DOCSLIB.ORG

EB 20-004 Chapter 9: Section 9.4 Retaining Walls and Reinforced

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
EB 20-004 Chapter 9: Section 9.4 Retaining Walls and Reinforced ENGINEERING BULLETIN EB 20-004 Title: HDM CHAPTER 9: SECTION 9.4 RETAINING WALLS AND REINFORCED SOIL SLOPES Approved: /s/ Robert L. Sack 1/10/2020 Robert L. Sack, P.E. Date Deputy Chief Engineer (Research) Expires one year after issue unless replaced sooner ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION: • This Engineering Bulletin (EB) is effective upon signature. • This EB does not supersede any other issuance. • Disposition of issued materials: The information transmitted by this issuance will be incorporated into the Highway Design Manual Chapter 9 Soils, Walls, and Foundations. PURPOSE: The purpose of this EB is to announce the availability of the revision to the Highway Design Manual Chapter 9: Section 9.4 Retaining Walls and Reinforced Soil Slopes. TECHNICAL INFORMATION: • A revised Geotechnical Engineering Manual (GEM-16) Mechanically Stabilized Earth System Inspection Manual is being issued concurrently via EB 20-003. • A revised Standard Specification Section 554 Fill Type Retaining Walls is being issued concurrently via EI 20-001. • The revisions to Section 9.4 Retaining Walls and Reinforced Soil Slopes includes the following: 1. Section 9.4.2.1 Externally Stabilized Cut Structures C. – added information regarding Braced Walls. 2. Section 9.4.2.3 Internally Stabilized Fill Structures C. – differentiated between a GRSS Slope and a GRSS Wall. 3. Section 9.4.2.3 C.2. GRSS Slopes – included a warning regarding the susceptibility to erosion. 4. Section 9.4.2.3 C.3. Vegetated Face Vertical GRSS – included additional information regarding geocells. 5. Section 9.4.5 Wall Design & Detailing – added a summary of the major design concerns with a cut type retaining wall in A. Cut Type Retaining Walls. 6. Section 9.4.5 Wall Design & Detailing – identified the specific design requirement manual in A1. Sheeting, Soldier Pile & Lagging Wall, or Anchored Walls. 7. Section 9.4.5 Wall Design & Detailing – identified the specific design requirement manual in A2. Soil Nail Walls. 8. Section 9.4.5 Wall Design & Detailing – added a summary of the major design concerns with a fill type retaining wall in B. Fill Type Retaining Walls. 9. Section 9.4.5 Wall Design & Detailing – identified the specific design requirements in B1. Cast-in-place/Precast Cantilever/Gravity Walls. 10. Section 9.4.5 Wall Design & Detailing – identified the specific design requirements in B2. Proprietary Retaining Wall Systems. 11. Section 9.4.5 Wall Design & Detailing – Expanded on the designer’s responsibilities in B2. Proprietary Retaining Wall Systems. 12. Section 9.4.5 Wall Design & Detailing – Added guidance regarding the assumed fill wall volume to address constructability issues in B2b. Fill Type Retaining Wall Volume. EB 20-004 Page 2 of 2 13. Section 9.4.5 Wall Design & Detailing – Added guidance and figures from the FAQ’s regarding jersey barrier installation in B2c. Fill Type Retaining Walls Supporting a Shoulder and Requiring a Jersey Barrier. 14. Section 9.4.5 Wall Design & Detailing – Added guidance and figures from the FAQ’s regarding subsurface installations conflicting with the fill type retaining wall volume in B2d. Addressing Conflicts with the Fill Type Retaining Wall Volume and Surface/Subsurface Installations. 15. Section 9.4.5 Wall Design & Detailing – Added guidance regarding the choices in the Approved List and highway work permits in B2e. The Exception – Highway Work Permits. 16. Section 9.4.5 Wall Design & Detailing – identified the specific design requirement manual in B4. Geosynthetically Reinforced Soil System (GRSS). TRANSMITTED MATERIALS: Revision to Section 9.4 Retaining Walls and Reinforced Soil Slopes BACKGROUND: Retaining walls and reinforced soil slopes are used in areas where free-standing (natural) earth slopes are undesirable, usually because of space restrictions. These walls have, in the past, normally been poured, reinforced concrete (gravity or cantilever), timber, steel, or precast concrete cribbing, stone-filled wire-basket gabions, timber or steel sheeting, or steel soldier pile and lagging walls, all of which provide external support to the retained soil mass. Several innovations in types of retaining walls have become available, including using inherent characteristics of retained or reinforced soil as part of the support system. Inadequate drainage of the backfill material can result in unsatisfactory long-term performance of the retaining wall system. A subsurface drainage system is typically installed simultaneously with the erection of the wall to ensure a continuous, uninterrupted system to serve to prevent the accumulation of destabilizing water pressure on the wall. CONTACT: Questions or comments regarding this issuance should