<nbertson

21 W. Robert11on

22 W. Robertson

09/29/80

DRA\llNG NO./

SPEC. SECTION

4. 7

SpeclflcatiQns

5.2.1.A.l

5.2.1.A.6

5 .4. 3

5.6. l

12.).1.C.l

6.4.5.D. !.h

6. 5. l

7.3.1.D.ll

PACE

TP-4-26

TP-4-27

TP-5-5

TP-5-3

TP-5- 7

TP-6-1 J

TP-6-14

COMME!n

fLS Criteria 2.5.).1. requires ATC bunp;alows to he pro

vided with automatic sprln)ders. Add new sectlnn 4.7.5

to so Indicate.

All fluorescent light In the prewired ATC equipment bunga

low shall have radio frequency Interference shielding for

its Jens and the ballast to be equipped ... tch radio inter

ference filter and )rd haI'lllonic suppressor. Lenses shall

be clear lens with radio frequency suppressing grid.

Sequence No. 83.

Last sentence: Verify reference to Attlc\e 2.5.

Two 750 MCM cables for track connectlor, does not agree

with drawing Q-1188, which shows two 500 MCM.

Exothermic welding may not be avallable for 750 MCM.

Oieck that two 500 MCM Have sufficient amp,Klty.

SeqtJence No. 101.

Stiq11,•11ce No. 10).

Sequence No. 109.

)

RESPONSE 0A"CT~I00N~----------

ATC bunKalows not structures as de- None. fined In FI.S Crlttorla, tht,rtifore,

sprinklers are not requlrtid.

This level of detail not nectissary. None.

ATC supplier also furnlstws light-

Ing and Is respomdble for co111-

patiblllty.

Rtqulremtint for MR conformity h

sufficient.

Should be Article ).5.

Should be twn 500 MCM C<1hltis,

or two 1,000 MCM cabltis at sub

station returns an<l insulated joint 11.

Noni?>.

Corr<~ct to Article ).5

In Specifications Article

5.2.1.A.6.

Correct drawing Q-111:IB to

specify proper cables, ch11nge

speclflcation Articles 5.4. 3,

5.6.2, 11.7.2.B, and J2.J.J.f:.I.

l::rlco Products, Inc. has Indicated None.

that tiXothermlc weldings ls avail-

able for these cables.

Checked per ATC Action Items

2.7 and ).4. None.

'J'Jmer n:lily cuntact,'> a,!tJ,,,J lo None.

"II" clr,;ult~, Drawing Q-0'.>&, REV.B per audit of prr.final cnmm,:nt~.

St,1teml'nl ~ 11re co111pat It.le.

Thnt ltivel (>f detal l not necessary on typlcill drawing.

Non"°.

None.

S1lE7936

DRAWING NO./

NO. FI RM /REV I E\,/ER SPEC. SECTION PAGE

:,;,/ M. Ing um 8.3.1.A TP-8-5

J.C. lazetta 9. 2. 2.A TP-9-2

W.E. Price 9 .6. 3 TP-9-ll

26 w. Robertson General TP-10

27 w. Robertson 10.3.l.G.4 TP-10·5

M. Ingram 10.3.2.F.l TP· 10· 7

29 Bo Hansson 10.5.2.B.l TP-10-9

30 w. Robertson 10.5. 2.B.1 TP-10-9

31 w. Robertson 10.8.2.B TP-I0-12

0'!/29/86

COMHEtIT

Vert fy reference to Art le le 3.4 Co, failsafe requl re-

men ts; possibly should be Article 3. 3.

Fl.S Cri terla 2-5-3.l requires ATC bungalows to be

prov lded with automatic sprinklers.

lndicat tons should be specified for an HTBF of 1,000,000

hrs. Thi, value represE;nts the state-of- the ·art fo,

console indicators. Currently does Mt agree wt th

apeci fled MTBF fo, control panel (p. TP-15-6).

Sequ1;,nce No. 157.

Sequence No. 150.

"· .. descrli,tion of ATC vehicle equipment SiKn;ds ... ,, requ I red to be furnished, should be a,l,hid to Cllll.l ..

Correct sentence.

Sequence No. 151.

Sequence No. 154.

4

RESPONSE

Agree.

ATC bungalows not structures, as

defined in FI.S criteria; there

fore sprinklers are not required.

Completed per audit of prefinal

commentl:l.

Agreed to incorporate. statements to

interface section identifying con

tractor's responsibility for In

stalling l)fstrlct·fumiahed cables,

per met-ting of 07/23/86.

Quantity will be spectf11;,d in Bid

Forms as a r1;,sult of proposal pro

cess requirement PH 2.0.G.

Locations are sho\111 on double

line track plans; details will

will be per reference drawings.

Agre1;,d to show locations of SCA.DA

lnterfac1;, racks on ATCoC Room

layouts per meeting of 07/2J/86.

ACTION

Change reference to Article

3.3 ln Specifications Article

8.3.1.A.

None.

None.

Add Articles 10.5.3 and 10.8.3

to identify contractor's re·

sponsibillty to install 019•

trict-fumished c.obles.

None.

Add CIJRL re-qulre11111rnt to

Article I0.3.2.F.l and

to CORL list.

Correct sentence ln Article

l0.5.2.B.l for clarity.

None.

"Business as usual" item -

awaiting coinrnunlcat ions input.

snt:1'1 ·1h

FIRM/REV I EWER

,, W. Robertson

J.C. lazzetta

M. lngn1m

J.C. Iazzetta

l7 A. Smlthsuvan

l8 W. Robertsnn

(\(\ ''"l /,a(,

DRAWING NO./

SPEC. SECTION

11.4.)

Table TP·ll·2

Table TP·ll·2

Table TP·ll·3

Table TP·ll·3

Q·007A·Ol 3B &

12.).1

11.3.2.A

TP·ll·l)

)!> TP • 11 • }("'"

TP·l1·25

DWC.

TP·I2·4

COMMHIT

Sequence No. 159.

"Vertical Flame Teat ICEA S-66·524" should read "Flame

Teat iEEE-383" and should indicate "Pass and have no

short circuits for 5 minutes."

Notation explanation at bottom of page.

Qualification tests should have two asterisks.

Item #9 - Smoke Generation - FI.S Crlteda

Stations 2.4.2.3 & 2.).3.1.1. Re(]uire a max. of

200 at 4 min. point for both flaming and nonflamlng mode

and not 325 as shown in Table.

Some impedance bonds do not have coordlnat .. s 11nd It Is

a:.sumed that they will Le designed by ATC Contractor (at

sp .. cl11l trackwork and direct fixations). After 2 years of

design efforts, why do we still want the Contr11ctor to decide

at the locations of impedance bonds, and how can we control

the cost?

Sequence No. 162.

RESPONSE

Requirements are compat Ible; all

circuit boards shall be keyed;

however, only relays affecting

safety need to be keyed.

Agree.

Two asterisks should

qua I I flcat ion tests.

ACTION

None.

Add IEEE·)83 requlre111enu to Table ll·2.

Corrf'ct to show two asterhks

with qualification tests of

Table ll-2.

Correct to show t\-0 asterisks.

with qualification tf'Sta of

Table 11-3.

These requlrements ref,cr to cover- None.

boards and vehicle 111Bterlah. Elec

trical Installations are required to

meet NEC standards, as specifl,id.

Requirements for embedded conduit

or enclosed raceways eliminates need

for stringent flaming and smoking

specifications.

impedance bond locations .ire

ultimately a result of the

Conu;-actor's block design o<s

approved by the District.

