1989 - Contracts - SCRTD METRO RAIL PROJECT, SAFETY...
Transcript of 1989 - Contracts - SCRTD METRO RAIL PROJECT, SAFETY...
•
• 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
See TP Article 3.2.2.B
PAGE_l_ OF_6"--0001.o.o
•• SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT
METRO RAIL PROJECT DESIGN REVIEW CHECKLIST CERTIFIABLE ELEMENT: AUTOMATIC TRAIN CONTROL
GROUP: MP'T'IC Safety, Assurance c S.:...1.""urity
REVIEWER: R. Harve
DISCIPLINE: SYSTEM SAFETY
REVIEW REFERENCE: SCRTD Metro Rail System Design
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,
TRAIN CONTROL, 07/86 Revision 2
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
CONTRACT No.: _A_6_2_o ____ _
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
METRO RAIL PROJECT DESIGN REVIEW CHECKLIST CERTIFIABLE ELEMENT: AUTOMATIC TRAIN CONTROL
GROUP: MPTC Saf2ty, +tssnranco s: SecJJri t;,
REVIEWER: R. Harvey
DISCIPLINE: SYSTEM SAFETY
REVIEW REFERENCE: SCRTD Metro Rail System Design
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,
TRAIN CONTROL, 07/86 Revision 2
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
CONTRACT No.: _A_6_2_o ____ _
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
METRO RAIL PROJECT DESIGN REVIEW CHECKLIST CERTIFIABLE ELEMENT: AUTOMATIC TRAIN CONTROL
e
GROUP: MRTC Safetv, Assurance & Security
REVIEWER: R. Harvey
DISCIPLINE: SYSTEM SAFETY
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 __ _
Criteria & Standards, Vol. I, Section 3.6,
TRAIN CONTROL, 07/86 Revision 2
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 6.4.5.B
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
METRO RAIL PROJECT DESIGN REVIEW CHECKLIST CERTIFIABLE ELEMENT: AUTOMATIC TRAIN CONTROL
GROUP: MBTC Saf"ety Assnrance & Security
REVIEWER: R. Harvey
DISCIPLINE: SYSTEM SAFETY
REVIEW REFERENCE: SCRTD Metro Rail System Design
REO. I.D.
3.6.1.G
• 3.6.2
3.6.3
• 12/15/86 - Rev. 1 SDE7981 A620
Criteria & Standards, Vol. I, Section 3.6,
TRAIN CONTROL, 07/86 Revision 2
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
CONTRACT No.: _A_6_2_o ____ _
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
•• SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT
METRO RAIL PROJECT DESIGN REVIEW CHECKLIST CERTIFIABLE ELEMENT: AUTOMATIC TRAIN CONTROL
•
•
GROUP: MRTC Sa~ety Assurance & Securi tv
REVIEWER: R. Harvey
DISCIPLINE: SYS_TEM SAFETY
REVIEW REFERENCE: SCRTD Metro Rail System Design
Criteria & Standards, Vol. I, Section 3.6,
REO. I.D.
