the wall. Following this approach, 50 ft of recession for the 100-ft design 
would have a frequency of occurrence of approximately 35 years. Recurrence 
intervals on the order of years are indicated for complete recession of the 
flat berm with the 50-ft and 30-ft designs. Because the continued lowering of 
the beach is nonlinearly related to the computed maximum recession frequency 
of occurrence curves, further comparisons of the 50- and 30-ft designs cannot 
be made without additional analysis. The results indicate, however, that both 
the 30- and 50-ft berm width designs provide far less protection to the 
seawall face than does the 100-ft design. 
181. Consideration of the potential recession experienced by the 30- 
and 50-ft design profiles leads to the conclusion that both berm widths would 
provide insufficient shore protection in the project area. Present model 
results quantitatively substantiate a recommendation for a 100-ft design berm 
width. 
100 
