|
|
| Re: PHOTOS: Staten Island ERA Trip (925500) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: PHOTOS: Staten Island ERA Trip |
|
|
Posted by Bill West on Mon Apr 19 15:00:11 2010, in response to Re: PHOTOS: Staten Island ERA Trip, posted by trainsarefun on Mon Apr 19 14:31:45 2010. Sorry I misread you as wondering why PATH can’t get out too rather than why SIR was allowed to.That clause 4 needs be read in view of what would be the opposite. IE non suburban service, midday traffic and a lack of commutation fares. SIR can argue amongst these versus say NJT, can show a lack of freight hazards, show a strong tie to NYCTA and only needs an FRA interpretive ruling. PATH can argue but needs a congressional amendment. I was involve with a railroad museum years ago. Our locomotive boilers had been inspected by the state department of labour for 30 years. Then the hobby had a couple of high profile incidents and presto the FRA just showed up one day and told us they were in charge. There was no legal way to stop them from “interpretively” changing the existing legal practices. The laws overlap and administrations can read them as they choose. The Federal-Federal and Federal-State-Local overlap is a problem in US law. If you look to the north the Canadian “constitutional” rules draw strong lines between the law making jurisdictions, pretty well excluding duplicate legislation. Bill |
|
|
|