|
Military
Communities |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| History | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Looking for assistance: need original or scanned copies of maps of Area Command, support districts, support activities, military communities and installations for further research. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Source: ARMY LOGISTICIAN, SEP-OCT 1975) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| USAREUR Community Support by Colonel W.B. Holwick Within the Federal Republic of Germany, there are few U.S. Army facilities comparable to a continental United States installation. Instead, the U.S. Army is stationed in small facilities called kasernes -- local barracks inherited from the German Armed Forces after World War II. There may be one or many individual barracks situated throughout a town, along with housing areas, depots, dependent schools, and an occasional hospital. Each kaserne may house units ranging in size from a company to a brigade or a large headquarters. The combined U.S. Army facilities in and adjacent to major cities are grouped together for administration and designated a "community." Before 1974, the United States Army, Europe and 7th Army base operations support was provided to these units and dependents under a variety of support organizations whose chains of command were parallel to, but independent of, the tactical command channels. Among these were the area support command, theater army support command, and engineer command. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Many problems were readily apparent with the community leader system as it was organized. In late 1972, General Michael S. Davison, commander-in-chief of the United States Army, Europe directed that a study be made of the system. He appointed a study group made up of individuals from his major staff elements.
The objective of the study, known as Project RED (rediscover the) WHEEL, was to recommend an appropriate organizational community structure with the authority, responsibility, and capabilities needed to provide effective use of resources within United States Army, Europe constraints, adequate control over the military and their families, and suitable base support and services with minimal interference with tactical command and readiness. Three major problem areas under the old system were examined.  Leadership and Management Problems. The dichotomy of support and command channels and the fact that some community leaders were assigned to United States Army, Europe major commands other than those of the appointing authority lead to multiple lines of authority and communication into communities. Often, a single Headquarters United States Army, Europe directive was misinterpreted or delayed as it passed through successive and parallel echelons of tactical and community communication channels. The result-order, counterorder, disorder!In addition, the term "community leader" was confusing. "Community" is generally understood. But "leader" is a term seldom used officially at senior military levels. The community leader's role was never fully clarified. Without formal installations, each Army regulation referring to the installation commander's responsibilities had to be interpreted. Theater army support command filled the role of installation commander for commissaries for the entire Federal Republic of Germany and the engineer command served as the installation commander for engineering projects. In all other functional areas for which responsibility was not specifically assigned elsewhere, the community leader had this function. In many cases, the senior officer was not the community leader and the community leader and his support staff were not under the same United States Army, Europe major command. This organization lead to split loyalties and resource control. The man charged with solving community support problems. in fact, was not in charge of support organization. The matter of being in charge raised yet another crucial issue of authority and control. Within the community, tenant commands tended to subvert actions the community leader was taking to make a better community, His influence over tenant units not under his command was limited and success in community matters depended largely on coordination and cooperation. This was no way to run a military organization! Organizational Problems. As you can see from the organizational chart of the community leader chain of command, the key members of the directorate staff were not assigned to the community leader. The staff functioned in a dual status whereby they received their resources and principal direction from the vertical (stovepipe) commands. The directorate staff was misnamed -- members had no real authority. They tried to respond to a community commander who usually could use only persuasion to get them to react. If he directed them to do things in which their own command (who provided the resources) did not agree, the result was impasse or bypass. A complicated situation was made further untenable in that some of these directorates also served as the directorate staff for up to five community leaders at the same time because they were providing support to a geographic area that included more than one community.In addition to the theater army support command and engineer command district organizations which alined with the German State boundaries, United States Army, Europe