Determine mechanism and require

~nts comprising contractor's ac

ceptance of Dlstrlct·lnstalled in

sulated joints, per meeting of

07/23/66.

Nune.

Will he completed per Action

lte111 No. 12.l.

sm:1.,31,

FIRM/REVIE\.IER

39 \./. Robertson

,o F. Rutty

" A. Slllthsuvan

" A. Smlthsuvan

" A. Smithsuvan

" · W. Robertson

09/29/66

DRA\./ING NO./

SPEC. SECTION

12.3.3.B

12. 7

12.10.5

6, Section 13

12.10.5.B. 3

12.10.5.B.5

13.4.1

13.7.2.H.3

TP-12-5

TP·I2·14

TI'·l2·12

TP-12-13

TP-12-13

TP·l3·5

TP- 13-17

COKMEIIT

Sequence No. 163.

(Rutty comment 1166 on P['eflnal.) Mechanism fo[' testing

t['lp['ock positioning should be p['ovlded, wayside, since

tdpcock la "ultimate" safety device ;it tennlnals. Cost

Is minimal. Mechanls111 ls in fona of a "t(ate"; desl~n

Info previously supplied to ATC design staff.

\.le will have ['esponslblllty p['oblems between Cu11tn1ct At>20

and At>)l, A640 since the["e a['e no test ['C<jll!['ement.1:1 for

nwrni'r-furnlshed cables. fly the time contrnct A6]l 6, Al,40

Stan testing, the cnmplet .. syst .. 111 A620 has already lrft

the job site and payment has been recelv .. d. A change onJe['

111ay h..,ve to be issued to A640 and to A631 to cnrn•ct the

probJ.,ms, If any, du["lng the final ACceptaoco:- test.

I think we are Inviting problems If cables a["e not tagged

p['Op.,['ly fo[" A6)1 l:, A640 cont['acts to identify and terminate.

Raceways fO[' co1mmolcatlnns c.ibles (Including flbe[" optic)

w,-r., ,1,-sfgn,-d lrns"'<l 01, m,oxlm,un pull of 1-90" hf'nd p<'r Agr.,.,m.,nt

2 yean ago. Many p<>rtlons will have more than l·'::10" bend, as

C. Cole specified. Revise this requirement.

The interim test reports re<Julr.,d to be submitted should

be added to CURL.

Sequence No. 177.

6

RESPONSE

Not necessa["y; standa,-d design

procedure wl 11 be to use re ierence

drawings. Meeting of 07/2)/IJ6

["evealed inconsi11tent terminology

between "junction device" and "con

necto["" of A['tlcle 10.5.2.B.l.

Comment wlthd["awn.

ACTION

Change "connec to[' s" to "j unc -

tlon devices" In Anlcle

10.S.2.B.l.

None.

ATC Cont me to[" wl 11 be responsible Add testi11g ['equl["ement to

for testlni,: llFE cables tie ln~talls. \./ork Scope in Article 1.3.4.B.

Add det11JJ.,d tt:H requirf'roents

to Art le le 13. 7.2.F.

Host cables wlll be pre-tagged; None.

those not can easl ly be identified

by colo[" 0[' physical positioning.

n1ere a["e no 3·<J0° bends Involved

in a comm. Cilble pull. ATC speci

iflc.ition will only provide pull

tension cdterla.

Agree.

No conflict exists.

Delet., bend cdterls In

Article 12.10.5.B.5.

Add CD]<!. to Article 13.4.l

and to CDRl. list.

None.

S1>f7'l JI,

Fl RM/REVIl:."WER

46 W. Rol.iertson

..,,,, M. Ingram

48 M. Ingram

H. Hunt

W.E. Price

H. Hunt

II. llunt

09/29/86

DRAWING NO./

SPEC. SECTlON

11. 7. 2.M

13.11

15.1.8

15.2.2.A.l

IS. 3. 2 .B

15.4.4.G

13.12.1

15.4

PAGE

TP-lJ-20

TP-13-27

TP-15-4

TP-15-S

TP-15-6

TP-15-10

TP-13-JO

TP-15-10

COMMENT

Sequence No. 178.

Need to indicate CORL ltem, to be in concert wl th CORL

Item No. 63.

To be complete and consistent, add "Quality Assurance

Program" to the sub-article heading and the first

sentence of 15.1.8.

Change "System Hazard Analysis" to "Interface Hazard

Analysis" to conform to SCRTD 5-001.

The value specified for the wayside signal is trresponst

tbly low. Signal lamps for BRRTS were pn•dlcted Jt 0.027

failures per million hours. Trtiln st1,p signalling for

MARTA was predicted nt 70,000 hrs betw,•c•n ful lures.

Rewrite as follows: "Detailed Test Procedures using

MIL-ST[J 471A as a guide." MIL-ST[) 471A establishes the selec

tion process (random) and helps ensure an adequate yet suit

able demo test.

Add par agrnph "15 .4. (, I nterctl,mgea!,l l lty-Access 1 b I 11 ty"

A. !'arts, components, and assemblies performing like

functions shall be physically and functionally lnter

change..ible. Those which are not functionally inter

changeable shall not be physically tnt,•rchangeable.

B. Accessibility to system elements shall comply wltt1

SCRTD Design Criteria and Standards.

These are critical to system maintainability.

RESPONSE

These are design parameters, not

appropriate for these tests. Per

tinent Test Grlterla ls defined in

Article 13.7.2.M and will Oe prov

en during qualification testing .

Agree.

Agree.

ACTlON

None.

Add GORL requirement to.

Article 13.11.

Add "Quality Assurance.

Program" to heading and first

sentence of Article '15.1.8.

Wll 1 comply. ~ It; Change "System Hazard Analysis"

19., to "Interface Hazard Analysis"

ln Arttc\e 15.2.2.A.l.

Agree.

Will comply.

Wlll comply with "A" tn

Section J; "B" withdrawn.

Revise wayside signal MTflf In

Article 15.J.2.B to recommen·

ded v.ilue.

R,ifcr to MIL-STD 471A In

Article 15.4.4.C.

Add as Article J.3."v.A.

SIJE 79 )I,

FIRM/RE-VIEWER

53 H. Hunt

54 R. Vance

ss H. Hunt

DRAWING NO./ SPEC. SECTlON

15.4

16.3.1.A

16.3. l.D

TP-15-10

TP-16-2

TP-16-2

COMMENT

Add Paragraph 15.4.6.

B. Accessibility to system elements shall l,e prov_lded by

using the following techniques:

1. Panels and openings shall be of sufficient size,

quantity and placement to permit ready access frnm

a normal or serviceable work area.

2. Se If - retainl ng fasteners shall be used wherever

practicable.

). Speclal access opening tools shal J "°' " n:,qul red

unless considered necessary to prevent vandal ism.

4. Latch hold open devices shall be incorporated,

where practicable, as an additional safety factor.

5. In equipment cablnets, the component,; that are most

frequently maintained or adjuste/1 shall be the most

acce:uit,1,-.

6. llevices to facilitate the handliny, of ti .. avy or less

.iccessible components sh,111 be pn,vi<.led.

7. Human factors shall he considered In the design,

using MIL-STD 1472.C-ltum,m Engineering Design

Crlterla for Military Systems, r'luipment

fmd fact ll t !es.

Suggest the following reductions In manual quantities;

1. Op Instr - 150 (be consistent with Vehicle)

2. Hepalr & Mtnce - 50

3. Spare Parts catalog - 20

Add after " .•. Safety warnings"

cautions ... "

. and safety-related

RESPONSE

WI ll comply in Section ).

Wl 11 research.

