This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-04-417 
entitled 'Flood Map Modernization: Program Strategy Shows Promise, but 
Challenges Remain' which was released on March 31, 2004.

This text file was formatted by the U.S. General Accounting Office 
(GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part of a 
longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every 
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of 
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text 
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the 
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided 
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed 
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic 
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail 
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this 
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work 
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the 
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this 
material separately.

Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on Housing and Community 
Opportunity, Committee on Financial Services, House of Representatives:

United States General Accounting Office:

GAO:

March 2004:

FLOOD MAP MODERNIZATION:

Program Strategy Shows Promise, but Challenges Remain:

GAO-04-417:

GAO Highlights:

Highlights of GAO-04-417, a report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on 
Housing and Community Opportunity, Committee on Financial Services, 
House of Representatives 

Why GAO Did This Study:

Flood maps identify areas at greatest risk of flooding and provide the 
foundation for the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) managed by 
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The maps are used by 
(1) communities to establish minimum building standards designed to 
reduce the impact of flooding, (2) FEMA to set insurance rates, and 
(3) lenders to identify property owners who are required to purchase 
flood insurance. Nearly 70 percent of all flood maps are more than 10 
years old, according to FEMA. In an effort to update its flood maps, 
FEMA is implementing a $1 billion, 5-year map modernization program. 
GAO was asked to review the progress of FEMA’s map modernization 
program.

What GAO Found:

Through its map modernization program, FEMA intends to use advanced 
technologies to produce more accurate and accessible digital flood maps 
available on the Internet. These maps are expected to improve community 
efforts to reduce the impact of floods, increase property owners’ use 
of flood insurance, and improve community, state and federal efforts to 
reduce the risks of other natural and man-made hazards. 

In developing digital flood maps, FEMA plans to incorporate data that 
are of a level of specificity and accuracy commensurate with 
communities’ relative flood risk. According to FEMA, there is a direct 
relationship between the types, quantity, and detail of the data and 
analysis used to develop maps and the costs of obtaining and analyzing 
those data. Although FEMA ranked the nation’s 3,146 counties from 
highest to lowest risk, it has not yet established data standards that 
describe the appropriate level of detail, accuracy, and analysis 
required to develop digital maps based on risk level. Without such 
standards, FEMA cannot ensure that it uses the same level of data 
collection and analysis for all communities in the same risk category. 
Such standards can also help FEMA to target its map modernization 
resources more efficiently by matching the level of data collection and 
analysis with the level of flood risk.

FEMA has developed partnerships with states and local entities that 
have begun mapping activities and has a strategy on how to best work 
with these entities. However, the overall effectiveness of FEMA’s 
future partnering efforts is uncertain because FEMA has not yet 
developed a clear strategy for partnering with communities with less 
resources and little or no experience in flood mapping. By developing 
such a strategy, FEMA will be better able to identify and use the most 
effective approaches to engage all of its partners in map 
modernization. 

What GAO Recommends:

To help ensure that FEMA’s map modernization program achieves its 
intended benefits, GAO is making several recommendations. FEMA should 
address differences among the communities for which flood maps are 
being developed—whether those differences arise from different levels 
of flood risk or different levels of capacity and resources to assist 
with flood mapping.

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-417.

To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on 
the link above. For more information, contact William O. Jenkins, 
202-512-8777, jenkinswo@gao.gov.

[End of section]

Contents:

Letter:

Results in Brief:

Background:

Map Modernization Intends to Use Advanced Technologies to Produce More 
Accurate and Accessible Digital Flood Maps:

FEMA Expects Map Modernization to Increase the Likelihood Maps Will Be 
Used for Risk Management:

FEMA's Strategy for Map Modernization Shows Promise, but Challenges 
Remain:

Conclusions:

Recommendations:

Agency Comments:

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology:

Appendix II: Users of Flood Maps:

Appendix III: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments:

GAO Contacts:

Staff Acknowledgments:

Table:

Table 1: FEMA's Objectives for Map Modernization and Our Observations 
on the Objectives and Challenges:

Figures:

Figure 1: Age of the Nation's Current Flood Map Inventory:

Figure 2: Key GIS Layers or Themes for Digital Flood Maps:

Figure 3: Comparison of Original and Updated Floodplain for Plum Creek 
in Douglas County, Colorado:

Figure 4: Use of LIDAR Technology:

Figure 5: Comparison of Old Paper and New Digital Map Sections in North 
Carolina:

Figure 6: Expected Benefits of Map Modernization:

Figure 7: Comparison of FEMA and Sarasota County Floodplain after 
Remapping:

Figure 8: Impact of Capital Improvement Project on Floodplain in 
Sarasota County:

Figure 9: Expanded Floodplain Boundary for Regulating New Construction 
in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina:

Figure 10: Flooding in Greenville, North Carolina, during Hurricane 
Floyd:

Figure 11: Example of Spill Response Model in Harris County, Texas:

Figure 12: Comparison of Cumulative FEMA Funding for Mapping Data with 
the Total Cumulative Dollar Value of Mapping Data Produced through CTP 
Program:

Figure 13: Status of Remapping in North Carolina:

Abbreviations:

CTP: Cooperating Technical Partner:

DHS: Department of Homeland Security:

FEMA: Federal Emergency Management Agency:

GIS: Geographic Information Systems:

LIDAR: Light Detection and Ranging:

NFIP: National Flood Insurance Program:

United States General Accounting Office:

Washington, DC 20548:

March 31, 2004:

The Honorable Robert W. Ney: 
Chairman: 
Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity: 
Committee on Financial Services: 
House of Representatives:

Dear Mr. Chairman:

Floods inflict more damage and economic losses upon the United States 
than any other natural disaster. During the 10 years from fiscal year 
1992 through fiscal year 2001, flooding caused over 900 deaths and 
resulted in approximately $55 billion in damages.[Footnote 1] Since its 
inception 36 years ago, the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) has 
combined the development of flood maps to identify the areas at 
greatest risk of flooding with mitigation[Footnote 2] efforts to reduce 
or eliminate flood risks to people and property and the availability of 
insurance that property owners can purchase to protect themselves from 
flood losses. To date, the flood insurance program has paid about $12 
billion in insurance claims, primarily from policyholder premiums, that 
otherwise would have been paid, at least in part, from taxpayer-funded 
disaster relief.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is responsible for 
managing the NFIP, including the development of flood maps.[Footnote 3] 
Accurate flood maps that identify the areas at greatest risk of 
flooding are the foundation of the NFIP. The maps are principally used 
by (1) the approximately 20,000 communities participating in the NFIP 
to adopt and enforce the program's minimum building standards for new 
construction within the maps' identified floodplains, (2) FEMA to 
develop accurate flood insurance policy rates based on flood risk, and 
(3) federally regulated mortgage lenders to identify those property 
owners who are statutorily required to purchase federal flood 
insurance. Under the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as 
amended,[Footnote 4] property owners whose properties are within the 
designated floodplain and have a mortgage from a federally regulated 
financial institution are required to purchase federal flood insurance. 
Flood maps can become outdated for a variety of reasons, such as 
erosion or community growth and development that can affect the 
drainage patterns of rainwater. Thus, flood maps must be periodically 
updated to assess and map changes in the boundaries of floodplains that 
result from community growth, development, erosion, and other factors 
that affect the boundaries of areas at risk for flooding. According to 
FEMA, limited funding for flood mapping has resulted in a backlog of 
outdated maps. FEMA estimates that as of March 2004 nearly 70 percent 
of the nation's flood maps were more than 10 years old and reflected 
outdated data that could affect the ability to accurately identify 
current flood hazard areas.

With congressional support and funding, FEMA has embarked on a $1 
billion, 5-year effort to update the nation's flood maps. Recognizing 
that FEMA is currently in the early stages of its map modernization 
effort, our objectives for this review were to answer the following 
questions: (1) How is map modernization intended to improve the 
accuracy and accessibility of the nation's flood maps? (2) What are the 
expected benefits of more accurate and accessible flood maps? (3) To 
what extent does FEMA's strategy for managing the map modernization 
program support the achievement of these benefits and what, if any, 
limitations could affect the implementation of the strategy?

To answer these questions, we analyzed available information from FEMA 
on the program's purpose, objectives, and status and met with agency 
officials in headquarters and in the regional offices to discuss the 
program's progress. We also conducted site visits to states and 
communities that have already begun to modernize their flood maps and 
interviewed industry organizations such as the Association of State 
Flood Plain Managers, the National Association of Flood and Stormwater 
Management Agencies, and the National Emergency Management Association. 
We conducted our work from April 2003 to March 2004 in accordance with 
generally accepted government auditing standards. See appendix I for 
more details on our scope and methodology.

Results in Brief:

Through map modernization, FEMA intends to produce more accurate and 
accessible flood maps by using advanced technology to gather accurate 
data and make the flood maps, and the digital information on which they 
are based, available on the Internet. For example, displaying map data 
in digital Geographic Information Systems format permits consistent, 
accurate display and ready electronic retrieval of a variety of map 
features, including elevation data and the location of key 
infrastructure, such as utilities. According to FEMA, nearly 70 percent 
of the nation's approximately 92,222 flood maps are more than 10 years 
old, and many of these maps no longer reflect current flood hazard 
risks because of such changes as erosion and development that can alter 
drainage patterns and thus the areas at highest risk of flooding. 
Moreover, since many flood maps were created or last updated, there 
have been improvements in the techniques for assessing and displaying 
flood risks.

