Federal Register/Vol. 79, No. 139/Monday, July 21

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Federal Register/Vol. 79, No. 139/Monday, July 21 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 139 / Monday, July 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 42197 connection with the acquisition or experimental or laboratory sense. Because When these regulations are enforced, production of depreciable property to be $50,000 of Z’s costs to construct the new test certain restrictions are placed on marine used in the taxpayer’s trade or business bed was incurred for research and traffic in specified areas. This are limited to amounts expended for experimentation, the costs qualify as research rulemaking project promotes efficiency or experimental expenditures under section research or experimentation within the 174. Paragraph (b)(2) of this section applies by eliminating the need to produce a meaning of section 174 and paragraph to $50,000 of Z’s costs for the test bed separate rule for each individual (a) of this section. because they are expenditures for research or recurring event, and serves to provide (5) Examples. The following examples experimentation that result in depreciable notice of the known recurring events illustrate the application of paragraph property to be used in the taxpayer’s trade or requiring a special local regulation or (b) of this section. business. Z’s remaining $4,950,000 of costs is safety zone throughout the year. not allowable under section 174 because Example 1. Amounts paid to others for DATES: This rule is effective August 20, these costs were not incurred for research or research or experimentation resulting in 2014. experimentation. depreciable property. X is a tool ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in manufacturer. X has developed a new tool * * * * * this preamble are part of docket [USCG– design, and orders a specially-built machine (d) Effective/applicability date. The 2014–0095]. To view documents from Y to produce X’s new tool. The machine eighth and ninth sentences of § 1.174– mentioned in this preamble as being is built upon X’s order and at X’s risk, and 2(a)(1); § 1.174–2(a)(2); § 1.174–2(a)(4); available in the docket, go to http:// Y does not provide a guarantee of economic § 1.174–2(a)(5); § 1.174–2(a)(11) utility. There is uncertainty regarding the www.regulations.gov, type the docket appropriate design of the machine. Under X’s Example 3 through Example 10; number in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click contract with Y, X pays $15,000 for Y’s § 1.174–2(b)(4); and § 1.174–2(b)(5) ‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket engineering and design labor, $5,000 for apply to taxable years ending on or after Folder on the line associated with this materials and supplies used to develop the July 21, 2014. Taxpayers may apply the rulemaking. You may also visit the appropriate design of the machine, and provisions enumerated in the preceding Docket Management Facility in Room $10,000 for Y’s machine production materials sentence to taxable years for which the W12–140 on the ground floor of the and labor. The $15,000 of engineering and limitations for assessment of tax has not Department of Transportation West design labor costs and the $5,000 of materials expired. and supplies costs represent research and Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., development costs in the experimental or John Dalrymple, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. laboratory sense. Therefore, the $15,000 X Deputy Commissioner for Services and and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, pays Y for Y’s engineering and design labor Enforcement. except Federal holidays. and the $5,000 for materials and supplies FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If used to develop the appropriate design of the Approved: June 27, 2014. Mark J. Mazur, you have questions on this rule, call or machine are for research or experimentation email Dennis Sens, Fifth Coast Guard under section 174. However, section 174 Assistant Secretary of the Treasury (Tax District, Prevention Division, (757) 398– does not apply to the $10,000 of production Policy). 6204, [email protected]. If you costs of the machine because those costs [FR Doc. 2014–16956 Filed 7–18–14; 8:45 am] were not incurred for research or have questions on viewing or submitting experimentation. See paragraph (a)(2) of this BILLING CODE 4830–01–P material to the docket, call Cheryl section (relating to production costs) and Collins, Program Manager, Docket paragraph (b)(4) of this section (limiting Operations, telephone (202) 366–9826. deduction to amounts expended for research DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: or experimentation). SECURITY Example 2. Expenditures with respect to Table of Acronyms other property. Z is an aircraft manufacturer. Coast Guard Z incurs $5,000,000 to construct a new test AOR Area of Responsibility bed that will be used in the development and 33 CFR Parts 100 and 165 APA Administrative Procedure Act improvement of Z’s aircraft. No portion of Z’s COTP Captain of the Port $5,000,000 of costs to construct the new test [Docket Number USCG–2014–0095] DHS Department of Homeland Security bed represent research and development FR Federal Register costs in the experimental or laboratory sense RIN 1625–AA00, AA08 NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to develop or improve the test bed. Because no portion of the costs to construct the new Special Local Regulations and Safety A. Regulatory History and Information test bed were incurred for research or Zones; Recurring Marine Events and The Coast Guard published an interim experimentation, the $5,000,000 will be Fireworks Displays Within the Fifth final rule and request for comments on considered an amount paid or incurred in the Coast Guard District May 27, 2014 (79 FR 30025). The special production of depreciable property to be local regulations listed in 33 CFR used in the taxpayer’s trade or business that AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. are not allowable under section 174. 