TRANSPORTATION DIVISION Locals
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
8364 Licensed Charities As of 3/10/2020 MICS 24404 MICS 52720 T
8364 Licensed Charities as of 3/10/2020 MICS 24404 MICS 52720 T. Rowe Price Program for Charitable Giving, Inc. The David Sheldrick Wildlife Trust USA, Inc. 100 E. Pratt St 25283 Cabot Road, Ste. 101 Baltimore MD 21202 Laguna Hills CA 92653 Phone: (410)345-3457 Phone: (949)305-3785 Expiration Date: 10/31/2020 Expiration Date: 10/31/2020 MICS 52752 MICS 60851 1 For 2 Education Foundation 1 Michigan for the Global Majority 4337 E. Grand River, Ste. 198 1920 Scotten St. Howell MI 48843 Detroit MI 48209 Phone: (425)299-4484 Phone: (313)338-9397 Expiration Date: 07/31/2020 Expiration Date: 07/31/2020 MICS 46501 MICS 60769 1 Voice Can Help 10 Thousand Windows, Inc. 3290 Palm Aire Drive 348 N Canyons Pkwy Rochester Hills MI 48309 Livermore CA 94551 Phone: (248)703-3088 Phone: (571)263-2035 Expiration Date: 07/31/2021 Expiration Date: 03/31/2020 MICS 56240 MICS 10978 10/40 Connections, Inc. 100 Black Men of Greater Detroit, Inc 2120 Northgate Park Lane Suite 400 Attn: Donald Ferguson Chattanooga TN 37415 1432 Oakmont Ct. Phone: (423)468-4871 Lake Orion MI 48362 Expiration Date: 07/31/2020 Phone: (313)874-4811 Expiration Date: 07/31/2020 MICS 25388 MICS 43928 100 Club of Saginaw County 100 Women Strong, Inc. 5195 Hampton Place 2807 S. State Street Saginaw MI 48604 Saint Joseph MI 49085 Phone: (989)790-3900 Phone: (888)982-1400 Expiration Date: 07/31/2020 Expiration Date: 07/31/2020 MICS 58897 MICS 60079 1888 Message Study Committee, Inc. -
Amtrak's Rights and Relationships with Host Railroads
Amtrak’s Rights and Relationships with Host Railroads September 21, 2017 Jim Blair –Director Host Railroads Today’s Amtrak System 2| Amtrak Amtrak’s Services • Northeast Corridor (NEC) • 457 miles • Washington‐New York‐Boston Northeast Corridor • 11.9 million riders in FY16 • Long Distance (LD) services • 15 routes • Up to 2,438 miles in length Long • 4.65 million riders in FY16 Distance • State‐supported trains • 29 routes • 19 partner states • Up to 750 miles in length State- • 14.7 million riders in FY16 supported3| Amtrak Amtrak’s Host Railroads Amtrak Route System Track Ownership Excluding Terminal Railroads VANCOUVER SEATTLE Spokane ! MONTREAL PORTLAND ST. PAUL / MINNEAPOLIS Operated ! St. Albans by VIA Rail NECR MDOT TORONTO VTR Rutland ! Port Huron Niagara Falls ! Brunswick Grand Rapids ! ! ! Pan Am MILWAUKEE ! Pontiac Hoffmans Metra Albany ! BOSTON ! CHICAGO ! Springfield Conrail Metro- ! CLEVELAND MBTA SALT LAKE CITY North PITTSBURGH ! ! NEW YORK ! INDIANAPOLIS Harrisburg ! KANSAS CITY ! PHILADELPHIA DENVER ! ! BALTIMORE SACRAMENTO Charlottesville WASHINGTON ST. LOUIS ! Richmond OAKLAND ! Petersburg ! Buckingham ! Newport News Norfolk NMRX Branch ! Oklahoma City ! Bakersfield ! MEMPHIS SCRRA ALBUQUERQUE ! ! LOS ANGELES ATLANTA SCRRA / BNSF / SDN DALLAS ! FT. WORTH SAN DIEGO HOUSTON ! JACKSONVILLE ! NEW ORLEANS SAN ANTONIO Railroads TAMPA! Amtrak (incl. Leased) Norfolk Southern FDOT ! MIAMI Union Pacific Canadian Pacific BNSF Canadian National CSXT Other Railroads 4| Amtrak Amtrak’s Host Railroads ! MONTREAL Amtrak NEC Route System -
U.S. Railroad Retirement Board
FOM1 315 315.1 Supplemental Annuity Background 315.1.1 General In 1966 the Railroad Retirement Board (RRB) began paying supplemental annuities, in addition to regular age and service annuities, to railroad employees who met certain criteria. At that time, eligibility for the supplemental annuity was limited to those employees who were age 65 or older with 25 or more years of railroad service and who were first awarded regular retirement annuities after June 30, 1966. The Railroad Retirement Act of 1974 (RRA) extended supplemental annuity eligibility to those employees who were age 60 or older with 30 or more years of service and who were first awarded regular age and service annuities after June 30, 1974. The 1981 Amendments to the RRA began phasing out the supplemental annuity by adding the requirement that the employee must have at least one month of creditable railroad service before October 1, 1981 to be eligible for the supplemental annuity. Therefore, a supplemental annuity is not payable to an employee who does not have at least one month of service before October 1, 1981, even if they meet all other age and service requirements. 