SEA GRANT PROJECT SUMMARY FORM (90-2) SOUTH ATLANTIC REGIONAL PROPOSAL

Transcription

1

2 INSTITUTION: Clemson University SEA GRANT PROJECT SUMMARY FORM (90-2) SOUTH ATLANTIC REGIONAL PROPOSAL TITLE: Assessing Local Impacts to Enhance Community Resiliency along the South Atlantic Coast SUB PROGRAM: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: London, James B. Clemson Jim Self Center (SC) Alexander, Clark R., Jr. UGA Skidaway Institute (GA) CO-PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Walsh, John P. ECU Geological Sciences (NC) Harrington, Julie A. FSU Econ Forecasting & Analysis (FL) ASSOCIATE INVESTIGATOR: Jaeger, John M. UFL Geological Sciences (FL) Harris, M. Scott CofC Geology & Env Geosciences (SC) Corbett, R. Reide ECU Geological Sciences (NC) Kriesel, Warren P. UGA Agric & Appl d Economics (GA) Kruse, Jamie B. ECU Economics (NC) REVISION DATE: 5/29/2015 INITIATION DATE: 2/1/2016 COMPLETION DATE: 1/31/2018 EFFORT 2.37 months 1.8 months EFFORT 1.0 months 2.4 months EFFORT 1.5 months 1.0 months 0.6 months SEA GRANT FUNDS: $446,543 MATCHING FUNDS: $133,474 OBJECTIVES: The primary objective is to provide an enhanced decision-making framework allowing communities to better identify vulnerabilities, consider adaptation options, and assess the viability of those options to address immediate and long-term physical and economic change in coastal communities. METHODOLOGY: The research team will partner with OCM NOAA using Digital Coast as the base platform and adding finer resolution physical and economic attributes as overlays from local sources. The approach will allow more accurate assessment of property loss due to climate-related change. Working with Sea Grant Climate Specialists, the research team will present information to the communities where options will be identified. The research team will then assess the impact for preferred interventions and cost avoidance with corrective action. RATIONALE: The South Atlantic coast is highly vulnerable to shoreline change, inundation and coastal storms. Climate change and development pressure are increasing human and economic exposure. Still, there remains a disconnect between the growing scientific body of knowledge and public perception. Localizing those impacts particularly in terms of economic and fiscal effects at appropriate resolution will lead to increased public awareness and promote necessary action to improve coastal resiliency. IMPACTS: The primary benefit of the project is to increase public awareness of the vulnerabilities of climate-related change in coastal communities and to provide a decision-making framework to help them assess alternatives. The project complements existing programs at both OCM and the four South Atlantic Sea Grant programs, is cost effective and is designed to be replicable in other coastal locations.

3

4 U S Department of Commerce - National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration - NOAA Sea Grant OMB No SEA GRANT BUDGET FORM 90-4 Form Approved Expiration Date 07/31/2011 The information required on this form is required to obtain federal grant funds and will be used to Complete a budget sheet for each year of the project. Also, complete a total budget if multi-year project. determine the cost of each project and the allowability of matching funds. Cumulative Budget 0 Grantee Institution: Clemson Grant/Project Number: 0 Grant budget period: 02/01/ /31/ Principal Investigator: London Duration / Months: 24 No. of Man A. Salaries and Wages: People Months SEA GRANT FUNDS MATCHING FUNDS 1. Senior Personnel: a. (Co) Principal Investigator ,505 0 b. Associates (Faculty or Staff) Sub total , Other Personnel: a. Professionals b. Research Associates c. Research Asst./Grad. Students ,820 0 d. Prof. School Students e. Pre-Bach Students f. Secretarial-Clerical g. Technical-Shop h. Other Total Salaries and Wages ,325 0 B. Fringe Benefits (when charged as direct cost) 5,595 0 Total Salaries, Wages, and Fringe Benefits (A and B) 49,920 0 C. Permanent Equipment 0 0 D. Expendable Supplies and Equipment 0 0 E. Travel: 1. Domestic - US and its Possessions (Inc. Puerto Rico) 13, International 0 0 Travel - Total 13,285 0 F. Publications and Documentation Cost 0 0 G. Other Costs: 1. Computer Costs Consultants Copying, Library, and Communication Analytical and Shop Services Fuel, Boat time, Vehicle Usage, Space Rental Tuition / Stipend 17, Subcontract - Other Institutions 363,462 50, Workshop Cost 2, Total Other Costs 383,338 50,622 Total Direct Costs (A through G) 446,543 50,622 Modified Total Direct Cost 65,705 0 Indirect Costs: S.G. % Match % Sea Grant Funds / Grantee Match On Campus % of MTDC 0.00% 50.00% 0 82,852 Sea Grant Funds / Grantee Match Off Campus % of MTDC 0.00% 0.00% 0 Other IDC, Explain in budget justification 0.00% 0.00% 0 0 Total Indirect Costs 0 82,852 Total Costs 446, ,474

5 U S Department of Commerce - National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration - NOAA Sea Grant OMB No SEA GRANT BUDGET FORM 90-4 Form Approved Complete a budget sheet for each year of the project. The information required on this form is required to obtain federal grant funds and will be used to determine the cost of each project and the allowability of matching funds. Budget Year 1 Grantee Institution: Clemson Grant/Project Number: Grant budget period: 02/01/ /31/2017 Also, complete a total budget if multi-year project. Principal Investigator: London Duration / Months: 12 No. of Man A. Salaries and Wages: People Months SEA GRANT FUNDS MATCHING FUNDS 1. Senior Personnel: a. (Co) Principal Investigator ,270 0 b. Associates (Faculty or Staff) Sub total , Other Personnel: a. Professionals b. Research Associates c. Research Asst./Grad. Students ,740 d. Prof. School Students e. Pre-Bach Students f. Secretarial-Clerical g. Technical-Shop h. Other Total Salaries and Wages ,010 0 B. Fringe Benefits (when charged as direct cost) 1,257 Total Salaries, Wages, and Fringe Benefits (A and B) 13,267 0 C. Permanent Equipment D. Expendable Supplies and Equipment E. Travel: 1. Domestic - US and its Possessions (Inc. Puerto Rico) 8, International Travel - Total 8,765 0 F. Publications and Documentation Cost G. Other Costs: 1. Computer Costs 2. Consultants 3. Copying, Library, and Communication 4. Analytical and Shop Services 5. Fuel, Boat time, Vehicle Usage, Space Rental 6. Tuition / Stipend 6, Subcontract - Other Institutions 193,049 27, Workshop Cost 2, Total Other Costs 202,207 27,892 Total Direct Costs (A through G) 224,239 27,892 Modified Total Direct Cost 124,532 0 Indirect Costs: S.G. % Match % Sea Grant Funds / Grantee Match On Campus % of MTDC 50.00% 0 62,266 Sea Grant Funds / Grantee Match Off Campus % of MTDC 0 0 Other IDC, Explain in budget justification 0 0 Total Indirect Costs 0 62,266 Total Costs 224,239 90,158

6 U S Department of Commerce - National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration - NOAA Sea Grant OMB No SEA GRANT BUDGET FORM 90-4 Form Approved Expiration Date 07/31/2011 The information required on this form is required to obtain federal grant funds and will be used to Complete a budget sheet for each year of the project. Also, complete a total budget if multi-year project. determine the cost of each project and the allowability of matching funds. Budget Year 2 0 Grantee Institution: Clemson Grant/Project Number: 0 Grant budget period: 02/01/ /31/ Principal Investigator: London Duration / Months: 12 No. of Man A. Salaries and Wages: People Months SEA GRANT FUNDS MATCHING FUNDS 1. Senior Personnel: a. (Co) Principal Investigator ,235 0 b. Associates (Faculty or Staff) Sub total , Other Personnel: a. Professionals b. Research Associates c. Research Asst./Grad. Students 10,080 d. Prof. School Students e. Pre-Bach Students f. Secretarial-Clerical g. Technical-Shop h. Other Total Salaries and Wages ,315 0 B. Fringe Benefits (when charged as direct cost) 4,338 Total Salaries, Wages, and Fringe Benefits (A and B) 36,653 0 C. Permanent Equipment D. Expendable Supplies and Equipment E. Travel: 1. Domestic - US and its Possessions (Inc. Puerto Rico) 4, International Travel - Total 4,520 0 F. Publications and Documentation Cost G. Other Costs: 1. Computer Costs 2. Consultants 3. Copying, Library, and Communication 4. Analytical and Shop Services 5. Fuel, Boat time, Vehicle Usage, Space Rental 6. Tuition / Stipend 10, Subcontract - Other Institutions 170,413 22, Workshop Cost 9. Total Other Costs 181,131 22,730 Total Direct Costs (A through G) 222,304 22,730 Modified Total Direct Cost 41,173 0 Indirect Costs: S.G. % Match % Sea Grant Funds / Grantee Match On Campus % of MTDC 50.00% 0 20,586 Sea Grant Funds / Grantee Match Off Campus % of MTDC 0 0 Other IDC, Explain in budget justification 0 0 Total Indirect Costs 0 20,586 Total Costs 222,304 43,316

7 SEA GRANT BUDGET FORM 90-4 OMB Control No Expiration Date 10/31/2001 GRANTEE: GRANT/PROJECT NO.: College of Charleston PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: YEAR ONE M. Scott Harris, Ph.D. 2/16/2016 DURATION (months): 12 SALARIES AND WAGES man-months Sea Grant Matching No. of Amount Funds Funds 1. Senior Personnel People of Effort a. (Co) Principal Investigator: 1 1 $ 8, b. Associates (Faculty or Staff) Sub Total: $ 8, $0 2. Other Personnel a. Professionals: b. Research Associates c. Res. Asst./Grad/ Students: d. Prof. School Students: e. Pre-Bachelor Student(s): 3 8 $ 16, f. Secretarial-Clerical g. Technicians: h. Other: Total Salaries and Wages: $ 25, $0 B. FRINGE BENEFITS (rates): FacSum= StuSum= 9% $ 3, $0 Total Personnel (A and B): $ 28, $0 C. PERMANENT EQUIPMENT: 0 0 D. EXPENDABLE SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT; $ E. TRAVEL: 1. Domestic International 0 0 Total Travel: $0 $0 F. PUBLICATION AND DOCUMENTATION COSTS: 0 0 G. OTHER COSTS: 1. GIS Use Fee $2500/yea q $ 2, Total Other Costs: $2,500 $0 TOTAL DIRECT COST (A through G): $31,287 $0 INDIRECT COSTS (On campus) Rate: 47.86% $0 $7,822 INDIRECT COSTS (Off campus) Rate: 0% $0 $0 Total Indirect Cost: $0 $7,822 TOTAL COSTS: $31,287 $7,822

8 SEA GRANT BUDGET FORM 90-4 OMB Control No Expiration Date 10/31/2001 GRANTEE: GRANT/PROJECT NO.: College of Charleston PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: YEAR TWO M. Scott Harris, Ph.D. 2/16/2017 DURATION (months): 12 SALARIES AND WAGES man-months Sea Grant Matching No. of Amount Funds Funds 1. Senior Personnel People of Effort a. (Co) Principal Investigator: $ 4, b. Associates (Faculty or Staff) Sub Total: $ 4, $0 2. Other Personnel a. Professionals: b. Research Associates c. Res. Asst./Grad/ Students: d. Prof. School Students: e. Pre-Bachelor Student(s): 1 2 $ 4, f. Secretarial-Clerical g. Technicians: h. Other: Total Salaries and Wages: $8,567 $0 B. FRINGE BENEFITS (rates): FacSum= 24.5% StuSum= 9% $1,448 $0 Total Personnel (A and B): $10,015 $0 C. PERMANENT EQUIPMENT: 0 0 D. EXPENDABLE SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT; 0 0 E. TRAVEL: 1. Domestic International 0 0 Total Travel: $0 $0 F. PUBLICATION AND DOCUMENTATION COSTS: 0 G. OTHER COSTS: 1. GIS Use Total Other Costs: $500 $2,000 TOTAL DIRECT COST (A through G): $10,515 $2,000 INDIRECT COSTS (On campus) Rate: 47.9% 0.0% $ INDIRECT COSTS (Off campus) Rate: Total Indirect Cost: $0 $629 TOTAL COSTS: $10,515 $2,629

9 SEA GRANT BUDGET FORM 90-4 OMB Control No Expiration Date 10/31/2001 GRANTEE: GRANT/PROJECT NO.: College of Charleston PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: TOTAL PROJECT M. Scott Harris, Ph.D. 02/01/ /31/2018 DURATION (months): 24 SALARIES AND WAGES man-months Sea Grant Matching No. of Amount Funds Funds 1. Senior Personnel People of Effort a. (Co) Principal Investigator: $12,600 $0 b. Associates (Faculty or Staff) $0 $0 Sub Total: $12,600 $0 2. Other Personnel a. Professionals: $0 $0 b. Research Associates $0 $0 c. Res. Asst./Grad/ Students: $0 $0 d. Prof. School Students: $0 $0 e. Pre-Bachelor Student(s): 4 10 $21,000 $0 f. Secretarial-Clerical $0 $0 g. Technicians: $0 $0 h. Other: $0 $0 Total Salaries and Wages: $33,600 $0 B. FRINGE BENEFITS: FacSum= 25% StuSum= 9% $4,977 $0 Total Personnel (A and B): $38,577 $0 C. PERMANENT EQUIPMENT: $0 $0 D. EXPENDABLE SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT (hard drives); $225 $0 E. TRAVEL: 1. Domestic $0 $0 2. International $0 $0 Total Travel: $0 $0 F. PUBLICATION AND DOCUMENTATION COSTS (VIMS Pub. Center): $0 $0 G. OTHER COSTS: 1. GIS Use Fee $2500/year $2500 Y1; $500 Y2 $3,000 $2, $0 $0 3. $0 $0 4. $0 $0 5. $0 $0 6. $0 $0 Total Other Costs: $3,000 $2,000 TOTAL DIRECT COST (A through G): $41,802 $2,000 INDIRECT COSTS (On campus) $0 $8,450 INDIRECT COSTS (Off campus) $0 $0 Total Indirect Cost: Rate: 47.86% $0 $8,450 TOTAL COSTS: $41,802 $10,450

