Closure of Jefferson Proving Ground, Indiana, and Realignment to Yuma

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Closure of Jefferson Proving Ground, Indiana, and Realignment to Yuma ___ - CLOSURE OF JEFFERSON PROVING GROUND INDIANA AND REALIGNMENT TO YUMA PROVING GROUND ARIZONA li 'J.fI..,o. Pre.1. VOLUME 1 OF 2 *YE=. GI.".] Pre.1. TEXT G,...d Final ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT . I STATEMENT September 1991 - . CLOSURE OF JEFFERSON PROVING GROUND, INDIANA AND REALIGNMENT TO WMA PROVING GROUND, ARIZONA Prepared by: Reviewed by: Louisville District U.S. Amy U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Materiel Command yy\C .- David E. Peixotto William 8. McCrath Colonel, Corps of Engineers Major General, US. Army Commander Chief of Staff Recommended for Approval by: Department of the Army Office of the Chief of Staff William A. Stofft Mabr General, General Staff Director of Management Approved by: Office of the Secretary of the Amy & 6,D& Lewis D. Walker Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Amy (Environment, Safety and Occupational Health) FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CLOSURE OF JEFFERSON PROVING GROUND, INDlANA AND REALlGNMENT TO Wh4A PROVING GROUND, ARIZONA LEAD AGENCY: Department of the Army, U.S.Amy Materiel Command (AMC); TITLE OFTHE PROPOSED ACTION Closure of Jefferson Proving Ground, Indiana and Realignment to Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona AFFECTED JURISDICTION: Jefferson Proving Ground: Jefferson, Jennings and 1Zipk-y Counties, Indiana. Yuma Proving Ground: Yuma and La Paz Counties, Arizona PREPARED BY David E. Peixotto, Colonel, Corps of Engineers, Commander, US. Army Corps of Engineers, Louisville District, P.O. Box 59, Louisville, KY 40201-0059 REVIEWED BY: William 8. McCrath, Major General, Chief of Staff, US. Army Matericl Command RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL BY Williim A. Stofft, Major General, General Staff, Director of Management, Office of the Chief of Staff, Department of the Army APPROVED BY Mr. Lewis D. Walker,, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Ammy (Environment, Safety, and Occupational Health) ABSTRACT The action evaluated in this Final Environmental Impact Statement includes the closure of Jefferson Proving Ground (JPG),Indiana, and realignment of personnel and equipment to Yuma Proving Ground (YE),Arizona. The impacts associated with the alternative methods of implementing the realignment action to YPG are analyzed. The closure and realignment action is in accordance with the Defense Authorimtion Amendments and Base Closure and Realignment Act, and the Defense Secretary's Commission on Base Realignment and Closure. This EIS considers the effects of the planned action on the natural and human environments at JPG and YPG. The discontinuation of testing activities is considered to be a beneficial environmental impact at JPG because no new contamination caused by firing additional ordnance will occur. The closure of JFC will not change the potential for existing UXO contamination. However, the extent and level of existing contamination are unknown. [Significant adverse economic impacts due to closure of JFG are expected2Implementation of the realignment of JPG to the central Kofa Range at YPG will result in potential adverse impacts to vegetation, wildlife and cultural resources. Surveys will be performed prior to construction and appropriate mitigation measures will be developed where necessary. A recent noise study has determined that there will be no significant impact due to the mission transfer from JPG to WG. Beneficial impacts on the regional economy are expected at YPG due to the realignment action. NO Action will be taken until 30 days from the FElS filing with the Environnicntal Protection Agency and publication of the Notice of Availability in the Federal Rth'' mlrr. Following the 30 day waiting period, on or about September 24, a Record of Deci&on will be filed with the Army Environmental Office. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction The Base Realignment and Closure Conimission (The Commission) was c*stiildislicxl by thc Stvrt%iry of Defense on May 3, 1988. Its purpose was to recommend rcalignnient iind c,losiirl, of milit.iry I~,ISC~S within the United States, its commonwealths, territories, and possessions. 