DOCSLIB.ORG

SOLANO COUNTY Alternative Fuels & Infrastructure Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
SOLANO COUNTY Alternative Fuels & Infrastructure Plan SOLANO COUNTY Alternative Fuels & Infrastructure Plan blank page Solano County Alternative Fuels & Infrastructure Plan December 11, 2013 Submitted to: Robert Guerrero, Senior Planner Solano Transportation Authority One Harbor Center, Suite 130 Suisun City, CA 94585-2473 Prepared by: ICF International 630 K Street, Suite 400 Sacramento, CA 95814 blank page Table of Contents Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................1 1. Introduction and Background ................................................................................................7 2. Overview of Alternative Fuels for Transportation ............................................................. 10 2.1. Ethanol ..................................................................................................................................... 10 2.2. Biodiesel .................................................................................................................................. 14 2.3. Natural Gas ............................................................................................................................. 17 2.4. Propane ................................................................................................................................... 21 2.5. Hydrogen ................................................................................................................................. 24 2.6. Electricity ................................................................................................................................. 26 3. Solano County Government Fleets and Alternative Fueling Infrastructure ................... 31 3.1. Municipal Fleets ..................................................................................................................... 31 3.2. Alternative Fuel Stations ....................................................................................................... 33 4. Benefits and Costs of Alternative Fuel Vehicles ............................................................... 40 4.1. Regulatory Requirements ..................................................................................................... 40 4.2. Fleet Cost Impacts ................................................................................................................. 44 4.3. Air Pollution and Health Impacts ......................................................................................... 54 4.4. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impacts ................................................................................. 56 4.5. Funding Sources .................................................................................................................... 61 5. Implementation Steps ........................................................................................................... 66 5.1. Biofuels .................................................................................................................................... 66 5.2. Natural Gas ............................................................................................................................. 69 5.3. Electric Vehicles ..................................................................................................................... 74 5.4. Summary of Implementation Steps and Action Items ...................................................... 88 Endnotes .......................................................................................................................................91 Solano County Alternative Fuels & Infrastructure Plan i December 11, 2013 List of Figures Figure 2-1. E85 Flexible Fuel Vehicles Sold, Leased, or Converted per Year in the U.S. (1998–2010) .... 12 Figure 2-2. E85 Consumption by Motor Vehicles in California (2003–2010) .............................................. 13 Figure 2-3. Price of E85 and Gasoline, Nationwide (2000–2012) .............................................................. 14 Figure 2-4. Alternative Fuel Transit Buses in Service, Nationwide (2009) ................................................. 16 Figure 2-5. Price of B20 and Diesel, Nationwide (2000–2012)................................................................... 17 Figure 2-6. Alternative Fuel Transit Buses, Nationwide (1996–2009) ........................................................ 19 Figure 2-7. Consumption of Alternative Fuels in the Transportation Sector in California (2003–2010) ..... 20 Figure 2-8. Retail Price of Natural Gas, Diesel, and Gasoline, Nationwide (2000–2012) .......................... 21 Figure 2-9. Price of Propane, Diesel, and Gasoline, Nationwide (2000–2012) .......................................... 24 Figure 2-10. Monthly Electric Vehicle Sales in the United States (November 2010 – November 2012) .... 27 Figure 2-11. Annual Hybrid Electric Vehicle Sales in the United States (1999–2012) ............................... 28 Figure 3-1. Percent of Alternative Fuel Vehicles in Solano County Municipal Fleets ................................. 33 Figure 3-2. E85 Fueling Infrastructure in and around Solano County (2012) ............................................ 34 Figure 3-3. Biodiesel Fueling Infrastructure in and around Solano County (2012)..................................... 35 Figure 3-4. Natural Gas Fueling Infrastructure in and around Solano County (2012) ............................... 