had overlapping jurisdictions for other stovepipe organizations such as military police, legal affairs, post exchange system, and medical service. Altogether there were 16 different geographical jurisdictions. The communities with the greatest troubles were those where jurisdictional borders overlapped. Also organizationally, there were community programs that had never been specifically delegated either to the tactical commander or the community leader. A great number of these programs covered human relations, equal opportunity, alcohol and drug abuse-all good, but most confusing as to who was to exercise control. Resource Problems. Inadequacy was well documented. The greatest complication was that resources for engineer, base support, hospital, and nonappropriated funds were being vertically managed. The community leader had no opportunity to pull all of these resources together to obtain the best balance for his community. Actual resource control was exercised at varying higher levels depending upon the subject. Many of the community leaders' frustrations occurred while trying to find out at what level real decision authority (illegible). It was apparent that efficiency and effectiveness in the use of resources were on a collision course. United States Army, Europe had organized the stovepipe commands to produce efficiency. In terms of meeting the aspirations and goals at the community level, the end result was noneffectiveness.At the conclusion of Project RED WHEEL in May 1973, members recommended consideration of five options. The members recognized that it would take time to achieve a configuration that would solve or partially solve the problems. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| The commander-in-chief, United States Army, Europe ordered immediate implementation of the first option and approved development of the option for installations under the theater army support command and the corps for possible adoption by fiscal year 1976. In brief, the first option made these changes in the community concept of support. Changed the title of community leader to community commander. Provided for the separation of command and community channels for action. Directed that the senior officer in the community normally would be the community commander. Established directive authority for the community commander that clearly subordinated tenant unit prerogatives to the community commander where his role was distinctly defined in terms of regulatory authority. Prohibited the United States Army, Europe staff from adding responsibilities to the community commander without command approval.In late 1973 when Department of the Army ordered a major headquarters consolidation, Project CHASE (Consolidation of Headquarters and Area Support Elements) was initiated. It took up where Project RED WHEEL left off and continued along the same lines. Project CHASE added the theater army support command headquarters to the overall reduction along with the engineer command disestablishment approved under Project RED WHEEL. The basic concept was to merge headquarters, theater army support command with Headquarters, United States Army, Europe, to disestablish the engineer command, to increase the operational role of Headquarters, United States Army. Europe, and to place additional logistics responsibility on the V and VII Corps thereby placing them closer to the wartime posture of the Echelons Above Division concept. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| The Resource Management Office in the larger communities has five budget and management specialists. 1n small communities, it consists of two budget specialists and a management clerk-typist. These specialists are not comptroller staffs in any sense but are intended primarily to meet the fund accountability and planning requirements essential to effective community base support. It may seem that this is a drastic change from the way United States Army, Europe has done business in the past. However, United States Army, Europe has been a pacesetter for the Army in decentralizing financial management. In 1972, it established comptrollers in its Army divisions and this has now been adopted as doctrine. It has financial managers in organizations such as cavalry regiments, corps artillery, and engineer brigades. With the addition of the Resource Management Offices, a chain of financial management that reaches into each of 32 communities has been completed. The reorganization in Europe is going well. The benefits are being seen immediately. The frustrations formerly faced by community commanders have lessened because it is no longer necessary for two or three commanders or major staff offices to agree on the urgency of a problem before things can happen. They now have the authority to do some things previously reserved to the highest levels. Things they are capable of doing may need only to be referred directly to one chain of command that also has resource control for decision. Colonel W. B. Holwick, Infantry, has been Chief, Management Division in the United States Army, Europe Comptroller Office since 1971. He was chief of Project RED WHEEL. He is a graduate of the Army Comptrollership School, Syracuse University, and has previously served in Germany as area command budget officer and Berlin Command comptroller. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Source: The Aschaffenburg Forum, May 29, 1991) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| USAREUR commander announces Community Command Plan The commander in chief of U.S. Army, Europe, has announced his decision to proceed with one of the two key aspects of the USAREUR Community Command Plan (CCP), according to a USAREUR news release April 26. Gen. Crosbie Saint will proceed with the transfer of routine community administration responsibilities from the USAREUR Major Commands (V Corps, VII Corps, 21st Theater Army Area Command) to HQ, USAREUR, by the end of the second quarter of fiscal year 1992. Some functions may transfer earlier, but, by March 31, 1992, all routine community administration will be accomplished directly between the appropriate HQ, USAREUR, staff sections and USAREUR military communities, even though the UMC commanders will remain in direct command. Additionally, according to the CINC's announcement, effective April 1, 1991, operational control of the Mannheim and Karlsruhe military communities transferred from 21st TAACOM to HQ, USAREUR. These changes facilitate current and future military mission accomplishment and are in concert with other initiatives affecting community operations. Despite the change in community administration, UMC and tactical commanders will continue to be in charge of communities within their area of responsibility. Additionally, UMC commanders will remain coordinating authorities on key administration decisions affecting quality-of-life issues. The second major aspect of the CCP envisions the reorganization of the current 37 USAREUR communities into 12 Area Support Groups and three separate communities by October of this year. Saint announced his intent to proceed with this aspect. Final details are being developed for cooperation with the USAREUR Head Works Council. The designated ASGs are: Bad Kreuznach, Frankfurt, Hanau, Wuerzburg, Nuernberg, Stuttgart, Westpfalz (Kaiserslautern), the Netherlands, NATO/SHAPE Support Group (Belgium), Heidelberg, Vicenza (Italy) and Grafenwoehr. Berlin, Bremerhaven and Munich would remain as separate communities not subject to conversion at this time. In addition to this arrangement, some smaller communities may be reduced or closed over the next several years, depending on troop movements and other operational considerations. "Right now, there is no announcement to close us," said Col. Jim Riley, Aschaffenburg's community commander. "There was a decision made nine or TO months ago to do that, but that timeline and decision have been set aside. New plans will be announced sometime in the future." Each ASG would continue to be responsible for managing all normal community operations within its area as current communities and subcommunities are today. Day-to-day community services and support required by soldiers, family members, retirees or other authorized beneficiaries will continue to be performed by the ASG community or other communities within the ASG area of responsibility. The changes brought on by the CCP should not affect how services are provided at the community level, rather only how programs are administered, according to Saint's announcement. These changes should therefore be transparent to the soldier, family member, retiree or authorized civilian requesting community services. For example, services such as facilities engineering, maintenance, morale, welfare and recreation services, and housing operations will continue to be provided at all levels (based on demand for service). The objective of the plan is the efficient restructuring of community administrative operations consistent with troop strength changes, without compromising the quality of life for the soldiers who remain. The CCP changes should not adversely impact services or quality of life in USAREUR communities. However, some positions within the community may be transferred, eliminated, or otherwise affected as a result of these community initiatives. Department of the Army civilian and local national employees occupying these positions may be reassigned to other jobs within the community, offered jobs outside the community, or released. Established procedures will be followed in processing these personnel actions, including cooperating individual actions on local national employees with local works councils. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Military Communities | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Source: USAREUR Reg 10-20, 14 Dec 1978) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| SECTION I - GENERAL 4. Explanation of Terms.  a. Region. A geographic area in the FRG delineated by the Commander in Chief, USAREUR, that encompasses military communities and surrounding territory. A region is defined for the purpose of base support and community command. The following commanders will provide base operations support in these specified areas. (1) Commander, V Corps.(2) Commander, VII Corps.(3) Commander, 21st Support Command (21st SUPCOM).