This map contains two layers of data pertaining to the State of Delaware Coastal Zone Act (CZA).The “Coastal Zone” layer is the boundary of the regulated area under the State CZA.The “Coastal Zone Facilities” layer are heavy industry facilities that were existing in Delaware’s Coastal Zone prior to the establishment of the CZA.Learn more about the CZA: https://de.gov/czaDelaware also operates under the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA), which defines the coastal zone management area as the entire State of Delaware. A federal consistency review may be necessary under CZMA if a project is or requires a federal action. Learn more about the CZMA: https://de.gov/fedcon

These data were created as part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office for Coastal Management's efforts to create an online mapping viewer called the Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flooding Impacts Viewer. It depicts potential sea level rise and its associated impacts on the nation's coastal areas. The purpose of the mapping viewer is to provide coastal managers and scientists with a preliminary look at sea level rise and coastal flooding impacts. The viewer is a screening-level tool that uses nationally consistent data sets and analyses. Data and maps provided can be used at several scales to help gauge trends and prioritize actions for different scenarios. The Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flooding Impacts Viewer may be accessed at: https://coast.noaa.gov/slr. This metadata record describes the New Jersey, Middle digital elevation model (DEM), which is a part of a series of DEMs produced for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office for Coastal Management's Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flooding Impacts Viewer described above. This DEM includes the best available lidar known to exist at the time of DEM creation that met project specifications. This DEM includes data for Burlington, Mercer, Monmouth, and Ocean Counties. The DEM was produced from the following lidar data sets: 1. 2019 New Jersey South Jersey FEMA 2. 2019 NJ Southern NJ 3. 2015 USGS Delaware Valley 4. 2014 NGS Coastal Mapping Program Topobathy Lidar: Post-Sandy Atlantic Seaboard 5. 2014 USGS New Jersey CMGP Sandy The DEM is referenced vertically to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88) with vertical units of meters and horizontally to the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83). The resolution of the DEM is approximately 3 meters.

description: The Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFIRM) Database depicts flood risk information and supporting data used to develop the risk data. The primary risk classifications used are the 1-percent-annual-chance flood event, the 0.2-percent-annual- chance flood event, and areas of minimal flood risk. The DFIRM Database is derived from Flood Insurance Studies (FISs), previously published Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), flood hazard analyses performed in support of the FISs and FIRMs, and new mapping data, where available. The FISs and FIRMs are published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The file is georeferenced to earth's surface using the Delaware (FIPS 0700) State Plane projection and coordinate system. The specifications for the horizontal control of DFIRM data files are consistent with those required for mapping at a scale of 1:12,000. Coastal study data as defined in FEMA Gudelines and Specifications, Appendix D: Guidance for Coastal Flooding Analyses and Mapping, submitted as a result of a coastal study. Appendix D notes that a variety of analytical methodologies may be used to establish Base (1-percent-annual-chance) Flood Elevations (BFEs) and floodplains throughout coastal areas of the United States. Appendix D itemizes references for the methodologies currently in use by FEMA for specific coastal flood hazards, provides general guidance for documentation of a coastal flood hazard analysis, specifies flood hazard analysis procedures for the Great Lakes coasts, and outlines intermediate data submissions for coastal flood hazard analyses with new storm surge modeling and revised stillwater flood level (SWFL). (Source: FEMA Guidelines and Specs, Appendix D Guidance for Coastal Flooding Analyses and Mapping, Section D.1); abstract: The Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFIRM) Database depicts flood risk information and supporting data used to develop the risk data. The primary risk classifications used are the 1-percent-annual-chance flood event, the 0.2-percent-annual- chance flood event, and areas of minimal flood risk. The DFIRM Database is derived from Flood Insurance Studies (FISs), previously published Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), flood hazard analyses performed in support of the FISs and FIRMs, and new mapping data, where available. The FISs and FIRMs are published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The file is georeferenced to earth's surface using the Delaware (FIPS 0700) State Plane projection and coordinate system. The specifications for the horizontal control of DFIRM data files are consistent with those required for mapping at a scale of 1:12,000. Coastal study data as defined in FEMA Gudelines and Specifications, Appendix D: Guidance for Coastal Flooding Analyses and Mapping, submitted as a result of a coastal study. Appendix D notes that a variety of analytical methodologies may be used to establish Base (1-percent-annual-chance) Flood Elevations (BFEs) and floodplains throughout coastal areas of the United States. Appendix D itemizes references for the methodologies currently in use by FEMA for specific coastal flood hazards, provides general guidance for documentation of a coastal flood hazard analysis, specifies flood hazard analysis procedures for the Great Lakes coasts, and outlines intermediate data submissions for coastal flood hazard analyses with new storm surge modeling and revised stillwater flood level (SWFL). (Source: FEMA Guidelines and Specs, Appendix D Guidance for Coastal Flooding Analyses and Mapping, Section D.1)

