Escalator Data News articles, cases and authoritative commentary on elevator accidents or their construction. ESCALATOR SIDE-OF-STEP ENTRAPMENT by David Cooper, LECS Ltd., R. Unito Abstract The International Association of Electrical Engineers (IAEE) Elevcon '90 workshop on escalator safety, convened by Bernard James, drew attention to escalator entrapment accidents (of all types). Despite seven years having passed and the awareness of the problem having become more prominent in the public eye, action to remedy the side-of-step entrapment problem has not received the attention by owners and operators of both new escalators and older types as perhaps it deserves. Passenger entrapments between the steps of an escalator and the balustrade skirting have been an issue which has been with us for sometime. 1. The Problem The problem, itself, is the direct entrapment of limbs or the entrapment of clothing, which directly leads to limb entrapment in the gap between the edge of an escalator or moving walkway step and the side wall adjacent to the steps, known as the balustrade skirt. Escalator side-of-step entrapments are not a new topic within our industry. Records dating back to the mid-1960s can be readily found detailing incidents where passengers' injuries have occurred as a result of this situation. Manufacturers deny that there is a serious problem, when considering the number of passenger trips made every day. However, incidents and reports suggest that even though the number of trips between accidents are low, the actual volume of accidents warrants more attention. Evidence collected over the past few years raises queries on the extent of the problem, and also, detailed accident records kept by independent authorities ­ such as the DTI ­ help to clarify the case. Other available statistics are kept by interested parties and manufacturers. The latter do not tend to release the information they have accumulated to the public, probably for obvious commercial reasons. In the U.S., the problem has been brought to public attention by various television documentaries and press barrages. However, the problem is worldwide and not restricted to the U.S. or U.K. alone. 2. How The Problem Occurs There are a number of ways of becoming entrapped in the gap. Some entrapments are of clothing with no limb injury involved, but by far the most serious, in terms of injuries, are those where limbs are caught. It is important to remember that we are only discussing the problem of the gap between the edge of the steps and the balustrade skirting and not any other entrapment points on escalators. Many of these are detailed in Health & Safety Executive releases in the U.K. The most frequent situations where the problem occurs are as follows: 1. loose clothing (including shoe laces) being drawn into the gap and becoming entangled; 2. fingers becoming entrapped when people fall over on the escalator; 3. fingers or feet becoming entrapped when children either deliberately or inadvertently place their fingers/ feet at or near the gap; and 4. footwear being drawn into the gap as a result of friction. Other accidents have involved long hair becoming entangled. The Elevcon '90 workshop focused on situations where loose or long, flowing clothing is worn, as there is a possibility of it being drawn into the gap. Also, it was reported that drawstrings on passengers' head-wear and flimsy footwear were a concern. Reported accidents from category 3 include a case investigated by Dr. Campbell Reid, a plastic surgeon in the Plastic and Jaw Department at the Royal Hospital Annex in Sheffield, England, where the child had deliberately inserted his hand into the gap. Other accidents have focused on children's footwear, principally Wellington boots. Wellington boot material has been known to melt as a result of the friction when it rubs against escalator side skirt panels, eventually sticking to the panel. The escalator step band continues moving, drawing the child's entrapped foot and footwear into the gap between the step and panel, as there is nowhere else for it to go. There is no time to remove the foot from the boot, as the escalator step band is still moving. 