36 Figure 3-5. Propane Fueling Infrastructure in and around Solano County (2012)...................................... 37 Figure 3-6. Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure in and around Solano County (2012) ........................ 38 Figure 4-1. Sample Light-Duty Sedan Purchase and Lifetime Fuel Cost Comparison.............................. 47 Figure 4-2. Sample Light-Duty Truck Purchase and Lifetime Fuel Cost Comparison ............................... 48 Figure 4-3. Sample Medium-Duty Truck Purchase and Lifetime Fuel Cost Comparison .......................... 50 Figure 4-4. Sample Transit Bus Purchase and Lifetime Maintenance and Fuel Cost Comparison .......... 51 Figure 4-5. Emissions Reductions of Biofuels, Biofuel Blends, and CNG Compared to Petroleum-Based Fuels .................................................................................................................................................... 56 Figure 4-6. GHG Emissions Benefits of Alternative Technologies and Fuels for Light-Duty Vehicles Compared to Conventional Gasoline .................................................................................................. 57 Figure 4-7. Annual GHG Emissions of Alternative Technologies and Fuels for a Light-Duty Vehicle Compared to Conventional Gasoline .................................................................................................. 58 Figure 4-8. GHG Emissions Benefits of Alternative Technologies and Fuels for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Vehicles Compared to Diesel .............................................................................................................. 60 Figure 4-9. Annual GHG Emissions of Alternative Technologies and Fuels for a Transit Bus Compared to Diesel .................................................................................................................................................. 61 Figure 5-1. Locations of Most Likely Electric Vehicle Adopters in Solano County .................................... 79 Figure 5-2. Workplace Charging Siting Analysis for Solano County.......................................................... 80 Figure 5-3. Opportunity Charging Siting Analysis for Solano County ........................................................ 82 Solano County Alternative Fuels & Infrastructure Plan ii December 11, 2013 List of Tables Table 2-1. E85 Flexible Fuel Vehicle Population in California ................................................................... 12 Table 2-2. Forecasted Electric Vehicle Charger Population, Nationwide (2020) ....................................... 30 Table 3-1. Municipal Fleet Vehicles in Solano County by Vehicle Type (2012) ........................................ 31 Table 3-2. Municipal Fleet Vehicles in Solano County by Fuel Type (2012) ............................................. 32 Table 3-3. E85 Fueling Infrastructure in Solano County (2012) ................................................................ 34 Table 3-4. Biodiesel Fueling Infrastructure in Solano County (2012) ......................................................... 35 Table 3-5. Natural Gas Fueling Infrastructure in Solano County (2012) .................................................... 36 Table 3-6. Propane Fueling Infrastructure in Solano County (2012) .......................................................... 37 Table 3-7. Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure in Solano County (2012) ............................................ 38 Table 4-1: Summary of ARB Regulations and their Impact on Transit or Municipal Fleets ....................... 40 Table 4-2. Sample Incremental Vehicle Prices for Alternative Fuel Light-Duty Sedans Compared to Gasoline Vehicles ............................................................................................................................... 44 Table 4-3. Sample Incremental Vehicle Prices for Alternative Fuel Light-Duty Trucks Compared to Gasoline Vehicles ..............................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • • NOV-DEC MEETINGS Mayor Emanuel Joins Chicago Transit
    OFFICIAL NEWSLEITER OF THE OMNIBUS SOCIETY OF AMERICA, INC. NOV-DEC 2011 RUN 06-2011 Welcome to another issue of The Green Pennant Special, our residents." the official publication of The Omnibus Society of America. Through this publication we hope to keep our readers The displays will provide four lines of text via CTA Bus informed of events happening in the transit industry in Tracker with bus arrival information, and eventually Chicago and other cities in the United States. important customer alerts affecting the respective route and surrounding transfer points. The LED signs will be Visit the Omnibus Society of America website at "www.osabus.org". At www.osabus.org we will be installed on the sides of bus shelters and face outward to posting upcoming fan trips and meetings information, as serve as many riders as possible - both those at the stop well as membership information. and within the vicinity of the shelter. Please visit our site when you have a chance and give us "The installation of these signs will help simplify your opinions and comments. commuting by providing highly visible information on bus • NOV-DEC MEETINGS arrivals at that stop, including places where there are transfers to bus or rail service," said CT A President Forrest The November meeting of the Omnibus Society of Claypool. "The availability of these signs also will extend America will be held on November 4, 2011, at the Beef & the benefits of CTA Bus Tracker to those who may not be Brandy located at 127 S. State Street in downtown familiar with the service or may not have the tools to Chicago.
