DOCSLIB.ORG

2009 Anchorage CEDS Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Anchorage Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Adopted by the Anchorage Municipal Assembly on May 26, 2009 Matt Claman, Acting Mayor Municipality of Anchorage Mary Jane Michael, Executive Director Office of Economic & Community Development (OECD) Bill Popp, President and CEO Anchorage Economic Development Corporation (AEDC) Prepared By Susan R. Fison, Fison & Associates Darrel W. Hess, OECD Project Manager Erin E. Ealum, AEDC Business & Economic Development Director Funding Provided By Alaska Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development Alaska Regional Development Organizations Program and Municipality of Anchorage 2 Table of Contents Introduction & CEDS Development Process Background ........................................................................................7 CEDS Development Process .............................................................8 Anchorage Overview Anchorage History ............................................................................13 Geography & Climate .......................................................................16 Demographics...................................................................................19 Labor Force, Employment & Unemployment....................................24 Income & Wage Rates......................................................................26 Education..........................................................................................27 Quality of Life....................................................................................32 Cost of Living....................................................................................34 Infrastructure Overview...........................................................................................36 Air Transportation .............................................................................36 Port of Anchorage!.............................................................................38 Alaska Railroad!................................................................................40 Roads & Highways!...........................................................................42 Public Transportation!........................................................................43 Telecommunications!.........................................................................46 Natural Gas & Electricity!...................................................................49 Solid Waste!.......................................................................................50 Commercial Space!...........................................................................51 Major Economic Sectors Oil and Gas Industry!.........................................................................57 Air Cargo & Global Logistics!.............................................................59 Visitor Industry!..................................................................................61 Health Care!......................................................................................63 Construction!.....................................................................................65 Housing Market!.................................................................................66 Retail Trade!......................................................................................70 Military!..............................................................................................70 Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities & Threats Background!......................................................................................74 Economic Outlook!............................................................................74 Infrastructure!....................................................................................78 4 Education and Workforce Development!...........................................81 Visitor Development!..........................................................................83 Quality of Life!....................................................................................85 Industry Targeting Background Analysis!........................................................................88 Recommended Target Industries!......................................................89 Detailed Industry Targets!..................................................................90 Five-Year Goals, Objectives & Strategies Economic Development!....................................................................93 Infrastructure!....................................................................................94 Education & Workforce Development!...............................................96 Visitor Industry!..................................................................................98 Quality of Life!..................................................................................100 Bibliography Appendix - Proposed Projects Appendix - Resolutions from the Federation of Community Councils and Municipality of Anchorage Assembly 5 Introduction & CEDS Development Process Background A robust, diversified economy in Anchorage is essential to the well-being and quality of life of our communityʼs residents. Without a healthy, growing economic base, employment opportunities will diminish. Anchorageʼs economic vitality is also essential to the State of Alaska, because Anchorage accounts for more than 40% of the stateʼs population and employment. The current national and global recession increase the importance of strategic economic development planning. The Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965 requires an approved Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) so that a city can apply for investment assistance under the The Chugach Mountains frame the downtown Anchorage skyline. U.S. Department of Commerceʼs Economic Development Administrationʼs (EDA) Public Works or Economic Adjustment Assistance Programs. The spirit of a CEDS is one of continuous community involvement and cooperation from the private and public sectors in order to understand and confront economic challenges via a feasible, prioritized series of plans and projects that serves as a benchmark for economic and community development. The CEDS also identifies performance measures that will be used to evaluate progress in meeting goals. A CEDS is designed to bring together the public and private sectors to create an economic roadmap to diversify and strengthen the economy for the next five years. The planning process should identify a communityʼs unique advantages and analyze weaknesses of the local market. Most important, it should identify opportunities that could diversify and strengthen the local economy. Integrated economic development planning provides the flexibility to adapt to changing national and global economic conditions. A CEDS should establish goals, objectives, and strategies that provide the foundation to implement an action plan that can be used to set investment priorities for funding sources and attract private investment that creates jobs. CEDS Development Process The development of this Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy was a cooperative effort between Mary Jane Michael, Executive Director of the Municipalityʼs Office of Economic and The Anchorage plan won a major national Community Development (OECD) and Bill Popp, President and CEO of the Anchorage Economic Development Corporation (AEDC). OECD contracted with Susan Fison, former Municipal Planning Director, to lead the project team, which included Darrel Hess, OECD Project Manager and Erin Ealum, AEDC Business and Economic Development Director. Funding for the project was provided by the Municipality of Anchorage and the Alaska Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development, Alaska Regional Development Organizations Program. The fundamental purpose of this strategy is to provide direction for public and private actions to stimulate economic development in the Municipality of Anchorage and the region. At a basic level, the goals of the strategy are to create jobs, income and wealth. The strategy also aims to generate municipal revenue to fund facilities and services that will maintain and enhance our quality of life. The Anchorage CEDS draws heavily on the Municipalityʼs Anchorage 2020 Plan and its Housing and Community Development 8 Plan. It also incorporates much of the work done as part of the Vision Anchorage project, a major, year-long effort that was spearheaded by the Anchorage Economic Development Corporation. The CEDS also draws upon more than three dozen other strategic and long-range plans developed by various Municipal departments, state agencies and non-profit community organizations. Mayorʼs Economic Advisory Panel The Mayorʼs Economic Advisory Panel served as the 2009 CEDS Committee. This panel is a knowledgeable group of private sector and non-profit professionals with a broad range of expertise related to Anchorage economic and community issues. The panel met with Acting Mayor Matt Claman, Nancy Nolan, Senior Policy Director to the Acting Mayor, key Municipal staff and the project team. Members provided input on the strength, weaknesses, opportunities and threats facing the Municipality. They also reviewed the draft goals, objectives and strategies. Several members provided more AEDC spearheaded the Vision detailed information about topics in their areas of expertise. Anchorage project The committee met and reviewed the draft CEDS and provided comments, corrections and suggestions for
Recommended publications
  • Late Oligocene to Present Contractional Structure in and Around the Susitna Basin, Alaska—Geophysical Evidence and Geological GEOSPHERE; V

