The objective of this call for proposals was to support projects that will distill engineering design lessons, design criteria, and future design guidance from an evaluation of both the benefits and vulnerabilities observed in coastal engineering projects implemented at coastal military or analogous civilian locations for the period of approximately 1970 to 2020.

Resilience of infrastructure is imperative for continuity of operations and mission readiness of coastal installations. Outcomes from this retrospective assessment of coastal protection infrastructure will enhance coastal planning and design criteria resilience for the benefit of the DoD.

Natural and built coastal infrastructure projects engineered to prevent damage from storm surges, coastal erosion, and coastal flooding in many cases have a long implementation history. The objective of this effort was to examine the long-term effectiveness of those engineering approaches and distill vulnerabilities and opportunities for improved future design and implementation at DoD installations. Although the past 25 to 50 years is specifically called out in the objective, implemented projects with longer histories are welcome for consideration. In addition, preference will be given to analysis of implemented projects that have undergone or observed conditions that severely tested the initial design parameters. The availability of relevant data, detailed design, and implementation information must be described in the proposal. Proposals may consider projects implemented on DoD installations or analogous civilian infrastructure relevant to DoD installations.

In proposal development, proposers may be considered, but are not limited to, addressing numerous potentially material project elements such as the a priori metrics for implementation success, a project’s intended purpose, the planned and actually realized effectiveness of the project, vulnerabilities and unintended benefits, elements not included or considered in implementation due to resource constraints or other limitations and the impact of their elimination, if any, on the long-term effectiveness of the project. In the alternative, if there were additional elements and features added to the project later, the impacts of those changes may be additionally considered.

If the proposed analysis includes projects in which any member of the project team or a team member’s parent organization materially participated in either the design or implementation of a project to be analyzed, the proposal must describe how their project team and analysis approach will avoid the bias of self-assessment. Preference may be given to teams without prior connection to a project proposed for assessment. When possible, proposers should compare more than one project, either at the same installation or across installations or locations that are similarly situated, to improve the generalization of findings. When selecting prior projects, preference will be given to proposals that can lean heavily on quantifiable data to support their assessment and describe a clear data access plan. Proposers are expected to partner with subject matter experts from a range of relevant fields and industry sectors.

Pre-proposals followed the general instructions provided on the ESTCP website and should consider the following information:

• Abstract: one paragraph summary of the prior projects that will be assessed, the intended purpose of those prior projects, the assessment approach and plan for obtaining data on project effectiveness and expected benefit for future demonstrations on DoD installations.
• Description of Selected Projects: description of the location, design, and purpose of the prior projects; discussion on team’s involvement in the prior projects, and how any conflict of interest will be prevented.
• Technical Approach: detailed description of assessment approach, including the availability of data to determine project effectiveness, and whether additional data collection will be required. Proposers should explain how the surrounding community was both negatively and/or positively impacted by the project(s). Proposers should clearly state the expected deliverable from the assessment.
• Expected Benefits: discussion of how the assessment will be applicable and beneficial to selecting and designing adaptation technologies for DoD installations at risk of coastal erosion, coastal flooding, and storm surges, in the context of sea level rise.
• Technology Transfer: discussion of how the conclusions from the assessment can be applied to future engineering practice and will facilitate DoD wide adoption.

The cost and time to meet the requirements of this call for proposals are at the discretion of the proposer. The proposals must describe a complete effort. It is anticipated that the scope of this call for proposals is such that a multi-disciplinary team will be required to execute a successful effort. Single investigator efforts will not be of sufficient scope to compete successfully. The proposer should incorporate the appropriate time, schedule, and cost requirements to accomplish the scope of work proposed.