August 25, 2016

The Role of KAMM and TMAC

to Help FEMA Make a More Resilient Nation

The Future Direction of Flood

Hazard Mapping in the US

What is TMAC?

The TMAC provides advice

and recommendations to the

Administrator of FEMA.

The duties of the TMAC are

solely advisory in nature.

TMAC = Technical Mapping

Advisory Council

TMAC Overview

Federal advisory committee

established by the Biggert-Waters Flood

Insurance Reform Act of 2012

amended by the

Homeowner Flood

Insurance Affordability

Act of 2014

Objectives of TMAC

How to improve in a cost-effective

manner the:

– Accuracy, general quality, ease of use, and

distribution and dissemination of flood

insurance rate maps and risk data; and

– Performance metrics and milestones

required to effectively and efficiently map

flood risk areas in the United States.

Objectives of TMAC

Mapping standards and guidelines for:

– Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs); and

– Data accuracy, data quality, data currency,

and data eligibility;

How to maintain, on an ongoing basis,

FIRMs and flood risk identification; and

Procedures for delegating mapping

activities to State and local mapping

partners.

Objectives of TMAC

The TMAC recommends to the

Administrator and other Federal

agencies participating in the Council:

– Methods for improving interagency

and intergovernmental coordination

on flood mapping and flood risk

determination; and

– A funding strategy to leverage and

coordinate budgets and expenditures

across Federal agencies.

TMAC Reporting Requirements

Report Name Delivery

Future Conditions Risk

Assessment and Modeling ReportFebruary 2016

TMAC Annual Report February 2016

Who is a part of TMAC?

Member TMAC Category Title and Organization

Luis.Rodriguez FEMA Designee Director, Risk Analysis Division, FEMA

Juliana Blackwell NOAA DesigneeDirector, National Geodetic Survey, National Oceanic nad Atmospheric

Administration (NOAA)

Nancy Blyler USACE Geospatial Community Leader, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)

Richard Butgereit State GIS GIS Administrator, Florida Division of Emergency Management

Mark DeMulder USGS GSGS National Geospatial Program

John Dorman State CTPDirector, Emergency Management Division, Geospatial and Technology

Management Office, North Carolina State Government

Leslie Durham State CTPDirector, State Cooperating Technical Partner (CTP) Program and National Flood

Insurance Program (NFIP), Alabama

Scott Edelman Mapping Division Director for North America, AECOM Water Resources

Steve Ferryman State Mitigation Officer Mitigation and Chief Engineer, Clark County Regional Flood Control District

Gale Wm. Fraser, IIRegional Flood and

Stormwater Management

General Manager and Chief Engineer, Clark County Regional Flood Control

District

Carrie Grassi Local CTPSenior Policy Advisor, Mayor’s Office of Long-Term Planning and Sustainability,

New York City

Christopher Jones Engineering Registered Professional Engineer

Howard Kunreuther Risk ManagementProfessor of Decision Sciences and Public Policy, Department of Operations and

Information Management, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania

Wendy Lathrop Surveying President and Owner, Cadastral Consulting, LLC

David Mallory Local CTPSenior Project Engineer, Urban Drainage & Flood Control District’s Floodplain

Management Program, Denver, Colorado

Robert Mason DOI Designee Deputy Chief, Office of Surface Water, Department of Interior (DOI)

Sally Ann McConkey Floodplain Management Illinois State Water Survey Prairie Research Institute, University of Illinois

Christine ShirleyState NFIP Coordination

OfficeNFIP Coordinator, Oregon State

Cheryl Small Flood Hazards Determination Vice President of Operations, CoreLogic Flood Services

TMAC Resources

• www.fema.gov/TMAC

TMAC 2015 Annual Report

2015 Annual Report Recommendations

22 recommendations were adopted on October 21-22,

2015

Recommendations are aligned to 7 Goals

– Accurate Data for Existing and Future Conditions

– Time and Cost Efficiency in Generating Data

– Effective Utilization of Technology

– Integrated Flood Risk Management

– Stakeholder Acceptance of Data

– Leveraging Partners for Added Value

– Permanent Funding that Supports Requirements

10

Goal 1:

Accurate, comprehensive data, models, displays

and risk assessments associated with present

and future flood hazards

GOAL 1 | Recommendation 2

FEMA should develop a national 5-year flood hazard and risk assessment plan

and prioritization process that aligns with program goals and metrics. This

should incorporate a rolling 5-year plan to include the establishment and

maintenance of new and existing studies and assessments in addition to a long-

term plan to address the unmapped areas.

GOAL 1 | Recommendation 3 FEMA should develop National Flood Hazard and Risk Assessment Program

goals that include well-defined and easily quantifiable performance metrics.

Specifically, the program goals should include metrics for the following:

a) Maintaining an inventory of flood hazard miles;

b) Addressing the non-modernized and unstudied flood hazard miles;

c) Conducting flood risk analysis and assessments; and

d) Counting population having defined floodplains using a stream level

performance indicator for a better representation of study coverage.

GOAL 1 | Recommendation 4 and 5

FEMA should ... ensure topographic, geodetic, water-level, and bathymetry

data for the flood mapping program are collected and maintained to Federal

standards. ….

FEMA should document the horizontal and vertical accuracy of topographic

data input to flood study models and the horizontal and vertical accuracy of

topographic data ….

GOAL 1 | Recommendation 6 & 7 (Riverine)

FEMA should periodically review and consider use of new publicly available

statistical models, such as the proposed Bulletin 17C, for flood-frequency

determinations.

