Report Template

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Report Template PREFACE This Draft Environmental Assessment for the Expansion of the Wallops Flight Facility Launch Range has been developed by URS Group, Inc. (URS) and EG&G Technical Services (EG&G) for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Goddard Space Flight Center’s (GSFC) Wallops Flight Facility (WFF) and the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport (MARS). URS/EG&G have prepared this report for the exclusive use of WFF in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347), the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations for implementing NEPA (40 CFR 1500- 1508), NASA’s regulations for implementing NEPA (14 CFR Subpart 1216.3), and the NASA Procedural Requirement (NPR) for implementing NEPA and Executive Order 12114 (NPR 8580.1) (NASA, 2001). Executive Summary DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT EXPANSION OF THE WALLOPS FLIGHT FACILITY LAUNCH RANGE NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER WALLOPS FLIGHT FACILITY WALLOPS ISLAND, VA 23337 Lead Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration Cooperating Agency: Federal Aviation Administration Office of Commercial Space Transportation Proposed Action: Expansion of the Wallops Flight Facility Launch Range on Wallops Island For Further Information: Joshua A. Bundick NEPA Program Manager Code 250.W Goddard Space Flight Center’s Wallops Flight Facility National Aeronautics and Space Administration Wallops Island, VA 23337 (757) 824-2319 Date: April 2009 ABSTRACT This Environmental Assessment addresses the proposed expansion of the launch range at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) Wallops Flight Facility (WFF), which is located on the Eastern Shore of Virginia. Under the Proposed Action, NASA and Mid Atlantic Regional Spaceport facilities would be upgraded to support medium large class suborbital and orbital ELV launch activities from WFF, including site improvements required to support launch operations (such as facility construction and infrastructure improvements), testing, fueling and processing operations, as well as launching of an additional 6 vehicles and associated spacecraft per year from Pad 0-A. The Proposed Action would have both adverse and beneficial impacts to environmental or socioeconomic resources, however most are minor and of short duration and none are considered 19-MAR-09\\ i Executive Summary significant. Adverse impacts would be mitigated to the greatest extent practicable to minimize the effects on resource areas. PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE ACTION The purpose for the Proposed Action is to enhance the respective NASA or MARS facilities such that they are able to accommodate a wider variety of new launch vehicles and payloads. Such an expansion is consistent with national space policies, including the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 and the 1994 National Space Transportation Policy, both of which contain the primary objective of keeping the United States at the forefront of space transportation technology. Additionally, WFF and MARS are located within the only NASA-owned launch range, and therefore they provide the only established location in the world solely under NASA control and focused on NASA’s schedule, budget, and mission objectives. ALTERNATIVE DESCRIPTIONS No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, the proposed launch vehicle activities would not be conducted at WFF, and NASA or MARS would not proceed with expansion activities to support medium large class Expendable Launch Vehicle (ELV) operations at Pad 0-A. Proposed Action The Proposed Action is to expand and upgrade NASA or MARS facilities to support medium large class suborbital and orbital ELV launch activities from WFF. Components of the Proposed Action include site improvements required to support launch operations, testing, fueling and processing operations, and launching of an additional 6 vehicles and associated spacecraft per year from Pad 0-A. NASA or MARS would make minor modifications to the boat dock on the north end of Wallops Island, such as installing additional fendering, sheet piling, and armor stone. Ongoing maintenance dredging would continue at the Wallops Island Boat Dock to ensure a navigable channel and docking area. NASA would construct a dedicated payload fueling facility (PFF) as well as a facility dedicated to payload processing (PPF) and storage that would be located on the north end of Wallops Island. The new PFF would include a high bay, employee dress-out room, several equipment rooms, and a loading dock. Payloads would be handled by bridge cranes located within the high bay area. A water storage tank (with a maximum capacity of 1,135,625 liters [300,000 gallons]), pumps, and a deluge water retention basin would be constructed