100.501 and safety zones in 33 CFR However, the allowances for depreciation of ACTION: Final rule. 165.506 were last amended on May 21, the test bed are considered research and 2013 (78 FR 29629). SUMMARY: This document adopts as a experimental expenditures of other products, B. Basis and Purpose for purposes of section 174, to the extent the final rule, without change, an interim test bed is used in connection with research final rule amending the Coast Guard This rulemaking updates the list of or experimentation of other products. See regulations established for recurring permanent special local regulations at paragraph (b)(1) of this section (depreciation marine events and fireworks displays 33 CFR 100.501 and safety zones at 33 allowances may be considered research or that take place within the Fifth Coast CFR 165.506, established for recurring experimental expenditures). Guard District area of responsibility. marine events and fireworks displays at Example 3. Expenditure resulting in Under that rule, the list of recurring depreciable property. Assume the same facts various locations within the Fifth Coast as Example 2, except that $50,000 of the marine events requiring special local Guard District area of responsibility costs of the test bed relates to costs to resolve regulations or safety zones is updated (AOR). The Fifth Coast Guard District uncertainties regarding the new test bed with revisions, additional events, and AOR is defined in 33 CFR 3.25. design. The $50,000 of costs represents removal of events that no longer take Publishing these regulatory updates in research and development costs in the place in the Fifth Coast Guard District. a single rulemaking promotes efficiency VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:01 Jul 18, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21JYR1.SGM 21JYR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 42198 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 139 / Monday, July 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations and provides the public with notice enforce 50 special local regulations for The two newly added marine events through publication in the Federal marine events and 78 safety zones for to 33 CFR 100.501 affect the Middle Register of the upcoming recurring fireworks displays on the specified River, Essex, MD and the Atlantic marine events and fireworks displays navigable waters as listed within the Ocean, Ocean City, MD. The two and their accompanying regulations, Table to § 100.501 and § 165.506 removed events no longer listed in 33 special local regulations, and safety respectively. CFR 100.501 are the Tri Rock Triathlon, zones. D. Discussion of the Final Rule Annapolis, MD, and the Virginia Beach, C. Discussion of Comments, Changes VA, Hydroplane Races. The 10 existing and the Final Rule Special Local Regulations special local regulations that involve The Coast Guard did not receive This rule adds 2 new marine events changes to marine event date(s) and comments in response to the interim with special local regulations, removes coordinates are shown in Table 1, with final rule and request for comments 2 events, and revises 10 previously reference by section as printed in the published in the Federal Register. established marine events in the Table Table to § 100.501. Accordingly, the Coast Guard will to § 100.501. TABLE 1 Table to Revision § 100.501 section Location (date/coordinates) 1. (a.) 4 .................... N. Atlantic Ocean, Atlantic City, NJ ................................................................................................ date. 2. (b.) 7 .................... Severn River, Annapolis, MD .......................................................................................................... coordinates. 3. (b.) 20 .................. Patuxent River, Solomons Island, MD ...........................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • The District of Columbia Water Quality Assessment
    THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT 2008 INTEGRATED REPORT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AND U.S. CONGRESS PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 305(b) AND 303(d) CLEAN WATER ACT (P.L. 97-117) District Department of the Environment Natural Resources Administration Water Quality Division Government of the District of Columbia Adrian M. Fenty, Mayor PREFACE PREFACE The Water Quality Division of the District of Columbia's District Department of the Environment, Natural Resources Administration, prepared this report to satisfy the listing requirements of §303(d) and the reporting requirements of §305(b) of the federal Clean Water Act (P.L. 97-117). This report provides water quality information on the District of Columbia’s surface and ground waters that were assessed during 2008 and updates the water quality information required by law. Various programs in the Natural Resources Administration contributed to this report including the Fisheries and Wildlife Division and the Watershed Protection Division. Questions or comments regarding this report or requests for copies should be forwarded to the address below. The District of Columbia Government District Department of the Environment Natural Resources Administration Water Quality Division 51 N St., NE Washington, D.C. 20002-3323 Attention: N. Shulterbrandt ii TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE ................................................................... ii TABLE OF CONTENTS........................................................iii LIST OF TABLES...........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The District of Columbia Water Quality Assessment
    THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT 2012 INTEGRATED REPORT TO THE US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AND CONGRESS PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 305(b) AND 303(d) CLEAN WATER ACT (P.L. 97-117) District Department of the Environment Natural Resources Administration Water Quality Division i PREFACE The Water Quality Division of the District of Columbia's District Department of the Environment, Natural Resources Administration, prepared this report to satisfy the listing requirements of §303(d) and the reporting requirements of §305(b) of the federal Clean Water Act (P.L. 97-117). The report provides water quality information on the District of Columbia’s surface and ground waters that were assessed during 2010-2011 and updates the water quality information required by law. Various programs in the Natural Resources Administration contributed to this report including the Fisheries and Wildlife Division, the Stormwater Management Division, and the Watershed Protection Division. The Lead and Healthy Housing Division, Environmental Protection Administration also contributed to this report. Questions or comments regarding this report should be forwarded to the address below. The District of Columbia Government District Department of the Environment Natural Resources Administration Water Quality Division 1200 First Street, NE 5th Floor Washington, D.C. 20002 Attention: N. Shulterbrandt ii TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE ......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Flood Risk Management Planning Resources for Washington DC
    Flood Risk Management Planning Resources for Washington, DC January 20181 Flood Risk Management Planning Resources for Washington, DC January 2018 NOTICE: Usage: This is not a regulatory document. Updating: This document is current as of January 2018. It may be updated from time to time, at which point the dates will be changed. Disclaimer: Mention of a commercial company or product does not constitute an endorsement by the DC Silver Jackets or the National Capital Planning Commission. Cover Photo: The wake from a passing boat crashes over a flooded walkway on East Potomac Park during high tide on September 28, 2013. Credit: John Cochran 2 Table of Contents 1. Introduction 4 2. Flood Risk Management Resources 10 3. Mapping Current Flood Risk 28 4. Riverine Flooding 36 5. Interior Flooding 40 6. Coastal Flooding 44 7. Summary 56 8. Appendices 58 3 1. Introduction 4 Document Purpose Washington, DC and the surrounding National Capital Region (NCR) have experienced significant river, coastal, and interior floods that have negatively impacted federal and local operations, land and facility assets, and supporting infrastructure. As a result, flooding is one of the hazards that property and asset managers must consider to ensure a more secure and resilient capital. This guide provides a short summary of key flood risks in the NCR, an overview of recent studies and tools that address current and future flood risks in the region, and brief descriptions of how these studies can be used in flood risk management. While much of the information addresses the entire NCR, the guide focuses on Washington, DC and its monumental core.
    [Show full text]
  • The District of Columbia Water Quality Assessment
    THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT 2006 INTEGRATED REPORT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AND U.S. CONGRESS PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 305(b) AND 303(d) CLEAN WATER ACT (P.L. 97-117) Department of Health Environmental Health Administration Bureau of Environmental Quality Water Quality Division Government of the District of Columbia Anthony A. Williams, Mayor PREFACE PREFACE The Water Quality Division of the District of Columbia's Department of Health, Environmental Health Administration, prepared this report to satisfy the listing requirements of §303(d) and the reporting requirements of §305(b) of the federal Clean Water Act (P.L. 97-117). This report provides water quality information on the District of Columbia’s surface and ground waters that were assessed during 2006 and updates the water quality information required by law. Various programs in the Bureau of Environmental Quality contributed to this report including the Watershed Protection Division and the Fisheries and Wildlife Division. Questions or comments regarding this report or requests for copies should be forwarded to the address below. The District of Columbia Government Department of Health Environmental Health Administration Bureau of Environmental Quality Water Quality Division 51 N St., NE Washington, D.C. 20002-3323 Attention: N. Shulterbrandt ii TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE ................................................................... ii TABLE OF CONTENTS........................................................iii ACRONYMS .................................................................ix