10 U S Department of Commerce - National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration - NOAA Sea Grant OMB No SEA GRANT BUDGET FORM 90-4 Form Approved Expiration Date 07/31/2011 The information required on this form is required to obtain federal grant funds and will be used to Complete a budget sheet for each year of the project. Also, complete a total budget if multi-year project. determine the cost of each project and the allowability of matching funds. Cumulative Budget 0 Grantee Institution: East Carolina University Grant/Project Number: 0 Grant budget period: 02/01/ /31/ Principal Investigator: JP Walsh Duration / Months: 24 No. of Man A. Salaries and Wages: People Months SEA GRANT FUNDS MATCHING FUNDS 1. Senior Personnel: a. (Co) Principal Investigator ,628 4,314 b. Associates (Faculty or Staff) ,198 9,502 Sub total ,826 13, Other Personnel: a. Professionals b. Research Associates c. Research Asst./Grad. Students ,000 0 d. Prof. School Students e. Pre-Bach Students f. Secretarial-Clerical g. Technical-Shop h. Other Total Salaries and Wages ,826 13,816 B. Fringe Benefits (when charged as direct cost) 7,190 4,023 Total Salaries, Wages, and Fringe Benefits (A and B) 58,016 17,839 C. Permanent Equipment 0 0 D. Expendable Supplies and Equipment 2,000 0 E. Travel: 1. Domestic - US and its Possessions (Inc. Puerto Rico) 5, International 0 0 Travel - Total 5,000 0 F. Publications and Documentation Cost 0 0 G. Other Costs: 1. Computer Costs Consultants Copying, Library, and Communication Analytical and Shop Services Fuel, Boat time, Vehicle Usage, Space Rental Tuition / Stipend 3, Subcontract - Other Institutions Workshop Cost Total Other Costs 3,000 0 Total Direct Costs (A through G) 68,016 17,839 Modified Total Direct Cost 65,016 17,839 Indirect Costs: S.G. % Match % Sea Grant Funds / Grantee Match On Campus % of MTDC 47.50% 0.00% 0.00% 30,882 8,473 Sea Grant Funds / Grantee Match Off Campus % of MTDC 0.00% 0.00% 0 0 Other IDC, Explain in budget justification 0.00% 0.00% 0 0 Total Indirect Costs 30,882 8,473 Total Costs 98,898 26,312

11 U S Department of Commerce - National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration - NOAA Sea Grant OMB No SEA GRANT BUDGET FORM 90-4 Form Approved Complete a budget sheet for each year of the project. The information required on this form is required to obtain federal grant funds and will be used to determine the cost of each project and the allowability of matching funds. Budget Year 1 Grantee Institution: East Carolina University Grant/Project Number: Grant budget period: 02/01/ /31/2017 Also, complete a total budget if multi-year project. Principal Investigator: JP Walsh Duration / Months: 12 No. of Man A. Salaries and Wages: People Months SEA GRANT FUNDS MATCHING FUNDS 1. Senior Personnel: a. (Co) Principal Investigator ,314 2,157 b. Associates (Faculty or Staff) ,099 4,751 Sub total ,413 6, Other Personnel: a. Professionals b. Research Associates c. Research Asst./Grad. Students ,000 d. Prof. School Students e. Pre-Bach Students f. Secretarial-Clerical g. Technical-Shop h. Other Total Salaries and Wages ,413 6,908 B. Fringe Benefits (when charged as direct cost) 3,572 1,994 Total Salaries, Wages, and Fringe Benefits (A and B) 28,985 8,902 C. Permanent Equipment D. Expendable Supplies and Equipment 1,000 E. Travel: 1. Domestic - US and its Possessions (Inc. Puerto Rico) 1, International Travel - Total 1,500 0 F. Publications and Documentation Cost G. Other Costs: 1. Computer Costs 2. Consultants 3. Copying, Library, and Communication 4. Analytical and Shop Services 5. Fuel, Boat time, Vehicle Usage, Space Rental 6. Tuition / Stipend 3, Subcontract - Other Institutions 8. Workshop Cost 9. Total Other Costs 3,000 0 Total Direct Costs (A through G) 34,485 8,902 Modified Total Direct Cost 31,485 8,902 Indirect Costs: S.G. % Match % Sea Grant Funds / Grantee Match On Campus % of MTDC 47.50% 14,955 4,228 Sea Grant Funds / Grantee Match Off Campus % of MTDC 0 0 Other IDC, Explain in budget justification 0 0 Total Indirect Costs 14,955 4,228 Total Costs 49,440 13,130

12 U S Department of Commerce - National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration - NOAA Sea Grant OMB No SEA GRANT BUDGET FORM 90-4 Form Approved Expiration Date 07/31/2011 The information required on this form is required to obtain federal grant funds and will be used to Complete a budget sheet for each year of the project. Also, complete a total budget if multi-year project. determine the cost of each project and the allowability of matching funds. Budget Year 2 0 Grantee Institution: East Carolina University Grant/Project Number: 0 Grant budget period: 02/01/ /31/ Principal Investigator: JP Walsh Duration / Months: 12 No. of Man A. Salaries and Wages: People Months SEA GRANT FUNDS MATCHING FUNDS 1. Senior Personnel: a. (Co) Principal Investigator ,314 2,157 b. Associates (Faculty or Staff) ,099 4,751 Sub total ,413 6, Other Personnel: a. Professionals b. Research Associates c. Research Asst./Grad. Students ,000 d. Prof. School Students e. Pre-Bach Students f. Secretarial-Clerical g. Technical-Shop h. Other Total Salaries and Wages ,413 6,908 B. Fringe Benefits (when charged as direct cost) 3,618 2,029 Total Salaries, Wages, and Fringe Benefits (A and B) 29,031 8,937 C. Permanent Equipment D. Expendable Supplies and Equipment 1,000 E. Travel: 1. Domestic - US and its Possessions (Inc. Puerto Rico) 3, International Travel - Total 3,500 0 F. Publications and Documentation Cost G. Other Costs: 1. Computer Costs 2. Consultants 3. Copying, Library, and Communication 4. Analytical and Shop Services 5. Fuel, Boat time, Vehicle Usage, Space Rental 6. Tuition / Stipend 7. Subcontract - Other Institutions 8. Workshop Cost 9. Total Other Costs 0 0 Total Direct Costs (A through G) 33,531 8,937 Modified Total Direct Cost 33,531 8,937 Indirect Costs: S.G. % Match % Sea Grant Funds / Grantee Match On Campus % of MTDC 15,927 4,245 Sea Grant Funds / Grantee Match Off Campus % of MTDC 0 0 Other IDC, Explain in budget justification 0 0 Total Indirect Costs 15,927 4,245 Total Costs 49,458 13,182

13 U S Department of Commerce - National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration - NOAA Sea Grant OMB No SEA GRANT BUDGET FORM 90-4 Form Approved Complete a budget sheet for each year of the project. The information required on this form is required to obtain federal grant funds and will be used to determine the cost of each project and the allowability of matching funds. Budget Year 1 Grantee Institution: Florida State University Grant/Project Number: Also, complete a total budget if multi-year project. Grant budget period: January 1, December 31, 2017 Principal Investigator: Julie Harrington Duration / Months: 12 No. of Man/Woman A. Salaries and Wages: People Months SEA GRANT FUNDS MATCHING FUNDS 1. Senior Personnel: a. (Co) Principal Investigator ,285 b. Associates (Faculty or Staff) ,108 Sub total , Other Personnel: a. Professionals b. Research Associates c. Research Asst./Grad. Students d. Prof. School Students e. Pre-Bach Students f. Secretarial-Clerical g. Technical-Shop h. Other Total Salaries and Wages ,393 0 B. Fringe Benefits (when charged as direct cost) 2,437 Total Salaries, Wages, and Fringe Benefits (A and B) 15,830 0 C. Permanent Equipment D. Expendable Supplies and Equipment E. Travel: 1. Domestic - US and its Possessions (Inc. Puerto Rico) 4, International Travel - Total 4,183 0 F. Publications and Documentation Cost G. Other Costs: 1. Computer Costs 2. Consultants 3. Copying, Library, and Communication 4. Analytical and Shop Services 5. Fuel, Boat time, Vehicle Usage, Space Rental 2, Tuition / Stipend 7. Subcontract - Other Institutions 17, Workshop Cost 9. Total Other Costs 20,048 0 Total Direct Costs (A through G) 40,061 0 Modified Total Direct Cost 37,703 0 Indirect Costs: S.G. % Match % Sea Grant Funds / Grantee Match On Campus % of MTDC 0 0 Sea Grant Funds / Grantee Match Off Campus % of MTDC 26.00% 9,803 0 Other IDC, Explain in budget justification 0 Total Indirect Costs 9,803 0 Total Costs 49,864 0

14 U S Department of Commerce - National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration - NOAA Sea Grant OMB No SEA GRANT BUDGET FORM 90-4 Form Approved Expiration Date 07/31/2011 The information required on this form is required to obtain federal grant funds and will be used to Complete a budget sheet for each year of the project. Also, complete a total budget if multi-year project. determine the cost of each project and the allowability of matching funds. Budget Year 2 0 Grantee Institution: Florida State University Grant/Project Number: 0 Grant budget period: January 1, December 31, Principal Investigator: Julie Harrington Duration / Months: 12 No. of Man/Woman A. Salaries and Wages: People Months SEA GRANT FUNDS MATCHING FUNDS 1. Senior Personnel: a. (Co) Principal Investigator ,594 b. Associates (Faculty or Staff) ,201 Sub total , Other Personnel: a. Professionals b. Research Associates c. Research Asst./Grad. Students d. Prof. School Students e. Pre-Bach Students f. Secretarial-Clerical g. Technical-Shop h. Other Total Salaries and Wages ,795 0 B. Fringe Benefits (when charged as direct cost) 2,490 Total Salaries, Wages, and Fringe Benefits (A and B) 16,285 0 C. Permanent Equipment D. Expendable Supplies and Equipment E. Travel: 1. Domestic - US and its Possessions (Inc. Puerto Rico) 4, International Travel - Total 4,183 0 F. Publications and Documentation Cost G. Other Costs: 1. Computer Costs 2. Consultants 3. Copying, Library, and Communication 4. Analytical and Shop Services 5. Fuel, Boat time, Vehicle Usage, Space Rental 2, Tuition / Stipend 7. Subcontract - Other Institutions 18, Workshop Cost 9. Total Other Costs 20,483 0 Total Direct Costs (A through G) 40,951 0 Modified Total Direct Cost 27,778 0 Indirect Costs: S.G. % Match % Sea Grant Funds / Grantee Match On Campus % of MTDC 0 0 Sea Grant Funds / Grantee Match Off Campus % of MTDC 26.00% 7,222 0 Other IDC, Explain in budget justification 0 Total Indirect Costs 7,222 0 Total Costs 48,173 0

15 U S Department of Commerce - National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration - NOAA Sea Grant OMB No SEA GRANT BUDGET FORM 90-4 Form Approved Expiration Date 07/31/2011 The information required on this form is required to obtain federal grant funds and will be used to Complete a budget sheet for each year of the project. Also, complete a total budget if multi-year project. determine the cost of each project and the allowability of matching funds. Cumulative Budget 0 Grantee Institution: Florida State University Grant/Project Number: 0 Grant budget period: January 1, December 31, Principal Investigator: Julie Harrington Duration / Months: 24 No. of Man/Woman A. Salaries and Wages: People Months SEA GRANT FUNDS MATCHING FUNDS 1. Senior Personnel: a. (Co) Principal Investigator ,879 0 b. Associates (Faculty or Staff) ,309 0 Sub total , Other Personnel: a. Professionals b. Research Associates c. Research Asst./Grad. Students d. Prof. School Students e. Pre-Bach Students f. Secretarial-Clerical g. Technical-Shop h. Other Total Salaries and Wages ,188 0 B. Fringe Benefits (when charged as direct cost) 4,927 0 Total Salaries, Wages, and Fringe Benefits (A and B) 32,115 0 C. Permanent Equipment 0 0 D. Expendable Supplies and Equipment 0 0 E. Travel: 1. Domestic - US and its Possessions (Inc. Puerto Rico) 8, International 0 0 Travel - Total 8,366 0 F. Publications and Documentation Cost 0 0 G. Other Costs: 1. Computer Costs Consultants Copying, Library, and Communication Analytical and Shop Services Fuel, Boat time, Vehicle Usage, Space Rental 4, Tuition / Stipend Subcontract - Other Institutions 35, Workshop Cost Total Other Costs 40,531 0 Total Direct Costs (A through G) 81,012 0 Modified Total Direct Cost 65,481 0 Indirect Costs: S.G. % Match % Sea Grant Funds / Grantee Match On Campus % of MTDC 0.00% 0.00% 0 0 Sea Grant Funds / Grantee Match Off Campus % of MTDC 26.00% 0.00% 17,025 0 Other IDC, Explain in budget justification 0.00% 0 0 Total Indirect Costs 17,025 0 Total Costs 98,037 0

16 GRANTEE: SUBPROGRAM: PROJECT TITLE: SEA GRANT BUDGET FORM 90-4 UGA-Skidaway Institute of Oceanography Adapted from OMB Control No Expiration Date 08/31/2008 Assessing Local Impacts to Enhance Community Resiliency along the South Atlantic Coast PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Dr. Clark R. Alexander Start Date: End Date: PROJECT NUMBER: GRANT NUMBER: 1-Feb Jan-2017 No. Months Sea Grant $ Grantee $ A. SALARIES AND WAGES 1. Senior Personnel a. C.R. Alexander, GA PI ,866 b. W. Kriesel, co-pi ,250 Sub Total: , Other Personnel a. Professionals: b. Research Associates: c. Res. Asst./Grad. Students: ,667 d. Prof. School Students: e. Pre-Bachelor Students: f. Secretarial-Clerical: g. Technicians: ,500 h. Other: Database Manager Total Salaries and Wages: 35,282 B. FRINGE BENEFITS (When charged as direct cost): 7,868 Total Personnel (A and B): 43,150 C. PERMANENT EQUIPMENT: D. EXPENDABLE SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT: 1,000 E. TRAVEL 1. Domestic U.S. 2, International Total Travel: 2,226 F. PUBLICATION AND DOCUMENTATION COSTS: G. OTHER COSTS Total Other Costs: H. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS (A through G): 46,376 I. INDIRECT COST On Campus 35.0% of MTDC 50% Match 16,232 INDIRECT COST Waived 15.0% of MTDC 6,956 Total Indirect Cost: 16,232 6,956 J. TOTAL COSTS: 62,608 6,956 P/AD-1