The area of coverage consists of 192 square miles of benthic habitat mapped from 2005 to 2007 in the Delaware River and Upper Delaware Bay. The bottom sediment map was constructed by the utilization of a Roxann Seabed Classification System and extensive sediment grab samples. Data was collected in a gridded trackline configuration, with tracklines spacing of 100 meters parallel to the shoreline...

description: The Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFIRM) Database depicts flood risk information and supporting data used to develop the risk data. The primary risk classifications used are the 1-percent-annual-chance flood event, the 0.2-percent-annual- chance flood event, and areas of minimal flood risk. The DFIRM Database is derived from Flood Insurance Studies (FISs), previously published Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), flood hazard analyses performed in support of the FISs and FIRMs, and new mapping data, where available. The FISs and FIRMs are published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The file is georeferenced to earth's surface using the Delaware (FIPS 0700) State Plane projection and coordinate system. The specifications for the horizontal control of DFIRM data files are consistent with those required for mapping at a scale of 1:12,000. Coastal study data as defined in FEMA Gudelines and Specifications, Appendix D: Guidance for Coastal Flooding Analyses and Mapping, submitted as a result of a coastal study. Appendix D notes that a variety of analytical methodologies may be used to establish Base (1-percent-annual-chance) Flood Elevations (BFEs) and floodplains throughout coastal areas of the United States. Appendix D itemizes references for the methodologies currently in use by FEMA for specific coastal flood hazards, provides general guidance for documentation of a coastal flood hazard analysis, specifies flood hazard analysis procedures for the Great Lakes coasts, and outlines intermediate data submissions for coastal flood hazard analyses with new storm surge modeling and revised stillwater flood level (SWFL). (Source: FEMA Guidelines and Specs, Appendix D Guidance for Coastal Flooding Analyses and Mapping, Section D.1); abstract: The Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFIRM) Database depicts flood risk information and supporting data used to develop the risk data. The primary risk classifications used are the 1-percent-annual-chance flood event, the 0.2-percent-annual- chance flood event, and areas of minimal flood risk. The DFIRM Database is derived from Flood Insurance Studies (FISs), previously published Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), flood hazard analyses performed in support of the FISs and FIRMs, and new mapping data, where available. The FISs and FIRMs are published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The file is georeferenced to earth's surface using the Delaware (FIPS 0700) State Plane projection and coordinate system. The specifications for the horizontal control of DFIRM data files are consistent with those required for mapping at a scale of 1:12,000. Coastal study data as defined in FEMA Gudelines and Specifications, Appendix D: Guidance for Coastal Flooding Analyses and Mapping, submitted as a result of a coastal study. Appendix D notes that a variety of analytical methodologies may be used to establish Base (1-percent-annual-chance) Flood Elevations (BFEs) and floodplains throughout coastal areas of the United States. Appendix D itemizes references for the methodologies currently in use by FEMA for specific coastal flood hazards, provides general guidance for documentation of a coastal flood hazard analysis, specifies flood hazard analysis procedures for the Great Lakes coasts, and outlines intermediate data submissions for coastal flood hazard analyses with new storm surge modeling and revised stillwater flood level (SWFL). (Source: FEMA Guidelines and Specs, Appendix D Guidance for Coastal Flooding Analyses and Mapping, Section D.1)

Digital flood-inundation maps for coastal communities within Cape May County in New Jersey were created by water surfaces generated by an Advanced Circulation hydrodynamic (ADCIRC) and Simulating Waves Nearshore (SWAN) model from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Region II coastal analysis and mapping study (Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2014). Six synthetic modeled tropical storm events from a library of 159 events were selected based on parameters including landfall location or closest approach location, maximum wind speed, central pressure, and radii of winds. Two storm events were selected for the tide gage providing two "scenarios" and accompanying inundation-map libraries. The contents of this data release support the following publication: Suro, T.P., Niemoczynski, M.J., Boetsma, A.C., and Niemoczynski, L.M., 2023, Moderate flood level scenarios: synthetic storm-driven flood-inundation maps for coastal communities in 10 New Jersey counties: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2023-5005, 64 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20235005. The landing page on which this and 24 other storm scenarios reside is: Niemoczynski, L.M., Niemoczynski, M.J., Boetsma, A.C., and Suro, T.P., 2023, Synthetic storm-driven flood-inundation grids for coastal communities in 10 New Jersey counties: U.S Geological Survey data release, https://doi.org/10.5066/P9RVF9P8. References cited: Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2014, FEMA Region II Coastal Analysis and Mapping Study, accessed November 2, 2018, at http://www.region2coastal.com/resources/about-the-coastal-flood-study/