adjacent to the building to satisfy fire suppression requirements. The footprint of the PFF would occupy approximately 465 square meters (5,000 square feet). The PPF would be an approximately 1,115 square meter (12,000 square foot) facility dedicated to payload processing and storage on north Wallops Island approximately 183 meters (600 feet) east of the proposed PFF. Payloads would be transported from offsite locations to this facility prior to fueling for initial assembly, inspection, cleaning, and testing. Following fueling, the fueled payload could be transported back for final assembly prior to being integrated into the launch vehicle. Following final payload processing, the payload would be transported south to the MARS Horizontal Integration Facility (HIF) for integration into the launch vehicle. 19-MAR-09\\ ii Executive Summary Transportation improvements would be made by NASA or MARS as necessary to transport cargo from the existing boat dock on the north end of Wallops Island to the proposed PFF or PPF, from the PPF or PFF to the HIF, and from the HIF to the launch pad. Infrastructure improvements include construction of new roads and minor upgrades to existing roads. New road construction could be up to 664 linear meters (2,178 feet) of 6 meter (20 foot) wide road, adding approximately 0.4 hectare (1 acre) of additional asphalt pavement. The widening or straightening of existing roads could add up to an additional 0.2 hectare (0.5 acre) of pavement. A new launch complex including a pad access ramp, launch pad, and deluge system would be constructed in approximately the same location as the existing Pad 0-A. The combined improvements would result in an overall pad complex footprint of approximately 1.3 hectares (3.3 acres). New construction would add approximately 1 hectare (2.5 acres) of impervious surface, which would consist primarily of concrete pavement. Because demolition of portions of the launch pad and the entire gantry at Pad 0-A have been completed, only minor additional demolition activities would occur. Several existing facilities could undergo minor interior modifications to support the launch of commercial medium large class orbital rockets; these facilities would include the blockhouses (launch control buildings), communication support systems, radar, and antennae improvements. In addition to constructing a dedicated PFF, NASA may make minor interior modifications to building V-55 so that it could also serve as a temporary PFF. Modifications could include the installation of explosion-proof electrical outlets, ventilation system changes, and installing vapor monitoring devices. Fueling operations would generally be the same as in the PFF, however use of this building for fueling would be irregular and only if the primary PFF was not available. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Potential environmental impacts resulting from the Proposed Action are summarized below. No environmental impacts are anticipated as a result of the No Action Alternative. Topography and Drainage Under the Proposed Action, land grading, excavation, and construction activities for the construction of a PPF, PFF, roads, and Pad 0-A would cause land disturbances. Construction of these facilities would also result in increased impervious surfaces on Wallops Island. Because Wallops Island is essentially flat, the site improvement activities would not substantially alter topography; therefore, changes to natural drainage patterns would be minor. Although wetlands would be filled for construction of the launch ramp and PPF, only minor changes in drainage patterns would occur as a result. Permanent stormwater control measures would be implemented in compliance with Virginia Stormwater Management Laws and Regulations to provide adequate drainage for the new building sites, and to mitigate the effects of increased runoff from impervious surfaces. Therefore, with permanent stormwater measures incorporated into the site design, no significant impacts to topography and drainage are anticipated. Geology and Soils Under the Proposed Action, construction activities, including grading, clearing, filling, and excavation, would result in disturbance of the ground surface and would have the potential to cause soil erosion. NASA or MARS would minimize adverse impacts to soils by acquiring 19-MAR-09\\ iii Executive Summary VSMP permits as necessary, and developing and implementing site-specific SWPPPs and E&SC Plans prior to ground disturbing activities. NASA or MARS would revegetate bare soils and incorporate landscaping measures in areas to be left as pervious surfaces (not paved) when construction is complete. Other potential impacts to soils include spills or leaks of pollutants from vehicles
Recommended publications
  • Unique Uses for Emissions Inventories in Maryland