3.6.4
3.6.4.A
3.6.4.B
3.6.4.C
3.6.4.D
TRAIN CONTROL, 07/86 Revision 2
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
CONTRACT No.: _A_6_2_o ____ _
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
METRO RAIL PROJECT DESIGN REVIEW CHECKLIST CERTIFIABLE ELEMENT: AUTOMATIC TRAIN CONTROL
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
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT
METRO RAIL PROJECT DESIGN REVIEW CHECKLIST CERTIFIABLE ELEMENT: AUTOMATIC TRAIN CONTROL
-
e
GROUP: MRTC Safety A~sJJrance & Sec11rity
REVIEWER: R. Harvey
DISCIPLINE: RELIABILITY
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 Article 15.3.3
X See Articles 15.3.3.C &
15.1.6.D
X See Section 10
X See Article 15.3.5
X See Articles 15.3.5.D &
15.3.5.H
X See Articles 15.3.5 &
15.3.5.I
X See Article 15.3.5
P r'.GE _ 2__ 0 F __ 4 __ _ 0002.0.0
~<6 e ~..I SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT
METRO RAIL PROJECT DESIGN REVIEW CHECKLIST CERTIFIABLE ELEMENT: AUTOMATIC TRAIN CONTROL
GROUP: MRT.C_Safety Assnrance & Secnri ty
REVIEWER: R. Harvey
DISCIPLINE: RELIABILITY
REVIEW REFERENCE: Mi:TRQ P,71Ib PP.Q.+i:CT P•6TEU i;ie:gicw
Criteria & Standards, Vol. I, Section 5.2
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
See TP Article 3.3.3
PAGE_3_ OF_4 ___ _ 0003.0.0
•• SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT
METRO RAIL PROJECT DESIGN REVIEW CHECKLIST CERTIFIABLE ELEMENT: AUTOMATIC TRAIN CONTROL
GROUP: MRTC Sa~ety Ass11rance & Sec11rity
REVIEWER: R. Harvey
DISCIPLINE: RELIABILITY
REVIEW REFERENCE: METRO RZ\IT PROJECT SYSTEM DESIGN
Criteria & Standards, Vol. I, Section 5.2
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 3.3.5
See TP Article 3.3.3.A.2
PAGE_4 _ OF_4 __ 0004.0.0
• 411:.~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT
METRO RAIL PROJECT DESIGN REVIEW CHECKLIST CERTIFIABLE ELEMENT: AUTOMATIC TRAIN CONTROL
GROUP: MRTC Safetl' Assurance & Security
REVIEWER: R. Harvey
DISCIPLINE: MAINTAINABII,ITY
REVIEW REFERENCE: Mi:111-lQ ~'>Ih pi;tQJEGT .6Uls'i'EU OE&ICW
Criteria & Standards, Vol. I, Section 5.3
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
METRO RAIL PROJECT DESIGN REVIEW CHECKLIST CERTIFIABLE ELEMENT: AUTOMATIC TRAIN CONTROL
GROUP: MBTC Safety Assurance & Securitv
REVIEWER: R. Harvey
DISCIPLINE: MAINTAINABILITY
REVIEW REFERENCE: METRO PAIT PPOIFCT SYSTEM DESIGN
Criteria & Standards, Vol. I, Section 5.3
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
METRO RAIL PROJECT DESIGN REVIEW CHECKLIST CERTIFIABLE ELEMENT: AUTOMATIC TRAIN CONTROL
GROUP: MBTC Safety Assurance & Security
REVIEWER: R. Harvey
DISCIPLINE: MAINTAINABILITY
REVIEW REFERENCE: METRO P1\II PROJECT SYSTEM DESIGN
Criteria & Standards, Vol. I, Section 5.3
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
See TP Article 15.4.5
See TP Article 15.4.5.A
See TP Article 16.3.1
PAGE_3_ OF~5'--ooo3.o.o
• ~aj& SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT
METRO RAIL PROJECT DESIGN REVIEW CHECKLIST CERTIFIABLE ELEMENT: AUTOMATIC TRAIN CONTROL
GROUP: MBTC Safeh1
' Assnrance & SecPri ty
REVIEWER: R. Harvey
DISCIPLINE: MAINTAINABILITY
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
METRO RAIL PROJECT DESIGN REVIEW CHECKLIST CERTIFIABLE ELEMENT: AUTOMATIC TRAIN CONTROL
GROUP: MBTC Safet,, Ass11rance & Sec11rity DATE: 07/29/88
REVIEWER: R. Harvey
DISCIPLINE: MAINTAINABILITY
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
METRO RAIL PROJECT DESIGN REVIEW CHECKLIST CERTIFIABLE ELEMENT: AUTOMATIC TRAIN CONTROL
