Photo: NYT

A Times investigation revealed that LIRR workers -- even white-collar managers who had little active role in running trains -- had won approval for approximately $250 million in taxpayer-funded disability payments since 2000.

In fact, the GAO found that LIRR employees have filed Retirement Board claims at a rate 12 times higher than the other seven railroads covered by the agency (a list is available after the jump). Meanwhile, LIRR riders are facing yet more fare increases amid a massive budget gap at New York's transit authority.

How could the Retirement Board get away with sending disability payments to rail workers who the Times found well enough to spend most days golfing? By setting the bar for claims much lower than the Social Security system, which administers disability requests for most American employees.

The Retirement Board requires rail workers claiming a disability to have 20 years of work experience at any age level or 10 years, for those who have already turned 60. Social Security, by contrast, requires 20 quarters of participation in the system during the 10 years prior to the claim.

Once that standard is met, the Retirement Board asks workers to prove that they are prevented from working in their regular railroad position due to a permanent mental or physical condition. Most LIRR claimants provided their medical evidence of disability from one of three doctors, which the GAO deemed "an indicator of fraud or abuse."

Social Security, on the other hand, asks workers to prove that a permanent ailment prevents them from taking on any gainful employment in the national economy. While 99.6 percent of LIRR employees won Retirement Board payments, only 39.1 percent were approved for Social Security disability checks. Employees of other commuter railroads, who won 100 percent approval from the Retirement Board, were cleared by Social Security at a 79.4 rate.

After the Times story prompted New York attorney general Andrew Cuomo to open a formal probe of the LIRR disability system, the Retirement Board implemented a five-point reform plan to apply greater scrutiny to rail workers' claims. But the GAO audit cast doubt on the plan's effectiveness, noting that a nearly universal rate of claims approvals has remained the norm. The Retirement Board defended the five-point plan and reiterated its commitment to better quality control.

Rep. John Mica (FL), the senior Republican on the House transportation committee, said in a statement that he had taken over supervision of the GAO request after an initial inquiry by Sen. Charles Schumer was withdrawn. "We should not assume that there is widespread abuse of the program by railroad workers, but we need to determine whether improvements to the system are necessary," Mica said in a statement.

In addition to the LIRR, the following railroads are covered by the federal Retirement Board: the Massachusetts Bay Commuter Railroad, Metro-North Railroad, New Jersey Transit, Northeast Illinois Commuter Railroad, Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District, Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corporation, and Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority.

New York's LIRR, San Francisco's BART, and D.C.'s Metro plan to install the Maximo software, a program that anticipates and schedules preventive maintenance on rail cars, tracks, buses, and other equipment. Reads an IBM press release:

The LIRR will use IBM technology to manage and maintain approximately 1,180 rail cars, locomotives, and their associated parts to improve operations and passenger safety. As part of a project expected to be completed in 2012, IBM will also be helping the LIRR expand its asset management system to include facilities, bridges, and tunnels.

The move could prove particularly beneficial for D.C., which was urged by federal safety regulators to phase out the older rail car model that was involved in a fatal accident in June but found itself short of cash to fund a full-scale replacement. In a statement on the IBM deal, Metro's deputy information technology chief said a recent meeting with China's Guangzhou Metro, which also uses Maximo, helped pave the way for the agreement.

On this website ... travelers can obtain information about policies for bringing bikes on board the New York City Subway, Long Island Rail Road, Metro-North Railroad and Staten Island Railway and can learn about the availability of bike lockers near regional railroad stations and bike lanes on bridges operated by MTA Bridges & Tunnels.

The site also announces two "recently clarified" policies:

• Folding bikes, appropriately folded, are considered luggage and not subject to rules governing standard frame bicycles. Therefore, folding bicycles can be brought on board local buses as if they were a backpack or suitcase. They can also be brought aboard LIRR and Metro-North trains at any time without a permit and are best stored in the overhead luggage racks. Conventional bikes are not allowed on board buses operated by New York City Transit, the MTA Bus Company or Long Island Bus.
• Bicycles can be brought aboard the Staten Island Railway except on rush-hour trains traveling in the peak direction.

It's nice to see MTA acknowledging bike-and-ride like this, and it would be even better if the agency would partner with DOT on siting additional bike parking near train stations. While the city is working on measures that would make it easier for cyclists to find secure parking at the workplace, as previewed by DOT's Josh Benson last week, for cyclists who need to park before riding, or who won't benefit from new zoning that might require indoor parking, here is what MTA+Bike has to say:

Bicycle racks provided by the New York City Department of Transportation are available near many Subway entrances. Bicycles chained to Subway entrance railings will be removed and delivered to the Lost Property Unit (212-712-4500), so please lock up your bike appropriately.