17 GRANTEE: SUBPROGRAM: PROJECT TITLE: SEA GRANT BUDGET FORM 90-4 UGA-Skidaway Institute of Oceanography Adapted from OMB Control No Expiration Date 08/31/2008 Assessing Local Impacts to Enhance Community Resiliency along the South Atlantic Coast PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Dr. Clark R. Alexander Start Date: End Date: PROJECT NUMBER: GRANT NUMBER: 1-Feb Jan-2018 No. Months Sea Grant $ Grantee $ A. SALARIES AND WAGES 1. Senior Personnel a. C.R. Alexander, GA PI ,082 b. W. Kriesel. Co-PI ,250 Sub Total: , Other Personnel a. Professionals: b. Research Associates: c. Res. Asst./Grad. Students: ,933 d. Prof. School Students: e. Pre-Bachelor Students: f. Secretarial-Clerical: g. Technicians: ,550 h. Other: Database Manager Total Salaries and Wages: 32,815 B. FRINGE BENEFITS (When charged as direct cost): 7,966 Total Personnel (A and B): 40,782 C. PERMANENT EQUIPMENT: D. EXPENDABLE SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT: 2,000 E. TRAVEL 1. Domestic U.S. 3, International Total Travel: 3,476 F. PUBLICATION AND DOCUMENTATION COSTS: G. OTHER COSTS Total Other Costs: H. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS (A through G): 46,258 I. INDIRECT COST On Campus 35.0% of MTDC 50% Match 16,190 INDIRECT COST Waived 15.0% of MTDC 6,939 Total Indirect Cost: 16,190 6,939 J. TOTAL COSTS: 62,448 6,939 P/AD-1

18 GRANTEE: SUBPROGRAM: PROJECT TITLE: SEA GRANT BUDGET FORM 90-4 UGA-Skidaway Institute of Oceanography Adapted from OMB Control No Expiration Date 08/31/2008 Assessing Local Impacts to Enhance Community Resiliency along the South Atlantic Coast PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Dr. Clark R. Alexander Start Date: End Date: PROJECT NUMBER: GRANT NUMBER: 1-Feb Jan-2018 No. Months Sea Grant $ Grantee $ A. SALARIES AND WAGES 1. Senior Personnel a. C.R. Alexander,GA PI ,948 b. W. Kriesel, co-pi ,500 Sub Total: , Other Personnel a. Professionals: b. Research Associates: c. Res. Asst./Grad. Students: ,600 d. Prof. School Students: e. Pre-Bachelor Students: f. Secretarial-Clerical: g. Technicians: ,050 h. Other: Database Manager Total Salaries and Wages: 68,098 B. FRINGE BENEFITS (When charged as direct cost): 15,834 Total Personnel (A and B): 83,932 C. PERMANENT EQUIPMENT: D. EXPENDABLE SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT: 3,000 E. TRAVEL 1. Domestic U.S. 5, International Total Travel: 5,702 F. PUBLICATION AND DOCUMENTATION COSTS: G. OTHER COSTS Total Other Costs: H. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS (A through G): 92,634 I. INDIRECT COST On Campus 35.0% of MTDC 50% Match 32,422 INDIRECT COST Waived 15.0% of MTDC 13,895 Total Indirect Cost: 32,422 13,895 J. TOTAL COSTS: 125,056 13,895 P/AD-1

19 University of Georgia Skidaway Institute of Oceanography Budget Justification (Year 1) Salaries and Wages: $35,282 Senior Personnel: $11,116 Lead Georgia PI Alexander requests 0.8 months summer salary to work with Project PI London to coordinate the participants in this regional effort. Alexander will be responsible for working with and coordinating the state physical process co-pis (Jaeger in FL, Harris in SC, Walsh and Corbett in NC), and for fostering the progress of the individual state cooperating partners, both during project and methodology development, data synthesis and outreach activities. He will also be responsible for gathering, synthesizing and providing to London materials to satisfy the reporting requirements of the grant. Co-PI Kriesel requests 0.3 m summer salary to conduct economic valuation and cost-benefit analysis for the project, and to supervise a Masters student who will work on this project for their thesis. Other Personnel: $24,167 Limited support (2.5 m) is requested for a GIS specialist (M. Robinson) to compile GIS datasets for Georgia and to integrate the results from cooperating partners in other states as they become available. In addition, Robinson will provide GIS support for map production required for outreach sessions with our target communities. Robinson has worked for the past 8 years providing GIS services for Alexander, is extensively experienced in modeling sea level rise, and has an intimate knowledge of available Georgia datasets pertinent to coastal hazards research. Eleven months support for a Masters level student to work under Kriesel is also requested at an annual salary of $16,000. Fringe Benefits: $7,868 For budgeting purposes at the University of Georgia, fringe benefits are estimated based on annual salary and student status. A 30% rate is applicable to both faculty salaries (>$75,000 per year), a 40% rate is applicable to technician salaries between $35,000- $50,000 (as is the case here) and a 5% rate is applicable to all student stipends. Actual fringe benefit rates for each individual will be applied should this project be funded. Equipment: none Travel: $2,226 Travel funds ($1381 to Alexander and $845 to Kriesel) are requested to support two trips by each PI to coordinate with collaborators at a kick-off meeting in Charleston (Alexander 1 day per $38/254 miles@$0.55 per mile/no hotel; Kriesel 2 day per miles@$0.55 per mile/1 night hotel@$100) and a mid-year status

20 meeting in Savannah (No travel costs for Alexander, who is based in Savannah; Kriesel 2 days per diem@$27/426 miles@$0.55 per mile/1 night hotel@$100). Alexander will receive roughly two-thirds of these funds given his additional need to travel to coordinate and discuss progress with the state physical processes co-pis. In Year 1, he plans to visit co-pis in FL (416 miles@$0.55 per mile/2 days per diem@$38, 1 night hotel@$100), SC (1 day per $38/254 miles@$0.55 per mile/no hotel) and NC (740 miles@$0.55 per mile/2 days per diem@$38 per day/1 night hotel@$100). Supplies: $1,000 Limited material and supply funds ($1000) are requested to provide GIS and computational software and routine upgrades (e.g., ArcGIS site license, additional computer memory, upgraded video card), back-up storage media (i.e., RAID array tapes, portable hard drives for sharing data, archival-quality DVD disks), and color graphics and media for initial community meetings for outreach and education. Other Costs None Indirect Costs: $16,232 The University of Georgia Skidaway Institute of Oceanography s approved indirect cost rate is 50% on Modified Total Direct Costs (Fringe rate letter provided with this proposal). Our indirect cost rate has been lowered for this proposal to meet the Georgia Sea Grant requirement that no more than 35% of the total Federal request be indirect costs. Unrecovered overhead (15% MTDC; $6,956) is provided as match in this proposal.

21 University of Georgia Skidaway Institute of Oceanography Budget Justification (Year 2) Salaries and Wages: $32,815 Senior Personnel: $13,332 Lead Georgia PI Alexander requests 1.0 months summer salary to work with Project PI London to coordinate the participants in this regional effort. Alexander will be responsible for working with and coordinating the state physical process co-pis (Jaeger in FL, Harris in SC, Walsh and Corbett in NC), and for fostering the progress of the individual state cooperating partners, both during project and methodology development, data synthesis and outreach activities. He will also participate in the community outreach sessions, and be responsible for gathering, synthesizing and providing to London materials to satisfy the reporting requirements of the grant. Co-PI Kriesel requests 0.3 m summer salary to conduct economic valuation and cost-benefit analysis for the project, and to supervise a Masters student who will work on this project for their thesis. Other Personnel: $19,483 Limited support (2.25 m) is requested for a GIS specialist (M. Robinson) to compile GIS datasets for Georgia and to integrate the results from cooperating partners in other states as they become available. In addition, Robinson will provide GIS support for map production required for outreach sessions with our target communities. Robinson has worked for the past 8 years providing GIS services for Alexander, is extensively experienced in modeling sea level rise, and has an intimate knowledge of available Georgia datasets pertinent to coastal hazards research. We also request 8.2 months of support for a Masters level student to work under Kriesel is also requested at an annual salary of $16,000. Fringe Benefits: $7,966 For budgeting purposes at the University of Georgia, fringe benefits are estimated based on annual salary and student status. A 30% rate is applicable to both faculty salaries (>$75,000 per year), a 40% rate is applicable to technician salaries between $35,000- $50,000 (as is the case here) and a 5% rate is applicable to all student stipends. Actual fringe benefit rates for each individual will be applied should this project be funded. Equipment: none Travel: $3,476 Travel funds ($1260 to Alexander, $400 to Kriesel and $1816 for Georgia Sea Grant) are requested to support travel to group planning meetings and community meetings with Tybee. Alexander will attend a program planning meeting with NOAA in Charleston (Alexander 1 day per $38/254 miles@$0.55 per mile/no hotel) and a planning

22 meeting in Athens with Sea Grant and co-pi Kriesel (Alexander 2 days per $27/436 miles@$0.55 per mile/1 night hotel@$106). Alexander and Sea Grant staff will hold several community meetings on Tybee Island (per diem $27 a per mile for Sea Grant staff). Kriesel will attend the first Community meeting (per diem $27 a per mile). Further, several meetings are planned to be held on the Georgia coast to disseminate results from this research to other municipalities (per diem $27 a day/hotel@$106/426 miles@0.55 per mile for Sea Grant staff; Alexander per diem $27 a day/hotel@$106/200 miles@0.55 per mile). Supplies: $2,000 Limited material and supply funds ($1,000 to Alexander) are requested to provide GIS and computational software and routine upgrades (e.g., ArcGIS site license, additional computer memory, upgraded video card), back-up storage media (i.e., RAID array tapes, portable hard drives for sharing data, archival-quality DVD disks) and color graphics and media for community meetings for outreach and education. As instructed in the RFP, an additional $1000 in supply money is requested to support creation and publication of materials by Georgia Sea Grant staff for outreach and extension events. Other Costs None Indirect Costs: $16,190 The University of Georgia Skidaway Institute of Oceanography s approved indirect cost rate is 50% on Modified Total Direct Costs (Fringe rate letter provided with this proposal). Our indirect cost rate has been lowered for this proposal to meet the Georgia Sea Grant requirement that no more than 35% of the total Federal request be indirect costs. Unrecovered overhead (15% MTDC; $6,939) is provided as match in this proposal.

23 Budget Justification Clemson University A. Salary: A.1.a. Principal Investigator Rate - $11,250/month A.2.c. Graduate Students - $12/hour 15 hours/week * 13 weeks/semester (3 semesters) $12/hour * 37.5 hours * 12 weeks in summer (2 summers) B. Fringe Benefit Rates: Temporary Faculty 16.62% Graduate Students 7.3% E. Travel: PI Year 1 Travel to Charleston (3) + Charleston/Skidaway (1) Mileage 1410 Lodging/Meals 10 $125, 10 $25 PI Year 2 Travel to Charleston (4) Mileage 1160 Lodging/Meals 7 $125, 7 $25 Grad Student Year 1 1 additional trip to Charleston w/out PI Mileage 580 Lodging Meals 12 $125, 12 $25 (less if student & PI are same sex) Grad Student Year 2 Lodging Meals 7 $125, 7 $25 (less if student & PI are same sex) Sea Grant Staff travel to be covered in grant Year 1 Includes travel for help cover cost of travel to Charleston for initial meeting and Skidaway for meeting at end of year 1 - $2345. Year 2 Travel to Folly Beach meetings for Charleston based Sea Grant Coastal Society biennial meeting. Partial funding for PI and Graduate Student to present early findings. G.6. Tuition/Stipend Required Graduate Tuition Differential Fees: Per Semester - $3,728 (2), $3,914 (1) Summer - $2,930 (1), $3,076 (1) G.7 Subcontract Other Institutions Because this is a regional project PIs at Florida State University, the University of Georgia, and East Carolina University will coordinate activities in those states. The research team will coordinate in terms of methodology. Case studies will be developed in each state working with Sea Grant staff. A maximum of $100,000 for the two year study per state is allocated to the lead PI in each state with an additional $25,000 to Clark Alexander at the University of Georgia who serves as project co-pi. An additional subcontract to the College of Charleston is to the Department of Geology & Environmental Sciences for assistance on the modeling activity totaling $41,802. G.8. Workshop Cost $2500 allocated for training by NOAA OCM staff on Digital Coast program. Allocated to help defray costs for other project team members.

24

25 Budget Justification College of Charleston M. Scott Harris, Ph.D. Assessment of Physical Change working group, South Carolina Personnel One month of summer salary based on his for Harris in year one will allow for supervision of the physical data identification, collection, compilation, and analysis using the Hazard Vulnerability Assessment tools. In year two, two weeks of summer salary for Harris will allow for coordination with the Economic team and those involved with Community Engagement. Harris will be assisted by three students in year one who will work on (1) data consistency and spatial verification; (2) data integration and analysis; and (3) hazard vulnerability assessment. The students will be paid at a rate of $15 per hour for 35 hours a week, for four weeks. In year two, one undergraduate will assist in the final product generation. Fringe Benefits The institutional rate of 24.5% for summer salary (Harris) and the undergraduate summer fringe rate of 9% will be applied both years of the project. Expendable Supplies and Equipment Expendable equipment requested for year one includes data drives for transfer of final data, analyses, and documents to the economic team. Other Costs Our in-house GIS use fee is $2500/year for GIS-intensive projects such as this one. The full amount is requested for year one and in year two only $500 is requested, with the remaining $2000 being contributed as part of the required match. Indirect Costs The College of Charleston s federally-negotiated indirect rate is 47.86%. The indirect costs are being contributed as cost share and are reduced to 23.85% in order to fulfill the required 25% match.

