DOCSLIB.ORG

Historic Resources Survey and Planning Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Historic Resources Survey and Planning Analysis Historic Resources Survey And Planning Analysis City of Lompoc, California Prepared by Historic Resources Group for the City of Lompoc July 2005 Historic Resources Survey And Planning Analysis City of Lompoc, California Prepared for City of Lompoc 100 Civic Center Plaza Lompoc, California 93438 Prepared by Historic Resources Group 1728 Whitley Avenue Hollywood, California 90028 July 2005 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...........................................................................1 I. BACKGROUND .................................................................................3 CITY OF LOMPOC.................................................................................. 3 PREVIOUS SURVEYS AND EVALUATIONS ............................................................ 4 National Register of Historic Places ................................................... 5 California Register of Historical Resources........................................... 7 City Landmarks............................................................................. 8 Cultural Resources ........................................................................ 8 Other Studies............................................................................. 10 II. METHODOLOGY ............................................................................ 11 OBJECTIVES ..................................................................................... 11 SURVEY PROCESS................................................................................ 11 “THE MILE SQUARE”............................................................................ 12 SURVEY AREA ................................................................................... 12 DATABASE....................................................................................... 15 PLANNING DISTRICTS ............................................................................ 18 Old Town Lompoc Specific Plan Area ................................................ 18 Old Town Commercial District (OTC) ................................................ 18 Southside Old Town Neighborhood (Measure 19) .................................. 18 HPSR Area of Potential Effect......................................................... 18 DEFINITIONS..................................................................................... 20 III. HISTORIC CONTEXT....................................................................... 22 PURPOSE ........................................................................................ 22 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. 22 HISTORICAL OVERVIEW .......................................................................... 23 Chumash Period.......................................................................... 23 Mission Period (1787-1834) ............................................................ 24 Rancho Period (1835-1873)............................................................. 25 Colony Period (1874-1901) ............................................................. 25 City Growth Period (1902-1940) ...................................................... 28 Camp Cooke Army Base Period (1941-1955) ........................................ 33 Vandenberg Air Force Base Period (1956 to present) ............................. 35 SIGNIFICANT PERSONS........................................................................... 36 SELECTED CHRONOLOGY ........................................................................ 38 IV. SURVEY RESULTS ......................................................................... 45 EVALUATION PROCESS........................................................................... 45 Properties Evaluated.................................................................... 45 Evaluations Assigned .................................................................... 45 Local Designation Criteria ............................................................. 46 Historic Significance .................................................................... 46 Integrity ................................................................................... 47 CITY LANDMARKS ................................................................................ 47 Designated City Landmarks ............................................................ 47 Potential City Landmarks .............................................................. 48 POTENTIAL HISTORIC DISTRICT.................................................................. 48 Physical Character....................................................................... 52 HISTORIC OBJECTS, LANDSCAPE FEATURES, AND SITES ......................................... 53 ELIGIBLE FOR THE NATIONAL REGISTER.......................................................... 54 UN-REINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS........................................................... 54 AREAS FOR FURTHER STUDY..................................................................... 57 Properties Outside the Mile Square.................................................. 57 Properties Outside the City Limits ................................................... 57 NOTES ABOUT THE DATA................................................................... 58 V. PRESERVATION IN LOMPOC.............................................................. 59 PRESERVATION ORDINANCE...................................................................... 60 Designation of Historic Landmarks and Districts .................................. 61 Historic Resources Commission ....................................................... 