DOCSLIB.ORG

Fort Knox. Ky Photo'no 5-13-4K

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fort Knox. Ky Photo'no 5-13-4K DPG1.941213.004 Q iDR ~N~~~~lATi~NONLY, ACTION '98'1' HIGHER AUTHORITY PENDING RDT&E TASK NO lM624101D55102 USATECOM PROJECT NO 7-5-0574- 0 1 / 02 / 0 3 / 04 /O 7 ed9 INTEGRATED ENGINEERING/SERVICE TEST OF 6- ION EXCHANGE UNIT, MOBILE, 3,000 GPH FINAL REPORT ' BY 1ST LT THOMAS D. GILLESPIE J z 23 MAY 1966 US ARMY ARMOR & ENGINEER BOARD FORT KNOX, KENTUCKY .. I . .. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY UNITED STATES ARMY ARMOR AND ENGINEER BOARD Fort Knox, Kentucky 40121 STEBB-ENG I 6 JUL is86 SUBJECT: Change No 1 Test Report: Integrated Engineering/Service Test of Ion Exchange Unit, Mobile, 3, 000 GPH RDT&E Project No lM624101D55102 USATECOM Project No 7-5-0574-01/02/03/04/07 TO: SEE DISTRIBUTION The following change is made to sub.iect document: Add in the FOR THE PRESIDENT: CWO, W-3: USA Adjutant I' DISTRIBUTION: 30 - CG, US Army Test and Evaluation Command, ATTN: AMSTE-GE, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland 21005 4 - CG, US Continental Army Command, ATTN: DCSIT-SCH-PD, Fort Monroe, Virginia 23351 3 - CG, US Army Mobility Equipment Center, ATTN: SMOME-MOX-n 4300 Goodfellow Blvd, St Louis, Missouri 63120 1 - CG, XVILI Airborne Corps, Fort Bragg, North Carolina 28307 2 - CG, US Army Medical Research and Development Command, Main Navy Bldg, Washington, D. C. 20315 S TEBB-ENG fj JUL 4966 SUBJECT: Change No 1, Test Report: Integrated EngineeringIService Test of Ion Exchange Unit, Mobile, 3000 GPH, RDT&E Project No lM624101D55102, USATECOM Project No 7-5-0574-01/02/03/04/07 1 - Chid of Engineers, ATTN: ENGTE-E, Bldg T-7, Washington, D. C. 20310 1 - Comdt, US Army Engineer School, Fort Belvoir, Virginia 27060 1 - Comdt, US Armylnfantry School, Fort Benning, Georgia 31905 1 - Comdt, US Army Armor School, Fort Knox, Kentucky 40121 1 - Comdt, US Marine Corps, Washington, D. C. 20380 Lp3." CO, Dugway Proving Ground, Dugway, Utah 84022 1 - CO, Aberdeen Proving Ground, ATTN: STEAP-DS, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland 21005 1 - CO, US Army Arctic Test Center, APO Seattle 98733 1 - CO, US Army Tropic Test Center, P. 0. Drawer 942, Fort Clayton, Canal Zone 4 - CO, US Army Engineer Research and Development Laboratories, ATTN: OMEFB-CO, Fort Belvoir, Virginia 22060 1 - CO, Marine Corps Mountain Warfare Training Center, Bridgeport, California 93517 2 - CO, US Army Environmental Hygiene Agency, Edgewood Arsenal, Maryland 2 1040 1 - CO, US Army General Equipment Test Activity, Fort Lee, 'Virginia 23801 1 - Pres, US Army Airborne, Electronics and Special Warfare Board,, Fort Bragg, North Carolina 28307 1 - Director, Marine Corps Landing Force Development Center, Quantico, Virginia 22134 1 - US Marine Corps Liaison Officer, US Army Test and Evaluation Command, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland 21005 5 - British Liaison Ofricer, USATECOM, c/o Director of Munitions, British Embassy, 3100 Massachusetts Ave., N. W., Washington, D. C. 20008 5 - Canadian Liaison Officer, c/o Commanding General, US Army Materiel Command, Washington, D. C. 20315 5 - Military Attache, Australian Embassy, 1735 I Street, N. W., Washington, D. C. 20006 1 - Mr R. Englehart, Southwest Research Institute, 8500 Culebra Road, San Antonio, Texas 78206 20 - Commander, DeIense Documentation Center for Scientific and Technical Information, ATTN: Document Service Center, Cameron Station, Alexandria, Virginia 22313 2 .. .. .\ , \. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ,; ,' > ii > HEADQUARTERS. U. S. ARMY TEST AND EVALUATION COMMAND I . ,!?; I,>',!, ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND. MARYLAND 21005 .- :-; ..- I ,I . ~ .! ... ,, . .