Will comply .

ACTJON

Add as Article 3.3.6.B.

Complete pt!r Action Item -.c.-1.

Add " ... and safety-related

cautions .•. " to Article

16;].l.D

Sflf.7'JJ6

FJRM/REVIl:."WER

56 R. Vance

57 H. Hunt

58 R. Vance

59 R. Vance

" R. Vance

61 R. Vance

62 II. llllllt

09/29/86


16.3.1.A.2

H,.7

H,.6.2

16.8.2.D

16. B. 2

Table 17-1

App.B

Sect. 16

Table 17-1

Table TP-17-1

PAGE

TP· 16- 2

TP-H,-6

TP-H,-10

TP-H>-10

TP-17-9

SP-B-1 TP-H,+

TP·l 7-9

TP-17·8

•

COMMENT

Con11lder no sepante ATC Op Instr'. Manual, but tncor·

poratc that lnto Vehicle Operaton Manual, since

supplier ls to lnstall ATC equlp111ent.

Add as 1st sentence "the use of special tools shall be

mlnilllized."

This Is good design practice - to limit number of special

tools (I.e. requtdng of Reed when a Phillps will do.)

Delete level fr{D title: "Shop level equipment."

2nd llne, replace ''whether" wlth "Including".

In intro, spare parts 11st fonaat Is referenced as a CDRI .. It should be included in Table 17-1 CDRl.'s.

Dt>llvery dates are Inconsistent for manuals and training.

For example, draft manual nequirements are:

at month JO In Sp. App. B. before syslem tests in Tl's Sec. 16,

and 'JO ,Ji,ys before tn1lnlng In COl{L 11st. Let's dlscuas.

Add CllRL's for the.~e analyses:

I. lnterfllce Hazard Analysis

lt,•m No. 86

Para11n1ph

Fonn.il

schedule/etc.

15.2.2.A As speclfled/3 copies

At FOR/approval requireli

2. Suhsystem Hllzard Analytiis

Item No 87

l'nrllgraph

Format

Schedule/etc.

15. 2. 2.A As specified/) copies

At f"DR/approval required

RESPONSE 0AcCT=l(c>N~----------

No, this manual is system operation Change wording to "Syste111

not train operation. Operation Instruction Manual"

in Article 16.J.l.A.2.

Not necessary, Is covered ln None. Section ).

No, will remain for consistency.

Wlll ccaply.

Agree. ~

Agree. Dates l!IUat be ioade con

sistent.

Will comply.

None.

Revise Article 16.B.2.D.

Add spsre parts 11st

format to CORL 11st.

Complete per Action Items #4-3

and #4-4.

Insert these CDRL's to CDII.I.

list; add CORI. requirements

to Article 15.2.2.A.

FIRM/REVIE\.JER

63 A. Smithsuvan

64

65 T. Eng

66 T. Eng

b7 T. Eng

68 T. Eng

Q<J/29/8(,


Criteda Vol.

Sec. 2 and

Vol 5 Sec. 4

Exhibit A

Q·OOJB

Q-0041s

Q·004B

Q·004B

PAGE COHMEtIT

J. Operating Hazard Analysis

Item No. 88 Paragraph 15.2.2.A

Fornat

Schedule /etc.

As speclfled/J copies

At FDR, as part of test plan

An Alternative to listing these as separate CDRL's ls to

11peclfy 11ubmittal tlnte tn Paragraph 15.2.2.A, t.e.

1. Interface Hazard Analysis - at FOR & FACI for approval

Then change CDRL Item es to read:

CCIL analysis 15.2.2 as SP/) FUR/FACJ/Test/Approval required.

Vol. 5 Sec. 2 does not include cross-bonding nf running mil.

If they are really part of ATC, a change re11uest should be

issued to uansfer l'aL 4.5.J.C of Section 4 to Section 2 (ATC).

Refererice Dwgs. - Contract Nos., Drawing Nos, and dwg. titles

wlll re,1ulre veriflcatlon upon finalization of facllltles

contract pnckHges.

RESPONSE

Not necessary. Cross-bonding

ls a traction power require

ment, but connected to ATC

equlpment.

DcJ.:t,: "i!aSt & we.11t" references, slnce th!~ l:>..rg. ls simply a Wlll remain to show railroad

schcm,ak, not lntendihg to show route orlentatlon. orlentatlon.

Define under impedance bond designation Af ("audio fre11uency") Spell out "Audio Frequency." for ,mlnfurmed.

Consider changing trlp stop abbreviation, since it's the same as Not necessary, "train Stop" will

1~ 11bbreviation for "tangent-to-spiral transition point". have a designation with tt; 11 iso

Add under track designation table "I.I - Insulated Jolnt,"

"XO • cross-over" , "EQ TO - equilateral turnout".

10

on track plan. "Tangent-to-Splral"

is alignment.

Wlll comply.

ACTION

None.

''Bus lness-as -usua I • "

None.

Qiange "AF" to Audlo Frequency

on Drawing Q-004 Rev. B.

None.

Add lJ, XO, and EQ to

designations to draving Q-004,

Rev. B.

SlJE791h

NO. FJRM/REVltlJER

69 T. Eng

70 T. Eng

71 J.C. lazzetta

72 W. Robertson

n A. S1Dlthsuvan.

74 J. Loo

75 W. Robertson

76 W. Robertson

09/19/H6


Q-004B

Q-021B

Q-0228

Q-02 lB

Q-024B

Q-0428

Q-0528

Q-052B

ATC Power D1str1but1on

Schematic

Q-067B Q-0688

Q-Ob9B

Q-0708

Q-0918

Q-092A

Q-09)8

Q-094A

42

DI.C

" " 69

70

91

" 9)

94

COMMENT

Under "notes," add to 12, "percent grades represent track

p;radlent for track segment bounded by adjacent PVI locations."

Othen,,lse, the sche111atlc is quite confusing.

These Dwgs. are 11119slng AR 6, AL structure information

(e.g. t\Jln tunnel sub\Jay structure, etc.). Conflna that we

do not \JlSh to do so beyond Wt lshlre/Alvarado.

Distances between cross-passages

shown on these drawings exceeds

the maximum allowed by FILS

Criteria 2.J.4.4

Sequence No. 220.

As <1greed by Patel. Faclllttes wlll provide tr,rnsfumers

inside ATC/C RM. Interface point Is at secondary of trans

formers. Who will provide secondary main breakers (Dwg.

shows "District-furnished'·).

Note 10 requires "one 120 V/208 V }-Phase, 4-wlre servlc ..

circult breaker for communications load of 100 A". TI1is

additional rt!quirement will exceed the JO kVA made

aval !able to eacl1 TCR 11:i noted In note b. Please

verify.

Sequence No. 229: Item a. and c.

Irem a. and c.

I tern c.

Sequence No. 24 7.

ll

RESPONSE

Not necessary; contractor shuild

know meaning of symbology.

Confirmed. Trackwork

Is not designed beyond

this point.

Distances by Special

Considerations 84-010 6, 84-0ll,

approved 1-4-86. Aho see

Dwg. SD-0648, Notes l 6, 4.

Agreed to add explanatory sample

control line to Drawing per meet

Ing of 07/23/86.

Drawing Q-052, Rev. 8 corrected

per audit of preflnal comments.

Communications load requlrenients will be reduced to }5 A.

Item "a" not nect>ssary; ltPm "c"

accolIID'lodated for these <Jr.i"'lugs

per audit of preftnal comments.

Delete MDF from rOOCD layout draw

ings per meeting of 07/23/86.

Note added to these drawing~ per

audit of preflnal comments.