    [Show full text]
  • Potomac Park
    46 MONUMENTAL CORE FRAMEWORK PLAN EDAW Enhance the Waterfront Experience POTOMAC PARK Potomac Park can be reimagined as a unique Washington destination: a prestigious location extending from the National Mall; a setting of extraordinary beauty and sweeping waterfront vistas; an opportunity for active uses and peaceful solitude; a resource with extensive acreage for multiple uses; and a shoreline that showcases environmental stewardship. Located at the edge of a dense urban center, Potomac Park should be an easily accessible place that provides opportunities for water-oriented recreation, commemoration, and celebration in a setting that preserves the scenic landscape. The park offers great potential to relieve pressure on the historic and fragile open space of the National Mall, a vulnerable resource that is increasingly overburdened with demands for large public gatherings, active sport fields, everyday recreation, and new memorials. Potomac Park and its shoreline should offer a range of activities for the enjoyment of all. Some areas should accommodate festivals, concerts, and competitive recreational activities, while other areas should be quiet and pastoral to support picnics under a tree, paddling on the river, and other leisure pastimes. The park should be connected with the region and with local neighborhoods. MONUMENTAL CORE FRAMEWORK PLAN 47 ENHANCE THE WATERFRONT EXPERIENCE POTOMAC PARK Context Potomac Park is a relatively recent addition to Ohio Drive parallels the walkway, provides vehicular Washington. In the early years of the city it was an access, and is used by bicyclists, runners, and skaters. area of tidal marshes. As upstream forests were cut The northern portion of the island includes 25 acres and agricultural activity increased, the Potomac occupied by the National Park Service’s regional River deposited greater amounts of silt around the headquarters, a park maintenance yard, offices for the developing city.
    [Show full text]
  • Foundations for Memorials and Monuments on the National Mall
    Missouri University of Science and Technology Scholars' Mine International Conference on Case Histories in (2008) - Sixth International Conference on Case Geotechnical Engineering Histories in Geotechnical Engineering 14 Aug 2008, 7:00 pm - 8:30 pm Foundations for Memorials and Monuments on the National Mall Douglas W. Christie Mueser Rutledge Consulting Engineers, New York, NY Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/icchge Part of the Geotechnical Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Christie, Douglas W., "Foundations for Memorials and Monuments on the National Mall" (2008). International Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering. 4. https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/icchge/6icchge/session08/4 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License. This Article - Conference proceedings is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars' Mine. It has been accepted for inclusion in International Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering by an authorized administrator of Scholars' Mine. This work is protected by U. S. Copyright Law. Unauthorized use including reproduction for redistribution requires the permission of the copyright holder. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FOUNDATIONS FOR MEMORIALS AND MONUMENTS ON THE NATIONAL MALL Douglas W. Christie, P.E. Associate Mueser Rutledge Consulting Engineers New York, New York 10122 ABSTRACT As the western end of the National Mall in Washington, DC was made by filling in portions of the Potomac River, memorials and monuments have required deep foundations. The site history including stream channels, canals, and materials used in filling various areas has had a large impact on the development of the Mall.
    [Show full text]
  • A Flow-Simulation Model of the Tidal Potomac River
    A Flow-Simulation Model of the Tidal Potomac River A Water-Quality Study of the Tidal Potomac River and Estuary United States Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2234-D Chapter D A Flow-Simulation Model of the Tidal Potomac River By RAYMOND W. SCHAFFRANEK U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 2234 A WATER-QUALITY STUDY OF THE TIDAL POTOMAC RIVER AND ESTUARY DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DONALD PAUL MODEL, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1987 For sale by the Books and Open-File Reports Section, U.S. Geological Survey, Federal Center, Box 25425, Denver, CO 80225 Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Schaffranek, Raymond W. A flow-simulation model of the tidal Potomac River. (A water-quality study of the tidal Potomac River and Estuary) (U.S. Geological Survey water-supply paper; 2234) Bibliography; p. 24. Supt. of Docs, no.: I. 19.13:2234-0 1. Streamflow Potomac River Data processing. 2. Streamflow Potomac River Mathematical models. I. Title. II. Series. III. Series: U.S. Geological Survey water-supply paper; 2234. GB1207.S33 1987 551.48'3'09752 85-600354 Any use of trade names and trademarks in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey. FOREWORD a rational and well-documented general approach for the study of tidal rivers and estuaries. This interdisciplinary effort emphasized studies of the Tidal rivers and estuaries are very important features transport of the major nutrient species and of suspended of the Coastal Zone because of their immense biological sediment.