FEMA expects that by producing more accurate and accessible digital 
flood maps through map modernization, the nation will benefit in three 
ways. First, communities can use more accurate digital maps to reduce 
flood risk within floodplains by more effectively regulating 
development through zoning and building standards. Second, accurate 
digital maps available on the Internet will facilitate the 
identification of property owners who are statutorily required to 
obtain or who would be best served by obtaining flood insurance. Third, 
accurate and precise data will help national, state, and local 
officials to accurately locate infrastructure and transportation 
systems (e.g., power plants, sewage treatment plants, railroads, 
bridges, and ports) to help mitigate and manage risk for multiple 
hazards, both natural and man-made.

FEMA's strategy for managing map modernization is designed to support 
the expected program benefits, but FEMA's approach to implementing the 
strategy raises several concerns that could hamper the agency's 
efforts. FEMA's implementation approach is based on four objectives: 
(1) establish and maintain a premier data system, (2) expand outreach 
and better inform the user community, (3) establish and maintain 
effective partnerships, and (4) achieve effective program management.

* Establish and maintain a premier data system: Although FEMA's efforts 
to establish a new data system could result in more accurate flood maps 
and make it easier to access and use the revised flood maps, FEMA has 
not yet established clear standards for the types, quantity, and 
specificity of data collection and analysis associated with different 
levels of flood risk. FEMA has ranked the nation's 3,146 counties from 
highest to lowest flood risk. According to FEMA, communities at the 
highest risk of flooding require the most extensive, detailed data and 
analysis, but the same level of data collection and analysis may not be 
necessary to create accurate, useful maps for communities with lower 
flood risks. Defining the level of data collection and analysis for 
different levels of risk is important because obtaining and analyzing 
flood map data is time-consuming and expensive, and the more detailed 
and specific the data, generally the greater the effort and costs 
required to obtain it. By identifying the types, quantity, and 
specificity of the data and analysis needed for communities based on 
their risk, FEMA can better ensure that data collection and analysis is 
consistent for all communities with similar risk and that it is using 
its resources efficiently while producing maps that are accurate and 
useful for communities at different levels of flood risk. FEMA 
acknowledges the need to develop such standards, but has not yet 
developed draft standards or included this task into its map 
modernization implementation plan.

* Expand outreach and better inform the user community: FEMA's planned 
expanded outreach efforts are intended to increase public awareness and 
obtain community acceptance of the updated flood maps because the 
updated information could potentially identify changes in floodplain 
boundaries and, therefore, affect property owners, including whether or 
not their property's location may require them to purchase federal 
flood insurance. FEMA's intended outcome for these outreach efforts is 
to reduce community vulnerability to natural and man-made hazards and 
increase participation in the flood insurance program. Because FEMA 
does not have the authority to require that affected property owners 
take steps to mitigate their properties against flood risks or to 
ensure that owners whose properties are in the floodplain purchase 
flood insurance, effective outreach is essential to ultimately achieve 
these benefits.

* Establish and maintain effective partnerships: FEMA's objective for 
building and maintaining mutually beneficial partnerships is designed 
to facilitate and support the efficient production and effective use of 
maps. FEMA recognizes that local, state, and federal agencies, that 
have been working on mapping activities for years, have the resources 
and potential to positively affect the quality and quantity of the data 
collected and improve the way these data are used. In addition, these 
partnerships can enable FEMA to leverage its resources and reduce the 
federal costs of map modernization. FEMA has developed a strategy for 
partnering with these agencies to encourage greater involvement in map 
modernization, including the contribution of resources. However, the 
overall effectiveness of the agency's future partnering efforts is 
uncertain because FEMA has not yet developed a clear strategy for 
partnering with communities that have few resources, limited mapping 
capability, and little history of flood mapping activities.

* Achieve effective program management: In March 2004, FEMA awarded a 
performance-based contract to a single contractor to oversee map 
modernization that includes performance measures to gauge the success 
of its efforts. Through a staffing analysis, FEMA has determined that 
it needs 75 staff with specific, identified skills to effectively 
monitor and manage the contract and overall map modernization program. 
As of March 2004, FEMA had hired 1 of the 75 staff, had developed plans 
to hire or transfer 43 others, but had not yet determine how it would 
acquire the remaining 31 positions. FEMA has not clearly defined 
performance measures related to whether (1) the revised maps meet any 
established standards for accuracy and (2) outreach efforts have been 
successful in increasing the community and individual awareness and use 
of flood maps.

To help ensure that FEMA's map modernization program achieves its 
intended benefits, we make recommendations to the Secretary of Homeland 
Security to direct the Undersecretary of Emergency Preparedness and 
Response to address data and analysis standards, partnering with state 
and local governments, and program management. We provided a copy of 
our draft report to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for 
comment. In its oral comments, DHS generally concurred with the 
report's findings and recommendations and provided technical comments 
that we incorporated where appropriate.

Background:

FEMA is the primary federal agency responsible for assisting state and 
local governments, private entities, and individuals to prepare for, 
mitigate, respond to, and recover from natural disasters, including 
floods. FEMA's NFIP has served as a key component of the agency's 
efforts to minimize or mitigate the damage and financial impact of 
floods on the public, as well as to limit federal expenditures needed 
after floods occur.

In 1968, to address the increasing amount of flood damage, the lack of 
readily available insurance for property owners, and the cost to the 
taxpayer for flood-related disaster relief, the National Flood 
Insurance Act of 1968,[Footnote 5] created the NFIP. Since its 
inception, the program has sought to minimize flood-related property 
losses by making flood insurance available on reasonable terms and 
encouraging its purchase by people who need flood insurance protection-
-particularly those living in the areas at highest risk of flooding 
known as special flood hazard areas. The program identifies and maps 
flood-prone areas in the country, makes flood insurance available to 
property owners in the nearly 20,000 communities that currently 
participate in the program,[Footnote 6] and requires floodplain 
management efforts to mitigate flood hazards on the part of 
participating communities.

FEMA's flood maps are one of the basic, essential tools for flood 
hazard mitigation in the United States. FEMA estimates that the maps 
are used an estimated 30 million times annually in the private and 
public sectors. FEMA uses the maps to identify the floodplain 
boundaries in which flood insurance is required and to set flood 
insurance rates. Mortgage lending institutions use the maps to 
determine who is required to purchase flood insurance and ensure that 
flood insurance is purchased and maintained for these properties. 
Community planning officials, land developers, and engineers use the 
maps for designing new buildings and infrastructure to be safe from 
flooding. See appendix II for more information on the various 
stakeholders that use and rely upon flood maps.

Flood maps provide the basis for establishing floodplain building 
standards that participating communities must adopt and enforce as part 
of the program. For a community to participate in the program, any 
structures built within special flood hazard areas--also known as 100-
year floodplains[Footnote 7]--that have a 1 percent or greater chance 
of experiencing flooding in any given year must be built according to 
the program's building standards whose purpose is to minimize flood 
losses. A key component of the program's building standards that must 
be followed by participating communities is a requirement that the 
lowest floor of the structure be elevated to or above the base flood 
level--the elevation at which there is a 1 percent chance of flooding 
in a given year. The administration has estimated that local 
governments' compliance with the program's standards for new 
construction is saving over $1 billion annually in flood damage 
avoided.

Flood maps also provide the basis for setting insurance rates and 
identifying properties whose owners are required to purchase flood 
insurance. When the NFIP was created, the purchase of flood insurance 
was voluntary. To increase the impact of the program, however, Congress 
amended the original law in 1973 to require the purchase of flood 
insurance in certain circumstances. Flood insurance is required for 
structures in special flood hazard areas of communities participating 
in the program if (1) any federal loans or grants were used to acquire 
or build the structures or (2) the structures have outstanding mortgage 
loans made by lending institutions that are regulated by the federal 
government. Owners of properties without mortgages or properties with 
mortgages held by unregulated lenders were not, and still are not, 
required to purchase flood insurance, even if the properties are in 
special flood hazard areas.

Federal regulations require that FEMA communicate potential changes in 
flood risk to the public when it decides to initiate a flood mapping 
study and when it is ready to release preliminary maps. At the 
beginning of the mapping process, FEMA is required to notify community 
stakeholders.[Footnote 8] When FEMA is ready to release preliminary 
maps, the agency must publish the proposed base flood elevations in the 
Federal Register for public comment and notify the community of the 
results of the study.[Footnote 9] When the final map is approved and 
implemented, FEMA publishes another Federal Register notice.[Footnote 
10]

In the early 1990s, some of the data and information FEMA collected to 
develop flood maps were becoming available in digital format. In 1994, 
the President issued Executive Order 12906, which mandated that 
standards for digital geographic data be applied uniformly across the 
federal government. Anticipating that electronic data would soon become 
the standard vehicle for information delivery and in an attempt to make 
flood map production more cost-effective and efficient, FEMA developed 
a prototype for a digital flood map.