'l'lir I >vfcwsr Aii~Ii(ii.i/.,itioii Amendments and Base Closure and Realignment Act, Public LAW 100-.52h, dntrd Ortolwr 24, IOXH, directed 145 realignments and closures (Appendix A). Based on this dircction, tliv C'oniniission presented its recommendations to the Secretary of Defense on December 29, 11)H8. The Law requires the closure of the US.Army Jefferson Proving Ground (JlC), which is Iocntcd six miles north of Madison, Indiana. Its mission of ammunition acceptance testing lor tho Army is !(I hc relocated to the US.Army Yuma Proving Ground (YE), Yuma, Arizona. The closure of JPC means the discontinuation of operations in preparation for movcmrnt to aiioth~r site. This closure activity will take place in a phased manner from 1991 to 1005. 'I'ht* hiis(, rva1it;iiintmt and closure process is a dynamic process that will rquire continuoits refiiienivnt to iiw*lI hc Ariny's changing needs and circumstances. The closure alternatives considered in this Environmental lmpnct StaLement (1%) includc tlic No Action Alternative and the Proposed Action. Although P.L. 100-526 cxcmpts tlic decision to cIos(~Ironi environmental analysis, the No Action Alternative has been established as a benchmark iipiinst which the proposed closure action may be compared. This proposed action is the closiire of JI'C: iind thc realignment of the munitions production acceptance testing mission to YPG. Several realignment implementation alternatives at YPG were considered and some were eliminated from further consideration due to feasibility, cost, or environmental concerns. These included locating the proposcd facilities on the West Arm of YPG, and a phasing alternative. Other implementation alternatives wcw considered including the realignment of JI'G activities to the East Arm of YPG. The proposed realignment action is to intensify the use of the central Kofa Range. The JPC analysis focuses upon the cessation of operations at JPG. Some potential rciisr options arc described but not analyzed. The YM; analysis focuses on the alternatives to iniplemrntntion of th(* realignment action. The environmental consequences of the planned closure at JIY; and impleinrii1;iticiii alternative actions at YPC are reported, as well as general means for minimizing and mitignlinl; unavoidable adverse impacts. This EIS does not address specific actions or impacts associated with potentiiil remedinlion .ic'tivities at JPC. The Army will conduct a Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) on thr iirc'ii of JIY; in the cantonment area and clean it up. En addition, a RI/FS will be performed on any othrr area priy to releasing that property from Department of Defense (DOD)contrdl Hazardous matcriills are discussed to the extent that they affect or are affected by closure or realignment. Army rt?quireiiwntr concerning environmental compliance will be met prior to the disposal of any property. Remcdiiih. and reuse planning are interrelated processes. The Army will address the effects of spcrific rws(’ alternatives in separate analyses in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NKI’A). Closure of JF‘G and the realignment of its munitions testing activities at YPC will affect a totiil of 14 military and 407 civilian personnel positions. Three military positions and 135 civilian positions will be eliminated. Closure will require the transfer of 271 civilian personnel positions. No lnilitiiry positions will be realigned to YPG. The remaining personnel shifts include the transfer of one civilian to Fort Shafter, HI and the transfer of 11 members of the Indiana Air National Guard (INAN(;) to an as yet undesignated installation. In addition to the transfer of personnel positions, realignment involves the construction of additional facilities and gun emplacements for direct fire, mortar and depleted uranium (DU) at the cxisting Kofa Range at YPG. There will be construction of associated ammunition handling, storage and trsting facilities as well as additional maintenance and administration facilities. A summary of new construction requirements is provided in Table S1. The estimated cost for facility construction is $82.2 million. One time expenditure estimates are $50.04 million which would result in a total realignment estimate of $132.24 million. This EIS does not address the financial data nor estimated cost savings that were considered by the Commission during the base closure and realignment decision making prows5 JPG Potential Reuse Options Discussed Potential options for reusing surplus JPG property were identified on the basis of consultation with the key participants involved with the closure and reuse process. Options were selected by applying reuse evaluation criteria, including: compatibility with existing land use activities, conditions, policies and