    [Show full text]
  • M a R Y L a N D V I R G I N
    300 ¢ U.S. Coast Pilot 3, Chapter 12 26 SEP 2021 77°20'W 77°W 76°40'W 76°20'W 39°N Annapolis Washington D.C. 12289 Alexandria PISCATAWAY CREEK 38°40'N MARYLAND 12288 MATTAWOMAN CREEK PATUXENT RIVER PORT TOBACCO RIVER NANJEMOY CREEK 12285 WICOMICO 12286 RIVER 38°20'N ST. CLEMENTS BAY UPPER MACHODOC CREEK 12287 MATTOX CREEK POTOMAC RIVER ST. MARYS RIVER POPES CREEK NOMINI BAY YEOCOMICO RIVER Point Lookout COAN RIVER 38°N RAPPAHANNOCK RIVER Smith VIRGINIA Point 12233 Chart Coverage in Coast Pilot 3—Chapter 12 NOAA’s Online Interactive Chart Catalog has complete chart coverage http://www.charts.noaa.gov/InteractiveCatalog/nrnc.shtml 26 SEP 2021 U.S. Coast Pilot 3, Chapter 12 ¢ 301 Chesapeake Bay, Potomac River (1) This chapter describes the Potomac River and the above the mouth; thence the controlling depth through numerous tributaries that empty into it; included are the dredged cuts is about 18 feet to Hains Point. The Coan, St. Marys, Yeocomico, Wicomico and Anacostia channels are maintained at or near project depths. For Rivers. Also described are the ports of Washington, DC, detailed channel information and minimum depths as and Alexandria and several smaller ports and landings on reported by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), these waterways. use NOAA Electronic Navigational Charts. Surveys and (2) channel condition reports are available through a USACE COLREGS Demarcation Lines hydrographic survey website listed in Appendix A. (3) The lines established for Chesapeake Bay are (12) described in 33 CFR 80.510, chapter 2. Anchorages (13) Vessels bound up or down the river anchor anywhere (4) ENCs - US5VA22M, US5VA27M, US5MD41M, near the channel where the bottom is soft; vessels US5MD43M, US5MD44M, US4MD40M, US5MD40M sometimes anchor in Cornfield Harbor or St.
    [Show full text]
  • Washington's Waterfront Study
    WASHINGTON’S WATERFRONTS Phase 1 December 1999 The Georgetown Waterfront Anacostia Park’s West Bank Potomac River r Rive Anacostia The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts Washington Navy Yard and Southeast Waterfront National Capital Planning Commission Southwest Waterfront Anacostia Park’s East Bank 801 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Suite 301 Bolling Anacostia Waterfront Washington, D.C. 20576 tel 202 482-7200 fax 202 482-7272 An Analysis of Issues and Opportunities Along the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers www.ncpc.gov TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION.............................................2 A. Overview B. Study Origin C. Study Process D. Study Goals E. Study Area II. THE WATERFRONT.......................................4 A. Regional Context B. Area Description C. Existing Conditions D. Land Use E. Transportation F. Urban Image III. WATERFRONT ISSUES..............................12 A. Identification of Concerns B. Planning Issues C. Opportunities D. Development Guidelines E. Implementation Tools IV. THE WATERFRONT PLAN.........................16 Recommended Outline V. CONCLUSION.............................................17 VI. APPENDIX..................................................18 1 7. Develop a waterfront redevelopment zone in areas 2. Enhance public access to the river. I. INTRODUCTION where major new development is proposed and ensure that existing maritime uses are protected. 3. Protect the natural setting of the valued open spaces A. Overview along the rivers. 8. Establish public transportation where needed and This document was developed to study the waterfront as a resource encourage the development of adequate parking in 4. Identify opportunities for attracting additional river- that belongs to all of the people of the United States and to the resi- redeveloped areas. related activities that can aid in revitalizing the District's dents of the District of Columbia.