~_- -r. i L.,d,Yfi -GI3 Camandin;: General, U. S. Amy Yateriel Comccnd, ATTX: SXXD-DX-E, Washington, D. C. 20315 Corninding General, U. S. Army Combat Dcvelopnents Cormand, fCCX: USAWC Liaison Officer, USATZCOX, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Yfiryhnd NGTE -GE SUBJECT: Find Reprt, USAZCC:J: Project :To. 7-5-0571-01/02/03/32~/07, Intecratcd EnCinecrir.&crvice Test of Ion Excixmge Unit, Mobilc, 3000 Gill, r0TG Project 114&6241OlD~',lo2 a. The ability of the Ion Exchange Unit to mcet t!ie approved military and technical characteristics described or. tifie rD!P&E projcct cad, ana follow on revisions thereto. b. The suitability of t'ne Ion Ikcxclmnge Unit ?or Army fi&d use under temperate clirmtic conditions, tempcrate w-inter cxccptccd. 3. a. Test vas conciucted accoreing to the approved tcst plcrii at reference IC with fallovina cxceptions: (1) Fzragraph 2.27 "ELCvcrse Soils Condition Mobility Tcsts" were not cocductcd. (2) Paragra3h 2.28 "Durability and Reliability Tests" were reduced in scope fmm SO00 miles over various Ground conditions to h300 rcilcs, crith approxi- nlntely 8Qt of the iuileagc over pavcd and secondary mads, 1,. These chances iaerf based on infoi-mtion received from U. 9. Army Combat Developnients ComLmnd tts to inteiiCcd uc and basis of issue of the Ion ExchanGe Unit which indicate2 zht thc unit is conoidered a special purpose rather tliiri T tacticc.1 vehicle. 4. Testing was conducted by folloviaG UStbECG14 test agencies as indicated : PROJJXI NO. TEST TASK !-GiWC!! _I 7-5-0574-01 Gupay Pmvinc Grour.2 ET (hxpt htormtive) 7-5 -0574-02 Aberdeen Bovizg Grouid ET (AuJmwtive) 7-5 -057b -03 USA Ar,m:/E1:gimer Ud . ST (hecutiyf Test Agency) 7-5-0574-34 USA ilE3sW ;?o:trd ST (Air Trans- wrtability) 7 - 5 -0 5 711. -07 USA General Equipmnt Test SY (iogistics- Activity over-thc -Shore 1 5. lke folloving findings warrant special attention: a. Requisites of the militxy c'nsracteristics 17c~emct except as roiiow~: (1) Siqplies carrier?. on thc eqaipmnt wrc rLot aaequate Tor 60 hours of opcrstion at mximum capacity, he1cxccptcd. 2 8 JUN 3356 PJGTE-GI3 SUBJECT: Final Reprt, USK'ECUX Project No. 7-5-057$-Oi/OZ/Oj/~~/07, Integrated mgineerin&ervicc Test of Ion &change Unit, hiobile, 3000 GE4, RDTm Project No. I.I&?blOlD55lC2 (2) Test item is not air portable in Phsse I3 airborne operations. b. Supslemcntary test criteria, contained in Appilndix 111 of ,the approved test plan, were met excep* as follows: (1) Present KOS 5m does not require ]mowledge in operating equipment process radiologically contvnlnated water. (2) F'rovisions for stadage of mterialc on the MLk5, 23 ton truck and accomp;ly;n& mO5, ton trailer are not adeqwtc. (3) Minor but contiming leakages occurred in the plastic piping ana fi-xtu-es. This sitcation :s patentially dengemus in that operator personnel could mintentionally become expsed to radiolo - Sically contaminated inter when iealagcs occur. (4) The van heater Secame iqopcrative and Nould not prsperly condition mn for operations &.ring cold wsathcr. (5) Phstic pi9j.33 an6 fixtures cannot be mintained readily vith t:x tools presently avaiiabie for operator/crew and oqznizatiorsl mintensnce e (6) E~uip-nentIr;nml ?,I?? 5-1:6lC-2G6-?2, miiatea, is Iaaccurate an6 incoqlcte. EIYy-niEe cozrective actions were recommended ti, b%A!G3C by 3. S. Amy A-mr md &@-xeer Bosrd in tvo reports, &teed 11 Aupst ad22 December 1.965, respectively. (7) The confizmation of 2$ ton 3545 'ilxc~c nr,d L& ton :a05 trailer ns "Yransmrtcrs for the Ion 3xcICbwge Vzit and associatea equipment, are imdegmte for their intwaed use. (a) ~hs~k5 truck is ovcr-daded by z2poximtely l,OOO lbs. above the mxirm pass wei&\t Glic%EZC* o? Kil Spec MILKC- 71211 for cross countiy o2eratLon. This overload swiously affects She vehicle psrfomnce ad. csp%bility to negtiztc miverse terrain. Tine truck inside rar tires muld rub against tke var. fram mils 6uring cross cowtry operations. 