The Coastal Program of Delaware's Division of Soil and Water conservation (DNREC), the University of Delaware, Partnership for the Delaware Estuary, and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection have partnered and are carrying out a bottom and sub-bottom imaging project to identify and map the benthic habitat and sub-bottom sediments of Delaware Bay and River. This project was init...

Environmental Sensitivity Index (ESI) data characterize the marine and coastal environments and wildlife based on sensitivity to spilled oil. There are three main components: shoreline habitats, sensitive biological resources, and human-use resources. The shoreline and intertidal areas are ranked based on sensitivity determined by: (1) Shoreline type (substrate, grain size, tidal elevation, origin); (2) Exposure to wave and tidal energy; (3) Biological productivity and sensitivity; and (4) Ease of cleanup. The biology layers focus on threatened/endangered species, areas of high concentration and areas where sensitive life stages may occur. Supporting data tables provide species/location-specific abundance, seasonality, status, life history, and source information Human use resources mapped include managed areas (parks, refuges, critical habitats, etc) and resources that may be impacted by oiling and/or clean-up, such as beaches, archaeological sites marinas etc. ESIs are available for the majority of the US coastline, as well as the US territories. ESI data are available in a variety of GIS formats as well as PDF maps.For more information go to or to download complete ESI data sets go to: https://response.restoration.noaa.gov/esiFor the full metadata record please go to: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/inport/item/53986For online ESI query tools, see the Environmental Response Management Application (ERMA): https://response.restoration.noaa.gov/resources/maps-and-spatial-data/environmental-response-management-application-erma

This data set contains the rock unit polygons for the surficial geology in ESRI shapefile format for the Delaware Coastal Plain covered by DGS Geologic Map No. 12 (Lewes-Cape Henlopen area). The original Geologic Map Description of the published map follows: The surficial geology of the Lewes and Cape Henlopen quadrangles reflects the geologic history of the Delaware Bay estuary and successive high and low stands of sea levels during the Quaternary. The subsurface Beaverdam Formation was deposited as part of a fluvial-estuarine system during the Pliocene, the sediments of which now form the core of the Delmarva Peninsula. Following a period of glacial outwash during the early Pleistocene represented by the Columbia Formation found to the northwest of the map area (Ramsey, 1997), the Delaware River and Estuary developed their current positions. The Lynch Heights and Scotts Corners formations (Ramsey, 1993, 1997, 2001) represent shoreline and estuarine deposits associated with high stands of sea level during the middle to late Pleistocene on the margins of the Delaware Estuary. In the map area, the Lynch Heights Formation includes relict spit and dune deposits at the ancestral intersection of the Atlantic Coast and Delaware Bay systems, similar in geomorphic position to the modern Cape Henlopen. The relationship between the Lynch Heights and Scotts Corners is shown in cross-section A-A'. The Lynch Heights is composed of a fine, well-sorted sand. The break in topography (scarp) between the surface of the Lynch Heights (at approx. 25 ft and higher) and that of the Scotts Corners (at approx. 6 to 15 feet) represents ancestral shorelines of Delaware Bay during a high sea level contemporaneous with the deposition of the Scotts Corners. The cross section also shows two depositional units within the Scotts Corners. A younger shoreline sequence with sand at the land surface has cut into an older unit (marked by silt at the land surface). Gravel beds within both units represent shoreline deposits like those found along the modern Delaware Bay in the area. Two depositional units within the Scotts Corners is consistent with observations of the Scotts Corners by Ramsey (1997) just to the north of the map area. Both of these units were deposited during the last interglacial period. The older unit may be attributed to the high sea stand at 120,000 years B.P. and the younger unit to one at 80,000 years B.P. (Ramsey, 1997). Quaternary deposits were transgressed by Holocene swamp, marsh, shoreline, estuarine and spit deposits. The spit deposits form the modern Cape Henlopen (Ramsey, et al., 2000, Ramsey, 1999). Cross-section B-B' depicts sediment distribution within the Cape Henlopen complex and stratigraphic relationships with units underlying the Holocene spit deposits. Offshore surficial sediment distribution is a compilation of historical offshore core and grab sample textural descriptions and data (Hoyt, 1982, Maley, 1981, Marx, 1981, Oostdam, 1971, Sheridan et al., 1974, Strom, 1972, 1976, Terchunian, 1985, Weil, 1976, Wethe et al., 1982, 1982a, 1983 and unpublished data in DGS files). From core descriptions, the top six inches was used as the surficial sediment type. Sediment textures shown on the map show a general distribution of sediment size over a large area. Site-specific information about bottom sediment textures may require additional sampling. Refer to the adjacent triangular diagram for sediment texture abbreviations. Historical shoreline positions are from historical U.S. Coast&Geodetic Survey T-sheets (1884) and topographic maps (1944, 1977). Stratigraphic units found at depth within the map area are shown with the geophysical log of Ni31-07, a 1035-foot deep geothermal test hole drilled in 1978 for the U.S. Department of Energy. Major aquifer units are also shown (Andres, 1986).