FEMA should develop guidelines, standards, and best practices for selection

and use of riverine models appropriate for certain geographic, hydrologic, and

hydraulic conditions.

a) Provide guidance on when appropriate models would be 1-D vs 2-D, or

steady state vs unsteady state,

b) Support comparative analyses of the models and dissemination of

appropriate parameter ranges; and

c) Develop quality assurance protocols.

Goal 2:

Time- and cost-efficient generation and process

management of flood hazard and risk data,

models, assessments, and displays.

GOAL 2 | Recommendation 11, 12, and 13

FEMA should modify the current work flow production process and supporting

management system, Mapping Information Platform, to reduce unnecessary

delays created by redundant tasks and inflexibility of the system.

FEMA, in its update of guidance and standards, should determine the cost

impact when new requirements are introduced and provide guidance to

consistently address the cost impact to all partners.

FEMA should develop guidelines and procedures to integrate a mass LiDAR-

based LOMA process into the National Flood Hazard and Risk Assessment

Program. As part of this process, FEMA should also evaluate the feasibility of

using parcel and building footprint data to identify eligible “out as shown”

structures as an optional deliverable during the flood mapping process.

Goal 3:

Effective utilization of efficient technologies for

acquisition, storage, generation, display, and

communication of data, models, displays and risk.

GOAL 3 | Recommendation 16

FEMA should transition from the current panel-based cartographic limitations

of managing paper maps and studies to manage NFIP data to a database-

derived, digital-display. FEMA should:

a) Prepare a multi-year transition plan …

b) Update required information for map revisions (MT-2 forms) and LOMC

applications …

c) Adopt progressive data management approaches to disseminate

information collected and produced …

d) Ensure that the data management approach is flexible to allow efficient

integration, upload, and dissemination of … data … and serve as the

foundation for creating all digital display and mapping products.

e) Provide a mechanism for communities to readily upload jurisdictional

boundary data, …

Goal 4:

Integrated flood risk management framework of

hazard identification, risk assessment, mitigation,

and monitoring.

GOAL 4 | Recommendation 10

FEMA should transition from identifying the 1-percent-annual-chance

floodplain and associated base flood elevation as the basis for insurance

rating purposes to a structure-specific flood frequency determination and

associated flood elevations.

GOAL 4 | Recommendation 14

FEMA, and its mapping partners including the private sector, should transition

to a flood risk assessment focus that is structure specific. …

Goal 5:

Strong confidence, understanding, awareness

and acceptance of flood hazard and risk data,

models, displays, assessments, and process by

the public and program stakeholders.

GOAL 5 | Recommendation 15

FEMA should leverage opportunities to frame and communicate messages to

stakeholders in communities so they understand the importance of addressing

the flood risk today and consider long-term resilience strategies. Messages

should be complemented by economic incentives such as low-interest loans

and mitigation grants that lead community leaders and individuals to

undertake cost-effective risk reduction measures.

Goal 6:

Robust added value coordination, leveraging and

partnering with local, state, federal, and private

sector organizations.

GOAL 6 | Recommendation 17

FEMA should consider National Academy of Public Administration

recommendations on agency cooperation and federation (6, 7, 8, 9, 13, and 15)

and use them to develop more detailed interagency and intergovernmental

recommendations on data- and program-related activities that can be more

effectively leveraged in support of flood mapping.

GOAL 6 | Recommendation 18

FEMA should work with Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies, particularly

the USGS and National Ocean Service, to ensure the availability of the accurate

water level and streamflow data needed to map flood hazards. Additionally,

FEMA should collaborate with the USGS to enhance the National Hydrography

Dataset to better meet the scale and resolution needed to support local

floodplain mapping while ensuring a consistent national drainage network.

GOAL 6 | Recommendation 19 and 20

FEMA should develop and implement a suite of strategies to incentivize

communities, non-government organizations, and private-sector stakeholders

to increase partnering and subsequent contributions for flood hazard and risk

updates and maintenance.

FEMA should work with CTPs to develop a suite of measures that

communicate project management success, competencies, and capabilities of

CTPs. Where CTPs demonstrate appropriate levels of competencies,

capabilities, and strong past performance, FEMA should further entrust

additional hazard identification and risk assessment responsibilities to CTPs.

GOAL 6 | Recommendation 21

To ensure strong collaboration, communication, and coordination between

FEMA and its CTP mapping partners, FEMA should establish a National Flood

Hazard Risk Management Coordination Committee. The role of the committee

should be focused around the ongoing implementation of the 5-year Flood

Hazard Mapping and Risk Assessment Plan. FEMA should add other members

to the committee that have a direct bearing on the implementation of the plan.

Goal 7:

Permanent, substantial funding that supports all

program resource requirements.

GOAL 7 | Recommendation 22

FEMA should define the financial requirements to implement the TMAC’s

recommendations and to maintain its investment in the flood study inventory.

Prioritizing

Benefit

– Credibility

– Efficiency

– Customer Experience

Resources

– FEMA Resources (staff)

– Financial Resources

32

21

22

1

2

4

3

5

6

7

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

18

19

17 20

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

9.00

10.00

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

Be

ne

fit

-C

um

ula

tive

Resources

Quick

Wins

Top Priorities Opportunities

Benefits

• Highest: 7-9

• Moderate: 4-6

• Lowest: 0-3

Financial Resources

> $2MM$500K

to $2MM

< $500K

Low Priorities

Resources

• Highest: 1-3 Staff >75% Time + Dedicated Leadership

• Moderate: 2-3 Staff 50% Time + Dedicated Manager

• Lowest: 1-2 Staff <25% Time

For More Information

FEMA.gov/TMAC

Please provide

your comments

to Carey

Johnson.