3. The Consequences The consequences of entrapment range from near misses to fatal injuries being sustained. In a paper by Dr. Reid, a number of cases are discussed where extensive lacerations and damaged tendons have been experienced. In one accident, a young girl was known to have narrowly escaped scalping after her hair became entangled whilst attempting to retrieve a coin which she had dropped on an escalator. This accident was also reported in the local press. Table 1 STATISTIC TOTAL ESCALATORS ELEVATORS Number of units in the United States 600,000 30,000 (5%) 630,000 (95%) Estimated Trips/Day 230,000,000 180,000,000 55,000,000 Ratio of installed units to trips/day 6000:1 92:1 Ratio of Trips 3.27 1 Ratio of installed units 20 1 Consumer Protection Safety Committee estimated annual accidents resulting in hospitalization (1994)* 17,111 7,300 (43%) 9811 (57%) Estimated annual accidents   (Boston Globe 8/4/94) 18,000 16,000 2,000 Number of accidents per unit annually .236 0.221 (94%) 0.015 (6%) Maximum Load Per Hour 13,500 4. Exposure to the Problem It is generally agreed that more people use escalators per unit than elevators. The traffic-handling capacity of an escalator is far greater than that of an elevator. In theory, there is no waiting time for the machine, itself. An escalator with a maximum step width and running at maximum speed (both as stated in BS 5656/EN 115) can carry up to 13,500 passengers per hour. The statement that more people use elevators is generally known, but The Boston Globe printed escalator and elevator usage and installation figures for the U.S. as a whole on August 4, 1995. (See Table 1.) Naturally, the unit-installation figures are more likely to be accurate than passenger usage figures, since the latter are both transient and more than likely theoretical rather than measured. Obtaining precise figures detailing escalator accidents, let alone specifically side-of-step entrapments, is difficult. By piecing together pieces of information gained from various reliable sources, this author has managed to create a table of accidents in the U.S. (See Table 2.) It should be borne in mind that these figures are for all escalator accidents not just side-of-step entrapments. Source locations for information used in this table are available from the author. Getting down to the specifics of entrapments, a paper published by Carl White in the U.S. entitled "Escalator Accident Statistics and Safety" compared two maintenance contractors escalator accident figures for the period 1971-1977 (Table 2). The figures were obtained from the companies by two methods. One company had voluntarily published the figures, and the other had been made to reveal theirs during a court case in a product liability dispute. The figures extrapolated show the statistics for persons being entrapped in escalators whilst on the step chain. It can be seen that, by far, the number of accidents involving step/skirt entrapments outweighs the number of combplate entrapments. Even more worrying is that if you look at the individual year figures for side-of-step entrapments only, the trend is most definitely upward, with only two drops being recorded (and incidentally being consecutive) for Company B between 1974-1975 and 1975-1976 and 1975-1976 and 1976-1977. Table 2* Company A Company B Total Step/Skirt Accidents (including risers) 391 770 1,161 Combplate Accidents 228 289 517 1971/72 32 55 87 1972/73 64 59 123 1973/74 54 72 126 1974/75 79 226 305 1975/76 93 213 303 1976/77 99 145 244 * Source:  "Escalator Accident Statistics and Safety" by Carl White 5. Knowledge of the Problem Outside the Industry 5.1 The Newspapers Since Elevcon '90, newspapers worldwide have focused their attention on the problem. The following excerpts are from accidents which can be related directly to entrapments, not just side-of-step entrapments, which are highlighted by an * by the date. The reasoning is because when they were reported, their precise location on the escalator was not recorded. Newspaper: Sunderland Local (U.K.) Reported that a child had bent down to pick up a coin she had dropped, and her hair became entangled down the side of the step in between the step and the skirt. Quick action by passengers avoided scalping. Date: Unknown but after 1990 Newspaper: Unknown woman's national magazine (U.K.) Reported that a three-year-old Birmingham girl had fallen whilst getting onto an escalator. Her hand became entrapped in a tiny gap, pinning her to the moving metal steps. The report is not specific as to whether the entrapment was down the side of the step or between the steps and the combplate. Date: April 1, 1993* Newspaper: Kent Today (U.K.) Reported that a five-year-old child fell, and his foot became trapped between the steps and the balustrade skirting as the step band deprofiled on the run into the combplate at the bottom end of the escalator. Date: July 26, 1993* Newspaper: Kent Today (U.K.) Reported that a three-year-old boy had his foot dragged between the edge of the step and the skirting as the family was looking at nearby clothing racks in a department store. Date: May 1994 Newspaper: Belfast Telegraph (U.K.) Reported that a toddler lost part of a finger, as a result of an escalator entrapment. The location of the entrapment was not reported. Date: December 4, 1994 Newspaper: Boston Sunday Globe (U.S.) Published a report announcing that two people were killed and 150 injured on Washington Metro escalators in