    Late Oligocene to Present Contractional Structure in and Around the Susitna Basin, Alaska—Geophysical Evidence and Geological GEOSPHERE; V

    Research Paper THEMED ISSUE: Geologic Evolution of the Alaska Range and Environs GEOSPHERE Late Oligocene to present contractional structure in and around the Susitna basin, Alaska—Geophysical evidence and geological GEOSPHERE; v. 12, no. 5 doi:10.1130/GES01279.1 implications R.W. Saltus1,*, R.G. Stanley2, P.J. Haeussler3, J.V. Jones III3, C.J. Potter4, and K.A. Lewis1 7 figures; 1 supplemental file 1U.S. Geological Survey, Denver Federal Center, Denver, Colorado 80225, USA 2U.S. Geological Survey, 345 Middlefield Road, Menlo Park, California 94025, USA CORRESPONDENCE: rick .saltus@ noaa .gov 3U.S. Geological Survey, 4210 University Drive, Anchorage, Alaska 99508-4626, USA 4U.S. Geological Survey, Piscataway, New Jersey 08854, USA CITATION: Saltus, R.W., Stanley, R.G., Haeussler, P.J., Jones, J.V., III, Potter, C.J., and Lewis, K.A., 2016, Late Oligocene to present contractional structure in ABSTRACT morphic rocks of the Talkeetna Mountains, and on the southeast by the Castle and around the Susitna basin, Alaska—Geophysical Mountain strike-slip fault. evidence and geological implications: Geosphere, The Cenozoic Susitna basin lies within an enigmatic lowland surrounded Existing structural information for the basin is sparse; aside from the Castle v. 12, no. 5, p. 1378–1390, doi:10.1130/GES01279.1. by the Central Alaska Range, Western Alaska Range (including the Tordrillo Mountain fault, none of the bounding structures are exposed. Subsurface data Mountains), and Talkeetna Mountains in south-central Alaska. Some previ- consist of a modest number of vintage seismic lines (e.g., Lewis et al., 2015) Received 1 October 2015 Revision received 8 June 2016 ous interpretations show normal faults as the defining structures of thebasin and a few wells, none of which drilled deep enough to reach crystalline base- Accepted 6 July 2016 (e.g., Kirschner, 1994).
  • Chapter 1. Existing Conditions

