DOCSLIB.ORG

7/2/76 HR12384 Military Construction Authorization Act FY 1977 (Vetoed) (2)” of the White House Records Office: Legislation Case Files at the Gerald R

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
7/2/76 HR12384 Military Construction Authorization Act FY 1977 (Vetoed) (2)” of the White House Records Office: Legislation Case Files at the Gerald R The original documents are located in Box 48, folder “7/2/76 HR12384 Military Construction Authorization Act FY 1977 (vetoed) (2)” of the White House Records Office: Legislation Case Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Copyright Notice The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald R. Ford donated to the United States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections. Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Exact duplicates within this folder were not digitized. Digitized from Box 48 of the White House Records Office Legislation Case Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library 1EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT ~~~ , OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET DATE: 7-1-76 TO: Bob Linder FROM: D • Evans Attached is the Senate Conf. Rept. for inclusion in the enrolled bill file on H.R. 12384. Thanks. OMB FORM 38 !I· 94TH CONGRESS SENATE REPORT 2d Session } { No. 94--937 MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION, FISCAL YEAR, 1977 JuNE 9 (legislative day, JUN,E 3), 1976.-0rdered to b.e printed Mr. HARRY F. BYRD, Jr. (for Mr. SYMINGTON), from the committee of conference, submitted the following CONFERENCE REPORT [To accompany H.R. 12384] The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 12384) to authorize certain construction at military installations and for other · purpOses, having met, after full and free conference, have agreed to recommend and do recommend to their respective Houses as follows: That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate and agree to the same with an amendment as follows: In lieu of the matter proposed to be inserted by the Senate amend­ ment insert the following: TITLE I-ARMY SEc. 101. The Seeretary of the Army may establish or develop mili­ tary installations and facilities by acquiriri{J, constructing, converting, rehabilitatiri{J, or installing p_ermanent or temporary public works, including land acquisition, szte preparation, appurtenances, utilities, and equipment, for the following acquisition and construction: INSIDE THE UNITED STATES UNITED STATES ARMY FORCES COMMAND Fort Bragg, North Carolina, $33./393,000. Fort Campbell, K~ntucky, $65,387,000. Fort Oarson, Colorado, $10,589,000. Fort Drum, New York $7,114,000. ·Fort Gree71!1, Alaska, $9,854,,000. Fort H oOfl, Tewaa, $90,033,000. Fort Lewis, W aahington, $9,114,,000. Fort George G. Meade, M arylan¢, $1,142,000. 117-0080 2 3 Fort Ord, California, $14,453,000. Milan Army Am;m;unitionPlant, Tennessee, $51~,000. Fort Polk, Louisiana, $47,613,000. Radford Army Amm/lmition Plant, Virginia, $387,000. Fort Riley, Kansas, $5,694,000. Sunflower Army Ammunition Plarnt, Kansas, $15~38,000, Fort Stewart/Hunter Army Air Field, Georgia, $39,634,000. Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant, Tennessee, $~85,000. Fort Wainwright, Alaska, $17,163,000. UNITED STATES MILITARY ACADEMY UNITED STATES ARMY TRAINING AND DOCTRINE COMMAND United States Military Academy, West Point, New York, $~,857,000. Fort Belvoir, Virginia, $6,05~,000. · Fort Benninq, Georqia, $10,394,000. t!NITED STATES ·ARMY HEALTH SERVICES COMMAND Fort Bliss, Texas, $3,856,000. Fort Eustis, Virginia, $3,016,000. Fitzsimons Army Medical Center, Colorado, $~44,000. Walter Reed Army Medical Center, District of Columbia, $1,108,000 Fort Gordon, Georgia, $~~~4,000. Fort Benjamin Harrison, Indiana, $987,000. Fort Know, Kentucky, $10,379,000. UNITED STATES ARMY MILITARY TRAFFIC COMMAND Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, $190,000. Sunny Point Army Terminal, North Carolina, $531,000. Fort Lee, Virginia, $1,11/i,OOO. Fort Rucker, Alohama, $1,841,000. NUCLEAR WEAPONS SECURITY Fort Sill, 0 klahoma, $1,181,000. Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, $15,~49,000. V arioua locations, $~.P75,000. UNITED STATES ARMY MILITARY DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES Fort McNair, District of Columbia, $7~~,000. EIIJHTH UNITED STATES ARMY,· KOREA UNITED STATES ARMY MATERIEL COMMAND Various locations, $13,669,000. Aberdeen Provinfl Grownd, Maryland, $7~6,000. UNITED STATES ARMY, JAPAN Detroit Arsenal, Michigan, $340,000. Kansas Army Ammunition Plant, Kansas, $493,000. Okinawa, $1~4,000. Letterkenny Army Depot, Pennsylvania, $8,357,000. Fort Monmouth, New Jersey, $495,000. UNITED STATES ARMY SECURITY AGENCY Natick Laboratories. Massachusetts, $118,000. Picatinny Arsenal. New Jersey, $560,000. V ariouslocations, $4,480,000. Pine Bluff Arsenal, Arkansas, $6,934,000. Pueblo Army Depot, Colorado. $417,000. UNITED STATES ARMY, EUROPE Radford Army Am.munition Plant, Virginia, $~5,663,000. Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, $1,1~6,000. Germany, various locations, $15,907,000. Scranton Arm11 Ammunition Plant. Pennsylmania, $16~,000. Italy, various locations, $1,088,000. Seneca Army Depot, New York, $421.000. Various locations: For the United States share of the cost of multi­ Sharpe Army Depot, California. $lili1,000. lateral programs for the acquisition or construction of militatry facili­ Sierra Army Depot, California, $1,489,000. ties and installations, including international military headquarters, Tooele Army Depot, Utah, $~,57~,000. for the collective defense of tlie North Atlantic T1·eaty Area, $80 000,- USA Fuel Lubrication Re.~earch J:abomtory, Texas, $469,000. 000. Within thirty days after the end of each quarter, the Secretdry of Watervliet Arsenal, New York, $3.383,000. the Army shall furnish to the Committees on Armed Services and on White Saruls Missile Ranqe, New lflewioo. $31,.9,000. Appropriations of the Senate and House of Representatives a descrip­ Woodbridge Research Facility, Virqinia, .~~,130,000. tion of obligations incurred as the United States share of such multi­ Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona, $6,978,000. lateral programs. NUCLEAR WEAPONS SECURITY AMMUNITION FACILITIES Various locations, $49,393,000. H olaton Army Ammunition Plant, Te'YIIYI.essee, $1,118,000. Indiana Army Ammunition Plant, I ndiarna, $6,758,000. EMERGENCY OONSTRUOTION Lone Star Army Am;m;unition Plant, Texas, $116,000. SEc. 10~. The Secretary of the Army may establish or de·velop Army Longhorn Army Ammunition Plant, Texas, $86,000. installations and facilities by proceeding with construction made nee- ... 5 CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS essary by clw;n,ges in Army '1'1l!bssion8 t1lflll re:JporUJibilities which have been occasioned by (1) unforeseen aecu,rity conaiderationa, (!8) new NO!Val Support Aotiv~ty, Brooklyn, New Yl?"',k, $491,000. weapons develo[J111..6nts, ( 3) new and unforeseeen research 0/fUJ., develop­ Naval Support Activ~ty, New Orleans, Louunana,,~1,400./)00. ment requirements, or (4) improved production BchedUtes, if the Secre­ Commander in Ohief Pacific, Pearl Harbor, Hawa~~ $4,300,000. tary of lJefense determines that deferral of suck construction for in­ Naval Support Activity, Philadelphia, Pe'flffl,8ylvanza, $~01./)00. clusion in the next Military Construction Autkorization Act would be Naval Support Activity, Seattle, Washington, $~67,000. inconsistent with itnterests of national secu,rity and, in connection there­ Headquarters Naval D·lstriot Washington, lVashmgton, Dutrwt of with to acquire, construct, convert, rehalJititate, or install permanent Oolwmhia, $1 ,300./)00. or temporary public works, including land ac!J.ui8ition, site prepara­ tion, appurtenancea, utilities and equi[J111..6nt iln the total amount of COMMANDER IN CHIEF, ATLANTIC FLEET $10/)00,000. The Secretary of the Army, or his de:Jignee, skatl notify the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate arut House of Bepre­ Naval Air Station, Cecil Fiel1, Florida, $!81tEf!OO: . sentatwes, immediately upon reaching a final deciaion to implement, Oceanographic System Atlantw, D(Jiflb Neck, Vzrg~nza, $8,048,000. of the cost of construction of any public work undertaken under tkis NO!Val Air Station, Jacksonville, Florida, $6,101,000. Bection, including those real estate actions pertaining thereto. T~ Naval Station, Mayport, Florida, $1,674./)00. with, may acquinJ, construct, convert, rekabititate, or install perrna.nent NO!Val S'libmarine Base, Netv London, Oonneotwut, $300./)00. autkorization 'Will ewpire upon