the period between 1985 and 1994. Also, a 1991 report stated that there had been 156 injuries in the previous five years and 1,800 over a period of 15 years. One of the deaths reported in the newspaper was an accident involving a 40-year-old woman fatally injured when her clothes became entrapped in an escalator. The precise location of the entrapment on the escalator was not reported. The report also listed various accidents, including a three-year-old girl from Long Beach, California, whose clothing became entrapped in an escalator, and a four-year-old boy who was seriously hurt when his hand was caught in an escalator. Again, the precise location of the entrapments was not reported. Date: January 9, 1995* Newspaper: Bradford Telegraph & Argus (U.K.) Reported that a red Wellington boot being worn by a three-year-old girl was dragged in toward the gap between the steps and the skirting. Fortunately, injury was avoided due to deflector devices being fitted. Date: August 22, 1995 Newspaper: Boston Sunday Globe (U.S.) Published a report which stated that between July 1992 and June 1994, more than 300 accidents (not just side-of-step entrapments) had been reported on escalators in the Washington Metro. Date: September 25, 1995 Newspaper: Michigan Free Press (U.S.) The paper reported that a free press analysis of accidents reported to the state of Michigan between January 1994 and August 1995 revealed 95 cases involving escalators and elevators, of which 62% were attributed to escalators. It was also reported that the state was responsible for 670 escalators and 10,700 elevators. Date: October 6, 1995* Newspaper: Detroit Free Press (U.S.) The paper reported that in May 1994, a woman missed her step on an escalator in an airport and became entrapped in the gap between the steps and the skirt. Further investigations by the paper revealed that 153 accidents had occurred on escalators and moving stairways at the same airport since January 1991, with 19% of the accidents resulting in hospitalization. The split between accidents on escalators and moving walkways was 63% and 37%, respectively. The report also stated that the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) had revealed, "Nationally, an estimated 18,000 people per annum are treated in hospitals for injuries received while using elevators or escalators." Date: November 21, 1995* Newspaper: Newsday (U.S.) Reported that a three-year-old girl riding a subway escalator had received crushing injuries to her toes. The paper went on to highlight the lack of entrapment-prevention devices on some escalators. Date: December 11, 1995* Newspaper: Daily Mail (U.K.) Reported that until the 1980s, there were around 40 accidents a year caused by children's fingers or shoes getting caught between the moving steps and balustrade skirts. 5.2 The Medical Profession The medical profession has also noted the problem. Dr. Reid noted two similar sets of injuries on children where escalators had been involved and published a paper in 1968 entitled "Escalator Injuries." Following a third incident, he documented his findings in another paper entitled "Escalator Injuries of the Hand," which was published in The British Journal of Accident Surgery. There had been other papers by medical professionals on escalator accidents published prior to this, notably "A Tragic Moving Staircase Mishap" by Dr. Kates. In all of the cases investigated by Dr. Reid, the children involved had all been accompanied by a parent. In one of the cases, the child entered his hand into the gap between the edge of the step and the balustrade skirt and became trapped when the gap closed up. The injuries were sustained when the hand was forcibly removed. Detailed examination of the escalator revealed that the gap concerned varied considerably along the length of the escalator. 5.3 Television Programs On October 23, 1995, a program entitled A Current Affair claimed that 10 people had died on escalators in 10 years. The Atlanta subway also claimed that the fitting of anti-entrapment devices had cut the number of accidents by two-thirds. The following day, another program, entitled "American Journal ­ 39 Steps," stated that since 1990, government figures showed 29,000 accidents on escalators (including 11 deaths). Another program (Newsbeat) claimed that there are 18,000 escalators accidents annually, with Twelve Oaks Mall in Michigan experiencing 28 accidents on six escalators since January 1994. On November 29, 1995, NBC television network in the U.S. broadcast a program entitled "Moving Violations." In this program, a nun called Sister Theresa had taken up the cause of investigating side-of-step entrapments after her nephew had been involved in an accident in 1976. Her investigations uncovered figures from the U.S. Federal government, revealing that over 16,000 people a year are sent to hospitals due to escalator accidents (not just side-of-step entrapments), with the vast majority being children. The Newsday program in the U.S. announced on November 21, 1995 that the New York underground system had experienced a growing number of escalator accidents. 