DOCSLIB.ORG

A Case Study in Anacostia, DC

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Case Study in Anacostia, DC 1 Expanding Conceptions of Water Security and Health: A Case Study in Anacostia, D.C. Abigail Ulman Advisors: Professors Mark Giordano and Emily Mendenhall Third Reader: Professor Uwe Brandes A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Award of Honors in Science, Technology, and International Affairs, Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University, Spring 2019 2 Acknowledgements I am incredibly grateful to a number of people: family, friends, professors, mentors, and local partners, who have supported me as I struggled through this thesis process for the past year. To my mentor, Professor Mark Giordano: Thank you for all your support and encouragement throughout this process. I would never have thought to conduct a case study in D.C. if it were not for an offhand comment you made in office hours. Your paper on water security sparked my interest in exploring the concept further. Thank you so much for your quick replies, direct feedback, and reassurance when I doubted myself. To Professor Mendenhall: I would not have known what to write or how to write it without you. You pushed me to think harder and write better than I ever could alone. You taught me about coding, qualitative analysis, concept mapping, and how to write a literature review, and were always available to answer questions and talk my ideas through with me. I will be forever grateful for your guidance and mentorship throughout this process. To my third reader, Professor Uwe Brandes: Thank you so much for your insightful comments and thoughtful feedback. I am honored to gain approval of my thesis from an expert on D.C. and urban studies! To the residents I interviewed and the community organizations I partnered with: Thank you for allowing me into your space and telling me about your lives and work. I am grateful for your openness and willingness to let me explore this important issue with you and your organizations. Thank you especially to Tommy Lawrence and the Earth Conservation Corps, who generously opened up their Pump House for my community presentation, and to Trey Sherard, who has been invaluable in connecting me with community members and providing his incredible amount of expertise on the Anacostia River and communities around it. To my brother, Nate: Thank you for your copy edits and for suffering through my hundred- page document voluntarily. You’re my favorite brother! To my friends: Thank you for listening to my rants about my thesis and environmental justice and pretending to be interested. I appreciate your support! Lastly, to my parents: Thank you so much for all the support, both emotional and financial, you provided throughout this process. You were there for me every step of the way: when I scrambled to finish the interviews, when I complained about transcription, when I coded my interviews at my grandparents’ over Thanksgiving break, when I broke down (more than once) because I thought I would not finish in time, when I rehearsed my presentation, and finally when you drove six hours each way to stay for twenty-four hours and watch me present my thesis. I truly could not have completed this endeavor without your assistance and love, and I am more grateful than I can express for your unconditional belief in me. 3 Table of Contents ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................................................ 4 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................................... 5 LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................................................................................... 11 I. CONCEPTS OF WATER SECURITY AND HEALTH ..................................................................................... 11 II. HEALTH EFFECTS OF WATER SECURITY ................................................................................................ 16 III. GENDER DYNAMICS OF WATER SECURITY AND HEALTH ................................................................. 24 IV. URBAN WATERWAYS AND THE FUTURE OF WATER SECURITY AND HEALTH .................................. 27 CONTEXT: HISTORY OF THE ANACOSTIA RIVER.................................................................................. 29 I. ANACOSTIA RIVER: BEGINNINGS AND POLLUTION ............................................................................... 29 II. TRASH IN THE RIVER ............................................................................................................................. 31 III. THE BANKS OF THE RIVER: ANACOSTIA WATERSHED ...................................................................... 33 IV. THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT ................................................................................................................ 39 V. POVERTY ............................................................................................................................................... 41 VI. HEALTH DISPARITIES IN THE COMMUNITY ....................................................................................... 44 VII. FISH CONSUMPTION IN THE ANACOSTIA RIVER ................................................................................ 47 VIII. DRINKING WATER AND INFRASTRUCTURE ....................................................................................... 