ACTION

None.

None.

None.

Add explanatory sample control

line to Drawing Q·042, Rev. IL

None.

Correct note 10 of Drawing

Q-052, Rev. 8 to indicate a

co11111unkations load of 35 A.

Delete M!lF from Drawln11 Q-Ot.f,,

Rev. B.

None.

DRA\.IING NO./

~ FIRM/REVIEWER SPEC. SECTION PAGE

77 T. '"' Q-101A

78 J. Loo Q-103B

,, B. Ilana son Q-103tt

80 A. Sml thsuvan Q-1038 Dwg

81 "· Ingram Q-115 115

82 \.I. Robertson Q-llBB ll8

63 M. Ingram Q-120 110

84 A. Sml thsuvan Q-123A Dwg.

09/29/136

COMMENT

Delete car washer from Dwg., since It Is no longer located

there.

Please be more specific about the load to be provided

than mentioned In note 2.

Cnrnblnl' the tran11fnrmer11 for th.- hunR;1low power by

placing the111 after the tram1fer 11wltches, or

ellmlnate by connecting dlrectly to 120/208 V sources.

Fae. contract will provide conduits, duct bunks, and

feeder cables to bungalows. Shov dotted line at all

feeders and breakers to bungalows.

Hast-111ounted and wal I-mounted ladder1; must comply wl th

Section 3277, fixed ladders, of Title B, Sut,-chapter 7,

general indlllltrlal safety orders. Tiils comment remains

unresolved from the 85'\. design review.

Sequence No. 277.

There Is a Section C cut on the plan, but no Section C

on the [Jwg. Should lt be referenced to the Sectlnn C

on Q-l l9?

NEC cl.1Sslfled )4.5 kV cable as medium voltage class ;md

requires different group of electricians to Install (ATC Is

for l20 V class>. 1l1e most cost-effective Is to combine tills

34.5 kV works with traction p()\,/er contract, which requires

same group of electricians to Install 34.5 kV swltch~-,ars.

1-YJS-1 con9tructlon schedule shows that with ;1 good work

plan, TPSS contrnct<1r ca1, arrange to use .~mne group of

electricians for the works at stations .and at tunnels.

12

RESPONSE ACTION

\.1111 comply. Relocate car washer to Dr.1wlng

Q-102, Rev. A.

Not necessary, communications design None.

requires 20 A breaker. This ls al I

the ATC contractor needs to provide.

The traosform.-rs provide thf' 120/

1UH V sources; deS181l wl II rem,iln f.,r

system reliability considerations.

None.

Agree that wlrlng/cable 5ltuatlon

should Le clarlfled.

Add note 3 to drawing Q-J03B

clarifying wiring/cabling

to bungalows.

CAC requirements added to Drawing None.

Q-115, Rev. A per audit of pre final

comments.

Location of track Junction boxes

will be contractor design; substation

return locations are shown on double

l lne track plans.

Yes.

The ATC contractor wt 11 lnstal 1 34.5 kV cable, but not connect it.

Therefore, it does not require a

different group.

N,;,ne.

Add Section "C'' to Drawing

Q-120, Rev. B.

None.

S0E7<}36

DRAWlNG NO./

~ FI RH/REVIEWER SPEC. SECTION ~

a, A. Smlth:mvan Q-123A J>,,g.

86 w. Robertson Q-124 124

87 W. Robertson Genera I

66 W. Robertson General

" W. Robertson General

09/29/86

cmw:trr

..,., ,, the acope of work for 34.5 kV and communications

c .. bles from manhole No. Al5 to the Yard area and vent

structure? Deflne more uplicitly.

New drawing has been added but installation detai la

"' ,o, included. See Sequence No. 285.

Sequence No. 286.

Sequence No. 287.

Sequence No. 290.

13

RESl'flNSF: ,•cCT="s'""------------ATC contractor installation of 34.5 None.

kV and COllllll. c .. b!es ls required In

tunnel sectlons only. ',Iii I verlfy

that scope of this work Is e.11pllcltly

deHne6 l.n the I.TC tlesign pacllag:e.

Installation details are defined

in speclflcations and reference

drawings. Specl ft cation Artlcle

12.10.5 was revised per audit of

prefinal comments.

This t, adequately addressed on Drawing Q-047A. Will add "min."

to distance parameter from I.J.

to signal, per meeting: nf 07/23/86.

Move Installation details from

Section 5 to Section 12 and add

submittal requirements, per mf!etlng

of 07/23/86.

None.

Add "min." to dlstance from

insulated joints to signal on

Drawing Q-047, Rn. A.

Delete Article 5.5.4 and add

Speed l.lmit Transrolsslon l..oops

lnstall.,tlon Requirements as

Article 12.4.

References and definitions concern- None.

Ing Installation of DFE material are

made throughout the design pnckage.

son•nt.

•

•

METRO RAIL TRANSIT CONSULTANTS DMJM/PBQD;KE/HWA

MEMORANDUM

May 26, 1987

TO: P.M. Burgess

FROM: M. Ingram ?n-~

C r o 5 ":J Re .(\1 .... ,t.1 .. c. <.

Scc::.-4-,ovt '(['

OL.s 'S ~ ,~ev,(..u co,.,141e,,, .J!)

o..,,,,t ,,- . 21-s i ,- - ,1,. e, i3

SUBJECT: Contract A620 Legal/Technical Review Comments

FILE No: S440A620X082

The attached comments from MRTC Safety, Assurance and Security are submitted in response to Alan Dale's memo dated May 13, 1987 on the referenced subject.

We will be pleased to discuss any of these comments with you, as required.

MI:ss

Attachment.

cc: J .N. Brown ~~·},

13186

T.W. Cook (w/attachrnent) A.M. Dale M. Ingram (w/attachment) W.L. Lucci T. Tanke (w/attachment) DCC (2) Chron Subject

0010-00!•088]

M E M O R A N D U ~

SOUTHER!-/ CALIFORNIA R<.PID TP,0.:,SIT DISTRICT TRANSIT SYSTEMS DEVELOPME,,T DSPART!-;ENT

SYSTE~lS DESIGN AND ANALYSIS

*~******************************************·~~*******************

DATE:

TO:

FROM:

SUBJECT:

!·lay 2 9, 19 8 7

M. Becher ,,;h, / H. Storey~

Contract A620, Automatic Train Control, Technical Review

B~CilYJD JUN O ;J ;r1s7

Legal~,t;Q.

*****************************************************************

The Safety and Systems Assurance Section and the Fire/Life Safety Committee have reviewed the subject contract document. Our comments are indicated on the attached H. Storey (5) and L. Boyden (1) comment sheets.

Attachments

cc: F/LSC L. Boyden L. Durrant

:-iS/4:46

---------- -- ------------- ---

•

•

PCCC 8S-009f,:) A J01Nf vENTUAE Off>•[ AALPM M P,u:,so,,.s COMPA"ff OllLI~ ........ CONSTAVCTION. IJr< ""° Of LEUW CAr"(R & COMPlt.HY

INTEROFFICE CORRESPONDENCE·

To

From

Distribution

"· ,. ,.,,fc Phone 6948

Date March 7, 1988

Location1 3 O 4

SUBJECT ATC Coordination Meeting No. 41 BECEl't~D i'llJMt Oi I· ·'

Date: Place:

February 24, 1988, 9:30 a.m. MRTC 11th Floor Conference Room

File:

Attendees: R. P. Townley, M. P. Cassagnol, P. M. Burgess,

SCRTD PDCD MRTC

M. S. Patel, MRTC

Absentees: F. R. DiBugnara, L. s. Durrant, T. H. Lewis D. Coury, BAH

SCRTD SCRTD SCRTD

B. E. Warrensford, SCRTD M. C. Becher, SCRTD

N. C. Johnson, PDCD W. Robertson, PDCD A. M. Virginkar, BAH

Agenda: The meeting agenda was distributed on February 24, 1988, (copy attached).

