Colorado Public Utilities Order
March 15, 1917
BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILTIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO
IN THE MATTER OF AN INVESTIGATION ON MOTION OF THE COMMISSION INTO THE METHOD OF OPERATION OF FLANGER PLOWS UPON THE LINE OF RAILWAY OF THE RIO GRANDE SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY, AND UPON THE DURANGO-SILVERTON BRANCH OF THE DENVER AND RIO GRANDE RAILROAD COMPANY:
Case No. 123 I. C. No. 379
Submitted March 12, 1917. Decided March 15, 1917
Appearances: E. N. Clark, Esq.
W. D. Lee, Esq.
Representing the Rio Grande Southern RR Company and the Denver and Rio Grande RR Company
W. F. Hines, Esq.
Intervener for Employees.
STATEMENT AND ORDER
During the month of January 1917, the commission received numerous informal complaints directed against the Rio Grande Southern Railroad Company as to its method of operating flanger plows on its line of railway. These complaints were communicated by the commission to the officials of the Rio Grande Southern Railroad Company. As a result of the filing of the informal complaints with the commission, Inspector E. S. Johnson, for the commission, was instructed to investigate into the operation of the flanger plows upon line of the defendant carrier, the Rio Grande Southern Railroad Company, and on the 14th day of February, 1917, the commission received from its inspector a detailed written report of the investigation conducted by him, containing the recommendations for the improvement of the present method of operation.
The report of the commission’s inspector was transmitted to the officials of the Rio Grande Southern Railroad Company on the 20th day of February 1917, with a request from the commission that the carrier state its position in regard to the suggestion contained in the report of the commission’s inspector. No action being taken by the officials of the Rio Grande Southern Railroad Company, the commission on the 9th day of March, 1917, ordered an investigation, on its motion, into the operation of the flanger plows owned and operated by the defendant carriers, the Rio Grande Southern Railroad Company and the Denver and Rio Grande Railroad Company. The commission ordered the officials of the defendant carriers to appear before it in the hearing room of the commission in the Capitol building in the city and county of Denver at the hour of ten o’clock AM on the 12th day of March, 1917, to take such part in such hearing and investigation, and to make such showing on behalf of the defendant carriers as to the representatives of these carriers the interest of the carriers seemed to require.
The hearing in this cause convened on the 12th day of March, 1917, in the hearing room of the commission, and witnesses representing the commission and the defendant carriers presented the case for the commission and the defendants. The commission ordered a dismissal as to the defendant carrier, The Denver and Rio Grande Railroad Company, upon a sufficient showing to the commission that the Denver and Rio Grande Company did not operate a snow plow-flanger.
The commission is convinced from the evidence submitted that the operation of the flanger-plow by the defendant carriers requires much caution and care on the part of the carrier and its employees, the evidence in this case disclosing that the flanger-plow is subject to derailment, and that its operation is more or less dangerous. E. S. Johnson, inspector for the commission, testified that his investigation did not disclose that the construction of the flanger-plow is subject to adverse criticism, with the exception of the location of the handbrake on one flanger, which was so exposed that snow and ice would, under severe weather conditions, render its operation practically useless. Upon Mr. Johnson’s suggestion, the defendant carrier immediately changed the location of the handbrake.
The flanger-plow as operated by the defendant carrier, is an enclosed car, with a door on each side and one in the rear, the windows being so located that an unobstructed view can be had from the operator’s seat in the front end of the car. A wedge plow is built on the front end of the car and a flanger is located midway between two trucks, and is operated by one man by the use of air, the air valve being located near the operator. The commission’s inspector testified that, while one man can operate the flanger, another man should be employed to ride inside the flanger, in order that two men may change about and assist one another in watching for obstructions and preventing ice from gathering on the door sills of the car. A stove is installed in the flanger car, and the inspector testified that it was impossible for the man operating the flanger to keep up the fire in the stove.
The inspector further testified that a caboose should be attached to the rear of the train, equipped with re-railing tools, lamp and stove. The inspector also testified that it is essential that a flagman ride in the rear car because of the fact that passenger trains usually follow close behind the snow-flanger in stormy weather, and that the flagman should therefore be in a position from which he can quickly and properly attend to his duties as flagman.
Owing to the topography of the country through which the defendant carrier operates, the task of clearing snow from the track, with its frequent curves, heavy grades, narrow roadbed, numerous cuts, bridges and fills, makes the operation of the flanger-plow difficult and more than ordinarily dangerous, and it is the opinion of the commission’s inspector that the flanger-plow should be accompanied by a conductor and two brakemen and an engineer and fireman for each engine attached to the flanger-plow.
W. D. Lee, general superintendent for the Rio Grande Southern Railroad Company, stated that the flanger-plow is in charge of a crew consisting of a conductor and two brakeman, with an engineer and fireman for each engine attached to the flanger plow; and while admitting that in exceptional cases a full crew does not operate the flanger plow, he denied that there was any necessity for two men in the flanger car.
Complaints having come to the commission alleging that the defendant carrier operated its flanger plow in connection with, and as part of, passenger trains operated upon its line of railroad, Mr. Lee was interrogated and in regard to these complaints and denied that the flanger plow was at any time operated and part of a passenger train.
The commission is convinced from the evidence that the snow flanger train of the defendant carrier should be composed of a caboose equipped with re-railing tools, lamps, and stove, and that the train should be operated by conductor, two brakemen, with a fireman and engineer for each engine attached thereto, and that it is necessary for the convenience of the trainmen and general public that one of the brakeman should be stationed with the conductor in the flanger, except at such times as the conductor shall order the brakeman upon other duties. It is also the opinion of the commission that the flanger plow should not be operated as a part of a passenger train, and it is difficult for the commission to conceive that such practice would be tolerated by the defendant carrier.
O R D E R
IT IS THEREFORCE ORDERED, First as to the Denver and Rio Grande Railroad Company, a dismissal shall be entered. Second, that the Rio Grande Southern Company shall operate its flanger plow upon its line of railway with a caboose attached thereto, with necessary tools and equipment contained therein, and that the flanger plow train shall be in charge of a conductor and shall be operated with the aid of two brakemen and with an engineer and fireman for each engine attached thereto, except in cases where it is impossible for the defendant carrier to provide a full crew for the operation of the snow flanger plow train.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED That one of the brakeman shall accompany the conductor in the snow flanger car, except at such times as the conductor shall find that the services of the brakeman are required elsewhere.
THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, By George T. Bradley, M. H. Ayulesworth A. P. Anderson, Commissioners