In 1997, FEMA developed its initial flood map modernization plan that 
outlined the steps necessary to update the nation's flood maps to 
digital format and streamline FEMA's operations in raising public 
awareness of the importance of the maps and responding to requests to 
revise them. This initial plan and subsequent updates to the plan 
reflected the recommendations of the Technical Mapping Advisory Council 
created by Congress and active from 1995-2000. The council provided a 
number of recommendations which were aimed at making the digital flood 
map the future method for assessing flood hazard risk and setting 
federal insurance rates. Recognizing the importance of updating the 
nation's flood maps, Congress appropriated additional funds in fiscal 
years 2000-2002. FEMA used these funds to launch its map modernization 
program through such activities as developing new flood mapping 
standards and procedures, expanding the Cooperating Technical Partner 
(CTP) program that recognizes and encourages state and local 
participation in flood hazard data development and maintenance and 
developing some digital flood maps. In fiscal year 2003, Congress 
appropriated $150 million, allowing FEMA to initiate a full-scale 
update of the nation's flood maps called the Multi-Hazard Flood Map 
Modernization Program,[Footnote 11] an effort FEMA expects to take 
about 5 years and cost about $1 billion. In fiscal year 2004, Congress 
appropriated an additional $200 million for map modernization, and the 
administration has requested an additional $200 million for fiscal year 
2005 to continue the program. FEMA has established four primary 
objectives for implementing map modernization: (1) establish and 
maintain a premier data collection and delivery system, (2) expand 
outreach and better inform the user community, (3) build and maintain 
mutually beneficial partnerships, and (4) achieve effective program 
management. In March 2004, FEMA awarded a performance-based contract 
for overseeing map modernization that includes contractor performance 
measures for each of these objectives.

Map Modernization Intends to Use Advanced Technologies to Produce More 
Accurate and Accessible Digital Flood Maps:

Through map modernization, FEMA intends to produce more accurate and 
accessible flood maps by using advanced technology to gather accurate 
data and make the resulting information available on the Internet. 
Currently, many of the flood maps in FEMA's inventory do not accurately 
reflect the true flood hazard risks because over time, new development 
and other factors altered watersheds and floodplains faster than the 
maps could be updated. For the most part, the $35 million to $50 
million in annual flood insurance policy fees has been the only source 
of funding for updating flood maps, and according to FEMA, the agency 
has not been able to keep the maps updated with the funds available. As 
a result, nearly 70 percent of the nation's approximately 92,222 flood 
maps[Footnote 12] are more than 10 years old and many of these maps 
reflect inaccurate data, according to FEMA. Figure 1 shows the age 
distribution of the current map inventory.

Figure 1: Age of the Nation's Current Flood Map Inventory:

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

Over time, physical conditions in watersheds and floodplains can 
change, and improvements in the techniques for assessing and displaying 
flood risks are made. FEMA plans to use the latest technology, such as 
Geographic Information Systems (GIS), to create accurate digital flood 
maps. GIS technology provides the foundation for achieving FEMA's goals 
of melding different types and sources of data to create the new 
digital flood maps and making the new digital flood maps available to a 
variety of users over the Internet.

The primary function of GIS is to link multiple digital databases and 
graphically display that information as maps with potentially many 
different types of "layers" of information. When layers of information 
are formatted using the same standards, users can potentially overlay 
various layers of information about any number of specific topics to 
examine how the layers interrelate. Each layer of a GIS map represents 
a particular "theme" or feature, and one layer could be derived from a 
data source completely different from the other layers. For example, 
one theme could represent all the streets in a specified area. Another 
theme could correspond to the topography or elevation data of an area, 
and others could show aerial photography and streams in the same area. 
These themes are all key elements needed to create flood maps that 
accurately depict floodplains and can be used to identify properties in 
these areas. In preparing for full-scale implementation of map 
modernization, FEMA has established standards and graphic 
specifications for digital flood maps created with GIS. Figure 2 shows 
the concept of data themes in GIS for flood maps.

Figure 2: Key GIS Layers or Themes for Digital Flood Maps:

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

GIS technology also enables the creation of more accurate and 
accessible maps than would be possible with older mapping methods and 
technology. The majority of FEMA's flood map inventory was produced 
using manual techniques that have inherent accuracy and accessibility 
limitations. For example, in creating traditional paper flood maps, 
field measurements taken by surveyors would have been transferred by 
hand to paper base maps. If the paper base map contained any 
inaccuracies, then the field-survey data could be shown in the wrong 
place on the final flood map. This would then result in floodplain 
boundaries being shown in the wrong place.

Douglas County, Colorado:

Recent remapping efforts in Douglas County, Colorado, show the accuracy 
of digital maps using GIS technology compared with paper maps created 
using manual techniques. As seen in figure 3, some areas (around cross 
section J) shown outside the floodplain on the original map will be 
shown in the floodplain based on the updated flood hazard information 
from a new mapping study using GIS technology. More critically, some 
areas shown outside the floodplain on the original map will now be 
shown in the floodway, the most dangerous area of the floodplain 
(greatest depth, highest flood water velocity). According to FEMA and 
community officials, the limitations of the manual techniques used to 
create the original map contributed to the resulting inaccuracy.

Figure 3: Comparison of Original and Updated Floodplain for Plum Creek 
in Douglas County, Colorado:

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

Using GIS technology to create digital flood maps minimizes mapping 
errors and improves accuracy because each data component (e.g., 
streams, streets, etc.) would have a common geographic reference 
system.

By their nature, paper flood maps have limited accessibility as 
compared with a digital map that can be made available on the Internet. 
The expansion of Internet connectivity in recent years has 
substantially enhanced the potential value of digital maps created with 
GIS because now it is possible to locate and connect data from many 
distinct GIS databases to develop analytical information on almost any 
topic that is associated with physical locations. Digital flood maps 
created according to FEMA's standards are intended to provide users not 
only with the ability to determine the flood zone and base flood 
elevations for a particular location, but also with the ability to 
access other information like road, stream, and public land survey 
data. Communities could use this information for a variety of purposes, 
including decisions on future development and evacuation routes.

As part of map modernization, FEMA has promoted the use of a variety of 
advanced technologies to improve the accuracy of flood maps. In recent 
years, for example, where it deems it appropriate, FEMA has promoted 
the use of Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) remote sensing 
technologies to generate highly detailed, digital elevation data. 
Elevation data are a key component needed to determine flood risk and 
identify floodplain boundaries. According to FEMA, for very flat areas 
where small changes in elevation can have a large impact on where flood 
plain boundaries are drawn, LIDAR can provide the level of detail 
needed to accurately delineate these boundaries. Communities can also 
use detailed, digital elevation data for planning and land development 
purposes. Figure 4 shows an airplane equipped with laser-pulsing 
sensors using LIDAR to gather digital elevation data to measure the 
contours and crevices that determine where floodwaters collect.

Figure 4: Use of LIDAR Technology:

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

North Carolina's Use of GIS and LIDAR to Develop and Deliver Revised 
Flood Maps:

The state of North Carolina has been utilizing GIS and LIDAR technology 
to develop new flood maps. As of February 2004, 8 counties had received 
new effective flood maps, and 28 counties received new preliminary 
maps, which are now under community review. The state has gathered 
elevation data through LIDAR for 80 percent of the state. The maps and 
LIDAR and other data can be freely accessed and downloaded by anyone 
who has access to the Internet (http://www.ncfloodmaps.com). The state, 
dependent on continued FEMA funding, expects to have the entire state 
remapped by 2008. Figure 5 compares a digital flood map section 
produced by North Carolina with the same area on the original paper 
map.

Figure 5: Comparison of Old Paper and New Digital Map Sections in North 
Carolina:

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

FEMA Expects Map Modernization to Increase the Likelihood Maps Will Be 
Used for Risk Management:

FEMA expects map modernization to increase the likelihood that the more 
accurate and accessible maps will be used for risk management purposes. 
Specifically, FEMA expects the new maps to be used to (1) improve flood 
mitigation, (2) increase flood insurance participation, and (3) improve 
"multi-hazard" mitigation and risk management capabilities. First, FEMA 
expects communities to be able to use these new and revised maps to 
better manage and mitigate flood risk by regulating floodplain 
development through building codes, ordinances, and regulations. 
Second, the new maps also have the potential to help increase flood 
insurance participation because they will more accurately identify 
those properties that are in the floodplain and whose owners would be 
required to purchase flood insurance. Compared with the existing paper 
maps, accessing the new maps through the Internet will make it much 
easier for lenders to identify property owners who should have flood 
insurance. In addition, the newly revised flood maps should more 
accurately identify all properties in the floodplain, including those 
whose owners do not have a mortgage or whose mortgage is held by a 
lender that is not federally regulated. Accurately identifying these 
property owners should assist FEMA and communities in targeting their 
outreach about the importance of flood insurance. Third, the data and 
infrastructure developed by map modernization is also expected to help 
national, state, and local officials mitigate and manage risk from 
multiple hazards, both natural and man-made. Accurate digital maps can 
provide more precise data on such things as the location of hazardous 
material facilities, power plants, railroads, and airports to state and 
national officials for planning development as well as to assess 
internal weaknesses and evacuation routes. (Fig. 6 highlights these 
expected benefits.):

Figure 6: Expected Benefits of Map Modernization:

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

Map Modernization Is Expected to Improve Flood Mitigation:

The more accurate and updated flood hazard information produced through 
map modernization is expected to help improve flood mitigation in 
participating communities. The NFIP requires participating communities 
to adopt and enforce building standards based on the floodplain 
boundaries and base flood elevations when maps are updated. For 
example, the lowest floor of structures in new construction must be 
elevated to at least the base flood elevations identified on the maps. 
FEMA's policy is to monitor communities to ensure that they have 
adopted building standards that meet the minimum NFIP criteria and to 
ensure that they are effectively enforcing these standards. If 
communities fail to establish and enforce minimum NFIP flood plain 
building standards, FEMA can suspend availability of federal flood 
insurance.