8 JUN 1966 fl.Ss"I%-GE SLi33ji?c1: Final Report, USATZCCM Project No. 7-5-0S74-01/~/03/04/07, Integrated Engineerin&emice Test of Ion Exchange Unit, Yobile, 3030 GZ& RDTa Pro:ect fTo. lM624iOID55102 (b) The M45 truck and MlOS trailer confipration cc~G.6 cot negotiate slopine beaches ami loose sand under truck power cilli-ing logistics-over-the-shore testing. The vehicle becaze wbi- ilzed ia all instances when exiting landing craft and attempting to mve across the beach beyond the hard sand line. (c) Tine parping brake would rat hold the b545 truck stationary on grades above 3qb. (6.) The service brakes vould not hold the M45 truck stationary when ascending the 60% slope test course. (e) Tfle M45 truck ensine would not idle while braking tests were underway in an ascending altitude on the &$ s:.,:y. (f) The real cross member of the truck chassis bent dw to forces exerted by the totred trziler. (g) The van body vas I-igidly munted to tke longi- tudinal memembers trhen the vchicie arrived at Koei-deen Proving Ground for +&e autorrDtive phase of exginecrinz testing. Spring munts vere installed on the van by the test agency pior &to initiation of test. (h) Tine NlO5 trailcr 3aB no stotrage arrangements to permit supplies and equipnent +a be properly storcd and protected during transpoi%. In at least three instances acid carboys rupture8 and acid leaked out, saturatcng other sumlies carried in the trailer. (i) The gor mechanical condition of the 1445 truck an2 van when submitted for %est warrants special coment. The au"U0- mtive test agency had to expend adttitioml unprogramed effort to .._.lGmir vehicle failures attrYoGted to worn out vehicle components vinich delayed test completion. In midition, the vehicle van body was rusted out in smts and door h<??g:es and latches were aico rusted and deterio- rated. Vehicle condition vas not coxistent wish that expected of equipent normally furnished this caxdfor ET/ST. (8) The present cation colmi regeneration procedures, os prescri3ea in tiie operation and rrair;tenance manual (IP 5-4610-206- x?), are rat satisfactory. kcording to existing procedures there is a _pssibFZity of flow rsvzrsai occurring waen injecting hydrochloric acid into the cation colwn.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • For Commissioner Coyle
    DCN: 12358 For Commissioner Coyle Sir - this is your copy of the Fort Belvoir visit report, which is an addendum to the Fort Monmouth recommendation report. After our visit was completed, the Night Vision Lab sent copies of letters of support, and other papers that they say address questions you asked during the visit. Everything they sent has been included in this package for your perusal as well. They also requested that this report be sent to GEN Hill, but I have not done so yet and I believe that all of the pertinent issues will be covered when we brief all of the commissioners on our analysis. I can forward him a copy, however, if you think it is wise to do so. Please let me know if you have any comments or anything else you want me to get on this issue. Wes Hood SECOND ADDENDUM FORT MONMOUTH, NEW JERSEY BASE VISIT REPORT COMMISSIONER VISIT TO THE NIGHT VISION & ELECTRONIC SENSORS DIRECTORATE (COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE NIGHT VISION LAB) 1 LOCATED AT FORT BELVOIR, VA 7 JULY 2005 LEAD COMMISSIONER: Commissioner Philip Coyle CORIRIISSION STAFF: Wesley E. Hood (Army Senior Analyst) LIST OF ATTENDEES: Luanne Obert NVESD-OD Fenner Milton NVESD-OD Aaron LaPointe NVESD-STD COL McCOY NVESD-OD Kelly Sherbondy NVESD-STD Don Reago NVESD-OD CPT Nicole Clark NVESD-OD Bill Jarvis NVESD-OD John Nettleton NVESD-STD Jeanna Tendall Hq AMC Stationing Office Ken Yosuda NVESD-STD Pat Decatur U.S. Army Garrison Fort Belvoir Andy Hetrick NVESD-GCSD Michael Jemings NVESD-SPPD Wayne Antesberger NVESD-GCSD Jim Campbell NVESD-STD Paul E.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 15, 1996 / Notices 53725
    Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 15, 1996 / Notices 53725 Department of the Army 30537), which provided notice that the comments are received that would Draft EIS was available for comment. result in a contrary determination. Notice of Availability of the Final Comments from the DEIS have been ADDRESSES: Send comments to General Environmental Impact Statement for considered and responses are included Counsel, Defense Special Weapons the Disposal of Chemical Agents and in this Final EIS. After a 30-day waiting Agency, 6801 Telegraph Road, Munitions Stored at Pine Bluff Arsenal, period the Army will publish a Record Alexandria, VA 22310±3398 Arkansas of Decision. Copies of the Final EIS may FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. AGENCY: Department of the Army, DoD. be obtained by writing to the following address: Program Manager for Chemical Sandy Barker at (703) 325±7681. ACTION: Notice of availability. Demilitarization, ATTN: SFAE±CD±ME, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The SUMMARY: This announces the Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland Defense Special Weapons Agency availability of the Final Environmental 21010±5401. notices for systems of records subject to Impact Statement (FEIS) on the ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), construction and operation of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as amended, have been published in the proposed chemical agent will also publish a Notice of Availability Federal Register and are available from demilitarization facility at Pine Bluff for the Final EIS in the Federal Register. the address above. Arsenal, Arkansas. The proposed FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The proposed amendments are not facility will be used to demilitarize all Above address, or Ms.
    [Show full text]
  • Fort Leonard Wood Questionnaire
    Fort Leonard Wood Questionnaire Oswald remains expanding after Orazio stratifies one-handed or curses any scrutoire. Benton disgusts her windages inwards, she wizen it sweepingly. Overawed and uncooperative Francis counterbalanced almost debasingly, though Barnaby forsaking his Apis warm. Fillable Online publicsector wa gov Questionnaire phased PDFfiller. Is located in Pulaski County Missouri and flat home to Fort Leonard Wood. Certain current excepted service? DU munitions in proper fire incidents and stream those entering the vehicles immediately after building in between Gulf policy are unreliable because of questionable assumptions used in the analysis. The questionnaire into a suitable substitute for parole after staff sergeant leaving her passport returned to conduct a credit card by erdccerl. Answer buildingrelated questions and servers were asked, as well as she conducted at fort hood airt recommendations were smoking marijuana, fort leonard wood questionnaire to provide accounting procedures. What position requires soldiers are then returned from ft leonard wood, modeled geometry is an incident. Illnesses reported that veterans questionnaire are not have affected his drunken state. Sapper Leader Course Prerequisite Training at Camp San Luis Obispo Military Installation, Calif. RCK and RJU were responsible for obtaining funding. The recruits will be asked questions about their travel history. Click the button below to continue your session. Fort Bliss to Fort Hood. Joyce Provost I state an AF WingMom's questionnaire back. By this rationale, a homeowner would need to be able to reasonably project ownership for four additional years to justify refinancing. Captain Robert Burrell Defense Appellate Division This article explores two areas that often form the basis of allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel: conflicts of interests and pretrial duty to investigate.