be directed to Randall J. Romer, P.E., of the Geotechnical Engineering Bureau at (518) 457-4714, or via e-mail at [email protected]. SOILS, WALLS, AND FOUNDATIONS 9-75 9.4 RETAINING WALLS AND REINFORCED SOIL SLOPES Retaining walls and reinforced soil slopes are used in areas where free-standing (natural) earth slopes are undesirable, usually because of space restrictions. These walls have, in the past, normally been poured reinforced concrete (gravity or cantilever), timber, steel, or precast concrete cribbing, stone-filled wire-basket gabions, timber or steel sheeting, or steel soldier pile and lagging walls, all of which provide external support to the retained soil mass. Several innovations in types of retaining walls have become available, including using inherent characteristics of retained or reinforced soil as part of the support system. Inadequate drainage of the backfill material can result in unsatisfactory long-term performance of the retaining wall system. A subsurface drainage system is typically installed simultaneously with the erection of the wall to ensure a continuous, uninterrupted system to serve to prevent the accumulation of destabilizing water pressure on the wall. Regional Designers should consult with the Regional Geotechnical Engineer during the retaining wall design phase (see Section 9.4.4 Wall Selection Process). Good, long term performance of any wall is dependent on the use of well-compacted, good quality backfill. It is not possible to adequately compact backfill in below-freezing temperatures, unless special material that does not require water for compaction (i.e. crushed stone) is used. 9.4.1 Definitions There are three categories of support systems based on their intended functional life: permanent, temporary, and interim. 1. Permanent: A permanent system provides a structural support function for the life of the facility. 2. Temporary: A temporary system is designed to provide structural support during construction, and is removed when construction is complete. 3. Interim: An interim system is identical to a temporary system in function, except it remains in place (although it no longer provides a structural function) because its removal would be detrimental to the finished work. The classification of retaining wall systems is based on the basic geotechnical mechanism used to resist lateral loads and the construction method used for the installation of the wall. The following are definitions used to classify retaining wall systems: 1. Externally Stabilized Structures: Externally stabilized structures rely on the integrity of wall elements (with or without braces, struts, walers and/or tiebacks or anchors) to both resist lateral loads and also prevent raveling or erosion of the retained soil. 2. Internally Stabilized Structures: Internally stabilized structures rely on friction developed between closely-spaced reinforcing elements and the backfill to resist lateral soil pressure. A separate, non-structural element (facing, erosion control mat and/or vegetation) is attached to prevent raveling or erosion of the reinforced soil. 3. Fill Type Retaining Walls: Retaining structures constructed from the base of the wall to the top (i.e. “bottom-up” construction). 4. Cut Type Retaining Walls: Retaining structures constructed from the top of the wall to the base (i.e. “top-down” construction). An overview of the classification of retaining wall systems is provided in Table 9-6. The table provides a breakdown of available retaining wall systems, its associated method of construction, means of stability, design requirements and constraints (e.g. typical height range, maximum wall height). 1/10/20 §9.4 9-76 SOILS, WALLS, AND FOUNDATIONS Table 9-6 Classification of Retaining Wall Systems(14m) Wall Wall Wall Construction Wall Design Constraints Class Type Type1 Group Typical Height Range: Designed & detailed Sheeting Walls Cut Wall Cantilever 6 ft. to 15 ft. in contract. Maximum Wall Height= 15 ft. Soldier Pile & Designed & detailed Typical Height Range: Cut Wall Cantilever Lagging Walls in contract. 6 ft. to 15 ft. Externally Deadman Designed & detailed Stabilized Anchors in contract. Cut Anchored or Detailed in contract. Typical Height Range: 15 ft. to Structures Braced Walls Grouted Designed by 65 ft. (Sheeting or Cut Wall Tiebacks Contractor’s Design Soldier Pile & Consultant. Lagging Walls) Designed & detailed Braced Walls in contract. Precast Designed & detailed Typical Height Range: 6 ft. to Primarily Fill Cantilever in contract. 30 ft. Wall. May be Wall Cantilever Wall installed as a CIP Typical Height Range: 6 ft. to Designed & detailed Cut wall. Cantilevered 30 ft. in contract. Wall Maximum Wall Height = 30 ft. Typical Height Range: 6 ft. to Designed & detailed Gabion 20 ft. in contract. Externally Maximum Wall Height = 20 ft. Stabilized Primarily Fill Fill Wall.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Item Unit of Specification Description Number
