FRA/Volpe Center Trespass Prevention ResearchFRA/Volpe Center Trespass Prevention Research Study

2014 Operation Lifesaver Leadership ConferenceM 15 2014

Volpe The National Transportation Systems Center

May 15, 2014

1

U.S. Department of TransportationOffice of Research and TechnologyJohn A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center

Volpe The National Transportation Systems CenterAdvancing transportation innovation for the public good

Trespass Prevention Research StudyProject initiated August 2009

Objective

• Reduce trespasser incidents and fatalities

Project initiated August 2009

• Reduce trespasser incidents and fatalities

• Provide national guidance on trespass mitigation

Study Area

• City of West Palm Beach, FL

– SFRTA (TriRail)/CSX/Amtrak (milepost 966‐973)

– FEC (milepost 296‐301)

2

Sponsored by the FRA Office of Research and Development - Signal, Train Control and Communications Division

Trespass Prevention Research Study

Source: Canadian Pacific Police Service, Managing Risk; A model for Deterring Trespassers, Operation Lifesaver 16th

International Symposium, August 31, 2010.

3

Railroad Trespass Example

42013 SFRTA (West Palm Beach, FL)

COMMUNITY

5

West Palm Beach Neighborhood Associations

COMMUNITY ‐ Recommendations Local champion(s) need to be identified early and given the authority to

drive the community-based group from inception to execution of the trespass mitigation strategies. Such leader should work to ensure appropriate trespass mitigation strategies. Such leader should work to ensure appropriate representation is present in the stakeholder group.

Stakeholder group should maximize use of existing local safety coalitions.

Stakeholder group should be divided into an executive level committee consisting of decision-makers and an operational level committee conducting the specific activities outlined in the model. g p

Stakeholder engagement strategy should be developed at the beginning of the process.

Champion(s) must develop awareness of stakeholders’ sensitivities.

6

Analysis

Incident Data CollectionIncident Data Collection

Stakeholder Data Type StatusFRA I id t d t FRA Incident data Volpe/FRA Field observations SFRTA Incident data SFRTA Incident data SFRTA Train crew observations SFRTA Locomotive video Amtrak Police Incident Data CSXT Police Incident Data

FEC Police Incident Data

West Palm Beach PD Violation/Incident data

7

PB County School District PD Incident Data

Hazard Analysis Methodology

• Uses the System Safety Program Hazard Identification/Resolution Process which is based on US‐MIL Standard 882D1Process which is based on US MIL Standard 882D• Used by several transit agencies, including SFRTA, within their 

System Safety Program 

• By determining the hazard severity and probability, the hazard can be reduced to its lowest practical level

• Attempt to apply methodology to the trespass problem

1Military Standard 882D, System Safety Program Requirements, Department of Defense, Washington, DC January 19, 1993http://www.acq.osd.mil/atptf/policy/documents/MILSTD882D.pdf

8

Hazard Analysis Methodology

Prioritization Algorithm

F l f h tPS = Priority ScoreFA = Fatal IncidentsFormula – for each segment

PS = FA(10) + FS(5) + DS(2) + TRFA = Fatal IncidentsFS = Fatal Suicides (& attempts?)DS = Debris StrikesTR = Trespass Reports

R d id t f t l

9

Red=accident fatalsBrown = suicide fatals or attempted suicides

Trespass Location Severity Analysis (TLSA)A (high risk):A (high risk):B (medium risk):C (low risk):D (negligible risk):

10

ANALYSIS ‐ Recommendations Stakeholder group should develop a data sharing plan.

A data analysis subgroup should be created.A data analysis subgroup should be created.

Objective data collection and analysis, using the risk-based methodology validated from this study, should be performed.

Stakeholder group should reach consensus on effectiveness measures before the Response step.

11

Response Mitigation StrategiesMitigation Strategies

Engineering• SignsSigns• Fencing/landscaping/environmental design/channelization• Second train warning signs (for crossing trespass)• Pedestrian gate skirts (for crossing trespass)• P d t i i / d• Pedestrian crossing, over/underpass

Education• Safety message (signage and/or PSAs) on platforms and in trains• Media events• OL presentations to local community (targeted)• Safety blitzes (targeted)

Enforcement• Enforcement of state and local trespass laws• Remote monitoring (video‐based)

12

Recommended Mitigation Strategies

13

Implementation of Recommended Strategies

• Education of passengers by SFRTA and FL Operation Lifesaver• Enforcement by SFRTA security contractor and CSX Police• Additional signage installed by FDOT• Operational change by SFRTA of two southbound trains in the afternoonOperational change by SFRTA of two southbound trains in the afternoon

14

RESPONSE ‐ Recommendations An implementation group composed of representatives from the core

stakeholders should be organized to execute the strategies. The group would be directed by executive committee members, which have decision-would be directed by executive committee members, which have decisionmaking authority within their respective organizations.

The implementation group should conduct field reviews to validate response d tirecommendations.

15

EVALUATION* ‐ Recommendations The local champion(s) should leverage executive-level committee to

execute on the implementation plan.

The stakeholder group should collect and analyze objective post-implementation trespass data.

*FRA R&D funded an independent evaluation on the CARE model process as implemented by the research team in the study area. This evaluation, as recommended b th CARE id i h d l d t b l t d i 2014 d ill id tif dditi l

16

by the CARE guide, is scheduled to be completed in 2014 and will identify additional lessons learned that may be applied to further implementations of the CARE model.

Report Submittal: December 30, 2013

Authors: Marco daSilva and Tashi DRAFTNgamdung

Acknowledgements:FRA R&D S Alib hi T k O

DRAFT

FRA R&D – Sam Alibrahim, Tarek Omar

FRA RRS – Ron Ries, Daniel Knote, Michail Grizkewitsch

Volpe Center – Len Allen, Patrick Bien-Aime, Bernard Kennedy, Anya Carroll, Gabriel Lopez Bernal Roxanne TullyLopez-Bernal, Roxanne Tully

17

Next Steps Collect additional data and evaluate implementation of select recommended

strategies in West Palm Beach Explore implementation model with recommendations at follow-on site

18

Tashi NgamdungUS DOT | RITA | Volpe CenterPhysical Infrastructure Systems Center of Innovation S t S f t d E i i Di i i RVT 62Systems Safety and Engineering Division, RVT-6255 Broadway, Kendall Square | Cambridge, MA 02142Office: 617-494-2937Email: Tashi.Ngamdung@dot.gov

19