26 Budget Justification East Carolina University The budget includes 50% salary support and partial tuition ($3,000) for a Coastal Resources Management doctoral student at East Carolina University each year. This student will focus on the method and effort to quantify physical hazards and the evaluation of economic impacts. A half month of salary is requested for Walsh and Corbett in Year 1 and Year 2.They will help with and oversee efforts of the student and participate in meetings and other interactions with the collaborators and for outreach. Supply funds of $1,000 per year are requested for miscellaneous items such as outreach materials, data storage and computer essentials. Travel funds of $1500 and $3500 in Year 1 and Year 2, respectively are needed for members of the team to participate in project or other meetings; the additional travel funding in Year 2 will support travel for our SeaGrant partner. For Facilities and Administration, the ECU overhead rate is 47.5%

27 BUDGET JUSTIFICATION Florida State University A. Senior Personnel: The PI Harrington s will be at 0.1 FTE effort per month of salary at a rate of $9,970 (including fringe rate at percent) /month to conduct economic data collection and analysis, project management and coordination with project team members from: UF, SC, NC and GA researcher(s), community and Sea Grant staff. A forthcoming 3% salary increase in Year 1 was budgeted. Harrington will be responsible the Year 1 and 2 final report deliverables. There will be one senior researcher staff (with Ph.D.) included at 0.65 FTE effort per month of salary at a rate of $4,856 (including a fringe rate at 1.55 percent 1 )/month to also conduct economic data collection and analysis and to manage the database(s). C. Fringe Benefits: Fringe benefits are calculated at the newly revised rates (as of January 22, 2015) of 16.32% for faculty (PI Julie Harrington). Health Insurance is $296 bi-weekly * 48 months * 0.1 effort/month = $1,420 for two years. The senior researcher has a health insurance plan elsewhere. D. Permanent Equipment: No permanent equipment is requested. E. Rent/Lease: Included is monthly charge of $2,358 for CEFA space with expected use of 1/12 year (or $2,358 * 2 years) = $4,716 for two years. F. Travel: Funds are requested to attend organizational meetings at NOAA in Charleston, SC and at Skidaway Institute of Oceanography in Savannah GA. Funds are requested for a two-day kickoff meeting where all the PIs and state partners would meet to and discuss project goals and a final two-day workshop for all members to discuss project results. Additionally, funds are requested for three one-day in-person meetings within the region per year with Fernandina Beach city planners, and two meetings per year between the UF and Florida State partners to be held in Tallahassee. Funds are requested to cover the cost of the Florida Sea Grant Extension Agent from their office in Tampa FL for travel to case study area. Mileage allowance is $0.445/mile. Hotel estimated at $125/night. Per Diem is $36/day. G. Travel Budget (for PI Harrington) = $5,317 (or $2,659 annually) Travel Budget Harrington Round Trip Number of Total Total Mileage Total Travel Annual Mileage Trips Mileage Cost Hotel Per Diem Budget Travel Cost Tallahassee,FL - Charleston, SC ,608 $716 $750 $72 $1,538 $769 Tallahassee, FL - Skidaway, GA ,216 $541 $750 $72 $1,363 $682 Tallahassee, FL - Fernandina Beach, FL ,438 $1,530 $563 $324 $2,416 $1,208 FSU Travel $5,317 $2,659 Travel Budget (for Sea Grant Coastal Specialist) = $3,050 for two years Travel Budget Thomas Ruppert Round Trip Number of Total Total Total Travel Annual Mileage Trips Mileage Mileage Hotel Per Diem Budget Travel Cost Tampa, FL - Fernandina Beach, FL ,640 2, $360 $3,050 $1,525 Subtotal ,640 2, $360 $3,050 $1,525 SG Travel $3,050 $1,525 H. Indirect Costs: Federally negotiated off-campus indirect cost rates are 26%. Grand Total $8,635 $4,318 1 Base salary is: $4,782.

28 E. PROPOSAL NARRATIVE PROJECT TITLE: Assessing Local Impacts to Enhance Community Resiliency along the South Atlantic Coast INTRODUCTION AND RATIONALE: The South Atlantic coast is characterized by barrier islands, tidal inlets, and a low lying coastal plain making the region particularly vulnerable to shoreline retreat, inundation, and storm damage. Those vulnerabilities are exacerbated by climate change with accelerated sea level rise, changes in ocean currents, increased wave heights, and more intense coastal storms. Add to climate induced changes high rates of development along the region s coastline where the population in oceanfront counties of the four South Atlantic states grew by 140 percent from 1970 to 2010 compared to 52 percent for the country as a whole (US Census of Population). As a result, human and economic exposure to coastal hazards is significant and growing. Hurricane Katrina and Super Storm Sandy helped elevate a national dialogue on those vulnerabilities. Despite the fact that a major hurricane has not hit the region in nine years, public awareness is increasing with more frequent coastal flooding and shoreline retreat. To understand the extent of those vulnerabilities requires accurate and current information. An initial information base in terms of coastal processes and shoreline change emerged by the 1970s largely with Sea Grant projects and consortia compiling historical erosion rates, beach profiles and sediment budgets. At the same time, the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 established a national interest in the effective management, beneficial use, protection, and development of the coastal zone. State and local plans were developed within the CZM framework to address the convergence of dynamic coastal systems and increasing development pressure, and a requirement to address sea level rise was added in the 1990 amendments to the CZMA. Yet, despite the substantially improved information on coastal processes and a targeted management framework, vulnerabilities have continued to increase in recent decades. Worldwide, real estate and infrastructure losses from extreme weather have tripled over the last decade (Bienert 2014). In the U.S., coastal storms accounted for 14 of the 15 highest expenditure events for FEMA from 1996 to 2013 (NRC 2014). Still, there remains a disconnect between the growing scientific body of knowledge particularly in terms of atmospheric and ocean systems and the public perception of risk. More information on impacts on natural systems including the effect of acidification in near shore waters on coral reefs and mollusks is coming forward as well as additional information on habitat loss. Still, what seems to move public perception is the tangible impact of climate change where people live. What is the potential loss due to no action and what is the cost avoidance of taking corrective action? Addressing coastal hazards becomes more immediate when the public and local officials realize that it is in their best interest both economically and fiscally to deal with rather than avoid the issue. Physical Processes Natural System Socio- Economic System Policy Realm

29 A part of the problem lies with the institutional framework in which coastal risk has been couched. While the Federal government has assumed a greater responsibility for coastal protection over the past half century, the bulk of expenditures have been for post-storm recovery. In essence, the approach has been reactive rather than proactive and to some extent discourages state and local governments from taking appropriate actions to reduce risk and enhance resiliency. (NRC 2014) Pressure to address this issue led to the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 that further addressed state conditions for disaster assistance and added a new requirement for local hazard mitigation plans. The just released Presidential Policy Directive 8: National Preparedness (PPD-8), raises the bar with a vision for preparedness as, a secure and resilient Nation with the capabilities required across the whole community to prevent, protect against, mitigate, respond to, and recover from the threats and hazards that pose the greatest risk. With the realization that damages related to coastal hazards are becoming increasingly expensive, the current funding model tilted heavily toward post-disaster recovery without sufficient attention to prevention is not sustainable. Still, communities are becoming more engaged as the 100-year flood seems to occur more often. There has been an increase in the development of vulnerability assessments and adaptation plans with the realization that more of the responsibility for addressing long-term risk will fall locally. The problem is that many of these plans are ad hoc with varying levels of information on which to make informed, longterm decisions. Further while there has been a recent increase in adaptation planning efforts, little has been done from an implementation standpoint. If in fact coastal communities are to assume greater responsibility in addressing both near and long-term vulnerabilities, they need accurate and current information to understand those vulnerabilities under changing climatic conditions, the options they have, and the effectiveness of those various options in preventing loss of life and property. The question then becomes how do we assess vulnerability and weigh options for addressing those vulnerabilities? The assessment of impacts associated with climate change began as an extension of shoreline change modeling incorporating accelerated sea level rise during the late 1980s. Early studies were conducted at Galveston, Ocean City, Sea Bright, Charleston, and Myrtle Beach. Subsequent work using LIDAR elevation data and improved modeling capabilities has allowed applications to larger geographic areas. An early effort to expand to larger regional scale assessments by EPA, Maps of Lands Vulnerable to Sea level Rise, was developed to identify areas along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts that are vulnerable to sea level rise. At a 1.5-meter rise it was estimated that 58,000 square kilometers along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts would be inundated. A later interagency assessment Coastal Sensitivity to Sea Level Rise: A Focus on the Mid-Atlantic Region simulated a one-meter sea level rise across the region running from New York through Virginia. The assessment superimposed digital elevation files with and without sea level rise on land cover data to determine areas of inundation. Population, property and tax information was compiled from census data overlaid on the inundation maps to delineate impacted areas. At NOAA, the development and refinement of the Digital Coast Program provides a rich data base including elevation files, land cover, critical habitat areas, and demographic and economic data sets. Early program development along the Gulf coast allowed for visualization of affected areas under alternate inundation scenarios. The Coastal Resiliency Program developed initially for the south shore of Long Island projected inundation and storm surge to identify areas and populations at risk. The current menudriven iteration of the program including the Sea Level Rise Viewer and Coastal Change Hazards Portal provides a valuable tool for coastal planning with visualization to identify areas of inundation under alternate sea level rise and storm surge conditions. Economic assets include industry and workforce information with particular attention to marine industries. The social vulnerability component includes census data on population and affected communities at tract/block group detail. 2

30 Meanwhile, the economic impact of changed conditions in coastal areas has evolved from the early sea level rise scenarios to more recent state level assessments conducted in California (King, et al. 2008), Florida (Harrington and Walton 2007), and North Carolina (Bin, et al. 2007). The assessments provided broader geographic coverage compiling comparative information for multiple coastal counties within the individual states. In each case, the economic impact by county of sea level rise and increased vulnerability to storm events was projected. Comparison between states is difficult given differences in methodologies as well as assumptions as to: sea-level rise scenarios, procedures for incorporating storm events timing, flood and wind damage, time frame of assessment, variability in property listings at county level, and discounting of future loses to present value. Some methodological consistency would be helpful as a basis for comparing impacts across regions and for aggregating results over larger geographic areas. Discussion of consistency given the ability to compile assessments over larger geographic regions came out of the recent National Climate Assessment. The EU has moved in that direction with the Climate Cost Project that offers a view of how a large, multijurisdictional assessment framework can be developed (Brown, et al. 2011). The project stems from the Dynamic Interactive Vulnerability Assessment (DIVA) Model that is used to project mean sea level rise scenarios. Socioeconomic change is estimated with and without adaptation with cost avoidance as a residual. Major costs are to land loss and to people who would have to relocate. Recent advances in geospatial data quality and technology at the national and regional scale have led to a more robust modeling capability with the means to simulate physical change with finer resolution over larger geographic areas. The evolving vulnerability assessment tools are valuable resources for visualizing physical change under alternate scenarios. They provide better information on climate-related vulnerabilities than most communities are able to acquire given the cost and expertise required to assemble a comparable information base. The problem from a socioeconomic perspective is that the larger scale assessments generally rely on data often at census boundary level that is too coarse for accurate impact assessment or project appraisal at the local level. If in fact a hybrid approach that provides some additional refinement of local conditions along with overlays of economic and cultural assets at local scale are superimposed on existing physical change models, local officials would have a more useful output with a better understanding of the impact of change scenarios in terms of property loss, infrastructure and cultural and historic resources. Such an approach would bring richness to the assessment process with information needed by local officials in a cost effective way allowing communities to more effectively identify vulnerabilities, to examine options for addressing those vulnerabilities and to assess the viability of those options in addressing immediate and long-term change. GOAL AND OBJECTIVES: The goal of the project is to provide an enhanced decision-making framework to assist coastal communities in addressing near and long-term vulnerabilities. Specific objectives of the project are: to provide a seamless platform incorporating national, regional and local information into an enhanced community level vulnerability and assessment framework, to provide decision-making tools to assist state and local officials and the public at large to assess the impact of short and long-term coastal hazards and the cost avoidance of individual intervention strategies, 3

31 to assist the pilot coastal communities in developing adaptation planning mechanisms to enhance their coastal management and hazard mitigation plans, and to develop an assessment framework that can be replicated in other coastal communities within the four South Atlantic states as well as other coastal states in the U.S. PROJECT DESIGN: The project is envisioned as a partnership involving the research team, NOAA OCM, and the four South Atlantic Sea Grant Programs. The project will involve four case study communities and develop an approach that can be replicated in other coastal locations. For that reason, the research team will work closely with OCM and Sea Grant staff. The project will begin with a meeting in Charleston involving OCM staff, Sea Grant climate specialists, and the research team. The project will use OCM s Digital Coast as a platform with initial discussions focusing on extensions to the base model that add value including local physical and economic attributes to provide an assessment framework for estimating economic as well as physical losses under alternative change conditions. In terms of community engagement, the research team will work with Sea Grant staff to identify and focus on critical needs from a decision-making perspective. It is expected that the project will tie in with community resiliency planning activities of Sea Grant staff Jessica Whitehead in North Carolina, Liz Fly in South Carolina, Kelly Spratt in Georgia, and Thomas Ruppert in Florida. For that reason, Sea Grant staff will be the primary points of contact with the research team as active participants at public meetings and in providing support through assessments and presentation materials. If in fact the approach is to be replicated in other coastal communities in the region, it is expected that Sea Grant specialists will be the lead with college/university research teams providing technical support as warranted. Initial contacts have been established at each of the four case study communities Nags Head, North Carolina; Folly Beach, South Carolina; Tybee Island, Georgia; and Fernandina Beach, Florida. The four communities selected for case studies all have current vulnerabilities that are increasingly experienced by the local population. Each of these communities has begun to address the issue(s) with a dialogue and planning effort. Although the communities are at different stages of their planning efforts, the project will be structured to tie into ongoing community-based resiliency programs at each location. The research team is interdisciplinary as is essential for a project of this type involving an assessment of both physical and economic change as well as community engagement. The team includes coastal geologists from each of the four states to head the physical process component of the project including lead researchers on the Governors South Atlantic Alliance assessment of coastal vulnerability in the region (Alexander, et al. 2013). Each of the coastal stretches included in the project has been studied in the past by one of the coastal process team members (Alexander 2008, Adams, Opdyke, Jaeger 2010, Harris, et al. 2013, Corbett and Walsh in press). The team also includes economists and planners from each of the four states with significant experience in assessing impacts of coastal change and developing policy and planning prescriptions. Specific areas of expertise include impact assessment, valuation of non-market environmental resources, project appraisal, risk assessment, and adaptation planning (Kriesel, et al. 2004, Harrington and Walton 2007, Bin, Kruse, and Landry, 2008, London, 2013). The research agenda will focus on the three principal elements: 1. assessment of physical change, 2. assessment of economic impact, and 3. community engagement. The first year will be committed to compiling relevant data sets and overlay maps as well as field-testing the modeling framework. The second year will focus on community engagement and providing assessments of alternatives to assist in the local decision-making process. 4