1. Review of Action Items (see Action Items List attached).

2. B.E. Warrensford reported that A-620 Contract, Awarded to GRS, had been signed and returned by the Contractor. There were some late changes requiring the Contractor initials. NTP will be forwarded to the Contractor on 2/24/88 with Contract start date of March 1, 1988.

3. Initial Activities Meeting Agenda was discussed. Meeting will be scheduled for 3/21/88 at 9.00 a.m. Meeting will be confirmed and an agenda forwarded at a later date. Agenda will include at a minimum, items specified in Article 14.3.B of the Contract Technical Provisions. Townley during discussion with GRS has reminded the Contractor of initial Submittal Schedule.

4. Scheduling of Quarterly Management Meeting was discussed. It was agreed that meeting site would be alternated between L.A. and the Contractors facilities in Rochester .

e ATC Meeting Minutes 24 Feb 88

-2-

5. Townley requested that any comments on GRS Project Manager's Resume and Qualifications be submitted by Feb. 26, 1988. GRS has designated Mr. Kenneth W. Embling to be the Project Manager.

6. Townley reported on status of the two Change Orders to the contract being processed by the RTD.

A620-CR-001 Revision to Project Schedule.

A620-CR-002 Changes to General Provisions Articles: 4, 34, 35 & 80

Change Orders will be issued following NTP.

7. Patel noted that power requirements for communications contract were being revised to indicate an increase from 35 KVA to 45 KVA. Becher noted that Change Request would be triggered by Contract A-640 when detail interface requirements have been determined.

8. Corrosion Control Requirements will need clarification. Patel will transmit Memo of Engineering Documentation Clarification, based on his investigation with Pete Pignatelli, Corrosion Consultant.

9. Format of Conformed Documents was discussed. RTD will review procedure during internal meeting to be scheduled by M. C. Becher.

10. Contract Cross Reference List was discussed. PDCD to request inclusion of missing items.

11. Patel noted there had been reports of back contact of GRS Bl relay welding shut. Becher indicated that this fact should be noted and, if need be, brought up during Product Submittal Review.

/ /

e

ATC Meeting Minutes 24 Feb 88

-3-

12. Next scheduled ATC Coordination Meeting is scheduled for March 8 at 9:30 a.m, PDCD Conference Romm 1315.

Attachments:

Action Item List, Cross

CM/MPC/MJM/6948

cc: Attendees Absentees CM File/MLP Doc Control Operations

•

e

•

METRO RAIL TRANSIT CONSULTANTS O.\.lJ\.1. PBQD, t,,;E/H\\A

MEMORANDUM

March 28, 1988

TO: M. Patel

FRCXV!: M. Ingram /11, flr.-, SUBJECT: Response to Information Requests

- A620 Contract

FILE NO: S440A620X052 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• As a result of your verbal request, the attached data Ls forwarded for your use in responding to requests for information submitted by the A620 contractor at the March 21, 1988 Initial Activities Meeting. Your request covered three subjects: (1) CAL-OSHA requirements for fixed ladders; (2) State Building Code

Title 24 CAC Earthquake Requirements: and (3) L.A. City Bui !ding Code requirements. The three separate attachments are as fo 11 ows:

1 ) Ca I i f o rn i a Adm in i st rat i ve Code Ti t I e 8 Indus tr i a I Relations; Part I. Department of Industrial Relations; Chapter 4. Division of Industrial Safety; Sub-chapter 7. General Industry Safety Orders; Group 1. General Physical Condit ions and Structures; Article 2. Standard Speci fi-cat ions Excerpt for Section 3277. Fixed Ladders, pp. 432.40 - 432.54, inclusive.

2) 1985 Edition of the State Building Code, California Administrative Code Title 24. Part 2. Chapter 2-23. General Design Requirements - Excerpt for Section 2-2312 Earthquake Regulations, pp. 190-216, inclusive.

3) City of Los Angeles Building Code 1985 Revised Edition, excerpt for revised Section 2312 Earthquake Regulations, pp. 114-124.2, inclusive; and Uniform Building Code (UBC) 1985 Edition, excerpt for Section 2312 Earthquake Regulations, (UBC) pp. 114-137, inclusive.

16199

• M. Patel March 28, 1988 Page 2

Please note the fol lowing with respect to attachments 2 and 3 The State Building Code, Title 24 CAC is based collectively on the 1979 and 1982 editions of the Uniform Building Code. The L.A. City Bui !ding Code is based on the 1985 edit ion of the Uni form Bui !ding Code, with amendments. In the case of the L. A. City Bui !ding Code, the amendments adopted by the City supersede the 1985 UBC and must be complied with. The City. amendments are readily identified in the excerpts included in attachment 3.

Please feel free to contact me at extension #7134 should you have any questions.

MI: dj r

Attachments

cc: J. N. P. M. H. J. A. M.

Brown • Burgess Chaliff Dale •

DCC ( 2) Chron Subject

(. w/o attachments)

16199

* •

•

• 88-03:1J1

BOOZ·ALLEN & HM\ILlDN INC. SUITE 502 • 523 WEST SIXTH STREET• LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90014 • TELEPHONE: 1213) 620-1900

Mr. Harold E. Storey Director, Systems and Construction Safety Southern California Rapid Transit District 600 South Spring Street, 3rd Floor Los Angeles, California 90013

July 13, 1988

Reference: ATP Vehicle Equipment Reliability Data

Dear Mr. Storey:

RECE:1::J

JUL14 l~bc

At a meeting with Leigh Boyden on July 6, 1988, Booz, Allen was asked to search our files to uncover any available documentation on the origin of ATP reliability requirements. Dave Coury was able to retrieve some data from his own files on the ATC Industry Review held during the second half of 1984. The following exhibits are enclosed:

Exhibit I - Responses to R TD letter from Union Switch and Signal (US&:S) and Jeumont Schneider. The letter specifically asked for ATP vehicle equipment MTBF.

Exhibit 2 - Handout (2 pages) from Union Switch and Signal at the industry review meeting in Pittsburgh.

Exhibit 3 - Page from meeting minutes of industry review meeting with Alsthom A tlantique.

These exhibits tend to indicate that the specified 15,000 hours MTBF is somewhat higher than industry standards. The first page of Exhibit 2 shows US&:S calculations of predicted MTBF for ATP vehicle equipment. If we remove door opening protection from the equation, since it does not apply to Metro Rail; the resultant MTBF becomes 6565 hours.

•

•

:V!r. Hal Storey Southern California Rapid Transit District July 13, 1988 Page 2

I hope this information is useful and look forward to providing you with further assistance towards the resolution of this issue. Please feel free to call me or Dave Coury should you have any questions.

Very truly yours,

)J~ 11 lzLJnvi~ BOOZ·ALLEN &: HAMIL TON Inc.

Gary M. Schulman Project Manager, Systems Engineering

mh/ l 653L

Enclosures

cc: w/encs • BAH D. Coury L. Elliott J. Wing

MRTC N. Brown M. Ingram

PDCD W. Robertson

SCRTD M. Becher L. Boyden J. Sandberg R. Townley

e

e

-US(S

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 1

7. ~TBF for ATC Vehicle Equipment

RECEIVED SY M.R.T.C.