    [Show full text]
  • President's 2015 Budget Recommendations
    CTA: Investing in Chicago President’s 2015 Budget Recommendations Rendering of future design CTA FY15 Budget Chicago Transit Board Terry Peterson, Chairman Appointed by: Mayor, City of Chicago Jacquelyne Grimshaw, Vice Chairman Appointed by: Governor, State of Illinois Ashish Sen Appointed by: Governor, State of Illinois Robert Lewis Appointed by: Governor, State of Illinois Rev. Charles E. Robinson Appointed by: Mayor, City of Chicago Alejandro Silva Appointed by: Mayor, City of Chicago Kevin Irvine Appointed by: Mayor, City of Chicago Forrest Claypool, President Distinguished Budget Presentation Award a Distinguished Budget Presentation Award to Chicago Transit Authority, Illinois for the Annual TheBudget Government beginning Finance January Officers 01, 2014. Association In order of the to Unitedreceive States this andaward, Canada a governmental (GFOA) presented unit must publish a budget document that meets program criteria as a policy document, as an operationsThis award guide,is valid as for a financiala period plan,andof one year as only.a communications device. transitchicago.com 14JN67 1-888-YOUR-CTA CTA FY15 Budget Table of Contents Letter from the President ............................................................................................................................................... 1 CTA Organizational Chart ............................................................................................................................................... 5 Executive Summary ..........................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Cuta's 2006 Fall Conference
    February/février 2007 National Transit Employee Recognition Awards 2006 · Prix nationaux de reconnaissance des employés du secteur des transports en commun 2006 CANADIAN TRANSIT CANADIEN SUR LE TRANSPORT COLLECTIF CUTA’S 2006 FALL CONFERENCE COMMUNITIES IN TRANSIT CONGRÈS D’AUTOMNE DE L’ACTU 2006 COLLECTIVITÉS EN TRANSITION PLUS: 2006 Mid-Year Ridership Results Données semestrielles 2006 de l’achalandage Quick test fact: Q’Straint rear tie-down belts along with stainless steel floor pockets and fastening hardware are static pull tested with every shipment. www.qstraint.com 312983_Qstraint.indd 1 1/3/07 12:35:10 PM We Listen, You Drive Discover the new face of performance with the line of Nova Bus transit, suburban, and shuttle vehicles. Building on our reputation for quality, our bold new front styling reflects the sound engineering and unique design features you have come to expect from every vehicle we produce. At Nova Bus, the quality is built right in. We listen, You Drive. www.novabus.com 312983_Qstraint.indd 1 1/3/07 12:35:10 PM 311734_Nova.indd 1 12/11/06 10:35:40 AM Under 30' and 35' length 12 year/500,000 mile Altoona tested 102" wide Cummins ISB-02 engine 35" front door - Vapor Optional 42" centre door Allison B300 or B300R transmission 19 – 35 passenger capacity Meritor independent front suspension KIRKMAN BUS SALES LTD. BLUE BIRD PEARSON BUS 1-888-381-3010 COACHWORKS 1-877-794-7670 CALGARY, AB 1-800-486-7122 BRANTFORD, ON 4 WESTERN CANADA EASTERN CANADA February/février 2007 Vol. 17 No. 1 CANADIAN TRANSIT CANADIEN SUR LE TRANSPORT COLLECTIF February 2007/ février 2007 CUTA Editor • Rédactrice de l’ACTU : Maureen Shuell cover • couverture Executive Editor • Rédactrice en chef : Thanks to partnerships between the various orders of government, Janine Strom new funding is making significant improvements to public transit to Contributing Editor • meet the growing needs of Canadians.
