DOCSLIB.ORG

DB Netz AG Network Statement 2020 Valid from 15.12.2019

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
DB Netz AG Network Statement 2020 Valid from 15.12.2019 DB Netz AG Network Statement 2020 valid from 15.12.2019 DB Netz AG Headquarters I.NMN Version control Date Modification 09.12.2018 Amendment of Network Statement 2019 as at 09. December 2018 (Publication of the Network Statement 2020) 06.12.2018 Addition of detailed information concerning funding of rail freight transport by way of pro-rated financing of the approves track access charges 13.02.2019 Amendment of Network Statement 2020 due to decision of the Fed- eral Network Agency (BNetzA) to the application of DB Netz AG for approval of the charging principles and charges for the provision of the minimum access package with effect from 15. December 2019 (TPS 2020) 21.06.2019 Amendment Section 6.3.3.1 of the Network Statement 08.08.2019 Amendment Section 6.5 of the Network Statement “Incentive system to enhance performance capability” 23.10.2019 Addition of detailed information concerning the implementation of terms of use Click&Ride Printed by DB Netz AG Editors Principles of Network Access/Regulation (I.NMN) Theodor-Heuss-Allee 7 60486 Frankfurt am Main Picture credits Front page photo: Urheber: Volker Emersleben Copyright: Deutsche Bahn AG Network Statement 2020, editorial status 23.10.2019 2 Notes 1. Pending court proceedings regarding prohibitions of individual clauses The following clauses may still be modified due to court proceedings: Section 2.9.8.3 The Federal Network Agency (BNetzA) rejected the intended modification in section 2.9.8.3 sentence 2 lit. c) of the Network Statement 2018 with its decision of 18 November 2016 – BK 10-16-0009_Z, namely the modification to use the word “material” in relation to contractual duties. The rejection also covers the addition in brackets, which includes an abstract legal definition of the material contractual duty. If the rejection should be qualified as unlawful as a result of court proceedings, section 2.9.8.3 sentence 2 lit. c) would read as follows: „only for damage resulting from a non-inconsiderable infringement of a material contrac- tual duty (an obligation whose satisfaction is what makes the proper performance of the contract even possible and the observance thereof is something on which the contractual partner regularly relies and is able to rely); in this case, however, liability is limited to compensating the damage that is foreseeable and which typically occurs.” Section 2.9.8.4 The Federal Network Agency rejected the intended modification in section 2.9.8.4 sub- section 1 of the Network Statement 2018 with its decision of 18 November 2016 – BK 10- 16-0009_Z. If the rejection should be qualified as unlawful as a result of court proceedings, section 2.9.8.4 would read as follows: „2.9.8.4 Third Party Liability Act, attribution of fault, settlement between joint and several debtors In any event, DB Netz AG’s liability for damage to property under section 1 of the Third Party Liability Act relies that DB Netz AG be at fault. This does not apply to any liability for personal damage of the Applicant or the involved RU. The limitations on liability under section 2.9.8.3 also apply in the event of breaches of duty by or for the benefit of persons for whose fault DB Netz AG or the Applicant or the involved RU is responsible under statutory provisions. If DB Netz AG and the Applicant or the involved RU are liable as joint and several debtors for any damage to a third party, the limitations on liability under section 2.9.8.3 of the Network Statement and this section 2.9.8.4 will not apply in relation to the settlement between joint and several debtors in the internal relationship between DB Netz AG and the Applicant or the involved RU.“ Section 4.2.5.1 With its decision of 22 September 2015 – file no.: 10.030-F-15-404, the Federal Network Agency objected to the intended deletion of the following wording in section 4.2.5.1: “In the event of the technical failure of PCS, RNE offers the option of submitting train path applications for PaPs by means of sending the current RNE application form to the contact named in section 1.9.2.