Al, I can't imagine any railroad allowing anybody out on their mainline without a track warrant. I know I've received grief just blue flagging something on a siding even near a Class I mainline. Somehow, I'm thinking from what the old heads told me when I got started that the rules haven't changed appreciably, irregardless of which alphabet was issuing them. Tom Dempsey
________________________________
From: "water.kresse@..." <water.kresse@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 12:53 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Definition of what make a common carrier railroad vs a product specific railroad
With that definition, when a little GE pushes four loaded grain covered hoppers out onto the mainline and spots them on a siding for pickup, the grainry becomes a common carrier?
Mining railroads ran dirty passenger cars to transport their workers to and from mainline depots . . . picking some up at shelters along the way. Does that make them a common-carrier?
Al Kresse
----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas Dempsey" <thmsdmpsy@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 3:28:14 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Definition of what make a common carrier railroad vs a product specific railroad
If your "train" never leaves your property, than it doesn't have to comply with title 49 regulations. As soon as you leave the company tracks (even one inch), or pick up a paying passenger, you have become essentially a common carrier. I had this discussion once or twice in a previous career with private owners, and I'm sure we can find exceptions, but in general this should cover the question. A common carrier also has to comply with ICC, FRA, etcetera regulations and also generally, but not necessarily, AAR standards. Tom Dempsey
________________________________
From: Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 11:24 AM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Definition of what make a common carrier railroad vs a product specific railroad
Also, a common carrier could "sign up" for published tariffs, i.e.
it could bid on traffic as a competitor and solicit routings over its
tracks. Since a lot of safety regulations came from states, why would
they exempt non-common carriers from those regulations? A privately
owned train can kill or maim as easily as any others.
Tim O'Connor
A common carrier accepts certain obligations, including serving
all customers equally, no matter how they show up. Obviously a company
short line would not want and could not meet such an obligation.
The upside to those obligations might be the reason for accepting common
carrier status. As I understand it, such "niceties" like the ability to
use eminent domain to acquire land rights, or the rights to cross public
roadways at grade, were primarily available to common carrier railroads
only.
Of note to some of us: some of the rules and regulations applying to train
crew requirements, boiler inspections, and other "safety" items were not
always applicable to the company-owned non-common-carrier line.
My prototype (the Washington Idaho & Montana) ran as a common carrier road,
but connected to many different woods lines run by the Potlatch Lumber
Company (who also owned & operated the WI&M). Hours of service laws didn't
apply to the woods crews, nor did the stringent FRA inspections. "If it
moved, it ran" was more or less the rule of the day. These woods engines
could occasionally run on the WI&M line, but woods-service cars were not
likely kept up to interchange quality to go beyond the WI&M.
david d zuhn Saint Paul Bridge & Terminal Ry.
zoo @ stpaulterminal.org
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