315.1.2 Earliest Supplemental Annuity Eligibility Dates Under 1937 and 1974 Acts A. Earliest Eligibility Dates The date an age and service annuity or disability annuity is awarded is the voucher date of the award, i.e., the date the award is processed for payment. Beginning in 1966, the employee’s age and service annuity had to be vouchered after June 1966 for them to be eligible for a supplemental annuity at age 65 with at least 25 years of service. -
OPINION REVENUE; SATISH UPADHYAY, in His Official Capacity As Acting Director of the Oregon Department of Revenue, Defendants-Appellants
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY, a No. 19-35184 Delaware corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 3:17-cv-01716-JE v. OREGON DEPARTMENT OF OPINION REVENUE; SATISH UPADHYAY, in his official capacity as Acting Director of the Oregon Department of Revenue, Defendants-Appellants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Michael H. Simon, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted May 15, 2020 Portland, Oregon Filed July 8, 2020 Before: Jay S. Bybee and Lawrence VanDyke, Circuit Judges, and Vince Chhabria,* District Judge. * The Honorable Vince Chhabria, United States District Judge for the Northern District of California, sitting by designation. 2 BNSF RAILWAY V. OREGON DEP’T OF REVENUE Opinion by Judge VanDyke; Concurrence by Judge Chhabria SUMMARY** Rail Carriers The panel affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of BNSF Railway Co., a rail carrier that challenged the Oregon Department of Revenue’s imposition of a tax on its intangible personal property, such as accounting goodwill. Agreeing with other circuits, the panel held that BNSF could challenge the property tax under the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act, known as the 4- R Act, which prohibits taxes that discriminate against rail carriers. The panel rejected the argument that tax was generally applicable and that BNSF’s challenge was no more than a demand for exemptions offered to other taxpayers. The panel held that the proper comparison class for BNSF was Oregon’s commercial and industrial taxpayers, and the intangible personal property tax assessment discriminated against BNSF in violation of the 4-R Act, 49 U.S.C. -
Federal Register Volume 32 • Number 119
FEDERAL REGISTER VOLUME 32 • NUMBER 119 Wednesday, June 21,1967 • Washington, D.C. Pages 8789-8845 Agencies in this issue— Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service Agriculture Department Atomic Energy Commission Business and Defense Services Administration Civil Aeronautics Board Consumer and Marketing Service Fédéral Aviation Administration Federal Communications Commission Federal Highway Administration Federal Home Loan Bank Board Federal Maritime Commission Food and Drug Administration Geological Survey Interstate Commerce Commission Land Management Bureau Navy Department Securities and Exchange Commission Small Business Administration Detailed list o f Contents appears inside. Subscriptions Now Being Accepted SLIP LAWS 90th Congress, 1st Session 1967 Separate prints of Public Laws, published immediately after enactment, with marginal annotations and legislative history references. Subscription Price: $12.00 per Session Published by Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Service, General Services Administration Order from Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 ¿vONAt.*- r r i i r O M l W SW D E P IC T E D Published daily, Tuesday through Saturday (no publication on Sundays, Mondays, or r r J l E i l r l I l i E l l I ^ I E l f on the day after an official Federal holiday), by the Office of the Federal Register, National $ Archives and Records Service, General Services Administration (mail address Nations Area Code 202 ^ Phone 962-8626 Archives Building, Washington, D.C. 20408), pursuant to the authority contained in the Federal Register Act, approved July 26, 1935 (49 Stat. 500, as amended; 44 U.S.C., Ch. -