62 SURVEY OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ............................................................... 63 CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT................................................................. 64 PRESERVATION OFFICER AND STAFF ............................................................. 64 PRESERVATION IN RELATION TO THE GENERAL PLAN ............................................ 65 Historic Preservation Element ........................................................ 65 PRESERVATION IN RELATION TO OTHER PLANS AND REGULATIONS............................... 65 Old Town Lompoc Specific Plan ....................................................... 66 Zoning Code............................................................................... 66 Mills Act ................................................................................... 68 California State Historical Building Code ........................................... 69 VI. RECOMMENDATIONS...................................................................... 70 PROPERTY DESIGNATION ........................................................................ 70 Potential Landmarks .................................................................... 70 Potential Historic District.............................................................. 70 LANDMARKS ORDINANCE......................................................................... 71 Establish a Designation Process ....................................................... 72 Adopt Designation Criteria ............................................................ 72 Establish a Historic Preservation Commission...................................... 72 Establish Design Review Guidelines .................................................. 73 Utilize the California State Historical Building Code............................. 73 HISTORIC DISTRICT ORDINANCE ................................................................. 74 OTHER REGULATIONS AND PROCEDURES......................................................... 74 Certified Local Government Status .................................................. 74 Adopting a Historic Resources Inventory ............................................ 76 Adopt a Historic Preservation Element.............................................. 76 PRESERVATION INCENTIVES ...................................................................... 77 Federal Tax Credits ..................................................................... 77 Preservation Easements ................................................................ 78 Hart Family Fund for Small Towns ................................................... 79 Marks Historical Rehabilitation Act .................................................. 80 Proposition 40 ............................................................................ 80 Community Development Block Grants.............................................. 80 ADDITIONAL STEPS .............................................................................. 81 Administration ........................................................................... 81 Planning and Zoning..................................................................... 82 Community Participation .............................................................. 83 Education.................................................................................. 83 Incentives ................................................................................. 83 Technical Assistance .................................................................... 84 BIBLIOGRAPHY.................................................................................. 85 List of Tables Table 1. Properties Eligible for or Listed in the National Register. ................... 7 Table 2. Designated City Landmarks........................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pacifying Paradise: Violence and Vigilantism in San Luis Obispo
    PACIFYING PARADISE: VIOLENCE AND VIGILANTISM IN SAN LUIS OBISPO A Thesis presented to the Faculty of California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in History by Joseph Hall-Patton June 2016 ii © 2016 Joseph Hall-Patton ALL RIGHTS RESERVED iii COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP TITLE: Pacifying Paradise: Violence and Vigilantism in San Luis Obispo AUTHOR: Joseph Hall-Patton DATE SUBMITTED: June 2016 COMMITTEE CHAIR: James Tejani, Ph.D. Associate Professor of History COMMITTEE MEMBER: Kathleen Murphy, Ph.D. Associate Professor of History COMMITTEE MEMBER: Kathleen Cairns, Ph.D. Lecturer of History iv ABSTRACT Pacifying Paradise: Violence and Vigilantism in San Luis Obispo Joseph Hall-Patton San Luis Obispo, California was a violent place in the 1850s with numerous murders and lynchings in staggering proportions. This thesis studies the rise of violence in SLO, its causation, and effects. The vigilance committee of 1858 represents the culmination of the violence that came from sweeping changes in the region, stemming from its earliest conquest by the Spanish. The mounting violence built upon itself as extensive changes took place. These changes include the conquest of California, from the Spanish mission period, Mexican and Alvarado revolutions, Mexican-American War, and the Gold Rush. The history of the county is explored until 1863 to garner an understanding of the borderlands violence therein. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CHAPTER INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………... 1 PART I - CAUSATION…………………………………………………… 12 HISTORIOGRAPHY……………………………………………........ 12 BEFORE CONQUEST………………………………………..…….. 21 WAR……………………………………………………………..……. 36 GOLD RUSH……………………………………………………..….. 42 LACK OF LAW…………………………………………………….…. 45 RACIAL DISTRUST………………………………………………..... 50 OUTSIDE INFLUENCE………………………………………………58 LOCAL CRIME………………………………………………………..67 CONCLUSION……………………………………………………….