    ITEM UNIT OF SPECIFICATION DESCRIPTION NUMBER MEASURE YEAR REFERENCE ------- ----------------- --------- ------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0001.00 CAL DAY 08 SURVEILLANCE OF TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES ------- ----------------- --------- ------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0001.04 DAY 08 ENDANGERED SPECIES DAILY SURVEYOR ------- ----------------- --------- ------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0001.06 BARR DAY 08 VERTICAL PANELS ------- ----------------- --------- ------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0001.08 BARR DAY 08 422.00 BARRICADE, TYPE II ------- ----------------- --------- ------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0001.10 BARR DAY 08 422.00 BARRICADE, TYPE III ------- ----------------- --------- ------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0001.20 EACH 08 BARRICADE, TYPE III ------- ----------------- --------- ------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0001.30 LIGHT DAY 08 422.00 TYPE B HIGH INTENSITY WARNING LIGHT ------- ----------------- --------- ------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0001.45 BARR DAY 08 REFLECTORIZED PLASTIC DRUM -------
    [Show full text]
  • Linktm Gabions and Mattresses Design Booklet
    LinkTM Gabions and Mattresses Design Booklet www.globalsynthetics.com.au Australian Company - Global Expertise Contents 1. Introduction to Link Gabions and Mattresses ................................................... 1 1.1 Brief history ...............................................................................................................................1 1.2 Applications ..............................................................................................................................1 1.3 Features of woven mesh Link Gabion and Mattress structures ...............................................2 1.4 Product characteristics of Link Gabions and Mattresses .........................................................2 2. Link Gabions and Mattresses .............................................................................. 4 2.1 Types of Link Gabions and Mattresses .....................................................................................4 2.2 General specification for Link Gabions, Link Mattresses and Link netting...............................4 2.3 Standard sizes of Link Gabions, Mattresses and Netting ........................................................6 2.4 Durability of Link Gabions, Link Mattresses and Link Netting ..................................................7 2.5 Geotextile filter specification ....................................................................................................7 2.6 Rock infill specification .............................................................................................................8
    [Show full text]
  • 68: Protest, Policing, and Urban Space by Hans Nicholas Sagan A
    Specters of '68: Protest, Policing, and Urban Space by Hans Nicholas Sagan A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Architecture in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Galen Cranz, Chair Professer C. Greig Crysler Professor Richard Walker Summer 2015 Sagan Copyright page Sagan Abstract Specters of '68: Protest, Policing, and Urban Space by Hans Nicholas Sagan Doctor of Philosophy in Architecture University of California, Berkeley Professor Galen Cranz, Chair Political protest is an increasingly frequent occurrence in urban public space. During times of protest, the use of urban space transforms according to special regulatory circumstances and dictates. The reorganization of economic relationships under neoliberalism carries with it changes in the regulation of urban space. Environmental design is part of the toolkit of protest control. Existing literature on the interrelation of protest, policing, and urban space can be broken down into four general categories: radical politics, criminological, technocratic, and technical- professional. Each of these bodies of literature problematizes core ideas of crowds, space, and protest differently. This leads to entirely different philosophical and methodological approaches to protests from different parties and agencies. This paper approaches protest, policing, and urban space using a critical-theoretical methodology coupled with person-environment relations methods. This paper examines political protest at American Presidential National Conventions. Using genealogical-historical analysis and discourse analysis, this paper examines two historical protest event-sites to develop baselines for comparison: Chicago 1968 and Dallas 1984. Two contemporary protest event-sites are examined using direct observation and discourse analysis: Denver 2008 and St.
