DOCSLIB.ORG

Executive Summary

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

2145 Suttle Avenue Charlotte, N.C. 28208 - 5 2 3 7 August 31, 2017 Mr. Tracy Davis, Director North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Division of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources Stormwater Permitting Unit 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 RE: Storm Water Management Program Assessment Report Certification NPDES Permit NCS000395 Dear Mr. Davis: In accordance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Number NCS000395 issued to Mecklenburg County, Charlotte-Mecklenburg School System, Central Piedmont Community College and the Towns of Cornelius, Davidson, Huntersville, Matthews, Mint Hill and Pineville, please find attached the Storm Water Management Program Assessment Report for FY2017 along with a signed certification statement (in duplicate). This year we have elected not to use the NCDEQ web-based reporting gateway. Instead, we are using a reporting framework that we believe will enable us to more effectively evaluate program compliance, the appropriateness of best management practices, and progress towards achieving measurable goals; as well as assess the overall performance and effectiveness of our Storm Water Quality Management Program Plan. Please contact me at (980) 314-3217, if you have any questions or require additional information. Sincerely, Rusty Rozzelle Water Quality Program Manager Attachments: Certification T o report pollution o r drainage prob lems call: 3 1 1 http://stormwater.charmeck.org Storm Water Management Program Assessment Report for Permit No. NCS000395 Reporting Period: July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2017 Co-Permittees: Mecklenburg County, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools, Central Piedmont Community College and the Towns of Cornelius, Davidson, Huntersville, Matthews, Mint Hill and Pineville Report Date: August 2017 Report Prepared by: Charlotte-Mecklenburg Storm Water Services 2145 Suttle Avenue Charlotte, NC 28208-5237 Annual Report for July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2017 - Phase II MS4 Permit No. NCS000395 Table of Contents Section 1: Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1 Section 2: Overview ................................................................................................................. 2 Section 3: Public Education and Outreach Program ................................................................ 3 3.1 Implementation Status for FY2017 ......................................................................... 3 3.2 Status of Improvements Identified for Implementation in FY2017........................ 8 3.3 Improvements Identified for Implementation in FY2018 ....................................... 8 Section 4: Public Involvement and Participation Program .................................................... 10 4.1 Implementation Status for FY2017 ....................................................................... 10 4.2 Status of Improvements Identified for Implementation in FY2017...................... 11 4.3 Improvements Identified for Implementation in FY2018 ..................................... 11 Section 5: Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Program ........................................... 12 5.1 Implementation Status for FY2017 ....................................................................... 12 5.2 Status of Improvements Identified for Implementation in FY2017...................... 23 5.3 Improvements Identified for Implementation in FY2018 ..................................... 23 Section 6: Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Program ..................................... 24 6.1 Implementation Status for FY2017 ....................................................................... 24 6.2 Status of Improvements Identified for Implementation in FY2017...................... 25 6.3 Improvements Identified for Implementation in FY2018 ..................................... 26 Section 7: Post-Construction Site Runoff Control Program .................................................. 27 7.1 Implementation Status for FY2017 ....................................................................... 27 7.2 Status of Improvements Identified for Implementation in FY2017...................... 29 7.3 Improvements Identified for Implementation in FY2018 ..................................... 29 Section 8: Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations .................. 30 8.1 Implementation Status for FY2017 ....................................................................... 30 8.2 Status of Improvements Identified for Implementation in FY2017...................... 34 8.3 Improvements Identified for Implementation in FY2018 ..................................... 34 Section 9: Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) ............................................................... 35 9.1 Implementation Status for FY2017 ....................................................................... 35 9.2 Status of Improvements Identified for Implementation in FY2017...................... 39 9.3 Improvements Identified for Implementation in FY2018 ..................................... 39 Section 10: Program Effectiveness .......................................................................................... 40 Section 11: Program Enhancements for FY2018 ..................................................................... 41 Section 12: Storm Water Quality Management Program Plan Modifications for FY2017 ..... 43 Figures Figure 1: Mecklenburg County Phase II Stream Monitoring Sites............................................... 21 Figure 2: Stream Walk/Outfall Inspection-Inventory ................................................................... 22 Figure 3: Notices of Violation Issued Per 100 Inspections from FY2011 through FY2016 ........ 25 Figure 4: Waters of Mecklenburg County with Approved TMDLs ............................................. 38 i Annual Report for July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2017 - Phase II MS4 Permit No. NCS000395 Tables: Table 1: BMP Summary Table for the Public Education and Outreach Program .......................... 3 Table 2: Presentations Conducted in FY2017 ................................................................................ 6 Table 3: Events Attended in FY2017.............................................................................................. 7 Table 4: Status of Improvements Identified for FY2017 Implementation ..................................... 8 Table 5: BMP Summary Table for the Public Involvement and Participation Program .............. 10 Table 6: Status of Improvements Identified for FY2017 Implementation ................................... 11 Table 7: BMP Summary Table for the IDDE Program ................................................................ 12 Table 8: Action/Watch Level Exceedances Identified by Fixed Interval Monitoring .................. 18 Table 9: Number and Type of Service Requests and Emergency Responses by Jurisdiction ...... 20 Table 10: Status of Improvements Identified for FY2017 ............................................................ 23 Table 11: BMP Summary Table for the Construction Site Storm Water Control Program ......... 24 Table 12: Status of Improvements Identified for FY2017 ............................................................ 25 Table 13: BMP Summary Table for the Post-Construction Site Runoff Control Program .......... 27 Table 14: Summary of BMP Inspections ...................................................................................... 28 Table 15: Summary of BMP Education ........................................................................................ 28 Table 16: BMP Inspections Revealing Problems from 2007 through 2017 ................................. 28 Table 17: Status of Improvements Identified for FY2017 ............................................................ 29 Table 18: BMP Summary Table for the Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping Program ..... 30 Table 19: Employee Training by Jurisdiction in FY2017 ............................................................ 32 Table 20: Summary of Inspection Findings from FY2008 through FY2017 ............................... 33 Table 21: Status of Improvements Identified for FY2017 ............................................................ 34 Table 22: BMP Summary Table for the TMDL Program............................................................. 35 Table 23: Approved TMDLS for Mecklenburg County’s Phase I and Phase II Jurisdictions ..... 36 Table 24: Measures of Success in FY2017 ................................................................................... 40 Table 25: Improvements Identified for Implementation in FY2017 ............................................ 41 Attachments Attachment 1: Evaluation of the Effectiveness of the TMDL Program ....................................... 44 ii Annual Report for July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2017 - Phase II MS4 Permit No. NCS000395 Section 1: Introduction This document satisfies the annual reporting requirement of Storm Water Permit No. NCS000395 as follows: • Evaluate program compliance, the appropriateness of best management practices (BMPs), and progress towards achieving measurable goals; and • Evaluate the performance and effectiveness of the Storm Water Quality Management Program Plan, herein referred to as the Storm Water Plan. The purpose of the Storm Water Plan is to describe the actions undertaken by the Permittee to ensure compliance with Permit
Recommended publications
  • 2007 Lake Monitoring Report Mecklenburg County Water Quality Program SWIM Phase I Part 2-CO