restrictions; compatibility with significant M~UAresources located within the boundaries of Jl’G; general market feasibility requirements and current regulatory factors or limitations. General rruse options discussed include: like-kind use, general aviation facility, regional (five county landfill), and correctional facility. The impacts associated with reuse of JPG are not addressed in this document. The impacts will be discussed in follow-on NEPA analysis and documentation. Reuse will be studied by the JPG Regional Development Board in conjunction with the Army and Office of Economic Adjustment. Table 5-1. Summary of new construction required for Proposed Action at YE. Facility AM (in square M) - 1. Direct Fire Ran% Gun Positions Bsrricade 12,000 Communlcatlonr Building
Recommended publications
  • California Vegetation Map in Support of the DRECP
    CALIFORNIA VEGETATION MAP IN SUPPORT OF THE DESERT RENEWABLE ENERGY CONSERVATION PLAN (2014-2016 ADDITIONS) John Menke, Edward Reyes, Anne Hepburn, Deborah Johnson, and Janet Reyes Aerial Information Systems, Inc. Prepared for the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Renewable Energy Program and the California Energy Commission Final Report May 2016 Prepared by: Primary Authors John Menke Edward Reyes Anne Hepburn Deborah Johnson Janet Reyes Report Graphics Ben Johnson Cover Page Photo Credits: Joshua Tree: John Fulton Blue Palo Verde: Ed Reyes Mojave Yucca: John Fulton Kingston Range, Pinyon: Arin Glass Aerial Information Systems, Inc. 112 First Street Redlands, CA 92373 (909) 793-9493 [email protected] in collaboration with California Department of Fish and Wildlife Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program 1807 13th Street, Suite 202 Sacramento, CA 95811 and California Native Plant Society 2707 K Street, Suite 1 Sacramento, CA 95816 i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Funding for this project was provided by: California Energy Commission US Bureau of Land Management California Wildlife Conservation Board California Department of Fish and Wildlife Personnel involved in developing the methodology and implementing this project included: Aerial Information Systems: Lisa Cotterman, Mark Fox, John Fulton, Arin Glass, Anne Hepburn, Ben Johnson, Debbie Johnson, John Menke, Lisa Morse, Mike Nelson, Ed Reyes, Janet Reyes, Patrick Yiu California Department of Fish and Wildlife: Diana Hickson, Todd Keeler‐Wolf, Anne Klein, Aicha Ougzin, Rosalie Yacoub California
    [Show full text]
  • The Japanese Village at Dugway Proving Ground: an Unexamined Context to the Firebombing of Japan
    Volume 16 | Issue 8 | Number 3 | Article ID 5136 | Apr 15, 2018 The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus The Japanese Village at Dugway Proving Ground: An Unexamined Context to the Firebombing of Japan Dylan J. Plung Abstract This paper explores a previously unexamined context to the firebombing of Japan. Analysis of the decisions leading up to construction and military testing conducted in 1943 at the Japanese Village at Dugway Proving Ground in Utah allows important insights into the evolution of US bombing strategy. The shift in US strategy from precision to carpet bombing, the testing and development of incendiary weaponry, and the institutionalization and rationalization of pursuing civilian targets throughout Japan are considered alongside this untold history. Additionally, a broader appreciation of World War II timelines is suggested. Keywords Napalm, firebombing, Dugway Proving Ground, Japanese Village, World War II, precision bombing, civilian bombing, Tokyo air raids. M-69 incendiary tests on Japanese style structures at Dugway Proving Ground. This and all subsequent images are from Standard Oil,Design and Construction of Typical German and Japanese Test Structures at Dugway Proving Grounds, Utah, 1943. Via JapanAirRaids.org "The M69/M69X bomb was designed to lodge in the most flammable part of the building—the ceiling beams." 1 16 | 8 | 3 APJ | JF - U.S. Army Dugway Proving Rhode Island) is unfenced open range filled Ground, Historical Fact Sheet, p. 1 with wildlife, cattle, blind curves, and vision- impeding hillsides. Isolated more than twenty miles beyond the gate of Dugway Proving Ground lies the remains of German-Japanese "Initially, it often seemed a home Village, where replicas of German and Japanese was unaffected, until the windows buildings were constructed, bombed at least 27 began to shine from within and times (see Table 1), and rebuilt in order to test then glowed ‘like a paper lantern’ incendiaries for use in World War II.