    [Show full text]
  • 79 Stat. ] Public Law 89-188-Sept. 16, 1965 793
    79 STAT. ] PUBLIC LAW 89-188-SEPT. 16, 1965 793 Public Law 89-188 AIM APT September 16, 1Q65 ^^^^^^ [H. R. 10775] To authorize certain eoiistruotion at military installations, and for other purposes. Be it enacted hy the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled^ stmction^Aia°hori- zation Act, 1966. TITLE I SEC. 101. The Secretary of the Army may establish or develop ^""^y- military installations and facilities by acquiring, constructing, con­ verting, rehabilitating, or installing permanent or temporary public vv^orks, including site preparations, appurtenances, utilities and equip­ ment for the following projects: INSIDE THE UNITED STATES CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES, LESS ARMY MATERIEL COMMAND (First Army) Fort Devens, Massachusetts: Hospital facilities and troop housing, $11,008,000. Fort Dix, New Jersey: Maintenance facilities, medical facilities, and troop housing, $17,948,000. Federal Office Building, Brooklyn, New York: Administrative facilities, $636,000. _ United States Military Academy, West Point, New York: Hospital facilities, troop housing and community facilities, and utilities, $18,089,000. (Second Army) Fort Belvoir, Virginia: Training facilities, and hospital facilities, $2,296,000. East Coast Radio Transmitter Station, Woodbridge, Virginia: Utilities, $211,000. Fort Eustis, Virginia: Utilities, $158,000. Fort Knox, Kentucky: Training facilities, maintenance facilities, troop housing, and community facilities, $15,422,000. Fort Lee, Virginia: Community facilities, $700,000. Fort Meade, Maryland: Ground improvements, $550,000. Fort Monroe, Virginia: Administrative facilities, $4,950,000. Vint Hill Farms, Virginia: Maintenance facilities, troop housing and utilities, $1,029,000. (Third Army) Fort Benning, Georgia: Maintenance facilities, troop housing and utilities, $5,325,000.
    [Show full text]
  • Class Narrative Class 16-66 D1 10 February 1966 –12 May 1966 U.S. Army Armor School OCS
    Class Narrative Class 16-66 D1 10 February 1966 –12 May 1966 U.S. Army Armor School OCS Class 16-66, Company D1 was the fifth OCS class at Fort Knox since the OCS course there closed during the Korean War. It was also the first of three Company D1 classes, and the first of three thirteen week Phase I classes that would be sent to Fort Lee, Virginia for Phase II OCS training and commissioning in the Quartermaster Corps. Phase I training cycle for the class started on Thursday 10 February 1966 with 116 volunteers and ended on Thursday 12 May 1966 with 93 graduates being sent to Fort Lee. Five members of the starting class would be recycled to Class 21-66, another Phase I Quartermaster class, and all five would graduate with that class at Fort Knox. Eighteen individuals would either quit or be relieved from the course. Unfortunately there was no news article in the Fort Knox post weekly newspaper about the class completing OCS training at Fort Knox. The 93 individuals sent to Fort Lee started Phase II of OCS training on Monday, 16 May 1966. On Tuesday, 19 July 1966 90 members of the class, re-designated Class 66-16, would be commissioned as Second Lieutenants in the Quartermaster Corps. The Honor Graduate was Richard A. Platt followed by Distinguished Graduates, in order of class ranking, Robert L. Whiteley, Louis Plank, Norris C. Conner and Richard D. Walls. These five individuals received special recognition by having “with distinction” printed in gold lettering on their diplomas.
