In view of President Trump's vow to reduce unnecessary regulation what FRA rules regarding steam engine operation, inspection and tourist rail operations be eliminated or changed?
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
None. Any RR that interchanges with another should follow the same safety rules and practices. the steam locomotive and inspection rules that were updated 10 to 15 years ago represent best practices and have already been adjusted to reflect tourist rr operating reality instead on everyday use.
While I am all in favor of reducing regulation and red tape, safety is nothing to be taken lightly. If you want to make the regulations easier from a small business administration perspective, it would benefit everyone.
John Z.
I can think of one. The two-foot gauge Wicasset, Waterville and Farmington museum railroad cannot extend tracks south over previous right-of-way, according to their newsletter, because they would cross a single rural public low-traffic road, which would put their museum under FRA jurisdiction, with all the bells and whistles. As well as requiring expensive crossing gates. The FRA does not provide exemptions.
I don't think I would not want to visit a live steam railroad that did not pass FRA rules.
How do those who actually operate the locomotives feel?
C W Burfle posted:I don't think I would not want to visit a live steam railroad that did not pass FRA rules.
How do those who actually operate the locomotives feel?
Exactly!!!!! Those of us in this "steam business" NEVER want to "cut corners", as was done years ago on the Gettysburg Railroad. As a result of that mess, the FRA FINALLY had to realize that the Part 230 rules & regulations HAD to be revised & up-dated, and along with advise from the Mechanical Standards Committee, we have those regulations today. Any, and I mean ANY, "live steam operation" that does NOT understand and follow such safety regulations. is NOT worth going to visit, in my opinion.
Hot Water posted:C W Burfle posted:I don't think I would not want to visit a live steam railroad that did not pass FRA rules.
How do those who actually operate the locomotives feel?Exactly!!!!! Those of us in this "steam business" NEVER want to "cut corners", as was done years ago on the Gettysburg Railroad. As a result of that mess, the FRA FINALLY had to realize that the Part 230 rules & regulations HAD to be revised & up-dated, and along with advise from the Mechanical Standards Committee, we have those regulations today. Any, and I mean ANY, "live steam operation" that does NOT understand and follow such safety regulations. is NOT worth going to visit, in my opinion.
HW - Something you and I are in complete agreement on. Your worked on the big stuff and I on the other end, but safety rules are safety rules. As we know, all the rules are written in blood. There is simply never an excuse for looking to skirt safety rules. In addition to Gettysburg, don't forget about that Steam tractor incident in OH that had similar consequences.
Nowadays I work at steam driven power plant and deal with up to 4000 psi, 1000 deg F steam pressure. Safety is always job 1.
This state has rural roads guarded only with crossbucks with lights, and some with just crossbucks ...Maine has different laws?
colorado hirailer posted:This state has rural roads guarded only with crossbucks with lights, and some with just crossbucks ...Maine has different laws?
And your point is???????
Medina, OH was the site of the steam thresher explosion. The operator knew almost nothing about it, including that he shouldn't have been running over a paved roadway with those big cleated steel wheels. I won't go down the list of findings, because there was far more wrong than right. The incident nearly canceled all of the steam thresher reunions, at least in our area.
I think this is a write up on that thresher boiler explosion. Re-enforces my belief that inspections are a good thing:
Antique boiler explosion
Tommy posted:In view of President Trump's vow to reduce unnecessary regulation what FRA rules regarding steam engine operation, inspection and tourist rail operations be eliminated or changed?
Keeping partisan politics out, the key word here is unnecessary.
Many of us would conclude that when dealing with fifty or seventy five year or more old equipment, testing and regular inspections are necessary.
Tourist railroads are probably not a good example of a place where there are excessive or burdensome regulations.
Tommy posted:I can think of one. The two-foot gauge Wicasset, Waterville and Farmington museum railroad cannot extend tracks south over previous right-of-way, according to their newsletter, because they would cross a single rural public low-traffic road, which would put their museum under FRA jurisdiction, with all the bells and whistles. As well as requiring expensive crossing gates. The FRA does not provide exemptions.
Hot Water,
I am pretty sure that this is the post that Colorado Hirailer was responding to, in which you asked
" And your point is??????"
Doug
Yeah, we don't have ANY "expensive crossing gates" on our FRA-governed railroad either. Just crossbucks.
As to the Wicassett, Waterville & Farmington, I have ridden their train, looked the engine and cars over - carefully - and see no need for them to volunteer to have the FRA Inspectors on the property picking at small things. They are already complying with good practices and can probably do without the bureaucracy that comes with Federal inspection.
The FRA has long worked with tourist railroads and museums and most of their regulations make specific accommodations for antique railroad equipment. As for grade crossing protection, it is regulated by states, not the FRA. As for the WW and F, they want to stay in the "insular" category. If they cross a public road they will become "non insular, non general system". That would subject them to a slightly higher level of regulation. Probably an annual inspection of equipment and minimum track conditions. Part 230 applies to steam locomotives regardless of where they run.
Congress gave the FRA sweeping regulatory authority when it was established. They do not inspect "insular" operations because they choose not to, not because they do not have the authority to. The problem with the FRA is there are two kinds of requirements. The regulations that the FRA has written, they can work with. The rules that were written by congress are laws and the FRA has no room to work with them. Slowly the congress written rules are being replaced by FRA written rules, which allow for reasonable situations to be worked out.
In my experience the biggest problem with the FRA was the freight car rules, which prevented photo freights without a lot of work and advanced planing. I believe that the FRA is currently revising the freight car rules, which will allow more operation of antique freight cars.
There always has been problems with local FRA inspectors not knowing how to deal with tourist railroads and museums, but this could always be worked out with a call to Washington. The FRA has a tough job. I have gone to several meetings where the FRA was getting input on proposed regulations. There were usually three groups there. Railway labor was there trying to get the regulations to maximize the labor requirements in any new regulation. The railway supply industry was trying to maximize the amount of hardware required in any new regulations. And the AAR was there representing the railroads. They opposed everything. Rarely was there anything said about the safety issue the new regs were trying to address. My input was to protect historic preservation from new regulations that would require changes in historic equipment. I was always well received by the FRA, they participated in meaningful discussions of historic equipment issues, and I always was able to influence new regulations to protect historic equipment. In my experience historic preservation groups will fair better by participating if the regulatory process rather than fighting it.
There is (and will always be) that area of the regulatory framework that is written by the peers and engineering experts within a certain trade. When it comes to steam and boilers, the body of regulations is there for solid reasons, not political expediency. The alarming stunts prevalent on Youtube, with things like "steam-powered lawn mowers" and other nonsense, are tragic accidents waiting to happen. The steam tractor accident in Medina OH showed a woeful ignorance of the forces working inside old, poorly maintained boilers. Things like the FRA rules will always be there, and are probably the only bastion against growing steam ignorance as the old machinery disappears.