50 METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................................................. 51 I. STUDY SETTING ..................................................................................................................................... 51 II. DATA SOURCE ....................................................................................................................................... 52 III. DATA COLLECTION ........................................................................................................................... 54 a. Part I: Qualitative Interviews with Residents ................................................................................... 55 b. Part II: Qualitative Interviews with Local Community Leaders and Workers ................................. 56 c. Part III: Quantitative Government Data .......................................................................................... 59 IV. DATA MANAGEMENT ........................................................................................................................ 60 V. DATA ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................................... 60 RESULTS .................................................................................................................................................................. 61 I. RESIDENTS ............................................................................................................................................. 63 a. Water use .......................................................................................................................................... 63 b. Experiences around water ................................................................................................................ 67 c. Feelings around water ...................................................................................................................... 68 d. Perceptions of the water in their lives .............................................................................................. 72 e. Health effects .................................................................................................................................... 74 II. COMMUNITY LEADERS .......................................................................................................................... 77 a. Water security ................................................................................................................................... 77 b. Assessment of resident perceptions .................................................................................................. 78 c. Health effects .................................................................................................................................... 83 d. Change in the Anacostia River ......................................................................................................... 86 DISCUSSION ........................................................................................................................................................... 90 LIMITATIONS .................................................................................................................................................. 99 CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................................................................... 101 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................................................... 103 4 Abstract Water security is traditionally conceptualized as an issue of access to a regular supply of drinking water of good quality, only affecting health when communities lack an improved water source or proper sanitation facilities. However, research has shown that even communities with reliable drinking
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Anacostia RI Work Plan
    Comment Form Remedial Investigation Work Plan, Anacostia River Sediment Project, Washington DC Commenter/ Section/Table/Figur Page Number Representative Organization Type e Nos. No. Comment Response The discussion of Sources does not seem to treat the re-suspension of in situ legacy sediments as a source of the toxics under The re-suspension and re-deposition of sediments is expected to occur during storm inv estigation. It may well be that a major source of the toxic sediments in any one place is depostion of these resuspended toxic ev ents and is a secondary source of sediment contaminants. The relativ e Anacostia materials af ter they hav e been stirred up by storms , dredging or other ev ents. While the extent of this source and the nature in which it signif icance of this process is dif f icult to quantif y and would v ary f rom storm to Watershed Citizens 1 William Matuszeski Env ironmental Group 3.1.2 24 deliv ers these toxics is dif f icult to determine, it is important to establish its relativ e contribution as a source. storm. Although the concentration distribution in sediments is expected to change in Adv isory response to these processes ov er time, the sampling approach presented in the RI Committee Work Plan will prov ide the data needed to support an ef f ectiv e f easibility study . The discussion of Ongoing Activ ites should include a detailed discussion of the current ef f ort by EPA and DCDOE to develop a new Total DDOE is engaged in an ef f ort to characterize the tributary mass loadings of the key Maximum Daily Load f or toxics in the Anacostia.