5.4 The Legal Industry The Washington Post published a case on September 9, 1994 where a three-year-old child was awarded a US $15,000 payout following an incident where, sitting on an escalator step, her leg became entrapped in the gap between the steps and the side wall. Her leg was torn open, leaving a 6-in. scar. The award was described as "small" by the paper, because the jury judged that the parents had failed to supervise the child properly but also concluded that the escalator had not been maintained properly. The same newspaper also published a case on November 2, 1994 when a court decided to award US $218,000 following an incident where the shoelace of a two-year-old girl ­ standing on an escalator ­ became entangled inside the escalator via the step/skirt gap. When she attempted to pull the lace out, her hand was drawn into the gap and became mangled. American law has held that escalator manufacturers and maintenance companies, etc. owe a higher or special degree of care and protection to children than adults (Graves v. May Department Store, Burdines v. McConnell, etc.) and a duty to take precaution that would not be necessary in the case of adults (Nettrour v. JC Penney). Generally, every person using an escalator, except those children of such an age that do not understand or appreciate the danger, is bound to exercise reasonable care of his/ her own safety (Hendershoot v. Macy's). 6. Knowledge of the Problem Within the Escalator Industry 6.1 Consultants Following a news broadcast, Dennis Chandler of Continental Hoisting Consultants wrote to NBC on December 4, 1995 and pointed out that the nonfitment of devices to prevent side entrapment actually conflicted with the purpose of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) 17.1 Safety Code, which is "to provide for the safety of life and limb, and to promote public welfare." Leroy Gravatte, a forensic engineer who has investigated many escalator entrapment incidents, also wrote to NBC on December 14, 1995 and stated, "I am sick of seeing pictures of children with mangled hands or feet, with limbs sliced open, the result of being caught in what the industry terms 'side-of-step entrapments'." Any gap exceeding 1/16 inches between the moving escalator step and fixed side skirt panel preys on little people, and the injuries suffered by adults are just as disturbing. White has published many papers worldwide on the problem, including "Measuring Step Clearances and Inspection of Escalators and Moving Walkways," "Escalator Accident Statistics and Safety" and "Rubber and Brush Skirt Guards." Barry Fowkes of Kleeneze Sealtech has also published a paper in Elevatori (the IAEE journal) entitled "Brush Guards for Increased Passengers' Safety on Escalators." 6.2 Manufacturers Manufacturers have been aware of the problem for some time. Even before this, maintenance companies and installers have been known to issue technical information sheets to their engineers. A leading manufacturer issued a marketing document in 1983 entitled "Reduce Your Liability Risk," in which the opening sentence states, "Skirt panels are easy to install and protect against the second most common cause of escalator accidents ­ foot entrapment." The document also states, "Children are frequently involved, and the number of liability suits is growing at an alarming rate." Finally, the document includes a graph showing the number of product liability suits filed in federal district courts as rising from 1,579 in 1974 to 8,944 in 1982. 7. Conclusion Based on the evidence gathered for this paper, it is this author's contention that the need for side-of-step entrapment prevention devices be called for in all standards and be included by all manufacturers ­ as standards should be a mandatory requirement. It is also my conclusion that older escalators with no such devices be retrofitted with a device as a matter of urgency. One accident is one too many, and those that claim that their escalators have been in service for years and have not been involved in an accident should remember that they are really only years closer to having an accident. Insurance companies should refuse to provide coverage for third-party injury to escalator owners who do not have such devices. Finally, this author believes that the authors of EN 115 should search their consciences and ask whether they are happy to live with the knowledge that an accident can occur, which could cause both mental and physical distress to a person and which could have been avoided