Digital flood-inundation maps for coastal communities within Cumberland County in New Jersey were created by water surfaces generated by an Advanced Circulation hydrodynamic (ADCIRC) and Simulating Waves Nearshore (SWAN) model from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Region II coastal analysis and mapping study (Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2014). Six synthetic modeled tropical storm events from a library of 159 events were selected based on parameters including landfall location or closest approach location, maximum wind speed, central pressure, and radii of winds. Two storm events were selected for the tide gage providing two "scenarios" and accompanying inundation-map libraries. The contents of this data release support the following publication: Suro, T.P., Niemoczynski, M.J., Boetsma, A.C., and Niemoczynski, L.M., 2023, Moderate flood level scenarios: synthetic storm-driven flood-inundation maps for coastal communities in 10 New Jersey counties: U.S. Geolo ...

This item is the root of the tree that represents the navigable items or 'enabled' items. Adding aggregations or data items to this will display them as top-level items on the portal home. This item is not displayed on the portal, so none of these fields need ever be edited.

This data set contains the rock unit polygons for the surficial geology in the Delaware Coastal Plain covered by DGS Geologic Map No. 11 (Milton-Ellendale area) in ESRI shapefile format. The original Geologic Map Description of the published map follows: The surficial geology of the Ellendale and Milton quadrangles reflects the geologic history of the Delaware Bay estuary and successive high and low sea levels during the Quaternary. Ramsey (1992) interpreted the Beaverdam Formation as deposits of a fluvial-estuarine system during the Pliocene. Sediment supply was high, in part due to geomorphic adjustments in the Appalachians related to the first major North Hemisphere glaciations around 2.4 million years ago. The Beaverdam Formation forms the core of the central Delmarva Peninsula around which wrap the Quaternary deposits. The Columbia Formation which is recognized to the north of the map area was deposited as the result of the distal portion of glacial outwash of the Delaware and possibly Susquehanna rivers during the early Pleistocene (Ramsey, 1997). After the deposition of the Columbia, the Delaware River and Bay developed their present geographic positions. In the northwest portion of the map area contiguous with the area mapped by Ramsey (1993) as the Columbia Formation, the surficial unit has many similarities in texture, color, bedding, geophysical log character, and thickness with the Beaverdam Formation to the south and east. No diagnostic pollen-bearing beds or other fossils have been found in the area to aid in identification of the unit. Because of the continuity in thickness and lithic character with the Beaverdam, the area in mapped as Tbd?. Where the Beaverdam is mapped, silty clay to clayey silt beds yielded pollen assemblages characteristic of the unit (Andres and Ramsey, 1995, 1996; Groot and Jordan, 1999). The Lynch Heights and Scotts Corners formations (Ramsey, 1993, 1997) represent shoreline and estuarine deposits associated with high stands of sea level during the middle to late Pleistocene on the margins of Delaware Bay. The western boundary of these units is found at a topographic break (scarp) that marks the ancestral, erosional shoreline of Delaware Bay during the sea-level high stand. Upland dunes (Qd) are extensive linear dunes and large dune fields found along the contact between the Lynch Heights and older deposits to the west. Some of these dunes may be relict coastal dunes associated with the ancestral shoreline of Delaware Bay at the time of Lynch Heights deposition. Dunes to the west may be younger; late Pleistocene or early Holocene in age. Carolina Bay deposits are circular to semi-circular depressions with sand rims found in the northern half of the Milton Quadrangle. They are thought to be cold climate features associated with reduced tree cover and increased winds during the glacial periods of the Pleistocene (Ramsey, 1997). Quaternary upland deposits (Qud) cover much of the southern half of the Ellendale Quadrangle. These deposits represent deposition in swamps associated with poor drainage and eolian deposition during cold climate phase of the late Pleistocene and early Holocene. The eolian sands are found both as small dunes in this area, but more commonly, as sheets of fine to medium sand with no to rare sedimentary structures. Although no radiocarbon dates have been collected from this area, the age of the deposits is considered to be latest Pleistocene to early Holocene on the bases of similarities in stratigraphic position and depositional style with the Cypress Swamp Formation (Andres and Howard, 2000) found to the south of the map area. Quaternary and older deposits are transgressed by Holocene swamp, marsh, shoreline, and estuarine deposits along the stream valleys and shoreline of Delaware Bay. Stratigraphic units found at depth within the map area are shown with the geophysical log of Ng42-17, a deep test well drilled in Milton. Major aquifer units are also shown. Cross section A-A' is a north-south section roughly along Route 113 through the center of the Ellendale Quadrangle. It shows the relationship of the Beaverdam Formation (Tbd?) and the Beaverdam Formation (Tbd). Also shown are the units underlying the surficial units and position of the major aquifers. Cross-section B-B' is a west-east section showing the relationships between the Quaternary-Tertiary deposits undifferentiated, Lynch Heights, and Scotts Corners formations as well as underlying stratigraphic units. Aquifers shown in the cross-sections are water-bearing sand layers that are used for public, domestic, agricultural, and industrial sources of water. Where the surficial or water-table aquifer is in contact with sands of an underlying geologic unit such as the Manokin formation, the entire water-bearing unit is called the Columbia aquifer.