Communities also may use updated flood hazard data to take actions to 
mitigate flooding that go beyond adopting the building standards 
required by the NFIP. For example, communities may use the data from 
the maps to identify where to conduct capital improvement projects 
designed to mitigate flooding of structures in the floodplain. In 
addition, FEMA has established a Community Rating System that provides 
discounts on flood insurance premiums for those communities that take 
mitigation actions beyond those required by the NFIP.

Sarasota County's Use of Flood Map Data for Storm Water Capital 
Improvement Projects:

Sarasota County, Florida, is in the process of modernizing its flood 
maps and has been using the maps and the models behind them to 
implement stormwater capital improvement projects whose purpose is to 
mitigate the flood risk for structures now located in the floodplain. 
These efforts have also resulted in lower insurance premiums for 
property owners.

In the late 1990s, because Sarasota County officials believed that 
current maps did not accurately reflect changes to the floodplain that 
had occurred due to development and other factors, they began an effort 
to aggressively remap the county's watersheds using GIS and new flood 
modeling technologies. At the time, the county had experienced several 
significant flooding events where hundreds of properties not depicted 
in the floodplain on its 11-year old maps were damaged. Figure 7 shows 
both the increase and decrease in the floodplain based on the county's 
remapping efforts.

Figure 7: Comparison of FEMA and Sarasota County Floodplain after 
Remapping:

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

The county has been using the maps to implement storm water improvement 
projects such as retention ponds and levees that are designed to 
improve drainage and, therefore, alter the floodplain. Ultimately, 
these projects would result in structures no longer being in the 
floodplain. County officials estimate that they have reduced the number 
of structures in the floodplain by 75 percent (from 800 to under 200) 
through these projects. According to these officials, the reduction in 
their Community Rating System rating from an 8 to a 6 was due in large 
part to their remapping efforts. They estimate that this reduction is 
saving the community over $1 million a year in flood insurance 
premiums. Figure 8 shows an example of the impact one such capital 
improvement project had on the floodplain in Sarasota County.

Figure 8: Impact of Capital Improvement Project on Floodplain in 
Sarasota County:

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

Mecklenburg County, North Carolina:

Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, provides another example of how 
communities may use revised maps as a basis for adopting and enforcing 
building standards that exceed the standards required by the NFIP.

In February 2004, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, issued final 
digital maps that not only show the floodplain boundaries and base 
flood elevations used by FEMA to set insurance rates, but also include 
local land use maps designed to guide future development. (See fig. 9.) 
These maps are more restrictive than the FEMA maps, which are used for 
setting insurance rates. The county uses these maps to require that the 
lowest floor of all new construction is built an additional foot above 
the future minimum base flood elevation identified by the map. 
Engineering and economic studies estimate that this higher standard 
will save over $300 million in structure and content losses due to 
future flooding. As in the case of Sarasota County, adopting these 
higher standards should result in a better Community Rating System 
rating for the county and reduce insurance rates for property owners.

Figure 9: Expanded Floodplain Boundary for Regulating New Construction 
in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina:

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

Map Modernization Is Expected to Help Increase Flood Insurance 
Participation:

Map modernization has the potential to help increase flood insurance 
participation. The accuracy of the new maps should better identify at-
risk property owners who would be best served by obtaining flood 
insurance whether or not the owners would be required to purchase 
insurance under the NFIP's mandatory purchase requirement. Moreover, 
the digital, GIS-based maps should make flood risk information more 
accessible to a variety of users such as lenders and community 
officials who could conduct targeted outreach at these property owners.

Outreach Efforts in Wilson and Johnston Counties, North Carolina:

Recent outreach activities conducted during remapping in Wilson and 
Johnston counties in North Carolina provide an example of the types of 
information that can be provided to communities and property owners 
through outreach efforts during map modernization.

As part of its map modernization program, the state of North Carolina 
holds two meetings. The first meeting is held with the county and 
community officials and floodplain administrators, and the second 
meeting is open to the general public. The purpose of the meetings is 
to provide an overview of the state's program; an outline of flood 
hazard data changes between the current maps and preliminary revised 
maps; and guidance on the use of the maps, including how to view and 
download data from the state's Web site. After the state had completed 
preliminary studies and maps for Wilson and Johnston counties, 
community officials used the digital, GIS-based maps to identify 
structures that are located in the newly identified floodplain. The 
counties then sent out letters to these property owners that:

* notified them that their property was in a floodplain,

* provided a telephone number to call for more information,

* announced upcoming public meetings where the preliminary maps would 
be discussed, and:

* identified the state's Internet site where the flood maps could be 
viewed (Wilson County).

By providing this information in advance, property owners could know 
before the meeting whether their property was in the newly designated 
floodplain. According to community officials, their outreach activities 
provided the information necessary for the public to become aware of 
their risk and know what actions could be taken to mitigate these 
risks.

It is important to note, however, that FEMA, states, and communities do 
not have the authority to ensure that property owners who are subject 
to the mandatory purchase of flood insurance requirement actually 
purchase flood insurance. It is the federally regulated lenders' 
responsibility to ensure that borrowers purchase flood insurance and 
that the insurance policy is maintained throughout the loan's life as 
each new lender servicing the loan becomes aware that the affected 
property is at risk for flooding. Furthermore, owners of properties 
without mortgages or properties with mortgages held by unregulated 
lenders are not required to purchase flood insurance, even if the 
properties are in floodplains.

Map Modernization Is Expected to Improve Multi-Hazard Mitigation and 
Risk Management Capabilities:

FEMA expects that the data developed, collected, and distributed 
through map modernization will help national, state, and local 
emergency managers mitigate and manage risk posed by other natural and 
man-made hazards. Accurate digital base maps provide more precise data 
to state and national officials for planning, such as the location of 
hazardous material facilities, power plants, utility distribution 
facilities, and other infrastructure (bridges, sewage treatment plants, 
buildings, and structures). According to FEMA, map modernization will 
also support DHS's overall goal to reduce the nation's vulnerability to 
terrorism by providing GIS data and capabilities to other departmental 
functions. For example, more accurate information on transportation 
systems such as railroads, airports, harbors, ports, and waterways 
should be helpful in assessing internal weaknesses and evacuation 
routes.

Flood-Inundation Application Developed by North Carolina:

North Carolina's use of information collected during flood mapping to 
develop a flood-inundation application exemplifies how the data 
collected through map modernization can be used for other risk 
management purposes.

Leveraging the work done through the floodplain mapping program, North 
Carolina is in the process of establishing a real-time flood-inundation 
and flood forecast mapping Web application that will provide the public 
with valuable safety information during weather events. During a storm, 
the application will provide maps and information over the Internet 
that display which land area, roads, and bridges are inundated by 
floodwaters. Furthermore, to help ensure that the public is aware of 
high flood risk areas, the state plans to develop an automated alert 
network that will utilize different media to notify and warn emergency 
managers, law enforcement, and the general public. North Carolina is 
currently working with television broadcasters in the region to 
broadcast warnings and up-to-date safety information based upon 
information provided through the Web application. The majority of 
deaths during Hurricane Floyd, which hit North Carolina in 1999, 
occurred to individuals driving over flood-inundated roads and bridges. 
North Carolina hopes that their real-time and forecasted inundation 
mapping application will help to prevent such deaths during future 
storm events.

The flood forecasting component of North Carolinaís flood-inundation 
and forecasting application was recently tested during Hurricane 
Isabel, which struck in September of 2003. Using data collected by 
North Carolina, the National Weather Service released an experimental 
Peak Forecast Inundation Web site for predicting the flooding effects 
of the hurricane. This was a new level of capability for the National 
Weather Service by forecasting flood-inundation throughout a major 
portion of the river basin rather than focusing solely on fixed 
forecasting locations. The implementation of this new flood forecasting 
technology will greatly enhance North Carolinaís flood warning Web 
application.

Figure 10 shows an example of how the flood-inundation application is 
intended to work. As floodwaters rise and spread out over the 
landscape, the flood-inundation application will produce maps to show 
the extent of flooding and when roads, critical facilities, and other 
structures will become flooded. The following maps show flooding in 
Greenville, North Carolina, and are based on flood levels caused by 
Hurricane Floyd.