32 Physical Change: The assessment framework will begin with available national, regional, and state-level data sets. With OCM s Digital Coast now available for all coastal states, it provides a useful tool raising public awareness of coastal vulnerabilities at alternative change scenarios. The research team has had previous discussions with OCM staff to discuss options for overlaying physical as well as socioeconomic attributes at local scale to make Digital Coast still more robust for local decision-making. Digital Coast¹s Inundation Mapping tool, along with the Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flooding Viewer will be used as initial platforms upon which to build. We will prioritize those hazards that are common to all coastal communities to broaden the applicability of the assessments tools we develop. These hazards, storm and tidal flooding (flood risk today) sea level rise (flood risk in the future), and shoreline change (shoreline erosion), can be assessed with currently available datasets in most cases, and are listed, along with respective datasets, their sources, and coastal planning applications for these datasets, in Table 1. In early discussions with OCM, a list of physical attributes at local scale that might add value will be explored and prioritized. Additional attributes might include the presence of a variety of landscape features (dune systems, historic and current inlet areas, overwash areas, seawalls and other hard structures, and land use characterization) and beach-renourishment cycle. It is expected that the additional, locally relevant data layers will be compiled by the research team and introduced as overlays adding local refinement to the assessment. Members of the research team including students and technicians will be sent to a coastal inundation mapping training session at OCM to assure that the stitching of new data layers with the existing platform can be accommodated effectively. The AMBUR Hazard Vulnerability Assessment tool, developed under the auspices of the Governors South Atlantic Alliance with NOAA funding, provides pertinent assessments of vulnerability to both shoreline change and inundation. Vulnerability rankings from these two assessments will be critical datasets that will be included in each study area. Important to the inclusion of additional data layers is that the information is available and adds value, that the impacts can be delineated, and that the information added is cost effective. Those points are particularly important if the procedure is to be replicated in other coastal areas as a community resiliency assessment roadmap and tool. Mapping and Assessing Vulnerability to Coastal Erosion, Flooding and Sea Level Rise The overarching goal of the project is to test the effectiveness of various NOAA tools and to engage the pilot communities in identifying and managing current risk and adapting to climate change through effective resiliency planning. Within the four pilot communities, the primary current coastal hazards are associated with flooding from King tides, storm surges and chronic erosion along sandy and estuarine shorelines (Table 1). A primary objective of this project is to work with the pilot communities to identify areas of highest risk utilizing both NOAA/FEMA flood risk data sets and local/regional shoreline change data sets (Table 1). When coupled with sea-level rise projections, the research team will work with the pilot communities to model various what-if scenarios to estimate potential vulnerabilities and establish sea level rise and shoreline erosion mitigation priorities. This will be implemented with GIS data sets to map hazards (e.g., flood and storm surge; coastal erosion) and identify areas and structures at risk in both physical and economic terms. This will involve both projecting shoreline change rates and adding future surface-water conditions in areas that may be inundated by sea level rise. From this mapping, we will develop an inventory of properties including public buildings and infrastructure that may be particularly vulnerable to sea level rise and/or shoreline change. By focusing on current and future flooding potential and shoreline change hazards, local planners will be able to target resiliency strategies that have the greatest benefit to their community through hazard avoidance and external aid. All counties maintain a Local Hazard Mitigation Strategy to be eligible for FEMA aid, with a requirement for periodic reassessment of hazards. We envision that our hazard mapping and projection of at-risk facilities can be used to acquire targeted community input to the importance of the identified hazards and provide a framework to readily update required assessments. 5

33 Table 1: Initial datasets to be used for mapping and assessing vulnerability to flooding, sea-level rise and coastal erosion Coastal communities that have critical infrastructure and substantial development in Coastal High Hazard areas can see a savings in insurance premiums associated with the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The Community Rating System (CRS) is a voluntary FEMA program offering discounts on flood insurance to reward good floodplain management within a community that maintains a higher standard with an information and knowledge base that will be provided by the proposed pilot studies. A primary goal is to reduce flood damage to insurable property. It is envisioned that the mapping efforts with local communities can be beneficial to their CRS rating by: providing the public with direct knowledge and information about local flood hazards and flood-prone areas that are predicted to be susceptible to flooding in the future; using future-conditions hydrology and floodplain mapping, allowing communities to modify their floodplain development regulations to use base flood elevations based on estimates of the sea level rise anticipated over longer term planning horizons; and identifying coastal shoreline that would benefit from open space preservation and natural shoreline protection. The research team will work with state CZM programs to provide consistency with coastal vulnerability assessment tools developed in each of the four states. All of the South Atlantic states have developed state or sub-state hazard assessment programs - the GA Coastal Hazards portal (gchp.skip.uga.edu), SC Hazard Vulnerability Assessment Tool (HVA) (scdhec.gov/homeandenvironment/water/coastal management/coastalhazards), NC COHAZ and NC Coastal Atlas ( and FL NE Regional Council (nefrpc.org) and GATOR (Geospatial Assessment Tool for Operations and Response) (floridadisaster.org/gator/map/html). Links to other geospatial modeling tools such as the Community Resource Inventory compiled by Clemson s Baruch Institute for SC Sea Grant can be accommodated as well. Discussions have already begun with State Coastal Zone Management programs and their coastal specialists [Ken Richardson in NC, Jessica Boynton in SC, Jennifer Kline in GA, and Gary Cook in FL]. The research team will also work with state Emergency Management agencies [Michael Sprayberry, Emergency Management Director, North Carolina Department of Public Service; Kim Stenson, Director, South Carolina, Emergency Management Division; Dee Langley, Director, Georgia Emergency Management Agency, and Steve Martin, State Floodplain Manager, Florida Division 6

34 of Emergency Management] to ensure that the products generated from this project are useful to the pilot communities in meeting state requirements for hazard identification and mitigation as well as in improving ratings through the Community Rating System. Economic Variables: As indicated earlier, most national and regional studies to date have used census information generally at the census tract and block group level. While useful for large geographic areas, the resolution is too coarse for meaningful assessment of intervention options at community scale. For that reason, local onshore assets will be overlaid on the physical change maps to reflect damages under alternate physical change conditions. The primary focus for the current assessments will be on the potential loss of property. The image below shows a parcel boundary map adjacent to an inundation map from the Georgia Hazards Portal (shown at high inundation levels). Data layers will include parcel level information w/ boundaries, appraised values, and building footprints. Other important economic, cultural, and environmental attributes will be compiled and digitized where not already geo-referenced. That information can assist in assessing potential impacts to important historic and ecological resources. Infrastructure will be an important consideration as well. While roads will be available, water and sewer lines may be spotty but will be included where available. Land cover is already included as a Digital Coast data layer that will allow the determination of developed and undeveloped land to be inundated under alternate conditions. The 30-meter pixels are an issue, but they do allow for consistency in coverage. Current and projected land use will be available - there will likely be some variation in how land use is presented but it provides the basis for saying under x scenario we lose 25% of residential property. Economic/Fiscal Assessment: The proposed assessment approach lends itself to more than one presentation option. In a risk assessment framework, areas of highest vulnerability based on value and probability of inundation will be identified and mapped as a way of showing not only land areas to be lost but also the highest valued land areas lost through inundation. From the overlay above, a property valued at $1 million with a five percent risk would have an expected risk value of $50,000. Similarly, a property valued at $500,000 but with a 10% risk would have the same risk value. Tybee has already used this mapping approach to depict areas of highest risk value. The approach can be extended to incorporate land use categories and critical infrastructure that may have proximity to areas of high expected loss. 7

35 In addition, standard project appraisal methodology will be used to assess the impact of alternative inundation scenarios on local property value and tax base. A consistent set of base physical change scenarios will be run in each of the communities overlaid on parcel boundaries to identify vulnerabilities under no action or business-as-usual conditions. Based on the initial assessments, presentations will be made to the individual communities to show vulnerabilities and to explore planning and resiliency options. Those community-driven options will be reduced with an initial screening to a limited number of interventions to focus on priority options (perhaps two per case). For each of the proposed interventions, the scope of the project and estimated cost will be determined. Detailed engineering studies for replacing infrastructure are beyond the scope of this project although consultation with technical experts and standard engineering costs per unit will be employed where appropriate. Based on projected cost and revised damage estimates, the with intervention scenarios will be run relative to the without or no action scenario. A consistent methodological approach will be used in each of the cases in terms of assessment framework, time horizons and constant dollar discount rates to estimate net benefits for the proposed interventions. For each of those interventions, cost avoidance from taking corrective action will be provided. Non-market considerations can be included if the loss to ecological or cultural resources is significant and proxies can be established. Community Engagement: The final step of the process is critical. Conversations have begun with each of the communities. Once the project begins, further discussions with key stakeholders will be held to hone in on key issues, establish timetables, pin down available local data sets and make plans to fill data gaps as needed. Working with Sea Grant climate specialists, it is expected that the focus will be on current and short to intermediate vulnerabilities addressing what the community is already experiencing and will likely experience within their planning horizon. The research team is sensitive to the fact that beginning the discussions with high-end scenarios that inundate all or most community may be seen as a scare tactic that proves to be counterproductive in starting the conversation. It is expected that a series of consensus workshops will be held in each of the communities. Initial public meetings will be held at the start of the second year to gather input on critical issues, to provide background information including data layers compiled, present initial inundation scenarios, and identify options. The options will be prioritized and evaluated as indicated above. The findings to be reported will include an assessment of impacts both physical and economic with and without intervention and projected cost avoidance associated with corrective action. Based on that assessment, the research team and Sea Grant climate specialists will assist the community in folding the results into planning documents including local coastal zone management plans, comprehensive plans, and hazard mitigation plans. An important piece of the project is to assess next steps coming out of the community engagement whether that involves an implementation plan or specific funding actions that move toward an effective adaptation strategy. The framework brings in local economic data at a resolution that allows communities to objectively weigh options. For viable projects identified, the preliminary assessments will provide information that can be adapted and framed within OMB Circular A-94 guidelines. Although full engineering assessments would likely be required, the preliminary assessments may help the projects move forward for consideration and full assessment. Evaluation: The data development phase of the project will involve ground truthing to assure that the overlays developed match the base maps and that the assessment of interventions provides acceptable results in terms of hazard reduction. The ultimate test is whether the project makes a difference in terms of public awareness and leads to concrete steps to address vulnerabilities. Participants will be asked the extent to which they were made more aware by the process and how their views were affected relative to resiliency measures. Public officials will also be asked the extent to which the process made them more aware and what actions they anticipate coming out of the process as well as what other information they need to take their community resiliency program to the next level. 8

36 Case Studies The Town of Nags Head is located on the Outer Banks of North Carolina. The town is bordered to the north by the Town of Kill Devil Hills and to the south by the Cape Hatteras National Seashore. The Town of Nags Head is located in Dare County with a permanent population of 2,835 in 2013 and a summer population that reaches 40,000. Nags Head is a major tourism destination with approximately 11 miles of ocean shoreline and its traditional cedar shake beach cottages. Major attractions include Jockey s Ridge State Park, the tallest natural sand dune system in the Eastern U.S. and Jennette s Pier, a state-of-the-art educational center and fishing pier owned and operated by the NC Aquarium system. Wave energy is high along the Outer Banks, and long-term shoreline change rates are variable ranging from an accretion rate of ~ 1foot /year in the north to an erosion rate >7 feet/year in South Nags Head. The town supports beach nourishment and has lobbied for a statewide beach management strategy. The town raised taxes in 2011 to help fund the latest beach nourishment project that placed 4.6 million cubic yards of sand on the beach at a cost of $36 million. The project held up very well during Super Storm Sandy that hit in 2012 and caused extensive damage to the north and south of Nags Head. Hard structures along the beachfront are prohibited under North Carolina s Coastal Area Management Act. The town is working to identify repetitive loss properties and to find assistance for property owners. The town has also worked to remove condemned structures from the oceanfront that remain on the ocean side of the first line of vegetation. Lawsuits with affected property owners are ongoing. Coastal storms are an issue along the exposed Outer Banks. The Ash Wednesday Storm, a Nor easter that hovered for three days remains a benchmark for the area. The town s storm recovery and mitigation procedures were updated following Hurricane Isabel. Implementation if the Incident Command System framed the town s response to Hurricane Irene. The town s Land Use Plan was adopted in 2010 with many of the same policy recommendations incorporated into the town s 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan. In 2014, the Board Of Commissioners adopted the new Stormwater, Fill and Runoff Ordinance as well as text amendments to the Sedimentation and Zoning Ordinances. Along with the Stormwater Ordinance, the town prepared a "Low Impact Development Solutions to Reduce Stormwater Run-Off" manual. The town of Nags Head is a Class 6 community in the Community Rating System. Recent CRS workshops have addressed hazard mitigation through retrofits and information materials for property owners on stormwater management. [Information drawn in part from Town of Nags Head Hazard Mitigation Plan] The City of Folly Beach, SC, is located 4 miles south of the entrance to Charleston Harbor. The island is approximately 6 miles in length and runs in a generally northeast/southwest direction. It is bordered on the northeast by Lighthouse Inlet and Morris Island and on the southwest by the Stono River Inlet and Kiawah Island. The Folly River runs along the landward side of the island with some marsh buffers north and south. The city of Folly Beach is located in Charleston County with a permanent population of 2,617 persons (up nearly 25% since 2000). Despite the small permanent residency, Folly Beach is the closest and most publicly accessible beach for the City of Charleston and is therefore a popular beach recreation area for locals as well as visitors to the region. The county operates beachfront parks at both ends of the island as well as a fishing pier in the center of the island. With the exception of the county parks, the island is developed with mostly single-family homes. Of the 18.6 sq. miles of area associated with the City, 6.4 square miles (>1/3) is considered waterfront. 9

37 The 3-mile long Charleston Harbor jetties built in the 1890 s have impacted Morris and Folly Islands, located downdrift of the jetties. Both islands have experienced severe erosion due to the elimination of sediment bypassing the harbor s previously expansive ebb tidal delta. This erosion led over time to the loss of beachfront homes and coastal roads. In an attempt at erosion management, the South Carolina State Highway Department installed 48 timber and rock groins along Folly Beach. Private armoring structures have been constructed along nearly all the beachfront. Armoring continues today. After prolonged discussion with the Corps of Engineers, the City and the federal government entered into a 50-year commitment to beach nourishment as the primary erosion management tool through a 1992 Local Cooperation Agreement (LCA). The first federal beach nourishment project was constructed on in The Federal Shore Protection Project provides periodic renourishment at an 85% federal cost. The most recent renourishment occurred in 2013 and the Corp and Folly Beach are currently searching for a new source of renourishment sand due to the early depletion of the last offshore borrow site.. Erosion management is the City s primary beach management objective. In addition to the periodic renourishment projects, the city would like to explore other means of maintaining beach sand between renourishment projects, rehabilitate existing groins, address erosional hot spots and deal with more frequent flooding. Other issues include storm related impacts on septic tanks that are maintained as a growth management strategy and vehicular traffic that leads to congestion and is an emergency management concern. The city is just completing its Local Beachfront Management Plan currently under review. Folly Beach is exempt from some provisions of the state Beachfront Management Plan. The baseline is at the Perpetual Easement Line demarcated as the limits of the Federal Shore Protection project. Minimum local setbacks implemented in 2006 are used instead of the state s 40 year setback line. Although new hard structures are prohibited in the state plan, hard structures are permitted on Folly because of the high level of erosion. An update of the city s comprehensive plan is expected later this year. The City of Folly Beach has adopted Charleston County s Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan but plans to supplement the regional plan with a more localized hazard assessment. The plan will assess the vulnerability of infrastructure and municipal codes and policies as they relate to natural hazards, with the goal of taking steps to either reduce or eliminate some of the highest risks. The first step toward this goal will be a comprehensive risk assessment to identify the most high-risk structures and infrastructure. It is expected that this proposed project will contribute to that effort. The City of Tybee Island is located on the northernmost barrier island on the Georgia coastline. Located within Chatham County approximately 15 miles due east of Savannah, the incorporated City of Tybee Island covers an area of about 2.7 square miles with a 2010 population of 2,990 residents. Informally known as Savannah s Beach, Tybee Island has long been a popular destination for local and state residents. Although among the most densely developed of Georgia s barrier islands, Tybee Island maintains a quaint beach town character that features a number of historic sites, an active business sector, and productive coastal ecosystems. Similar to other barrier islands along the Georgia and wider southeast coastline, Tybee Island has a frontline exposure to the Atlantic Ocean that brings risk of flooding from hurricanes and other coastal storms. The worst flooding recorded historically on Tybee Island occurred with a powerful Category 3 10

