Bloomberg has an interesting article on the poorly managed PATH system. Even though PATH is basically a subway, the system is three times more expensive to operate compared to the NY subway. Mismanagement by the Port Authority is certainly one reason. But another problem is that PATH is regulated by the FRA:
Federal Railroad Administration regulations, higher maintenance costs and round-the-clock service have boosted spending compared with other transit systems, Port Authority officials say.
A major difference between PATH and the New York subway system is that the trans-Hudson rail is regulated by the FRA while the Federal Transit Administration oversees the subway. The FRA imposes stricter safety standards and labor requirements, imposing higher costs, Port Authority officials said.
Before each run, PATH workers must test a train’s air brakes, signals and acceleration, Mike Marino, PATH’s deputy director, said in a telephone interview. When a train gets to its terminus, workers repeat the test. In addition, every 90 days all of PATH’s rail cars undergo a three-day inspection at a facility in Harrison, New Jersey. Brakes, lights, communications, heating and air conditioning, signals and odometers are all checked, Marino said.
“It’s a very intense inspection on every piece of rolling stock,” he said.
Although the Port Authority has tried to switch its regulator to the Federal Transit Administration, the FRA has opposed a switch for safety reasons, Marino said. PATH runs parallel to high-speed trains operated by NJ Transit, Amtrak and freight-line CSX Corp.
I’m sure that FRA-mandated HVAC check is essential for saving lives.
There was an incident in Britain a few years ago when the air conditioning of a train stranded by signal failure (or similar, I forget the details) failed. People nearly died from heat exposure. Passengers had to smash emergency escape windows and flee carriages onto the track. Since PATH shares right-of-way with Amtrak and freight railroads, this is a feature that the FRA has to care about.
I think the incident you are referring to was on the South West train service in 2011. The signal failure resulted in a train being stuck for 3 hrs outside a station. Some of the passengers got out to walk on the track to the next station. As a safety precaution, the power to the track then had to be cut, which resulted in the air conditioning losing power.
I really don’t see how an FRA HVAC check would have helped in that kind of situation.
I was thinking of this (albeit, longer ago than I thought) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1492710/Trapped-train-passengers-swelter.html
but the story doesn’t detail abandoning the train onto the tracks. Maybe I mis-remembered and conflated the two incidents? Also, since the problem was a power failure, it doesn’t seem that an HVAC check would necessarily have made a difference in this case. However, I think my broader point stands. HVAC failures can, under the correct circumstances, strand trains and endanger lives. The government absolutely needs to regulate, monitor and enforce.
The FRA regulations are monumentally stupid. Apparently the brake test rules, which appear to be designed largely to delay passenger trains, were only introduced about 10 years ago. It seems that the FRA has had a historical agenda of crippling passenger service; I’m not sure exactly when this started, but it needs to end.
[…] its recommendation, the NTSB uses PATH as the model for FRA regulation of Metro. But as I pointed out last year, FRA regulation of PATH has been an unmitigated disaster. FRA rules increase PATH […]
[…] Square. While this connection has been severed, it has numerous additional FRA regulations, which raises costs. It could seek to be let loose of the FRA, and if it does, perhaps considerations for a connection […]