“ Network Statement 2020, editorial status 23.10.2019 3 Section 4.2.1.17 The Federal Network Agency (BNetzA) rejected the intended new issues in section 4.2.1.17 subsection 2 of the Network Statement with its decision of 13 November 2015 – BK 18-0201_Z. The rejection was linked with the requirement, to include in section 4.2.1.17 a wording expressing the following: The involved parties have to include at least those requests for capacity in the examination in the sense of Art. 56 (3) ERegG which have been placed not falling within the annual timetable during the last two annual time- table periods. The above requirement was to be implemented by the publication of the final Network Statements according to Art. 19 (6) 1 ERegG at the latest. If the rejection should be qualified as unlawful as a result of court proceedings, section 4.2.1.17 subsection 2 would read as follows: „4.2.1.17 Check for provisions of surplus capacity according to Article 56 (3) ERegG DB Netz AG will ensure that path requests for ad-hoc capacity which are submitted after finalisation of the annual timetable may also be answered. For this reason, DB Netz AG will check if the provision of surplus capacity is necessary. This check includes a review of two past timetable periods, taking into account changes of the annual timetable, the rate of path cancellations and the number of path rejections. Furthermore, prior to the start of timetable construction for the upcoming timetable period, any findings resulting from customer support of the regional sales service or from feasi- bility studies which may concern the structure of the timetable or the preparation of new rail services will be taken into consideration.” Annex 4.3.2 section 2 sentence 2 The Federal Network Agency (BNetzA) rejected the intended new issues of the Network Statement in Annex 4.3.2 section 2 sentence 2 (Usage regulations for congested railway lines Köln Hbf – Köln-Mülheim (routes 2633, 2639, 2650, 2652, 2658 und 2659)) with its decision of 13 November 2015 – BK 18-0201_Z. The rejection was linked with the re- quirement, to replace in the first sentence of section 2 the wording “verpflichtet” (obliged) with the wording “bittet” (requests). The above requirement was to be implemented by the publication of the final Network Statements according to Art. 19 (6) 1 ERegG at the latest. If the rejection should be qualified as unlawful as a result of court proceedings, section 2 of Annex 4.3.2 of the Network Statement (Usage regulations for congested railway lines Köln Hbf – Köln-Mülheim (routes 2633, 2639, 2650, 2652, 2658 und 2659)) would read as follows: „DB Netz obliges RUs to submit train paths requests for the annual timetable for all feeder and outflow empty runs for all passenger trains originating and terminating in Köln Hbf (Cologne main station). Path requests that do not meet these requirements are treated as implausible. In case of empty runs, which must be carried out as shunting movements, the terminating operating control point for shunting movements of terminating trains and the originating operating control point for shunting movements of originating trains shall be named in the application.” Operating Regulation 402.0202, section 2, numbers (3) to (5) The Federal Network Agency rejected the intended modification of section 2, numbers (3) to (5) of operating regulation 402.0202 with its decision of 13 November 2015 – BK-18- 0201 Z. Network Statement 2020, editorial status 23.10.2019 4 If the rejection should be qualified as unlawful as a result of court proceedings, section 2, numbers (3) to (5) of operating regulation 402.0202 have to be changed. Operating Regulation 402.0203, section 6, number (4) to (5), fourth and fifth indent The Federal Network Agency rejected the intended modification of section 6, number (4), fourth and fifth indent of operating regulation 402.0202 with its decision of 13 November 2015 – BK-18-0201 Z. If the rejection should be qualified as unlawful as a result of court proceedings, section 6, number (4), fourth and fifth indent of operating regulation 402.0203 have to be changed. 2. General The charging principles and charges published here for the working timetable period 2019 / 2020 concerning the minimum access package and being subject to the approval of the Federal Net- work Agency pursuant to section 45 ERegG have been approved with the decision of 13 February 2019. Appeals have been lodged against the decision. The charging principles and charges for the working timetable period 2019 / 2020 may change as a result of the appeal procedure. The charges indicated in the final and binding decision will be finally valid. Network Statement 2020, editorial status 23.10.2019 5 Contents Version control 2 Notes 3 List of Annexes 11 1 GENERAL INFORMATION 13 Introduction 13 Objective Fehler! Textmarke nicht definiert. Legal basis 13 Legal framework of the Network Statement 13 Scope 13 Liability 14 Appeals Procedure 14 Arbitration Agreement 14 Application of GTC of the Applicant 14 Formal requirements 15 Structure of the Network Statement 15 Term of and amendments to the Network Statement 15 Publication and opportunity to respond 15 Contacts at DB Netz AG 15 Contacts of international RIUs 16 Other contacts 16 Rail freight corridors 16 Corridor One Stop Shop 17 Corridor OSS for the rail freight corridors 18 Information on the conditions of use of the Rail Freight Corridors 18 RNE and international cooperation between DB Netz AG and other RIUs 19 One Stop Shop 19 Other RNE services