    Unique Uses for Emissions Inventories in Maryland Roger Thunell, Chief AQ Planning Division, MDE – EPA EI Conference – August 2017 Welcome to Baltimore • During Your Visit • Crab Cakes • Microbrews • Burger Cookies • Camden Yards Focus on Three Topics • Use of CAMD data as a Regulatory Mechanism • Locomotive Survey • Temporal Improvements for Small EGUs in Modeling Inventories 3 CAMD Data as a Regulatory Mechanism • Focused on coal-fired EGUs with SCR or SNCR post-combustion controls • Baseline Starting Point - The year with the lowest recorded NOX emission rate for an entire ozone season • Using Daily CAMD data, compute the 123 30-day rolling averages for that ozone season. – (Ozone Season = 153 Days) 4 CAMD Data as a Regulatory Mechanism • Selected the highest maximum 30-day rolling average from this 123 value dataset. • This max 30-day rolling NOX emission rate represents an “achievable” emission rate for the unit – Some have referred to this as “optimization” of the unit. We would disagree and refer to it as “achievable” – Since the unit has demonstrated that it is capable of hitting this rate over an entire ozone season 5 CAMD Data as a Regulatory Mechanism • What can you do with this unit-specific “achievable” NOX rate – Design/Set permissible NOX rates per Unit • MDE has done this by setting “Indicator Rates” within our latest NOX regulation for coal-fired EGUs • The “Indicator Rates” are not identical to the “Achievable” rates but they are similar • Requires EGU owner/operators to explain why they were unable to meet the “Indicator
    [Show full text]
  • 2 Million Square Feet of Distribution Center Space
    2 MILLION SQUARE FEET P OF DISTRIBUTION CENTER SPACE ORT S READY FOR YOU TORAGE & T RAN SP ORTATION We Offer Our Clients: Foreign Trade Zone, Vendor Compliance Management, Inventory Control, Vendor Managed Inventory, Order Fulfillment and Product Modification. Now what can we do for your business? Givens.com 67 PORT STORAGE & TRANSPORTATION Cold Storage ................................................................. 67 Warehousing ................................................................. 68 Air Services and Airports ...................................................... 77 Motor Carrier Services ........................................................ 82 Passenger Cruise Service ...................................................... 82 Railroad Services ............................................................. 83 Towing and Barge Services .................................................... 87 ORTATION SP RAN T & Beyond Distribution TORAGE S CrossGlobe works in partnership with the Port of Virginia, which handles ORT containerized cargo and break-bulk [notably project cargo, machinery, P pulp and paper, and steel). We provide drayage and local intermodal transportation services to and from all the Port's marine terminal facilities, rail yards, and customs exam stations. CrossGlobe is a premier logistics service provider. We specialize in transportation and warehousing solutions for the mid-Atlantic region. www.logistec.com . · ·I PORT StoragE & Transportation StoragE/WAREHOUSE COLD STORAGE n LINEagE Logistics Lineage Logistics
    [Show full text]
  • Project Argonaut: a Proposal for a Mars Sample Return Mission ∗
    Project Argonaut: A Proposal for a Mars Sample Return Mission ∗ Archit Arora, Courtney Best, Liam Durbin, Robert Groome, Duncan Harris, Henry Heim, Thomas Keane, Eric Miller, Annie Ping, and Alexandra Wyatt Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, 47906, United States With increasing interest in colonizing Mars, multiple missions have been aimed at re- trieving more information about the red planet, such as the recent Mars Science Laboratory mission. The main focus of this interest is in determining whether Mars is capable of sup- porting life, which requires an analysis of the soil. The next major step in Martian science is a Mars Sample Return mission, which would allow scientists to conduct complicated and in-depth tests on the soil that are not possible with robotic instruments sent to Mars. This paper explores Project Argonaut, a mission proposal to retrieve a sample from the surface of Mars and bring it back to Earth. The name Argonaut reflects the legend of the band of heroes who sailed on the Argo to fetch the golden fleece from the field of Ares, as the mis- sion requires a journey to Mars in order to retrieve the prized sample. Project Argonaut integrates existing research with innovative concepts to propose a plausible solution to the key issues associated with the mission. ∗Copyright c 2016 by Archit Arora, Courtney Best, Liam Durbin, Robert Groome, Duncan Harris, Henry Heim, Thomas Keane, Eric Miller, Annie Ping, and Alexandra Wyatt. Published by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc, with permission. 1 of 51 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Contents I Introduction 6 A Mission Objective .
