Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Mapping, Risk MAP Products, & Risk Assessments

Be able to develop things like a cross section table or profile on the fly. Somehow be able to select an area and then automatically generate the information for just your area of interest. Or be able to click on the profile baseline (or maybe a cross section) and be able to pull up the image of the pre-canned profile or cross section table for the selected point. For our area cross sections tables should also include ...more »

FEMA constantly hears concerns about completing the job of Map Modernization and fully modernizing the remainder of the paper map inventory. Are there current technologies or techniques that FEMA should consider in order to address this issue in the near future?

Nearly 80% of FEMA's map inventory is comprised of riverine miles that do not have water-surface elevations associated with them. Without these elevations, effectively managing these floodplains is a challenge at a local level. Should FEMA be more concerned with producing a FIRM product that escalates these flooding sources to a flood study with detailed engineering information (i.e. BFEs, floodways, depth grids, etc) ...more »

There ought to be varying levels of levee certification based on the type of flooding source. For example, a 40-foot tall levee along the Missouri river that could be impounding water for weeks or months is very different from an ephemeral stream in the west that will only convey 60 cfs in a 100-year event for an hour or two. Right now, both of these levees are required to be built based on the same standard with the ...more »

FEMA needs to leverage its current investment in RISK MAP by fostering the dissemination and interaction of RISK MAP data to include DFIRM’s, LIDAR, Flood Risk Reports, Areas of Mitigation Interest, Flood Insurance Studies, and other Non-Regulatory Products. There is a need for a robust, layered, public facing web viewer that allows homeowners access to flood hazard information which, they can use and understand to make ...more »

After several years and several conferences, I have yet to hear what Risk Map is exactly. Yes, touchy/feely explanations, but nothing that explains how it will be used in the field. The program has been poorly defined and I feel that it is beginning to hurt the credibility of the overall flood program. Go back to the drawing board and come up with a program that clearly defines limits of RISK (if desired) or go back to ...more »

To encourage innovation, creation, and adoption of new technological solutions, FEMA may wish to consider creating an environment - a "pilot testbed" – that is free to operate outside formal IT protocols for conceptualizing and testing new tools for producing and distributing risk data to facilitate community engagement. This environment would be a growing field where industry players can show the Agency what can be ...more »

To ensure stakeholders fully understand the changes occurring as a result of the issuance of a preliminary FIRM, a more robust map viewing option is recommended for this information. Currently, the preliminary and effective FIRMs for any given community are viewable separately through the Map Service Center website in pdf format. However, in some cases, FEMA Regions have developed enhanced map viewing tools which allow ...more »

Functionality could be built into an online preliminary map viewing tool or deployed as a separate tool that allows for the digital submittal of appeals to preliminary flood hazard data by communities. During the appeal period, this functionality could be activated which allows a registered community official to upload appeal packages including supporting files and the community’s own comments about the submittal. The ...more »

Consider adopting 2002 Heinz Center study and recommendations to map shoreline change as coastal erosion zones on FIRMs. This will require that FEMA establish a coastal erosion hazard determination methodology and mapping criteria as a high hazard risk regulatory or non-regulatory area of NFIP. Without a nationwide shoreline change mapping program under Risk MAP for high risk coastal erosion areas, the properties on coastal ...more »

Recent tsunami flood and wave damages on west coast demonstrate a potential need for tsunami model studies and mapping. In past, the west coast developed areas have been provided worst-case scenarios of tsunami flooding to be used for coastal planning and emergency management officials. Adopting probabilistic methodologies for tsunami flood inundation and wave runup mapping could improve the ability to address tsunami ...more »

Sea level rise is a complex coastal hazard to incorporate into existing FEMA products (whether a regulatory or non-regulatory product). In order to improve Risk MAP non-regulatory products to help coastal communities, future changes to the flood risk data due to sea level rise could accompany FEMA coastal studies to look at future risks to flooding beyond the effective coastal flood data depictions on the FIRM. The coastal ...more »