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Newsletter No. 41
    Page 1 SARPA Newsletter 41 SARPA Newsletter 41 Page 1 Shrewsbury Newsletter Aberystwyth Rail No. 41 Passengers’ November 2007 Association This year saw the fortieth anniversary of the last Cambrian Coast Express to and from Paddington, on the 4th March 1967. The down train pauses at Newtown. Photo: Robert Knight. Chairman’s Message..................................................................................................2 News in Brief...............................................................................................................3 Rail Users urge Assembly Members to be positive.....................................................7 Tramforward - launch of a light railway champion.........................................................7 Passenger focus.........................................................................................................8 From the House of Commons......................................................................................9 Rail rambles................................................................................................................9 Shrewsbury Railway Heritage Trust............................................................................9 Carting passengers around the countryside and other statistical revelations.............10 From the AGM...........................................................................................................10 From Arriva’s website................................................................................................11
    [Show full text]
  • Signalling on the High-Speed Railway Amsterdam–Antwerp
    Computers in Railways XI 243 Towards interoperability on Northwest European railway corridors: signalling on the high-speed railway Amsterdam–Antwerp J. H. Baggen, J. M. Vleugel & J. A. A. M. Stoop Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands Abstract The high-speed railway Amsterdam (The Netherlands)–Antwerp (Belgium) is nearly completed. As part of a TEN-T priority project it will connect to major metropolitan areas in Northwest Europe. In many (European) countries, high-speed railways have been built. So, at first sight, the development of this particular high-speed railway should be relatively straightforward. But the situation seems to be more complicated. To run international services full interoperability is required. However, there turned out to be compatibility problems that are mainly caused by the way decision making has taken place, in particular with respect to the choice and implementation of ERTMS, the new European railway signalling system. In this paper major technical and institutional choices, as well as the choice of system borders that have all been made by decision makers involved in the development of the high-speed railway Amsterdam–Antwerp, will be analyzed. This will make it possible to draw some lessons that might be used for future railway projects in Europe and other parts of the world. Keywords: high-speed railway, interoperability, signalling, metropolitan areas. 1 Introduction Two major new railway projects were initiated in the past decade in The Netherlands, the Betuweroute dedicated freight railway between Rotterdam seaport and the Dutch-German border and the high-speed railway between Amsterdam Airport Schiphol and the Dutch-Belgian border to Antwerp (Belgium).
    [Show full text]
  • Twinning Conference Presentation – 12Th December 2017
    Welcome to the conference Network rail 10-Apr-18 Safety Culture Twinning conference 1 Agenda 10:00 - 10:15 The value of twinning (Keir Fitch, European Commission) 10:15 – 10:30 Welcome (Lisbeth Fromling, Network Rail) 10:30 – 11:30 Group 1 presentation (Network Rail, CFR, Infrabel and HZ) 11:30 – 11:50 Break 11:50 – 12:40 Group 2 presentation (ProRail, Irish Rail and OBB) 12:40 – 13:15 Lunch 13:15 – 14:05 Group 3 presentation (Trafikverket, Adif and PLK) 14:05 – 14:35 Group 4 presentation (RFI and SNCF Reseau) 14:35 – 14:55 Learning activity based on safety culture evaluation 14:55 – 15:15 Opportunity for questions 15:15 – 15:30 Summary of event and closure 10-Apr-18 Safety Culture Twinning conference 2 Welcome from Keir Fitch Head of Unit C4 "Rail Safety & Interoperability”, European Commission 10-Apr-18 Safety Culture Twinning conference 3 Welcome from Lisbeth Fromling Chief Health, Safety, Quality and Environment Officer, Network Rail 10-Apr-18 Safety Culture Twinning conference 4 10-Apr-18 Safety Culture Twinning Programme Welcome to the final conference • Thank you for joining us • Today is a good day! • Purely pro-active project • All information is good • Lots to share PRIME Safety Culture Sub-Group / 5 10-Apr-18 Safety Culture Twinning Programme Co-ordinator Participant PRIME Safety Culture Sub-Group / 6 10-Apr-18 Safety Culture collaboration PRIME Safety Culture Sub-Group / 7 Group 1 Presentations Network Rail, CFR, Infrabel and HZ 10-Apr-18 Safety Culture Twinning conference 8 Group 1 Presentations Network Rail 10-Apr-18 Safety