•
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
CONTRACT No.: _A_6_2_o ____ _
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
METRO RAIL PROJECT DESIGN REVIEW CHECKLIST CERTIFIABLE ELEMENT: AUTOMATIC TRAIN CONTROL
GROUP: MBTC Safety Assurance & Secnritv DATE: 08/04/88
REVIEWER: R. Harvey
DISCIPLINE: QUALITY ASSURANCE
REVIEW REFERENCE: SCRTD Metro Rail Project System
Design Criteria & Standards, Vol. I, Section 5.4,
CONTRACT No.: _A_6_2_o ____ _
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 Article 15.5.15
See TP Article 15.5.16
'
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
METRO RAIL PROJECT DESIGN REVIEW CHECKLIST CERTIFIABLE ELEMENT: AUTOMATIC TRAIN CONTROL
GROUP:
REVIEWER:
DISCIPLINE:
MBTC Safety. Assurance & Security
R. Harvey
QUALITY ASSURANCE
DATE: 08/04/88
REVIEW REFERENCE: SCRTD Metro Rail Project System
Design Criteria & Standards, Vol. I, Section 5.4,
CONTRACT No.: _A_6_2_o ____ _
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 Article 15.5.17
See TP Article 15.5.13
See TP Articles 15.5.7 & 15.5.2.A
See TP Article 15.5.2.A
See TP Articles 15.5.2.B & 15.5.1
See TP Article 15.5.7
PAGE_3_ OF_5 __ 0003.0.0
• 4J+ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT
METRO RAIL PROJECT DESIGN REVIEW CHECKLIST CERTIFIABLE ELEMENT: AUTOMATIC TRAIN CONTROL
GROUP: MRTC Safety: AssPrance & Secnri h.r , DATE: 08/04/88
REVIEWER: R. Harvey
DISCIPLINE: QUALITY ASSURANCE
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
See TP Article 15.5.19
See TP Article 15.5.20
See TP Article 15.5.21
PAGE_4_ OF~5 __ 0004.0.0
• ~w SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT
METRO RAIL PROJECT DESIGN REVIEW CHECKLIST CERTIFIABLE ELEMENT: AUTOMATIC TRAIN CONTROL
GROUP: MBTC Safety Assurance & Security
REVIEWER: R. Harvey
DISCIPLINE: QUALITY ASSURANCE
REVIEW REFERENCE: SCRTD Metro Rail Project System
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
CONTRACT No.: _A_6_2_o ____ _
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
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
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
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
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 $e< F, 1-'\A,l ,, • ..,, .. v
AAA/ nr Z£>o .4, A.,i,, •AJ. Po1-<JT .&r.P °t.o\ll\Me,.....,½ Q.._,c~~~· i ~ -· ,LI'. .4,-,, IAN'·, r/ A/n,U ,..,_,~/,41~ ,Hpl)e:: - 1-i H,
fu.Jh AlnT -'>-Z.~ ;1'}5, -- ,II"-- 1 1N ~,,._
,, ,,
VOOI -001-0114 I I
• e llr?~IJ METRO RAIL TRANSIT CONSULT ANTS L~~ DMJM/1'8QD/Kl/HWA
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
1u.:v1EwER J' C' IA..7..-Z.E:TTA FILE NO. ,;;o,,/ ,,; & / 0 //. J. I
/00 'I' SUIIMITT AL FOK A-lP 'Z.O - Au-rn"" ~S:: '&tz,._,4;,V'Q4L
KU, PAGE OKAWING NO./ COMMLNTS NO. NO. SPEC SlCT ION
• OAT[ /O-/o-es-SHEET 3 OF --;
OkGANllA TION ROLF JENSEN & ASSOCIATES, IN(
K[Sl'ON~[ ACTION
7 -/.J iJOZ/8 D, !=>Tl\>JC<c.$ 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...--
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
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-,. $,').J-/1..I, I/ •. 1 S'. I . r - v~-:.f' r -f.o ARJ,,j& 2,S. s ... f,--._\ PcJ1evV ,fo .4 1J" r, -,-. ", '?,
' c"~me11 b K~,/.,r1!,i!!: a;, e,
4- TP..&A J< '3,, I - h 'v€k. .C, ,Rrc r - - ·" - J A .. .J::. I ,r;- i. d. £ n rA/J !c_._e,e. F, o\W4,. \ n,t:..,,1!...v AJI, .. ,-~.., (4,::r.1 · .- .,.,....J.3 '. .,,tl,[,L/, cL-JJ L.r A I ~ • ;/
. I • • ,C CoM.,....t. .... ~., ~c:,0 .. 11'"•~ 2. J I t I '· .. .