    [Show full text]
  • Remedial Investigation Report (Draft)
    Prepared for: Prepared by: Pepco and Pepco Energy Services AECOM Washington, D.C. Beltsville, Maryland February 2016 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT (DRAFT) Benning Road Facility 3400 Benning Road, NE Washington, DC 20019 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT (DRAFT) Benning Road Facility 3400 Benning Road, N.E. Washington, DC 20019 PREPARED FOR: Pepco and Pepco Energy Services 701 9th Street, NW Washington, DC 20068 PREPARED BY: AECOM 8000 Virginia Manor Road, Suite 110 Beltsville, MD 20705 February 2016 AECOM Project Team ________________________________ ________________________________ Robert Kennedy Betsy Ruffle Data Management and Forensics Lead Human Health Risk Assessment Lead ________________________________ ________________________________ Maryann Welsch Helen Jones Ecological Risk Assessment Lead Background Data Evaluation Lead ________________________________ ________________________________ Ben Daniels John Bleiler Field Operations Lead and Report Compiler Senior Technical Reviewer ________________________________ Ravi Damera, P.E., BCEE Project Manager ES-1 Executive Summary This draft Remedial Investigation Report presents the results of recently completed environmental investigation activities at Pepco’s Benning Road facility (the Site), located at 3400 Benning Road NE, Washington, DC. The Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS) Study Area consists of a “Landside” component focused on the Site itself, and a “Waterside” component focused on the shoreline and sediments in the segment of the Anacostia River adjacent to
    [Show full text]
  • Public Access Points Within 50 Miles of Capitol Hill
    Public Access Points within 50 Miles of Capitol Hill Public Access Point Boat Ramp Fishing Swimming Restrooms Hiking/Trekking Location 2900 Virginia Ave NW, Thompson's Boat Center X X X X Washington, DC 20037 3244 K St NW, Washington, DC Georgetown Waterfront Park X X 20007 George Washington Memorial Theodore Roosevelt Island X X X Pkwy N, Arlington, VA 22209 West Basin Dr SW, Washington, West Potomac Park X X DC 20024 Capital Crescent Trail, Washington Canoe Club X Washington, DC 20007 600 Water St SW, Washington, DC Ganglplank Marina X X X X 20024 George Washington Memorial Columbia Island Marina X X X Parkway, Arlington, VA 22202 99 Potomac Ave. SE. Washington, Diamond Teague Park X X DC 20003 335 Water Street Washington, DC The Yards Park X 20003 Martin Luther King Jr Ave SE, Anacostia Boat House X Washington, DC 20003 700-1000 Water St SW, Washington Marina X X X X Washington, DC 20024 Anacostia Park, Section E Anacostia Marina X X X Washington, DC 20003 2001-2099 1st St SW, Washington, Buzzard's Point Marina X X X DC 20003 2038-2068 2nd St SW, James Creek Marina X X X Washington, DC 20593 Anacostia Dr, Washington, DC Anacostia Park X X X 20019 Heritage Island Trail, Washington, Heritage Island X DC 20002 Kingman Island Trail, Washington, Kingman Island X DC 20002 Mt Vernon Trail, Arlington, VA Gravelly Point X X 22202 George Washington Memorial Roaches Run X X X X Pkwy, Arlington, VA 22202 1550 Anacostia Ave NE, Kenilworth Aquatic Gardens/Park X X X Washington, DC 20019 Capital Crescent Trail, Jack's Boat House X X Washington, DC 20007 Daingerfield Island X X X X 1 Marina Dr, Alexandria, VA 22314 67-101 Dale St, Alexandria, VA Four Mile Run Park/Trail X X X 22305 4601 Annapolis Rd.
    [Show full text]
  • The River - Welcome
    Placeholder Image Return to the River - Welcome N Annual Meeting Luncheon & State of the Capitol Riverfront a Thursday, January 17, 2019 m e D a t e Capitol Riverfront “Dashboard” • 500 acres • 37.5M square feet • 65% built-out • 34,000 employees • 9,500 residents • 7 subareas • 2 grocery stores • 2 sports stadiums • 13 acres of parks Why We Are Here… River Connections “Eventually everything connects – people, places, objects. The quality of the connections is the key to quality per se.” Charles Eames “Take me to the river, drop me in the waters…washing me down” Talking Heads We are all Connected… Physically Spiritually Generationally By Place By Social Media By Events And Rivers Connect Us… Anacostia Destinations Arboretum Tidal Basin/ Langston Golf Hains Point Kingman Island Yards Park Kenilworth RFK Stadium Aquatic Gardens Washington Channel Poplar Point