    2007 Lake Monitoring Report Mecklenburg County Water Quality Program SWIM Phase I Part 2-CO

    2007 Lake Monitoring Report Mecklenburg County Water Quality Program SWIM Phase I Part 2-CO Prepared by: David Buetow Final Report for FY2007-2008 PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND The Mecklenburg County Water Quality Program (MCWQP) has an ongoing program to monitor the water quality in the three Catawba Lakes bordering the county: Lake Norman, Mountain Island Lake and Lake Wylie. Samples are also routinely collected at the two water bodies in the northern end of Mecklenburg County cut off from Lake Norman proper by I-77: Lake Cornelius and Lake Davidson. Data collected from all lake sites are used to screen for environmental problems using MCWQP Action and Watch levels for various pollutants and also to rate the overall water quality at sampling locations in the lakes using a water quality index. Additional objectives are to describe seasonal trends and address spatial variability in the data. This report presents the lake monitoring data for the calendar year 2007 ACTIVITIES AND METHODS Regular monthly lake sampling was conducted at seven locations in Lake Norman and one location each on Lake Cornelius and Lake Davidson (Appendix A), ten locations in Mountain Island Lake (Appendix B) and eight sampling locations in Lake Wylie (Appendix C). In May 2007, the sampling program was changed in Lake Wylie to add several new cove monitoring sites. This resulted in an increase in regular sampling sites in Lake Wylie from eight to thirteen (Appendix D). Lakes Norman, Wylie and Mountain Island were sampled monthly from May through September and every other month during the rest of the year, i.e.
  • Throwing Distance and Competitive Performance of Boccia Players

