DOCSLIB.ORG

Urban Transit Bus Fleet Rule

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Urban Transit Bus Fleet Rule California Air Resources Board: Urban Transit Bus Fleet Rule Page 1 of 2 TRANSIT AGENCIES Air District Fuel Path 1 Alameda-Contra Costa (A/C) Transit Bay Area D 2 Antelope Valley Transit Authority Antelope Valley D 3 Arcata and MAD River Transit System North Coast Unified D 4 Benecia, City of Bay Area D 5 Butte Regional Transit Butte County D 6 Chula Vista Transit San Diego County A 7 Commerce, City of South Coast A 8 Culver City Municipal Bus Lines South Coast A 9 Contra Costa (Central) Transit Authority Bay Area D 10 Contra Costa (Eastern) Transit Authority Bay Area D 11 Contra Costa (Western) Transit Authority Bay Area D 12 El Dorado County Transit Authority El Dorado County D 13 Elk Grove, City of Sacramento Metro A 14 Eureka Transit Service North Coast Unified D 15 Fairfield/Suisun Transit Bay Area D 16 Folsom Stage Line Sacramento Metro D 17 Foothill Transit South Coast A 18 Fresno Area Express San Joaquin Valley A 19 Gardena Municipal Bus Lines South Coast A 20 Glendale, City of South Coast A 21 Golden Empire Transit District San Joaquin Valley A 22 Golden Gate Bridge Hwy & Transportation District Bay Area D 23 Humboldt Transit Authority North Coast Unified D 24 Imperial County Transit Imperial County D 25 Kings County Area PublicTransit Agency San Joaquin Valley D 26 Lincoln, City of Sacramento Metro D 27 Livermore / Amador Valley Transit Authority Bay Area D 28 Lodi, City of San Joaquin Valley A 29 Long Beach Transit South Coast A 30 Los Angeles County MTA South Coast A 31 Los Angeles Department of Transportation South Coast A 32 Mendocino Transit Authority Mendocino County D 33 Merced County Transit San Joaquin Valley D 34 Modesto, City of San Joaquin Valley D 35 Montebello Bus Lines South Coast A 36 Monterey - Salinas Transit Monterey Bay Unified D 37 Napa VINE Transit Service Bay Area D 38 National City Transit San Diego County D 39 Norwalk Transit South Coast A 40 Omnitrans South Coast A 41 Orange County Transportation Authority South Coast A 42 Placer County Placer County A 43 Redding Area Bus Authority Shasta County D 44 Riverside Transit Agency South Coast A 45 Roseville, City of Placer County D 46 Sacramento Regional Transit District Sacramento Metro A As of 9/12/2006 D: Diesel, A: Alternative Fuel California Air Resources Board: Urban Transit Bus Fleet Rule Page 2 of 2 TRANSIT AGENCIES Air District Fuel Path 47 San Diego Metropolitan Transit System San Diego County A 48 San Diego (North County) Transit District San Diego County A 49 San Francisco Municipal Railway (MUNI) Bay Area D 50 San Joaquin Regional Transit District San Joaquin Valley D 51 San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority San Luis Obispo County D 52 San Luis Obispo South County Area Transit San Luis Obispo County D 53 San Luis Obispo, City of San Luis Obispo County D 54 San Mateo County Transit District Bay Area D 55 Santa Barbara County Association of Gov Santa Barbara County D 56 Santa Barbara Metropolitan Transit District Santa Barbara County D 57 Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Bay Area D 58 Santa Clarita Transit South Coast A 59 Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District Monterey Bay Unified A 60 Santa Maria Area Transit Santa Barbara County D 61 Santa Monica's Big Blue Bus South Coast A 62 Santa Rosa Citybus Bay Area D 63 Simi Valley Transit South Coast A 64 Siskiyou County STAGE Siskiyou County D 65 Sonoma County Transit Bay Area A 66 South Coast Area Transit Ventura County A 67 South Lake Tahoe El Dorado County A 68 Stanislaus Regional Transit San Joaquin Valley A 69 Sun Line Transit Agency South Coast A 70 Tahoe Area Regional Transit Placer County A 71 Thousand Oaks Ventura County A 72 Torrance Transit South Coast A 73 Union City Transit Bay Area A 74 Unitrans Yolo-Solano A 75 Vacaville Yolo-Solano A 76 Vallejo Transit Bay Area D 77 Victor Valley Transit Authority Mohave Desert A 78 Visalia City Coach San Joaquin Valley D 79 Yolobus Yolo-Solano A TOTAL FOR DIESEL FUEL PATH: 40 TOTAL FOR ALTERNATIVE FUEL PATH: 39 NUMBER OF TRANSIT AGENCIES: 79 As of 9/12/2006 D: Diesel, A: Alternative Fuel .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2018 Financial and CSR Report Attestation of the Persons Responsible for the Annual Report