    [Show full text]
  • Use Style: Paper Title
    Journal of Transportation Technologies, 2013, Vol. 3, No.4 doi:10.4236/jtts.2013. Published Online October 2013 (http://www.scirp.org/journal/jtts) Peak Car Use and the Rise of Global Rail: Why this is happening and what it means for large and small cities Peter Newman1, Jeffrey Kenworthy1, Garry Glazebrook2 1Curtin University Sustainability Policy (CUSP) Institute, Fremantle, Australia 2University of Technology, Sydney (UTS), Sydney, Australia Email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Received July 2013 Abstract The 21st century promises some dramatic changes – some expected, others surprising. One of the more surprising changes is the dramatic peaking in car use and an associated increase in the world’s urban rail systems. This paper sets out what is happening with the growth of rail, especially in the traditional car dependent cities of the US and Aus- tralia, and why this is happening, particularly its relationship to car use declines. It provides new data on the plateau in the speed of urban car transportation that supports rail’s increasing role compared to cars in cities everywhere, as well as other structural, economic and cultural changes that indicate a move away from car dependent urbanism. The paper suggests that the rise of urban rail is a contributing factor in peak car use through the relative reduction in speed of traf- fic compared to transit, especially rail, as well as the growing value of dense, knowledge-based centers that depend on rail access for their viability and cultural attraction. Finally, the paper suggests what can be done to make rail work bet- ter based on some best practice trends in large cities and small car dependent cities.
    [Show full text]
  • TECHNICAL REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Formats
    STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ADA Notice For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document is available in alternate TECHNICAL REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE formats. For alternate format information, contact the Forms Management Unit TR0003 (REV 10/98) at (916) 445-1233, TTY 711, or write to Records and Forms Management, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento, CA 95814. 1. REPORT NUMBER 2. GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION NUMBER 3. RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER CA-17-2969 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. REPORT DATE A Comparative Analysis of High Speed Rail Station Development into Destination and/or Multi-use Facilities: The Case of San Jose Diridon February 2017 6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE 7. AUTHOR 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO. Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris Ph.D. / Deike Peters, Ph.D. MTI Report 12-75 9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. WORK UNIT NUMBER Mineta Transportation Institute College of Business 3762 San José State University 11. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER San José, CA 95192-0219 65A0499 12. SPONSORING AGENCY AND ADDRESS 13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED California Department of Transportation Final Report Division of Research, Innovation and Systems Information MS-42, PO Box 942873 14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE Sacramento, CA 94273-0001 15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 16. ABSTRACT As a burgeoning literature on high-speed rail development indicates, good station-area planning is a very important prerequisite for the eventual successful operation of a high-speed rail station; it can also trigger opportunities for economic development in the station area and the station-city. At the same time, “on the ground” experiences from international examples of high-speed rail stations can provide valuable lessons for the California high-speed rail system in general, and the San Jose Diridon station in particular.