    Throwing Distance and Competitive Performance of Boccia Players

    J. Phys. Ther. Sci. 32: 574–577, 2020 The Journal of Physical Therapy Science Original Article Throwing distance and competitive performance of Boccia players Masataka Kataoka, PhD1)*, Kuniharu Okuda, PhD1), Akira Iwata, PhD1), Shuji Imura, MS1), Kosuke Yahagi, MS1), Yohei Matsuo2) 1) Graduate School of Comprehensive Rehabilitation, Osaka Prefecture University: 3-7-30 Habikino, Habikino-city, Osaka 583-8555, Japan 2) Fukushima Rehabilitation Center for Children, Japan Abstract. [Purpose] This study aimed to clarify the relationship between throwing distance and competitive performance in Boccia players in order to establish a training program based on this evidence. [Participants and Methods] In total, 40 athletes, who competed in the Japan Boccia Championships and are certified players of the Japan Boccia Association, participated in the study. Participants threw the Boccia ball as far as possible, and throw- ing distances were compared between certified players (Group I, n=8), those who participated in the final round (Group II, n=9), and those who lost in the preliminary round (Group III, n=23). [Results] The maximum throwing distances were 16.38 ± 5.17 m (Group I), 10.67 ± 2.66 m (Group II), and 8.34 ± 2.73 m (Group III). Group I threw the ball significantly farther than Groups II and III. [Conclusion] Boccia is a target sport and throwing farther distances requires more effort. In addition, being able to throw at a longer distance means that Boccia players can throw a stronger ball and use this for various tactics. The results of this study suggest that long-distance throwing training would be effective in improving the competitive performance of Boccia players.
  • World Para Nordic Skiing Homologation Guide Version 2017

    World Para Nordic Skiing Homologation Guide Version 2017

    World Para Nordic Skiing Homologation Guide Version 2017 Homologation of courses for World Para Nordic Skiing (WPNS) (Para Cross Country Skiing and Para Biathlon for skiers with impairments) 1 General In general, the philosophy for FIS homologation, and the requirements and recommendations for stadium and course design applies to World Para Nordic Skiing as well. IBU requirements for stadium, range and course design are also applicable, particularly on IBU venues. See FIS Homologation manual for: - Philosophy of Homologation - Course Design Criteria - Design of courses - Stadium - Waxing cabins, Ski test area, warm up course - Practicing homologation skills However, since certain classes and categories have clear physical limitations, the courses must in general be made easier, with special attention to fast downhill sections, sharp curves, and steep or long up hills. The following sections will describe areas within homologation work that specifically should be considered when designing courses for Paralympic Nordic Skiing athletes. 2 Definitions 2.1 HD (height difference) is the difference in height between the lowest and highest points of a competition course. 2.2 MC (Maximum climb) is the climb with the highest partial height difference, in other terms, the biggest uphill. The uphill can be interrupted by a section of undulating terrain that does not exceed 200 m in length or a downhill that does not exceed 10 m PHD. 2.3 TC (Total climb) represents a total of all climbs on the course. World Para Nordic Skiing Homologation Guide ver 2017 1 3 Classification Paralympic Nordic Skiing athletes are classified according to the following table: Category Class Region Impairment Main sport equipment and degree of impairment Standing LW2 Impairments in one lower limb (ex.
  • Framework for In-Field Analyses of Performance and Sub-Technique Selection in Standing Para Cross-Country Skiers