    2018 Financial and CSR Report Attestation of the persons responsible for the annual report We, the undersigned, hereby attest that to the best of our knowledge the financial statements have been prepared in accordance with generally-accepted accounting principles and give a true and fair view of the assets, liabilities, financial position and results of the company and of all consolidated companies, and that the management report attached presents a true and fair picture of the results and financial position of the consolidated companies and of all uncertainties facing them. Paris, 29 March 2019 Chairwoman and CEO Catherine Guillouard Chief Financial Officer Jean-Yves Leclercq Management Corporate report governance Editorial 4 report Profile 6 The Board of Directors 89 RATP Group organisation chart 14 Compensation of corporate officers 91 Financial results 16 Diversity policy 91 Extra-financial performance Appendix – List of directors declaration 28 and their terms of office at 31 December 2018 91 International control and risk management 69 Consolidated Financial fi nancial statements statements Statutory Auditors’ report on the financial statements 156 Statutory Auditors’ report on the consolidated financial statements 96 EPIC balance sheet 159 Consolidated statements EPIC income statement 160 of comprehensive income 100 Notes to the financial statements 161 Consolidated balance sheets 102 Consolidated statements of cash flows 103 Consolidated statements of changes in equity 104 Notes to the consolidated financial statements 105 RATP Group — 2018 Financial and CSR Report 3 Editorial 2018 – a year of strong growth momentum and commitment to the territories served 2018 was marked by an acceleration in RATP Capital Innovation continues to invest the Group’s development in Île-de-France, in new shared mobility solutions and smart cities, in France and internationally.
    [Show full text]
  • Smart Location Database Technical Documentation and User Guide
    SMART LOCATION DATABASE TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION AND USER GUIDE Version 3.0 Updated: June 2021 Authors: Jim Chapman, MSCE, Managing Principal, Urban Design 4 Health, Inc. (UD4H) Eric H. Fox, MScP, Senior Planner, UD4H William Bachman, Ph.D., Senior Analyst, UD4H Lawrence D. Frank, Ph.D., President, UD4H John Thomas, Ph.D., U.S. EPA Office of Community Revitalization Alexis Rourk Reyes, MSCRP, U.S. EPA Office of Community Revitalization About This Report The Smart Location Database is a publicly available data product and service provided by the U.S. EPA Smart Growth Program. This version 3.0 documentation builds on, and updates where needed, the version 2.0 document.1 Urban Design 4 Health, Inc. updated this guide for the project called Updating the EPA GSA Smart Location Database. Acknowledgements Urban Design 4 Health was contracted by the U.S. EPA with support from the General Services Administration’s Center for Urban Development to update the Smart Location Database and this User Guide. As the Project Manager for this study, Jim Chapman supervised the data development and authored this updated user guide. Mr. Eric Fox and Dr. William Bachman led all data acquisition, geoprocessing, and spatial analyses undertaken in the development of version 3.0 of the Smart Location Database and co- authored the user guide through substantive contributions to the methods and information provided. Dr. Larry Frank provided data development input and reviewed the report providing critical input and feedback. The authors would like to acknowledge the guidance, review, and support provided by: • Ruth Kroeger, U.S. General Services Administration • Frank Giblin, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Rapport Financier Et RSE 2019 3 « Plus Que Jamais, Le Groupe Place Au Cœur De Ses Valeurs La Performance Opérationnelle Et Économique, Mais Aussi