    [Show full text]
  • The Connected Train
    ascent Thought leadership from Atos white paper The Connected Train Your business technologists. Powering progress All around the world Atos is bringing connectivity to places where it has never been envisaged, delivering benefit to both business and user. We make sure that people have access to the right information no matter what their activity or context. Global rail is a major research area led by our experience in the UK where we have significant heritage and ‘on the ground’ vision. With travelers, operators and nation states demanding high bandwidth to improve passenger experience and drive business efficiencies we are defining a new economic and technical model that gives passengers free WiFi without the rail industry carrying operational cost. Furthermore we are focused on the true business benefit to all parties in the rail industry; revenue and margin drivers are at the core of our proposition. This paper outlines a blueprint for this service called The Connected Train. We examine the nature of the proposition by posing and answering a number of questions. Published in April 2014 © Atos, 2014, all rights reserved. The contents of this white paper is owned by Atos. You may not use or reproduce it in any type of media, unless you have been granted prior written consent thereto by a competent person authorized to represent Atos for such purpose. 2 Ascent / The Connected Train The Connected Train Contents 04 11 What is The Connected Train? How much bandwidth does a passenger need? 05 What is the value chain? 12 How much bandwidth
    [Show full text]
  • Genesee & Wyoming Inc. 2016 Annual Report
    Genesee & Wyoming Inc. 2016 Annual Report Genesee & Wyoming Inc.*owns or leases 122 freight railroads worldwide that are organized into 10 operating regions with approximately 7,300 employees and 3,000 customers. * The terms “Genesee & Wyoming,” “G&W,” “the company,” “we,” “our,” and “us” refer collectively to Genesee & Wyoming Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliated companies. Financial Highlights Years Ended December 31 (In thousands, except per share amounts) 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Statement of Operations Data Operating revenues $874,916 $1,568,643 $1,639,012 $2,000,401 $2,001,527 Operating income 190,322 380,188 421,571 384,261 289,612 Net income 52,433 271,296 261,006 225,037 141,096 Net income attributable to Genesee & Wyoming Inc. 48,058 269,157 260,755 225,037 141,137 Diluted earnings per common share attributable to Genesee & Wyoming Inc. common stockholders: Diluted earnings per common share (EPS) $1.02 $4.79 $4.58 $3.89 $2.42 Weighted average shares - Diluted 51,316 56,679 56,972 57,848 58,256 Balance Sheet Data as of Period End Total assets $5,226,115 $5,319,821 $5,595,753 $6,703,082 $7,634,958 Total debt 1,858,135 1,624,712 1,615,449 2,281,751 2,359,453 Total equity 1,500,462 2,149,070 2,357,980 2,519,461 3,187,121 Operating Revenues Operating Income Net Income Diluted Earnings ($ In Millions) ($ In Millions) ($ In Millions) 421.61,2 Per Common Share 2 2,001.5 401.6 1 $2,000 2,000.4 $400 394.12 $275 271.3 $5.00 1 2 4.79 1 374.3 1 380.21 384.3 261.0 4.581 1,800 250 4.50 350 1,639.0 225.01 225 2 1 1,600 233.5 4.00 2 3.89 1,568.6 4.10 2 300 2 200 213.9 213.3 2 3.78 2 1,400 1 3.50 3.69 289.6 183.32 3.142 250 175 1,200 3.00 211.
    [Show full text]
  • Die Hohe Kunst Des Fahrplans
    Themendienst Faktor X oder: Die hohe Kunst des Fahrplans Wie in nur 18 Monaten aus rund 65.000 Verkehrsanmeldungen von über 400 Eisenbahnverkehrsunternehmen Jahr für Jahr ein robuster Netzfahrplan entsteht (Frankfurt am Main, Dezember 2016) Letztlich interessiert den Reisenden doch nur eines: der Zug soll pünktlich am Bahnsteig vorfahren und ebenso im angegebenen Zeitfenster sein Fahrtziel erreichen. Gleiches gilt für den Endkunden im Güterverkehr, dem daran liegt, dass sein Transport rechtzeitig abgeholt oder bereitgestellt wird. Eigentlich ganz einfach – so scheint es… Damit der Bahnverkehr bundesweit konfliktfrei, in hoher Qualität und möglichst nahtlos ineinander greifend funktioniert, arbeiten hinter den Kulissen etwa 140 Konstrukteure im Netzfahrplan der DB Netz AG daran, dass auf dem rund 33.300 Kilometer langen Schienennetz für jeden der täglich 40.000 Personen- und Güterzüge ein passender, freier Abschnitt gefunden werden kann. Diese Aufgabe erinnert mitunter an die Quadratur des Kreises. So sollen etwa lange Wartezeiten vermieden und Fahrtzeiten möglichst kurz gehalten werden. Die Umsteigedauer hingegen ist ausreichend lang zu bemessen. Zudem muss der Fahrplan neue oder weiterentwickelte Infrastruktur, Forderungen des Gesetzgebers, Baumaßnahmen und Kapazitätsengpässe abbilden. Bei alledem soll er Taktverkehre und Anforderungen des Güterverkehrs integrieren und so robust sein, dass bei Verspätungen einzelner Züge nicht die gesamte Pünktlichkeit leidet. Um all diese Faktoren bis zum Fahrplanwechsel am Tag „X“ unter einen Hut zu bekommen, brauchen die Fahrplaner einen vergleichsweise langen Vorlauf. X-18: Eineinhalb Jahre vor dem Fahrplanwechsel wird die verfügbare Infrastruktur festgeschrieben. X-17: Bahnunternehmen werden über Planungsprämissen im neuen Fahrplanjahr informiert. Dazu zählen beispielsweise Baumaßnahmen. X-10: Diese Planungsprämissen werden bei Bedarf noch einmal angepasst.