    [Show full text]
  • Sustainable Fleet Transition Plan
    Sustainable Fleet Transition Plan RIPTA Sustainable Fleet Transition Plan PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Gladstein, Neandross & Associates P a g e | ii RIPTA Sustainable Fleet Transition Plan Authorship and Uses This report was prepared by the clean transportation and energy consulting firm of Gladstein, Neandross & Associates (GNA). This report was prepared on behalf of Rhode Island Public Transit Authority (RIPTA). The opinions, findings, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of RIPTA. RIPTA, its officers, employees, contractors, and subcontractors make no warranty, expressed or implied, and assume no legal liability for the information in this report. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by RIPTA or GNA. No part of this work shall be used or reproduced by any means, electronic or mechanical, without first receiving GNA’s express written permission. The following GNA staff prepared this report: Patrick Couch, Vice President - Technical Services Eleanor Johnstone, Senior Associate Gladstein, Neandross & Associates P a g e | iii RIPTA Sustainable Fleet Transition Plan Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 1 1.0 Introduction .....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • CNG As a Transit Bus Fuel
    TheThe TransitTransit BusBus NicheNiche MarketMarket ForFor AlternativeAlternative Fuels:Fuels: ModuleModule 3:3: OverviewOverview ofof CompressedCompressed NaturalNatural GasGas asas aa TransitTransit BusBus FuelFuel CleanClean CitiesCities CoordinatorCoordinator ToolkitToolkit PreparedPrepared byby TIAXTIAX LLC,LLC, IrvineIrvine OfficeOffice DecemberDecember 20032003 TIAX LLC One Park Plaza, 6th Floor Irvine, California 92614 949-833-7131 / [email protected] Options for Natural Gas Fueling in Transit • Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) – Pipeline natural gas: methane with other hydrocarbons – Pressurized to 3,600 psi – Fueling accomplished by pressure transfer to vehicle – About 12% of transit buses in the U.S. now use conventional CNG – Largest users include LACMTA, MARTA, NY DOT, Pierce Transit, Washington D.C. (WMATA), Cleveland, Sacramento • Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) – Nearly pure methane (~98%) liquefied at very low temperatures – Liquid transfer to vehicle – Largest users are Phoenix, Orange County (CA), Dallas, and Tempe – Newer users include Santa Monica, Long Beach • LNG to CNG (“LCNG”) – Vaporized LNG (also nearly pure methane) – Liquid to gas conversion, then pressure transfer to vehicle – Sun Metro, OmniTrans, others use this approach Document Code 1 Methane Content in Pipeline Natural Gas Varies Regionally Methane Molecule Typical Composition of Pipeline Natural Gas What are the Implications of the Resulting CNG Fuel Quality Variations? • CNG with lower methane content (higher levels of ethane, propane, or butane) has resulted in some adverse affects on heavy-duty NG engine performance (e.g., misfire, stumble and underrated operation, engine knock, overheating) • However, today’s lean-burn closed-loop NG engines for transit (e.g., C Gas Plus and DDC S50G) are better able to tolerate and compensate for variations • Compromises in emissions performance have been found to be modest Document Code 2 Numerous OEMs Offer Natural Gas Transit Buses and Paratransit Vehicles Natural Gas Bus Manufacturer Models Available Champion Bus, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • [Picture of 79Th Street Bus] [Picture of a CTA Employee Wearing
    [BOOK FRONT COVER] Public Transit: An Essential Key to Recovery [Picture of 79th Street Bus] [Picture of a CTA employee wearing a mask] [2 different pictures of CTA employees performing COVID-19 related sanitation on a bus and train] President’s 2021 Budget Recommendations [CTA Logo] [BACK PAGE OF FRONT COVER] Chicago Transit Board and CTA President The governing arm of the CTA is the Chicago Transit Board, consisting of seven board members, one of which is currently vacant. The Mayor of Chicago appoints four board members, subject to the approval of the City Council and the Governor of Illinois. The Governor appoints three board members, subject to the approval of the State Senate and the Mayor of Chicago. CTA's day-to-day operations are directed by the President. Arabel Alva Rosales, Vice Chair Appointed by: Governor, State of Illinois Judge Gloria Chevere, Board Member Appointed by: Governor, State of Illinois Kevin Irvine, Board Member Appointed by: Mayor, City of Chicago Dr. L. Bernard Jakes, Board Member Appointed by: Governor, State of Illinois Rev. Johnny L. Miller, Board Member Appointed by: Mayor, City of Chicago Alejandro Silva, Board Member Appointed by: Mayor, City of Chicago Chicago Transit Authority Dorval Carter Jr., President TABLE OF CONTENTS System Map: page 1 President’s Letter: page 4 Organizational Chart: page 6 Executive Summary: page 8 Strategic Goals: page 26 Operating Budget Schedule: page 28 2020 Operating Budget Forecast: page 32 2021 Proposed Operating Budget: page 36 2022-2023 Two-Year Financial Plan: page
    [Show full text]