(4) Commander, Seventh Army Training Command (7ATC).The term "region" is conceptual and communications will be directed only to the appropriate Commander, V Corps, VII Corps, 21st SUPCOM, or 7ATC. The term region commander will not be used. b. Regional Support Element. The group of table of distribution and allowances (TDA) assigned personnel who operate a support activity (e.g., a furniture repair facility) that provides support to a large number of communities. Although these facilities are located in and receive support from a particular community, control is held at the major base support headquarters (i.e., corps, 21st SUPCOM, or 7ATC) and is not delegated to the community in which the facility is located.c. Military Community. A geographic area encompassing a specified metropolitan area identified by the Commander in Chief, USAREUR, within established boundaries. The term "installation," as used in Army regulations, equates to military community in the United States Army, Europe (USAREUR), except as it is defined for real property maintenance activity project purposes in the AR 200- and 400-series. Installation in USAREUR is defined in j below. Appendix A lists the military communities. A large military community may be divided into subcommunities.d. Boundaries. USAREUR regional boundaries generally are defined along political boundaries (i.e., Land and Kreis (state and county)) with consideration given to the continuance of tactical organizational integrity and location of base operations support resources. The Commander in Chief, USAREUR, establishes the boundary of the 7ATC community area of responsibility. Other community boundaries are administrative boundaries established by the Commanders, V Corps, VII Corps, and 21st SUPCOM, based on the practical subdivision of areas of responsibility. Community boundaries also should be generally defined along political boundaries (Land and Kreis boundaries), but may cross state boundaries. The regional and military community boundaries encompass all of the FRG land area, plus the NSSG(US) area of responsibility. Tab 1, appendix A, designates the regional areas of responsibility for the Commanders, V Corps, VII Corps, 21st SUPCOM, and 7ATC. e. US Military Community Activity. The TDA organization that provides a full-time base support operations element to assist the community commander in the discharge of his or her duties.f. Subcommunity. A subdivision of a military community. The need for a subcommuniry is determined by factors including wide physical separation from the community headquarters, population served, and existence of satellite-offices of central community base activities. Establishment is approved by the Commander in Chief, USAREUR, for the 7ATC area and by the Commanders, V Corps, VII Corps, 21st SUPCOM, in their respective regions. Subcommunities should not be established when installation (J below) is the more appropriate designation. Subcommunities are listed in appendix A.g. Community Commander. Normally, the senior US Army general officer (or colonel when no general officer is assigned) assigned to or residing in a community who is eligible for command as defined in AR 600-20. The community commander is designated by the appropriate Commander, V Corps, VII Corps, or 21st SUPCOM with the exception of:(1) The Community Commanders, Heidelberg and 7ATC. These community commanders will be designated and appointed on orders by the Commander in Chief, USAREUR. (2) The Kaiserslautern Community Commander. This community commander will be designated by the
Commander in Chief, United States Air Forces in Europe (USAFE). h. Deputy Community Commander. A TDA authorized officer designated by the community commander to act as the deputy for community operations, assigned to the US military community activity, and responsible for the day-to-day community operations.i. Subcommunity Commander. Normally, the senior officer eligible for command in a subcommunity. He or she is designated by the community commander to be responsible for a specified subcommuniry as a second major duty.j. Installation. A casern, station, field camp, storage site, training area, range, missile or communications site, housing area, shopping area, or separate group of buildings chat may be considered by itself and can be designated in appropriate directives. (This definition applies only to this regulation and does not apply for engineer project approval purposes as defined in the AR 200- and 400-series.)k. Installation Coordinator. Normally, the senior commissioned officer or noncommissioned officer (NCO) eligible for command on an installation (j above). The installation coordinator is appointed by the community (or subcommunity) commander to coordinate the common community support activities and efforts of tenants and support elements in the installation.l. Tenant. An individual organization, activity, or unit located or providing support in a region or community. Non-USAREUR units located in USAREUR communities and receiving base operations support on reimbursable or non-reimbursable basis are considered tenant units for the purpose of this regulation.m. Directive Authority. The authority exercised by the community commander to initiate or govern actions and procedures of community-based activities, appoint and supervise subcommunity commanders and installation coordinators, and Jevy requirements on tenants for accomplishing community-oriented tasks on a proportionate basis. This directive authority pertains only to community-based activities as outlined by USAREUR directives. In military communities, the granting of directive authority is intended to ensure effectiveness and economy of community operations and prevent or minimize unnecessary duplication of effort, varying policies, and the overlapping of functions and services provided by units and service elements represented in the community. The authorization of directive authority is not intended to:(1) Interfere with the internal or command operations of tenant elements in the community.