38 hurricane in August This storm produced a local storm surge of approximately 11.5 feet above MHHW, destroying many structures on the island and resulting in significant loss of life throughout Georgia and South Carolina. In addition to coastal storms, Tybee is subject to intermittent flooding with an average upland elevation of 4 feet above the local mean higher high water (MHHW) line. Spring tides that occur naturally during full and new moon cycles can bring higher high water elevations that rise over 2 feet above the MHHW line in areas around the island. Sea level rise contributes to shoreline retreat as well as increased inundation. The tide gauge station at Ft. Pulaski, GA, located just north of Tybee Island, indicates a local sea level rise trend of 2.98 mm/yr (~0.12 in/yr) since data collection began in This rate of sea level rise amounts to a local increase of approximately 1 foot as averaged over a 100 year period. Local land subsidence is believed to be the primary cause for the higher rate of sea level rise observed at Ft. Pulaski as compared to the global average. Tybee Island has been a leader among South Atlantic communities in coastal resiliency planning. Interest in taking a more proactive approach was prompted by increased backups of stormwater pipes and increased flooding of yards within the city particularly when heavy rains occur during high tides. Also important is concern with tidal water overwash across areas of US Highway 80 (the sole access road to Tybee Island) during king tide and onshore-wind events. Working with Georgia Sea Grant and the UGA Vinson Institute of Government, the city secured a grant through NOAA s National Sea Grant Community Climate Adaptation Initiative (CCAI) funding program in The project identified key issues and assessed options for addressing immediate concerns. Options assessed and carried out included retrofitting city well houses to prevent flood damage to electronic components with loss of water supply and stormwater system retrofits to prevent tidal waters from entering the system. Also considered were elevation of US 80 to assure the island can be evacuated during high water conditions and a seawall. While Tybee is ahead of the other case study communities in terms of resiliency planning efforts, it is expected that the proposed project will enhance the city s ongoing assessment and planning process with additional information and assessment of options leading to implementation strategies and concrete action plans. [Information drawn from City of Tybee Island Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plan]. The City of Fernandina Beach is located at the northern end of Amelia Island, along the Cumberland Sound inlet. The island is within the Sea Islands barrier island chain. The city is located in Nassau County just below the Georgia state line. In 2013, the population of the city was 11,952 representing a 13.3 percent growth since The estimated median household income was $47,749 ($2012) with an increase of ~20 percent since Median housing values have almost doubled since 2000, at $248,660 and $134,800, for 2012 and 2000, respectively. Fernandina Beach is fronted by sandy beaches and dunes with back-barrier salt marshes, having a typical mesotidal barrier island morphology. It has a 4.4 mile segment of critically eroded beach extending from the south jetty of the St. Mary s River Entrance to Sadler Road. The erosion is associated with jetty construction in Cumberland Sound. Since 1978, Fernandina Beach has an agreement in place with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Navy (Kings Bay, GA Naval Submarine Base) that sand dredged from the St. Mary s River Entrance as part of the Federal Navigation Channel Maintenance is applied to the 11

39 northern section. A construction project Nassau County Beach Erosion Control Project was authorized in In addition to long-term erosion, Fernandina Beach as a low-lying barrier island is susceptible to various forms of coastal flooding. The city of Fernandina Beach s comprehensive plan (2009 to year 2030) will be updated later this year and has included several adaptation add-on policy objectives relating to shoreline and disaster resiliency. The city has started holding workshops and presentations on coastal resiliency education and awareness with local government officials and the community. In addition to city staff, the parties include: St Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD), Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), Florida Fish and Wildlife (FWC), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and Army Corps of Engineers. The city has been working with the University of Florida GEOPLAN on historic shoreline mapping and is also working on a shoreline inventory/evaluation project. The city of Fernandina Beach has been using Digital Coast Sea Level Rise Viewer for presentation purposes since 2008, and is very familiar with the scenario mapping that Tybee Island has recently conducted. They have a very good collection of maps and data and are interested in extending applications with a new planner/mapper coming on board. A particular focus has been on identifying historic structures with a recently completed flood mitigation plan for the local railroad museum. The city is currently working with three incorporated communities in Nassau County to complete a hazard and vulnerability assessment. They have also been working to quantify and value the building infrastructure in Fernandina Beach, and to map future building in flood plain areas using a revised version of the 2010 FEMA flood map. In terms of the National Flood Insurance Program, the city is hoping to improve its Class 6 CRS rating to a Class 5, which currently provides a 20 percent discount on residential and commercial real estate flood insurance PARTICIPANTS AND CO-SPONSORS: The project team will collaborate with NOAA OCM, the four South Atlantic Sea Grant programs, the four state coastal management offices, and the four case study communities. Specific participants include: Doug Marcy, Coastal Hazards Specialist, and other staff members, Office of Coastal Management, NOAA. Jessica Whitehead, Coastal Communities Hazards Adaptation Specialist, North Carolina Sea Grant. Liz Fly, Coastal Climate Extension Specialist, South Carolina Sea Grant Consortium. Kelly Spratt, Shana Jones, and Jill Gambill, Georgia Sea Grant Program. Thomas Ruppert, Coastal Planning Specialist, Florida Sea Grant College Program. Holly White, Principal Planner, Town of Nags Head, NC. Spencer Wetmore, City Administrator and Aaron Pope, City Planner, City of Folly Beach, SC. Paul Wolff, City Council Member, City of Tybee Island, GA. Adrienne Burke, Community Development Director, City of Fernandina Beach, FL. 12

40 Braxton Davis, Director, Division of Coastal Management, NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Dan Burger, Director, Coastal Services Division and Jessica Boynton, Shoreline Management Specialist, SC Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management. Jennifer Kline, Coastal Hazards Specialist, GA Department of Natural Resources. Gary Cook, GIS Manager, GISP, Beaches, Mines and ERP Support Team, Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). Because OCM s Digital Coast Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flooding Viewer is being used as a framework, the research team will work with OCM staff to identify and add data layers compatible with the Digital Coast platform. Each of the four states has developed vulnerability assessments models incorporating in part information from the Governors South Atlantic Alliance assessment of coastal vulnerability in the region. Those models include the NC COHAZ and NC Coastal Atlas in North Carolina, the Hazard Vulnerability Assessment in South Carolina, the Georgia Coastal Hazards portal, and the Geospatial Assessment Tool for Operations and Response (GATOR) in Florida. The research team will work with state coastal management staffs to extend current state assessment tools with additional data layers to enhance local decision-making capabilities. At the community level, discussions have been held with Sea Grant climate specialists and local officials to determine what information is currently available as well as to identify information gaps. Additional data layers will be overlaid within the existing modeling framework. Sea Grant staff will be integral in assessing what local initiatives seem to be working and assessing information needs to assist local decision-makers. The research team and Sea Grant staff will work with local officials and the community to identify key issues and options to be assessed. As the project develops, conversations will be held with State CZM programs, FEMA and state and local emergency management offices to assure that the project outcomes add value to both local coastal management and local hazard mitigation plans. STUDENT PARTICIPATION: Graduate and undergraduate students from each of the universities will be involved in the project with a combination of academic assistantships and internships allowing them to work with Sea Grant and community partners. Students will be involved with data compilation and modeling. They also will be involved in discussions with agency staff and will participate in public meetings to help them understand how their work is incorporated into local decision-making process. ROLE OF INVESTIGATORS: The research team will serve as a bridge between NOAA OCM and Sea Grant climate specialists. The idea is to use Digital Coast as the platform adding additional data layers as appropriate to incorporate local physical and economic conditions. The team will work with OCM staff to identify and prioritize data overlays that add value but at the same time are cost effective so that they can be replicated in other locations. The coastal geologists on the team were chosen because of their knowledge of in-state and regional coastal processes. The economic/planning team will work with OCM staff to identify and add economic and cultural resources at local scale. The compilation of additional data layers and overlay mapping will be the responsibility of the research team. At the same time, the team will work closely with OCM to build a community assessment framework that can be replicated in other coastal communities. The data layers will be developed in consultation with Sea Grant climate specialists who are currently working with communities to develop community resiliency programs. The primary objective of the project is to provide a decision-making framework to allow communities to assess their vulnerabilities, to weigh alternatives and to take corrective action as necessary to reduce the impact of climate-related change. The research team will serve as technical support for the Sea Grant climate specialists in each of the four case study communities preparing background information, vulnerability maps, and assessing impacts under alternate change scenarios. The team will assist in identifying options, running impact 13

41 assessments with and without corrective action and calculating cost avoidance with those actions. The four cases are seen as pilot projects to be replicated in other communities. It is expected that for subsequent community projects that Sea Grant climate specialists will be able to assemble an increasing share of the necessary data layers and assessments in-house with technical support provided as needed from university scientists and/or summer interns. The idea is to develop a cost effective decision support system that is data rich yet adaptable enough to be applied in other locations. With the process run through Sea Grant offices drawing on a sound scientific base it avoids the black box problem where geospatial data are processed without proper quality control and interpretation of the results. EXPECTED RESULTS, APPLICATIONS AND BENEFITS: The primary benefit of the project is to increase public awareness of the vulnerabilities associated with climate-related change in coastal communities. The project builds on existing national level vulnerability assessment tools as well as emerging state-level assessment frameworks. Using Digital Coast Sea Level and Coastal Flooding Viewer as a platform, it brings in refinement with overlays of physical and economic attributes that allow an assessment of economic as well as physical impacts at a resolution relevant for local decision-making. It is expected that this extension lends itself to OCM s Coastal Resilience Decision-Support Framework allowing communities to assess alternative intervention strategies and determine cost avoidance from taking corrective action. The project incorporates community engagement working with Sea Grant climate specialists focusing on issues, identifying alternatives and assessing alternative intervention strategies. It is expected that the assessment of alternatives will enhance local hazard mitigation and coastal management plans and lead as well as lead to concrete actions to address coastal hazards. The approach is cost effective and designed to be replicated by Sea Grant climate specialists in other coastal communities. LITERATURE CITED: Adams, P.M., N.D. Opdyke, and J.M. Jaeger, 2010: Isostatic uplift driven by karstification and sea-level oscillation: Modeling landscape evolution in north Florida. Geology, 38, Alexander, C., C. Jackson, P. Adams, R. Corbett, J. Jaeger, and J. Walsh, 2013: Regional collaborative research in the Southeastern US: Progress toward a new coastal hazard vulnerability assessment tool. SE GSA Annual Meeting, San Juan, Puerto Rico, Mar Alexander, C.R., (special issue editor). 2008: Coastal and marine geology of the Southeastern United States. Southeastern Geology, 45(3). Bienert, Sven, 2014: Extreme weather events and property values: Assessing new investment frameworks for the decades ahead. London: Urban Land Institute. Bin, O. C. Dumas, and B. Poulter, 2007: Measuring the impacts of climate change on North Carolina coastal resources. National Commission on Energy Policy. Washington, DC. Bin, O., J. Kruse and C. Landry, 2008: Flood hazards, insurance rates, and amenities: Evidence from the coastal housing market, Journal of Risk and Insurance 75(1), Brown, S., R. Nicholls, A. Vafeidis, J. Hinkel, and P. Watkiss, (2011): The impacts and economic costs of sea level rise on coastal zones of the EU and the costs and benefits of adaptation. in Watkiss, P. (editor) The climate cost project. Final report. Stockholm Environment Institute, Sweden. Corbett, D.R. and J.P. Walsh, in press: 210 Lead and 137 Cesium Establishing a chronology for the last century. Handbook of Sea Level Research. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2013: National Flood Insurance Program Community Rating System Coordinator s Manuel. OMB No

42 Harrington, J.A. and T. L. Walton, 2007: Climate change in coastal areas in Florida: Sea level rise estimation and economic analysis to year Ocean Engineering, 34, Harris, M.S., L.R. Sautter, K.L. Johnson, K.E. Luciano, G.R. Sedberry, E.E. Wright, and A.N.S. Siuda, 2013: Continental shelf landscapes of the southeastern United States since the last interglacial. Geomorphology, 203, King, P. G., A. R. McGregor, and J. D. Whittet, 2008: The economic costs of sea level rise to California beach communities. California Department of Boating and Waterways and San Francisco State University. Kriesel, W.P., A. Keeler, and C. Landry, 2004: Financing beach improvements: comparing two approaches on the Georgia coast. Coastal Management, 32(4), London, J.B., 2012: The implication of climate change on coastal real estate, in Burkett,.R. and Davidson, M.A. [eds.]. Coastal Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability: A Technical Input to the 2012 National Climate Assessment. National Research Council, Reducing coastal risks on the east and gulf coasts. National Academies Press. Robinson, M., Alexander, C., McCabe, D. Crass and C. Jackson Threatened Archaeological, Historic and Cultural Resources of the Georgia Coast: Identification, Prioritization and Management using GIS Technology. Geoarchaeology, 25: U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of the Census, selected years: Census of population. U.S. Global Change Research Program, National Climate Assessment. Washington, DC: Island Press. F. PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN Because the project is designed as a partnership, it requires close coordination between the research team, the Office of Coastal Management at NOAA, Sea Grant climate specialists, and the four case study communities. An initial meeting will occur at the start of the project in Charleston involving OCM, Sea Grant staff and the research team. Early discussions have been held with both parties, and the proposal lays out the anticipated scope of work. Still, the initial meeting will discuss the process in greater detail and finalize data layers to be added and procedures for stitching the local overlays to the Digital Coast platform. Other issues to be addressed including sea level rise scenarios, storm surge, and timeframe will be discussed with OCM as it is hoped that the approach will be available as an extension in other coastal locations. The project is designed to complement the work currently being done by the Sea Grant climate specialists in each of the four states with added value in terms of physical and economic vulnerabilities. The research team will work in support of the Sea Grant specialists providing background information, relevant maps and assessment to estimate the impact of climate related change with and without locally selected intervention strategies. Initial meetings have been held with each of the four communities. While all of the communities are experiencing impacts currently, the extent of the impacts and the stage of each community in addressing those impacts differs. While the overall methodology will be consistent, the options assessed and the recommendations will be targeted specifically to the critical issues in each of the individual communities. Within the research team, there are two PIs. Clark Alexander at Skidaway Institute of Oceanography will coordinate activities in terms of physical change. He led the team that developed the Governors South Atlantic Alliance coastal hazard vulnerability assessment tool with three of the other investigators participating in this study. They will coordinate a consistent approach to adding physical attributes at 15