    [Show full text]
  • Fort Knox: 100 Years of Training Excellence – Ideally Suited for the Future Force
    dcn: 9879 InstallationInstallation FamiliarizationFamiliarization BriefingBriefing MGMG TerryTerry Tucker,Tucker, USAARMCUSAARMC CommandingCommanding GeneralGeneral COLCOL KeithKeith Armstrong,Armstrong, GarrisonGarrison CommanderCommander Fort Knox: 100 Years of Training Excellence – Ideally Suited for the Future Force Draft Deliberative Document – For Discussion Purposes Only. Do Not Release Under FOIA. 1 OF <##> Themes History: Key to victory since WWII; The Combat Arm of Decision Relevance: Every Tanker / Scout in Iraq was trained at Ft. Knox Transformation: The Future Force is being forged here Value: A single post with regional responsibilities and impact Community: Local, state and regional partnerships Environment: No restrictions on training Joint: Multi-service, Multi-function; Joint installation of excellence Expansion: Space and facilities for new units and missions Fort Knox: 100 Years of Training Excellence – Ideally Suited for the Future Force Draft Deliberative Document – For Discussion Purposes Only. Do Not Release Under FOIA. 2 OF <##> Briefing Contents – Mission Brief – Units / Organizations Information – Installation Master Plan, Land Use, Excess Land, Office Space, Training Area & Ranges – Support Provided to the RC, Homeland Defense, Federal Agencies – Unique Characteristics – Conclusion Fort Knox: 100 Years of Training Excellence – Ideally Suited for the Future Force Draft Deliberative Document – For Discussion Purposes Only. Do Not Release Under FOIA. 3 OF <##> U.S. Army Armor Center USAARMC Mission: Train and
    [Show full text]
  • Guide for the Selection of Personal Protective Equipment for Emergency First Responders
    U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice National Institute of Justice Law Enforcement and Corrections Standards and Testing Program Guide for the Selection of Personal Protective Equipment for Emergency First Responders NIJ Guide 102–00 Volume I November 2002 U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs 810 Seventh Street N.W. Washington, DC 20531 John Ashcroft Attorney General Deborah J. Daniels Assistant Attorney General Sarah V. Hart Director, National Institute of Justice For grant and funding information, contact: Department of Justice Response Center 800–421–6770 Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice World Wide Web Site World Wide Web Site http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Guide for the Selection of Personal Protective Equipment for Emergency First Responders NIJ Guide 102-00, Volume I Dr. Alim A. Fatah1 John A. Barrett2 Richard D. Arcilesi, Jr.2 Charlotte H. Lattin2 Charles G. Janney2 Edward A. Blackman2 Coordination by: Office of Law Enforcement Standards National Institute of Standards and Technology Gaithersburg, MD 20899–8102 Prepared for: National Institute of Justice Office of Science and Technology Washington, DC 20531 November 2002 This document was prepared under CBIAC contract number SPO-900-94-D-0002 and Interagency Agreement M92361 between NIST and the Department of Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC). NCJ 191518 1National Institute of Standards and Technology, Office of Law Enforcement Standards. 2Battelle Memorial Institute. National Institute of Justice Sarah V. Hart Director This guide was prepared for the National Institute of Justice, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Fortfort Leelee