    [Show full text]
  • Maryland State Rail Plan
    Larry Hogan, Governor Boyd Rutherford, Lt. Governor Pete K. Rahn, Secretary of Transportation April 2015 www.camsys.com Maryland Statewide Rail Plan prepared for Maryland Department of Transportation prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 4800 Hampden Lane, Suite 800 Bethesda, MD 20814 date April 2015 Maryland Statewide Rail Plan Table of Contents 1.0 About the Plan ..................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Plan Development ...................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Plan Organization ....................................................................................... 1-3 1.3 Purpose of the Rail Plan ............................................................................. 1-3 1.4 Federal Compliance .................................................................................... 1-4 2.0 Maryland’s Rail History .................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Amtrak and Conrail ................................................................................... 2-3 2.2 MARC ........................................................................................................... 2-3 2.3 Short Lines ................................................................................................... 2-4 2.4 Summary ...................................................................................................... 2-5 3.0 Mission, Vision, and Goals ..............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Us Rocket Propulsion Industrial Base Assessment
    OMB Control Number: ####-#### Expiration Date: 12/31/2017 U.S. ROCKET PROPULSION INDUSTRIAL BASE ASSESSMENT: Propulsion Survey SCOPE OF ASSESSMENT The U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), Office of Technology Evaluation (OTE), in coordination with the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) co-chaired Joint Army, Navy, NASA, Air Force Interagency Propulsion Committee (JANNAF) is conducting a survey and assessment of organizations responsible for the research, design, engineering, development, manufacture, testing, and integration of rocket propulsion-related products, components, and services. The principal goal of this assessment is to gain an understanding of the intricate supply chain network supporting the development, production, and sustainment of products and services across both the U.S. Government and commercial propulsion-related sectors. With the data collected in this survey, U.S. Government agencies will be better informed and able to develop targeted planning, acquisition, and investment strategies to ensure industry's ability to support critical defense and civil missions and programs. RESPONSE TO THIS SURVEY IS REQUIRED BY LAW A response to this survey is required by law (50 U.S.C. App. Sec. 2155). Failure to respond can result in a maximum fine of $10,000, imprisonment of up to one year, or both. Information furnished herewith is deemed confidential and will not be published or disclosed except in accordance with Section 705 of the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended (50 U.S.C App. Sec. 2155). Section 705 prohibits the publication or disclosure of this information unless the President determines that its withholding is contrary to the national defense.
    [Show full text]
  • Statewide Shortline Railroad Improvement Plan Technical
    Statewide Shortline Railroad Improvement Plan Technical Memorandum November 2, 2009 Table of Contents A. Introduction......................................................................................................... 3 B. Existing Shortline Railroads in the Commonwealth........................................ 4 Bay Coast Railroad (BCR) ................................................................................. 4 Buckingham Branch Railroad (BB) .................................................................... 5 Chesapeake and Albemarle Railroad (CA) ........................................................ 6 Chesapeake Western Railroad (CHW) .............................................................. 6 Commonwealth Railway, Inc. (CWRY) .............................................................. 7 Deepwater Terminal Railroad (DWT) ................................................................. 7 Shenandoah Valley Railroad (SV) ..................................................................... 8 C. Benchmark Rail Grant Programs with Other State’s Programs ................... 12 New Jersey ...................................................................................................... 13 North Carolina.................................................................................................. 13 Ohio ................................................................................................................. 14 Wisconsin .......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • VIRGINIA STATE RAIL PLAN Executive Summary