    Chapter 1. Existing Conditions

    Chapter 1: Existing Conditions In order to advance the vision for the District, it is ANCHORAGE 2020 PLAN important to understand current conditions and Anchorage 2020 Anchorage Bowl Comprehensive Plan, adopted in build on the momentum of existing municipal goals February 2001 guides land use policy within the City of Anchorage. and plans. This chapter identifies existing planning The Land Use Policy Map from the Anchorage 2020 Plan identified documents, highlights key assets and opportunities, one town center, three neighborhood commercial centers and two transit supportive corridors within the East Anchorage study area. and describes current social and economic conditions. ANCHORAGE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Framework for Positive Change In March 2012, the City developed a comprehensive housing study Several other planning documents already in place provide an for the Municipality of Anchorage. It evaluated projected housing existing framework for East Anchorage District to move toward demand between 2010 and 2030 and analyzed financial feasibility positive change in the future. Along with the East Anchorage of different housing types, especially compact housing. District Plan, they support the transformation of East Anchorage. The East Anchorage District Plan aligns with existing document goals and details specific recommendations to further advance positive change in the area. 6 | REVIEW DRAFT Chapter 1: Existing Conditions Study Area Location and Boundary The East Anchorage District planning area includes the northeast corner of the Anchorage Bowl, bounded by the Glenn Highway to the north, the JBER to the east, Tudor Road to the south, and Bragaw Street to the west. In addition, the Stuckagain Heights (Basher) area – southeast of Tudor Road at the southeast end of the Campbell Airstrip Road – is also included in the study area, although it is not depicted in every map throughout the Plan.
  • Alaska Railroad Corporation. May

    Alaska Railroad Corporation. May

    Prepared for: Alaska Railroad Corporation Anchorage, Alaska Remedial Investigation Alaska Railroad Corporation Anchorage Terminal Reserve U.S. EPA Docket No. CERCLA 10-2004-0065 Volume I – Text and Tables The RETEC Group, Inc. November 2007 – Revision 1: January 25, 2008 Revision 2: May 12, 2008 Document No.: 00092-028 Contents 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.1 Objectives of the Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent .......................... 1-1 1.2 Preliminary Conceptual Site Models............................................................................................... 1-2 1.3 Approach for achieving investigation objectives............................................................................. 1-3 1.3.1 Areas not specifically addressed in the RI/FS .................................................................. 1-4 1.3.2 RI approaches for protection of Ship Creek ..................................................................... 1-5 1.3.3 Authoritative groundwater, soil, and soil gas evaluation .................................................. 1-6 1.3.4 Terminals Area................................................................................................................... 1-7 1.3.5 Sources of Site information ............................................................................................... 1-8 1.3.6 Leased property review for remedial investigation
  • Recommendations

    Recommendations

    RECOMMENDATIONS . 7-1 Anchorage Metropolitan Area Transportation Solutions 2035 Metropolitan Transportation Plan 7-2 . A Call to Action . 7-3 Anchorage Metropolitan Area Transportation Solutions 2035 Metropolitan Transportation Plan 7-4 7-5 Anchorage Metropolitan Area Transportation Solutions 2035 Metropolitan Transportation Plan 7-6 Roads Scoring Points Criterion 0 1 3 5 Some preliminary Final engineering design and/or ROW purchased; Project readiness No work started completed or environmental ready to construct nearing completion work complete Needed in short Needed in short term (2011- term—helps to Can wait until Long-term need 2023)— addresses Timing of need complete grid beyond 2035 (2023-2035) major system or improves safety/capacity facility to standards needs Next logical or final Logical sequencing N/A New project N/A phase of an existing road Functional classification Local Collector Arterial/expressway Freeway Number of modes (automobile, pedestrian, bike, transit, freight Single Two Three Four or more or intermodal) 1st quartile Cost/length/AADT 4th quartile 3rd quartile 2nd quartile (highest score) AADT = Annual Average Daily Traffic N/A = not applicable 7-7 Anchorage Metropolitan Area Transportation Solutions 2035 Metropolitan Transportation Plan 7-8 Criterion Scoring Points 2010 Cost Cost/ Project Project Timing of Logical Functional Multi-modal Project Name Project Location Estimate Length/ Total Number Readiness Need Sequencing Classification Function ($ million) AADT Seward Hwy - Dimond Blvd Dimond Blvd to Dowling 101
  • Ditarod Trail International Sled Dog Race Official Rules 2015