    [Show full text]
  • REFLECTIONS Washington’S Southeast / Southwest Waterfront
    REFLECTIONS Washington’s Southeast / Southwest Waterfront CAMBRIA HOTEL Washington, DC Capitol Riverfront REFLECTIONS Washington’s Southeast / Southwest Waterfront Copyright © 2021 by Square 656 Owner, LLC Front cover image: Rendering of the Frederick Douglass Memorial ISBN: 978-0-578-82670-7 Bridge. The bridge connects the two shores of Designed by LaserCom Design, Berkeley CA the Anacostia River and is named after a former slave and human rights leader who became one of Washington’s most famous residents. District Department of Transportation vi FOREWORD REFLECTIONS Washington’s Southeast / Southwest Waterfront Marjorie Lightman, PhD William Zeisel, PhD CAMBRIA HOTEL Washington, DC Capitol Riverfront QED Associates LLC Washington, DC CAMBRIA HOTEL n REFLECTIONS vii Then ... A gardener’s residence on the site of the Cambria Hotel. The flat-roofed frame house, 18 feet wide and costing $1,800 to construct more than a century ago, was home to Samuel Howison, a market gardener. The cornice at the top of the building now graces the Cambria Hotel’s lobby, and a fireplace mantle accents the rooftop bar. Peter Sefton Now ... The Cambria Hotel at 69 Q Street SW, a part of the Southeast/Southwest waterfront’s renaissance. Donohoe Welcome to the Cambria Hotel Located in an historic part of one of the world’s great cities. ashington is a star-studded town where money and influence glitter on a world stage of W24/7 news bites. Images of the White House, the Capitol, and the Mall are recognized around the world as synonymous with majesty and power. Washington, the nation’s capital, shapes our times and history.
    [Show full text]
  • District of Coulmbia: the Likelihood of Shore Protection
    The Likelihood of Shore Protection in the District of Columbia James G. Titus U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington D.C. September 2005 Draft The final version of this document can be cited as: J.G. Titus. 2010. “District of Columbia.” In James G. Titus and Daniel Hudgens (editors). The Likelihood of Shore Protection along the Atlantic Coast of the United States. Volume 1: Mid- Atlantic. Report to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, D.C. The opinions expressed herein are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official opinion of the Environmental Protection Agency. The primary referring page for this report is http://risingsea.net/ERL/DC.html CHAPTER 7 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA : James G. Titus U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [ 664 THE L I K E L I H O O D O F S H O R E P R O T E C T I O N I N T H E D I S T R I C T O F C O L U M B I A] CONTENTS Introduction................................................................................................................................... 665 Background................................................................................................................................... 667 Response to Sea Level Rise ........................................................................................................ 671 Stakeholder Review...................................................................................................................... 679 A Note on Horizontal Scale.........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Color of Wealth in the Nation's Capital
    INEQUALITY AND MOBIL ITY (just RESEARCH REPORT The Color of Wealth in the Nation’s Capital A Joint Publication of the Urban Institute, Duke University, The New School, and the Insight Center for Community Economic Development Kilolo Kijakazi Rachel Marie Brooks Atkins Mark Paul Anne E. Price URBAN INSTITUTE THE NEW SCHOOL DUKE UNIVERSITY INSIGHT CENTER FOR COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Darrick Hamilton William A. Darity Jr. THE NEW SCHOOL DUKE UNIVERSITY November 2016 American Gothic, Washington, DC, 1942. Photograph by Gordon Parks. Courtesy of and copyright the Gordon Parks Foundation. ABOUT THE URBAN INSTITUTE The nonprofit Urban Institute is dedicated to elevating the debate on social and economic policy. For nearly five decades, Urban scholars have conducted research and offered evidence-based solutions that improve lives and strengthen communities across a rapidly urbanizing world. Their objective research helps expand opportunities for all, reduce hardship among the most vulnerable, and strengthen the effectiveness of the public sector. ABOUT THE SAMUEL DUB OIS COOK CENTER ON S OCIAL EQUITY AT DUKE UNIVERSITY The Duke Samuel DuBois Cook Center on Social Equity is a scholarly collaborative engaged in the study of the causes and consequences of inequality and in the assessment and redesign of remedies for inequality and its adverse effects. Concerned with the economic, political, social, and cultural dimensions of uneven and inequitable access to resources, opportunity and capabilities, Cook Center researchers take a cross-national comparative approach to the study of human difference and disparity. Ranging from the global to the local, Cook Center scholars not only address the overarching social problem of general inequality, but they also explore social problems associated with gender, race, ethnicity, and religious affiliation.
    [Show full text]