43 local scale in consultation with OCM. Jim London at Clemson will have overall responsibility and will coordinate the development of the economic data layers as well as the economic assessments. The approach is somewhat straight forward as indicated in the project design. Still, maintaining consistency across the four states, coordinating with OCM and making sure that the outputs are useful for the target audiences will be addressed. The State PIs will coordinate activities with the Sea Grant staff for the community engagement phase of the project. The team will communicate on a regular basis with the coastal process and economic/planning groups each in regular communication. At a minimum monthly conference calls will be held to discuss project status and issues that need to be addressed. In addition to the initial group meeting in Charleston, a second group meeting will be held at Skidaway at the end of the first year to view initial assessment runs and to plan for community engagement activity. G. NOAA DATA SHARING PLAN: The research team will conform to NOAA s data sharing plan. Any environmental field data that is used as part of the project will be provided to Florida Sea Grant. It is understood that the data will be released on request after a waiting period of 24 months from the end of the project. It is assumed that field data collected in the individual states will be available through their respective Sea Grant offices. 16

44 H. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES: (in alphabetical order) Clark R. Alexander, Jr., University of Georgia R. Reide Corbett, East Carolina University Julie A. Harrington, Florida State University M. Scott Harris, College of Charleston John M. Jaeger, University of Florida Warren P. Kriesel, University of Georgia Jamie B. Kruse, East Carolina University James B. London, Clemson University J.P. Walsh, East Carolina University

45 Clark Raymond Alexander, Jr. Professor, University of Georgia Skidaway Institute of Oceanography, 10 Ocean Science Circle, Savannah, Georgia, (912) , Education: 1990 Ph.D. North Carolina State University, Marine Sedimentology 1985 M.S. North Carolina State University, Marine Geology 1983 B.S./B.A Humboldt State University, Oceanography (Cum Laude)/Geology Employment: Georgia Southern University, Director, Applied Coastal Research Laboratory, 2003-P. University of Georgia, Professor, Skidaway Institute of Oceanography, Assistant ( ), Associate ( ), Full (2002-P). Skidaway Institute of Oceanography, Postdoctoral Scientist ( ). Pertinent Publications (* denotes student author): Langley, S, C. Alexander, D. Bush and C. Jackson* Modernizing Shoreline Change Analysis in Georgia Using Topographic Survey Sheets in a GIS Environment. Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue 38: Jackson, C.*, Alexander, C. and D. Bush Backbarrier Shoreline Change History: Cumberland Island, Georgia, , Southeastern Geology, 45: Alexander, C.R. (special issue editor) Coastal and Marine Geology of the Southeastern United States. Southeastern Geology, 45(3). Robinson, M., C. Alexander, C., McCabe, D. Crass and C. Jackson* Threatened Archaeological, Historic and Cultural Resources of the Georgia Coast: Identification, Prioritization and Management using GIS Technology. Geoarchaeology, 25: Jackson, C*., Alexander, C. and D. Bush Application of the AMBUR R Package for Shoreline Change Analysis: Jekyll Island, Georgia. Computers and Geoscience, /j.cageo Griggs, G., Alexander, C., Atwater, B., Barnard, P., Honeycutt, M., Pilkey, O., Riggs, S., Ruggiero, P. and R. Young Managing U.S. Coastal Hazards, Geological Society of America Position Paper 22. Alexander, C., Jackson, C., Adams, P., Corbett, R., Jaeger, J., and J. Walsh Regional Collaborative Research in the Southeastern US: Progress Toward a New Coastal Hazard Vulnerability Assessment Tool. SE GSA Annual Meeting, San Juan, Puerto Rico, Mar Turck, J.*, and C. Alexander Coastal Landscapes and Their Relationship to Human Settlement on the Georgia Coast in V.D. Thompson and D.H. Thomas (eds), Life Among the Tides: Recent Archaeology on the Georgia Bight. Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History, volume 98. pp Synergistic Activities: Grays Reef National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council (Chairman ) and Sapelo Island National Estuarine Research Reserve Advisory Committee. Adjunct and Graduate Faculty in Geology and/or Marine Science departments at Savannah State University, Georgia Institute of Technology and Georgia Southern University. Georgia Coastal Marshlands Protection and Shore Protection Committees, which review and permit proposed activities in beach and estuarine sectors of the State. Proposal review for: NSF (3 Panels); EPA (1 Panel); NOAA; Sea Grant (9 states; 4 Panels); US State Dept.; Hudson River Foundation. 1

46 D. Reide Corbett East Carolina University, Greenville, NC 27858; ; UNC Coastal Studies Institute, Manteo, NC Education: 1994: B.S. in Chemistry; Florida State University 1996: M.S. in Chemical Oceanography (Geochemistry); Florida State University 1999: Ph.D. in Chemical Oceanography (Geochemistry); Florida State University Employment: 2012 to present: Program Head, Coastal Processes Program, UNC Coastal Studies Institute, Manteo, NC to present: Professor, Department of Geological Sciences, East Carolina University 2011 to 2012: Special Assistant for Diving and Water Safety, East Carolina University to 2011: Assistant Chair, Department of Geological Sciences, East Carolina University 2006 to 2011: Associate Professor, Department of Geological Sciences, East Carolina University 2005 to present: Adjunct Associate Professor, Department of Marine, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, North Carolina State University 2000 to 2006: Assistant Professor, Department of Geology, Carolina University, 1999 to 2000: Postdoctoral Research Associate, Department of Geology, Tulane University Pertinent Publications (graduate students are underlined) Kemp, A., B.P. Horton, C.H. Vane, C.E. Bernhardt, D.R. Corbett, S.E. Englehart, S.C. Anisfeld, A.C. Parnell and N. Cahill, Sea-level change during the last 2500 years in New Jersey, USA. Quaternary Science Reviews. 81, Lagomasino, D., D.R. Corbett, J.P. Walsh Influence of Wind-Driven Inundation and Coastal Geomorphology on Sedimentation in Two Microtidal Marshes, Pamlico River Estuary, NC. Estuarine, Coastal, and Shelf Science. 36 (6) ; DOI /s Cowart, L., D.R. Corbett, J.P. Walsh, Shoreline Change along Sheltered Coastlines: Insights from the Neuse River Estuary, NC. Remote Sensing, 3, Kirwan, M., A.B. Murray, J.P. Donnelly, D.R. Corbett, 2011 Rapid wetland expansion during European settlement and its implication for marsh survival under modern sediment delivery rates. Geology, 39(5) Kemp, A.C. B.P. Horton, S.J. Culver, D. R. Corbett, O. van de Plassche, W. R. Gehrels and B.C. Douglas, The timing and magnitude of recent accelerated sea level rise (North Carolina, USA). Geology. 37, Synergistic Activities: 2008 to present: Albemarle-Pamlico National Estuary Program Chair ( ), Science & Technical Advisory Council Department of Marine Fisheries Strategic Habitat Area Advisory Committee Region Worked with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and University of North Carolina system partners to build an estuarine dynamics observing system to present: Mentor/Advisor for high school and undergraduate students to perform independent research projects 2

47 Julie A. Harrington Director and Research Professor III, FSU Center for Economic Forecasting and Analysis, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL , , Education: Auburn University, Economics (Economics/Agricultural Economics), Ph.D., 1995 Auburn University, Fisheries (Water Quality) M.S., 1990 Montana State University, Fish and Wildlife Management, B.S., 1981 Employment: Director, Center for Economic Forecasting and Analysis, Florida State University, 2006-present Associate Director, FSU CEFA, President, Economic Research Enterprises, 2000 to present Consultant, MGT of America, Econometrician, State of Florida, Public Service: U.S. Peace Corps, Philippines, Pertinent Publications/Presentations: Harrington, J., T. Takatsuka, and M. Niekus. The Value of Using Irrigation Water in South Florida Agriculture. NSF/USDA NIFA. Mar Fact sheet: see: Harrington, J., and M. Niekus. An Economic Analysis Study to Identify the Methods and Best Practices to Increase Access to Credit to Entrepreneurs and Small Businesses in Florida. Final Report to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO). Dec See: Harrington, J., W. Mellone, D. Glassner, Z. Siddiqui and Xin Yu, The Economic Impact of the Quail Hunting Lands of Albany GA, and Red Hills Regions of SW GA and N FL. Oct See: AsPrinted-Spread-FINAL-small.pdf Diamond, C., J. Harrington, H.J. Lee and Z. Siddiqui. An Update of: An Analysis of Public Subsidies and Externalities Affecting Water Use in South Florida. Nov Final Report to The Everglades Foundation Harrington, Julie. Economic, Policy and Other Issues Related to Climate and SLR Research in Florida. Presentation at the Florida Climate Institute Symposium, Nov Harrington, J. and T. Walton, Climate Change in Coastal Areas in Florida: Sea Level Rise Estimation and Economic Analysis to Year 2080 Final Report to NCEP, Aug In: Ocean Engineering Vol 34: , Elsevier Press, Taylor, T., J. Harrington, and R. Swett, Coastal Training Programs Needs Assessment Final Report to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Dec Harrington, J., T. Lynch, and J. O Brien, Economic Impact Analysis of Coastal Ocean Observing Systems in the Gulf Coast Region, Final Report to NOAA/NOPP, Feb Synergistic Activities: Task One Leader NSF USDA South Florida Water Sustainability, and Climate Project Steering committee member, Florida Climate Institute (FCI), FSU IESES and FCAAP Contributing Author and Reviewer, Climate of the Southeast United States: Variability, Change, Impacts, and Vulnerability. NCA series, Island Press, Jan EDA Economic Impacts Working Group of Nat l Working Waterfront and Waterways Network Reviewer, Energy Policy Journal Department of Transportation Sea Level Rise Peer Review Committee member 3

48 M. Scott Harris Associate Professor of Geology and Environmental Geosciences, College of Charleston, Charleston, SC (843) , Education University of Delaware Newark, DE Geology Ph.D University of Virginia Charlottesville, VA Environmental Science M.S College of William & Mary Williamsburg, VA Geology B.S Employment Associate Professor College of Charleston, Charleston, SC 2013-present Assistant Professor College of Charleston, Charleston, SC Associate Professor Coastal Carolina University, Conway, SC Assistant Professor Coastal Carolina University, Conway, SC Pertinent Publications Harris, M. S., Sautter, L. R., Johnson, K. L., Luciano, K. E., Sedberry, G. R., Wright, E. E., & Siuda, A. N. S. (2013). Continental shelf landscapes of the southeastern United States since the last interglacial. Geomorphology, doi: /j.geomorph Luciano, K. E., & Harris, M. S. (2013). Surficial Geology and Geophysical Investigations of the Capers Inlet, South Carolina ( USA ), 7.5-Minute Quadrangle. Journal of Maps, 9(1), doi: / Harris, M. Scott; Wright, Eric E.; Fuqua, Lauren; and Tinker, Trent P., Comparison of Shoreline Erosion Rates Derived from Multiple Data Types: Data Compilation for Legislated Setback Lines in South Carolina (USA). Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue 56, pg ISSN Levine, N., Katuna, M., Harris, S., & Colgan, M. (2009). Folly Beach, South Carolina : An endangered barrier island. In J. T. Kelley & Pilkey (Eds.), Geological Society of America Special Paper (Vol. 460, pp ). doi: / (06) Schwab, W.C.; Gayes, P.T.; Morton, R.A.; Driscoll, N.W.; Baldwin, W.E.; Barnhardt, W.A.; Denny, J.F.; Harris, M. S.; Katuna, M.P.; Putney, T.R.; Voulgaris, G.; Warner, J.C.; and Wright, E.E., Coastal change along the shore of northeastern South Carolina The South Carolina Coastal Erosion Study, editor: Walter A. Barnhardt, USGS Circular 1339, 79 pp. ( Harris, M. Scott; Tinker, Trent; and Wright, E., 2007, Online Beach Profile Management and Analysis System (PMAS), Journal of Coastal Research Special Publication Harris, M. S., Gayes, P. T., Kindinger, J. L., Flocks, J. G., Krantz, D. E., & Donovan, P. (2005). Quaternary Geomorphology and Modern Coastal Development in Response to an Inherent Geologic Framework: An Example from Charleston, South Carolina. Journal of Coastal Research, 211, doi: / Synergistic Activities Member of College of Charleston Lowcountry Hazards Center and Santee-Cooper GIS Laboratory Inlet dynamics peer-review committee, SC-Department of Health and Environmental Control Member of the Shoreline Change Advisory Committee, SC-DHEC Member of the Geological Society of America Quaternary Geology and Geomorphology Division Built and maintain beach profile database for online access to large datasets: Faculty member in the Masters of Environmental Studies Program, CofC U.S. Fulbright recipient to Greece 4

