I HOPE SOMEONE CAN HELP. NOT TOO LONG AGO THERE WAS A DISCUSSION ON GOVERMENT STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS FOR RESTORING AND RUNNING STEAM LOCOMOTIVES. DOES ANYONE REMEMBER THE WEB ADDRESS FOR IT? THANX. MARK.
NOBODY KNOWS?
O.K. LET ME REPHRASE THE QUESTION,
I KNOW THAT IT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED HERE BEFORE AND I’VE BACK SEARCHED, BUT I JUST CAN’T FIND IT.
WHERE ON THE WEB CAN I FIND INFORMATION THAT THE GOVERMENT PUTS OUT SO THAT A STEAM LOCOMOTIVE MEETS MINIMUM REQUIRMENTS?
MARK.
Well, the Federal Railroad Administration would be a good starting place, as well as your local boiler/pressure vessel codes and regulations, and state railroad regulations.
May I ask why you want this stuff?
I would check with the FRA , Iknow in my FRA book there is a whole section just on Steam locomotives .
All rules will be found in the Code of Federal Regulations. You can find it online here:
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/index.html
The stuff about state railroad rules and boiler codes is mostly irrelevant as long as you are running on the general system of railroads, over which the Federal Railroad Administration (http://www.fra.dot.gov/) and the (federal) Surface Transportation Board (http://www.stb.dot.gov/) have nearly exclusive jurisdiction.
State stuff will only apply if you are basically operating the locomotive on private property as an amusement-park-type attraction. If you have grade crossings with public roads and/or interconnect with the general system of railroads, it’s pretty much a federal government show.
Interesting. Thats certainly not the case north of the 49th.
THANKS FOR THE LINKS. I GUESS I HAD BETTER GET STARTED READING IT ALL. [:)] MARK.
I’m a little late to this string, but I want to correct an important inaccuracy in one of the postings, which suggests that the FRA steam rule applies only to locomotives which operate on the general railroad system.
The FRA steam rule (49 CFR Part 230) is not limited to steam locomotives which operate on the general railraod system. The rule also applies to “non-insular” tourist / museum railroads which are NOT part of the general system, and preempts state laws or regulations that would otherwise apply to steam locomotives on these properties. This may not be readily evident from the text of the rule itself , since the “applicablility” section of the rule (section 230.2) uses terminology that isn’t defined in the rule (the explanation of the terms is in the cross reference to “appendix A to part 209”, a pre-existing policy statement discussing, among other things, applicablility of FRA rules to non-general system tourist roads). But the scope of the rule and its preemptive effect are clear from the FRA’s “preamble” to the final rule published in the November 17, 1999 Federal Register, available on the web at the following address:
http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fedreg/frcont99.html
Select the November 17 issue from the index, and then scroll down to the “Federal Railroad Administration” listings for that date, and you will find a link to the rule and its preamble. See p. 62835 of the preamble (discussing sec 230.5) for an explanation of how rule preempts state laws and regulations. See p. 62848 (discussing sec 230.2) for a discussion of the rule’s applicability to non-general system railroads.
The distinction between “non-insular” and “insular” railroads may seem a little confusing, so let me try to simplify it. Most tourist /museum railroads will be consider
In Ontario, the TSSA (Technical Stds and Safety Assoc., a private agency) seems to be the authority on pressure vessels. When it comes to models powered by live steam, they seem to have taken the position of “we don’t want to know what you are doing.”
As to railroads, being federally regulated, I would guess that Transport Canada gets involved. As to small tourist operations, that probably falls under provincial regulations regarding pressure vessels. Or your insurance company depending on the regulations.
The mere existence of a “connection” between a tourist/museum railroad and the general railroad system is not one of the criteria FRA uses for determining whether the tourist/museum road is subject to FRA jurisdiction (or, to put it in FRA’s convoluted language, not a factor in determining whether the tourist/museum road is “insular” or “non-insular”). A public grade crossing, on the other hand, is probably the most important criteria, and the one which will normally determine the regulatory status of these properties. The other criteria are distance from general rail system trackage and crossings of navigable waterways.
The relevance of a “connection” is the use that’s being made of it. If the tourist/museum road is only using it for movement of its own traffic, like a shipper with a private spur tack, it won’t affect its regulatory status. On the other hand, if it is using the connection to handle freight for hire, the road will be considered a part of the general system. The “insularity” criteria applies only to non-general system passenger railroads. If a railroad is part of the general system, it is subject to all FRA regulations, regardless of “insularity”.
By the way, a “non-insular” tourist road,
Falcon, my original post said “If you have grade crossings with public roads and/or interconnect with the general system of railroads, it’s pretty much a federal government show.” The grade crossings test is the same basic shorthand for “insular” you gave. Not sure what your point of disagreement is there. As to interconnect, I’ll admit that that was perhaps unclear, a poor word choice, but I did not mean to suggest that mere contiguous rail between your loco and common carrier rails would get you covered by FRA regs. If you run your locomotive out onto common carrier rules, obviously, the FRA regs cover you. But I think that, say, even if you keep your loco on your own private rails, but exchange cars with a common carrier, you may well also be covered (I’ll admit it’s been a while since I read the regs).
I wasn’t disagreeing with you on the “public crossing” criteria, merely giving a complete answer (a bad habit which I’ve been unable to break). The disagreement is on the “connection” issue. I’m pretty familar with FRA tourist railroad policy, since I’ve been involved with it up to my eyeballs since FRA first started getting interested in non-general system tourist roads. The steam rules themselves don’t expressly address the “connection” issue, since FRA’s policy as to tourist roads was already in place before the steam rules were adopted. There are earlier documents that do, although I’d have to do some digging to find them (I think it may be addressed in a report FRA made to Congress on tourist railroad regulation in 1994 or 1995, but I don’t have a copy immediately at hand).
Briefly, the mere existence of a “connection” with a general system road isn’t significant, whether you are a tourist road or an industry. Further, if you are using such a connection SOLELY to exchange your OWN traffic with a general system road (in other words, traffic you ar