    [Show full text]
  • Summer 2009, Vol. 35, Nos. 3 & 4
    ISSN 0734-4988 Ancestors est SANTA BARBARA COUNTY GENEALOGICAL SOCIETY Spring/Summer 2009 Volume 35 sbgen.org Numbers 3 &4 IN THIS ISSUE Presidents Message, Arthur Sylvester .............. ··'!.~:.· ...............................................................................•. 4 7 A Headstone for Aunt Frances by Howard Menzel .................................................................................48 Santa Barbara County WWI Memorial Freewaf:101 Widening Project.. .............................................. 50 WWI Honor Roll of Names .................................................................................................................... 50 News From Los Alamos ................................. ·.. ~.·.'··'-············································ .................................... 51 The English Land-Owning System in History, by Val Porter............................................................... .51 Research Insight-1825 Iowa Census, by Jeff ~chlatter. ...................................................................... 52 Dairies in San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties 1850-1965 (G-N) compiled by Jim Norris ... 53 FamilySearch.org-New Collections ..................................................................................................... 65 Genealogy: Tips for Fnding Females that Matter to You, by Julie Miller. .............................................. 66 An Obituary-AnotherTake.................................... .'....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • RIVERBEND PARK and TRAIL DRAFT MASTER PLAN and EIR December 2004
    RIVERBEND PARK AND TRAIL DRAFT MASTER PLAN AND EIR December 2004 VOLUME I Prepared by the City of Lompoc, with assistance from: Applied Earthworks Inc., Associated Transportation Engineers, Jones & Stokes, Kathleen Whitney - Consulting Biologist, Penfield and Smith, Rincon Consultants, Inc., Thomas Olson Biological Consulting, Wieland Associates, Inc. DRAFT RIVERBEND PARK AND TRAIL MASTER PLAN City of Lompoc December 2004 Prepared by the City of Lompoc With assistance from Jones & Stokes 2 Master Plan Table of Contents Volume I Introduction....................................................................................................................................1 Location ...............................................................................................................................1 Project Background..............................................................................................................1 River Values .........................................................................................................................2 Purpose and Scope ...............................................................................................................2 Master Plan Area Description.......................................................................................................2 Past Land Uses.....................................................................................................................3 Open Space / Flood Plain.....................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • L L Athletic Group to Hold Aiual Plat Day Here Phelps
    v o l . Santa Barbara, California, Wednesday, February 22, 1933 xn No. 21 Fraternity Representatives Lompoc Pupils in Praise o f State Student Officers in Reorganize Rules to Guide “ Boy, what a band! And what a keen college that must Ironing Out Process Rush Activities This Term be. That’s where I want to go.” L “ These are a few of the en­ Open House Scheduled to Acquaint Frosh thusiastic comments of Lom ­ With Tong Members Monday Night, Feb. 27 poc high school students, on of Financial Kinks L T IE the State college band and glee A t the final meeting of the fall term, the Inter-fraternity club,” reports President Clar­ ence L. Phelps, who spoke in Current Money A ffairs on Firm Basis but Clifford Leedy Leads council, composed of two men from each of the social organi­ James McCloskey at the Lompoc high school F ri­ Debits of Other Years Furnish Troubles 55 Local Men zations, completed its revision of rules covering rushing and Work on Plan to day evening, under the aus­ on Trip pledging. Several changes have been made in the method of Assist Book pices of ithe Lompoc P.T.A. procedure, as shown in the following section from the council’s The President’s subject was, AN EDITORIAL by-laws: “Shall We Maintain Our Ideals Evincing a commendable attitude of genuine and unselfish In Appearance Here Rush week this semester will be the fourth week of the Proposes Ad Changes of Publio Education?” concern toward the handling of student affairs, the associated new term.
    [Show full text]
  • Storage and Conveyance of the City of Santa Barbara's Gibraltar
    Draft FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Storage and Conveyance of the City of Santa Barbara’s Gibraltar Reservoir Pass Through Water in and Through Cachuma Project Facilities FONSI-12-086 U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation January 2016 Mission Statements The mission of the Department of the Interior is to protect and manage the Nation’s natural resources and cultural heritage; provide scientific and other information about those resources; and honor its trust responsibilities or special commitments to American Indians, Alaska Natives, and affiliated island communities. The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION South-Central California Area Office, Fresno, California Draft FONSI-12-086 Storage and Conveyance of the City of Santa Barbara’s Gibraltar Reservoir Pass Through Water in and Through Cachuma Project Facilities _____________ Prepared by: Stacy L. Holt Date Natural Resources Specialist _____________ Concurred by: Ned M. Gruenhagen Date Wildlife Biologist or Biology Technician _____________ Concurred by: Rain L. Emerson Date Supervisory Natural Resources Specialist _____________ Approved by: Michael P. Jackson, P.E. Date Area Manager Draft FONSI-12-086 Introduction In accordance with section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended, the South-Central California Area Office of the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), has determined that executing 5- and 40- year Warren Act contracts with the City of Santa Barbara (City) is not a major federal action that will significantly affect the quality of the human environment and an environmental impact statement is not required.