    [Show full text]
  • Ehemaliges Bodewig-Museum in Oberlahnstein
    Ehemaliges Bodewig-Museum in Oberlahnstein Schlagwörter: Museumsgebäude Fachsicht(en): Kulturlandschaftspflege Gemeinde(n): Lahnstein Kreis(e): Rhein-Lahn-Kreis Bundesland: Rheinland-Pfalz Bodewigmuseum in Oberlahnstein (2016) Fotograf/Urheber: Milena Bagic Museumsgebäude Das ehemalige Bodewig-Museum befindet sich in der Bodewigstraße 32 in Oberlahnstein. 1914 wurde es in dem Neubau mit Walmdach und torartigem Vorbau als das „Heimatmuseum für Oberlahnstein und den Kreis St. Goarshausen“ eröffnet. Namensgeber war Dr. Robert Bodewig, der am 1. Dezember 1857 in Wermelskirchen geboren wurde. Robert Bodewig (1857-1923) Bodewig war Archäologe, Gymnasiallehrer und Reichslimeskommissar. Er war Vorsitzender des Lahnsteiner Altertumsvereins. Bodewig widmete sich in Oberlahnstein intensiv der Geschichte seiner Wahlheimat. Im Jahr 1894 erschien seine erste Arbeit unter dem Titel „Lahnstein im Dreißigjährigen Krieg“ als Beilage zum Programm des Realprogymnasiums Oberlahnstein. „Die Reichslimeskommission ernannte ihn 1897 zum ehrenamtlichen Streckenkommissar für den Limesabschnitt 2 (Bad Ems bis vor Holzhausen a.d.H.) sowie zum Straßenkommissar für den rückwärtigen Limesbereich zwischen Rheinbreitbach und Bad Schwalbach. Als solcher leitete [er] die Ausgrabungen zur Erforschung des Römischen Limes und seiner Kastelle“ (StA Lahnstein in RLK v. 23.11.2007). Bodewig entdeckte u.a. den römischen Burgus (Grenzbefestigungsanlage) in Niederlahnstein. Sein Ziel war, die Bau- und Bodendenkmäler zu erhalten und sie zu erforschen. Als die Wenzelskapelle aufgrund der Erweiterung des Güterbahnhofs weichen musste, forderte er erfolgreich den Wiederaufbau neben der Bahnstrecke. Robert Bodewig verstarb am 4. Dezember 1923 in Oberlahnstein. In seine Zeit als Vorsitzender des Altertumsvereins fällt der Bau des Heimatmuseums. Im Jahr 1945 kam es zur Schließung des Museums. Ein Teil der Sammlung kann heute im Hexenturm in Oberlahnstein besichtigt werden.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparative Analysis of High-Speed Rail Station Development Into Destination and Multi-Use Facilities: the Case of San Jose Diridon
    MTI A Comparative Analysis of Funded by U.S. Department of Services Transit Census California of Water 2012 High-Speed Rail Station Transportation and California Department of Transportation Development into Destination and Multi-Use Facilities: The Case of San Jose Diridon MTI ReportMTI 12-02 December 2012 MTI Report 12-75 MINETA TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE MTI FOUNDER LEAD UNIVERSITY OF MNTRC Hon. Norman Y. Mineta The Mineta Transportation Institute (MTI) was established by Congress in 1991 as part of the Intermodal Surface Transportation MTI/MNTRC BOARD OF TRUSTEES Equity Act (ISTEA) and was reauthorized under the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st century (TEA-21). MTI then successfully competed to be named a Tier 1 Center in 2002 and 2006 in the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Founder, Honorable Norman Joseph Boardman (Ex-Officio) Diane Woodend Jones (TE 2019) Richard A. White (Ex-Officio) Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). Most recently, MTI successfully competed in the Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2011 to Mineta (Ex-Officio) Chief Executive Officer Principal and Chair of Board Interim President and CEO be named a Tier 1 Transit-Focused University Transportation Center. The Institute is funded by Congress through the United States Secretary (ret.), US Department of Amtrak Lea+Elliot, Inc. American Public Transportation Transportation Association (APTA) Department of Transportation’s Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology (OST-R), University Transportation Vice Chair