    [Show full text]
  • Construction Guidelines for Wildlife Fencing and Associated Escape and Lateral Access Control Measures
    CONSTRUCTION GUIDELINES FOR WILDLIFE FENCING AND ASSOCIATED ESCAPE AND LATERAL ACCESS CONTROL MEASURES Requested by: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Standing Committee on the Environment Prepared by: Marcel P. Huijser, Angela V. Kociolek, Tiffany D.H. Allen, Patrick McGowen Western Transportation Institute – Montana State University PO Box 174250 Bozeman, MT 59717-4250 Patricia C. Cramer 264 E 100 North, Logan, Utah 84321 Marie Venner Lakewood, CO 80232 April 2015 The information contained in this report was prepared as part of NCHRP Project 25-25, Task 84, National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board. SPECIAL NOTE: This report IS NOT an official publication of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, or The National Academies. Wildlife Fencing and Associated Measures Disclaimer DISCLAIMER DISCLAIMER STATEMENT The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied are those of the research agency that performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board or its sponsors. The information contained in this document was taken directly from the submission of the author(s). This document is not a report of the Transportation Research Board or of the National Research Council. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This study was requested by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), and conducted as part of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Project 25-25 Task 84. The NCHRP is supported by annual voluntary contributions from the state Departments of Transportation. Project 25-25 is intended to fund quick response studies on behalf of the AASHTO Standing Committee on the Environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Storms and Coastal Defences at Chiswell This Booklet Provides Information About
    storms and coastal defences at chiswell this booklet provides information about: • How Chesil Beach and the Fleet Lagoon formed and how it has What is this changed over the last 100 years • Why coastal defences were built at Chiswell and how they work • The causes and impacts of the worst storms in a generation booklet that occurred over the winter 2013 / 14 • What will happen in the future Chesil Beach has considerable scientific about? significance and has been widely studied. The sheer size of the beach and the varying size and shape of the beach material are just some of the reasons why this beach is of worldwide interest and importance. Chesil Beach is an 18 mile long shingle bank that stretches north-west from Portland to West Bay. It is mostly made up of chert and flint pebbles that vary in size along the beach with the larger, smoother pebbles towards the Portland end. The range of shapes and sizes is thought to be a result of the natural sorting process of the sea. The southern part of the beach towards Portland shelves steeply into the sea and continues below sea level, only levelling off at 18m depth. It is slightly shallower at the western end where it levels off at a depth of 11m. This is mirrored above sea level where typically the shingle ridge is 13m high at Portland and 4m high at West Bay. For 8 miles Chesil Beach is separated from the land by the Fleet lagoon - a shallow stretch of water up to 5m deep.
    [Show full text]
  • O B D S Orien Broch Distri Stake Ntatio Hure Ct Ehold on for Ders
    Government of Nepal Orientation Brochure for District Stakeholders Rural Access Programme (RAP) Phase 3 April 2016 ` 1. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this brochure is to provide an overview of the Rural Access Programme Phase 3 (RAP3). It describes the objective, core principles, programme areas, progrramme components and implementation arrangements. The target audience of the brochure are the stakeholders who are related with RAP3 implementation in general and the DDC and DTO officials in particular. 2. BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE OF RAP3 RAP has been implemented continuously since 2001 and is a bi-lateral progrramme between the Government of Nepal (GoN) and the Department for International Development (DFID) of the UK Government. The programme is being implemented with the grant assistance provided by UK Aid. The implementation of the current phase of RAP3 started in 2013 and will laast until March 2017. An extension of the programme to 2019 is planned. The current phase of the Rural Access Programme (RAP3) builds on the processes of previous phases but with significant changes, including: • Support focussed on the poorest districts in western Nepal • Emphasis on sustainable asset management and community resilience • Working closely to support central and district government organnisations and build capacity • A range of implementation modalities depending on intervention characteristics and management performances of the ddistrict. The objective of RAP3 is to increase the economic opportunities available to the poorest and most vulnerable people in the remotest districts of Nepal. It does so by providing employment for the poor to maintain and upgrade existiing roads, construct new rural roads and economic infrastructure where these are lacking.
    [Show full text]
  • Cast-In-Place Concrete Barriers
    rev. May 14, 2018 Cast-In-Place Concrete Barriers April 23, 2013 NOTE: Reinforcing steel in each of these barrier may vary and have been omitted from the drawings for clarity, only the Ontario Tall Wall was successfully crash tested as a unreinforced section. TEST LEVEL NAME/MANUFACTURER ILLUSTRATION PROFILE GEOMETRIC DIMENSIONS CHARACTERISTICS AASHTO NCHRP 350 MASH New Jersey Safety-Shape Barrier TL-3 TL-3 32" Tall 32" Tall The New Jersey Barrier was the most widely used safety shape concrete barrier prior to the introduction of the F-shape. As shown, the "break-point" between the 55 deg and 84 deg slope is 13 inches above the pavement, including the 3 inch vertical reveal. The flatter lower slope is intended to lift the vehicle which TL-4 TL-4 http://tf13.org/Guides/hardwareGuide/index.php?a absorbs some energy, and allows vehicles impacting at shallow angles to be 32" Tall 36" Tall X ction=view&hardware=111 redirected with little sheet metal damage; however, it can cause significant instability to vehicles impacting at high speeds and angles. Elligibility Letter TL-5 TL-5 B-64 - Feb 14, 2000 (NCHRP 350) 42" Tall 42" Tall NCHRP Project 22-14(03)(MASH TL3) NCHRP 20-07(395) (MASH TL4 & TL5) F-shape Barrier TL-3 TL-3 The F-shape has the same basic geometry as the New Jersey barrier, but the http://tf13.org/Guides/hardwareGuide/index.php?a 32" Tall 32" Tall "break-point" between the lower and upper slopes is 10 inches above the ction=view&hardware=109 pavement.