(2) Discourage coordination by consultation or agreement.(3) Impose requirements that are illegal, contrary to DA or USAREUR regulations, or require additional resources beyond those available to service organizations through command channels.(4) Give the community commander the option of reorganizing tenant commands.(5) Otherwise vest the community commander with the attributes of command (e.g., promotion authority, bar to reenlistment authority) with respect to the supervision of community activities and tenant units.n. Base Operations Support. The provision of administrative and logistic services. Base operations support includes, at the local level, supply operations, maintenance of materiel, base services (incl transportation and traffic management), military customs inspections, support of troop issue subsistence activity, operation of utilities, maintenance of real property, minor construction, support of commissary operations, family and bachelor housing, other engineering support, and the administrative services rendered by or through activities of the community. The extent and financing of base operations support provided to or by a corps, 21st SUPCOM, or 7ATC or a community to or by a tenant or satellite activity is as specified in this and other applicable regulations, circulars, mission statements or letters, and memorandums of agreement or understanding. For non-USAREUR tenants, HQ USAREUR/7A will consummate a memorandum of agreement or understanding.o. Base Communications (BASECOM) Support. BASECOM is basic peacetime garrison (nontactical) communications requirements of an installation or activity, including local telephone systems with associated connecting trunks, message teletype services, TELEX, and data equipment. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Area Support Groups/Hub Communities | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 1 - Neu Ulm; 2 - Bad Tölz; 3 - Göppingen; 4 - Rheinberg |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| COMMUNITY COMMAND PLAN ORGANIZATION - 1 OCT 1991 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (1) The Bad Tölz, Göppingen and Neu Ulm Military Communities were inactivated prior to implementation of the CCP and thus were never reorganized into base support battalions or assigned to any of the Hub Communities. (2) The 234th BSB would later be inactivated and Giessen became an AST of the 414th BSB in Hanau. After additional reorganizations in Hessen, the AST would again be upgraded to a BSB, this time designated as the 284th BSB (activated in Giessen in January 1998). |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| In "Marneland," the Community Command Plan means that the former separate military communities of Aschaffenburg, Schweinfurt and Greater Wuerzburg are now a single organization called the Marneland Area Support Group (ASG) headquartered in Wuerzburg. The ASG is a brigade-sized command of the 3rd Infantry Division. Instead of being called military communities, Aschaffenburg, Schweinfurt and Greater Wuerzburg are now called base support battalions (BSB) and are subordinate to the ASG. The subcommunities which existed under the Greater Wuerzburg military community are now called area support teams and are subordinate organizations to the Wuerzburg BSB. Area support teams are located in Giebelstadt, Kitzingen and Wertheim. The Marneland ASG was activated as a provisional ASG on June 7, 1991. It was officially activated by USAREUR on Oct 1, 1991. The geographic area of responsibility covers 3,100 square miles. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Effective Oct 1, 1991, Frankfurt will become a "hub" community under the Community Command Plan. A (Metro) Area Support Group will be formed in Frankfurt that is responsible for providing base support operations for Frankfurt, Darmstadt and Wiesbaden. Each community will form Base Support Battalions. The BSBs are equivalent to the current military communities, only they are smaller in size. The Frankfurt BSB will be located in portions of the EUD building (Bldg #31) on the Abrams Complex, while ASG offices will be in the current community headquarters building (Hansa Allee). While some functions within organizations such as the Civilian Personnel Office (CPO), Directorate of Resource Management (DRM) and the Directorate of Engineering and Housing (DEH) will be centralized at the ASG level, many customer services will retain offices at the BSB level. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| The Frontier Area Support Group officially activation ceremony was held on Oct 21, 1991 in Hanau. The establishment of the Frontier Region is part of a restructuring plan to centralize management and administrative areas through Base Support Battalions in Giessen, Fulda and Hanau. Prior to becoming the Frontier Region, the Hanau Military Community was the largest community in USAREUR providing support to over 30,000 soldiers, civilians and family members. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Telephone Directories (in collection) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| GERMANY | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ISSUES IN COLLECTION | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| AUSTRIA, ITALY, TRUST | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ISSUES IN COLLECTION | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