    Framework for In-Field Analyses of Performance and Sub-Technique Selection in Standing Para Cross-Country Skiers

    sensors Article Framework for In-Field Analyses of Performance and Sub-Technique Selection in Standing Para Cross-Country Skiers Camilla H. Carlsen 1,*, Julia Kathrin Baumgart 1, Jan Kocbach 1,2, Pål Haugnes 1 , Evy M. B. Paulussen 1,3 and Øyvind Sandbakk 1 1 Centre for Elite Sports Research, Department of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7491 Trondheim, Norway; [email protected] (J.K.B.); [email protected] (J.K.); [email protected] (P.H.); [email protected] (E.M.B.P.); [email protected] (Ø.S.) 2 NORCE Norwegian Research Centre AS, 5008 Bergen, Norway 3 Faculty of Health, Medicine & Life Sciences, Maastricht University, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +47-452-40-788 Abstract: Our aims were to evaluate the feasibility of a framework based on micro-sensor technology for in-field analyses of performance and sub-technique selection in Para cross-country (XC) skiing by using it to compare these parameters between elite standing Para (two men; one woman) and able- bodied (AB) (three men; four women) XC skiers during a classical skiing race. The data from a global navigation satellite system and inertial measurement unit were integrated to compare time loss and selected sub-techniques as a function of speed. Compared to male/female AB skiers, male/female Para skiers displayed 19/14% slower average speed with the largest time loss (65 ± 36/35 ± 6 s/lap) Citation: Carlsen, C.H.; Kathrin found in uphill terrain.
  • World Para Nordic Skiing WC Points Winter Season 2019/20

    World Para Nordic Skiing WC Points Winter Season 2019/20

    World Para Nordic Skiing World Cup Overall Rankings Winter Season 2019/20 World Para Nordic Skiing WC Points Winter Season 2019/20 World Cup Overall Rankings Cross Country created by IPC Sport Data Management System Period Start: 2019-07-01 | Period End: 2020-06-30 Women's VI Rank SDMS ID Name NPC Class WC Points Tie Break 1 43739 Khlyzova, Vera RUS B2 600 2 43732 Panferova, Anna RUS B2 560 3 13436 Sakhanenka, Sviatlana BLR B2 515 4 29128 Edlinger, Carina AUT B1 405 5 13605 Lysova, Mikhalina RUS B2 285 6 23918 Galitsyna, Marina RUS B1 258 7 43733 Umrilova, Vlada RUS B3 190 8 13657 Shyshkova, Oksana UKR B2 180 9 35723 Walter, Leonie Maria GER B2 165 10 19064 Klug, Clara GER B1 126 11 43734 Tereshchenkova, Margarita RUS B3 117 12 23987 Smirnova, Iuliia RUS B2 102 13 13525 Hoesch, Vivian GER B1 82 14 35103 Recktenwald, Johanna GER B2 76 15 43740 Razumnaia, Ekaterina RUS B2 66 16 40995 Kapustei, Andriana UKR B2 56 17 44280 Tkachenko, Nataliia UKR B2 52 18 13619 Remizova, Elena RUS B3 48 19 23919 Moshkovskaia, Ekaterina RUS B2 24 20 43742 Berezhnaia, Kseniia RUS B2 20 Women's Standing Rank SDMS ID Name NPC Class WC Points Tie Break 1 31597 Nilsen, Vilde NOR LW4 780 2 23402 Rumyantseva, Ekaterina RUS LW5/7 385 3 19080 Liashenko, Liudmyla UKR LW8 380 4 13643 Batenkova-Bauman, Yuliia UKR LW6 350 5 13648 Kononova, Oleksandra UKR LW8 325 6 29233 Mikheeva, Iuliia RUS LW8 264 7 30463 Faron, Iweta POL LW8 239 8 35400 Wilkie, Natalie CAN LW8 238 9 31663 Konashuk, Bohdana UKR LW8 188 10 20534 Ostroborodko, Anna RUS LW8 177 11 20641 Hudak, Brittany CAN
  • World Para Alpine Skiing WC Points Winter Season 2020/21