    [Show full text]
  • A Public Record
    Contested Commons / Trespassing Publics A Public Record I The contents of this book are available for free download and may be republished www.sarai.net/events/ip_conf/ip_conf.htm III Contested Commons / Trespassing Publics: A Public Record Produced and Designed at the Sarai Media Lab, Delhi Conference Editors: Jeebesh Bagchi, Lawrence Liang, Ravi Sundaram, Sudhir Krishnaswamy Documentation Editor: Smriti Vohra Print Design: Mrityunjay Chatterjee Conference Coordination: Prabhu Ram Conference Production: Ashish Mahajan Free Media Lounge Concept/Coordination: Monica Narula Production: Aarti Sethi, Aniruddha Shankar, Iram Ghufran, T. Meriyavan, Vivek Aiyyer Documentation: Aarti Sethi, Anand Taneja, Khadeeja Arif, Mayur Suresh, Smriti Vohra, Taha Mehmood, Vishwas Devaiah Recording: Aniruddha Shankar, Bhagwati Prasad, Mrityunjay Chatterjee, T. Meriyavan Interviews Camera/Sound: Aarti Sethi, Anand Taneja, Debashree Mukherjee, Iram Ghufran, Khadeej Arif, Mayur Suresh, Taha Mehmood Web Audio: Aarti Sethi, Bhagwati Prasad http://www.sarai.net/events/ip_conf.htm Conference organised by The Sarai Programme Centre for the Study of Developing Societies, Delhi, India www.sarai.net Alternative Law Forum (ALF), Bangalore, India www.altlawforum.org Public Lectures in collaboration with Public Service Broadcasting Trust, Delhi, India www.psbt.org Published by The Sarai Programme Centre for the Study of Developing Societies 29 Rajpur Road, Delhi 110054, India Tel: (+91) 11 2396 0040 Fax: (+91) 11 2392 8391 E-mail: [email protected] Printed at ISBN 81-901429-6-8
    [Show full text]
  • COURSE NAME CITY STATE ALBERTVILLE GOLF & COUNTRY CLUB Albertville Alabama MOUNTAIN VIEW GOLF COURSE Alden Alabama LAKEWINDS
    COURSE NAME CITY STATE ALBERTVILLE GOLF & COUNTRY CLUB Albertville Alabama MOUNTAIN VIEW GOLF COURSE Alden Alabama LAKEWINDS GOLF COURSE Alex City Alabama WILLOW POINT COUNTRY CLUB Alex City Alabama ALPINE BAY GOLF CLUB Alpine Alabama WHIPPORWHILL GOLF COURSE Altoona Alabama ANDALUSIA COUNTRY CLUB Andalusia Alabama EVANS BARNES GOLF COURSE Andalusia Alabama ANDERSON CREEK GOLF COURSE Anderson Alabama ANNISTON COUNTRY CLUB Anniston Alabama ANNISTON MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE Anniston Alabama B & J GOLF CENTER Anniston Alabama CANE CREEK GOLF COURSE Anniston Alabama CIDER RIDGE GOLF CLUB Anniston Alabama INDIAN OAKS GOLF CLUB Anniston Alabama PINE HILL COUNTRY CLUB Anniston Alabama BROOKSIDE GOLF COURSE Arab Alabama TWIN LAKES GOLF CLUB Arab Alabama UNION SPRINGS COUNTRY CLUB Armstrong Alabama CLAY COUNTY PUBLIC GOLF COURSE Ashland Alabama ATHENS GOLF & COUNTRY CLUB Athens Alabama CANEBRAKE GOLF CLUB Athens Alabama CHRISWOOD GOLF COURSE Athens Alabama SOUTHERN GALES GOLF CLUB Athens Alabama WOODLAND GOLF COURSE Athens Alabama ATMORE COUNTRY CLUB Atmore Alabama WILLS CREEK COUNTRY CLUB Attalla Alabama AUBURN LINKS AT MILL CREEK Auburn Alabama INDIAN PINES RECREATIONAL AUTHORITY Auburn Alabama MOORE'S MILL GOLF CLUB Auburn Alabama MOORE'S MILL GOLF CLUB Auburn Alabama PIN OAKS GOLF CLUB Auburn Alabama EUFAULA COUNTRY CLUB Bakerhill Alabama LAKEPOINT RESORT GOLF COURSE Bakerhill Alabama RED EAGLE GOLF COURSE Bakerhill Alabama WARRIOR POINT GOLF CLUB Barney Alabama HOLLY HILLS COUNTRY CLUB Bay Minette Alabama BENT BROOK GOLF COURSE Bess Alabama
    [Show full text]
  • The Origins of Word Processing and Office Automation
    Remembering the Office of the Future: The Origins of Word Processing and Office Automation Thomas Haigh University of Wisconsin Word processing entered the American office in 1970 as an idea about reorganizing typists, but its meaning soon shifted to describe computerized text editing. The designers of word processing systems combined existing technologies to exploit the falling costs of interactive computing, creating a new business quite separate from the emerging world of the personal computer. Most people first experienced word processing using a word processor, we think of a software as an application of the personal computer. package, such as Microsoft Word. However, in During the 1980s, word processing rivaled and the early 1970s, when the idea of word process- eventually overtook spreadsheet creation as the ing first gained prominence, it referred to a new most widespread business application for per- way of organizing work: an ideal of centralizing sonal computers.1 By the end of that decade, the typing and transcription in the hands of spe- typewriter had been banished to the corner of cialists equipped with technologies such as auto- most offices, used only to fill out forms and matic typewriters. The word processing concept address envelopes. By the early 1990s, high-qual- was promoted by IBM to present its typewriter ity printers and powerful personal computers and dictating machine division as a comple- were a fixture in middle-class American house- ment to its “data processing” business. Within holds. Email, which emerged as another key the word processing center, automatic typewriters application for personal computers with the and dictating machines were rechristened word spread of the Internet in the mid-1990s, essen- processing machines, to be operated by word tially extended word processing technology to processing operators rather than secretaries or electronic message transmission.