    2017 VIRGINIA STATE RAIL PLAN Executive Summary Enclosure 9 Virginia’s rail network is a valuable asset that drives the economy, reduces congestion, improves safety, and saves taxpayer money. Continued investment in rail infrastructure will ensure the mission and vision of the Commonwealth’s transportation network is achieved. CONTENTS 02 BENEFITS OF RAIL IN VIRGINIA 07 FUTURE OF RAIL IN VIRGINIA 09 VIRGINIA’S VISION FOR THE FUTURE 15 PRIORITY IMPROVEMENTS AND INVESTMENTS Enclosure 9 BENEFITS OF RAIL IN VIRGINIA VIRGINIA’S RAIL SYSTEMS Virginia’s rail network is state. The Commonwealth significant state investments a valuable asset for the recognizes the privately have leveraged private and Commonwealth. It provides owned rail network as part of a federal funds to improve an efficient means of moving multimodal system with public freight and passenger rail freight and passengers both benefits and growing economic transportation and support the within and through the impacts. Since the 2000s, overall transportation system. TRAVEL SAFE 18 LIVES SAVED AND 3,000 CRASHES AVOIDED EACH YEAR Shipping by rail avoids Passenger travel by rail avoids about about 1.7 billion miles 271 million miles of personal of truck travel in Virginia driving in Virginia BREATHE EASIER 3M TONS OF CO2 EMISSIONS AVOIDED (6.4% OF TOTAL IN VIRGINIA PER YEAR) CO2 On average, railroads Moving freight by2 rail instead The total estimated level are four times more fuel of truck generates 75% less of rail service in Virginia in efficient than trucks greenhouse gas emissions 2015 was about 25 billion ton-miles SAVE MONEY $123M PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE SAVINGS (6% OF ANNUAL VDOT MAINTENANCE BUDGET) 8 = 240 100 = 340 PASSENGER PASSENGER FREIGHT SEMI-TRAILER RAILCARS VEHICLES RAILCARS TRUCKS GROW THE ECONOMY RAIL SERVICES DRIVE 6% OF VIRGINIA’S TOTAL ECONOMY.
    [Show full text]
  • FEDERAL REGISTER INDEX January–October 2019
    FEDERAL REGISTER INDEX January–October 2019 Surface Transportation Board Canton Railroad Co. in Baltimore City, MD – 4601 ( Feb 15) RULES Acquisition and Operation Exemption: Arkansas-Oklahoma Railroad Co.; State of Oklahoma – 50095 ( Sep 24) Payment, Filing, and Service Procedures – 12940 ( Apr 3) Cando Rail Services, Inc., Georgia-Pacific Consumer Operations, Regulations Governing Fees for Services Performed in Connection with LLC – 37945 ( Aug 2) Licensing and Related Services - 2019 Update – 38579 ( Aug 7) Herrin Railroad, LLC; City of Herrin, IL – 15027 ( Apr 12) Water Carrier Tariff Filing Procedures – 20292 ( May 9) San Francisco Bay Railway, LLC; San Francisco Bay Railroad, Inc. – 22222 PROPOSED RULES ( May 16) Demurrage Billing Requirements – 55114 ( Oct 15) Soo Line Railroad Co. d/b/a Canadian Pacific Railway; BNSF Railway Exclusion of Demurrage Regulation from Certain Class Exemptions – 55109 Co. – 35706 ( Jul 24) ( Oct 15) WRL, LLC d/b/a Rainier Rail; City of Tacoma, Department of Public Works Final Offer Rate Review; Expanding Access to Rate Relief – 48872 ( Sep 17) d/b/a Tacoma Rail – 49564 ( Sep 20) Limiting Extensions of Trail Use Negotiating Periods; Rails-To-Trails Youngstown & Southeastern Railroad Co.; Mule Sidetracks, LLC – 45820 Conservancy – 26387 ( Jun 6) ( Aug 30) Market Dominance Streamlined Approach – 48882 ( Sep 17) Acquisition Exemption: Methodology for Determining the Railroad Industry's Cost of Akron Barberton Cluster Railway Co., Board of Portage County Capital – 55897 ( Oct 18) Commissioners – 12013 ( Mar 29) Petition for Rulemaking: Allegheny Valley Railroad Co.; Lines of CSX Transportation, Inc. – 18629 Railroad Performance Data Reporting – 53375 ( Oct 7) ( May 1) Petition for Rulemaking; Railroad Performance Data Reporting – 14907 Athens Transportation Partners, LLC; The Athens Line, LLC – 31976 ( Jul 3) ( Apr 12) Atlanta BeltLine, Inc.; Norfolk Southern Railway Co.