or at least minimized by the specification of a device to prevent entrapment. We know about the problem; we have dealt with the problem in the past; and we have the technology readily available to deal with the problem. Yet, we allow new escalators to enter service without entrapment prevention devices. At least if new escalators have them, we can look on it as a kind of inoculation, and eventually, the problem may go away as old escalators are replaced. However, with our present standards, we are not only allowing the problem to grow but promoting the life of the problem. A final thought, some 15 years ago, the U.K. recognized the number of road accidents where people were injured because they weren't wearing seat belts. The U.K. legislated that seat belts shall be worn. I ask you to look at the statistics. David Cooper has been in the U.K. lift and escalator industry since 1980. He is now a director of Consulting Engineers, LECS (U.K.) Ltd. and is a director and Fellow member of the Institute of Incorporated Executive Engineers. Cooper is also a member of IAEE, the National Association of Elevator Safety Authorities (NAESA) International, the National Association of Vertical Transportation Professionals (NAVTP), the Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers (CIBSE) Lift Group Committee and the British Standards MHE/14 Committee. Cooper has published many papers in trade journals, including ELEVATOR WORLD, Elevatori and Elevation. In 1993, he chaired the workshop on escalators at the Elevcon '93 conference in Vienna, Austria. Credit: Paper previously published in Elevatori and Elevator Technology 7 and was presented at IAEE Conference Elevcon '96 in Barcelona, Spain. Also published in "Elevator World". Escalator company must pay $16.9 million to boy who lost 3 toes Thursday, May 21st, 1998, the Houston Chronicle reported that the jury found the escalator maintenance company grossly negligent in the accident which caused a four year old boy to loose three toes. The jury deliberated for eight hours before before reaching a decision. They had yet to rule on punitive damages. Escalator rips off girl’s toes Saturday, April 4th, 1998, the Orlando Sentinel reported that an 8 year old Michigan girl had her toes ripped off when her sneaker was trapped by an escalator. The girl was rushed to a nearby hospital where she underwent emergency surgery on her right foot, but doctors were unable to reattach the toes. US Urges Upgrade in Escalator Safety The Boston Globe  07/21/96. By David Armstrong, 07/21/96 The federal government, in a reversal of a long-standing position, has determined that escalators pose a special threat to children and is pushing for an overhaul of most of the country's 30,000 escalators. The US Consumer Product Safety Commission concluded that escalators can be made less hazardous to children with the addition of safety devices that have been on the market for years, but never before required, according to documents obtained by the Globe. ``All of this information suggests that regular occurrences of entrapment, particularly of the legs and feet of small children, can be almost completely eliminated by the installation of aftermarket safety devices,'' the agency wrote in a draft letter this month to the chairman of the committee that sets the national escalator safety code. In addition, the agency is calling for tougher standards for new equipment, saying that a redesign of escalators could ``reduce or eliminate many of the other hazards as well.'' Although it is too early to tell what form the safety changes will eventually take, the kinds of safety devices cited by the commission as successful in reducing injuries typically cost between $4,000 and $6,000 per escalator. During the past week alone, three people were injured on escalators in Massachusetts, including two children aged 4 and 5. The injured children suffered the kind of entrapment injuries cited by the safety commission. The commission, based on a nationwide survey of hospitals, estimated that 7,300 people sought emergency-room treatment for escalator injuries in 1994. Safety commission spokesman Rick Frost said the agency is most concerned about the gap between the moving stair and the sidewall on an escalator. The agency estimates about 1,000 people a year seek emergency treatment after a body part or shoe is sucked into that gap. Of that number, half are children under 5, the agency said. ``Our figures show that children under 14 are especially vulnerable to the entrapment-type injuries,'' he said. Frost said the agency is asking the safety code committee to come up with changes that will address the problem. If the safety code committee fails to do so, the commission could order its own safety requirements, but Frost said the agency was ``optimistic'' the changes will