    World Para Alpine Skiing WC Points Winter Season 2020/21

    World Para Alpine Skiing World Cup Individual Rankings Winter Season 2020/21 World Para Alpine Skiing WC Points Winter Season 2020/21 World Cup Individual Rankings created by IPC Sport Data Management System Period Start: 2020-07-01 | Period End: 2021-06-30 Women's Slalom VI Rank SDMS ID Name NPC Class WC Points Tie Break 1 23842 Ristau, Noemi Ewa GER B2 220 2 22142 Aigner, Veronika AUT B2 200 3 40290 Aigner, Barbara AUT B3 180 4 44235 Rexova, Alexandra SVK B2 160 5 31601 Bennink, Maaike NED B2 60 6 13349 Farkasova, Henrieta SVK B3 50 Women's Slalom Standing Rank SDMS ID Name NPC Class WC Points Tie Break 1 29162 Rieder, Anna-Maria GER LW9-1 260 2 13162 Rothfuss, Andrea GER LW6/8-2 210 3 29136 Voronchikhina, Varvara RUS LW6/8-2 180 4 13116 Bochet, Marie FRA LW6/8-2 140 5 24067 Smetisko, Lucija CRO LW6/8-2 120 6 41102 Aarsjoe, Ebba SWE LW4 100 7 14585 Khorosheva, Anastasiia RUS LW9-2 50 8 42372 Richard, Aurelie FRA LW6/8-2 45 Women's Slalom Sitting Rank SDMS ID Name NPC Class WC Points Tie Break 1 13161 Forster, Anna-Lena GER LW12-1 400 2 21797 van Bergen, Barbara NED LW11 80 Men's Slalom VI Rank SDMS ID Name NPC Class WC Points Tie Break 1 13724 Deleplace, Hyacinthe FRA B2 230 2 20881 Bertagnolli, Giacomo ITA B3 200 24.30 (§302.3) 3 35366 Simpson, Neil GBR B3 200 35.60 (§302.3) 4= 40291 Aigner, Johannes AUT B2 160 4= 13338 Krako, Jakub SVK B2 160 6 13335 Haraus, Miroslav SVK B2 105 7 44167 Scharnagl, Michael AUT B3 100 IPC Sport Data Management System Page 1 of 7 26 September 2021 at 01:38:04 CEST World Para Alpine Skiing World Cup Individual
  • Classification Made Easy Class 1

    Classification Made Easy Class 1

    Classification Made Easy Class 1 (CP1) The most severely disabled athletes belong to this classification. These athletes are dependent on a power wheelchair or assistance for mobility. They have severe limitation in both the arms and the legs and have very poor trunk control. Sports Available: • Race Runner (RR1) – using the Race Runner frame to run, track events include 100m, 200m and 400m. • Boccia o Boccia Class 1 (BC1) – players who fit into this category can throw the ball onto the court or a CP2 Lower who chooses to push the ball with the foot. Each BC1 athlete has a sport assistant on court with them. o Boccia Class 3 (BC3) – players who fit into this category cannot throw the ball onto the court and have no sustained grasp or release action. They will use a “chute” or “ramp” with the help from their sport assistant to propel the ball. They may use head or arm pointers to hold and release the ball. Players with a impairment of a non cerebral origin, severely affecting all four limbs, are included in this class. Class 2 (CP2) These athletes have poor strength or control all limbs but are able to propel a wheelchair. Some Class 2 athletes can walk but can never run functionally. The class 2 athletes can throw a ball but demonstrates poor grasp and release. Sports Available: • Race Runner (RR2) - using the Race Runner frame to run, track events include 100m, 200m and 400m. • Boccia o Boccia Class 2 (BC2) – players can throw the ball into the court consistently and do not need on court assistance.
  • Classification Information Sheet Para-Cross Country Skiing