The coastal vulnerability index (CVI)provides a preliminary overview, at a National scale, of the relative susceptibility of the Nation's coast to sea-level rise. This initial classification is based upon variables including geomorphology, regional coastal slope, tide range, wave height, relative sea-level rise, and shoreline erosion and accretion rates. The combination of these variables and the association of these variables to each other furnish a broad overview of coastal regions where physical changes are likely to occur due to sea-level rise.

To make this coastal vulnerability index data more accessible to the public and other agencies, the USGS created this web service. This web service was created utilizing ESRI ArcServer. Vector layers were collected, organized by the coastal regions of the U.S., U.S. Atlantic, Pacific and Gulf of Mexico Coasts, and symbology made consistent among similar data sets. This service meets open geospatial consortium standards.

The geographic information system (GIS) data layers from this web service are cataloged by region for ease of access.

The area of coverage consists of 38 square miles of benthic habitat mapped from 2003 to 2004 along the middle to lower Delaware Bay Coast. The bottom sediment map was constructed by the utilization of a Roxann Seabed Classification System and extensive sediment grab samples. Data was collected in a gridded trackline configuration, with tracklines spacing of 100 meters parallel to the shoreline and 200 meters perpendicular to the shoreline.This project is an extension of the work currently being performed in Delaware waters by DNREC's Delaware Coastal Program's Delaware Bay Benthic Mapping Project.The bottom sediment point data, which has been classified according to the existing benthic mapping Roxann box plot, are converted from a number that categorizes the point according to its corresponding box (in the Roxann) into a number which reflects the sediment properties of each box in relation to one another. A ranking scale is used to allow a statistical griding scheme to interpolate between sediment data points, while minimizing erroneous sediment classifications and allowing gradational sediment deposits to be gridded. A ranking scale from 0 to 28 was used for this project, with 0 representing the finest grained classifications (fluidized clay) and 28 representing the coarsest grained classifications (dense shell material). Table 1 illustrates the distribution of sediment classifications along the ranking scale, which takes into account the relation of sediment types and grain sizes to one another using both the Wentworth Scale and Shepard's classification system. Finer grains are more similar in their deposition environments, such as clay and silts, because they reflect similar current regimes, sorting, and reworking patterns (Poppe et al., 2003). While coarse sediments are much more dissimilar to finer grains, with respect to current velocities, sorting, and winnowing, the finer grains are much more closely related in their sediment diameters that the coarser grains as you increase in Phi size and/or diameter. These account for the close clustering of coarse grained deposit descriptions at the upper end of the ranking scale, while the finer grained sediments show a gradation as you increase in the rating scale.The bottom sediment data is gridded in Surfer 8, a surface and terrain modeling program, using block kriging and a nugget effect. This statistical griding technique estimates the average value of a variable within a prescribed local area (Isaaks and Srivastava, 1989). Block kriging utilizes the existing point data values, weights the values of the data depending upon the proximity to the point being estimated, to discretize the local area into an array of estimated data value points and then averaging those individual point estimates together to get an average estimated value over the area of interest (Isaaks and Srivastava, 1989). A variogram is constructed for the data, and the resultant spatial model that is developed from the variogram is used in the block kriging surface model to more accurately interpolate the sediment data . The fitted model was a nugget effect (with an error variance of 21.8%) and a linear model (with a slope of 0.00286 and an anisotropy of 1, which represents a complete lack of spatial correlation). The accuracy of the estimation is dependent upon the grid size of the area of interpolation, the size of each cell within the grid, and the number of discretized data points that are necessary to estimate the cells within that grid spacing. The grid size