Currently downtown Lexington, KY's NFIP panel is not printed because the entire stream was piped in 1900+/-. There are a substantial number of properties with artesian springs, high groundwater, and very old brick culverts which go underneath old buildings. This is not shown in any way on the panels. This risk is well known, though less quantifiable. It is astonishing how many insurance agents and lenders do not know ...more »

In order to provide flood risk information in a format that is more usable and "actionable" by communities and individuals, FEMA should promote more risk assessments to be done under Risk MAP at the property or building level. Perceived data availability gaps should not deter from this goal - innovation will always find ways to fill a need. Actions and personal responsibility are more likely to be taken when risk can ...more »

While the non-regulatory products are great for communicating flood risk, FEMA would be well served by looking at ways to use them to enhance their regulatory products, and thus help them more closely achieve their digital vision. For example, with the right level of quality control, the water surface elevation grids could be used as an eventual replacement to the flood profiles themselves. Point-and-click BFEs, greater ...more »

Official elevation certificates and HMTAP disaster related structure elevation surveys store what is essentially geospatial information (X, Y, and Z values). The current system is archaic. A geospatial database should be developed and an online tool, i.e. E-EC or something similar, for entering and submitting elevation certificates. This would allow for geospatial analysis and Risk mitigation prioritization.

Preparing paper maps that are slaves to FIRM panel boundaries is a large cost in both initial map preparation and in preparing LOMR exhibits. Get rid of paper panels and use the savings in other areas such as modernizing more paper maps or more community engagement. There are some areas of the country that cannot go all electronic but there must be ways to address their needs without letting them drive the entire program ...more »

Identify entities that have the necessary capabilities and enlist them as CTPs; and empower them to do as many of the Risk MAP activities as they can.

Multi frequency depth grids can be used in performing many different types of analyses such as Average Annualized Losses and Benefit Cost Analyses that can be instrumental in facilitating community action. Further, they can be used for even risk based analyses, which has been recommended by the National Academy Sciences to FEMA. It would also have great benefit to FEMA’s many disaster programs. FEMA should invest in ...more »

FEMA needs to follow Maryland and others examples of storing the effective H&H models and terrain data used to create the floodplain boundaries in an easily used extraction system. The current system is chaotic and effective models are often lost at the FEMA library over time. This would allow more cost effective LOMRs and restudies if the original digital model was readily accessible.

The Map Mod process ended with significant unmet map needs. Studies were conducted using out-of-date hydrology (sometimes 30+ years old) and hundreds of miles of Zone A streams were mapped on USGS topography without BFE's. RiskMAP evolved concentrating on outreach with a minimal mapping effort. The Technical Mapping Advisory Council, identified in BW-12 is badly needed to summarize mapping needs and rekindle, if necessary, ...more »

The fact that the ocean breached the peninsular and flooded the bay should indicate that some of the FEMA guidelines as to height of 1st floor in V and A zones are out of line with the history of the areas adjecent to the bay. At 108 8th Ave SSP a house built on slab NEVER had any water inside the house built in 1951 and now the plot of land is in an A8 area. The breach in Mantelokin(?) was extraordinary and will not ...more »

The Floodway Data Table really should be a cross section table. It doesn’t make sense to exclude cross sections from a watercourse that doesn’t have a floodway. These tables should include the discharges used for the modeling. Publishing information for watercourses that don’t have floodways can help when we are trying to determine which hydraulic model is the effective model.

If a floodway is developed than that is the minimum elevation that should be used for regulatory purposes, LOMAs, and LOMRs. The floodway elevation needs to be more that it currently is.

FEMA needs to stop changing around the setup with their contractors every 5 years or so. It seems to take 2 to 3 years to get the new process up to speed, and just about the time everything seems to be working, we start moving towards a new setup. We seem to end up with mostly the same contractors; we just keep rearranging the deck chairs.