Review and Analysis of Railroad Passenger Car Waste Retention U 5 Deportment of Tronsportot~on Systems Federal Railroad Administration Volume 1: Report and Appendices A and B Office of Research and Development Washington DC 20590 Arthur D. Little, Inc. Acorn Park Cambridge MA 02140 DOTIFRAIORD-91-02 I January 1991 This document is available to the Final Report Public through the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161 NOTICE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. NOTICE The United States Government does not endorse products of manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers' names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of this report. Technical Keport Documentotion Page I. Report No. 2. Corcrnmcn? Acccs=fonNo. 3. Rcclplen!'r Cotalog No. DOT/FRA/OKD 91-02 I & 11 4. Tlvla and Subtl!le 5 Report 00,. Review and Analysis of Railroad Passenger Car Waste July 1990 Retention Systems 6. Pcrlormlng Orgonllo~lon Code Volume I Report and Appendices A and B 8 P.~I~~~,~~~~~ucport NO. .~~~~t~~~ 7. ~"thor(,l Alan J. Bing, Todd 0. Burger, Thomas J. Rasmussen ec al. 9. Perlormcng Orgqnlzo?lonName ond Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAlS) Arthur 3. Little, Inc. Acorn Park 11. con,roc,or clon(NO. Cambridge, MA 02140 DTFR-53-87-C-00035 - 13. Type 01 Rcpor~and Per,od covered 12. U.S.Sponrortng Department Aqoncy Nome ofond AddressTransportation Final Report January 1991 Federal Railroad Administration Office of Research and Development 14. Sponlorlng Agency Code 400 7th Street, S.W., Washington, UC 20590 t-- IS. Supplemenfory Notel The traditional practice of dumping railroad toilet and other waste directly onto the tracks is still used on most passenger cars operated by Amtrak. However, this practice is being questioned and legislation to require full waste retention systems is under consideration. This report has been prepared in response to a Congressional directive to identify, describe and evaluate waste-retention systems able to eliminate the need for direct dumping on the track. I This report provides the following information: I A description of waste retention systems currently used by intercity and local passenger railroads in the United States and elsewhere, including service experience. A discussion of waste disposal and environmental issues. An evaluation of the performance of the different waste retention technologies and systems. Review and estimate of capital, operating and maintenance costs. Recommendations regarding test programs for waste retention systems. 17 y Wmds 18. Dlrtrlbutlon Stolemen* o l'o~yet and other waste-retention Document is available to the public throug technologies the National Technical Information Service, o Intercity passenger train cars and Springfield, Virginia 22161 services o Test programs fl Cnst pvalllatlon 19 Spcunvy CIass~l.Iol vhqs report1 20. Sscurlty CIa.stI. 101 fh~spogcl 21. No. 01 Poges 22. Prlco Unclassified Unclassified Form DOT F 1700.7 18-72) Reproductnon of completed page outhortzed METRICIENGLISH CONVERSION FACTORS ENGLISH TO METRIC METRIC TO ENGLISH LENGTH lrrrnoxlurrrl LENGTH cL*tnoarrrn, 1 inch (in) = 2.5centimeters (cm) 1millimeter (mm) r 0.04 inch (in) 1 foot (k) - 30 centimeters (cm) 1 centimeter (cm) - 0.4 inch (in) 1 yard (yd) = 0.9 meter (m) 1 meter (m) = 3.3 feet (tr) 1 mile (mi) - 1.6 kilometers (km) 1 meter (m) s 1.1 yards (yd) 1 kilometer (km) i 0.6 mile (mi) AREA IAPPROXIW~J AREA mrrnoxtumr 1 sqvarr inch (sq in. in>) - 6.5 square centimeters (<my) 1 square centimeter (cml) 0.16 square inch(sq in, in') 1 square foot (sq h.hl) = 0.09 square meter (my) 1 square meter,(mt) r 1.2 square yards (sq yd. yd?) 1 square yard (sq yd, yd') = 0.8 square meter (my) 1 squaw kilometer (km') = 0.4 square mile (sq mi, m7) 1 square mile (sq mi, m?) r 2.6 square kilometers (kma) 1 hectare (he) - 10,000 square meters (mr) = 2.5 acres 1 acre = 0.4 hectares (he) = 4,000 square meters (ma) MASS- WEIGHT IASP~OIIYLT~I MASS - WEIGHT i~rr~o:~u*ro 1 ounce (oz) = 28 grams (gr) 1 gram (gr) i 0.036 ounce loz) 1 pound (lb) r .4S kilogram (kg) 1kilogram (kg) = 2.2 pounds (lb) 1 shoe ton - 2.000 pounds (lb) - 0.9tonne (1) 1 tonne (t) = 1.000 kilograms (kg) = 1.1 shorl tons VOLUME IAPPROllMArE) VOLUME IrP.noxlwm, 1 teaspoon (tsp) = 5 milliliters (ml) 1 milliliter (ml) = 0.03 fluid ounce (11 02) 1 tablespoon (tbsp) = 15 milliliters (ml) 1 liter (I) r 2.1 pints (pt) 1fluid ounce (fl oz) = 30 milliliters (ml) 1 liter (I) 1.06 quarts (qt) f cup (c) = 020 liter (I) 1 literrl) - 0.26 gallon (gall 1 pint (pt) r 0.47 liter (I) 1 cubic meter (mf) r 36 cubic feet (cu k, ft3) 1 quart(qt1 = 0.96 liner (I) 1 cubic meter (m') r 1.3 cubic yards (cu yd, ydf) 1 gallon (gal) = 3.8 liters (I) 1 cubic foot (cu ft, kf) - 0.03 