VII. Comments on Draft Decision
This is an uncontested matter in which the decision grants the relief requested. Accordingly, pursuant to Pub. Util. Code § 311(g)(2), the otherwise applicable 30-day period for public review and comment is being waived.
1. A notice of a November 15, 1999 settlement conference was provided on November 8, 1999.
2. The first settlement agreement between BART and Rail Safety and a motion to accept it were filed on November 18, 1999.
3. A PHC (the third one in this proceeding) was held on March 23, 2000 to ascertain whether the settlement resolved the issues presented in the proceeding.
4. On May 10, 2000 a new settlement agreement and motion requesting its approval were filed to supercede the November 18, 1999 settlement agreement.
5. In A.99-02-012, BART seeks authority to commence train service utilizing the Advanced Automatic Train Control System for train separation and motion control.
6. BART's application seeks authority to modify the existing train system with an overlay subsystem that will enable trains to operate at closer headways while maintaining no less than the existing degree of safety.
7. The Advanced Automatic Train Control System will transfer control of the motion control function of train operations from the original track circuit based system to a radio based system working in conjunction with station based computers.
8. The Settlement seeks deviations from GO 127 and D.91846 that will permit BART to do testing for the Advanced Automatic Train Control System.
9. The technology for train control has changed from the time of the adoption of GO 127 to the present.
10. The Rail Safety unit is the Commission staff organization with responsibility for carrying out the Commission's safety responsibilities with respect to BART.
11. The Settlement Agreement provides that approval is not being sought at this time for BART's application request for Phase Three revenue service on BART's other tracks and trains.
12. No party opposed the Settlement Agreement.
13. An evidentiary hearing is not required in this proceeding.
1. GO 127, by its own terms, permits deviations to be granted to the rules it contains.
2. The deviations to GO 127 as contained in the Settlement Agreement and authorized by this order are reasonable and limited to the circumstances described in this application and the Settlement Agreement and do not constitute an amendment of GO 127 itself.
3. The modification of D.91845 as contained in the Settlement Agreement and authorized by this order is reasonable.
4. The Commission has a statutory duty to regulate the safety appliances and procedures of BART, to inspect all safety related work and take such steps as are necessary for the purpose of safety to BART employees and the general public.
5. The May 10, 2000 Settlement Agreement is the Settlement Agreement which BART and Rail Safety request be approved.
6. The Settlement Agreement is an "uncontested" settlement as defined in Rule 51(f) of the Commission's Rules.
7. The proposed Settlement Agreement is reasonable in light of the whole record, consistent with law, and in the public interest.
8. The proposed Settlement Agreement satisfies the Commission criteria for an all-party settlement as set forth in Rule 51 et seq. of the Commission's Rules and in San Diego Gas & Electric (1992), 46 CPUC2d 538.
9. The proposed Settlement Agreement should be approved.
10. No evidentiary hearing is required in this matter.
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. The motion of the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) and the Commission's Rail Transit and Safety Section of the Rail Safety and Carriers Division (Rail Safety) for adoption of a Settlement Agreement filed on May 10, 2000, and set forth in Appendix A of this order, is granted.
2. BART may request final approval of the Advanced Automatic Train Control System in Phase Three revenue service on BART's other tracks and trains after successful completion of Phase Two objectives and any such request shall be by separate application.
3. This proceeding is closed.
This order is effective today.
Dated March 27, 2001, at San Francisco, California.
LORETTA M. LYNCH
President
HENRY M. DUQUE
RICHARD A. BILAS
CARL W. WOOD
GEOFFREY F. BROWN
Commissioners
APPENDIX A
BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Application of the San Francisco Bay Rapid Transit District for Authority to Institute Revenue Passenger Service Utilizing the Advanced Automatic Train Control System for Safety-Critical Motion Control. |
Application 99-02-012 |
SETTLEMENT
The parties to this settlement before the California Public Utilities Commission ("Commission") are the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District ("SFBARTD") and the Rail Transit Safety Section ("RTSS") of the Rail Safety and Carriers Division, collectively referred to as "the Parties."