“1 EDERAL \ 1 9 3 4 ^ VOLUME 20 NUMBER 47 * Wa N T E D ^ Washington, Wednesday, March 9, 1955
\ utteba\ I SCRIPTA I { fc “1 EDERAL \ 1 9 3 4 ^ VOLUME 20 NUMBER 47 * Wa n t e d ^ Washington, Wednesday, March 9, 1955 TITLE 5— ADMINISTRATIVE material disclosure: § 3.1845 Composi CONTENTS tion: Wool Products Labeling Act; PERSONNEL § 3.1900 Source or origin: Wool Products Agricultural Marketing Service PaS0 Labeling Act. Subpart—Offering unfair, Proposed rule making: Chapter I— Civil Service Commission improper and deceptive inducements to Milk handling in Wichita, Kans_ 1405 Part 6—Exceptions P rom the purchase or deal: § 3.1982 Guarantee— Agricultural Research Service Competitive S ervice statutory: Wool Products Labeling Act. Proposed rule making: DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Subpart—V sing misleading nam e— Foreign quarantine notices; for Goods: § 3.2280 Composition. I. In con eign cotton and covers______ 1407 Effective upon publication in the F ed nection with the introduction or manu eral R egister, paragraph (j) is added facture for introduction into commerce, Agriculture Department to § 6.104 as set out below. or the offering for sale, sale, transporta See Agricultural Marketing Serv ice; Agricultural Research Serv § 6.104 Department of Defense. * * * tion or distribution in commerce, of sweaters or other “wool products” as such ice; Rural Electrification Ad (j) Office of Legislative Programs. ministration. (1) Until December 31,1955, one Direc products are defined in and subject to the tor of Legislative Programs, GS-301-17. Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939, Bonneville Power Administra (2) Until December 31, 1955, two Su which products contain, purport to con tion pervisory Legislative Analysts, GS- tain or in any way are represented as Notices: 301-15. -
English/Deportation/Statistics
International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion Proceedings On Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory Palestine Written Statement (30 January 2004) And Oral Pleading (23 February 2004) Preface 1. In October of 2003, increasing concern about the construction by Israel, the occupying Power, of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, in departure from the Armistice Line of 1949 (the Green Line) and deep into Palestinian territory, brought the issue to the forefront of attention and debate at the United Nations. The Wall, as it has been built by the occupying Power, has been rapidly expanding as a regime composed of a complex physical structure as well as practical, administrative and other measures, involving, inter alia, the confiscation of land, the destruction of property and countless other violations of international law and the human rights of the civilian population. Israel’s continued and aggressive construction of the Wall prompted Palestine, the Arab Group, the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) and the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) to convey letters to the President of the United Nations Security Council in October of 2003, requesting an urgent meeting of the Council to consider the grave violations and breaches of international law being committed by Israel. 2. The Security Council convened to deliberate the matter on 14 October 2003. A draft resolution was presented to the Council, which would have simply reaffirmed, inter alia, the principle of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force and would have decided that the “construction by Israel, the occupying Power, of a wall in the Occupied Territories departing from the armistice line of 1949 is illegal under relevant provisions of international law and must be ceased and reversed”. -
Northern Michigan Rail Ridership Feasibility and Cost Estimate Study