Figure 10: Flooding in Greenville, North Carolina, during Hurricane 
Floyd:

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

Harris County, Houston, Texas:

Harris County, Texas, offers another example of how the digital data 
developed through map modernization could be used to plan for and 
respond to man-made disasters.

To demonstrate the multi-hazard use of the digital data, community 
officials showed how a spill response model could be developed to 
determine the path of a petroleum spill at a Houston area refinery. The 
model, developed with digital data by a private consultant, uses both 
elevation data and aerial imagery collected through map modernization 
to provide officials and emergency response personnel critical 
information to determine the path of a chemical spill and potentially 
impacted waterways. This information should provide local officials 
with valuable information to aid in their mitigation and evacuation 
efforts and to protect natural habitats. The figure shows how petroleum 
at a Houston area refinery would probably flow from specific tanks if 
ruptured.

Figure 11: Example of Spill Response Model in Harris County, Texas:

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

LIDAR data also provide a basis for three-dimensional modeling of the 
location of buildings, tanks, and equipment that could be used to 
determine the optimal location for fire-fighting equipment at the same 
refinery. The reach of a water jet can be placed against the 3-D model 
to determine the extent of coverage and identify obscured structures in 
the "shadow" of other structures that would limit or block the reach of 
the water jet. This same 3-D model could also be used in a 
vulnerability analysis to locate potential targets within a given area 
that are at risk from gunfire or hand-held rockets.

FEMA's Strategy for Map Modernization Shows Promise, but Challenges 
Remain:

FEMA's strategy for managing map modernization is intended to support 
the achievement of the expected program benefits of improved flood 
mitigation, increased NFIP insurance participation, and improved multi-
hazard mitigation and risk management capabilities. However, FEMA's 
approach to implementing the strategy poses several challenges that 
could hamper the agency's efforts. FEMA's approach is based on four 
objectives. Two objectives FEMA hopes to achieve through map 
modernization--building and maintaining a premier data collection and 
delivery system and expanding outreach and better informing the user 
community--have the potential to improve the use of flood maps for 
improved flood mitigation and increased NFIP participation, as well as 
multi-hazard risk management. The other two objectives--building and 
maintaining mutually beneficial partnerships and achieving effective 
program management--are intended to facilitate the achievement of the 
first two objectives and their intended benefits efficiently and 
effectively. Table 1 provides a brief description of FEMA's four 
objectives for map modernization and the challenges facing 
implementation.

Table 1: FEMA's Objectives for Map Modernization and Our Observations 
on the Objectives and Challenges:

Objective: Establish and maintain a premier data collection and 
delivery system
Description: Create a GIS-and Internet-based system that provides easy 
access to reliable flood hazard data and other data collected during 
the mapping process. The system will be available to states and 
communities to input and use data, therefore, enabling easier and less 
time-consuming data maintenance and the use of the information for 
multi-hazard risk management purposes
GAO Observations: FEMA has ranked the nation's counties based on risk. 
However, FEMA has not yet established data collection and analysis 
standards for communities with similar risk. Without such standards, 
FEMA cannot ensure that the level of data collection and analysis is 
consistent across all communities with similar risk.

Objective: Expand outreach and better inform the user community
Description: Raise the awareness of flood map users of their risk of 
flooding through increased outreach efforts and educate the public on 
how they can use flood maps and other hazard data to mitigate natural 
and man-made disasters
GAO Observations: FEMA's outreach strategy is based on a recognition 
that it has no direct authority to ensure that many map modernization 
benefits are achieved, but must rely on others- -e.g., mitigation 
efforts by individual property owners and lender enforcement of 
mandatory flood insurance purchase.

Objective: Build and maintain mutually beneficial partnerships
Description: Develop strategies for forming and enhancing relationships 
with all states and communities resulting in their active participation 
in the production of flood hazard data. This is intended to help 
improve the long-term quality of flood data, ensure that the maps meet 
local needs, and capitalize on local and regional knowledge and 
resources to achieve the effective production and efficient use of 
flood maps at a reduced cost to the federal government
GAO Observations: States and communities with limited resources and 
technical capabilities are likely to pose a challenge to FEMA's ability 
to fund and implement mapping activities. FEMA has not yet developed a 
strategy for how to partner with communities that do not have the 
resources, capabilities, or motivation to initiate and sustain mapping 
activities.

Objective: Achieve effective program management
Description: Develop a flexible program management structure that 
clearly evaluates the program's performance and identifies continuous 
improvement strategies to most effectively and efficiently conduct 
mapping activities that result in high-quality flood maps
GAO Observations: Using current staffing levels, FEMA may be challenged 
to effectively oversee the contract and the map modernization program. 
In addition, although FEMA has established measures to assess 
achievement of its program objectives, its measures for its objectives 
to develop a premier data system and to expand outreach and better 
inform the user community are not clearly defined or fully developed. 

Source: GAO analysis.

[End of table]

In Its Efforts to Establish a New Data System, FEMA Has Not Yet 
Established Data Standards for Different Levels of Risk:

The goal of FEMA's objective to develop a new data system using the 
latest technology is more efficient production, delivery and, thereby, 
the use of flood maps. As discussed previously, FEMA hopes to 
accomplish this by using geographic information systems technology that 
provides the foundation for the production and delivery of more 
accurate digital flood maps and multi-hazard data that is more 
accessible over the Internet.

In developing the new data system to update flood maps across the 
nation, FEMA's intent is to develop and incorporate flood risk data 
that are of a level of specificity and accuracy commensurate with 
communities' relative flood risks. According to FEMA, there is a direct 
relationship between the types, quantity, and detail of the data and 
analysis used for map development and the costs associated with 
obtaining and analyzing those data. FEMA believes it needs to strike a 
balance between the relative flood risk faced by individual communities 
and the level of analysis and effort needed to develop reliable flood 
hazard data if it is to update the nation's maps efficiently and 
effectively.

FEMA has ranked all 3,146 counties from highest to lowest based on a 
number of factors, including, among other things, population, growth 
trends, housing units, flood insurance policies and claims, repetitive 
loss properties, and flood disasters. On the basis of this ranking, 
FEMA established mapping priorities. However, FEMA has not yet 
established standards on the appropriate data and level of analysis 
required to develop maps based on risk level. FEMA has historically 
applied the same minimum standards for all flood maps and supporting 
data.[Footnote 13] FEMA's Guidelines and Specifications for Flood 
Hazard Mapping Partners provides guidance for selecting the level of 
analysis and effort to produce flood hazard data and have generally 
been used on a case-by-case basis.[Footnote 14] The guidelines do not 
specify standards to be used for all mapping projects within a given 
risk category. Without establishing standards for different categories 
of risk, FEMA cannot ensure that it uses the same level of data 
collection and analysis across all communities within the same risk 
category. These standards could also provide a consistent basis for 
estimating the costs of developing maps in each risk category. 
According to FEMA, the agency plans to develop standards that can be 
applied to different levels of flood risk as part of a 5-year map 
modernization implementation plan. FEMA expects this plan to be 
completed by the end of fiscal year 2004; however, at the time of our 
review, FEMA had not yet developed draft standards or incorporated this 
task into its implementation plan.

FEMA's Objective to Expand Outreach Efforts Recognizes the Agency Must 
Rely on Others to Achieve Map Modernization Benefits:

FEMA's objective to expand the scope and frequency of its outreach 
efforts is intended to increase community and public acceptance of 
revised maps and use of those maps. Historically, FEMA has only 
contacted communities when initiating remapping and again when 
preliminary maps are completed. These expanded outreach efforts reflect 
FEMA's understanding that it is dependent on others to achieve the 
benefits of map modernization. For example, under the structure of the 
NFIP, FEMA is dependent on communities to adopt and enforce FEMA's 
minimum building standards and on mortgage lenders to ensure compliance 
with mandatory flood insurance purchase requirements. To expand the 
scope of its outreach efforts, FEMA plans to involve a wide variety of 
community participants--e.g., mayors, emergency managers, lenders, 
property owners, insurance agents, and developers--in the mapping 
process. To expand the frequency of outreach, FEMA intends to increase 
community involvement, awareness, and participation throughout the 
entire flood mapping process. Through a continual education process, 
FEMA's goal is to inform property owners and others potentially 
affected by remapping efforts of steps they can take to mitigate the 
risk of flooding, the types of damage and costs caused by flooding, and 
the benefits of flood insurance.

According to FEMA, if a community is involved in and understands the 
map modernization process, the community is more likely to accept and 
trust the accuracy of the final, revised maps and is more likely to use 
the maps' hazard data to mitigate natural and man-made disasters. 
Conversely, if affected property owners do not understand why their 
communities are being mapped (or remapped) or why their property is now 
in a flood zone, the unexpected additional expense of new or increased 
flood insurance premiums can form the basis of significant community 
opposition to map modernization activities and lead to formal appeals, 
litigation, and delays in implementing map changes.

We visited several communities that have nearly completed or are 
engaged in revising flood maps and talked with relevant officials about 
recent mapping projects and the importance of outreach efforts. The 
experience of Pinellas County, Florida, shows the potential 
consequences of a limited outreach effort while the experiences of the 
Harris County Flood Control District in Houston, Texas, and 
Hillsborough County, Florida, show the potential benefits of a more 
expanded outreach strategy.