    [Show full text]
  • 3D Terrain Virtual Databases
    3D Terrain Virtual Databases MetaVR Continental US Plus Alaska and Hawaii (CONUS++) 3D Terrain MetaVR Africa, Asia, Australia & Oceania, Europe, North America, and South America 3D Terrain © 2018 MetaVR, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Virtual Reality Scene Generator, VRSG, and Metadesic are trademarks of MetaVR, Inc. Esri and ArcGIS are registered trademarks of Esri. Virtual Kismayo, Somalia Kismayo, Somalia Terrain Specifications Imagery coverage = 50 cm per-pixel Digital Globe (GeoEye-1) satellite imagery covering 1,017 sq km of the southern Somalia port city and are blended into 15 meters-per-pixel (mpp) natural view imagery Elevation coverage = SRTM void filled elevation source data. Cultural features MetaVR’s terrain is populated with hundreds of geographically specific culture models built from ground-level photographs taken on the streets of Kismayo. In addition to these geolocated and photographically specific models of buildings and other structures, several hundred other buildings were modeled by matching the structural footprints visible in the imagery as geographically typical models with culturally and architecturally accurate details. MetaVR’s virtual city contains varied terrain representative of important training environments, from a built-up port to dense urban streets to a sparsely populated outer region that includes a commercial airport. Virtual Afghanistan Village Imagery coverage The overall imagery resolution of the virtual terrain of the whole country is 2.5 meters per pixel. The terrain, built Cultural features with MetaVR’s Terrain Tools for Esri® ArcGIS®, includes an area of 1,120 sq. km of 60 cm Digital Globe commercial The village area has approximately 520 custom-built 3D structures that match the building satellite source imagery and 90 meter elevation posts.
    [Show full text]
  • Jefferson Proving Ground Employee
    Jefferson Proving Ground Employee and Pioneer Interviews Files Index Jefferson County Historical Society, 615 West First Street, Madison, IN 47250 [email protected] 812-265-2335 Carton No. 1 Community History Prior to the creation of JPG. 90% Documents, 10% Photographs Folder No. 1: Bridge # 27 Bennville Bridge, Jennings County; Photo of 3 arch bridge, color and B & W, photo of construction (1910) donated by Jesse Dwight Murphy. Folder No. 2: Housing/ Houses/Buildings; Photo, William and Cora Boggs Home and farm. Donated by Fauna Liter; Quarters 7, Quarters 15, Quarters 23 – former home of George Wehner, farm houses, Quarters 8 – former home of Charles Bently, Quarters 16, former home of William Boggs, Quarters 3, former home of Charles Jones, Quarters 4, former home of Harry R. Barber, Quarters 17, Quarters 21, Quarters 11, Quarters 12 moved to HDQ. Guest house at Old Timbers; donated by Fauna Liter; Oakdale school, base of silo on Craig farm, Wilson Dam at Big Creek – donated by Flora R. Wilson Thacker; envelope of small photos of JPG Qtrs, B & W small photos of Guardhouse, road with trees, Aerial of Old Timbers lodge, Headquarters Building with flag; list of quarters and former owners, Commanding officer’s Quarters, No. 1. Building 100, second floor hall of flags, “G” Firing Position, Tower 484, Bomb-field road, Building 100 with Jet planes flying over. Old Timbers lake 1977, Article, “Explains cost of JPG- Aug 8, 1941, Map with location of bridges Ed Caicedo, Inc. Folder No. 3: B & W small photos of Anderson Produce, Bryantsburg, J. W. Anderson, Minnie Anderson, Opal L.