NORTHERN MICHIGAN RAIL RIDERSHIP FEASIBILITY AND COST ESTIMATE STUDY PREPARED FOR: The Groundwork Center For Resilient Communities Grant Fiduciary: Bay Area Transportation Authority PREPARED BY: Transportation Economics & Management Systems, Inc. OCTOBER 2018 FINAL REPORT This page intentionally left blank NORTHERN MICHIGAN RAIL RIDERSHIP FEASIBILITY AND COST ESTIMATE STUDY About the Groundwork Center for Resilient Communities The Groundwork Center for Resilient Communities works with people to build a thriving local farm and food economy; to make Michigan towns and villages stronger, more walkable, bike-able, and transit- friendly; and to develop local, clean energy. They seek to achieve on-the-ground results in northwest Michigan and leverage them to support other communities and improvements to state policy. All of this is designed to strengthen the local economy, protect the environment, and build community. Re-establishing passenger rail service between Ann Arbor, Petoskey, and Traverse City—homes to growing technology industries—will link the growing northwest with population centers in the southeast and universities along the way. Civic and business leaders believe this effort will help our state attract the next generation workforce that wants to live and thrive in Michigan without depending on a car. Groundwork believes that bringing passenger rail service back to northern Michigan is possible in less than a decade with a focused campaign of public engagement, technical analysis, and support from community, state and federal agencies. For More Information Groundwork center 148 E. Front Street, Suite 301 Traverse City, MI 49684-5725 (231) 941-6584 [email protected] Introduction October 2018 Page i NORTHERN MICHIGAN RAIL RIDERSHIP FEASIBILITY AND COST ESTIMATE STUDY This page intentionally left blank Introduction October 2018 Page ii NORTHERN MICHIGAN RAIL RIDERSHIP FEASIBILITY AND COST ESTIMATE STUDY Acknowledgements This study was prepared by Transportation Economics & Management Systems, Inc. -
MDOT Michigan State Rail Plan Tech Memo 2 Existing Conditions
Technical Memorandum #2 March 2011 Prepared for: Prepared by: HNTB Corporation Table of Contents 1. Introduction ..............................................................................................................1 2. Freight Rail System Profile ......................................................................................2 2.1. Overview ...........................................................................................................2 2.2. Class I Railroads ...............................................................................................2 2.3. Regional Railroads ............................................................................................6 2.4. Class III Shortline Railroads .............................................................................7 2.5. Switching & Terminal Railroads ....................................................................12 2.7. State Owned Railroads ...................................................................................16 2.8. Abandonments ................................................................................................18 2.10. International Border Crossings .....................................................................22 2.11. Ongoing Border Crossing Activities .............................................................24 2.12. Port Access Facilities ....................................................................................24 3. Freight Rail Traffic ................................................................................................25 -
RW BAILEY INTERVIEW. INDEX. P 2. Education 3-4. Vice-Consul In