be made voluntarily. The commission, after a public hearing in May, determined there are safety devices on the market that eliminate or dramatically curb incidents of children becoming trapped in the space between the step and sidewall. The Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, which will shuttle thousands of people to Olympic events in the next two weeks, installed a device on all of its 143 escalators to reduce the gap between the step and the sidewall. The result: Since the devices were installed in the late 1980s, the transit system has not had a single entrapment accident. Prior to the installation of the devices, known as ``safety sideplates,'' entrapment injuries were the No. 1 safety problem on the system's escalators. The commission said other transit systems have experienced similar success with safety devices. In Boston, the MBTA is testing the sideplates on one of its escalators and is testing two other safety devices on other escalators. The testing follows years of serious injuries involving children using MBTA escalators. Two of the accidents last week involved MBTA escalators, including a 4-year-old boy whose hand was caught in an escalator at the Maverick Square station. The letter to the code committee represents a dramatic reversal for the safety commission. For the past two decades, the commission has maintained that escalators do not pose an unreasonable hazard and has refused requests to order safety improvements. In 1979, the commission said there was ``insufficient [data] to indicate that escalators present an unreasonable risk of injury.'' Last year, however, the agency decided to reexamine the question of escalator safety. In May, a public hearing was held with industry officials and safety advocates. Asked about the agency's new stance on escalators, Frost said, ``We have a new chairman and she is very concerned about consumer-injury issues, particularly those that affect the safety of children.'' In the draft letter to the escalator safety code committee, the CPSC indicated its staff believes injuries resulting from entrapments and falls ``must be addressed expeditiously.'' In addition, the agency said safety changes should be made on all existing escalators in addition to new ones - a stance that is sure to draw opposition from building owners leery of making potentially costly improvements to their escalators. ``We place high priority on identifying or defining measures that will retroactively reach existing units,'' the commission said in the draft letter. Frost declined to comment on the letter, but said any proposed actions and findings ``could change'' during the review process. Although escalator manufacturers have pledged to work with the commission to address safety concerns, the industry has been reluctant in the past to embrace proven safety improvements. The chairman of the escalator safety code committee, David L. Steel of Otis Elevator Co., wrote memos to his clients in 1990 discouraging them from installing the safety device used successfully by the Atlanta transit system. In an interview Friday, Steel said he has met with commission officials, but added that the federal government has yet to propose specific changes to the safety code. ``Until such time as information is made available, I can't tell you if changes will be made to the code or not,'' he said. The code is set by a committee dominated by industry representatives. Although the code is voluntary, almost every state has adopted it as the official standard. Critics of current safety standards argue that the escalator code actually prohibits the use of safety devices that have been successful in other countries. The device used in Atlanta uses brush-like bristles that touch riders' legs if they stand too close to the edge of an escalator step. The manufacturer of the device claims escalators using the brush in Europe and Asia have not had a single report of an entrapment injury. But the United States code prohibits the use of the product. Vic Alasio, who sells the product in the United States, said the state of Maryland had to pass emergency legislation to allow the Metro transit system in Greater Washington to install the brushes on escalators at Maryland stations. ``It's downright stupid,'' he said. To read the Globe series on elevator and escalator safety and follow-up articles, go to Globe Online at http://www.boston.com. Use the keyword: elevator. Correction: Because of an editing error, this story reports that so-called "brush guard" warning devices are being used on escalators in Atlanta. The devices are in use in other metropolitan areas, but not in Atlanta. This story ran on page a1 of the Boston Globe on 07/21/96. Back to Boston.Com     Aquarium escalators will test safety item In '89, T rejected a device to close stairs' perilous