    [Show full text]
  • CONTENTS Lesson No. Details Lesson Title Page No. BLOCK - a 01 UNIT – I Introduction to Computers 3 02 UNIT – II Classification of Computers 12
    CONTENTS Lesson No. Details Lesson Title Page No. BLOCK - A 01 UNIT – I Introduction to Computers 3 02 UNIT – II Classification of Computers 12 BLOCK - B 03 UNIT – I Digital Technology 26 04 UNIT – II Memory - Real and Virtual 31 BLOCK - C 05 UNIT – I MS-Word 34 06 UNIT – II Powerpoint 75 07 MS-Excel 86 08 MS-Access 125 BLOCK - D 09 UNIT – I Working with Text 168 10 UNIT – II Page Maker 170 11 Corel Draw 176 BLOCK - E 12 UNIT – I History of Internet 186 13 World Wide Web 191 Writer: Ms. Neha Vetter: Sh. Sushil K. Singh Converted into SIM format by: Sh. Rajesh Nain Bachelor of Mass Communication (1st year) COMPUTER APPLICATIONS (BMC-105) Block: A Unit: I Lesson: 1 INTRODUCTION TO COMPUTERS Writer: Ms. Neha Vetter: Sh. Sushil K. Singh Converted into SIM format by: Sh. Rajesh Nain LESSON STRUCTURE: In this lesson we shall discus about the various introductory aspects of computers. First, we shall focus on the components of computers. We shall also briefly discuss the evolution of computers and the various generations of computers. The lesson structure shall be as follows: 1.0 Objectives 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Presentation of Content 1.2.1 Components of Computers 1.2.2 Evolution of Computers 1.2.3 Generations of Computers 1.3 Summary 1.4 Key Words 1.5 Self-Assessment Questions (SAQs) 1.6 References/Suggested Reading 1.0 OBJECTIVES: The computer is a major component of Information Technology. Computers influence every aspect of life today from small businesses or even satellite launchings.
    [Show full text]
  • Society of Dance History Scholars Proceedings
    Society of Dance History Scholars Proceedings Twenty-Seventh Annual Conference Duke University ~ Durham, North Carolina 17-20 June 2004 Twenty-Eighth Annual Conference Northwestern University ~ Evanston, Illinois 9-12 June 2005 The Society of Dance History Scholars is a constituent member of the American Council of Learned Societies. This collection of papers has been compiled from files provided by individual authors who wished to contribute their papers as a record of the 2004 Society of Dance History Scholars conference. The compiler endeavored to standardize format for columns, titles, subtitles, figures or illustrations, references, and endnotes. The content is unchanged from that provided by the authors. Individual authors hold the copyrights to their papers. Published by Society of Dance History Scholars 2005 SOCIETY OF DANCE HISTORY SCHOLARS CONFERENCE PAPERS Susan C. Cook, Compiler TABLE OF CONTENTS 17-20 June 2004 Duke University ~ Durham, North Carolina 1. Dancing with the GI Bill Claudia Gitelman 2. Discord within Organic Unity: Phrasal Relations between Music and Choreography in Early Eighteenth-Century French Dance Kimiko Okamoto 3. Dance in Dublin Theatres 1729-35 Grainne McArdle 4. Queer Insertions: Javier de Frutos and the Erotic Vida Midgelow 5. Becomings and Belongings: Lucy Guerin’s The Ends of Things Melissa Blanco Borelli 6. Beyond the Marley: Theorizing Ballet Studio Spaces as Spheres Not Mirrors Jill Nunes Jensen 7. Exploring Ashton’s Stravinsky Dances: How Research Can Inform Today’s Dancers Geraldine Morris 8. Dance References in the Records of Early English Drama: Alternative Sources for Non- Courtly Dancing, 1500-1650 E.F. Winerock 9. Regional Traditions in the French Basse Dance David Wilson 10.