    [Show full text]
  • Unmanned Aerial & Space Systems & Launch Industry Feasibility Study
    Unmanned Aerial & Space Systems & Launch Industry Feasibility Study July 2013 For the Tri County Council Maryland Department of Business and Economic Development Prepared by: LJT & Associates 9881 Broken Land Parkway, Suite 400 Columbia, Maryland 21046 Exceeding Expectations through Innovation and Quality Tri County Council Feasibility Study LJT & Associates, Inc. 1 Executive Summary ................................................................................. 5 2 Background ............................................................................................. 9 3 Commercial Space Launch .................................................................... 11 3.1 Provide Critical Context........................................................................... 11 3.2 Identify Competing Commercial Spaceflight Activity Locations .................. 18 3.3 Identify Wallops’ Competitive Advantages ................................................ 25 3.4 Identify Planned Launches ....................................................................... 33 3.5 Specific ELV-Related Growth Opportunities ............................................. 34 4 Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) Industry ............................................ 54 4.1 Provide Critical Context........................................................................... 54 4.2 Identify Other UAV/UAS Competing Locations ......................................... 59 4.3 Prospective Test and Evaluation Clients and Opportunities .......................... 65 4.4 Specific
    [Show full text]
  • State Rail Plan FINAL
    Delaware State Rail Plan FINAL Acknowledgements DelDOT would like to recognize the following individuals for their contributions as a Stakeholder in this Plan’s development: Name Company Jeffrey Gerlach AMTRAK David Blankenship City of Wilmington Sharon Daboin CSX Jeffrey Stone Delaware Office of Economic Development Roberta Geier Delaware Department of Transportation Gregory Oliver Delaware Department of Transportation Dwayne Day Delaware Department of Transportation David Campbell Delaware Transit Corporation Kennard Potts Delaware Transit Corporation Albert Loyola Delaware Transit Corporation Cathy Smith Delaware Transit Corporation James Galvin Dover Kent MPO Daniel Wolfensberger Kent Economic Partnership, Inc. Jeannie Fazio Maryland Department of Transportation Debbie Bowden Maryland Department of Transportation Nicole Katsikides Maryland Department of Transportation Karl Kalbacher New Castle County Rick Crawford Norfolk Southern Herb Inden Office of State Planning Coordination David Edgell Office of State Planning Coordination Bryan Hall Office of State Planning Coordination Julie Wheatley Sussex County Economic Development Office Byron Comati SEPTA Harry Garforth SEPTA Hal Godwin Sussex County Dave Gula WILMAPCO Daniel Blevins WILMAPCO Foster Nichols Parsons Brinckerhoff John Baesch Parsons Brinckerhoff Joseph Gurskis Parsons Brinckerhoff Anna Lynn Smith Parsons Brinckerhoff Stephanie Jackson Parsons Brinckerhoff Len Usvyat Parsons Brinckerhoff Stephen Bassford S.L. Bassford and Associates Delaware State Rail Plan FINAL Table of
    [Show full text]
  • In This Issue
    Worldwide Satellite Magazine January 2012 SatMagazine in this issue Small Satellites: Changing The Size Of The Industry C-COM Satellite Systems Comtech EF Data Globecomm Chris Forrester, Alan Gottlieb, Jos Heyman + Bert Sadtler Grass Valley Harris CapRock Hermes Datacomms Intelsat Skybox Imaging Space Foundation T-VIPS Thrane & Thrane and much, much more... SatMagazine — January 2012 — Vol. 4, #10 Publishing Operations Payload Silvano Payne, Publisher + Writer A Case In Point: How to Run A Tight Ship Hartley G. Lesser, Editorial Director Pattie Waldt, Executive Editor PACC Ship Managers Pte. Ltd. knows how to run a Jill Durfee, Sales Dir., Editorial Assistant tight ship. They do it for their parent company, Pacific Donald McGee, Production Manager Carriers Limited (PCL), a Singapore-based company that Simon Payne, Development Manager is a leading owner and operator of dry bulk carriers and Chris Forrester, European Editor product tankers. P.36 Alan Gottlieb, Global Maritime Editor Bob Gough, Asia-Pacific Editor Richard Dutchik, Contributing Editor Jos Heyman, Contributing Editor Executive Spotlight: Dan Berkenstock, EVP, Skybox Imaging Dan Makinster, Technical Advisor Bert Sadtler, Contributing Editor Dan Berkenstock is an entrepreneur and engineer from Chicago, Illinois, with a healthy respect for the risks and rewards of doing business in space. He is also fascinated by scalab. P.48 Executive Spotlight: Janne Morstøl, COO, T-VIPS AS Authors Matt Allard Janne T. Morstøl is COO of T-VIPS AS, a technology Mark Dale company providing professional video transport solutions. Katy Harrison She is one of the founders of the company, and manages Casper Jensen key functions within the company.