Pinellas County, Florida:

Officials in Pinellas County, Florida, rejected revised flood hazard 
maps developed by FEMA that raised base flood level elevations and 
placed areas in newly established flood zones. According to community 
and FEMA officials, FEMA did little to communicate with the community 
and the public during the mapping process. According to FEMA, the 
agency was only required to inform the community when the remapping 
project was initiated in 1993 and again after the proposed maps were 
completed and provided to the community for comment in December 1997. 
County officials subsequently appealed the preliminary maps. According 
to local officials, expanded outreach efforts by FEMA throughout this 
process could have helped the community understand why the county was 
being mapped and how the new maps reflected the true flood risks of the 
properties shown in revised flood zones. After working closely with 
FEMA and mapping contractor officials, the community finally accepted 
and implemented the maps by establishing new building standards in 
September 2003.

Harris County, Houston, Texas:

The Harris County Flood Control District in Houston, Texas, took steps 
to expand stakeholder and community outreach by releasing up to date 
flood hazard map information on its Web site (http://www.tsarp.org). 
County officials have also worked closely with the local newspaper to 
release information on the updated flood hazard information to the 
public. In addition, the county has held individual meetings with the 
county's 35 flood plain managers to ensure that they understood the new 
flood maps and were able to convey that information to citizens; hired 
a public relations consultant to provide guidance on how to better 
utilize the media to disseminate flood map information; and conducted a 
poll survey to ascertain public opinion about flood hazard risk and to 
develop strategies to better convey flood hazard information. County 
officials also developed several committee groups to relay flood maps 
information that is audience-specific, such as a technical discussion 
group that reviews technical issues related to revising the flood maps 
and verifies methodological assumptions.

Hillsborough County, Florida:

Hillsborough County officials have conducted extensive outreach while 
continuing to work with FEMA throughout the remapping process. To help 
ensure that insurance companies, real estate agents, county workers, 
and citizens utilize flood maps in a more efficient and effective 
manner, a stakeholders outreach coalition was formed in March of 2003. 
The purpose of this coalition is to create an information campaign for 
individual property owners and businesses that will be directly 
impacted by the new maps. The coalition includes representatives from 
the county's Citizen Advisory Committee, the insurance industry, real 
estate brokers, builders, lenders, engineers, surveyors, and various 
county departments. Hillsborough County is working in cooperation with 
FEMA to have final maps in late 2004 and create a successful outreach 
program that could be duplicated throughout the nation.

FEMA's expanded outreach efforts are intended to educate the public of 
the potential flood risk in communities and to encourage them to take 
action. Communities that participate in the NFIP are required to 
establish floodplain management ordinances that require new and 
substantially improved structures in newly designated floodplains to 
meet NFIP building standards. However, if a property was not located in 
the floodplain in the old map, but is in the floodplain in the new 
revised map, NFIP floodplain management regulations do not require 
those owners to implement mitigation measures unless they make 
substantial improvements to the structure.[Footnote 15] FEMA cannot 
compel affected property owners to take steps to mitigate their 
properties against flood risks or to purchase flood insurance. Under 
current notification requirements, federally regulated lenders, not 
FEMA, serve as the primary channel for notifying property owners whose 
mortgaged properties are subject to flood insurance requirements. When 
property owners seek new financing--through purchase or refinancing--
federally regulated mortgage lenders are required to determine if the 
property is in the floodplain, and, if so, require the purchase of 
flood insurance. Lenders are not required to monitor map changes or to 
notify property owners with existing mortgages whose properties are 
identified in a floodplain by remapping if they are not aware of the 
change in status.[Footnote 16]

Nonetheless, if federally regulated lenders become aware of flood map 
changes that affect properties for which they hold mortgages through 
FEMA notifications or flood zone determination companies,[Footnote 17] 
then they must notify the property owner and require the purchase of 
flood insurance. The information that must be provided to property 
owners is limited to notifying property owners that their structure is 
in a floodplain, providing a definition of a flood plain, and requiring 
the purchase of flood insurance if they live in a participating NFIP 
community. As a result, FEMA's outreach efforts are important for 
supplementing the formal requirements for notifying communities and 
property owners of map changes.

FEMA's Strategy for Partnering with States and Local Communities Does 
Not Include Communities with Few Resources to Assist in Flood Mapping:

FEMA's objective for building and maintaining mutually beneficial 
partnerships is intended to facilitate and support the efficient 
production and effective use of flood maps. According to FEMA, local, 
state, and federal partners that have invested resources and assisted 
in managing mapping activities have the potential to positively affect 
the detail, accuracy, and quantity of the data collected and improve 
how these data are used. As part of their strategy for partnering, FEMA 
provides guidance to the states on how to develop "business plans" that 
document planned efforts to develop states' and communities' capability 
and capacity to oversee the collection, analysis, and implementation of 
flood data in their state and community and to justify funding for 
these efforts. According to FEMA, 38 states have begun drafting such 
plans. FEMA intends to use these state business plans to help 
prioritize its continuing efforts to develop map modernization 
partners.

Through its Cooperating Technical Partners (CTP) program, FEMA has 
developed partnerships with a variety of states and communities that 
have developed their own data and provided their own funds to help 
update local flood maps. Since 2000, FEMA has leveraged millions of 
dollars in funding from 171 partners (states and local communities) for 
producing maps through its CTP program. For example, from fiscal years 
2000 to 2002, FEMA used $70 million of its federal map modernization 
funding along with state and local funds to develop what FEMA has 
estimated to be more than $155 million worth of new mapping data. 
Figure 12 compares FEMA's cumulative funding for new mapping data 
through the CTP program with the total cumulative dollar value of data 
produced with partner contributions since the program was established 
in 2000.

Figure 12: Comparison of Cumulative FEMA Funding for Mapping Data with 
the Total Cumulative Dollar Value of Mapping Data Produced through CTP 
Program:

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

According to FEMA, partnering has other benefits as well. For example, 
in the long-term, those states and communities with whom FEMA has 
established partnerships may be more likely to accept final map 
changes, expand their capabilities, and assume greater responsibility 
for periodically developing and incorporating updated flood data, 
resulting in cost savings to FEMA.

FEMA's Cooperating Technical Partnership with the State of North 
Carolina:

FEMA's partnership with the state of North Carolina provides an example 
of a state assuming greater responsibility for producing and 
maintaining flood maps.

According to North Carolina officials, the devastating flooding and 
subsequent damage that occurred from Hurricane Floyd in 1999 led the 
state of North Carolina to take action to address the limitations of 
the existing FEMA flood maps. Approximately 80 percent of the homes 
damaged or destroyed during Hurricane Floyd were not depicted in the 
floodplain on the state's flood maps. In 2000, North Carolina became 
the first Cooperating Technical State under FEMA's CTP program, 
agreeing to assume primary ownership and responsibility of flood maps 
for all North Carolina communities. Since then, according to state 
floodplain mapping officials, the state has contributed approximately 
$41 million towards the overall floodplain mapping program. On the 
basis of this amount, North Carolina has covered approximately 65 
percent of the total cost to date for the remapping effort. To date, 8 
counties had received new effective flood maps and 28 counties received 
new preliminary maps, which are now under community review. (See fig. 
13.):

Figure 13: Status of Remapping in North Carolina:

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

Some states and communities with few resources and technical capacities 
or little history of flood mapping activities are likely to pose a 
challenge to FEMA's ability to fund and implement mapping activities. 
For example, we talked with flood management officials in several 
smaller communities in Montgomery County, Texas; Santa Cruz County, 
Arizona; and Larkspur, Colorado. These officials said that their 
communities lacked either the funding needed to develop flood data, the 
technological capability to develop digital flood data and use 
geospatial information systems, or, in some cases, the community 
support needed to conduct mapping activities. One approach for 
obtaining additional resources, capabilities, and community support 
would be for FEMA to facilitate coordination with other agencies within 
the state that have a stake in, or could benefit from, mapping 
activities. For example, state departments of transportation can 
benefit from information in FEMA's geospatial information system, such 
as elevation data, in developing and implementing state roads and 
bridges. North Carolina was able to get its state transportation 
department to help fund the development of elevation data used for 
flood maps. FEMA has not yet developed a strategy for how to partner 
with communities that do not have the resources, capabilities, or 
motivation to initiate and sustain mapping activities. Such a strategy 
could focus on how to assist these potential partners in garnering 
community resources and developing technological capabilities, how to 
coordinate with other agencies in their state, and how to integrate 
these efforts with FEMA's community outreach efforts to gain community 
support for mapping activities.

New Program Management Contract Is Performance-Based, but FEMA May Have 
Difficulty Overseeing the Contract and Measuring Achievement of Program 
Objectives:

In March 2004, FEMA awarded a performance-based contract to obtain 
assistance from a nationwide mapping contractor to manage tasks 
associated with the significant expansion of the map modernization 
program. Unlike many traditional government service contracts, which 
emphasize inputs rather than outcomes, a performance-based contracting 
approach gives the contractor the flexibility to determine how best to 
achieve the outcomes and links payment to the contractor's ability to 
achieve these outcomes--an approach supported by our past work in 
federal contracting. Overseeing these types of contracts requires 
agency staff with the knowledge, skills, and abilities to monitor the 
contractor's efforts using performance measures that accurately measure 
agreed-upon outcomes.