SEP OG i984

SYSTEMS DESIGN DIVISION

The predicted ~TSF for ATC vehicle equipment is a :unction of the system configuration and functions. Typical configurations fo~ recent t~ansit properties have resulted in an approximate value of 5,000 hours for ~TEF excluding station stop, speed regulation. and TwC functions.

8. Aoplication of TIIC for Vehicle Equioment Monitoring

Ho comment.

9. Roll E'ack ?cotection

The specification requires a mechanical integrity check of the speed sensor. This check can be implemented with an electronic circuit called a positive motion detector. This device requires that a preset minimum speed be attained within a relatively short preset time following release of service brakes. If this circuit is not satisfied, the brakes are reapplied.

Since positive forward acceleration is greater than reverse drift or roll back, the positive motion detector functionally meets the intent of roll back protection. Normally, however, roll back protection is assigned to the motorman. We recommend the latter considering the safety critical aspects at passenger stations.

10. Aoolication of Train Stoos

Mechanical and inductive type train stops are available. The electrically driven mechanical stop, of course, is the most common. We support your specified use of the train stop. We favor the mechanical stop based on ease of portable stop arms for area blocking to handle temporary construction sites, blue flag protection, etc.

11. Soecified Number of ATP Speed Limits

lie have asked in our comments if the TED speeds will be given in the final spec. If not, how and when will they be determined?

T.~e determination of the TBD speeds resu2ts in adCiticnal enginee~ing effort to be expended by the Contractor 2nd SCRTD operating personnel to finalize ~hese system parameters.

12 •. Asoects of 1/ayside Signals

The determination of types 2nd numbe~s of ~ayside aspects is best developed by the Authorities• operating personnel. Ne have no objection to the form of route signaling specified. We recommenC, howeve~, that a book of operating rules and procedures be es~ablished prior to the in-service date.

-3-

e

...

e.

..JEUMONT·SCHNEICER

-Annex l. EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 2

Comments to RTD letter from June 21, 1984

- Fixed Freouencv Chopper, ooerating at 240 or 360 Hz effect o! usin£ :n.:.l:iole disc=eet chopper freouencies The above frequencies are usually used by the chopper manufacturers 1.·hen :he power supply includes a :::uleitude of phases, more specifically the 360 Hz frequency. I: is also usual to use 3 (or 2) phases .hich will create in :he retu::-:1 circuit a frequency of 1080 Hz. With a single phase used the frequency ,ill reach 600 Hz .

- E!'J ~lications of future use of AC propulsion Being a chopper ~anufacturer our ATP system is designed to be protected against chopper frequencies with also the possibility to be i::."une when the propulsion frequency is SO or 60 Ez.

- Use of double brake circuits for ATC vehicle eouio:::ent. It is possible to use double brake circuits for the car bo=e ATC equ:.pne:,.: Ou-: ·,.-e '.:ill have to in:'o=m you that acco:-di:i.g to ou= experience such requirement will increase the price reducing in the s~"e ti.:ne the reliability of the ATC equ:.pnent.

SDec::'ieC M.T.B.F. :'or ATC vehicle eoci~rnent. - The class:.cal system I M.T.B.F. = 5000 hours - Digital syst~ ~. T. B. F. = 4500 hou:-s

-A~o::ca::.o~ o~ T.~.C. fo= vehicle equi~=e~: ~o~::c~~~; '!!le conti:i.uc-.;s :no~i:ori:i.g of the car t>o:-:i.e eqci.;:i::!e~: ca:-. j~

:=a~s=i::e~ :o :~e ~ays~de eq~i?~e~: :~=ough e:.:~~= =on::~uo~s :=a~s=:ssion o= po~~: :o pc:~t :=a~s~:ss:or. depe~~:.~g on :.~e ::a~s~iss:on code. ~~e :=a~s~:ss:o~ o~ s~c:: :.::.:'o~ation is r:.:b:::.:: recon.11ended a:1.:. si..:c:1 sys:e::: -;..·:.:.:. ;Je:-::::.: a~ ea:-:y jecec:::~ ~~- :~e Co~:=ol Ce~:!= o~ a~y ~e~=a~z::0~ occ'...:=i:-.g on :!"le ::-:.~:"".. :his system can 'oe e:..t:-ie= :.:--.c::.~::ec. i.:1 :he c:o.:.:::unico.: :o:-. -:.::..:~;:,:Jent. o:- in t:".e :.:-a:..n co~:=o~ e~u:~we:1:.

:~e =o:l ~ac~ ;:·· ~~C!~~-~= :~::~~ -

~=o:ec:.:.c~ s:~e=e - ·_,::-:. :.s d.es~~:-:.ed .., __ a S?e:::a.~ :-:o\·e::::-.:

: · .. .-~ee:.

- :o:-:-..-.-=:-.:s :.: :.:.: ::,=.se :.~

-~··

i;..

·_;.:

- EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 3 -

Annex 1.

Co!lllllents to RID letter from June 21, 1984

- Fixed Freauency Chopper, operating at 240 or 360 Hz effect of using multiple discreet chopper freauencies

The use of fixed frequency chopper or multiple frequency chopper is an old concern among the signal companies so far a multitude of design ways has been used to build signa~ equipment immune to the two kinds of chopper. We believe that the single frequency chopper has a certain advantage over the multiple frequency chopper and its use can simplify the signal equipment requirements,

- E.'!I i.l:lplications of future use of AC propulsion

The signal equipment based on Jeumont-Schneider technology is proven to be chopper immune and newly AC propulsion L=une.

- Use of double brake circuits for ATC vehicle equipoent.

The use of double brake circuits in the design of the ATC vehicle equipment is an expensive way of hiding lack of confidence on mode= technology, We believe and proved that the use of different design will produce the same failsafe ATC equipment without the use of the expensive double brake circuits.

Soecified M.!,B.F. for ATC vehicle equioment.

- The Jeumont-Scneider technology based system has a M.!.B.F. of 5000 hours

- Apolication o: T.W.C. ·for vehicle equipment rnonito~ing

We recorn..end the use of monitoring equipment linked to transmission system.to inform the Control Center on the status of the car borne eq~ipment.

- Specified rollback ~rotection sche~e

The rollback protection which is an essential element of an ATC system is based on a movement detector called phonic wheel.

e

. ·- - ... ·-- - ···---~ I. I. 1.110

nv,·rspL•1•,I Pr111 r.1·r Inn

;.\ 1 ., tlH.S~

Fi1 I lillo's/ 106 l\rs.

··- . --· -

l'rt·•llned tllllF,. ·1,21u hr:i1.

Mt•1111l1t•ll lllllf = flHIIO hrfl.

I. I. 2. l>O

lloor Ol't:n lt1R l'rult>cl lun

:>.2 • 2b.81

Fall11rcR/I06

llrs.

Predicted trnf • ]7,J'lO l1r!\,

R1i1 111lred HTnr • 11,2'JS l1rR.

)I r·>-1,;,.2 1 >-1•A,

1. I.J.oo

Brake A:rnura11ce

>, 3 • 4.14

Fallures/1/' ll1·s.

Predlctc,I HTRF • 210,970 hr,i,

Rcqu lrrd hTnf • 96,780 l1rs,

171J, 12 Foil I urr.s/106

lire,

rredlcLe1l HTRF (nr VPldclc Equipment• SSIJJ hrs.

RttlfU(rL•,I IITRF' rnr \lcldr-.lP E']ulpneut • 4482 llrs.

