Map Modernization Update

1
Map Modernization Update

• Paul Rooney, FEMA HQ
• NSGIC Annual Meeting, 2006

2
Mid Course Adjustment

• Why do it?
• Congress asked us to quantify and articulate more
  clearly what would be delivered
• It makes sense for any project of this size to
  deliberately look both behind and ahead
• It provides an opportunity to respond to things
  not originally anticipated
• We had recommendations from the IG, GAO, and
  our stakeholders regarding issues of significant
  magnitude
• It was completed in March 2006
• An Executive Summary is available online at
  http//www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/fhm/mm_mca.shtm
• Or search for FEMA mid course adjustment)

3
Mid Course in a Nutshell

• We were on a course that would provide a digital
  flood layer nationwide
• Weve scaled back to focus more on engineering
  elements in areas where flood risk is greatest
• We are projecting project completion on time
  (2010) without the need for resources beyond
  planned levels
• Were actively framing what happens beyond 2010
  and are interested in your thoughts

4
Where is Risk the Greatest?
5
Mid-Course AdjustmentNew Metrics
6
Aligning Study Scope with Flood Risk
7
Status Preliminary and Effective Maps
Population in Thousands
Fiscal Years
8
Flood Map Modernization and MHIP
Builds on Recommendations from our Stakeholders
Describes FEMAs Strategy for Updating NFIP
Flood Maps
Developed and Updated Through a Collaborative
Process with Local, State, and National
Participants
5-Year Forecast for Flood Mapping Activities
9
MHIP Version 2.0 Update

• Begins to reflect Mid-Course Adjustment
• Addresses stakeholder requests
• Greater flexibility in determining areas to be
  mapped
• Increase in the level of engineering analysis for
  areas at greatest flood risk
• Frame issues regarding engineering standards
• Updated flood map production sequencing (appendix
  A) through collaboration
• A continued work in progress

10
MHIP Version 2.0 Release Process

• Hard copies to FEMA Regions and NSP Regional
  Management Centers (RMCs)
• FEMA Regional offices coordinate with their
  respective key stakeholders
• Hard copies to stakeholder associations and
  mapping coalition
• Release of document on FEMAs Flood Hazard
  Mapping Website in mid-October
• http//www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/fhm/mh_main.shtm

11
Map Maintenance

• We will end up where we started if we dont
  adequately maintain the maps after 2010
• FEMA has many well qualified partners with the
  capability and desire to maintain the product
• Other partners possess skills and desire in other
  aspects of the production process

12
Envisioned Components of Map Maintenance

• Qualification Levels, Performance Thresholds, and
  Resource Issues
• Data Maintenance Components
• Engineering
• Geographic
• Data Management
• Publication and Distribution
• Education and Outreach
• IT Systems

13
Map Maintenance Questions to be Answered

• What should Map Maintenance involve?
• When should we revisit a modernized map?
• How should flood risk and map currency be
  considered for study prioritization?
• Should the Map Maintenance phase begin before the
  end of Map Modernization? How?
• What should/can be delegated, and to whom?
• What new technologies should be brought in?

14
eLOMA Determination ToolIncreasing Efficiencies

• Provides Licensed Land Surveyors and Professional
  Engineers a Web-Based System to Submit and Print
  Simple LOMA Requests
• Significantly Reduces the Amount of Time it Takes
  for the Requestor to Receive a Determination from
  FEMA.
• Audit Procedures and Automatic Checks to Ensure
  Accuracy

15
Digital Products as Official Concept

• Define the location of the floodplain boundaries
  relative to the coordinates printed on the maps
  rather than the roads or other features
• This is consistent with standard mapping
  practices and would make the digital and paper
  product identical
• Supports implementation of more advanced
  technology (e.g. GPS)
• Saves printing and distribution costs allowing
  more resources to be devoted to risk analysis
• Provides flexibility to swap base map features
• Allow for use of both paper and digital

16
Geospatial Coordination Status

• Policy in place for documenting and tracking
  geospatial activities
• Align with existing state processes
• Would like to hear from states good and bad
• https//hazards.fema.gov Tools and Links tab

17
Tools

• Policy and guide on web
• State geospatial coordination procedures to
  mapping partners
• Geospatial coordination report
• National fact sheets
• Contact lists
• Planned project coordination tools NDOP and
  NDEP (RAMONA)

18
Conclusion

• Were making progress nearly half the
  population will have preliminary maps by close of
  FY06
• We continue to be focused on risk and have
  adjusted course to align with stakeholder needs
• We are working hard to maximize the value of the
  data discovery efforts and minimize the workload
  on state GIS coordinators
• We cant do it alone and appreciate your support,
  good ideas, and insights

19
Flood Map Modernization