the date of enactment of the Military Flag Administrative Urnit, Atlantic, Norfolk, Virginia, $!8~3./)00. Construction A.utkorization Act for fiscal year 1978 except for th08e Naval Station, Norfolk, Virgi~ $tE4,!846,000. public works projects concer-ning which the Committees on Armed N O!Val Air Station, Oceana, Virgznia, $14,1,151./)00. Se1'vicea of the Senate atnd House of Bepresentatwes hatve been notified pursuant to this section prior to such date. 00111/ANDER IN CHIEF, PACIFIC FLEET TITLE II-NAVY NO!Val Station, Adak, Alaska, $1,418./)00. Naval Air Station, Barbers Point, Hawaii, $12,836,000. SEc. !801. The Secretary of the Navy may establish or develop mili­ Naval Air Station, Fallon, Nevada, $tE,376,000. tary installations and facilities by acquiring, constructing, converting, Naval Air Station, Miramar, California, $.1,,958./)00. rekabilitating, or installing permanent or temporary public works, in­ Naval Air Station, Moffett Field, California, $896,000. cluding land acquisition, Bite preparation, appurtenances, utilitiea, NO!Val Air Station, North Island, Califomia, $11,720,000. and equipment, for the following ac!J.uiBition and corUJtruction: N (lll)al Station, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, $4,051,000. NO!Val Submarine Base, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, $975./)00. INBIDE THE UNITED STATES NO!Val Facility, Point Sur, Oalifomia, $160,000. N(ffl)al Station, San Diego California, $8,386,000. TRIDENT FACILITIES Naval Air Station, Whidbey Island, Washington, $1,055,000. Various locations, $9!8,!878,000. NAVAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING MARINE CORPS N O!Val Academy, Annapolis, Maryland, $1,639,000.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • United States Air Force and Its Antecedents Published and Printed Unit Histories
    UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AND ITS ANTECEDENTS PUBLISHED AND PRINTED UNIT HISTORIES A BIBLIOGRAPHY EXPANDED & REVISED EDITION compiled by James T. Controvich January 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTERS User's Guide................................................................................................................................1 I. Named Commands .......................................................................................................................4 II. Numbered Air Forces ................................................................................................................ 20 III. Numbered Commands .............................................................................................................. 41 IV. Air Divisions ............................................................................................................................. 45 V. Wings ........................................................................................................................................ 49 VI. Groups ..................................................................................................................................... 69 VII. Squadrons..............................................................................................................................122 VIII. Aviation Engineers................................................................................................................ 179 IX. Womens Army Corps............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 302 Public Law 86-U8-Aug. 7, 1959 [73 Stat
    302 PUBLIC LAW 86-U8-AUG. 7, 1959 [73 STAT. Public Law 86-148 August 7, 1959 ^^ ^^'^ [H. R. 4068] To amend title 10, United States Code, by repealing section 7475, wliich restricts ' I the increasing of forces at naval activities prior to national elections. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Navy. United States of America in Congress assembled^ That title 10, United States Code, is amended as follows: ^^^f^*r 7 4^4 9 (1) Section 7475 is repealed. 