    [Show full text]
  • In Search of Bigfoot: the Ommonc Law Origins of Article X, Section 2 of the California Constitution Brian E
    Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly Volume 17 Article 10 Number 1 Fall 1989 1-1-1989 In Search of Bigfoot: The ommonC Law Origins of Article X, Section 2 of the California Constitution Brian E. Gray Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/ hastings_constitutional_law_quaterly Part of the Constitutional Law Commons Recommended Citation Brian E. Gray, In Search of Bigfoot: The Common Law Origins of Article X, Section 2 of the California Constitution, 17 Hastings Const. L.Q. 225 (1989). Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_constitutional_law_quaterly/vol17/iss1/10 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly by an authorized editor of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. "In Search of Bigfoot": The Common Law Origins of Article X, Section 2 of the California Constitution By BRIAN E. GRAY* I. Introduction In a constitution laden with obscure and sometimes trivial provi- sions, Article X, section 2 is surely among the least known and least appreciated. Enacted by initiative in 1928, this section directs that all uses of California's water resources must be reasonable and for beneficial purposes.' The policy of Article X, section 2 is set forth in its first sen- tence, which provides: [B]ecause of the conditions prevailing in this State the general wel- fare requires that the water resources of the State be put to benefi- cial use to the fullest extent of which they are capable, and that the waste or unreasonable use or unreasonable method of use of water be prevented, and that the conservation of such waters is to be ex- ercised with a view to the reasonable and beneficial use thereof in the interest of the people and for the public welfare.' The second sentence of the amendment implements this policy, declaring that [t]he right to water..
    [Show full text]
  • Documents Pertaining to the Adjudication of Private Land Claims in California, Circa 1852-1904
    http://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/hb109nb422 Online items available Finding Aid to the Documents Pertaining to the Adjudication of Private Land Claims in California, circa 1852-1904 Finding Aid written by Michelle Morton and Marie Salta, with assistance from Dean C. Rowan and Randal Brandt The Bancroft Library University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, California, 94720-6000 Phone: (510) 642-6481 Fax: (510) 642-7589 Email: [email protected] URL: http://bancroft.berkeley.edu/ © 2008, 2013 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Finding Aid to the Documents BANC MSS Land Case Files 1852-1892BANC MSS C-A 300 FILM 1 Pertaining to the Adjudication of Private Land Claims in Cali... Finding Aid to the Documents Pertaining to the Adjudication of Private Land Claims in California, circa 1852-1904 Collection Number: BANC MSS Land Case Files The Bancroft Library University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, California Finding Aid Written By: Michelle Morton and Marie Salta, with assistance from Dean C. Rowan and Randal Brandt. Date Completed: March 2008 © 2008, 2013 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Collection Summary Collection Title: Documents pertaining to the adjudication of private land claims in California Date (inclusive): circa 1852-1904 Collection Number: BANC MSS Land Case Files 1852-1892 Microfilm: BANC MSS C-A 300 FILM Creators : United States. District Court (California) Extent: Number of containers: 857 Cases. 876 Portfolios. 6 volumes (linear feet: Approximately 75)Microfilm: 200 reels10 digital objects (1494 images) Repository: The Bancroft Library University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, California, 94720-6000 Phone: (510) 642-6481 Fax: (510) 642-7589 Email: [email protected] URL: http://bancroft.berkeley.edu/ Abstract: In 1851 the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • INTERACTION BETWEEN ISLAND FOXES (Urocyon Littoralis) and NATIVE AMERICANS on ISLANDS OFF the COAST of SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: II