    [Show full text]
  • Construction Guide V2 LR.Pdf
    1 Introduction – protect and survive 2 Basic construction guidelines 3 Design of Concertainer structures 4 Fill selection and characteristics 5 Preconfigured structures 6 Improvised structures 7 Maintenance and repair 8 Product technical information 9 Trial information 10 Packing and shipping 11 Conversion tables 12 Contacts 1 Introduction – protect and survive Introduction – protect and survive 1.01 HESCO® Concertainer® has Delivered flat-packed on standard been a key component in timber skids or pallets, units providing Force Protection since can be joined and extended the 1991 Gulf War. using the provided joining pins and filled using minimal Concertainer units are used manpower and commonly extensively in the protection of available equipment. personnel, vehicles, equipment and facilities in military, Concertainer units can be peacekeeping, humanitarian installed in various configurations and civilian operations. to provide effective and economical structures, tailored They are used by all major to the specific threat and level military organisations around of protection required. Protective the world, including the UK structures will normally be MOD and the US Military. designed to protect against ballistic penetration of direct fire It is a prefabricated, multi- projectiles, shaped charge cellular system, made of warheads and fragmentation. Alu-Zinc coated steel welded HESCO Guide Construction for Engineers mesh and lined with non-woven polypropylene geotextile. Introduction – protect and survive 1.02 Protection is afforded by the fill In constructing protective material of the structure as a structures, consideration must consequence of its mass and be given to normal structural physical properties, allied with design parameters. the proven dynamic properties of Concertainer units. The information included in this guide is given in good faith, Users must be aware that the however local conditions may protection afforded may vary affect the performance of HESCO Guide Construction for Engineers with different fill materials, and structures.
    [Show full text]
  • Structural Design Guidelines
    Engineering Department Structural Design Guidelines Last Updated: 04/01/2017 Reviewed/Released 2018 v1.1 Engineering Department Manual Structural - TOC TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 OVERVIEW ............................................................................................ 1 2.0 TECHNICAL AND CODE STANDARDS/REGULATIONS .................................. 2 2.1 AVAILABLE STRUCTURAL TECHNICAL CODES AND STANDARDS ............................................... 2 2.1.1 BUILDINGS (1) ........................................................................................................... 2 2.1.2 BRIDGES (2) .............................................................................................................. 2 2.1.3 FEMA (SEISMIC) (3) .................................................................................................. 2 2.1.4 HELIPORT (4) ............................................................................................................ 2 2.1.5 PORTS (5) ................................................................................................................. 2 2.1.6 RAIL (6) .................................................................................................................... 2 2.2 AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TESTING MATERIALS (ASTM) (7) ........................................................ 2 2.3 FACTORY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY (FMRC) (8) .............................................................. 2 2.4 AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE (ACI) (9) ..............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Georgia Department of Transportation
    Updated 10-23-19 Georgia Department of Transportation Page 1 NPE Status Report --- Listed Alphabetically by Company Name NPE# Manufacturer Product Name / Description Estimated Time Contact Info Fee Status / Progress for Lab/Field Paid Report Evaluation 1107-3 3M Company "3M Scotch-Weld HoldFast 70" -- Complete -- Accepted 7910-1 3M Company 3M Brand Galvinizing -- Complete -- No Status 8002-1 3M Company / Traffic Control Devices Dept. Loop Sealant -- Complete -- No Status 0704-3 A.W.Cook Cement Products, Inc. "Cook Brand Rapid Cure Repair" - Rapid setting -- Complete -- Withdrawn/No Action cement/sand grout. 