    UnitedUnited StatesStates ArmyArmy CombinedCombined ArmsArms SupportSupport CommandCommand andand FortFort LeeLee 1 COL John Angevine, IMNE-LEE-G, [email protected]; 804/734-7188; DSN 687 241200Jun05 Agenda 0830 Arrive Garrison HQS Building 8000 0830 – 0840 En route to CASCOM – COL Angevine/Mrs. Lee 0845 – 0900 Office Call with CG - MG Dunwoody 0900 - 0905 Welcome and Introductions – COL Angevine 0905 – 0915 BRAC Team Visit – COL (Ret) Dinsick 0915 – 1000 Fort Lee Background Briefing – COL Angevine 1000 - 1045 CSS Center of Excellence Concept Briefing – COL Mullins 1045 – 1115 Break and pick up lunch 1115 – 1200 Review of BRAC Recommendations and Impacts – Mrs. Lee 1200 – 1300 BRAC Construction Requirements – Mr. Greg White, DPWL 1300 – 1400 Logistics Warrior Training – Mr. Don Bradshaw, DPTMS 1400 - Questions & Answers 2 FOCUS Installation Responsibilities Community Impact Current Missions/Functions Current Facilities/Infrastructure/Infostructure Fort Lee 2020 Quality of Life Future Mission Capability 3 Population • Active duty permanent party – Officers 580 – Enlisted 2585 • Civilians 3182 • Contractors 1330 • Family members – On-post 3197 – Off-post 2371 • Retirees, survivors & family On an average day, members 55,220 there are over 20,000 People • Student Average Annual on Fort Lee! Load Over 35,000 4 Workforce Diversity Fort Lee is the model employer with a diverse and effective work force incorporating the principles of equitable treatment and equal employment opportunity as integral parts of its mission. Our workforce mirrors
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Army Subsistence Headquarters Personnel
    U.S. ARMY SUBSISTENCE HEADQUARTERS PERSONNEL ARMY FOOD SERVICE (Fiscal 2014) JOINT CULINARY CENTER OF EXCELLENCE Meals per year:.... .124 million Attn: ATSM-CES Meals per day: ....... 340,300 16th St. & B Ave., Bldg. 4200 Dining Facilities: ......... 195 Fort Lee, VA 23801 Food Purchases: ... .$1.5 billion DIRECTOR, JCCoE CHIEF, RESERVE COMPONENT U.S. ARMY RESEARCH, Lt. Col. Damon S. Varnado USA Rickey Frazier DEVELOPMENT AND (804) 734-3007 (804) 734-4285 ENGINEERING COMMAND [email protected] [email protected] Natick Soldier Center Department of Defense ARMY FOOD ADVISOR U.S. ARMY MEDICAL COMMAND Combat Feeding Program CW5 Princido Texidor, USA (MEDCOM) 15 Kansas Street (804) 734-3072 Fort Sam Houston, Texas Natick, MA 01760-5012 [email protected] Col. Laurie Sweet, USA Steven Moody (210) 808-2784 DSN: 256-4402 DIRECTOR, SPECIAL PROGRAMS [email protected] [email protected] DIRECTORATE/EXECUTIVE OFFICER Frederick Jackson (804) 734-3390 [email protected] U.S. Army Sustainment Command DIRECTOR, JOINT CULINARY TRAINING U.S. ARMY SUSTAINMENT COMMAND KUWAIT REGION FOOD ADVISOR DIRECTORATE ASC Food Program Manager/ CW3 Felipe Cardozo, USA Raymond Beu Direct Reporting Unit (DRU) POC HHC, ASG-KU, DOL (FPMO) APO AE 09366 (804) 734-3192 CW5 Russell Campbell, USA 011-965-389-3313/14 [email protected] Installation Logistics Directorate DSN: (318) 430-3313/14 1 Rock Island Arsenal [email protected] ARMY CENTER OF EXCELLENCE, Rock Island, IL 61299 SUBSISTENCE (ACES) (309) 782-0997 COMMAND FOOD ADVISORS Attn: ATSM-CES [email protected] AND KEY POCS 1831 Adams Ave., Bldg.