    Ditarod Trail International Sled Dog Race Official Rules 2015

    DITAROD TRAIL INTERNATIONAL SLED DOG RACE OFFICIAL RULES 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS (note: the #’s refer to rule numbers.) Pre-Race Procedure & Administration 1 -- Musher Qualifications 2 -- Entries 3 -- Entry Fee 4 -- Substitutes 5 -- Race Start and Re-Start 6 -- Race Timing 7 -- Advertising, Public Relations & Publicity 8 -- Media 9 -- Awards Presentation 10 -- Scratched Mushers 11 -- Purse Musher Conduct and Competition 12 -- Checkpoints 13 -- Mandatory Stops 14 -- Bib 15 -- Sled 16 -- Mandatory Items 17 -- Dog Maximums and Minimums 18 -- Unmanageable Teams 19 -- Driverless Team 20 -- Teams Tied Together 21 -- Motorized Vehicles 22 -- Sportsmanship 23 -- Good Samaritan Rule 24 -- Interference 25 -- Tethering 26 -- Passing 27 -- Parking 28 -- Accommodations 2015 Race Rules 1 of 15 29 -- Litter 30 -- Use of Drugs & Alcohol 31 -- Outside Assistance 32 -- No Man’s Land 33 -- One Musher per Team 34 -- Killing of Game Animals 35 -- Electronic Devices 36 -- Competitiveness Veterinary Issues & Dog Care 37 -- Dog Care 38 -- Equipment & Team Configuration 39 -- Drug Use 40 -- Pre-Race Veterinary Exam 41 -- Jurisdiction & Care 42 -- Expired Dogs 43 -- Dog Description 44 -- Dog Tags 45 -- Dropped Dogs 46 -- Hauling Dogs Food Drops & Logistics 47 -- Shipping of Food & Gear 48 -- Shipping Amounts Officials, Penalties & Appeals 49 -- Race Officials 50 -- Protests 51 -- Penalties 52 -- Appeals OFFICIAL 2015 RULES Policy Preamble --The Iditarod Trail International Sled Dog Race shall be a race for dog mushers meeting the entry qualifications as set forth by the Board of Directors of the Iditarod Trail Committee, Inc. Recognizing the aptitude and experience necessary and the varying degrees of monetary support and residence locations of mushers, with due regard to the safety of mushers, the humane care and treatment of dogs and the orderly conduct of the race, the Trail Committee shall encourage and maintain the philosophy that the race be constructed to permit as many qualified mushers as possible who wish to enter and contest the Race to do so.
  • Iditarod National Historic Trail I Historic Overview — Robert King

    Iditarod National Historic Trail I Historic Overview — Robert King

    Iditarod National Historic Trail i Historic Overview — Robert King Introduction: Today’s Iditarod Trail, a symbol of frontier travel and once an important artery of Alaska’s winter commerce, served a string of mining camps, trading posts, and other settlements founded between 1880 and 1920, during Alaska’s Gold Rush Era. Alaska’s gold rushes were an extension of the American mining frontier that dates from colonial America and moved west to California with the gold discovery there in 1848. In each new territory, gold strikes had caused a surge in population, the establishment of a territorial government, and the development of a transportation system linking the goldfields with the rest of the nation. Alaska, too, followed through these same general stages. With the increase in gold production particularly in the later 1890s and early 1900s, the non-Native population boomed from 430 people in 1880 to some 36,400 in 1910. In 1912, President Taft signed the act creating the Territory of Alaska. At that time, the region’s 1 Iditarod National Historic Trail: Historic Overview transportation systems included a mixture of steamship and steamboat lines, railroads, wagon roads, and various cross-country trail including ones designed principally for winter time dogsled travel. Of the latter, the longest ran from Seward to Nome, and came to be called the Iditarod Trail. The Iditarod Trail today: The Iditarod trail, first commonly referred to as the Seward to Nome trail, was developed starting in 1908 in response to gold rush era needs. While marked off by an official government survey, in many places it followed preexisting Native trails of the Tanaina and Ingalik Indians in the Interior of Alaska.
  • Chester Creek Watershed Plan (Draft)

