No. 28000 (SUB-NO. 21) IN THE MATTER OF APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF SYSTEMS OR DEVICES UNDER PARAGRAPH (b), SECTION 26 OF THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE ACT AS AMENDED ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY AND ALTON RAILROAD COMPANY Submitted October 24, 1939. Decided November 15, 1939 Petition of the Illinois Central Railroad Company and the Alton Railroad Company, for approval of proposed discontinuance of mechanical interlocking at the crossing of these railroads at Mason City, Ill., substituting therefor an automatic interlocking, granted. J. H. Wright for petitioners. Richard Abram, J. G. Amerson, M. T. Fullington, E. E. Gentz, D. D. Hughson, T. S. Jackson, Frank L. Pierce, T. F. Shuman, and E. H. Smock for employee organizations. F. W. Markley for Illinois Commerce Commission. S. N. Mills for Interstate Commerce Commission. REPORT OF THE COMMISSION DIVISION 3, COMMISSIONERS MAHAFFIE, ALLDREDGE, AND PATTERSON BY DIVISION 3: In Illinois Central R. Co. Modification of Systems, 229 I. C. C. 771, the Illinois Central Railroad Company and the Alton Railroad Company, hereinafter termed the Illinois Central and the Alton, sought approval of proposed discontinuance of interlocking appliances at the point where lines of these two railroads cross at grade at Mason City, Ill., and the substitution of a crossing gate with color-light signals in lieu thereof. Petitioners urged that safety of operation would not be decreased by the proposed change, that adequate protection would be afforded thereby, and that economies in maintenance and operation would result. The change was opposed by representatives of train and engine service brotherhoods and other similar organizations, on the ground that it would result in decreased safety of operation. Division 3 found that the proposed arrangement was contrary to standard railroad signal practice, inasmuch as the proposed plan made no provision for a signal of any kind to indicate to an approaching north-bound engineman on the Alton track the point at which his train must stop; and an order was entered denying the petition without prejudice to the right of petitioners to submit a modified proposal which, in accordance with standard signal practice, would provide for a stop indication before reaching the crossing for a train approaching it from either direction on the Alton when the way was not clear for that train to proceed over the crossing. The Illinois Central and the Alton later submitted by petition the modified proposal here under consideration. Instead of the crossing gate with color-light signals covered by the former petition, it is now proposed to install an automatic interlocking plant in lieu of the mechanically operated interlocking plant which has remained in service at this point. Hearing has been held, and substantially the same claims with respect to safety, protection, and economies in maintenance and operation are made by the respective parties as were made in the former case. The railroad lines involved, with their physical characteristics, the traffic handled over them, and the mechanical interlocking plant, with its methods of operation and signals, are fully described in the original report and, inasmuch as it was agreed by the parties at the hearing that these facts were in all substantial particulars correctly stated and that no important changes have been made since that time, no further description of the crossing as it now exists appears necessary. It is proposed to remove the mechanical interlocking machine, and the signals and derails operated by it on both roads, and to install an automatic interlocking plant comprising color-position-light home signals on the Alton and color-light home signals on the Illinois Central. The home signals will be located 100 feet from the crossing; and each will display two aspects, red and yellow. Clearing sections will be provided on the Alton 4,667 feet in approach of the eastward home signal and 4,218 feet in approach of the westward home signal. On the Illinois Central, clearing sections will be provided 979 feet and 409 feet, respectively, in approach of the northward and southward home signals. Inoperative semaphore approach signals now used on both roads will be retained in their present locations. In the new plant as proposed, a train entering a clearing section on either road will cause the proper home signal to display an indication to proceed, provided there is no train between home signals on either road and another train has not already entered a clearing section. When a train on one road has passed through the interlocking plant and is beyond the opposing home signal on that route, and a train is then occupying a clearing section on the other road, the home signal on the other road will be operated to display an indication to proceed after a time interval of 2 minutes has elapsed. This time interval will be interposed from the time the home signal on either road assumes the stop position until the home signal on the opposing road is operated. A home signal can be operated for a reverse movement if no train is on the approach circuit on the other road. A release switch, to be operated manually, will be provided to effect transfer of signal indication from one road to another after an interval of 2 minutes. Means will be provided to protect against display of improper signal indications which might result from imperfect shunting of the track circuit by light-weight motor cars. The estimated cost of the project is $5,250.93, and savings in maintenance and operating costs would amount to approximately $200 monthly. The services of one operatorleverman will be discontinued. No objection to the proposed changes has been made by the Illinois Commerce Commission. The present plant is equipped with derails and detector bars. The record shows that the use of detector bars is not favored in modern interlockings and is considered by many signal engineers as obsolete practice. The present plant is not equipped with approach and time locking and electric switching locking, which are elements approved by modern signal practice. The present signals are equipped with oilburning lamps. The use of such lamps is generally considered an obsolete practice. The present plant is not continuously manned by operator-levermen, only one attendant being on duty between 9 a. m. and 6 p. m., daily except Sundays. This would require certain changes in present normal operating practices, should traffic be increased on the Illinois Central. The proposed plant will be installed in accordance with present standard practice, employing modern equipment, and will be available for use at all times. The apparatus and installation will conform to standards prescribed by the Commission under section 26 of the Interstate Commerce Act, as amended; and the speed of trains within the limits of the proposed interlocking will be restricted to 20 miles per hour in accordance with section 315 of the Commission's rules, standards, and instructions applicable to automatic interlockings having inoperative approach signals. The opposition to the proposed plan centers chiefly on the removal of derails and the method of operating the release switch previously described. With respect to the latter feature, the record shows that utilization of this method of transferring signals from one line to another will be necessary very infrequently, if at all, with traffic conditions as they now exist. It will be accomplished by pushing a button located on a post a few feet from the crossing, and it is intended that, should its use be necessary because of a train standing on the opposing line or for similar reasons, a member of the train crew will push the button and thus operate the time release after having ascertained that his train can safely use the crossing. Protestants urge that this places responsibilities and duties on trainmen which are normally performed by operator-levermen and might result in jurisdictional disputes involving working agreements. Control over such matters is not within the province of this Commission, and our consideration is confined to safety of operation. The record affords ample ground for the conclusion that the method of operating this time release will not decrease safety. The opposition to the proposal to remove derails at this crossing was considered in connection with the former petition in this case, supra, and the proposed removal of derails was not given as a reason for withholding approval of the former petition. In a number of cases in which consideration has been given to the traffic involved, the physical characteristics of the crossing lines, and type of equipment used, we have approved the removal of main-track derails and in that connection have said that we must be governed by the particular circumstances at the point considered. See Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. Modification of Systems, 231 I. C. C. 167; New York Central R. Co. Modification of Systems, 232 I. C. C. 131; Cleveland, C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. Modification of Systems, 232 I. C. C. 477; Southern Ry. Co. Modification of Systems, 234 I. C. C. 101; and Wabash Ry. Co. Modification of Systems, 234 I. C. C. 291. In the last case, time-element devices to be operated by trainmen, similar to the one here in question, were provided and the petition was approved. On the record, mention was made of the use of time-recording instruments at crossings, which enable a check to be made of the speed of passing trains. Following the hearing, it was suggested by letter from the chief engineer of the Illinois Commerce Commission that consideration be given to requiring such an instrument at this crossing. The evidence on this subject does not indicate the necessity for the use of such an instrument, and in the letter referred to it is admitted that such a device would not give reliable information as to the speed of trains in every case. Petitioners do not desire to install such an instrument, and it is our opinion that we would not be justified in requiring it to be used at this particular crossing. We find that, under the particular circumstances here shown, giving consideration to the traffic involved, the physical characteristics of the track, and the type of equipment to be used, the changes proposed as set forth in the application will not decrease safety but may reasonably be said to promote safety. We further find that the petition should be granted. An appropriate order will be entered. 235 I. C. C. FOURTH SECTION APPLICATION NO. 174131 PETROLEUM PRODUCTS TO TENNESSEE RIVER POINTS Submitted May 5, 1939. Decided October 30, 1939 1. Authority granted, on conditions, to establish and maintain rates on gasoline, kerosene, and fuel oil in tank-car loads, from the New Orleans-Baton Rouge, La., group and Mobile, Ala., to Florence, Sheffield, Decatur, and Guntersville, Ala., and to Chattanooga, Tenn., without observing the long-and-short-haul provision of section 4 of the Interstate Commerce Act. 2. Finding in Petroleum and Its Products, 171 I. C. C. 286, 346, requiring the maintenance of rates from New Orleans-Baton Rouge group in relation to rates from southwestern origin groups modified to the extent necessary to permit the establishment of rates herein authorized without similar changes in rates from southwestern origin groups, other than El Dorado, Ark. Lawrence Chaffee, Edward D. Mohr, Ben F. Morris, Joseph P. Cook, F. W. Gwathmey, W. A. Northcutt, K. H. Lyola, J. I. Bonner, H. L. Hanes, W. R. Henry, D. Jordan, D. F. McCullough, and Z. P. Hawkins for applicants. T. E. Wood for Arkansas Corporation Commission. Arthur M. Stephens, Harry Graham, Sam B. Short, J. C. Beck, J. F. Yulkey, J. E. Monroe, Cleveland A. Newton, Theodore Brent, Henry Hauseman, Arlington C. Harvey, A. L. Christy, Charles Donley, R. G. Cobb, S. P. Gaillard, Jr., R. C. Astin, O. V. King, C. A. Talley, P. G. Anderson, R. L. Aycock, E. M. Hinkle, and C. C. Correll for various interested parties. BY THE COMMISSION: REPORT OF THE COMMISSION By fourth-section application No. 17413, as amended, carriers parties to Agent F. D. Miller's tariff I. C. C. No. 195 apply for authority to establish and maintain a rate of 21 cents on gasoline, including blended gasoline, kerosene, and fuel-oil distillate, in tank-car loads, from points in the New Orleans-Baton Rouge, La., group to Florence, Sheffield, Decatur, and Guntersville, Ala., and Chattanooga, Tenn., hereinafter called Tennessee River points, without observing the long-and-short-haul provision of section 4 of the Interstate Com 1 This report also embraces No. 17000, Part 4, Petroleum and Petroleum Products. Previous report, 171 I. C. C. 286. 216338-40-vol. 235-10 |