7478. (2) The analysis of chapter 643 is amended by striking out the following item: "7475. Force at naval activities not to be increased before elections." Approved August 7, 1959. Public Law 86-149 August 10, 1959 AN ACT [H. R. 5674] rpo authorize certain construction at military Installations, and for other purposes. Be it enacted hy the Senate and House of Representatives of the Military Con- JJuited Statcs of America in Conoress assemhled. struction Act of •' £? J 1959. TITLE I ^™y* SEC. 101. The Secretary of the Army may establish or develop mili­ tary installations and facilities by acquiring, constructing, converting, rehabilitating, or installing permanent or temporary public works, including site preparation, appurtenances, utilities, and equipment, for the following projects: INSIDE THE UNITED STATES TECHNICAL SERVICES FACILITIES (Ordnance Corps) Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland: Training facilities and troop housing, $785,000. Letterkenny Ordnance Depot, Pennsylvania: Maintenance facilities, $454,000. Redstone Arsenal, Alabama: Operational facilities, research, devel­ opment, and test facilities, medical facilities, troop housing, and utilities, $5,292,600. Savanna Ordnance Depot, Illinois: Supply facilities, $1,160,000.
    [Show full text]
  • HOUSE of REPRESENTATIVES Annette M
    1964 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE 5529 In removing it, he dramatized, to my mind, can. They fought with an unrelenting cour­ it should also end there. They voted in the the coming of age of both this country and age in the economic, political, and mmtary United States with an eye to the effect on the Irish in it. He was the symbol of the battles of the country. They would not give the freedom of Ireland, and in so doing they immigrant--a symbol not exclusively reserved an inch. They were despised and rejected broadened the scope of American polltical for the Irish. and discriminated against, but they did not thinking. I think that Leonard Patrick O'Connor make this an occasion for wa111ng, but only Wibberley in a summation of his book, "The fought the harder. "The slums did not hold them. The mines Coming of the Green," tells us the Irish con­ "They did not desert their faith, once so did not break them. They were not lost tribution not only to America, but to the unpopular, in order to gain acceptance. Nor building roads and canals in the wilderness. world: did they forget their homeland, for though They were not defeated at the foot of Marye's "The Irish immigrants did what every for­ they believed that freedom began with the Heights. eign group must do to win the name Ameri- American coastline, they saw no reason why "It was a grand battle, indeed." H.R. 8280. An act for the relief of Mrs. jected by the House last week twists HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Annette M.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Law 85-325-Feb
    72 ST AT. ] PUBLIC LAW 85-325-FEB. 12, 1958 11 Public Law 85-325 AN ACT February 12, 1958 To authorize the Secretary of the Air Force to establish and develop certain [H. R. 9739] installations for'the national security, and to confer certain authority on the Secretary of Defense, and for other purposes. Be it enacted Ify the Senate and House of Representatives of the Air Force instal­ United States of America in Congress assembled^ That the Secretary lations. of the Air Force may establish or develop military installations and facilities by acquiring, constructing, converting, rehabilitating, or installing permanent or temporary public works, including site prep­ aration, appurtenances, utilities, and equipment, for the following projects: Provided^ That with respect to the authorizations pertaining to the dispersal of the Strategic Air Command Forces, no authoriza­ tion for any individual location shall be utilized unless the Secretary of the Air Force or his designee has first obtained, from the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, approval of such location for dispersal purposes. SEMIAUTOMATIC GROUND ENVIRONMENT SYSTEM (SAGE) Grand Forks Air Force Base, Grand Forks, North Dakota: Admin­ Post, p. 659. istrative facilities, $270,000. K. I. Sawyer Airport, Marquette, Michigan: Administrative facili­ ties, $277,000. Larson Air Force Base, Moses Lake, Washington: Utilities, $50,000. Luke Air Force Base, Phoenix, Arizona: Operational and training facilities, and utilities, $11,582,000. Malmstrom Air Force Base, Great Falls, Montana: Operational and training facilities, and utilities, $6,901,000. Minot Air Force Base, Minot, North Dakota: Operational and training facilities, and utilities, $10,338,000.