    [Show full text]
  • Overview of Priority Rules in Operation
    RNE_OverviewOfthePriorityRulesInOperation_v10 Overview of priority rules in operation Delivered by RNE Operation & After- sales WG – March 19th 2012 Approved by RNE General Assembly – May 9th 2012 Updated 04th December 2020 RailNetEurope Oelzeltgasse 3/8 AT-1030 Vienna Phone: +43 1 907 62 72 00 Fax: +43 1 907 62 72 90 [email protected] www.rne.eu RNE_OverviewOfthePriorityRulesInOperation_v10 Content 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 4 1.1 Aim and content of the Overview ....................................................................................................... 4 1.2 Updates and new features ................................................................................................................. 5 2 Overview of the priority rules in operation ................................................................................................. 6 2.1 General considerations ...................................................................................................................... 6 2.2 IM/Network Dossiers - Content ........................................................................................................ 10 2.3 Single IM/Network Dossier .............................................................................................................. 10 2.3.1 ADIF ........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • DB Netz AG Network Statement 2016 Valid from 14 April 2015 DB Netz
    DB Netz AG Network Statement 2016 valid from 14 April 2015 DB Netz AG Headquarters I.NMN Version control Date Modification 12.12.2014 Amendment of Network Statement 2015 as at 12 December 2014 (Publication of the Network Statement 2016) Inclusion of detailed information in sections 1.9 ff and 4.2.5 ff due to 14.10.2015 commissioning of rail freight corridors Sandinavian-Mediterranean and North Sea-Balitc. Addition of connection to Port of Hamburg (Hohe Schaar) in section 13.12.2015 3.3.2.5 Printed by DB Netz AG Editors Principles of Network Access/Regulation (I.NMN) Theodor-Heuss-Allee 7 60486 Frankfurt am Main Picture credits Front page photo: Bildschön, Silvia Bunke Copyright: Deutsche Bahn AG Contents Version control 3 List of Annexes 7 1 GENERAL INFORMATION 9 1.1 Introduction 9 1.2 Purpose 9 1.3 Legal basis 9 1.4 Legal framework of the Network Statement 9 1.5 Structure of the Network Statement 10 1.6 Term of and amendments to the Network Statement 10 1.7 Publication and opportunity to respond 11 1.8 Contacts at DB Netz AG 11 1.9 Rail freight corridors 12 1.10 RNE and international cooperation between DB Netz AG and other RIUs 14 1.11 List of abbreviations 15 2 CONDITIONS OF ACCESS 16 2.1 Introduction 16 2.2 General conditions of access to the railway infrastructure 16 2.3 Types of agreement 17 2.4 Regulations and additional provisions 17 2.5 Special consignments 19 2.6 Transportation of hazardous goods 19 2.7 Requirements for the rolling stock 19 2.8 Requirements for the staff of the AP or the involved RU 20 2.9 Special conditions
    [Show full text]