    Chester Creek Watershed Plan (Draft)

    Prepared for: The Municipal Planning Department and Watershed Management Services 1 Prepared by: Anchorage Waterways Council Rev. 4, September 2014 (Draft) Table of Contents Executive Summary...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 7 Importance of Watershed Planning .................................................................................................................................................................. 8 Regulations and Plans ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 9 2 Creation of the Plan................................................................................................................................................................................................ 10 History of the Plan and Participants ...............................................................................................................................................................
  • CMI Cook Inlet Surface Current Mapping Final Report

    CMI Cook Inlet Surface Current Mapping Final Report

    OCS Study MMS 2006-032 Final Report CODAR in Alaska Principal Investigator: Dave Musgrave, PhD Associate Professor School of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences University of Alaska Fairbanks P.O. Box 757220 Fairbanks, AK 99775-7220 (907) 474-7837 [email protected] CoAuthor: Hank Statscewich, MS School of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences University of Alaska Fairbanks P.O. Box 757220 Fairbanks, AK 99775-7220 (907) 474-5720 [email protected] June 2006 Contact information e-mail: [email protected] phone: 907.474.1811 fax: 907.474.1188 postal: Coastal Marine Institute School of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences P.O. Box 757220 University of Alaska Fairbanks Fairbanks, AK 99775-7220 ii Table of Contents List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. iv List of figures................................................................................................................................. iv Abstract........................................................................................................................................... v Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 1 Methods........................................................................................................................................... 2 Results............................................................................................................................................
  • National Trails System Act

    National Trails System Act

    Connecting Trails Across the Nation . National scenic trails are 100 miles or longer, continuous, primarily non- motorized routes of outstanding recreation opportunity. Such trails are established by Act of Congress. National historic trails commemorate historic (and prehistoric) routes of travel that are of significance to the entire Nation. They must meet all three criteria listed in Section 5(b)(11) of the National Trails System Act. Such trails are established by Act of Congress. National recreation trails, also authorized in the National Trails System Act, are existing regional and local trails recognized by either the Secretary of Agriculture or the Secretary of the Interior upon application. Sources: National Park Service Website . Appalachian National Scenic Trail . Continental Divide National Scenic Trail . Ice Age National Scenic Trail . Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail . Arizona Trail . Florida Trail . Natchez Trace National Scenic Trail . New England National Scenic Trail . North Country National Scenic Trail . Pacific Northwest National Scenic Trail . Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail . The Appalachian Trail is a 2,180+ mile long public footpath that traverses the scenic, wooded, wild, and culturally resonant lands of the Appalachian Mountains. Conceived in 1921, built by private citizens, and completed in 1937, today the trail is managed by the National Park Service, US Forest Service, Appalachian Trail Conservancy, numerous state agencies and thousands of volunteers. The Appalachian Trail spans from Maine to Georgia (through 14 different states), with the highest point being Clingman’s Dome in Tennessee. Less than 15,000 people have successfully thru hiked the trail. *Sources: National Park Service Website . The Ice Age National Scenic Trail is a thousand- mile footpath that highlights these landscape features as it travels through some of the state’s most beautiful natural areas.
  • Revised Dividend Payout Formula