    RAPPORT FINANCIER2019 ET RSE Attestation des personnes assumant la responsabilité du rapport financier annuel Nous attestons que, à notre connaissance, les comptes sont établis conformément aux normes comptables applicables et donnent une image fidèle du patrimoine, de la situation financière et du résultat de la société et de l’ensemble des entreprises comprises dans le périmètre de consolidation, et que le rapport de gestion ci-joint présente un tableau fidèle de l’évolution des affaires, des résultats et de la situation financière de la société et de l’ensemble des entreprises comprises dans le périmètre de consolidation ainsi qu’une description des principaux risques et incertitudes auxquels elles sont confrontées. Paris, le 6 mars 2020 La présidente-directrice générale Catherine Guillouard Le directeur financier Jean-Yves Leclercq Édito 4 Le groupe RATP aujourd’hui 6 Nos expertises 8 Notre modèle de création de valeur 10 Organigramme du groupe RATP 12 Rapport Rapport de de gestion 13 gouvernement Résultats financiers 14 d’entreprise 89 Contrôle interne Composition du conseil et gestion des risques 26 d’administration et mandats 90 Déclaration de performance Rémunérations et avantages 92 extra-financière 48 Politique de diversité 93 Annexe 1 — Liste des administrateurs et de leurs mandats au 31 décembre 2019 93 Comptes Comptes consolidés 96 sociaux 158 Rapport des commissaires Rapport des commissaires aux comptes sur aux comptes sur les comptes consolidés 97 les comptes annuels 159 État du résultat global 101 Bilan Epic 162 Bilan consolidé 103 Compte de résultat Epic 163 Tableau des flux Annexe aux comptes sociaux 164 de trésorerie consolidés 104 Tableau de variation des capitaux propres 105 Annexe aux comptes consolidés 106 Groupe RATP — Rapport financier et RSE 2019 3 « Plus que jamais, le Groupe place au cœur de ses valeurs la performance opérationnelle et économique, mais aussi la responsabilité sociale Catherine Guillouard Présidente-directrice générale et environnementale.
    [Show full text]
  • SB 1 Regional Fact Sheets
    TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS UNDERWAY IN THE EUREKA/ HUMBOLDT REGION Filling Potholes and Repaving roads PROJECTS FILLING 93 POTHOLES Pavement preservation project on nearly 78 miles of US 101 from AND REPAVING south of School Road to north of Big Lagoon Bridge near the City of CRUMBLING ROADS Trinidad in Humboldt County Pavement preservation project on nearly 37 miles of US 101 from Englewood Park Undercrossing to Eel River Bridge near Redcrest in PROJECTS Humboldt County 55 IMPROVING THE 31 projects rehabilitating local streets and roads in Siskiyou County SAFETY Nearly 6 miles of pavement improvements on two-lane road on OF LOCAL ROADS Lower Lake Road in the Fort Dick area in Del Norte County AND BRIDGES AND Pavement improvements on 25 miles on I-5 from the Sacramento River Bridge in the City of Dunsmuir to Black Butte Overhead in RELIEVING TRAFFIC Siskiyou County CONGESTION Pavement resealing and removal and replacement of failed roadway sections on various local streets in the City of Fort Jones Paving 13.5 miles of local roads in the City of Tulelake SAFETY IMPROVEMENT Rehabilitate and pavement improvements on local roads throughout PROJECTS FOR in the City of Eureka 9 PEDESTRIANS AND Improve approximately 20 miles of pavement on US 101 from north of Myers Flat to Newton Road in Humboldt County BICYCLISTS Paving of local streets and roads in the City of Arcata Resurface 2.3 miles of Myrtle Avenue in the unincorporated Eureka area of Humboldt County SB1 FUNDING FOR OUR Reconstruct entire length of Redwood Way in Humboldt County CITIES AND COUNTIES: 10-YEAR TOTAL Humboldt road safety County $91.6 million Install new traffi c signals at the intersection of Alma Street and Del Norte $18.2 Million North Mt.