    [Show full text]
  • Part 225 Reporting Railroads.Pdf
    Part 225 Reporting Railroads Total Records: 771 Report Created on: 4/30/2019 Notes: A railroad may be represented in multiple regions of the country. Region Railroad Reporting Railroad Name Code 1 ADCX Adirondack Scenic Railroad 1 APRR Albany Port Railroad 1 ARA Arcade & Attica Railroad Corporation 1 ARDJ American Rail Dispatching Center 1 BCRY BERKSHIRE SCENIC RAILWAY MUSEUM, INC. 1 BDRV BELVEDERE & DELAWARE RIVER RWY 1 BHR Brookhaven Rail, LLC 1 BHX B&H Rail Corp 1 BKRR Batten Kill Railroad 1 BSOR BUFFALO SOUTHERN RAILROAD, INC. 1 CDOT Connecticut Department Of Transportation 1 CLP Clarendon & Pittsford Railroad Company 1 CMQX CENTRAL MAINE & QUEBEC RAILWAY 1 CMRR Catskill Mountain Railroad 1 CMSX Cape May Seashore Lines, Inc. 1 CNYK Central New York Railroad Corporation 1 COGN COGN Railroad 1 CONW Conway Scenic Railroad 1 CRSH Consolidated Rail Corporation 1 CSO CONNECTICUT SOUTHERN RAILROAD INC. 1 DESR Downeast Scenic Railroad 1 DL DELAWARE LACKAWANNA RAILROAD 1 DLWR DEPEW, LANCASTER & WESTERN RAILROAD COMPANY, INC. 1 DRRV Dover and Rockaway River Railroad 1 DURR Delaware & Ulster Rail Ride 1 EBSR East Brookfield & Spencer Railroad LLC 1 EJR East Jersey Railroad & Terminal Company 1 EMRY EASTERN MAINE RAILROAD COMPANY 1 FGLK Finger Lakes Railway Corporation 1 FRR FALLS ROAD RAILROAD COMPANY, INC. 1 FRVT Fore River Transportation Corporation 1 GMRC Green Mountain Railroad Corporation 1 GRS Pan Am Railways/Guilford System 1 GU GRAFTON & UPTON RAILROAD COMPANY 1 HRRC HOUSATONIC RAILROAD COMPANY, INC. 1 LAL Livonia, Avon & Lakeville Railroad Corporation 1 LBR Lowville & Beaver River Railroad Company 1 LI Long Island Rail Road 1 LRWY LEHIGH RAILWAY 1 LSX LUZERNE & SUSQUEHANNA RAILWAY 1 MBRX Milford-Bennington Railroad Company 1 MBTA Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority 1 MCER MASSACHUSETTS CENTRAL RAILROAD CORPORATION 1 MCRL MASSACHUSETTS COASTAL RAILROAD, LLC 1 ME MORRISTOWN & ERIE RAILWAY, INC.
    [Show full text]