Waxman Seeks to Drop Key Subway Phase, Cites Risks

Claiming that the key first phase of the proposed Los Angeles Metro Rail system is too risky to construct as a subway, Rep. Henry Waxman on Wednesday called on the City Council and the Southern California Rapid Transit District to abandon that part of the project.

The possibility of chopping through gas-filled abandoned oil wells during tunneling and sparking a fire or explosion--a warning made recently by a panel of technical experts--makes the project too dangerous to build, the influential Westside Democrat said.

“I believe that it is clearly time we take a hard look at alternative rapid transit systems that do not place life and property in such great jeopardy,” he said in a letter to council members. “. . . I believe that the only responsible course is to abandon MOS-1,” he said, referring to the downtown segment of the proposed system.

On Friday, the council will consider the experts’ report, which raises several potential problems but concludes--unlike Waxman--that the subway is “feasible” to construct if adequate precautions are taken.

It was the first time that Waxman, a past supporter of the proposed $3.3-billion downtown-to-San Fernando Valley commuter line, has voiced outright opposition to the project. Waxman’s defection alone is not regarded as an automatic death knell for the project. But his opposition, coming at a time when some of Metro Rail’s toughest hurdles seemed to have been overcome, represented a significant setback for Metro Rail supporters, who have been optimistically predicting that they will break ground on the subway in March.

Congressional funds for the first 4.4-mile segment of the project have been approved, but an agreement on financing still must be formally concluded with the Reagan Administration, which strongly opposes all new mass transit projects as too costly.

A key Administration official said Wednesday that Waxman’s warnings--including a claim that federal law requires additional environmental impact studies before construction begins--”elevate our concerns” about beginning the project and warrant careful consideration. And one City Council member who supports the project said she is “jittery” about proceeding in light of the issues raised by Waxman.

RTD President Nikolas Patsaouras said that although he is concerned about Waxman’s opposition he does not think it will undermine political support or delay construction. “We are satisfied we have done everything that would protect the public and construct and operate a safe system,” he said.

Waxman, whose district includes much of what would be the Metro Rail route, has been raising questions about the project since early last year, when seeping underground methane gas blew apart a clothing store in the Fairfax area, injuring 21 people. Threatening to fight all Metro Rail appropriations, Waxman, who heads a powerful subcommittee that investigates environmental safety issues, forced the RTD to agree to reroute the subway to avoid Westside areas with underground gas. He also won an agreement to have the panel of experts re-evaluate tunneling safety of the first phase, which runs from Union Station to Alvarado Street. This stretch of the line lies outside Waxman’s district but also has been a focus of his concern.

The experts’ report, which concluded that the Metro Rail tunnel is not more hazardous than some other tunnels that have been safely constructed, is now pending before the council. The council has already agreed to put several million dollars into the project and would have to commit more in the future.

Citing testimony by panel members and RTD officials, Waxman noted that both groups agreed that there is no proven way to ensure that uncharted oil wells can be detected before they may be ruptured by the huge tunnel boring equipment that workers would be using.

Puncturing of Wells

Panel members said that, while unlikely, the equipment could puncture such wells and cause high-pressure methane gas to spew into the tunnel.

RTD officials said they would take all possible precautions, including blowing huge quantities of air at the face of the tunnel to dilute any gas and using probes ahead of the boring machine and gas sensors in the tunnel.

Council President Pat Russell, a strong supporter of the project, said Waxman’s letter adds “nothing new that I haven’t been aware of” and will not cause the council to withdraw its support. Asked if she is convinced that the subway is safe to build, she said: “I don’t know that I’d say anything is safe to do. But it’s as safe as getting in the car and driving to City Hall.”

Flores Jittery

But Councilwoman Joan Milke Flores, another supporter of the project, said the recent debate over safety has left her uncertain. “I’m not that comfortable it is safe to go forward,” she said, citing the assurances about backup systems and safety in the space shuttle program before Tuesday’s Challenger shuttle disaster. “You get a little jittery when something like this happens.”

In Washington, Ralph Stanley, administrator of the Urban Mass Transportation Administration, said he was not sure how his agency would proceed. In theory, the agency could demand new environmental studies before construction would begin, he said.

But Waxman’s view is in “direct conflict” with an order drafted by other members of Congress, who instructed the transit agency to finalize a construction financing contract for the first phase of the subway, Stanley said.