  • RFP) Rehabilitation of Three Low Floor Heavy Duty New Flyer Buses
    Rehabilitation of Three Low Floor Heavy Duty New Flyer Buses Request For Proposals_______________________________________ REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) Rehabilitation of Three Low Floor Heavy Duty New Flyer Buses Release Date: Monday, February 10 2014 Deadline for Submission: Friday, February 28, 2014 Contact Person: John Andoh, Transit Director Request for Proposal, Offer & Award February 2014 1 Rehabilitation of Three Low Floor Heavy Duty New Flyer Buses Request For Proposals_______________________________________ Table of Contents 1 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS, OFFER & AWARD ........................................................................................ 3 1.1 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS .................................................................................................................................. 4 1.1.1 SOLICITATION DATA ....................................................................................................................................................... 4 1.1.2 PRE-PROPOSAL .............................................................................................................................................................. 7 1.1.3 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS ........................................................................................................................................ 8 1.1.4 PROPOSAL EVALUATION, NEGOTIATION AND SELECTION ........................................................................................... 10 1.1.5 RESPONSE TO PROPOSALS ..........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2014 Budget Recommendations
    MODERNIZING TRANSIT FOR THE FUTURE PRESIDENT’S 2014 BUDGET RECOMMENDATIONS (THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) CTA FY14 Budget Table of Contents Letter from the President ........................................................................................................................................ 1 CTA Organizational Chart ........................................................................................................................................ 5 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................... 7 2013 Operating Budget Performance 2012 Operating Budget Performance Summary ........................................................................................ 25 2012 Operating Budget Schedule ..................................................................................................................... 34 President’s 2014 Proposed Operating Budget President’s 2013 Proposed Operating Budget Summary ....................................................................... 35 President’s 2013 Proposed Operating Budget Schedule ......................................................................... 42 President’s 2015-2016 Proposed Operating Financial Plan President’s 2015-2016 Proposed Operating Financial Plan Summary ............................................. 43 President’s 2015-2016 Proposed Operating Financial Plan Schedule .............................................. 47 2014-2018 Capital
    [Show full text]
  • ATTACHMENT 1 VE 15-044 MBTA Drawings, Miscellaneous
    Attachment 1 Technical Specification No. VE 15-044 for New Flyer Low Floor ECD (Option Fleet) Buses ATTACHMENT 1 VE 15-044 MBTA Drawings, Miscellaneous Technical Information, Color & Paint Scheme, and Decals & Special Signage Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Vehicle Engineering Boston, Massachusetts Page 1 of 2 Attachment 1 Technical Specification No. VE 15-044 for New Flyer Low Floor ECD (Option Fleet) Buses The following details the paint color, paint scheme, and decals (interior and exterior) required for this overhaul program. This attachment includes the following: 1) Color and paint scheme drawings 2) Original decal scheme drawings (interior and exterior) 3) Decal, signage and placard listings and specifications: List of new decals and special signage, including identification of decals to be converted to placards. The enclosed original decal layout drawings are for reference purposes only, reflecting the decal layouts (interior and exterior) as the vehicles were originally delivered to Boston. The decal/signage configuration has been modified since that time. Available existing decals will be provided to the Contractor at the first pre-production meeting. The Authority is currently in the midst of upgrading their vehicle signage and graphics in response to accessibility signage and quality improvements. Also, some interior decals are to be replaced with placards to improve durability. The updated decals description/listings, as currently envisioned, are listed in item 3. Placard designs / samples shall be submitted to the Authority for review and approval as part of the Engineering Design Review process. The final decal configuration shall be discussed and finalized during the design review process. Additional or modified decals/signage, if required, will be recognized as additional cost items.