FEMA may be limited in its ability to effectively manage the contract, 
as well as the significant expansion of tasks associated with a five 
fold increase in funding and related mapping activities that will 
continue to be performed by agency staff. These tasks include managing 
grants for many new mapping partners and administering contracts with 
independent firms to develop and process a significantly larger 
quantity of flood data to support local efforts. A staffing needs 
assessment completed by FEMA in December 2003 identifies a need for an 
additional 75 staff with additional skills, including contracting and 
program management capabilities. In appropriating fiscal year 2004 map 
modernization funds, Congress included a provision that would allow 
FEMA to use up to 3 percent, or $6 million, for administrative 
purposes. As of March 2004, FEMA had filled 1 of the 75 positions by 
reallocating existing resources. According to FEMA, it plans to fill 
another 33 positions using the administrative funding identified in the 
fiscal year 2004 budget. In addition, FEMA also plans to fill an 
additional 10 positions by moving staff from other FEMA departments or 
filling vacancies. However, at the time of our review, FEMA had not yet 
established a plan for filling the remaining 31 headquarters and 
regional positions.

One element of effective program management is establishing performance 
measures to determine how well FEMA is achieving its map modernization 
program objectives. FEMA has established performance measures for all 
four of its program objectives. However, FEMA's measures for two of 
those objectives that directly support the use of flood maps for risk 
management--to develop a premier data system and to expand and better 
inform the user community are not clearly defined or fully developed.

FEMA's principal measure for developing and maintaining a premier data 
collection and delivery system is the percent of the national 
population with community-adopted, GIS data-based flood maps. However, 
this measure does not indicate whether the maps themselves meet any 
FEMA-established standards for accuracy. As noted earlier, FEMA has not 
yet defined the minimum level of data collection and analysis for 
communities with similar risk.

To measure the progress and success of expanding and better informing 
the user community, FEMA established performance measures related to 
the percent increase in communities' awareness and use of new maps. 
FEMA plans to use surveys as the primary means of measuring increased 
community awareness and use of the new maps. However, FEMA has not yet 
fully developed an operational definition of how it plans to measure 
"awareness" or "use," for example, that reflect mitigation steps taken 
or the purchase of flood insurance. Because the link between revising 
maps and the use of maps in terms of increased NFIP participation is 
not direct, we recognize that it may be a challenge to develop a 
performance measure that accurately reflects the impact on NFIP 
participation rates of efforts to expand and improve outreach. 
Nonetheless, without developing such a measure (or measures), FEMA will 
be less able to ensure that its map modernization program will have 
resulted in one of FEMA's primary intended benefits.

Conclusions:

FEMA's map modernization strategy recognizes the limits of the agency's 
authority to directly achieve such key intended map modernization 
benefits as increased, effective flood mitigation efforts and increased 
flood insurance participation rates by property owners whose properties 
are within the most hazardous flood areas--those in which there is at 
least a 1 percent chance of flooding in any given year. At the same 
time, FEMA recognizes that it has finite resources for completing map 
modernization and needs to leverage its resources with assistance from 
state and local communities. Both the credibility of the maps as 
accurate and useful and stakeholders' understanding of how the maps can 
be used to reduce flood risk and flood damage will be instrumental in 
enhancing the probability that the maps will be used to achieve their 
intended benefits.

FEMA's outreach strategy for involving stakeholders in map 
modernization appears to be reasonable. Even with these outreach 
efforts, the credibility and likely use of the maps can be compromised 
if there is a perception that similar communities are not treated 
similarly during map modernization. Establishing and implementing data 
collection and analysis standards for communities with similar risk can 
help to assure communities that map development for all communities 
within the same risk category will be consistent and comparable. Such 
standards can also help FEMA to target its map modernization resources 
more efficiently by matching the level of data collection and analysis 
with the level of flood risk. Similarly, by developing strategies for 
partnering with state, and local flood management stakeholders with 
lower levels of capabilities and resources, FEMA will be better able to 
leverage available resources and identify the most effective approaches 
to engaging its partners in the remapping process.

To the extent that FEMA does not have appropriate numbers of staff with 
the requisite skills, it may have limited ability to provide effective 
monitoring and oversight of its new performance-based contract, whose 
contractor has been charged with much of the day-to-day work of map 
modernization that formerly FEMA performed. Finally, in some cases, the 
performance measures established for the program and the contractor may 
not be sufficient to permit FEMA to measure whether map modernization 
is achieving its intended benefits. Without useful operational 
definitions for its planned surveys to measure map acceptance and use, 
FEMA cannot reasonably measure and demonstrate whether map 
modernization has achieved its intended benefits in such areas as 
community and individual flood mitigation efforts or increased flood 
insurance purchase rates.

Recommendations:

To help ensure that FEMA's map modernization achieves the intended 
benefits of improved flood mitigation, increased flood insurance 
participation, and improved multi-hazard mitigation and risk management 
capabilities through the production of more accurate and accessible 
flood maps, we recommend that the Secretary of Homeland Security direct 
the Undersecretary of Emergency Preparedness and Response to take the 
following four actions:

* Develop and implement data standards that will enable FEMA, its 
contractor, and its state and local partners to identify and use 
consistent data collection and analysis methods for communities with 
similar risk.

* Develop and implement strategies for partnering with state and local 
entities with varying levels of capabilities and resources.

* Ensure that it has the staff capacity to effectively implement the 
nationwide mapping contract and the overall map modernization program.

* Develop and implement useful performance measures that define FEMA' s 
progress in increasing stakeholders' awareness and use of the new maps, 
including improved mitigation efforts and increased participation rates 
in purchasing flood insurance.

Agency Comments:

We provided a draft of this report to DHS for its review and comment. 
We met with DHS and FEMA officials, including FEMA's Mitigation 
Division Acting Deputy Director, to discuss the report. In providing 
oral comments, DHS and FEMA generally agreed with the report's contents 
and provided us with minor technical comments, which we have 
incorporated where appropriate. In addition, DHS and FEMA generally 
agreed with our recommendations and provided the following comments:

* To address the data standard recommendation, FEMA said that it plans 
to refine existing standards, in coordination with stakeholders, to 
ensure consistent data collection and analysis for all communities 
commensurate with their flood risk.

* To address the recommendation concerning partnering strategies to 
address varying levels of capabilities and resources, FEMA said that it 
would continue to collaborate with stakeholder groups to develop an 
effective strategy to include states and communities with varying 
levels of capabilities and resources.

* To address the recommendation to ensure that the agency has the staff 
capacity to effectively implement map modernization and oversee the 
contract, FEMA said that it has begun to take steps not only to fill 44 
positions for fiscal year 2004, as noted in the report, but is also 
developing a plan to ensure that additional staffing needs are met in 
fiscal year 2005 and beyond.

* To address the recommendation to develop and implement performance 
measures for increasing stakeholders' awareness and use of flood maps, 
FEMA said that it plans to refine performance measures for this map 
modernization objective to make them more useful and quantifiable.

We will send copies of this report to the Secretary of Homeland 
Security. We will also make copies available to others upon request. In 
addition, this report will be available at no charge on GAO's Web site 
at http://www.gao.gov. If you or your staff have any questions about 
this report, please contact me at (202) 512-8777 or at 
jenkinswo@gao.gov. Major contributors to this report are listed in 
appendix III.

Sincerely yours,

Signed by: 

William O. Jenkins, Jr.

Director, Homeland Security and Justice Issues:

[End of section]

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology:

To describe how map modernization is intended to improve the accuracy 
and accessibility of the nation's flood maps, we interviewed Federal 
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) headquarters officials and agency 
officials in three of the regional offices: Region IV in Atlanta, 
Georgia; Region VIII in Denver, Colorado; and Region VI in Denton, 
Texas. To assess the reliability of FEMA's data regarding the number 
and age of the nation's flood maps, we interviewed officials 
knowledgeable about the data and the systems that produced them and 
determined that the data were sufficiently reliable for the purposes of 
this report. We also reviewed key FEMA documents that describe how map 
modernization is intended to use advanced technology to improve the 
accuracy and accessibility of flood maps.

Realizing that map modernization is in the early stages of 
implementation and information on its impact is limited, we conducted 
site visits in states and communities that have already begun to 
modernize their flood maps. To identify potential locations for site 
visits, we spoke with FEMA Mitigation Division officials and 
representatives from the following professional organizations: 
Association of State Flood Plain Managers, National Association of 
Flood and Stormwater Management Agencies, National Emergency Management 
Association, and the Mapping Coalition. The selected site visits 
represent areas that have recently experienced considerable population 
growth, a high National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) base, or a high 
number of repetitive flood loss claims. Over 64 percent of all NFIP 
policies are located in the states selected for site visits, and over 
40 percent of all repetitive loss properties are located in the states 
in which we conducted site visits.