c- T P-JO.-: 10.?,.7 ·r:_ J ,, ... J~,_P,~ t,.,:, , .(. Arr ,,cl.7c /,.. =u,~.:c v+ ,;;, - x• f,,w.\ ~t\}1tiJ ylJ-# '• •; • V
- ... I , • • • I
,, f'h· ,:~r;: J ./-., h€ .(cJ,,,..;.;1,,;.J . <.Lo-,11 I• \i,G ~Q...";:i\l,o\\.<;e tt'2.f>
L,.,, ,.,J ,J_ .J +~ cnr>J, '
• Ll!?W METRO RAIL TRANSIT CONSULTANTS ~~ DMJM/PBQD/KE/HWA
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
• e DATE /0 ,z4-g5'"' SHEET G OF 7
REVIEWER /\1. ~«'At1 FILE NO. W()()fd/,ttJ ,4,9,{ ORGANIZATION G~/ Act.$ -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,£ -,
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
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..$4'011.S e. ,-··- ....__ • C.~VV\ rD Sc"TD S-=• tt: 49
J
'l. \1-l:l ~"-\.'::: TP-11- I b.. <:)'"' C..O,., L'• f'.=.cJa... '"ffi i:::-.s 1: Cl_• = I.."' C 1,:, ~ .. i=. '1.&<. l l<c.v11.W I ""'\i. ,· ~J_.
'2~ \. l~ L_ . .,.A,.·· 1h._ ...._,._ r,_ - . - t..: I" Co11.4114 en+- ~15/0,..se ~ 'l. . t I'""""' "'C = l. p~,,~r.a.A"" lS. '2. 2: A
\:""rM · · • A-_._ As. >~~- -~._..,._ { 3 <:...op~-.u
~Cl,t£)7Ul..€ [de. A,~ f=t'>!Z • FAc.i /r . -
fl->="""C).u,,t.,;"
:)_ '9 -'.)_ ':,, Vl.r, ,s\-1=~-- U-.,.-z_,..,-,n A~=L'1 c:c 5,,. F,,,1..r:., ( l<tv1 e,.,J
• ~ ~.,·,f) V
' . "'0 "27 (.o,'4,~t.-v'- Rc~(){)Ni<:!. ttH
0=·· •·•Ll. IS. 2, -i - A I- .•.•• \.- ~ ~-r-.r.-- /~ r,,o;i,;.s
C' --~ b""'(..U5 /'4c A~ =.-..o /fl,-pf'.AA-L. • J').-- l,1"'~ ,,
• • LJ[F~ METRO RAIL TRANSIT CONSULTANTS ~:4!0 DMJM/PBQD/KE/HWA
• DAT£ \o/2q_ !es SHEET -z_ OFS::'
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
REVIEWER d\-A-a.\J &Nt- Fl LE NO. ___________ ORGANIZATION -~-'--'----~_ .... ffi:.'-"-'----A-'-"'-'-" ---\ 'QO % SUBMITTAL FOR .....1:k~o::~C-=--.!:.A:!..lo!:..:'2-0=::::::__ _____ _
REF. PAGE DRAWING NO./ COMMENTS RESPONSE ACTION NO. NO. SPEC. SECTION
v:.. ~ r,,o f:-OA+,"v {\_,,._, -n I>. - \,.ic:r ~L>J,c....; ~OL F,l'\c...l
., 88 ' Ji '-l 6:ivi I '
. "" COIW,11\C!.••·--' Kc90ASE'. ~.r.e,s
'PA.i I'\ C:,IZ A(lf.J l '5. 2_ '2. A
l=clZ ~~J- A'> '$ 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
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
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
REF. PAGE DRAWING NO./ COMMENTS RESPONSE ACTION NO. NO. SPEC. SECTION
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"
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
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
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
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-
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
-----..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..