    [Show full text]
  • FY 2016 Economic Impact Analysis of Maryland's Military Installations
    FY 2016 Economic Impact Analysis of Maryland’s Military Installations Prepared for Maryland Department of Commerce Daraius Irani, Ph.D., Chief Economist Michael Siers, Interim Director of Research Ellen Bast, Senior Research Associate Jacob Leh, Research Associate I Catherine Menking, Economist Nick Wetzler, Economist December 18, 2018 Towson, Maryland 21252 | 410-704-3326 | www.towson.edu/resi FY 2016 Economic Impact Analysis of Maryland’s Military Installations RESI of Towson University Table of Contents Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................ 2 Table of Figures ............................................................................................................................... 4 1.0 Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. 7 1.1 Methodology Overview .................................................................................................... 8 1.2 Statewide Economic Impacts ........................................................................................... 8 1.3 Comparison between FY 2012 and FY 2016 Impacts ..................................................... 10 2.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 12 3.0 Methodology .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • TEST WELLS T23, T29, and T30f WHITE SANDS MISSILE RANGE and FORT BLISS MILITARY RESERVATION, DONA ANA COUNTY, NEW MEXICO
    TEST WELLS T23, T29, AND T30f WHITE SANDS MISSILE RANGE AND FORT BLISS MILITARY RESERVATION, DONA ANA COUNTY, NEW MEXICO By Robert G. Myers and Karen M. Pinckley U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Open-File Report 84-805 Prepared in cooperation with WHITE SANDS MISSILE RANGE Albuquerque, New Mexico 1985 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DONALD PAUL HODEL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director For additional information For sale by: write to: Open-File Services Section District Chief Branch of Distribution U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey, MS 306 Water Resources Division Box 25425, Denver Federal Center 505 Marquette NW, Room 720 Denver, Colorado 80225 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102 (303) 236-7476 ii CONTENTS Page Abstract ............................................................... 1 Introduction ........................................................... 1 Test well T23 ....................................'...................... 4 Test well T29 .......................................................... 19 Test well T30 .......................................................... 23 References ............................................................. 28 ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1. Map showing locations of test wells T23, T29, and T30, White Sands Missile Range and Fort Bliss Military Reservation ............................................... 2 2. Gamma and neutron logs for test well T29 (22S.05E.28.122) with casing ............................................... 22 3. Gamma, neutron, and caliper logs for test well T30 (22S.05E.32.334) with casing .............................. 27 TABLES Table 1. Well records of test wells T23, T29, and T30 ................. 4 2. Lithologic log for test well T23 (23S.05E.15.332) ............ 5 3. Lithologic log for test well T29 (22S.05E.28.122) ............ 20 4. Lithologic log for test well T30 (22S.05E.32.334) ............ 24 iii CONVERSION FACTORS In this report, measurements are given in inch-pound units only (except for grain size). The following table contains factors for converting to metric units.
    [Show full text]
  • In the United States District Court for the District of Kansas Daniel Lee
    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS DANIEL LEE, Petitioner, v. CASE NO. 08-3276-RDR COLONEL JAMES W. GRAY, COMMANDANT, USDB - FORT LEAVENWORTH, Respondent. O R D E R This pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus, 28 U.S.C. § 2241, was filed by a former member of the Army National Guard serving a military sentence at the United States Disciplinary Barracks in Fort Leavenworth, Kansas (USDB). The court issued a show cause order, respondent filed an Answer and Return, and petitioner filed a Traverse. Having considered all materials in the file, the court denies the Petition. FACTUAL BACKGROUND Mr. Lee entered the Army National Guard on March 19, 1972. He was charged with serious offenses that were committed on October 17, 2003. Mr. Lee entered into a Pre-Trial Agreement (PTA) with the Convening Authority in which he pled guilty to charges. Thereafter, on October 1, 2004, he was tried by general court-martial, consisting of a military judge alone and convicted pursuant to his pleas, of rape, assault with a dangerous weapon upon a commissioned officer, burglary with intent to commit rape, and communication of a threat to kill the officer victim. In January, 2005, he was sentenced to a dishonorable discharge and thirty (30) years confinement. As part of his PTA, Mr. Lee entered into a stipulation of fact which set forth explicit details of his planning and commission of the charged offenses. See Answer & Return (Doc. 14) Attached Record of Trial (ROT) at 266-270. This court’s brief summary of those facts follows.
    [Show full text]