[T]his is the giant carrot to accompany Bloomberg's congestion-pricing stick. Charge $16 instead of $8, the authors suggest - and add parking and taxi surcharges. Really make the drivers pay. Then take that money and make all the buses and subway free.

Bold enough for you?

Henican talked with lead author and Streetsblog contributor Charles Komanoff, who said the same approach could be applied to the LIRR, Metro-North and Jersey Transit.

Meanwhile, there's a lively discussion going on over at Second Ave. Sagas, where blogger Benjamin Kabak says he likes the Kheel plan, a lot, but sees it as too good to be true.

People in New York City are, stupidly, married to their cars. They demand below-market, on-street parking. They demand access to roads at the expense of wide sidewalks and bike lanes. They demand access to roads at the expense of common-sense bus rapid transit lanes. They demand the right to drive as though it were protected by the Constitution, and this is simply a misguided and harmful attitude.

But sadly, the ideal society where a Kheel plan could pass because it would negatively impact the people who could afford and positively impact the people who need it doesn't exist. Ted Kheel should be applauded for his vision, and his plan deserves as much attention as anything under consideration now. It's groundbreaking; it's visionary; it would work; and it just won't happen.

Setting aside the Kheel plan's chances of being taken seriously by the mayor and the Congestion Mitigation Commission, before it's over they may be among the few who aren't at least talking about it.

In related news, a new program in Chicago that will allow seniors 65 and up to take transit for free has been deluged with applicants. The AP, via WTHI in Terre Haute, IN, reports that "Governor Rod Blagojevich says response has been so strong that the state is adding a second toll-free number to accommodate callers who are registering for the program."

Last week, MTA PR man Jeremy Soffin sent along an interesting news blip about the gigantic tunnel boring machine chewing up the schist beneath 60th Street in Manhattan for the MTA's East Side Access project. It turns out that blogger Michael Frumin knows "a guy" who's working on that project. Frumin visited the tunnel entrance in Sunnyside, Queens and snapped a bunch of photos that give you some sense of the humongousness of the project. 

The overriding feeling I had throughout was of being inside, around, and on top of a Sandworm in the novel Dune. What really impressed me was the number of people necessary just to put one of these things together, and the enthusiasm of all the people working on the project (sweating it out under 200 feet of bedrock).

MTA Deputy Director of Media Relations, Jeremy Soffin, sends this along:

As you know, the first tunnel boring machine for the East Side Access project has been chewing its way under Manhattan for almost a month, and we just wanted to provide a short update. The machine has now tunneled approximately 1,350 feet. While the machine generally averages 50 feet per day, we had a record performance yesterday of 114 feet. The machine is now operating underneath 60th Street near Lexington Avenue. In total, the machine will bore approximately 7,200 feet total to 38th street. A second TBM has been assembled in the "launch box" at 63rd Street and 2nd Avenue and will begin tunneling a parallel tube shortly.

East Side Access will bring LIRR trains into Grand Central Terminal for the first time.

You can find more information on the construction here.

Photo: robert the bear/Flickr

Co-chairs

• Elliot Sander, director of NYU Rudin Center for Transportation, VP at MTA contractor DMJM Harris and former city Dept. of Transporation commisioner. (Rumored to an MTA chairman candidate)
• Mary Ann Crotty, former transportation advisor for Mario Cuomo.

Members

• Janette Sadik-Kahn, VP at Parsons Brinckerhoff (Big MTA contractor leading the Partnership for NYC's congestion pricing study)
• Gene Russianoff, Straphangers Campaign (the MTA's best critic)
• Jon Orcutt, president of the Tri State Transportation Campaign (another tough MTA critic and big thinker on regional transport issues)
• Ernest Tollerson, VP at Partnership for NYC (Working on the Partnership's congestion pricing study)
• Mitch Palley, MTA board member from Suffolk (often the lone dissenting voice with votig power on the board and big supporter of the third rail project for the LIRR)
• Susan Kupferman, president MTA Bridges and Tunnels (Rumored candidate for MTA executive director)
• Robert Yaro, president of Regional Plan Association

Other Members

• James Conigliaro, Machinists
• Sam Williams, UAW 9A
• Garry Labarbera, president Teamsters Local 282
• Jack Aherne, International Union of Operating Engineers
• Chris Ward, managing director of the General Contractors Association (Ports, shipping and environment expert)
• Sonia Toledo, managing director Merrill Lynch
• Jamie Mercado, partner at Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett
• Edward Malloy, president of Buildings and Construction Trades Council
• Eva Lerner Lamb, presidents of Palisades Consulting
• Doreen Frasca, president of Frasca & Associates
• John Egan, president of Renaissance Corp.
• Binta Brown, Associate at Cravath, Swaine & Moore
• Samara Barend, director of STV Inc. (Engineering firm that did the Cross Harbor Freight Tunnel study)