NTSB: Track defect flagged two days before derailment

Morgan Kaolian/AEROPIX Two trains collided and one derailed shortly after 6 p.m. Friday May 17, 2013, in the vicinity of Commerce Drive along the Fairfield-Bridgeport line in Conn. Morgan Kaolian/AEROPIX Two trains collided and one derailed shortly after 6 p.m. Friday May 17, 2013, in the vicinity of Commerce Drive along the Fairfield-Bridgeport line in Conn. Photo: Morgan Kaolian, Morgan Kaolian/AEROPIX Photo: Morgan Kaolian, Morgan Kaolian/AEROPIX Image 1 of / 5 Caption Close NTSB: Track defect flagged two days before derailment 1 / 5 Back to Gallery

STAMFORD -- A Metro-North inspector flagged a defective piece of track two days prior to last month's derailment and subsequent collision between two commuter trains in Bridgeport, but did not issue an order to immediately close the section or slow trains down.

The National Transportation Safety Board updated its findings Wednesday, citing a May 15 inspection that found an insulated rail joint used to pinpoint the location of trains along the New Haven Line lacked necessary support from the underlying railbed and was moving vertically out of alignment on the eastbound track where the train derailed.

A train heading to New Haven derailed during a busy Friday evening rush-hour commute on May 17. About 30 seconds after coming to a halt, it was struck by a westbound train, injuring 76 people. There were about 250 passengers on each train at the time of the accident, according to the updated report.

The report refers to a problem with the underlying ballast of golf-ball sized stones used to hold the tracks in place near the piece of rail which moved out of alignment as trains passed over it.

Two passengers, a Mystic woman and a Milford man, have filed lawsuits seeking damages for injuries.

The NTSB has taken sections of broken rail that had been secured by rail joint bars to its Washington, D.C., metallurgy lab for examination. NTSB spokesman Nicholas Worrell did not have further information Wednesday on the investigation of the section of broken rail.

The federal investigation is also focusing on other aspects of the crash, including the performance of two sets of the state's new M8 railcars in the crash and equipment such as the overhead catenary power system.

Investigators also are interviewing train crews about their decision-making and performance before the accident.

Metro-North spokeswoman Marjorie Anders said the visual inspection performed with a specially equipped truck two days before the accident identified that the ballast stones around the section of track near the site of the derailment needed to be packed down more tightly in the near future, but did not detect a need for a track closure or immediate action to keep the track immobilized.

Anders declined to discuss how soon the repair might have been scheduled after the inspector's report.

"In this case the inspector noted it needed tamping in the near term but did not issue a slow speed order or take it out of service," Anders said. "The track inspectors know their section of track intimately and they don't hesitate to issue a slow speed order when it's warranted."

In the section of track where the accident occurred, two of the four tracks were out of service to enable a project to replace the railroad's overhead catenary system and five bridge overpasses in Bridgeport. In April, Metro-North crews replaced a cracked rail joint bar in the area of the insulating joint on the Bridgeport track where the train collision occurred, according to federal investigators. The same rail joint was identified by federal investigators as the potential cause of the accident.

The equipment damage was estimated by Metro-North to be at least $18 million, including repairs to reestablish service the following Wednesday, replace cars, and run a shuttle bus service.

The report also said on-board data recorders showed the eastbound train that derailed was traveling about 70 mph when it went off the tracks, coming to rest in the path of the oncoming westbound train. The recorder also shows the westbound train engineer used the emergency brakes, slowing from 70 mph to 23 mph at the time of impact.

Anders said the insulated rail joint being investigated by the NTSB is a part of the railroad's electronic signaling system affixed between two separate sections of rail and secured on either side by rail joint bars. As part of the signal system, the insulated rail joint separates two sections of track to enable a signal to be sent when a train arrives on a particular block of track or leaves the previous one, helping control traffic and keep trains at a safe distance, Anders said.

Where the insulated rail joints are needed, they are secured with joint bars, Anders said, which is within track maintenance guidelines set by the Federal Railroad Administration.

Most of the New Haven Line is comprised of continuously welded rail of 1,500-foot single pieces of rail fused together, but the placement of insulating joints for signaling purposes requires the welded rail to be cut and reconnected, usually using joint bars.

U.S. Sens. Richard Blumenthal and Chris Murphy asked NTSB Chairman Deborah Hersman Wednesday to expedite the investigation and release more information as soon as possible.

Last week Blumenthal, along with U.S. Rep. Jim Himes and Bridgeport Mayor Bill Finch, called on the federal government to spend more on rail upgrades to ensure safety and reliability in the wake of the collision that shut down service on the New Haven line for more than four days.

"I am very concerned about the questions raised as to whether a possibly serious problem was not addressed right away and riders certainly have a right to more information as soon as possible," Blumenthal said. "Riders have a right to ask whether the inadequate ballast or the track movement was the cause of the derailment and what should have bene done to correct it."

Murphy said a speedier conclusion to the investigation was in the public interest, citing the 70-mile line's status as one of the nation's most heavily traveled, having provided a record-high 38.8 million trips in 2012.

"NTSB today revealed that the tracks at the site of the crash were compromised, and that MTA knew about it," Murphy said. "Riders deserve to know why reports of the compromised track were not immediately remedied and only NTSB has the stature and authority to provide us with these answers."

Finch said preliminary findings spotlight the need for greater support from the federal government to expedite improvement projects to boost safety but also keep all four tracks of the railway in service.

"The current pace of repairs is taking far too long; reducing the capacity of our rail system to 50 percent for two decades is unacceptable and demonstrates the government's lack of commitment to this critical service," Finch said.

Christophe Silvera, a union official for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local 808, which represents 600 Track and Maintenance department workers, which includes track inspectors for Metro-North, said the inspector did identify the needed repair to the ballast in the May 15 report.

Silvera noted the preliminary report made no indication about whether Metro-North mismanaged the situation or should have done the repairs more quickly.

"The individual is a long-term employee who has been doing the job sufficiently long enough to have observed that indicated an immediate shutdown."

Several passengers who sustained injuries in the collision declined comment about the report Wednesday, citing legal advice.

George Cahill, a New Haven attorney representing the engineer of the westbound train and five other Metro-North train crew members considering lawsuits against the railroad, said the inadequate ballast was consistent with the need to replace the joint bars on the insulating joint in April.

Two weeks ago, Metro-North crews replaced the stone ballast under the 2,000-foot stretch of rebuilt railway on both tracks, according to the railroad.

Cahill said he believes the limited capacity of the section of railway, where only two of four tracks remain in service, might have hindered scheduling maintenance.

"Something like inadequate ballast support is caused by lack of maintenance and the reason why they are not doing proper maintenance is they are operating two tracks instead of four tracks," Cahill said.

Anders said the railroad conducts twice-weekly visual inspections of all its rail tracks and maintains all rights of way up to federal safety standards.

"We do that regardless of how much traffic goes through an area," Anders said.

martin.cassidy@scni.com, 203-964-2264, twitter.com/martincassidyst