    /. Ethnobiol. 11(2):205-229 Winter 1991 INTERACTION BETWEEN ISLAND FOXES (Urocyon littoralis) AND NATIVE AMERICANS ON ISLANDS OFF THE COAST OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: II. ETHNOGRAPHIC, ARCHAEOLOGICAL, AND HISTORICAL EVIDENCE PAUL W. COLLINS Department of Vertebrate Zoology Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History 2559 Puesta Del Sol Santa Barbara, CA 93105 ABSTRACT.-Interactions which existed between Native Americans and island foxes (Urocyon littoralis) were examined using data gathered from archaeological, ethnographic, and ethnohistoric sources to ascertain how Native Americans viewed and used foxes and thus why they transported and introduced them to islands off the coast of southern California. Island foxes were harvested for their pelts which were used to make arrow-quivers, capes, blankets, and ceremonial fox dance headdresses. Although foxes were not an important staple in the diet of the inhabitants of the Channel Islands, they were kept as pets or semi­ domesticates and did playa prominent role in religious and ceremonial practices. The Island Chumash conducted an Island Fox Dance ceremony and foxes served as totems, dream-helpers, and characters in Chumash legends. Human-fox burial associations and ceremonial fox burials attest to the religious and ceremonial significance afforded foxes by Native Americans. I conclude, based on this data, that island foxes from the Northern Channel Islands were initially transported as pets and subsequently became feral on the Southern Channel Islands. RESUMEN.-Se examinaron las interacciones que existian entre los indfgenas y los zorros islenos (Urocyon littoralis), empleando informacion recogida de fuentes arqueo16gicas, etnograficas y etnohist6ricas para averiguar como percibian y utilizaban los indlgenas a los zorros y as! entender por que los transportaron e introdujeron a algunas islas frente a la costa del sur de California.
    [Show full text]
  • DWP Motion Final
    Councilmember Herb Wesson, Chair Rules, Elections & Intergovernmental Relations Committee Los Angeles City Council 200 North Spring Street, Room 340 Los Angeles, California 90012 CC: Mayor Eric Garcetti Los Angeles City Council City Controller Ron Galperin Dear Committee Members: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on Councilmember Fuentes’ motion to restructure LADWP’s governance. Green LA is a coalition of advocacy organizations based in the City of Los Angeles. We have worked with LADWP for over a decade on the advancement of safe, reliable, and affordable water and power service. While we agree that the current structure could benefit from some reform, we urge you to oppose the specific efforts to remove or limit city council and mayoral oversight. The proposed motion as currently drafted would put unelected officials in charge of policy decisions undermining our democratic process. Policy decisions such as efficiency, resiliency, and equity require a fresh look by leaders that represent voters. For instance, Mayor Garcetti set LA on a path to transform our city’s water portfolio into a resilient one that can withstand long-term droughts and climate change. And, in the prior administration, Mayor Villaraigosa and the Council embraced these policies as they moved LADWP away from coal in 2013. Without democratic representation, we are not able to secure our institutions evolve or hold elected officials accountable when they do not respond to voter interests. The proposed motion would remove the oversight that ensures necessary checks and balances. Decision-making without proper oversight too often results in unaccounted for and wasted resources. For instance, the still unaccounted for $40 million spent on training and safety left a veil of distrust over DWP management.
    [Show full text]
  • Northern Santa Barbara County, California
    Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology | Vol. 31, No. 2 (2011) | pp. 194–201 In Search of a White Bear: An Eccentric Crescent from Sudden Ranch (CA-SBA-208), Northern Santa Barbara County, California JON M. ERLANDSON Museum of Natural and Cultural History and Department of Anthropology, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403-1224 Over the years, there has been considerable interest Figure 1. Zoomorphic crescents from CA-SDI-9649 (top) among archaeologists in the distribution, function, and and Santa Rosa Island (bottom). Adapted from Koerper chronology of chipped stone crescents in California and Farmer (1987). The Santa Rosa Island specimens, curated at the Phoebe Hearst Museum of Anthropology and the western United States. Questions about their at the University of California, Berkeley, are described as chronology and function have yet to be fully resolved, ‘animal-form scrapers.’ but such crescents are widely considered to be Early Holocene or terminal Pleistocene time markers. More debated, with interpretations ranging from the utilitarian than a thousand crescents have been identified from to the symbolic (see Smith 2008). Wardle (1913) and California archaeological sites, but a relatively small Heye (1921:72) suggested that Channel Island specimens percentage have zoomorphic attributes, including a rare may have been used as surgical tools, for instance, while ‘bear-shaped’ specimen now listed as California’s official others have described them as specialized scraping or prehistoric artifact. About 20 years ago another bear- cutting tools (Fenenga 1984). Some California and Great shaped crescent in the Lompoc Museum was brought Basin scholars have interpreted crescents as transverse to my attention, a specimen not described in previous projectile points, possibly used in bird hunting (see syntheses of crescents in California and the Far West.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Management & Long Range Planning Committee Agenda Letter
    WATER MANAGEMENT & LONG RANGE PLANNING COMMITTEE AGENDA LETTER Secretary of the Board of Directors 4699 Hollister Avenue, Department Name: Water Supply & Goleta, CA 93110 Conservation (805) 879-4621 For Agenda Of: February 18, 2016 Estimated Time 15 minutes Continued Item: No If Yes, Date From: TO: Committee Members FROM: Department: Water Supply & Conservation Contact Info: Ryan Drake, Water Supply & Conservation Manager SUBJECT: Update on the Upper Santa Ynez River Operating Agreement (USYROA) and USBR Warren Act Contract Legal Concurrence: As to form: N/A Recommended Action: Receive an update on activities related to the Upper Santa Ynez River Operating Agreement (USYROA) and ongoing negotiations between the City of Santa Barbara and the United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), and provide direction to staff as appropriate. Summary Text: Historical Background on USYROA On August 1, 1989, the City of Santa Barbara (City) entered into the USYROA with the Downstream Purveyors1 on the Santa Ynez River, including Goleta Water District. The USBR signed an associated Consent and Acknowledgment document attesting that the USYROA was consistent with agreements related to the Cachuma Project, and would not adversely affect the financial obligations of the Cachuma Member Units with respect to the Cachuma Project. USYROA, which is also known as the “Pass Through Agreement,” was developed as a compromise solution to resolve concerns related to City plan to raise Gibraltar Dam in the mid-1980s for expansion of the diminishing capacity of Gibraltar Reservoir as a result of ongoing siltation. The Cachuma Member Units and downstream water rights holders raised concerns that enlarging Gibraltar would have 1 The Downstream Water Purveyors include Goleta Water District, Carpinteria Valley Water District, Montecito Water District, Summerland County Water District (since consolidated with the Montecito Water District), the Santa Ynez River Water Conservation District, and the Santa Ynez River Water Conservation District Improvement District No.
    [Show full text]
  • EXTENSIONS of REMARKS 36133 Major D
    October 31, 1977 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS 36133 Major D. Bursey, Jr. James C. Heinen Michael J. Gill Karl A. Klankowski John W. Mickelson Jeffrey A. Schmitz Elizabet h M. Claw Robert L. Howard Gary L. Girardet Robert L. Knight Gary G. Miller Dennis J. Seipel Mark E. Dowd Roger A. Hungerford James T. Glass Robert E. Kunkle James E. Miller Mark L. Shaw The following-named Navy enlisted scien­ Edward L. Graham Paul E. Lambourne Micheal G . Miller Robert R. Silvira tific education program candidates to be per­ Charles W. Green Michael H. Laptaz William E. Mize Harvey E. Sitzlar manent ensigns in the line or staff corps of Johnny L. Green Robert C. Larrabee Michael A. Moan Paul Slominski the Navy, subject t o the qualifications there­ Arthur W. Gresham Daniel L. Lehr Roger J. Morais Ronald E. Small for as provided by law : Ronald N. Gunn Peter J. Lestrange Kenneth M. Muske Alfred Smith James R. Hague James M. Loerch John A. Nixon Forrest J. Smith Thomas D. Dennis C. Claes John F. Hall Stephen R . Lowe Lawrence P. Norstedt William S. Stuhr Abrahamson Earl R. Coffin Norman E. Hardee John F . Luksik Charles E. Ogier Gary E. Tobias Scott J . Amos Donald E. Cole Ricky A. Heiderken John W. Lut z Leo D. Owens Raymond F. Toll Jacob A. Anthony Clenton Collier Robert W. Henderson Pat G . McCartney Scott E. Palmer Taylor T. Tripp Edwin D. Bankston Billy A. Colvin William J. William J. Bennie E. Patton Dave J . Urich Harrison A. Beasley, Kenneth W . Coomes Hendrickson McCullum Stephen S .
    [Show full text]