Anacostia Park Anacostia Destinations Rivers Have Sustained Us… Early Settlements Shipping/Commerce Manufacturing Agriculture Hydro-Electricity Water Supplies Recreation But We Have Not Always Been Kind… Inspiration 2003 Anacostia Waterfront Initiative Framework Plan “You can’t be unhappy in the middle of a big, beautiful river.” Jim Harrison Framework Plan Themes 15 Years of Implementation “A Plan Is Not Great Unless It Is Put Into Action.” Connections Clean the River Public Parks Community Events Boating Communities Infrastructure Recreation Fields s n o i t c e n n o C s n o i t c e n n o C Partners in the Effort Anacostia River Corridor Anacostia River & Parklands • 8.5 mile river corridor connects 1,800 acres of public parks • Connects to amenities such as: Washington Channel, Hains Point, Yards Park, Anacostia Park, Kingman & Heritage Islands, National Arboretum & Kenilworth Gardens, Nats Park, Audi Field, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Fiscal Year 2021 Committee Budget Report
    FISCAL YEAR 2021 COMMITTEE BUDGET REPORT TO: Members of the Council of the District of Columbia FROM: Councilmember Mary M. Cheh Chairperson, Committee on Transportation & the Environment DATE: June 25, 2020 SUBJECT: DRAFT Report and recommendations of the Committee on Transportation & the Environment on the Fiscal Year 2021 budget for agencies under its purview The Committee on Transportation & the Environment (“Committee”), having conducted hearings and received testimony on the Mayor’s proposed operating and capital budgets for Fiscal Year (“FY”) 2021 for the agencies under its jurisdiction, reports its recommendations for review and consideration by the Committee of the Whole. The Committee also comments on several sections in the Fiscal Year 2021 Budget Support Act of 2020, as proposed by the Mayor, and proposes several of its own subtitles. Table of Contents Summary ........................................................................................... 3 A. Executive Summary.......................................................................................................................... 3 B. Operating Budget Summary Table .................................................................................................. 7 C. Full-Time Equivalent Summary Table ............................................................................................. 9 D. Operating & Capital Budget Ledgers ........................................................................................... 11 E. Committee Transfers ...................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Project Area Scroll (PDF)
    What will the street look like at this location? Sidewalk Buffer and Travel Lane Travel 11'–12' Lane Travel 4'–8' 11' 1) (Track Travel Lane Travel 10' Median 11' (Track 2) (Track What choices are available for 18'–19' Lane Travel 11' Lane Travel the configuration of the stops? WESTBOUND 10' Travel Lane Travel Grass 11' 4' Track Cycle Buffer 8' IMPROVED BICYCLE/ EASTBOUND Sidewalk 0-2' PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 6' Benning Road Kingman Island Car Barn Training Bridge over Center (CBTC) Kingman Lake – PEPCO Rehabilitation KINGMAN ISLAND 36TH ST 26TH ST LANGSTON GOLF ANACOSTIA AVE 34TH ST COURSE EADS ST ANACOSTIA RIVER RIVER TERRACE Ethel Kennedy OKLAHOMA AVE Bridge – Rehabilitation Kingman Island Locator Map Provides shared-use path, sidewalk, and buffers Allows left turns into Driving Range Travel lane with streetcar tracks Streetcar platform What will the street look like at this location? Grass Sidewalk Travel Lane Travel 6' Lane Travel 4' (Track 1) (Track PARKSIDE Sidewalk What choices are available for 11' Lane Travel 10' Median 11' Lane Travel 7' (Track 1) (Track Travel Lane Travel (Track 2) (Track VARIES Lane Travel 12' the configuration of the stops? Median 12' Lane Turn 11' Lane Travel 5' (Track 2) (Track 10' Lane Travel 11' Lane Travel Grass WESTBOUND 11' 12' WESTBOUND Lane Travel 4' Track Cycle IMPROVED BICYCLE/ Buffer Shared 12' Use Path 8' Sidewalk PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 0-2' EASTBOUND 10' 6' EASTBOUND Anacostia Avenue to East of 36th Street NE 34th Street NE FORT MAHAN PEPCO 39TH ST PARK MINNESOTA AVE MINNESOTA KINGMAN ISLAND 41ST ST 36TH ST 40TH ST 40TH 42ND ST ANACOSTIA AVE 34TH ST 295 EADS ST ANACOSTIA RIVER Lorraine H.