    [Show full text]
  • Developing Statewide Sustainable-Communities Strategies Monitoring System for Jobs, Housing, and Commutes December 15, 2018 6
    STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ADA Notice TECHNICAL REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document is available in alternate TR0003 (REV 10/98) formats. For information call (916) 654-6410 or TDD (916) 654-3880 or write 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 18-2931 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. REPORT DATE Developing Statewide Sustainable-Communities Strategies Monitoring System for Jobs, Housing, and Commutes December 15, 2018 6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE 7. AUTHOR(S) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO. Paul M. Ong,Chhandara Pech, Alycia Cheng, Silvia R. González 9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. WORK UNIT NUMBER University of California, Los Angeles, 10889 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 700 Los Angeles, Ca 90095 11. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER 65A0636 12. SPONSORING AGENCY AND ADDRESS 13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED California Department of Transportation July 1, 2017 - December 31, 2018 Division of Research, Innovation and System Information PO Box942873, MS 83 14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE Sacramento, CA 94273-0001 15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 16. ABSTRACT This project is the second phase of a larger effort aimed at developing a group of key indicators, referred to in this document as the Statewide Monitoring System, to track progress toward achieving certain SB 375 goals across California. One of the legislation's goals is to promote better coordination of land-use, housing, and transportation planning with the goal of reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions. The proposed Statewide Monitoring System identifies key recent developments by small geographies (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • On-Road Motor Vehicle Activity Data Volume I - Bus Population and Activity Pattern
    On-Road Motor Vehicle Activity Data Volume I - Bus Population and Activity Pattern Pinal Report Contract No. A132-182 Prepared for: California Air Resources Board Research Division 2020 L Street Sacramento, California 95814 Prepared by: Yuji Rorie, Ph.D. Craig Tranby and Steven Sidawi Valley Research Corporation 8622 Reseda Blvd., Suite 209 Northridge, California 91324 September, 1994 DISCLAIMER The statements and conclusions in this report are those of the contractor and not necessarily those of the California Air Resources Board. The mention of commercial products, their sources, or their uses, in connection with materials or methods reported herein is not to be construed as either an actual or implied endorsement of such products. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Valley Research Corporation acknowledges the efforts and cooperation of several agencies and individuals who assisted in this project. Invaluable assistance was provided by the California Highway Patrol, the Federal Transit Administration, and the Southern California Rapid Transit District for completing the first of the two-volume final report -- Bus Population and Activity Pattern. The Department of Motor Vehicles and the Bureau of Automotive Repair provided statewide records of registered motor vehicles and Smog Check test data while the staff of the ARB's Technical Support Division provided advice and data preparation for completing the second volume -- Vehicle Age Distribution and Mileage Accumulation Rate. This project entitled "On-Road Motor Vehicle Activity Data" was funded by the California Air Resources Board Contract No. A132-182. ABSTRACT The objectives ofthis study were threefold: (1) to develop county-specific estimates ofthe transit bus fleet and vehicle miles of travel (VMT) ; (2) to develop county-specific estimates of the school bus fleet and VMT; and (3) to determine representative driving patterns of transit buses and school buses.