    [Show full text]
  • Demonstration and Evaluation of Hybrid Diesel Electric Transit Buses
    Fourth Quarter CTTRANSIT Demonstration and Evaluation of Hybrid Diesel Electric Transit Buses April, May & June 2004 Report No. CT-170-1884-4-04-11 PROGRAM PARTNERS CTTRANSIT Allison Transmission Horiba Instruments Inc. New Flyer Bus Industries University of Connecticut CDOT Division of Research The East Coast Hybrid Consortium CDOT Bureau of Public Transportation Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering Prepared By Stephen W. Warren Technical Report Documentation Page 1.Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipients Catalog No. CT-170-1884- 4-04-11 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date July, 2004 CTTransit Demonstration and Evaluation of Hybrid Diesel Electric Transit Buses – 6. Performing Organization Code Interim Report 4 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Stephen W. Warren 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRIS) CTTransit 11. Contract or Grant No. 100 Leibert Road CM-005984 Hartford, CT 06141 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Quarterly Interim April, May & June 2004 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Connecticut Department of Transportation 2800 Berlin Turnpike Newington, CT 06131-7546 14. Sponsoring Agency Code 170-1884 15. Supplementary Notes This project is being funded by a Congestion Mitigation Air Quality grant (CM- 005984). The project partners are: CTTransit, Allison Transmission, Horiba Instruments, Inc., New Flyer Bus Industries, University of Connecticut, ConnDOT Bureau of Public Transportation, ConnDOT Division of Research, The East Coast Hybrid Consortium, and the Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering. 16. Abstract The project goal is to identify the next generation of transit vehicles for future fleet replacement that are cost effective, reliable, produce fewer emissions, and have improved fuel economy compared to the standard heavy-duty diesel powered bus.
    [Show full text]
  • Bus Infrastructure Design Guidelines Is Offered As a Guide to Transit Infrastructure Design Best Practices, Rather Than As a Set of Strict Design Standards
    Revision 2018.01 (September 2018) USING THIS GUIDE The Bus Infrastructure Design Guidelines is offered as a guide to transit infrastructure design best practices, rather than as a set of strict design standards. Design matters requiring the approval of TransLink/CMBC will continue to be reviewed in previous manner. Municipal and provincial road design standards will continue to be applied. The design parameters and criteria presented in this Guide are suitable for typical applications and will provide operational efficiency, safety and customer comfort. As every project is different with unique site context, Designers should consider site specific context and recommend appropriate design solutions on a case by case basis. For new projects that have specific considerations and/or constraints that may lead to designs deviating from the guidelines, Designers should provide rationale to support any deviations and consult with TransLink at the onset of a project to verify the assumptions and criteria to be followed. This Guide is a living document. As technology, operational practice and customer expectation evolve, the document will be updated as needed. The information presented in the current version represents the best information available at the time of writing. Bus Infrastructure Design Guidelines SOP: Bus Infrastructure Design Guidelines SOP # INM-002 (Rev 01) TransLink Infrastructure Program Management Department – Transportation Owner Engineering Group The purpose of this Standard Operating Procedure is to provide guidance on making updates and changes to TransLink’s Bus Infrastructure Design Guidelines (“BIDG”) following an update to the previous 2013 document. Purpose of The BIDG provides guidance on design practices to accommodate buses and the SOP passengers, and promote safe and efficient bus operations.
    [Show full text]
  • Characteristics of Bus Rapid Transit for Decision-Making February 2009
    United States Federal Transit Administration Department of Transportation Office of Research, Demonstration and Innovation Characteristics of BUS RAPID TRANSIT for Decision-Making Project No. FTA-FL-26-7109.2009.1 February 2009 Photo courtesy of Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Characteristics of BUS RAPID TRANSIT for Decision-Making funded by the Federal Transit Administration FTA Project Manager: Helen M. Tann Transportation Program Specialist Federal Transit Administration Office of Research, Demonstration and Innovation 1200 New Jersey Ave, SE Washington, DC 20590 Principal Investigator: Dennis Hinebaugh Director, National BRT Institute Center for Urban Transportation Research University of South Florida (USF) 4202 E. Fowler Ave, CUT100 Tampa, FL 33620 © February 2009 Federal Transit Administration U.S. Department of Transportation NOTICE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the United States Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503.
    [Show full text]