    [Show full text]
  • Kingman Island Project
    VISITOR STATION, OUTDOOR CLASSROOMS, & TRAILS RIVER TERRACE COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION MEETING February 27, 2019 AGENDA 1 Project history 2 Where we left off 3 What DOEE has done since 4 SOW components 5 Contract community engagement timeline 6 Project timeline 7 Interim projects 8 Questions? TAG THIS PRESENTATION: @DOEE_DC PROJECT HISTORY • Kingman & Heritage Island Feasibility Study Act 2016 – Released July 2017 • Hickok Cole and DOEE present plan to RTCO – September 2017 • Mayor Bowser Announces $4.7 Million Investment in Kingman and Heritage Islands – January 12, 2018 • Kingman Island Community Advisory Group (Kingman CAG) First Meeting – July 2018 • DOEE Meets with River Terrace Community at Anacostia Park – August 2018 TAG THIS PRESENTATION: @DOEE_DC DOEE & RIVER TERRACE AT ANACOSTIA PARK Issues Discussed: • Kingman Island Benning Road Access (pedestrian entrance upgrade, wider gate, visible signage, etc.) • East Capital Street sidewalk needs upkeep • Benning Road sidewalk on west side needs repair • Programming on the Islands for the local community • Coordination with local schools for environmental education programming @DOEE_DC WHAT DOEE HAS DONE SINCE 1. Research visits to other parks for relevant features 2. Drafting the SOW a) Kingman and Heritage Island Feasibility Study as basis b) DOEE expertise consulted includes: wildlife management, green building, energy, toxic substances, building permit plan review, stormwater management c) Sister Agencies: DGS, DPR, OCTO, DDOT 3. Market Research 4. Interim Projects 5. Seeking Additional Funding 6. 2nd meeting with Kingman Advisory Group (2/5/19) @DOEE_DC SUMMARY OF PROPOSED PROJECT GOALS & FEATURES A flagship project showcasing state-of-the-art Design a Visitor Center at the Benning sustainability goals for the District of Columbia.
    [Show full text]
  • National Capital Planning Commission Ncpc Annual
    2oo5 NCPC ANNUAL REPORT NATIONAL CAPITAL PLANNING COMMISSION NCPC’S LEGISLATIVE MANDATE The U.S. Congress gave NCPC a broad legislative authority over a range of issues affecting everything from the city’s major monuments and historic treasures to its zoning maps and regulations. Congress established the agency in 1924 as the National Capital Park Commission. In 1952 Congress passed the National Capital Planning Act, renaming the agency and designating it as the cen- tral planning agency for the federal and District government in the National Capital Region (NCR). The Act, amended after D.C. Home Rule and the creation of the District Office of Planning, charges NCPC to provide overall planning guidance for federal land and buildings in the NCR. The Zoning Act of 1938 mandates that NCPC serve on the District of Columbia Board of Zoning Adjustment. The Board hears many cases that involve land adjacent to or affected by federal landholdings. Through the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, NCPC serves as a steward of the region’s historic buildings, districts, landscapes, and views. The Commission also operates under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which requires feder- al agencies to evaluate the environmental impacts of proposed projects. The 1968 International Center Act established a campus for foreign chanceries in Northwest Washington. Development plans for all chanceries in the 47-acre International Center are subject to NCPC’s approval. The Foreign Missions Act of 1982 establishes the criteria and procedures by which foreign mis- sions may locate in the District of Columbia. Under the law, NCPC’s executive director must serve as a member of the Foreign Missions Board of Zoning Adjustment, which considers applications by foreign missions.