    [Show full text]
  • Glasgow Growth Policy – October 2013 6.0 COMMUNITY FACILITIES
    City of Glasgow, Montana | CITY GROWTH POLICY CITY OF GLASGOW, MONTANA Growth Policy ‘a place where families grow’ October 30, 2013 DJ&A, P.C. Engineers. Planners. Surveyors. 10 1st Avenue North / Glasgow, MT 59230 Ph: 406/228-4065 www.djanda.com Since 1973 Promoting Healthy Community Growth through Sustainable Infrastructure - DJ&A, P.C. 1 Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose of the Growth Policy ........................................................................................................ 1 1.2 History of Glasgow ........................................................................................................................ 2 2.0 DEMOGRAPHICS ....................................................................................................... 7 2.1 Key Findings.................................................................................................................................. 7 2.2 Population ..................................................................................................................................... 7 2.3 Population Characteristics .......................................................................................................... 12 2.4 Households ................................................................................................................................. 14 3.0 HOUSING CONDITIONS AND TRENDS ....................................................................15
    [Show full text]
  • House' of Representatives
    6132 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE Ap1"il 16 jobs one at a t~e. This is so for these send the restricted bill without delay to sented to the ·President of tlie United reasons: the Hguse, whose concurrence in the States the following-enrolled bills: First. Malpractices in the internal af­ action of the Senate would make it rea­ S. 144. An act to modify Reorganization fairs of unionS and problems arising out sonably certain that union treasuries Plan No. II of 1939 and Reorganization Plan of the external relations of industry and will not be pillaged with impunity by No. 2 of 1953; and · labor are quite dissimilar in nature, and their custodians, that unrepentant con­ S. 1096. An act to authorize appropriations require quite different legislative treat­ victed felons and racketeers will not be to the National Aeronautics and Space Ad­ ment. To combine the· consideration of given dominion over honest and law­ ministration for salari-es and expenses, re­ such diverse matters is not conducive to search and development, construction and abiding union members, that dictatorial equipment, and for other purposes, sound legislation because it tends to con­ union officers will not be allowed to rob fuse issues and distract legislators. union members of their basic rights by Second. The passage of needed legis-. abuse of the trustee process, that cor­ REC~SS lation to outlaw malpractices in the in.; rupt union officers will not be permitted The PRESIDING OFFICER. What is ternal affairs of unions ought not to oe to connive with management to betray· put in jeopardy by saddling such legisla­ the union members they represent, and the wish of the Senate? tion with unrelated controversies be­ that union members will possess the Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Valley County Long Range Plan 2020
    2020 Valley County Long Range Plan MONTANA NRCS GLASGOW FIELD OFFICE CUMBER, TRACY - NRCS, GLASGOW, MT In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD- 3027, found online at How to File a Program Discrimination Complaint and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: 1 Contents SECTION I INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 166 Public Law 86-500-.June 8, 1960 [74 Stat
    166 PUBLIC LAW 86-500-.JUNE 8, 1960 [74 STAT. Public Law 86-500 June 8. 1960 AN ACT [H» R. 10777] To authorize certain construction at military installation!^, and for other pnriwses. He it enacted hy the Hemite and House of Representatives of the 8tfiction^'Acf°^ I'raited States of America in Congress assemoJed, I960. TITLE I ''^^^* SEC. 101. The Secretary of the Army may establish or develop military installations and facilities by acquiring, constructing, con- \'erting, rehabilitating, or installing permanent or temporary public works, including site preparation, appurtenances, utilities, and equip­ ment, for the following projects: INSIDE THE UNITED STATES I'ECHNICAL SERVICES FACILITIES (Ordnance Corps) Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland: Training facilities, medical facilities, and utilities, $6,221,000. Benicia Arsenal, California: Utilities, $337,000. Blue Grass Ordnance Depot, Kentucky: Utilities and ground improvements, $353,000. Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey: Research, development, and test facilities, $850,000. Pueblo Ordnance Depot, Colorado: Operational facilities, $369,000. Redstone Arsenal, Alabama: Community facilities and utilities, $1,000,000. Umatilla Ordnance Depot, Oregon: Utilities and ground improve­ ments, $319,000. Watertow^n Arsenal, Massachusetts: Research, development, and test facilities, $1,849,000. White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico: Operational facilities and utilities, $1,2'33,000. (Quartermaster Corps) Fort Lee, Virginia: Administrative facilities and utilities, $577,000. Atlanta General Depot, Georgia: Maintenance facilities, $365,000. New Cumberland General Depot, Pennsylvania: Operational facili­ ties, $89,000. Richmond Quartermaster Depot, Virginia: Administrative facili­ ties, $478,000. Sharpe General Depot, California: Maintenance facilities, $218,000. (Chemical Corps) Army Chemical Center, Maryland: Operational facilities and com­ munity facilities, $843,000.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Law 968 CHAPTER 939 Be It Enacted Hy the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress
    70 ST AT.] PUBLIC LAW 968- AUG. 3, 1966 991 Public Law 968 CHAPTER 939 AN ACT August 3, 195(5 To authorize certain construction at military installations, and for other [H. R. 12270] ^ purposes. Be it enacted hy the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, lationi.**'^ instai- Constructlon o t TTTT F T public works. SEC. 101. The Secretary of the Army may establish or develop mili- ^«»y* tary installations and facilities by acquiring, constructing, converting, rehabilitating, or installing permanent or temporary public works, including site preparation, appurtenances, utilities and equipment, for the following projects: INSIDE THE UNITED STATES TECHNICAL SERVICES FACILITIES (Ordnance Corps) Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland: Training and storage facili­ ties, $147,000. Jet Propulsion Laboratory (California Institute of Technology), California: Research and development facility, $143,000. Pueblo Ordnance Depot, Colorado: Maintenance facility, $2,142,000. Seneca Ordnance Depot, New York: Utilities, $88,000. Umatilla Ordnance Depot, Oregon: Storage facilities, $258,000. Redstone Arsenal, Alabama: Maintenance facilities, training facili­ ties, family housing and utilities, $6,159,000. White Sands Proving Grounds, New Mexico: Utilities, $693,000. (Quartermaster Corps) Atlanta General Depot, Georgia: Operational facilities, and main­ tenance facilities, $832,000. Columbia Quartermaster Center, South Carolina: Administrative facility, $98,000. Fort Worth General Depot, Texas: Operational facilities, mainte­ nance facilities, land acquisition, and utilities, $1,285,000. New Cumberland General Depot, Pennsylvania: Maintenance facili­ ties, $631,000. Sharpe General Depot, California: Maintenance facilities, $665,000. (Chemical Corps) Army Chemical Center, Maryland: Troop housing, community fa­ cility, and operational facility, $889,000.
    [Show full text]
  • Interview Summaries
    Special Collections Division Nashville Public Library 615 Church Street Nashville, TN 37219 Veterans History Project Interview Summaries Disclaimer on Veterans History Project Collection Materials – (Historical Accuracy and Reliability in Personal Accounts) The Library of Congress [and the Nashville Public Library] does not verify the accuracy of the accounts described herein by participants in the Veterans History Project. Individual stories are voluntarily submitted to the Veterans History Project and are placed in the Library's permanent collections as received. These histories are the personal recollections and perspectives of participating individuals and are not intended as a substitute for an official record of the federal government or of military service. (based upon a statement from the American Folklife Center at Library of Congress, May 15, 2008; http://www.loc.gov/vets/vets-disclaimer.html) A Note on Indexes and Transcripts Created by Nashville Public Library: Every effort is made to ensure the accuracy of transcripts and indexes created to accompany recorded interviews produced by the Nashville Public Library. However, errors of misunderstood words, misspellings, or other mistakes may remain. Researchers are advised to always compare the transcript to the original audio recording for utmost accuracy. Researchers may also wish to consult other third-party resources to further ensure accurate spellings of names, military terms or acronyms, geographic locations, or other information contained in transcripts and oral histories. Veterans History Project Veterans History Project Main Finding Aid Special Interest Categories World War II Index Biographical sketches of people who served as interviewers for this project on a regular basis can be found at the end of this finding aid.