    [Show full text]
  • 94 Stat. 1782 Public Law 96-418—Oct
    PUBLIC LAW 96-418—OCT. 10, 1980 94 STAT. 1749 Public Law 96-418 96th Congress An Act To authorize certain construction at military installations for fiscal year 1981, and Oct. 10, 1980 for other purposes. [H.R. 7301] Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act may be Military cited as the "MiUtary Construction Authorization Act, 1981". Au'thSdon Act, 1981. TITLE I—ARMY AUTHORIZED ARMY CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS SEC. 101. The Secretary of the Army may establish or develop military installations and facilities by acquiring, constructing, con­ verting, rehabilitating, or installing permanent or temporary public works, including land acquisition, site preparation, appurtenances, utilities, and equipment, for the following acquisition and construc­ tion: INSIDE THE UNITED STATES UNITED STATES ARMY FORCES COMMAND Fort Bragg, North Carolina, $16,350,000. Fort Campbell, Kentucky, $14,200,000. Fort Carson, Colorado, $129,960,000. Fort Devens, Massachusetts, $1,000,000. Fort Drum, New York, $5,900,000. Fort Gillem, Georgia, $2,600,000. Fort Hood, Texas, $24,420,000. Fort Hunter-Liggett, California, $5,100,000. Fort Lewis, Washington, $16,000,000. Fort Ord, California, $4,700,000. Fort Polk, Louisiana, $14,800,000. Fort Riley, Kansas, $890,000. Fort Sam Houston, Texas, $3,750,000. Fort Stewart/Hunter Army Air Field, Georgia, $31,700,000. Presidio of San Francisco, California, $750,000. UNITED STATES ARMY WESTERN COMMAND Schofield Barracks, Hawaii, $12,220,000. Tripler Army Medical Center, Hawaii, $84,500,000. UNITED STATES ARMY TRAINING AND DOCTRINE COMMAND Fort A.
    [Show full text]
  • Vol. 81 Monday, No. 142 July 25, 2016 Pages 48315–48686
    Vol. 81 Monday, No. 142 July 25, 2016 Pages 48315–48686 OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL REGISTER VerDate Sep 11 2014 20:54 Jul 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\25JYWS.LOC 25JYWS asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with FRONTMATTER II Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 142 / Monday, July 25, 2016 The FEDERAL REGISTER (ISSN 0097–6326) is published daily, SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES Monday through Friday, except official holidays, by the Office PUBLIC of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal Register Subscriptions: Act (44 U.S.C. Ch. 15) and the regulations of the Administrative Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 Committee of the Federal Register (1 CFR Ch. I). The Assistance with public subscriptions 202–512–1806 Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC 20402 is the exclusive distributor of the official General online information 202–512–1530; 1–888–293–6498 edition. Periodicals postage is paid at Washington, DC. Single copies/back copies: The FEDERAL REGISTER provides a uniform system for making Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Assistance with public single copies 1–866–512–1800 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and (Toll-Free) Executive Orders, Federal agency documents having general FEDERAL AGENCIES applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published Subscriptions: by act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of public interest. Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions: Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Email [email protected] Federal Register the day before they are published, unless the Phone 202–741–6000 issuing agency requests earlier filing.
    [Show full text]
  • Desert Training Center Collection
    TITLE: United States Army Desert Training Center Collection DATE RANGE: 1938 - 2010 CALL NUMBER: Y-MS 20 PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION: 6 boxes (3 linear feet) PROVENANCE: Collection materials have been donated by an assortment of individuals associated with the center. COPYRIGHT: Unknown RESTRICTIONS: This collection is unrestricted. CREDIT LINE: United States Army Desert Training Center Collection, Y-MS 20, Arizona Historical Society-Rio Colorado Division, Yuma PROCESSED BY: Benjamin Findley, 2014 HISTORICAL NOTE: The Desert Training Center was established in 1942 to provide training in desert warfare for troops slated to be deployed to the African theatre of World War II. Major General George S. Patton Jr. was tasked with setting up the Center and was designated its first Commanding General. A large tract of land approximately 10,000 square miles was chosen along the California-Arizona border and the southern tip of Nevada. This area was chosen because it included variety of desert terrains and had no large population centers. Operations began in April, 1942. This allowed the U. S. Army to test standard army equipment against the harsh environment and to develop a desert tactical doctrine. The supply officers contended with maintaining supply routes without access to railroad lines. Many of the initial training exercises resulted in high casualty rates due to restrictions on water rations. In July, 1942 Patton was abruptly re-assigned to the North African Campaign leaving Major General Alvan Gillem in command. The success of the North African Campaign by late 1942 meant that the Army no longer needed troops trained for desert combat. The Army increased the size of the area to approximately 87,000 square miles and changed its name from the Desert Training Center to the California- Arizona Maneuver Area.
    [Show full text]