    Classification Information Sheet Para-Cross Country Skiing

    Classification Information Sheet Para-Cross Country Skiing This information is intended to be a generic guide to classification for Para-Cross Country Skiing. The classification of athletes in this sport is performed by authorised classifiers according to the World Para Nordic Skiing classification rules. What is the classification process? Trained classifiers assess an athlete using the World Para Nordic Skiing classification rules to determine the following: 1. Does the athlete have an eligible impairment type? An athlete must have a permanent eligible impairment type and provide medical documentation detailing their diagnosis and health condition. 2. Does the athlete meet the minimum impairment criteria for the sport? Specific criteria applied to each sport to determine if a person’s impairment results in sufficient limitation in their sport. This is called the minimum impairment criteria. 3. What is the appropriate class to allocate the athlete for competition? Classes are detailed in the classification rules for the sport and a classifier determines the class an athlete will compete in. Which Paralympic impairment groups compete in Para-Cross Country Skiing? Athletes are required to have a permanent, eligible impairment and will be required to provide medical diagnostic information about their diagnosis and impairment. Eligible Impairment Type Examples of health conditions Vision Reduced or no vision in both eyes caused by damage to the eye structure, optical Impairment nerves/optic pathways, or visual cortex of the brain. Includes
  • World Para Alpine Skiing EC Points Winter Season

    World Para Alpine Skiing EC Points Winter Season

    World Para Alpine Skiing Europa Cup Overall Rankings Winter Season 2016/17 World Para Alpine Skiing EC Points Winter Season 2016/17 Europa Cup Overall Rankings created by IPC Sport Data Management System Period Start: 2016-07-01 | Period End: 2017-06-30 Women's VI Rank SDMS ID Name NPC Class EC Points Tie Break 1 24063 Goluza, Eva CRO B2 625 2 24071 Sana, Eleonor BEL B3 560 3 23842 Ristau, Noemi Ewa GER B2 430 4 12946 Perrine, Melissa AUS B2 400 5 20310 Dessart, Marie-Morgane BEL B3 270 6 13418 Umstead, Danelle USA B2 215 7 13140 Gallagher, Kelly GBR B3 100 8= 14237 Mannella, Staci USA B3 80 8= 16125 Yang, Jae Rim KOR B2 80 Women's Standing Rank SDMS ID Name NPC Class EC Points Tie Break 1 13086 Pueyo Marimon, Ursula ESP LW2 829 2 17261 Schmidt, Bigna SUI LW5/7-3 660 3 29162 Rieder, Anna-Maria GER LW9-1 600 4 13206 Corradini, Melania ITA LW6/8-1 440 5 13261 Jochemsen, Anna NED LW2 360 6 13162 Rothfuss, Andrea GER LW6/8-2 300 7 31624 Hondo, Ammi JPN LW6/8-2 260 8 17095 Chatel-Laley, Marie FRA LW9-2 215 9 22219 Perez de Juan, Barbara ESP LW4 210 10 20240 Turgeon, Frederique CAN LW2 141 11 26952 Pemble, Mel CAN LW9-2 125 12 22832 Jepsen, Mollie CAN LW6/8-2 80 13 13034 Schwartz, Melanie USA LW2 77 14 31418 Joechl, Eva-Maria AUT LW6/8-1 60 15 13351 Smarzova, Petra SVK LW6/8-2 40 Women's Sitting Rank SDMS ID Name NPC Class EC Points Tie Break 1 18077 Hagspiel, Ruth GER LW10-1 595 2 28882 Tuertscher, Heike AUT LW12-1 490 3 21797 van Bergen, Barbara NED LW11 460 4 12977 Loesch, Claudia AUT LW11 380 5 13163 Schaffelhuber, Anna GER LW10-2 260 6
  • IPC Alpine Skiing Classification Rules and Regulations