Our site visits involved reviewing key documents, graphics, and other 
information related to our reporting objectives. Site visits included 
the following locations:

* Hillsborough, Sarasota, and Pinellas counties of Southwest Florida:

* Maricopa County, Arizona:

* State of North Carolina:

* Mecklenburg County, North Carolina:

* Harris County, Texas:

* State of Colorado:

To describe the expected benefits of map modernization, we interviewed 
FEMA officials in their Mitigation Division in Washington, D.C., and 
obtained documents and graphics from FEMA officials describing the 
benefits the agency expects to result from map modernization 
activities. We also interviewed state and local officials on the 
potential multi-hazard benefits of map modernization and obtained 
documents and graphics illustrating the expected benefits.

To determine the extent to which FEMA's strategy for managing the map 
modernization program supports the achievement of the expected benefits 
of more accurate and accessible maps, we first reviewed previous 
documents published by FEMA and others on map modernization. Throughout 
our review, we remained in constant contact with FEMA officials in 
their Mitigation Division to monitor the development of FEMA's 
prioritization of fiscal year 2003 funded mapping projects and the 
implementation of the overall map modernization approach.

To identify areas where FEMA's implementation of map modernization is 
limited, we gathered and synthesized the experiences and challenges 
identified through documentation and interviews provided from various 
sources, including:

* FEMA headquarters and regional officials;

* site visits and selective review participants;

* professionals in the Association of State Floodplain Managers, 
National Association of Stormwater Management Agencies, the National 
Emergency Management Agency, and Arizona Association of Floodplain 
Managers; and:

* private industry representatives in the fields of flood zone 
determinations, engineering, technology and program consulting, real 
estate sales and development, and home mortgage lending.

We also conducted additional research to determine whether limitations 
existed in FEMA's implementation of its outreach approach for its map 
modernization program. We obtained information on the roles and 
responsibilities of FEMA and lenders to communicate changes in flood 
hazard status. We also reviewed and synthesized applicable laws, 
regulations, and guidance regarding notification of flood hazard risk 
to identify all parties designated to inform property owners of changes 
in the flood hazard maps. We interviewed FEMA mapping and insurance 
officials, state, community, and National Flood Determination 
Association officials as well as conducted site visits to ascertain 
information on current processes for communicating changes in flood 
hazard status. Additionally, we interviewed FEMA's general counsel to 
obtain the agency's position on statutory requirements for notification 
of property owners after remapping.

To further analyze the strengths and limitations of FEMA's 
implementation approach, we also reviewed FEMA's Inspector General's 
reports related to flood mapping and reviewed our previous work and 
guidance in the areas of performance-based contracting and performance 
measurement that relate to the objectives of map modernization.

[End of section]

The information regarding deaths and damages due to floods was 
considered background information and was not verified. We conducted 
our review from April 2003 through March 2004 in accordance with 
generally accepted government auditing standards.

[End of section]

Appendix II: Users of Flood Maps:

The principal stakeholders that use FEMA flood maps and the nature of 
their use are described in this appendix.

State and local floodplain managers/community planners: use flood maps 
to make floodplain management decisions for each of the nearly 2 
million development permits issued for new structures nearly 20,000 
NFIP participating communities that have maps. They are responsible for 
establishing and enforcing land-use and construction ordinances that 
comply with minimum NFIP standards.

Insurance companies and agents: use flood maps to determine actuarial 
rates for flood insurance policies. Private insurance companies that 
sell NFIP-backed flood insurance use the flood maps to determine the 
proper premium rate for a flood insurance policy. There are 
approximately 250,000 new policies rated and sold each year.

Lenders: use flood maps to determine the flood risk status of mortgaged 
properties at loan origination and through the entire life of the 
mortgage. Each of the 10 to 15 million federally related mortgage 
transactions each year requires that the flood maps be consulted to 
determine whether the structure secured by the loan is located in the 
floodplain on the current flood map.

Flood zone determination companies: use flood maps to determine 
property locations relative to flood hazard areas on behalf of mortgage 
lenders that typically contract this service to companies with 
expertise in making flood zone determinations and the capability to 
make many determinations quickly.

Individual property owners: use flood maps to better understand their 
flood risk status.

Land developers: use flood maps to assist in designing developments 
that are safe from flood hazards.

Surveyors: use flood maps to prepare elevation certificates for 
structures. These help owners determine their flood risk by comparing 
the mapped flood elevations to the building's lowest floor elevation.

Engineers: use flood maps when designing flood mitigation projects and 
to site and design new buildings and infrastructure.

Real estate professionals: use flood maps to determine the flood risk 
status of properties in the community.

State and local disaster and emergency response officials: use flood 
maps to prepare for all disasters, issue hazard warnings, and implement 
emergency response activities and aid in the rebuilding and 
reconstruction phases.

Other federal agencies: use flood maps in implementing Executive Order 
11988, Floodplain Management, for federal actions proposed in or 
affecting floodplains.

[End of section]

Appendix III: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments:

GAO Contacts:

William O. Jenkins, Jr. (202) 512-8777:

Christopher Keisling (404) 679-1917:

Staff Acknowledgments:

In addition to those named above, Mark Abraham, Leo Barbour, Mark 
Braza, Grace Coleman, Christine Davis, Michelle Fejfar, Brian James, 
Kirk Kiester, and Meg Ullengren made key contributions to the report.

FOOTNOTES

[1] Data are from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in cooperation with 
the National Weather Service.

[2] Mitigation is defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency as 
sustained action that reduces or eliminates long-term risk to people 
and property from hazards and their effects.

[3] Prior to March 2003, FEMA was an independent agency whose Federal 
Insurance and Mitigation Administration was responsible for managing 
the flood insurance program. The Homeland Security Act of 2002, P.L. 
107-296 (Nov. 25, 2002), transferred FEMA and all its responsibilities 
to the Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate within the new 
Department of Homeland Security. This transfer was effective March 1, 
2003. Currently, the Mitigation Division within FEMA is responsible for 
the flood insurance program, including flood map modernization.

[4] See 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.

[5] P.L. 90-448, (Aug. 1, 1968).

[6] Also included are Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.

[7] For clarity and ease of discussion throughout the report, we use 
the term "floodplain" in all discussions where we address the special 
flood hazard area or 100-year floodplain.

[8] FEMA is required to contact community stakeholders, such as the 
state coordinating agency and other appropriate community officials, to 
discuss the scope and methodology for the proposed flood map study. 44 
C.F.R. sec. 66.5.

[9] FEMA is required to publish the proposed flood elevations in a 
prominent local newspaper at least twice during the 10-day period 
following the notification of the community chief executive officer. 
Property owners have 90 days from the second newspaper publication to 
appeal the proposed flood elevations. 44 C.F.R. secs. 67.4, 67.5.

[10] Final flood elevations must be published in the Federal Register 
and copies sent to the community chief executive officer, all 
individual appellants, and the state-coordinating agency. 44 C.F.R. 
67.11.

[11] For clarity and ease of discussion throughout the report, we use 
the term "map modernization" in all discussions where we address the 
Multi-Hazard Flood Map Modernization Program.

[12] The 92,222 flood maps represent nearly 20,000 communities.

[13] For example, FEMA implemented digital base map standards in 1998 
and LIDAR standards in 2000.

[14] These guidelines describe detailed methods of analysis used for 
high-risk areas and less detailed methods used in low-risk areas.

[15] If a community determines that the cost of improvements to a home 
or business equals or exceeds 50 percent of the market value of the 
building, the building is considered a "substantial improvement" and 
must meet the NFIP's minimum requirements.

[16] In making loans, federally regulated lenders are required to 
ensure that property owners purchase flood insurance if their mortgages 
are secured by a structure located in a floodplain. Lenders are also 
required to check the flood hazard status of a property when triggered 
by statutory tripwires, such as loan renewal or extension.

[17] Many lenders use flood zone determination companies to determine 
whether properties require flood insurance as a result of loan 
origination, loan assumption, or map changes. These companies use FEMA 
flood maps and other data to ascertain if properties are situated in 
flood zones.

GAO's Mission:

The General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, 
exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional 
responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability 
of the federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use 
of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides 
analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make 
informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's commitment to 
good government is reflected in its core values of accountability, 
integrity, and reliability.

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 
cost is through the Internet. GAO's Web site ( www.gao.gov ) contains 
abstracts and full-text files of current reports and testimony and an 
expanding archive of older products. The Web site features a search 
engine to help you locate documents using key words and phrases. You 
can print these documents in their entirety, including charts and other 
graphics.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and 
correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as "Today's Reports," on its 
Web site daily. The list contains links to the full-text document 
files. To have GAO e-mail this list to you every afternoon, go to 
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to e-mail alerts" under the "Order 
GAO Products" heading.

Order by Mail or Phone:

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent 
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. 
Orders should be sent to:

U.S. General Accounting Office

441 G Street NW,

Room LM Washington,

D.C. 20548:

To order by Phone: 	

	Voice: (202) 512-6000:

	TDD: (202) 512-2537:

	Fax: (202) 512-6061:

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:

Contact:

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:

Public Affairs:

Jeff Nelligan, managing director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 U.S.

General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 Washington, D.C.

20548: