[PRCo] Re: Pa PUC Toilet Laws

[Schneider Fred]

And Fred realized it just as he pressed send ...


On Feb 22, 2010, at 1:29 PM, trams2 at comcast.net wrote:

> EHL got the first email.  But he's not where he can do anything  
> about it at the moment.  I suspect Dwight is aware of this!
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Schneider Fred" <fwschneider at comcast.net>
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 12:06:24 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada  
> Eastern
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Pa PUC Toilet Laws
> Send an e-mail to EHL.
>
>
> On Feb 22, 2010, at 12:13 AM, Dwight Long wrote:
>
>> List
>>
>> Does anyone on this list recall, or have copy of, Pa. PUC
>> regulations affecting interurban railways with regard to provision
>> of toilet facilities?  I seem to recall that they were related
>> either to distance, or time in transit, or both.
>>
>> In particular, I am interested in how they applied, or did not, to
>> the PRC interurban lines. Older interurban cars had toilets, PCC
>> interurbans did not.
>>
>> As a subset of this enquiry, I would also like to know how the
>> Railways dealt with access to the toilet when the cars were
>> operating in city streets.  With two man operation this would not
>> be a real problem, but when they went to one man operation, it
>> seems unlikely that the operator would stop the car and lock the
>> door before entering onto the street in the many towns where the
>> track was in the street, then stop again at the end of the street
>> trackage and unlock the door.  Did they just rely on signs saying
>> not to flush when on city streets?  Obviously these were DOT
>> toilets--no Microphors in those days!
>>
>> Any thoughts or facts on these questions will be appreciated!
>>
>> Dwight Long
>>
>>
>
>
>
>