Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile

Advanced

Re: Federal Jurisdiction over interstate commerce.

February 11, 2008 10:50PM avatar
The interesting question in my mind is not what the FRA regulates, but what they do not. For many years they apparently simply choose to limit their involvement with the C&TS to locomotives, until something got their attention and in 2000 they suddenly and aggressively exerted jurisdiction over track. They always had the right to do this because of the both the interstate nature of the railroad and the public crossings, but for some reason did not do so until 2000. What else is out there that the FRA could be regulating, but so far has chosen not to. The public crossing issue covers a lot of folks. It is probably some combination of visibility, percieved (political) risk, and resources. But over time most operations should be prepared to deal with the FRA. Which is not all bad. Just sometimes burdensome both in terms of bureaucracy and the potential for differing opinions.

JBWX
Subject Author Posted

A third rail to Alamosa.

Jim February 10, 2008 03:00PM

Re: A third rail to Alamosa.

CharlieMcCandless February 10, 2008 04:06PM

Re: A third rail to Alamosa.

Ed Stabler February 10, 2008 04:23PM

Re: A third rail to Alamosa.

Keith February 10, 2008 06:46PM

Re: A third rail to Alamosa.

george pearce February 10, 2008 07:38PM

Re: A third rail to Alamosa.

Chile John February 11, 2008 09:17AM

Re: A third rail to Alamosa.

HOD Bill February 11, 2008 03:16PM

Re: A third rail to Alamosa.

Chile John February 11, 2008 06:10PM

Federal Jurisdiction over interstate commerce.

Dan Markoff February 11, 2008 07:39PM

Re: Federal Jurisdiction over interstate commerce.

John West February 11, 2008 10:50PM

Toilet Paper and Federal Jurisdiction

Dan Markoff February 12, 2008 07:11AM

Re: Federal Jurisdiction over interstate commerce.

michael February 14, 2008 01:03PM

Re: A third rail to Alamosa.

Roger Mitchell February 12, 2008 12:57PM

Re: A third rail to Alamosa.

Eric Bolton February 12, 2008 06:35PM

Re: A third rail to Alamosa.

szuiderveen February 13, 2008 07:27PM

Re: FRA definition of insular

Ed Ellis February 14, 2008 07:02PM

Re: FRA definition of insular

HOD Bill February 14, 2008 07:55PM

Re: A third rail to Alamosa.

Greg Raven February 11, 2008 06:29PM

Re: A third rail to Alamosa.

dougvv February 11, 2008 07:41PM

Re: A third rail to Alamosa. Attachments

Ed Ellis February 11, 2008 08:14PM

Re: A third rail to Alamosa.

Earl February 13, 2008 08:56PM

Re: A third rail to Alamosa.

Keith February 11, 2008 09:33AM

Re: A third rail to Alamosa.

Dave Boyer February 11, 2008 10:46AM

Re: A third rail to Alamosa.

Keith February 11, 2008 07:38PM

Re: A third rail to Alamosa.

CharlieMcCandless February 11, 2008 07:51PM

Re: A third rail in Antonito

Russo Loco February 13, 2008 07:39PM

Re: A third rail to Alamosa.

stuart olson February 11, 2008 09:38PM

Re: A third rail to Alamosa.

dougvv February 11, 2008 10:46PM

Photoshop pic

timtrain488 February 12, 2008 07:14AM

Re: Photoshop pic

Ed Stabler February 12, 2008 08:16AM

Re: Photoshop pic

Keith February 12, 2008 09:12AM

Re: Photoshop pic

Ed Stabler February 12, 2008 12:21PM

Re: Photoshop pic - use #497 ... grinning smiley

Russo Loco February 13, 2008 07:48PM



Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login