gap Thursday, December 8, 1994 By David Armstrong and Shelley Murphy, Globe Staff The MBTA announced yesterday that escalators at Aquarium station will be fitted with safety strips to reduce a gap between the moving steps and side panels that has been blamed for maiming three children since 1988. As the MBTA moved to improve safety on those escalators, the Globe learned that the transit authority considered, but rejected, a plan five years ago for similar safety devices on most of its escalators. Since top officials balked at the safety devices in 1989, hundreds of MBTA riders have been injured on the transit system's escalators, agency records indicate. "I just couldn't put that much pressure on them to do it," Anthony T. Slowe, former assistant safety manager of the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, said of the 1989 proposal. "That wasn't the highest priority. There were other priorities at the time." On Monday night, a 2-year-old Everett boy was injured on an escalator at the Sullivan MBTA station on the Orange Line. That escalator remained shut down yesterday. A three-part Globe series concluded Tuesday focused on a lax state inspection system that allows hazardous elevators and escalators to continue operating. The series also highlighted accidents on MBTA escalators and the inherent dangers of the moving stairs, which have an accident rate 15 times that of elevators. The MBTA said it has ordered Esca-Strips, a device that narrows the gap between the the escalator step and the metal side panel. This gap has been blamed for several injuries to children at Aquarium and other stations. Robin Bavaro, an MBTA spokeswoman, said Esca-Strips cost $5 a step and are used widely in Canada and in several US cities. "The manufacturer claims this device prevents side entrapments and we want to give it a shot," she said. "We will use the Aquarium as a test site before embracing them systemwide." Robert B. James, the inventor of Esca-Strips, said he is providing the test devices free because "I am confident of my product." The lawyer representing the family of Brianna Bubeck, whose calf was ripped open on an Aquarium station escalator in July 1989, said the safety improvements should have been made years ago. "I think it's really sad that they had the knowledge necessary to prevent Brianna's accident and for some economic reasons chose not to act on it," said attorney Charles P. Kazarian. "What they're doing now is too little and too late for Brianna and other children hurt on the same escalator." In 1989 the MBTA considered, then turned down, a proposal to buy safety ''sideplates." The sideplates, like Esca-Strips, close the gap between the moving stair and the metal side panel, and have a shield to further protect limbs from being drawn into the empty space under a step. Several transit authorities across the country that have installed the sideplates have reported a dramatic decrease -- and in some cases, elimination -- of entrapment injuries. Slowe said yesterday that the agency tested the sideplate devices in 1989. Although he called sideplates a "good concept," he said MBTA managers decided against purchasing them. Slowe said the cost of the sideplates, about $52 a step, was not a deciding factor in the transit authority's rejection of the device. While acknowledging there were accidents on T escalators in 1989, Slowe said the numbers did not reveal a substantial problem. Bavaro, although she would not comment specifically on the sideplates proposal five years ago, said the MBTA has evaluated a number of safety devices over the years. She said the agency is currently making other safety improvements, including improved lighting near escalators, painting the bottom and top metal plates of escalators yellow, and painting yellow safety lines around escalator steps to keep people away from the edges. Meanwhile, Bavaro said the agency's safety department is investigating the Tuesday accident that injured the Everett 2-year-old. The boy's pants were pulled into the escalator, which cut his knee and leg. Bavaro said a preliminary report indicated the boy may have been sitting on the escalator step. The child, who was not identified, was treated and released for the cuts at Massachusetts General Hospital. A 7-year-old boy was injured at the same station in October when his foot was caught in an escalator, MBTA records indicate. Back to Boston.Com   Click here to return to main list of stories [ Home ] [ Sidebar ] [ Bona Fides ] [ Codes ] [ Contents ] [ Curiculum Vitae ] [ Disabled Equip ] [ Elevator Illustrations ] [ Escalator Illustrations ] [ FAQs ] [ Fees ] [ History ] [ Links ] [ References ] [ Services ] [ The Shanty ][ In Contempt ] [ Elevator Data ] [ Escalator Data ] [ Expert Services ] Updated on  03/04/00

 

You may contact me by:

EMAIL