that was used to interpolate the bottom sediment maps was 442 lines x 454 lines, with a cell size of 44.93 m2. The nugget effect is added to allow the griding to assume there is very little, if any, lateral correlation or trends within the bottom sediment (Isaaks and Srivastava, 1989). The nugget effect model entails a complete lack of spatial correlation; the point data values at any particular location bear no similarity even to adjacent data values (Isaaks and Srivastava, 1989). Without the nugget effect the griding would assume that you could only have a linear progression of sediment types and would insert all the sediment types along the scale between two sediment types (i.e. silty fine to medium sands and fine to medium sand with varing amounts of pebbles would be inserted between fine sand and coarse sand even though that is not what is occurring along the bottom. The sediment data is gridded with no drift for the data interpolation, also helping to minimize erroneous classifications. Sediment Classification Ranking Sediment Description 0-11-2 Clay, 2-33-44-55-66-7 Silt, 7-88-9 Sandy Silts,9-1010-11 Fine Sand, 11-1212-13 Silty Fine to Medium Sands, 13-14 Silty Medium Sand, 14-1515-16 Fine to Medium Sand,16-1717-18 Fine to Medium Sand with abundant shell material and/or pebbles, 18-1919-20 Coarse Sand with varying amounts of pebbles, 20-2121-2222-23 Moderate Shell Material/Sandy Pebbles, 23-2424-2525-26 Abundant Shell Material/Gravel 26-2727-28, Dense Oyster Shell

Hurricane Sandy, which made landfall on October 29, 2012, near Brigantine, New Jersey, had a significant impact on coastal New Jersey, including the large areas of emergent wetlands at Edwin B. Forsythe National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) and the Barnegat Bay region. In response to Hurricane Sandy, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has undertaken several projects to assess the impacts of the storm and provide data and scientific analysis to support recovery and restoration efforts. As part of these efforts, the USGS Coastal and Marine Geology Program (CMGP) sponsored Coastal National Elevation Database (CoNED) Applications Project in collaboration with the USGS National Geospatial Program (NGP), and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) developed a three-dimensional (3D) 1-meter topobathymetric elevation models (TBDEMs) for the New Jersey/Delaware sub-region including the Delaware Estuary and adjacent coastline. The integrated elevation data are extending the USGS 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) Elevation Dataset within the Hurricane Sandy impact zone to enable the widespread creation of flood, hurricane, and sea-level rise inundation hazard maps. More information on the USGS CoNED project is available at http://topotools.cr.usgs.gov/coned/index.php. The CoNED Applications Project team is also developing new applications for pre- and post-Hurricane Sandy regional lidar datasets for mapping the spatial extent of coastal wetlands. These new methods have been developed to derive detailed land/water polygons for an area in coastal New Jersey, which is dominated by a complex configuration of emergent wetlands and open water. Using pre- and post-Hurricane Sandy lidar data, repeatable geospatial methods were used to map the land/water spatial configuration at a regional scale to complement wetland mapping that uses traditional methods such as photointerpretation and image classification.

Coastal erosion is a widespread process along most open-ocean shores of the United States that affects both developed and natural coastlines. As the coast changes, there are a wide range of ways that change can affect coastal communities, habitats, and the physical characteristics of the coast-including beach erosion, shoreline retreat, land loss, and damage to infrastructure. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is responsible for conducting research on coastal change hazards, understanding the processes that cause coastal change, and developing models to forecast future change. To understand and adapt to shoreline change, accurate information regarding the past and present configurations of the shoreline is essential. A comprehensive, nationally consistent analysis of shoreline movement is needed. To meet this national need, the USGS is conducting an analysis of historical shoreline changes along open-ocean coasts of the United States and parts of the Great Lakes. As more data are gathered, periodic updates are made, which provide information that can be used in multidisciplinary assessments of global change impacts.