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
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 >
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
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
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
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
DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS
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
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT
', 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 $c"'7 c,ri,??•~ c/-c--p/'• • . · -r;r= d.,·,_,-,,;:b-z ~-,.7 <:U 7.
/2Je,,,.- ft v¼/,,......_ //4~,,.....,;_,,,' __ -
~,, .,.~ ro ~,., c/41~~ ~ C"/,?f-? ~ vP:75""' ~ ~ ,c,""~ ,d{,...,e. /','/' ... : . -;{. ~ fl'7 ....YS-/Y'/4/' rn ,,,,,«a. S? TC_ ~-yt,~ 7t, Jv' fi ,.,/ //7/ ... ~,,,...,, ~,,._
</,/'J/e'-. ~ J ).=£?/ /,?~~
/7 (; C. 4:u.'v ;a....., o/S-r'-7 ,,,/4,_,,. /J/c.«-. 50 ;;{,eT ,7L t..-v-( u,cJ/j
Ci ..r4v./ ~~ /4, "7S- .....,.../,,,,(
o,c./u /',,.(/~ ,..."~?:,, ~~" c"'-':/:.c4 ~ cL~ J/,.,--tij? b?~·<--"7 /!u -/4,,...;7...,,_ /e,.,., . ./4,,..., c.:.r/2~ ,-:..~ //~
RESPONSE / ACTION
I .tn111u5 so WooJJ J .f ,/ I
b e. W d I lJe r;;,,_ r ( <t t-Corl\A.
.f'.' ~i ,J. ,Qi \ t,
e
RTO 81·1 ':.FF 3/84
·, '
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT
METR01
RAIL PROJECT , . . REVIEW / COMMENT SHEET
Reviewer ,b-. ~s--j File No. A trcJ.CJ Date .S-/2.z 198,).
Submittal No. d Dept, / Section S7'J;4 and/or D~te _______ Sheet _7_ of ~
Design Review/ Submittal Title A,,,/4,-.,;{ :,:z::,,, C#,, £;~~ J:...f!--,
REF PAGE DRAWING NO./ NO. NO. DOCUMENT SECT
8 77'-_? J. 'j(.-:,)_ // '-.).-? , ~
I
i i
COMMl;NT
M Jh--• .,k( A.~ d../ a /~/.,... /-;k,-;-,; /J /?~- ~{''V-v V/4~ '*/--::,,7 ~/t"'~ TJ-1 A - .)-. Tr] .
/?~~ />-f'.i ,.,.,;7'[1/ .. -q!vn,
RESPONSE / ACTION
()1) 51 l'I ;J IA p
• 15 1.>11as,, 61'-
W / ,4i'P Stjha/
k"",r
:;~ i~'! SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT
METRO RAIL PROJECT
-eviewer /(~-~j REVIEW ~11?~~~!~~ f HE ET Submittal No.
Dept. I Section _5~F~J.~A~---- and/or Date
REF PAGE DRAWING NO./ NO. NO. DOCUMENT SECT
1 7f2.d
-:r • •
/0 7P-/.J /J, I. 3 2
/ / -rl'-/.3 /J. G. ~
-/Z-
COMMENT ~
'S\ RTO
Date ½Z 19¥---__,
Sheet 5 of _ 6 _
RESPONSE / ACTION
N0 -f /Jcce55a. ')'
..fc, ·+e.s+ . .for ..
RTOSr-1 -,EFF J .. '34
SOUTHE~N CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT
METRO RAIL PROJECT
~eviewer <.L.._/_·---=~~=----E-V_, IE_W_ ~11?~~MENT SHEET
Dept./ Section _$:,__...,.~_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
DRAWING NO./ SPEC. SECTION
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(,
DRAWING NO./ SPEC. SECTION
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
DRAWING NO./ SPEC. SECTION
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
Addendum A620-2 Page 2 of 3
,,,,--
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 /,/. .. . . -- ~ ...
Addendum A620-2 Page 3 of 3
T,L, Johnson Assistant Director
Office of Contracts, Procurement and Materiel