    [Show full text]
  • Read Application
    NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in National Regist er Bulletin, How to Complete the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form. If any item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions. 1. Name of Property Historic name: Kingman Park Historic District________________________________ Other names/site number: ______________________________________ Name of related multip le property listing: Spingarn, Browne, Young, Phelps Educational Campus; Spingarn High School; Langston Golf Course and Langston Dwellings ______________________________________________________ (Enter "N/A" if property is not part of a multiple property listing ____________________________________________________________________________ 2. Location Street & number: Western Boundary Line is 200-800 Blk 19th Street NE; Eastern Boundary Line is the Anacostia River along Oklahoma Avenue NE; Northern Boundary Line is 19th- 22nd Street & Maryland Avenue NE; Southern Boundary Line is East Capitol Street at 19th- 22nd Street NE. City or town: Washington, DC__________ State: ____DC________ County: ____________ Not For Publicatio n: Vicinity: ____________________________________________________________________________ 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I hereby certify that this nomination ___ request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60.
    [Show full text]
  • Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2012
    DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND EDUCATION, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012 WEDNESDAY, MAY 11, 2011 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS, Washington, DC. The subcommittee met at 9:59 a.m., in room SD–124, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Tom Harkin (chairman) presiding. Present: Senators Harkin, Reed, Mikulski, Brown, Shelby, Kirk and Moran. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH STATEMENT OF DR. FRANCIS S. COLLINS, DIRECTOR ACCOMPANIED BY: HAROLD VARMUS, M.D., DIRECTOR, NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE ANTHONY S. FAUCI, M.D., DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF AL- LERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES SUSAN B. SHURIN, M.D., ACTING DIRECTOR, NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE DR. GRIFFIN RODGERS, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DIA- BETES, DIGESTIVE AND KIDNEY DISEASES OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR TOM HARKIN Senator HARKIN. The Senate Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education will now come to order. First of all, Dr. Collins, welcome back to the subcommittee. We welcome also Dr. Harold Varmus, Director of the National Cancer Institute; Dr. Tony Fauci, Director of the National Institute of Al- lergy and Infectious Diseases; Dr. Griffin Rodgers, Director of the National Institute of Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney Diseases; and Dr. Susan Shurin, Director of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. This subcommittee holds an appropriations hearing on the NIH budget every year, and every year I am both inspired by the dedi- cation of the scientists who testify before us and proud that their accomplishments have made America the world leader in bio- medical research.
    [Show full text]
  • Reducing Poverty Sustaining Growth
    Reducing Poverty Sustaining Growth Scaling Up Poverty Reduction A Global Learning Process and Conference in Shanghai, May 25–27, 2004 Case Study Summaries Acknowledgments The World Bank gratefully acknowledges the participation of, and contributions from, the Governments of Austria, Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom, as well as the United Nations Development Programme. Many hundreds of people cooperated to bring these cases to you—too many to be acknowledged individually in the summaries. For the full text of any of the cases summarized here, as well as contact information for the authors and sponsors of the case, check after the conference at http://www.reducingpoverty.org. Except as otherwise noted in the summaries, the cases summarized here were commissioned by the World Bank Institute through the World Bank operational vice presidencies. This unedited collection of case studies was prepared for use at the Scaling Up Poverty Reduction conference in Shanghai, China, held in May 2004. A thorough synthesis of the findings of the conference will be published as a book by the World Bank late in 2004. © 2004 The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/ The World Bank 1818 H Street, NW Washington, DC 20433 Telephone 202-473-1000 Internet www.worldbank.org E-mail [email protected] All rights reserved. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Board of Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work.
    [Show full text]
  • Information to Users
    INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in ^ew riter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough,margins, substandard and improper alignment can adversely afiect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. UMI University Microfilms International A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 North Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600 Order Number 9427686 Corporate response to technological change: Dieselization and the American railway locomotive industry during the twentieth century. (Volumes I and II) Churella, Albert John, Ph.D.
    [Show full text]