A digital map of the thickness of the surficial unconfined aquifer, including from the land surface and unsaturated zone to the bottom of sediments of geologic units identified as part of the surficial aquifer, was produced to improve understanding of the hydrologic system in the Maryland and Delaware portions of the Delmarva Peninsula. The map is intended to be used in conjunction with other environmental coverages (such land use, wetlands, and soil characteristics) to provide a subsurface hydrogeologic component to studies of nitrate transport that have historically relied on maps of surficial features. It could also be used to study the transport of other water soluble chemicals. The map was made using the best currently available data, which was of varying scales. It was created by overlaying a high resolution land surface and bathymetry digital elevation model (DEM) on a digital representation of the base of the surficial aquifer, part of hydrogeologic framework, as defined by Andreasen and others (2013). Thickness was calculated as the difference between the top of land surface and the bottom of the surficial aquifer sediments, which include sediments from geologic formations of late-Miocene through Quaternary age. Geologic formations with predominantly sandy surficial sediments that comprise the surficial aquifer on the Delmarva Peninsula include the Parsonsburg Sand, Sinepuxent Formation (Fm.), and parts of the Omar Fm. north of Indian River Bay in Delaware, the Columbia Fm., Beaverdam Fm., and Pennsauken Fm. (Ator and others 2005; Owens and Denney, 1986; Mixon, 1985; Bachman and Wilson, 1984). Formations with mixed texture and sandy stratigraphy including the Scotts Corner Fm. and Lynch Heights Fm. in Delaware are also considered part of the surficial aquifer (Ramsey, 1997). Subcropping aquifers and confining beds underlie the surficial aquifer throughout the Peninsula and may increase or limit its thickness, respectively (Andreasen and others, 2013). Stream incision through the surficial aquifer into older fine-textured sediments is more common in the northern part of the Peninsula where confined aquifers and their confining beds subcrop beneath the surficial aquifer. The potential for nitrate transport is greatest where relatively coarse sediments of the unconfined surficial aquifer (such as sand and gravel), are present beneath uplands and streams. Where these sediments are truncated and the streambed is incised into underlying fine-textured sediments, the potential for nitrate transport is much less and typically limited to stream-bank seeps that flow across the floodplain. In parts of south-central Maryland and southern Delaware the surficial aquifer sediments are complex with surficial sandy sediments generally less than 20 ft thick (indicated as 19 ft on the map). They include the Parsonsburg Sand and some surficial sandy facies of the Omar Fm. underlain by predominantly fine-textured sediments of the Walston Silt and Omar Fm. (Denney and others, 1979; Owens and Denney, 1979). Even though the surficial aquifer is relatively thin in this area, extensive ditching of flat poorly drained farmland allows seasonal transport of nitrate from groundwater to streams when the water table is above the base of the ditches (Lindsey and others, 2003). Geologic units of the Coastal Lowlands that surround the Peninsula are relatively thin in many areas and are primarily composed of fine-grained estuarine deposits with some coarse-textured sediments, in particular remnant beach-ridge and dune deposits (Ator and others, 2005). The Kent Island Fm. (Owens and Denney, 1986), which is part of the Coastal Lowlands on the western side of the Peninsula, has predominantly fine-grained sediments and is not included in the surficial aquifer in Maryland, as defined by Bachman and Wilson (1984); the surficial aquifer is shown to have 0 ft thickness on the map in the area mapped as Kent Island Fm. Also shown on the map as 0 ft thickness are areas in the northern most portion of the peninsula in New Castle and Cecil counties where surficial aquifer sediments are not present and other areas such as stream valleys where surficial aquifer sediments are also not present. Nitrate transport through groundwater to surface water is limited in the areas with fine-grained sediments at or near the land surface that promote denitrification in groundwater (Ator and others, 2005). Where extensive tidal marshes overly the Coastal Lowlands they also limit nitrate transport to surface waters. Available sub-regional or county-scale geologic maps produced by the Delaware and Maryland State Geologic Surveys should be consulted when using this product (www.dgs.udel.edu; www.mgs.md.gov). Local-scale maps will be particularly important in understanding areas such as where the surficial aquifer is completely truncated or very thin and overlies confining beds or confined aquifers, in the Coastal Lowlands, and in south-central Maryland and Delaware. References: Andreasen, D.C., Staley, A.W., and Achmad, Grufon, 2013. Maryland Coastal Plain Aquifer Information system: Hydrogeological Framework: Maryland Department of Natural Resources Resource Assessment Service Maryland Geological Survey Open-File Report No. 12-02-20,121 p. Ator, S.W., Denver, J.M., Krantz D.E., Newell, W.L., and Martucci, S.K., 2005. A surficial hydrogeologic framework for the Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1680, 44 p., 4 plates. Bachman, L.J. and Wilson, J.M., 1984. The Columbia Aquifer of the Eastern Shore of Maryland: Maryland Geological Survey Report of Investigations No. 40, 144 p. Denney, C.S., Owens, J.P. and Sirkin, L.A., 1979. The Parsonsburg Sand in the Central Delmarva Peninsula, Maryland and Delaware: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1067-B, 16 p. Lindsey, B.D., Phillips, S.W., Donnelly, C.A., Speiran, G.K., Plummer, L.N., Böhlke, J.K., Focazio, M.J., Burton, W.C., and Busenberg, Eurybiades, 2003. Residence times and nitrate transport in ground water discharging to streams in the Chesapeake Bay watershed: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4035, 201 p. Mixon, R.B., 1985. Stratigraphic and geomorphic framework of the upper most Cenozoic deposits in the southern Delmarva Peninsula, Virginia and Maryland: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1067-G, 53 p. Owens, J.P. and Denney, C.S., 1979. Upper Cenozoic Deposits of the Central Delmarva Peninsula, Maryland and Delaware: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1067-A, 28 p. --------, 1986. Geologic map of Dorchester County, Maryland: Maryland Geological Survey, 1 sheet, scale 1:62,500. Ramsey, K.W., 1997. Geology of the Milford and Mispillion River Quadrangles, Delaware: Delaware Geological Survey Report of Investigations No. 55, 40 p.