    [Show full text]
  • Santa Maria Area Transit (SMAT)
    October 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section I .................................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1 Overview of the Transit System ............................................................................................ 1 Section II ................................................................................................................................. 9 Operator Compliance Requirements .................................................................................... 9 Section III .............................................................................................................................. 17 Prior Triennial Performance Recommendations ................................................................. 17 Section IV ............................................................................................................................. 21 TDA Performance Indicators .............................................................................................. 21 Section V ............................................................................................................... 34 Review of Operator Functions ............................................................................................ 34 Operations ............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Intercommunity Transit Service
    STAFF REPORT TO: TTAC, NCTAC, SBCTAC SUBJECT: Intercommunity Transit Service MEETING DATE: May 4, 2004 AGENDA ITEM: 4 RECOMMENDATION: A. Recommend approval of final draft Intercommunity Transit Service Implementation Plan between Lompoc – VAFB – Santa Maria. B. Recommend selection of lease/purchase budget scenario for development of CMAQ application. C. Review and comment on draft, Memorandum of Understanding, between the cities of Santa Maria, Lompoc, the County of Santa Barbara, and the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments, Regarding Coordination of a Three-Year Pilot Project to Provide Regular, Fixed Route, Commuter Public Transportation Service between Lompoc and Santa Maria. DISCUSSION: Background Last month staff obtained input from various advisory committees such as TTAC (Technical Transportation Advisory Committee) North County Transit Advisory Committee (NCTAC), and the Santa Barbara County Transit Advisory Council (SBCTAC) on the draft Transit Service Implementation Plan. The North County Transit Advisory Committee met on March 30 and approved the draft plan with the recommendation that a bus leasing option be given priority consideration so the service is delivered expeditiously. The Santa Barbara County Transit Advisory Council met later that same day and recommended that a leasing option be given priority consideration so the service is delivered expeditiously and that a low – floor bus configuration be selected to facilitate use of the service by disabled users. TTAC met on April 1 and requested the following adjustments to the assumptions in the development of the final plan: re-examine fuel costs due to recent increase in fuel price, assess implications of schedule on driver needs due to likelihood of split shifts increasing costs, delete Lakeview SB stop, add a formal annual evaluation period, at the end of two years assess continuation of service based on performance standards, and increase costs for comparable ADA transit service option.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation Emergency Preparedness Plan DRAFT | September 30, 2020 TABLE of CONTENTS
    TRANSPORTATION EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PLAN DRAFT Prepared for Prepared by Claris Strategy Terra Firma Enterprises CPARS Consulting SEPTEMBER 30, 2020 WARNING: FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Information contained in this document is exempt from FOIA (Exemption 2). Any authorized individual who knowingly or recklessly divulges information from this document may be imprisoned for one year, fined or both. This page intentionally left blank. 3 | Transportation Emergency Preparedness Plan DRAFT | September 30, 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 SECTION ONE: INTRODUCTION 10 1.1 Foreword 10 1.2 How to use the TEPP 10 1.3 Planning Assumptions and Considerations 11 1.4 Purpose 11 1.5 Objectives 12 1.6 Scope and Applicability 12 1.7 Authorities, Requirements and Regulations 12 1.8 Approval and Promulgation 13 1.9 Maintenance of Plan 13 1.10 Public Awareness and Education 13 1.11 ADA Considerations 14 1.12 Training, Exercises and Improvement Plan 14 1.13 Distribution List / Department and Agency Concurrence 14 2.0 SECTION TWO: SANTA BARBARA AND VENTURA COUNTIES OVERVIEW 18 2.1 Transportation Infrastructure for Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties 20 2.2 Vulnerable Populations 31 2.3 Threat Summaries 33 2.4 Prioritization Of Threats That May Impact Transportation 44 3.0 SECTION THREE: CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS 48 3.1 Organization 48 3.2 Activation Procedures 55 3.3 Communications 62 3.4 Facilities 63 4.0 SECTION FOUR: ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 66 4.1 Local and Regional Government Agencies 66 4.2 State Agencies 69 4.3 Federal Government 70 4.4 Multi-Agency Coordination
    [Show full text]
  • Global Mass Transit Report Information and Analysis on the Global Mass Transit Industry