    Revised Dividend Payout Formula

    Submitted by: Chair of the Assembly at the Request of the Mayor Prepared by: Finance Department CLERK'S OFFICE For reading: January 6, 2009 I>ate: ••........ ·~!:ll.?:J.:¥ED ANCHORAGE, ALASKA ................................. AO No. 2009-3 I AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ANCHORAGE MUNICIPAL CODE 2 SECTION 6.50.060 TO PROVIDE AN INTERIM REDUCTION IN THE MAXIMUM 3 PERCENTAGE APPLICABLE TO THE ANNUAL DIVIDEND PAYOUT, UNTIL SUCH 4 TIME AS THE TRUST'S MARKET VALUE RECOVERS TO A LEVEL EQUAL TO 5 OR GREATER THAN THE TRUST'S MARKET VALUE AT DECEMBER 31, 2007, 6 ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION. 7 8 9 THE ANCHORAGE ASSEMBLY ORDAINS: 10 II Section 1. Anchorage Municipal Code subsection 6. 50. 060D. is amended to read 12 as follows: 13 14 6.50.060 MOA Trust Fund 15 16 *** *** *** 17 18 D. Controlled spending policy. No more than five percent of the average 19 asset balance will be available for annual dividend distribution. The five 20 percent cap is tied to an endowment method whereby long-term capital 21 market projections for average annual investment return are netted 22 against projected inflation (e.g., in January 2001 capital market 23 projections indicated an 8.25 percent average annual investment return 24 less 3.25 percent average annual inflation, for a projected "net" 25 average annual rate of return of five percent over the next five years). 26 27 .1. However. effective January 1, 2010, no more than four percent 28 of the average asset balance will be available for annual 29 dividend distribution until such time as the Trust's market value 30 recovers to a level equal to or greater than the Trust's market 31 value at December 31.
  • Nos Cook Inlet Operational Forecast System: Model Development and Hindcast Skill Assessment

    Nos Cook Inlet Operational Forecast System: Model Development and Hindcast Skill Assessment

    NOAA Technical Report NOS CS 40 NOS COOK INLET OPERATIONAL FORECAST SYSTEM: MODEL DEVELOPMENT AND HINDCAST SKILL ASSESSMENT Silver Spring, Maryland September 2020 noaa National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Ocean Service Coast Survey Development Laboratory Office of Coast Survey National Ocean Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration U.S. Department of Commerce The Office of Coast Survey (OCS) is the Nation’s only official chartmaker. As the oldest United States scientific organization, dating from 1807, this office has a long history. Today it promotes safe navigation by managing the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) nautical chart and oceanographic data collection and information programs. There are four components of OCS: The Coast Survey Development Laboratory develops new and efficient techniques to accomplish Coast Survey missions and to produce new and improved products and services for the maritime community and other coastal users. The Marine Chart Division acquires marine navigational data to construct and maintain nautical charts, Coast Pilots, and related marine products for the United States. The Hydrographic Surveys Division directs programs for ship and shore-based hydrographic survey units and conducts general hydrographic survey operations. The Navigational Services Division is the focal point for Coast Survey customer service activities, concentrating predominately on charting issues, fast-response hydrographic surveys, and Coast Pilot
  • Upper Tanana Ethnographic Overview and Assessment, Wrangell St

    Upper Tanana Ethnographic Overview and Assessment, Wrangell St

    Technical Paper No. 325 Upper Tanana Ethnographic Overview and Assessment, Wrangell St. Elias National Park and Preserve by Terry L. Haynes and William E. Simeone July 2007 Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Subsistence Symbols and Abbreviations The following symbols and abbreviations, and others approved for the Système International d'Unités (SI), are used without definition in the following reports by the Divisions of Sport Fish and of Commercial Fisheries: Fishery Manuscripts, Fishery Data Series Reports, Fishery Management Reports, and Special Publications. All others, including deviations from definitions listed below, are noted in the text at first mention, as well as in the titles or footnotes of tables, and in figure or figure captions. Weights and measures (metric) General Measures (fisheries) centimeter cm Alaska Administrative fork length FL deciliter dL Code AAC mideye-to-fork MEF gram g all commonly accepted mideye-to-tail-fork METF hectare ha abbreviations e.g., Mr., Mrs., standard length SL kilogram kg AM, PM, etc. total length TL kilometer km all commonly accepted liter L professional titles e.g., Dr., Ph.D., Mathematics, statistics meter m R.N., etc. all standard mathematical milliliter mL at @ signs, symbols and millimeter mm compass directions: abbreviations east E alternate hypothesis HA Weights and measures (English) north N base of natural logarithm e cubic feet per second ft3/s south S catch per unit effort CPUE foot ft west W coefficient of variation CV gallon gal copyright © common test statistics (F, t, χ2, etc.) inch in corporate suffixes: confidence interval CI mile mi Company Co. correlation coefficient nautical mile nmi Corporation Corp.