1. FEMA’s Coastal Mapping and Management Process

2. 2 2 Welcome  Background and Coastal study methodologies  Technical Opportunities  Management Opportunities

3. 3 Regional Plans  Regions have each developed plans for when and how to go about updating the coastline

4. 4 FEMA Guidelines and Specifications  2002 and 2003 Guidance for Wave Elevation Determination and V Zone Mapping  2005 Guidance for Pacific Coast of the United States and Updates  2007 Guidance for Atlantic and Gulf Coasts of the United States and Updates  Guidance for Coastal Flood Hazard Analyses and Mapping in Sheltered Waters (Technical Memorandum, 2008)  Policy and Procedures for Identifying and Mapping Areas Subject to Wave Heights Greater than 1.5 feet (Procedure Memo No. 50)  FEMA Great Lakes Coastal Guidelines, Appendix D.3 Update (May 2012)  Guidance for the Determination of the 0.2 Percent-Annual-Chance Wave Envelope along the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico Coasts (Procedure Memo No. 47)  Various other PMs

5. 5 Coastal Study Process 3 - 4 years

6. 6 Components to create a DFIRM

7. 7 New components  LimWA FEMA Procedure Memorandum No. 50, 2008 Evidence that there is significant structural damage from as little as a 1.5 foot wave Information purposes only Not tied to regulatory requirements May Impact  CRS  Building codes

8. 8 Coastal Non- Regulatory  Risk MAP has new products and tools available as enhanced products Decisions have to be made in each study team as to what data is available and what enhanced products for coastal will be used Can be used to help drive communities towards being able to identify and initiate mitigation actions

9. 9 Coastal Depth Grids  total depth (i.e. stillwater and waves) –for the 1% annual chance flood  total depth (i.e. stillwater and waves) –for the 1% annual chance flood + factors of safety (1,2,3 feet)

10. 10 Wave Hazard Areas  Highlights areas where wave hazard are high (V Zone and PFD), moderate (between V Zone and LiMWA, minimal (wave heights less than 1.5ft)  Highlights calculated wave heights

11. 11 Erosion Risk Determination and Risk Assessments  Polygons depicting the spatial extent of the regulatory  HAZUS type coastal flood risk assessment

12. 12 New Steps  Additionally new steps in mapping process are a part of a coastal study Discovery- formerly scoping  New Guidance from HQ modified by Regions  Region IV took one step further to refine guidance for Coastal projects Flood Engineering Review (optional)  Study team decision point Resilience  Potential opportunity to partner with NOAA, SeaGrant, Gulf of Mexico Alliance to take advantage of their coastal resilience tools PDCC/Open House

13. 13 Different Management Techniques  Several Different Ways to Oversee Coastal Studies Cooperating Technical Partner (CTP) Led CTP and Contractor Led Contractor Led

14. 14 Management Opportunities  Region IV has studies with all three types 8 states in Southeast US  6 with coastal risk FL – State involvement, Water Management Districts, Contractors CTPs

15. 15 Management Opportunities  Full Partnership NC, SC, Northwest Florida, AL AL/NWFWMD Joint Project  MOA  Comprehensive Technical Approach  Risk MAP goals Local Tailored Approach Local Buy-in to approach Helps at boundaries Disconnect in oversight, can lead to schedule delays

16. 16 Management Opportunities  Joint Partnership GA, MS, Suwannee River Water Management District FEMA contractor assists with complex surge component  Helps build consistency with approach Floodplain Mapping and Outreach handled by Partner  Helps to have local involvement especially in politically charged areas  Provides more resources than Federal Government has

17. 17 Management Opportunities  FEMA Contractor Only Parts of Florida More direct oversight, but higher involvement needed Comprehensive outreach website to assist www.southeastcoastalmaps.com – Region IV www.southeastcoastalmaps.com www.r3coastal.comwww.r3coastal.com – Region III http://www.txchart.com/ http://www.region2coastal.com/ http://www.r9map.org/Pages/CCamp-Main.aspx Etc….

18. 18 Technical Opportunities  Geology Methodology selection Build consistency but allow for tailored approach dependant on shoreline  Demonstration Projects 1D/2D wave comparison  Coordinate cutting edge technology changes with Coastal IPT

19. 19 Conclusions  Can help studies keep up with cutting edge technology and techniques, by utilizing numerous sources to assist in studies  FEMA doesn’t have enough staff to oversee all studies, CTPs help with oversight  FEMA needs to provide and lead with more concise and consistent guidance for coastal studies