) r' R(t) • e - 1 wlicrti t IR muter lned

Fl1;11rl' l>-1 llrll,1hlllly ltlock IJlaR,rllffl nnd tlodcl [nr Train Protection S11h11yfllt•m, Vr.hlcle F.r('1lpmr.nl.

[)CL. 'l4

1. 1. ,, .no

l'uwPr

/\ 1· • 9. "'

Fall11rrs/lOh 111·8.

Predl1·lf.'1I tll'IH" .. I IO,Ht.S

Requlrt•cl H'IIIF .. 1,1,>Ull) hr~.

I

·- --•.

U (' J ' . _, \ ./

,, 1: ' I I

V I

-ALSTHOM ATLANTIQUE Arc INDUSTRY REVIEW W,i1y 25, 1985

EXHIBIT 3 PAGE 1

Page 4

VII.

• IX.

x.

The ATP antenna is mounted on the truck. Overspeed tolerance is +5%, -0. Rollback and speed sensor integrity is checked by requiring motion within 5 seconds after brake removal.

Modes of operation in Lyons is quite similar to that specified, except the stop and proceed is pushbutton oper;ited.

Testing is done by portable test set. AA also manufactures on elaborate test facility that cycles carborne equipment and locates intermittent problems.

No routine maintenance is needed.

Double brake circuits are not used on the vehicle. Strict requirements on wiring and installation are enforced.

Processor Based Yard Control

Two types of yard control available in France are:

PAl PRC2

Microprocessor Processor

AA does not manufacture either, but would purchase.

ATBF for ATC Eguioment

Carborne ATP Carborne ATO Track circuit (Lyons) Interlocking Loop transmission system-

4,000 hours 1,500 hours 30,000 hours will send 2,000 hours ( loops are always energized)

Figures are computed based on actual experience.

Disadvantaqed Business Enterprice (DBE) Particioation

SCRTD explained the policy of DBE participation and advised that Westinghouse may call the SCRTD on an informal basis concerning this subject.

SCRTD explained that although the percentage of participation is not yet determined, it will be reasonable.

•

•

e

-pOCO ( A l}DJl1/J.

SS-03333

~Tl-I SPRrHQ STREET

su1T1 1'200 LOS ,u,iGELES. c,.l,.lf0RN!,t, 91)01•

,l)J,11~E J M,P .. +~1 RC

(<v,,, SfJltcl~., Rc1r+..s · po #11 O~l'4Tf·

ON 'o/:lgg, REC El VE D

b :JUL25 ,~!lo 121ll •89-611!50

1620-REC-009.J

General Rail~a~ Signal Company p.a. Bo" 20600 ~oches:cr, .'i. Y. l-1602-0600

.-1.t:.er.:.ion: :!r. Ker.nc:h Emblin:; Progr.:i.m ~!::i!la~e_r

Jul~: 25, 1938

;ubject: Contract A620- Si1nal LaYout Data & Drawin1s-CDRL 1702 & 908 - A620-MR-13-0

0~:1: leme:1:

GRS Let,er~CRE:-0/Jic '::e1te,i J·.1!'.C 15, l988

FILE

1: .... ,ched !.s cr.c !:"c~;r-Jdticibl(?' 1..:.:op,- o:' :!:e :z1.1b.je--:t. s11bmittnl st.:-:.:n~eJ "App~:)~·2'....! :,·.i th ::v? ·2'.':cc:p::: ir::n cf 9r~h·::1~s .31 ~-! Z:5. 45906-393 & ;_29.~~-::.:: ~~-hi.c:l J.l.'C ''.-\t)prr-:\·pd :.!S \~tt.:'ci" The :'".lll:l·.~·i:~~ -:~mme~t'2

1, L.:i.dder sho1{n fo~ :;a!l mct1nted si;~.:i.l !GRS Dr~1~in; 312-1251 does not mee: 1

~ :~~~ max~~um space bet~een ~t:n;s

., requiremen:s she~~~ en Dr~~{1n; .Xo~O-Q-liJ.

Split Sase /u:1ct.i.::-:-;;; Sc:-~ ~r~y,·i:---.;::; ~nd 4395!-~7) 1~0~~ :lat shct{ 11~:;

:c: S. Lou is R. Townle;· 'I. \.ial ters SCRTD - TSD ~-S. Patel - !IRTC

•

•

•

e·

METRO RAIL TRANSIT CONSULTANTS DMJM/PBQD/KE/HWA

r<c- o 3 V3/

MEMORANDUM

RECEIVED BY MRTC

JUL c. 9 1988

SAEErt & ASSURANCE

July 29, 1988

TO:

FRCXV!:

H. E. Storey, SCRTD-600 ~

J. N. Brown, MRTC J.lfl. SUBJECT: Contract A620, Automatic Train Control,

Reliability Values Placed in the Contract Specifications by the General Consultant

REF.: Memorandum - H. E. Storey to J. N. Brown dated July 12, 1988 same subject.

FILE NO: W409A620X011 -----~------------------------------------------------------------As requested in the referenced letter MRTC has reviewed information a.vailable on Train Control reliability in two areas: yard track circuits and vehicle-borne ATP equipment. The results of our review are as follows:

A.

B.

17263

!~!~_!!~~~-~i!~~i!~ - The specification, paragraph 15.3.2 shows a 20,000 hour MTBF requirement per track circuit in the Yard Control Subsystem. This is to be interpreted as the non-vital storage track circuit. This is in line with GRS' s statements as to what they can meet. There is some lack of clarification in that the ATP Subsystem shows Power Frequency Track Circuits with a requirement of a 40,000 hour MTBF "Per Track Circuit". The yard circuit is shown as being singular and did not require the clarifying statement "Per Track Circuit" added. ! recommend that GRS be informed of the correct interpretation of the specification.

Vehicle-Borne ATP Eguiement - The specification, paragraph 15-:-·r:·2--sn-ow-s--a-Ts-;clllll -hour MTBF requ i rem en t per dependent pair. GRS has indicated that a lower number would be more reasonable. The method used to accumulate test hours has a significant impact on test results. In the A620 contract paragraph 13.12.5.A a test day is defined as follows:

"Each test day shall normally consist of 24 hours, which includes nonreve11ue service hours".

Q1\\\\-\\ll:-11'6'6\

•

H. E. Storey July 29, 1988 Page 2

For testing done in Baltimore, only the "B" car's actual operating time was used to calculate MTBF. Testing there was terminated with an achieved MTBF of 6650 hours which was passing. (See US&S Vehicle ATP MTBF chart dated December 1984.)

It is recommended that if GRS does not believe that the specified requirement is reasonable then they should submit a change request to the contract including justification and their proposed reliability test method. GRS should have raised any quest ions they had on rel iabi Ii ty prior to the bid date. A surrrnary of ATC rel iabi Ii ty test results from a GRS publication is attached.

In surrrnary we need to see a proposed change request to fully evaluate GRS's concerns.