cubic meter (ma) 1 cubic yard (cu yd. ydf) r 0.76 Nbic meter (mf) TEMPERATURE lrxrcn TEMPERATURE 1rx.m [(x-32)(511))IeF - y'C [(96)y*32l'C - 17 QUICK INCH-CENTIMETER LENGTH CONVERSION INCHES 0 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 0 9 10 t I CENTIMETERS 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 20 25 25.40 QUICK FAHRENHEIT-CELCIUS TEMPERATURE CONVERSION For more exact and'o~other conversion fanors, see NBS Mis~ellaneousPublication 286. Units of Weights and I Measures. Price S2.SO.SDCa:alog No.Cl3 10266. Prolect Team The following Arthur D. Little individuals and offices contributed to this study: Alan J. Bing Ashok B. Boghani Todd 0. Burger Bany Glauberrnan Thomas J. Rasrnussen Christopher C. Scholl and Arthur D. Little, overseas offices in Copenhagen Munich Paris Tokyo ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Numerous individuals and organizations have helped us in the preparation of this report. We would like to thank all of them, and would particularly like to mention the following: Amtrak James N. Michael, Senior Director, Engineering Marty Singer, Manager of Amaak's Waste Handling Department Program John Hutchinson, General Mechanical Superintendent, Cars, and his staff . C.E. Fernald, Senior Director Material Control, and his staff Greg Boardman from Beech Grove shops Toilet Svstems Suppliers EVAC D. Uzar, Director of Marketing, Land & Train Systems . Chamberlain GARD Philip A. Saigh, Director, Marketing and Sales Monogram Industries William I. Mercer, Product Sales Manager Railtech Ltd. Tim Secord, Manager, Engineering and Product Development Microphor Vern Haselswerdt, Vice President Sales Other Rail Svstems Several rail systems responded to our inquiries or entertained visits by ADL staff. These included: North America Long Island Railroad Metro-North Commuter Railroad Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority GO Transit (Toronto) METRA (Chicago) Via-Rail Canada International Japan Railways British Rail Danish State Railways German Federal Railwi~ys French National Railways TABLE OF CONTENTS BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION 1-1 1.1 Background ........................................ 1-1 1.2 Objective and Scope of Work ........................... 1-3 1.3 Guide to This Report ................................. 1-4 RECENT TOILET PRACTICE AND EXPERIENCE 2- 1 2.1 Introduction ........................................ 2-1 2.2 Recent Amaak Practice and Experience .................... 2-1 2.2.1 Heritage ........................................ 2-1 2.2.2 Amfleet I ....................................... 2-5 2.2.3 Amfleet II ...................................... 2-9 2.2.4 Superliner ...................................... 2-10 2.2.5 Horizon ....................................... 2-13 2.2.6 Viewliner ...................................... 2-13 2.2.7 Passenger Acceptance Overview ...................... 2-13 2.3 Recent Practice and Experience of Other North American Passenger Service Operators ................................... 2-16 2.3.1 MBTA (Boston) ................................. 2-16 2.3.2 Go Transit (Toronto) .............................. 2-17 2.3.3 MeaoNorth (NY) ................................ 2-18 2.3.4 METRA (Chicago) ............................... 2-18 2.3.5 LIRR(NY) ..................................... 2-19 2.3.6 Via Rail (Canada) ................................ 2-20 2.4 European and Japanese practice and experience .............. 2-21 2.4.1 Japan Railways .................................. 2-21 2.4.2 British Rail ..................................... 2-22 2.4.3 French National Railways (SNCF') ..................... 2-25 2.4.4 German Federal Railways @B) ...................... 2-25 2.4.5 Danish State Railways @SB) ........................ 2-26 OVERVIEW OF RETENTION TOILET TECHNOLOGY 3-1 3.1 Introduction and Scope ................................ 3-1 3.2 Features Common to all Systems ......................... 3-1 3.3 Gravity and Air Pressure Systems ........................ 3-3 3.3.1 GARD Amfleet I1 Prototype ......................... 3-4 3.3.2 Microphor Redwood Fiber H-Series Commuter/Lmomotive ... 3-4 3.3.3 Microphor Gravity System .......................... 3-8 3.3.4 Microphor Prototype .............................. 3-12 3.3.5 Railtech WTS 8300 .............................. 3-12 3.4 Recirculating Systems ................................ 3-14 3.4.1 Monogram Self-contained Recirculating System .......... 3-17 3.4.2 Monogram "Modified" Recirculating System ............. 3-19 3.4.3 Monogram Remote Recirculating System ............... 3-19 3.5 Vacuum Systems ................................... 3-19 Evac 2000 Vacuum Toilet System .................... 3-23 Evac Ultimate Vacuum Toilet System .................