From: schumann@msus1.msus.edu
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Re: Restroom Closings on Amtrak (Was: My Amtrak Vacation)
Date: 18 Aug 92 18:41:41 GMT
Organization: Minnesota State University System

In article <92231.101827C31801IE@wuvmd.wustl.edu>,
Derek Morgan <C31801IE@WUVMD> writes:
> I believe that Amtrak has the installation of holding tanks as a
> high priority for its fleet overhaul. As cars go in, they are being
> retrofitted. This also means that slumbercoaches will disappear,
> since there's no way to add holding tanks for 22 (?) rooms. 

What to do, if anything, about disposing of toilet wastes has been a
burning topic to the railroads in general and Amtrak in particular. 

Some environmentalists have complained about the common railroad
practice (which includes Amtrak) of simply dumping untreated wastes
directly onto the roadbed.  Not only the pollution itself, but also 
possible disease transmission have been pointed out.  (Traditional 
railroad equipment has simply dumped this waste directly onto the 
roadbed -- hence the common signs not to flush while the train is 
standing in the station!)

The railroads (including Amtrak) have tended to downplay the
importance of this source of pollution.  Amtrak has pointed out the
hugh expense in converting their fleet to treatment or holding tanks
and their lack of money for capital improvements.  In essence, the 
argument has been that the costs of reducing this source of pollution 
are not worth the benefits, given the "small" amount of pollution 
involved.  (Of course, the people making these cost/benefit arguments 
probably haven't had toilet waste dumped onto them. :-) )

(Personal aside:  I remember as a kid walking along the Grand Trunk 
Western tracks through the south side of Chicago in the winter and 
trying to avoid the frozen waste that littered the roadbed.  The 
frozen urine was usually in the form of small yellow "pebbles."  
Occasionally, a larger "icicle" would have broken off from the
underside of the car.  This winter experience reminded me that the 
passenger trains produced the same wastes in the summer, but it was 
merely less noticeable in the summer when the liquid wastes would be
quickly absorbed into the roadbed.) 

I seem to recall that at least some of the environmental laws deal
with these issues.  Again, my memory on this issue is rather fuzzy,
but I seem to recall that at least one recent environmental law either
exempted Amtrak or granted them an extension to come into compliance.
But, if my memory is correct, there is a deadline for dealing with 
this.  I believe Amtrak has experimented with several different 
systems.

Anyone with more complete information of this?  I believe I saw 
references to this subject in the newsletter (I forget its name) put 
out by the National Association of Railroad Passengers.  If there are 
any members of NARP on the net who save their back issues, they might 
be able to find more complete information.  I believe the story(ies) 
were published in the last year or so, so they wouldn't have to search 
back too far.  I speculate (since I don't read it) that the magazine 
_Private Varnish_ also has had articles dealing with this issue from 
the perspective of private car owners.  I do know I've seen ads for 
various systems in the professional railroad press.  So there is more 
information out there for anyone interested enough to make the time to 
dig for it.
--
   Paul L. Schumann, Ph.D.           |  VAX:  IN%"schumann@MSUS1.MSUS.EDU"
   Professor of Management           |  Office Phone:       (507) 389-5349
   Mankato State University          |  Secretary's Phone:  (507) 389-2966
   Mankato, MN   56002-8400          |  Fax Number:         (507) 389-5497