Long-term (78-177 years) rates of shoreline change have been computed for open-ocean shorelines of the conterminous United States and parts of Hawaii ranging from 1800's to 2018. Shorelines were compiled from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration T-sheets, air photos, and lidar data. These data are used to calculate rates of shoreline change using a linear regression method for the U.S. Geological Survey's National Assessment Project.

The Coastal Zone Boundary delineates Pennsylvania's two coastal zones: the Delaware Estuary Coastal Zone located in southeastern Pennsylvania, and the Lake Erie Coastal Zone located in the northwestern part of the state. The federal Coastal Zone Management Act (Act) defines the coastal zone as coastal waters and the adjacent shorelands, strongly influenced by each other. The zone extends inland from the shoreline only to extend necessary to control shorelands, the uses of which have a direct and significant impact on the coastal waters. The boundary is used as a starting point by persons or agencies to determine if their proposed activities will affect the coastal zones, and are subject to review by the Pennsylvania Coastal Zone Management Program. Further, local municipalities, authorities, state agencies and certain non-profit organizations within these boundaries are eligible for Coastal Zone grants to support the goals and objectives of the Act at the local and state level. Federal actions (eg. federal development activities, federal permits and licenses, federal assistance, and Outer Continental Shelf activities) occurring within the coastal boundary, or outside the boundary but impacting upon it, are subject to the federal consistency review requirements of the Act. In addition, applications for state Department of Environmental Protection permits for activities located in the coastal zones are subject to review and approval by Pennsylvania's CZM Program. The data is currently available on eMap for viewing under the "Areas POI - Environmental" - Coastal Zones layer.

The 2023 cartographic boundary KMLs are simplified representations of selected geographic areas from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). These boundary files are specifically designed for small-scale thematic mapping. When possible, generalization is performed with the intent to maintain the hierarchical relationships among geographies and to maintain the alignment of geographies within a file set for a given year. Geographic areas may not align with the same areas from another year. Some geographies are available as nation-based files while others are available only as state-based files. Block Groups (BGs) are clusters of blocks within the same census tract. Each census tract contains at least one BG, and BGs are uniquely numbered within census tracts. BGs have a valid code range of 0 through 9. BGs have the same first digit of their 4-digit census block number from the same decennial census. For example, tabulation blocks numbered 3001, 3002, 3003,.., 3999 within census tract 1210.02 are also within BG 3 within that census tract. BGs coded 0 are intended to only include water area, no land area, and they are generally in territorial seas, coastal water, and Great Lakes water areas. Block groups generally contain between 600 and 3,000 people. A BG usually covers a contiguous area but never crosses county or census tract boundaries. They may, however, cross the boundaries of other geographic entities like county subdivisions, places, urban areas, voting districts, congressional districts, and American Indian / Alaska Native / Native Hawaiian areas. The generalized BG boundaries in this release are based on those that were delineated as part of the Census Bureau's Participant Statistical Areas Program (PSAP) for the 2020 Census.