49 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH JOHN M. JAEGER Department of Geological Sciences, University of Florida, 241 Williamson Hall, P.O. Box Gainesville, FL , Tel: (352) , EDUCATION: Ph.D.-1998, State University of New York Stony Brook, Geological Oceanography M.S , State University of New York, Stony Brook, Marine Environmental Science B.S , Humboldt State University, Oceanography, Geology Minor EMPLOYMENT: 2007-Present, Associate Professor, University of Florida , Assistant Professor, University of Florida , Post Doctoral Scientist, Lehigh University Pertinent Publications: Johnson, J.M., L.J. Moore, K. Ells, A.B. Murray, P.A Adams, R.A. MacKenzie III, and J.M. Jaeger, Recent shifts in coastline change and shoreline stabilization linked to storm climate change. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, DOI: /esp Adams, P.N., Opdyke, N.D., and Jaeger, J.M., Isostatic uplift driven by karstification and sea-level oscillation: Modeling landscape evolution in north Florida. Geology, v. 38, p , doi: /g Van Eaton, A.R., A.R. Zimmerman, J.M. Jaeger, M. Brenner, W.F. Kenney, J.R. Schmid, A novel application of radionuclides for dating sediment cores from sandy, anthropogenically disturbed estuaries. Marine and Freshwater Research 61(11) , doi: /mf Jaeger, J.M., Ashish Mehta, A., Faas, R., and Grella, M., Anthropogenic Impacts on Sedimentary Sources and Processes in a Small Urbanized Subtropical Estuary, Florida. Journal of Coastal Research, v. 25 (1): Bhadha, J., Martin J.B., Jaeger J., Lindenberg M., and Cable J Implications for biogeochemical cycling from water circulation through estuarine sediments. Journal of Coastal Research, v. 23 (4), Cable J., Martin J.B., and J. Jaeger Evaluating the Bernoulli Effect on Seepage Meters and Submarine Ground Water Discharge Measurements. Limnology and Oceanography: Methods, 4: Martin, J. B., J. E. Cable, J.M. Jaeger, K. Hartl, and C.G. Smith Thermal and chemical evidence for rapid water exchange across the sediment-water interface by bioirrigation in the Indian River Lagoon, Florida. Limnology and Oceanography, 51: Mertz, L.M., Hart, M.L., and J. Jaeger, Preservation Potential Of Paleocyclone Deposits In Gulf of Mexico Coastal Sediments. Transactions - Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies, vol. 53, pp Synergistic Activities: Member of Coastal Community Resiliency Initiative Focus Group, Department of Economic Opportunity, State of Florida, March 2012-present U.S. Advisory Committee for Scientific Ocean Drilling, Member, Jan Oct. 2015; Chair, Oct present National Science Foundation, Division of Ocean Sciences GeoPRISMS Steering and Oversight Committee, Integrated Ocean Drilling Program, Science Steering and Evaluation Panel,

50 Associate Professor Agricultural & Applied Economics University of Georgia Athens, GA EDUCATION: CURRICULUM VITAE KRIESEL, WARREN 1977 B.S. University of Wisconsin/ River Falls 1983 M.S. Virginia Tech 1988 Ph.D. Ohio State University EXPERIENCE: Research Associate, Ohio State University 1988-present Assistant/Associate Professor, University of Georgia PUBLICATIONS: (selected from 75) Forgetting the Flood? Changes in Flood Risk Perceptions over Time. Land Econ, 89(4): (with A. Atreya and S. Ferreira) Alternative Housing Development Strategies in Georgia s Coastal Marshlands. Agricultural and Applied Economics Association selected paper, available at (with J. Mullen) Financing Beach Improvements: Comparing Two Approaches on the Georgia Coast. Coastal Mang. 32(4): (with A. Keeler and C. Landry) Participation in the National Flood Insurance Program: An Empirical Analysis for the Eastern United States Coast. J. of Risk and Insurance 71(3) (with C. Landry) Expanding the National Flood Insurance Program to Cover Coastal Erosion Damage. J. of Ag. and Res. Econs. 35(3): (with A. Keeler and C. Landry) Valuing Risk-Reducing Interventions with Hedonic Models: The Case of Erosion Protection. J. Ag. and Res. Econs. 21(1): (with J. Dorfman and A.G. Keeler) 1993 Estimating the benefits of shore erosion protection in Ohio's Lake Erie housing market. Water Resources Res. 29(4): (with A. Randall and F. Lichtkoppler) Coastal erosion and the residential property market. Sea Grant College Program, Ohio Cooperative Extension Service, Fact Sheet 044 and 044A (with F. Lichtkoppler). 6

51 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH: Jamie Brown Kruse Education and Professional Preparation University of Nebraska-Lincoln Ag Honors B.S. with distinction, 1979 Colorado State University-Ft. Collins Ag Economics M.S University of Arizona-Tucson Economics Ph.D Academic Positions HCAS Distinguished Professor of Economics, East Carolina University Sr. Scientist, Institute for Coastal Science and Policy, East Carolina University Professor, Department of Economics, East Carolina University Director, Center for Natural Hazards Research, East Carolina University 2010 Chief Economist and Sr. Advisor for the Social Sciences (IPA), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Director, Center for Coastal Systems Informatics and Modeling, East Carolina University Fellow, FDIC Center for Financial Research, Washington, D.C Eidgenossische Technische Hochschule (ETH) Zurich (Visiting Professor) Texas Tech University University of Colorado-Boulder Pertinent Publications-: Ericson, R and J. Kruse, Preference Representations for Catastrophic Risk Analysis, (invited book chapter) The Economics of the Global Environment, edited by G. Chichilinisky, Springer International Publishing AG (in press) Bin, O., T. Crawford, J. Kruse and C. Landry, On the importance of Time for GIS View Measures and their use in Hedonic Property Models, Transactions in GIS 18(2) , Kesete, Y., J. Peng, X. Shan, Y. Gao, R. Davidson, L. Novick, and J. Kruse, Modeling Insurer- Homeowner Interactions in Managing Natural Disaster Risk, Risk Analysis 34(6), , Kruse, J.,B. Ewing, and M.A. Thompson, Wind Hazard Risk Perception: an experimental test, Experimental Methods, Environmental Economics Vol. 8, 2008, T. Cherry, S. Kroll and J. Shogren, eds., Routledge. ISBN , pp Bin, O., J. Kruse and C. Landry, Flood Hazards, Insurance Rates, and Amenities: Evidence from the Coastal Housing Market, Journal of Risk and Insurance 75(1) 2008, pp Kruse, J. and M. Thompson, Valuing Low Probability Risk: Survey and Experimental Evidence, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 50(4): , Kruse, J., S. Rassenti, S. Reynolds and V. Smith, Bertrand-Edgeworth Competition in Experimental Markets, Econometrica. 62(2): , Synergistic Activity Workshop Participant and Speaker- Assessing the Socioeconomic Impact and Value of Geospatial Information, sponsored by NASA, USGS, IEEE-USA; Economics of Community Disaster Resilience, sponsored by NIST, American Society of Civil Engineers; Living with Extreme Weather, sponsored by NOAA. White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, member Subcommittee of Social Behavioral and Economic Science; member Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology (SOST); Co-chair SOST Interagency Working Group on Ocean Social Science; member White House Deepwater Horizon National Incident Command, Economic Solutions Team, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) member Research Council; Chair Research Council Social Science Committee; Chair Research Council Ad Hoc Committee on Scientific Integrity; Lead, Social Science Theme NOAA Deepwater Horizon Science Team, Awards, East Carolina University, 2011 Women of Distinction, 2012 HCAS Distinguished Professorship, 2012 Lifetime Achievement Award for Excellence in Research and Creative Work. 7

52 James Brady London Research Professor, Jim Self Center on the Future, Clemson University, Clemson, SC , (864) , Education: Clemson University, Clemson, SC Applied Economics, Ph.D., University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC Economics, M.S., University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC Business Economics, B.S., Employment: Clemson University, College of Architecture, Art and Humanities, Clemson, SC, , Associate Dean for Research and Graduate Studies. Clemson University, Department of Planning and Landscape Architecture, Clemson, SC, 1985 to 2013, Professor/Associate Professor; 2005 to 2008, Director, City & Regional Planning Program; 2013, Interim Chair, Department of Planning, Landscape, Development & Preservation, Clemson University, Policy Studies PhD Program, Clemson, SC, 2000 to 2011, Coordinator of Natural Resources Section. The College of Charleston, Center for Metropolitan Affairs & Public Policy and Department of Business Administration and Economics, Charleston, SC, 1979 to 1984, Assistant Professor. Pertinent Publications: London, J.B., Fisher, J.S., Zarillo, G.A., Montgomery, J.E., and Edge, B.L., (1981) A Study of Shore Erosion Management Options in South Carolina, South Carolina Sea Grant Report. London J.B. and Volonte, C.R., (1991) "The Land Use Implications of Sea Level Rise at Myrtle Beach, SC," Coastal Management, 19(2), pp London, J.B., et al, (1998) Options for Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the Chinese Industrial Sector, Energy Policy, 26(6), pp London, J. (2004) "The Implications of Climate Change on Small Island Developing States", Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 47(4), pp London, J.B., Dyckman, C.S., Allen, J.S., St. John, C.C., Wood, I.L., and Jackson, S.R., (2009) An Assessment of Shoreline Management Options along the South Carolina Coast, Report to SC Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management. London, J.B., (2012) The Implications of Climate Change on Coastal Real Estate, in Burkett,.R. and Davidson, M.A. [Eds.]. Coastal Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability: A Technical Input to the 2012 National Climate Assessment. Cooperative Report to the 2013 National Climate Assessment. Washington, DC: Island Press. Dyckman, C.S., St. John, C.C. and London, J.B., (2014) "Realizing Managed Retreat and Innovation in State-Level Coastal Management Planning," Ocean & Coastal Management, 102, pp Synergestic Activities: Member, Pickens County (SC) Council, Fellow, Strom Thurmond Institute, Clemson Univ present; Chair Faculty Advisory Comm. Visiting Associate Professor, Australian School of Environmental Studies, Griffith University, Brisbane, Western Australia School of Mines, Kalgoorlie, 1995, Member, Faculty of Economic Development, Clemson University. President, London & Associates, Economic, Policy, & Planning Consultants. Consultant to: The World Bank, Organization of American States, Nature Conservancy, National Audubon Society, Biltmore Estate, Wild Dunes Resort, International Paper Company, Union Camp, Inc., Umbro International, Inc., The Cliffs Development Corp, SC Governor's Office, miscellaneous public and private entities. 8

53 John Patrick Walsh II Geol. Sciences, Inst. for Coastal Science & Policy, East Carolina Univ., Greenville NC UNC Coastal Studies Institute, Manteo, NC Phone: (252) ; Fax: 252) ; Education: Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UCSD, San Diego, CA, Geosciences Post-Doc, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, Geological Oceanography, PhD, 2001 State University of New York, Stony Brook, NY, Marine Science, MS, 1997 Colgate University, Hamilton, NY, Geology, B.A., 1995 Employment: 1/12 present Co-Program Head, Coastal Processes, UNC Coastal Studies Inst. 8/10 present Associate Professor, East Carolina University 1/04 8/10 Assistant Professor, East Carolina University 10/01 12/03 Postgraduate Research Geologist, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego, CA 1/98 9/01 Research Assistant, School of Oceanography, University of Washington Pertinent Publications (*denotes advised student author): *Lagomasino, D., D.R. Corbett, J.P. Walsh Influence of Wind-Driven Inundation and Coastal Geomorphology on Sedimentation in Two Microtidal Marshes, Pamlico River Estuary, NC. Estuarine, Coastal, and Shelf Science. DOI /s *Eulie, D., Walsh, J.P. and D.R. Corbett High-Resolution Measurements of Shoreline Change and Application of Balloon-Aerial Photography, Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine System, North Carolina, USA. Limnology and Oceanography: Methods, 11, *Cowart, L., Corbett, D.R. and J.P. Walsh Shoreline Change along Sheltered Coastlines: Insights from the Neuse River Estuary, NC, USA, Remote Sensing, 3(7): *Cowart, L., Walsh, J.P. and D.R. Corbett Analyzing Estuarine Shoreline Change: A Case Study of Cedar Island, NC. Journal of Coastal Research, 6(5): Walsh, J.P. and C.A. Nittrouer Towards an Understanding of Fine-grained River- Sediment Dispersal on Continental Margins. Marine Geology, 263: Synergistic Activities: 2012 to present Working with NC Aquarium on Roanoke Island to communicate estuarine research and information at their new sound-side pier to present Working with NC Division of Coastal Management and other partners to map and analyzed shoreline characteristics and changes in North Carolina 2007 to present Leading the development and deployment of a web portal for communicating coastal hazards information in North Carolina Duke-UNC Oceanographic Consortium Advisory Committee member Worked with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and University of North Carolina system partners to build an estuarine dynamics observing system. 9

54 J. Cost share letters

55 I. LETTERS OF FROM COMMUNITIES: Town of Nags Head, North Carolina City of Folly Beach, South Carolina City of Tybee Island, Georgia City of Fernandina Beach, Florida

56

57

58

59

60

61 Cost Share Statement The College of Charleston is providing two items in order to fulfill the required 25% cost share. In year two, $2000 of the $2500 GIS lab fee is being contributed as cost share. In addition, the College has reduced our federally-negotiated indirect rate of 47.86% to 23.85%, for a total of $8,450 of indirect costs being contributed. In total, $10,450 will be provided as cost share for the proposed project. Susan Anderson, Assistant Vice President for Research & Director, Office of Research & Grants Administration 5/28/2015 Date

62 28 May 2015 Grant Support Services Clemson University 108 Barre Hall Clemson, SC P F Jackie Whitehouse Florida Sea Grant PO Box Gainesville, Florida Dear Ms. Whitehouse: Enclosed is a proposal for your consideration for a project entitled Assessing Local Impacts to Enhance Community Resiliency along the SC Coast from Dr. James London. Clemson University is aware of the 25% cost share match for this project and is committing to $82,852 in non-federal funds. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact Jessica Adkins at jeadkin@clemson.edu or Thank you for the opportunity to submit this proposal. We look forward to working with you in the future! Sincerely, R. Larry Dooley, Ph.D. Interim VP for Research

63 May 28, 2015 Clemson University Office of Sponsored Programs Clemson, SC ATTN: Jessica Adkins RE: Assessing Local Impacts to Enhance Community Resilience along the South Atlantic Coast, Under the Direction of Dr. Clark Alexander Dear Ms. Adkins: The University of Georgia Research Foundation, Inc. (UGARF) is pleased to submit the above referenced proposal in support of Dr. James London s proposal to Sea Grant. This proposal has been administratively approved by the appropriate University officials. Support is requested for two years in the amount of $125,056. Cost share in the amount of $13,895 will be provided for this project should the proposal be successful. If this proposal is successful, UGARF will ensure compliance with all pertinent Federal regulations and policies. The subrecipient agreement should be between your institution and UGA, and should be sent to my office for review and execution. Questions regarding the technical aspects of this proposal should be directed to Dr. Clark Alexander at (912) Administrative and/or fiscal questions should be directed to Jennifer Jones at (706) or via at jllester@uga.edu. Sincerely, Jennifer Jones Assistant Grants Officer Office for Sponsored Programs University of Georgia