The Parties stipulate that SFBARTD should be authorized to use the Advanced Automatic Train Control System ("AATCS") in Revenue Service during Phase 2 of this project (as described in SFBARTD's application), subject to execution by SFBARTD of the Safety Certification Plan (the "Plan"), a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, and verification by RTSS that each element detailed therein has been completed in accordance with the Safety Oversight Plan (a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B.)
Further, the Parties stipulate that RTSS has accepted the Plan, that the Plan is complete, and that the Plan provides sufficient opportunity for RTSS to carry out its responsibilities.
Further, the Parties stipulate that variances to various provisions of General Order 127 and Decision 98146 should be authorized for purposes of the present proceeding to enable SBARTD to use the AATCS:
1) Section 1.10 of General Order 127 should be revised for these purposes to read:
Failsafe - A characteristic of a system or a component of a system which either has no known mechanism that can lead to unsafe operation or, if the absence of such unsafe mechanisms cannot be proven, can be shown by analysis that the equipment will not fail in an unsafe manner more frequently than the criteria established by the mean time between hazards for the system or component.
2) Section 3.3 of General Order 127 should be revised for these purposes to read:
The AATCS shall locate each train continuously, store information on its last known location, and use this information to compute safe speed and deceleration for each following train.
3) Section 3.8 of General Order 127 should be revised for these purposes to read:
The AATCS shall ensure that the speed of each train at each location is always less than the safe speed determined according to physical constraints of the system and by the distance necessary to brake safely before reaching any closed interlocking gate or a detected obstacle.
(a) The Train Protection System shall immediately and automatically command any train exceeding safe speed to brake at a rate governed by the model and associated parameters specified in Exhibit A of the Safety Certification Plan and to maintain such braking until the train slows below the safe speed.
(b) The AATCS shall not permit any train to violate the Civil Speed Limit prevailing for any portion of track over which it is traveling.
4) Section 3.9 of General Order 127 should be revised for these purposes to read:
Any signal commanding a train's movement shall be transmitted at the Command Transmission Interval specified in Exhibit A of the Safety Certification Plan. The interruption of any such signal for longer than the Command Persistence Interval specified in Exhibit A shall automatically cause the Train Protection System to command the train to enter Open Loop Braking.
5) Notwithstanding Ordering Paragraph 1.A. of Decision 91846, SFBARTD should be authorized to suspend its Sequential Occupancy Release System for any portion of track controlled by AATCS.
Further, the Parties stipulate that SFBARTD will provide RTSS a copy within two working days of any change in the Plan and that RTSS will have fourteen calendar days to notify SFBARTD of any objection to the change. SFBARTD will not implement any change without the agreement of RTSS. Minor, nonsubstantive revisions to the Plan having nothing to do with the certification, such as changes to titles and formats, may be made without the process described herein.
Further, the Parties stipulate that SFBARTD will provide RTSS a schedule indicating the time and place of each audit to be performed by the Independent Safety Auditor regarding development of AATCS and notice of at least two weeks of any change in that schedule and agree that SFBARTD will provide RTSS an unedited copy of any report prepared by the Independent Safety Auditor of any such audit within two days.
Further, the Parties stipulate that SFBARTD will file an Advice Letter with the Commission upon completion of Safety Certification Gates defined in the Plan, along with a copy of each required certificate of conformance and that RTSS will then have two weeks to verify whether they were properly completed.
Further, SFBARTD hereby withdraws its request, as set forth on page 15 of its application, that the Commission issue "an order granting approval of Phase 3 revenue service," and will seek its approval at a later time.
Executed 10th day of May, 2000
/s/ MICHAEL FLANIGON /s/ ERIK JUUL
Michael Flanigon Erik Juul
Department Manager, System Safety Senior Transportation Engineer
San Francisco Rapid Transit District Rail Transit Safety Section
1330 Broadway, 17th Floor of the Rail Safety and Carriers
Oakland, CA 94612 Division
Phone (510) 464-6950
California Public Utilities Commission
505 Van Ness Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94102
Phone (415) 703-2723
(END OF APPENDIX A)