BDOHP: R. W. BAILEY INTERVIEW. INDEX. p 2. Education 3-4. Vice-Consul in Beirut, 1939-41 4-5. Alexandria in the war 5-6. Cairo and return to the FO, 1945-8 7-8. Middle East specialist in the Washington Embassy. (Includes Suez) 8. Khartoum, 1957-60 8-10. Experiences in the Yemen, 1960-62 10-11. Consul-General in Gothenburg 11. Minister in Baghdad, 1965-7 11-12. Ambassador to Bolivia, 1967-71 12-13. Ambassador to Morocco, 1971-5 13. Retirement. Adviser to the Omani government 13-14. Comments on career and British foreign policy, especially in Middle East 1 BRITISH DIPLOMATIC ORAL HISTORY PROGRAMME Interview with R W Bailey, CMG, on 25th April 1996. Interview conducted by Mr John Hutson. Mr Bailey, we have put down on paper the factual details of your education but what it doesn't say is how you came to join first of all the Consular Service. Would you like to tell us about that? Well, I attended King Edward VI School in Southampton and Southampton at that time was the biggest passenger port in the UK. I joined the League of Nations Union, so it was my job as Secretary to invite people to come and talk to this school group. The obvious source were the consuls of most countries, the American Consul and most of the South American countries had Consuls General there, like Brazil and so on and, in fact, I became very - good friends with the American Consul there, John Brooms, and it so happened that we were later colleagues in Beirut and then also he was in the State Department in Washington. -
Senate Keeps Health
20--MANCHESTER HERALD. Friday. Oci. 6., 1989 TOWN OF MANCHESTER LEGAL NOTICE CARS I CARS b e c a u s e y o u never FOR SALE know when someone will DEADLINES; For classified odvertlsments to Zoning Commission will hold a public hear- FOR SALE be searching for the Item be published Tuesday through Saturday, the Monday October 16, 1989 at 7:00 P.M. in ttie Hearing w u have for sale, it's BUICK 1979 Skvhawk - 2 deadline Is noon on the day before publica Center, 494 Main Street, Manchester, Connec better to run your want ad door hatch, good con- 1984 HONDA Civic Wagon tion. For advertisements to be published ticut to hear and consider the following petition: - 646-0767 or 649-4554, for several days ... cancel dltlon, standard. Monday, the deadline Is 2:30 p.m. on Frldoy. MANCHESTER - DAY CARE REGULATIONS Jack.__________ ing It os soon os you aet $700/best offer. 644- results. Application to amend the following Sections of the 6343. 1986 JEEP Wagoneer Ll- Manchester Zoning Regulations: Article I. Section 2.01; Article SUBARU 198'2-GL, red, 5 mlted - Excellent con II. Sections 2.01.08, 2.01.14 Now; 2.02.09; 2.02.16 New; Soc- dition, 43,000 miles, CARS jg i I CARS 3.01.07 New; 3.02.07 New; Sections 4.01 03- speed, air, sunroof. CARS 140K miles. $600/best automatic, air condl- FOR SALE CARS 4.01.08 New; 4.02.08 New; 4.02.09 New; Sections 5.01 04- tlonlng, am/fm FOR SALE L l j FOR SALE FOR SALE 5.01.12 New; 5.02.08 New; 5.02.09 New; Sections 6.01 04- offer. -
Karmiel Railway
World Tunnel Congress 2013 Geneva Underground – the way to the future! G. Anagnostou & H. Ehrbar (eds) © 2013 Taylor & Francis Group, London ISBN 978-1-138-00094-0 Proven tunnel forms at works in the Acre – Karmiel Railway B. Candeloro(1), M. Galimberti(1) (1)CIFA SpA – Zoomlion Heavy Industries, Senago, Italy ABSTRACT: At the beginning of 2012, CIFA signed a contract for the supply of 4 sets of formwork for the lining of the Gilon Tunnel which is constituted by two single track parallel tunnels, each one 4,7 km long, which include also 18 by-pass and escape tunnels. The need to meet a close deadline, the imposition of a restricted budget and the important length of the tunnels, imposed to find a balanced solution between costs saving and speed, by exploiting the skills of the constructor in digging and also its experience with proven and flexible lining methods. With regards to the lining phase, the choice of classical self-supporting formwork system is a key point to reach the targets making the most of the efficiency achievable with manpower and construction phases overlapping. 1 The Gilon Tunnel The Acre -Karmiel (or Akko-Carmiel) railway project (2,8 billion ILS) is part of the Netivei Israel plan, a 27,3 billions ILS project to promote a more balanced distribution of the population, economic activities and social condition between the central region of the country and the North and South regions of Negev and Galilee. The project is based on the commitment to make closer and accessible the various part of the country by creating a faster and more widespread transportation network.