9512-5 ABT, Inc. PolyDrain (Surface Drainage System) -- Complete -- No Application 7809-1 Acme Highway Products Corp. Fiberglass Dowel Bars -- Complete -- No Status 7707-1 Acme Highway Products Corp. Acmaseal -- Complete -- No Status 0307-4 ACO Polymer Products, Inc. "FG200 Fiberglass" 8" internal, Heavy duty -- Complete -- No Application fiberglass trench drain. 0307-3 ACO Polymer Products, Inc. "K100S Trench Drain" 4" Internal, Polymer -- Complete -- No Application Concrete Trench. 0307-2 ACO Polymer Products, Inc. "S300K Powerdrain" 12" internal, Polymer -- Complete -- No Application Concrete Trench. 0307-1 ACO Polymer Products, Inc. "S100K Powerdrain" 4" internal, Polymer -- Complete -- Accepted Concrete Trench. 1302-1 Active Minerals International, LLC "ACTI-GEL 208" Nov-13 Complete No application 9601-1 ADDCO Manufacturing The Signal DTS-2000 (Construction work zone -- Complete -- No Application sign) 9510-1 ADS N-12 (Smooth Lined
    [Show full text]
  • Coordinated Resource Management Plan
    APPLETON-WHITTELL RESEARCH RANCH COORDINATED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN The Research Ranch was established in 1968 by the Appleton family as an ecological field station to provide a large scale exclosure by which various land uses and actions in the Southwest could be evaluated. This role, as a control or reference area, creates challenges to land management actions. Each proposed action must be judged not only on the conservation outcome but also on the potential to have adverse impact on the research values for which the field station was established. Effective management for both conservation and research is only possible if all partners are informed and involved. The Research Ranch, approximately 8,000 acres, is a complicated partnership among land owners and federal land administrative agencies: Coronado National Forest (CNF), Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Resolution Copper Mining Co. (RCM), The Research Ranch Foundation (TRRF), The Nature Conservancy (TNC), and National Audubon Society (NAS or Audubon). NAS manages the facility via contractual agreements with each entity. The Research Ranch is a Center/Sanctuary of NAS, administered through the Audubon Arizona state office in Phoenix. Audubon’s strategic plan is to achieve conservation results on a broad scale by leveraging the NAS network and engaging diverse people; the Research Ranch is evaluated by NAS for its support of the following conservation concerns: Climate Change, Water, Working Lands and Bird Friendly Communities. This Coordinated Resource Management Plan (CRMP) constitutes all ownership along with the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), Arizona Game & Fish Department (AZGF) and US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS). Planned practices to meet goals listed in this CRMP may not necessarily be implemented on all parcels.
    [Show full text]
  • WAKE ISLAND AIRFIELD, TERMINAL BUILDING HABS UM-2-A (Building 1502) UM-2-A West Side of Wake Avenue Wake Island Us Minor Islands
    WAKE ISLAND AIRFIELD, TERMINAL BUILDING HABS UM-2-A (Building 1502) UM-2-A West Side of Wake Avenue Wake Island Us Minor Islands PHOTOGRAPHS WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDINGS SURVEY PACIFIC WEST REGIONAL OFFICE National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior 1111 Jackson Street, Suite 700 Oakland, CA 94607 HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDINGS SURVEY WAKE ISLAND AIRFIELD, TERMINAL BUILDING (Wake Island Airfield, Building 1502) WAKE ISLAND AIRFIELD, TERMINAL BUILDING HABSNo. UM-2-A (Wake Island Airfield, Building 1502) West Side of Wake Avenue Wake Island U.S. Minor Islands Location: The Wake Island Airfield Terminal Building is on the west side of Wake Avenue, east and adjacent to the aircraft parking and fueling apron, and 1,500' north of the east end of the runway on Wake Island of Wake Atoll. It is approximately 1 mile north of Peacock Point. The pedestrian/ street entrance to the terminal is on the east side of the building facing Wake Avenue. The aircraft passenger entrance faces west to the aircraft parking apron and lagoon. Present Owner/ Wake Island is an unorganized, unincorporated territory (possession) of the United Occupant: States, part of the United States Minor Outlying Islands, administered by the Office of Insular Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior. The airfield terminal is occupied by 15th Air Wing (AW) of the U.S. Air Force (USAF) and base operations support (BOS) services contractor management staff. Present Use: Base operations and air traffic control for USAF, other tenants, and BOS contractor. Significance: The Wake Island airfield played an important and central role in transpacific commercial airline and developments after World War II (WWII).
    [Show full text]