    NOVEMBER 2009 VOLUME I, ISSUE 1 Global Mass Transit Report Information and analysis on the global mass transit industry Contactless Ticketing in Mass Transit Mass Transit in South Africa A win-win solution for all stakeholders Governments invest heavily in transport infrastructure ith its myriad of advantages such as lower transaction costs, faster transaction speeds and multi-functionality, W s governments around the world acknowledge the contactless smart ticketing is the future of the global mass- important role that public transport plays in improving the transportation industry. Already operational in key metropolitan A quality of life, there is a global trend for increased investment in areas such as Hong Kong, London, Seoul, Washington D.C. and this important infrastructure sector. A commitment to upgrade Shanghai, contactless smart ticketing offers a win-win solution and expand mass transit systems has risen across the Americas, for transit operators and users, contactless technology developers Europe, Asia, and now in Africa as well. Taking the lead in Africa and financial institutions. is its biggest economy South Africa. Today, virtually all transit-fare payment systems in the For many years, South Africa boasted of the best transport delivery and procurement stages are opting for contactless infrastructure in the African continent. However, over the last ticketing as the primary medium. India’s Mumbai metro, which few years the transport infrastructure has been deteriorating. This is expected to become operational in 2011, will be equipped with is essentially owing to short sightedness and lack of continued a system based on contactless technology with reusable smart investment. It is only now that the transport sector has begun tickets.
    [Show full text]
  • Transit Profiles: 2014 Report Year Summary
    2014 Report Year NTD National Transit Database Transit Profiles: 2014 Report Year Summary Office of Budget and Policy March 2016 Federal Transit Administration U.S. Department of Transportation Transit Profiles: 2014 Report Year Summary Table of Contents Table of Contents ............................................................................................................. i Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1 Profile Details ............................................................................................................... 1 Sections ....................................................................................................................... 5 Additional National Transit Database Publications ....................................................... 6 Full Reporting Agencies for Report Year 2014 ................................................................ 7 Small Systems Reporting Agencies .............................................................................. 29 Separate Service Reporting Agencies........................................................................... 41 Planning Reporting Agencies ........................................................................................ 41 Building Reporting Agencies ......................................................................................... 41 Rural General Public Transit Reporting Agencies ........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2018-19 State of Good Repair Approved Project List
    2018-19 State Of Good Repair Approved Project List 2018-19 Project Location Estimated total # Recipient Sub-Recipient Project Title Project Description City SGR Allocation Amount* 1 San Joaquin Council of Governments San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission - to Altamont Facility Upgrades and Improvements The Western Pacific Depot building, adjacent to the Robert Stockton Corridor Express (ACE) J. Cabral Station, is currently in a state of disrepair due to a fire. The building will be rehabilitated for future use by ACE $256,937 passengers and SJRRC employees. Metropolitan Transportation Commission Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority - to Facility Upgrades and Improvements The Western Pacific Depot building, adjacent to the Robert Stockton Altamont Corridor Express (ACE) J. Cabral Station, is currently in a state of disrepair due to a fire. The building will be rehabilitated for future use by ACE $31,362 passengers and SJRRC employees. Metropolitan Transportation Commission Alameda County Congestion Management Agency - to Facility Upgrades and Improvements The Western Pacific Depot building, adjacent to the Robert Stockton Altamont Corridor Express (ACE) J. Cabral Station, is currently in a state of disrepair due to a fire. The building will be rehabilitated for future use by ACE $40,599 passengers and SJRRC employees. San Joaquin Council of Governments San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority - to Altamont Facility Upgrades and Improvements The Western Pacific Depot building, adjacent to the Robert Stockton Corridor Express (ACE) J. Cabral Station, is currently in a state of disrepair due to a fire. The building will be rehabilitated for future use by ACE $44 passengers and SJRRC employees. 2 Metropolitan Transportation Commission Metropolitan Transportation Commission Clipper®/Clipper® 2.0 Replacement and modernization of the San Francisco Bay All 101 cities of the San Area's Clipper electronic transit fare payment system Francisco Bay Area $10,250,287 which is used by 22 transit operators.
    [Show full text]