JNB:djr

cc: L. Boyden, SCRTD-600 R. Boerwinkle

17263

A. Dale M. Ingram~· M. Pate 1 R. Townley, SCRTD-600 DCC ( 2)

e

I. Carborne_Egui~ment

II.Yard Trnck Circuits I} VTtnT lnterlockTrq{ T1·uc..:k

Circuit.s

2) Signnl ( ludicat ion) Control Ci 1·cui ts

3) Power Frequc11cy Track Circuif.M

' I;'"::, = :-c !==1 .-. 63

i 4) Power &rfjj, I y, 28V

17265

ATC FA I LURE DATA

"Reliability Test Datn for ATC Equipment". NFTA Contract 1'l201l, Prepared by GRS; January 22, 1985:

\\MATA

~UlTA ~W!TA

WllATA

MBTA

~lARTA

WllATA

MHTA

~W!TA

WllATA

~UITA

~lAHTA

\\'MATA

Function No. of Devices

ATP

Switch Cont ro I Route Interlocking Switch Control end Truin Stop

Interlocking Train Circuit

Signal Control

Rni J Interlocking Signnl Control

Signul Control

Interlocking Tr11ck Circuit-Trnin Dctectio11 A1'J• Receivers

lntcrlocki11g 1'reck Circuit-Trnin Detection ATP Receivers

Interlocking Trnck Circuit-Trnin Detect io11 ATP Receivers

Power Supply

Power Supply

Power Supply

100

8

46

60

I 2

78

l 00

14

113

5 l

64

45

57

Total Test Hours (No. of devices X hours) ----------------

94,718

104,832

44,160

169,009

157,248

74,880

580,800

183,456

108,480

296,208

838,656

43,200

331,056

- --

Total FHi lures ---------7

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

7

,~ Reviewed by MRTC Safety, Assurance &: Security No Adverse Impact on Safety Certification

RTD

A D D E N D U M

covering

CHANGE IN SPECIFICATIONS AND/OR PLANS

Date Issued: July 31, 1987

Addendum Date: Julv 31, 1987

Addendum !-Jo. A620-l

Contract: A620: Automatic Train Control

1.

INTENT

This addendum is issued prior to receipt of bids to provide for modifications in the Procurement Specifications Book. Acknowledgement of this addendum shall be made and cost of Work included or excluded in Offerer's Bid.

2. This addendum consists of the following items:

Revisions to the following parts of the Specifications Book, and the pages including:

0 Revisions to Table of Contents. Pages i and ii.

0 Revisions to Bid Requirements. Pages 8 ' 9' 10, 13,· 1 7, ts, 19, 20, 21, and 22.

0 Revisions to Bid Forms. Pages. 9, 11, 13, 15, 23, 25, 27, 45, and 47.

0 Revisions to Special Provisions. Pages i, 1, 2' 6 ' 7' 8 ' 9 ' A-1, A-2, and A-3.

0 Revisions to General Provisions. Pages ii, iii, iv, 8 ' 16, 18, 19, and 31.

o Revisions to Technical Provisions. Pages 1-2, 2-2, 4-12, 9-14, 10-8, 10-13, 11-18, 12-14, 12-15, 12-17, 14-1, 14-3, 14-14, 15-6, 15-7, 15-8, 15-12, 16-2, and 18-11.

Southern Califomla Rapid Transit District 425 South Main Street. Los Angeles, California 90013 (213} 972-6000

Addendum A620-l Page 1 of 2

Addendum revisions are identified by the Addendum Number in the margins before and after each line modified. Pages changed due to relocation of lines or paragraphs that are not modified by addendum will not have identifying numbers, but are included to keep the Procurement Specifications Book intact and continuous. Please place the enclosed pages in your Procurement Specifications Book, and remove addended pages.

3. Revised Drawings as Follows:

0

0

0

Contract Drawings Changed:

Drawing Number

Q-031

Q-111 Q-112

Title

Double Line Track to 805+00

YCT ATC Equipment Yard Control Room

Plan 775+00

Room Layout Layout

Reference Drawings Changed:

Drawing Number

A620/3 A620/4

Q-302 Q-303

Title

Reference Drawings Index Sheet 3 of 4 Reference Drawings Index Sheet 4 of 4

Reference Drawings Added:

Title Drawing Number

A620/405 N-036 SCADA/Facilities Electrical Interfaces

Issued By: T.L. Johnson

Assistant Director Office of Contracts,

Procurement and Materiel

Addendum A620-l Page 2 of 2

,~ Reviewed by MRTC Safety, Assurance &: Security No Adverse Impact on Safety Certification

FITO

A D D E N D U M

covering

CHANGE IN SPECIFICATIONS AND/OR PLANS

Date Issued: September 2, 1987 Addendum No. A620-2

Addendum Date: September 2, 1987

Contract: A620: Automatic Train Control

1.

INTENT

This addendum is issued prior to receipt of bids to provide for modifications in the Procurement Specifications Book. Acknowledgement of this addendum shall be made and cost of Work included or excluded in Offerer's Bid.

2. This addendum consists of the following items:

Revisions to the following parts of the Specifications Book, and the pages including:

0 Revisions to Table of Contents. Pages i and ii.

0 Revisions to Bid Requirements. Page 22.

0 Revisions to Bid Forms. Pages 9' 11, 13, 15, 27, and 29.

0 Revisions to Special Provisions. Pages i' 2' 3' 6' 7' 8 ' and 9.

o Revisions to Technical Provisions. Table of Contents Pages ii, iii, v, vi; Pages 2-3, 2-8, 2-15, 3-16, 4-26, 7-5, 7-9, 7-10, 8-i, 8-9 through 8-11, 9-3, 10-19, 10-A-5, 10-A-30, 10-A-58, 10-A-60, 11-i, 11-ii, 11-3, 11-4, 11-8, 11-15 through 11-23, 11-28, 12-ii, 12-8, 12-14, 12-15, 12-16, 13-10, 18-ii, 18-8, 18-10, and 18-11.

Southern California Rapid Transit District 425 S0u1h Main Street. Los Ange!es. California 90013 (213} 972-6000

Addendum A620-2 Page 1 of 3

Addendum revisions are identified by the Addendum Number in the margins before and after each line modified. Pages changed due to relocation of lines or paragraphs that are not modified by addendum will not have identifying numbers, but are included to keep the Procurement Specifications Book intact and continuous. Please place the enclosed pages in your Procurement Specifications Book, and remove addended pages.

3. Revised Drawings as Follows:

o Contract Drawings Changed:

0

0

Drawing Number

Q-003 Q-004 Q-007

Q-043

Q-091 Q-093 Q-094 Q-125 Q-136

Title

Line Schematic Symbols and Abbreviations, Track Plans Double Line Track Plan, 84+00 to

103+00, Union Station - Yard Lead Tracks

Route and Aspect Chart, Union Station Inter lockings

Yard Schematic, Sheet 1 of 4 Yard Schematic, Sheet 3 of 4 Yard Schematic, Sheet 4 of 4 Yard Locking Chart, Sheet 1 of 8 35 KV Trainway Feeder, Installation

Details, Sheet 1 of 2

Reference Drawings Changed:

Drawing Number

A620/3 A620/4 A620/392

Q-302 Q-303 N-138

Title

Reference Drawings, Index Sheet 3 of 4 Reference Drawings, Index Sheet 4 of 4 Automatic Train Control, Interfaces

Reference Drawings Added:

Drawing Number Title

A620/286 T-147 No. 8 Double Crossover, 18' TC, Ballasted

A620/366 T-111 Yard Track Alignment Schematic, Sheet 1 of 2

A620/367 T-112 Yard Track Alignment Schematic, Sheet 2 of 2

A620/369 T-113 Yard Track Alignment Data, Sheet 1 of 4

A620/370 T-114 Yard Track Alignment Data, Sheet 2 of 4


,,,,--

Drawing Number

A620/371 T-115

A620/372 T-116

A620/406 N-273

Title

Yard Track Aligr..ment Data, Sheet 3 of 4

Yard Track Alignment Data, Sheet 4 of 4

TC&C Room and Radio Base Station Locations /.

;

·-I<' •. \_

Issued By: a /,/. .. . . -- ~ ...


T,L, Johnson Assistant Director

Office of Contracts, Procurement and Materiel