    IPC Alpine Skiing Classification Rules and Regulations

    IPC Alpine Skiing Classification Rules and Regulations 05 December 2012 International Paralympic Committee Adenauerallee 212-214 Tel.+49 228 2097-200 www.paralympic.org 53113 Bonn, Germany Fax+49 228 2097-209 [email protected] Content 1 INTRODUCTION TO CLASSIFICATION ..................................................................................................... 4 1.1 GOVERNANCE ........................................................................................................................................................... 4 1.2 STRUCTURE OF CLASSIFICATION REGULATIONS .................................................................................................................. 4 1.3 PURPOSE OF CLASSIFICATION REGULATIONS ..................................................................................................................... 4 1.4 IPC CLASSIFICATION CODE ........................................................................................................................................... 5 1.5 DEFINITIONS ............................................................................................................................................................. 5 2 CLASSIFIERS .......................................................................................................................................... 5 2.1 CLASSIFICATION PERSONNEL ......................................................................................................................................... 5 2.2 CLASSIFIERS – LEVELS
  • Dissecting the Spiral Galaxy M83: Mid-Infrared Emission And

    Dissecting the Spiral Galaxy M83: Mid-Infrared Emission And

    Astronomy & Astrophysics manuscript no. m83.paper.astroph May 6, 2019 (DOI: will be inserted by hand later) Dissecting the spiral galaxy M 83: mid-infrared emission and comparison with other tracers of star formation⋆ A. Vogler1, S. C. Madden1, R. Beck2, A.A. Lundgren3,4, M. Sauvage1, L. Vigroux1 and M. Ehle5 1 DSM/DAPNIA/Service d’Astrophysique, CEA/Saclay, 91191, Gif-sur-Yvette Cedex, France 2 Max-Planck-Institut f¨ur Radioastronomie, Auf dem H¨ugel 69, 53121 Bonn, Germany 3 European Southern Observatory, Casilla 19001, Santiago 19, Chile 4 Stockholm Observatory, AlbaNova, 106 91 Stockholm, Sweden 5 XMM-Newton Science Operations Centre, European Space Agency, Villafranca, PO Box 50727, 28080 Madrid, Spain Accepted July 7, 2005 Abstract. We present a detailed mid-infrared study of the nearby, face-on spiral galaxy M 83 based on ISOCAM data. M 83 is a unique case study, since a wide variety of MIR broad-band filters as well as spectra, covering the wavelength range of 4 to 18 µm, were observed and are presented here. Emission maxima trace the nuclear and bulge area, star-formation regions at the end of the bar, as well as the inner spiral arms. The fainter outer spiral ′ ′ arms and interarm regions are also evident in the MIR map. Spectral imaging of the central 3 × 3 (4kpc × 4kpc) field allows us to investigate five regions of different environments. The various MIR components (very small grains, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) molecules, ionic lines) are analyzed for different regions throughout the galaxy. In the total λ4 µm to 18 µm wavelength range, the PAHs dominate the luminosity, contributing between 60% in the nuclear and bulge regions and 90% in the less active, interarm regions.
  • (VA) Veteran Monthly Assistance Allowance for Disabled Veterans

    (VA) Veteran Monthly Assistance Allowance for Disabled Veterans

    Revised May 23, 2019 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Veteran Monthly Assistance Allowance for Disabled Veterans Training in Paralympic and Olympic Sports Program (VMAA) In partnership with the United States Olympic Committee and other Olympic and Paralympic entities within the United States, VA supports eligible service and non-service-connected military Veterans in their efforts to represent the USA at the Paralympic Games, Olympic Games and other international sport competitions. The VA Office of National Veterans Sports Programs & Special Events provides a monthly assistance allowance for disabled Veterans training in Paralympic sports, as well as certain disabled Veterans selected for or competing with the national Olympic Team, as authorized by 38 U.S.C. 322(d) and Section 703 of the Veterans’ Benefits Improvement Act of 2008. Through the program, VA will pay a monthly allowance to a Veteran with either a service-connected or non-service-connected disability if the Veteran meets the minimum military standards or higher (i.e. Emerging Athlete or National Team) in his or her respective Paralympic sport at a recognized competition. In addition to making the VMAA standard, an athlete must also be nationally or internationally classified by his or her respective Paralympic sport federation as eligible for Paralympic competition. VA will also pay a monthly allowance to a Veteran with a service-connected disability rated 30 percent or greater by VA who is selected for a national Olympic Team for any month in which the Veteran is competing in any event sanctioned by the National Governing Bodies of the Olympic Sport in the United State, in accordance with P.L.