    [Show full text]
  • Big Sky for Boeing Employees in Montana, the Sky’S the Limit
    Frontierswww.boeing.com/frontiers NOVEMBER 2012 / Volume XI, Issue VII Under the Big Sky For Boeing employees in Montana, the sky’s the limit PB BOEING FRONTIERS / NOVEMBER 2012 1 BOEING FRONTIERS / NOVEMBER 2012 Ad watch On the Cover The stories behind the ads in this issue of Frontiers. Inside cover: This ad was created to demon- strate Boeing’s appreciation and gratitude to veterans and will run in The Washington Post, The Seattle Times and more than 50 regional and trade papers. The campaign also features new TV and digital components such as www.boeing.com/tribute. Page 6: In June, Boeing announced the launch of Milestones in Innovation, its first official iPad app available for free from the App Store. The app brings nine decades of aviation innovation to life through beautiful still and video imagery and an interactive timeline. Pages 12–13: “Enduring Support” focuses on Boeing’s training expertise and is one of several ads in a Boeing Defense, Space & Security campaign highlighting the capabilities Boeing brings to its customers. The ads appear in print and selected online business, political and trade publications. Pages 14–15: Underscoring key advantages of the Boeing 20 747-8 Intercontinental jetliner over the Airbus A380, Skies of big ideas this ad is running in domestic and international trade publications. Although the Big Sky state of Montana is noted for its spectacular scenery, it is also home to Boeing operations that are critical to the entire company. Boeing Fabrication Back cover: employees in Helena are focused on the This ad highlights Boeing’s Space difficult process of machining titanium Launch System, a heavy-lift launch and other hard-metal parts for Boeing system being developed with jetliners.
    [Show full text]
  • Glasgow Report
    RESOURCE TEAM ASSESSMENT REPORT for GLASGOW, MONTANA FEBRUARY 23 – 24, 2004 In partnership with Montana Department of Commerce, Montana Economic Developers Association, Two Rivers Economic Growth, USDA/Rural Development, Southeastern Montana Area Revitalization Team (SMART), Eastern Plains RC&D, Real World Development, Valley county and the people of Glasgow. Glasgow Resource Team Assessment 1 February 2004 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY What a warm Glasgow welcome the team received! It was a privilege to spend two days in your vibrant community and learn of its challenges, strengths and dreams. Before digging in to the report itself, I would like to give recognition to Montana Department of Commerce (MDOC), USDA/Rural Development and MEDA – Montana Economic Developers Association. MDOC sponsors Resource Team Assessments across the state, while USDA/Rural Development provides funding for training team members and follow-up costs. MEDA provides the contractual services that make Resource Teams possible. You can join MEDA and become a part of this economic development network at http://www.medamembers.org. Special thanks are due Larry Mires of Two Rivers Economic Growth. Larry served as the spark plug behind this project and encouraged across-the-board community involvement. In addition, I applaud each and every team member that dedicated hours of work and travel in order to participate on the team: Joanne Bowers, USDA/Rural Development; Mark Campbell, Southeastern Montana Area Revitalization Team (SMART); Mike Carlson, Eastern Plains RC&D; and Myrt Webb of Real World Development. Each team member’s contact information is provided in the following report. Please feel free to call on any of us for additional information or support.
    [Show full text]