1. North Carolina CTS Committee Meeting #7 April 17, 2001

2. Introduction and Welcome

3. Scoping/Basin Plans Status Updates:

4. Schedule for Completing Basin Plans White Oak Lumber Tar-Pamlico Cape Fear Neuse Pasquotank 12/14/00 12/27/00 1/23/01 2/27/01 4/13/00 5/1/01 (Est.) May 2001 End of May 2001 June 2001 River BasinDraft DateFinal Date (Est.)

5. Final Scoping Meetings u Three separate meetings will be held to present the Draft Plan for the Neuse River Basin. Dates and locations include: l April 23rd — Raleigh, NC l April 24th — Goldsboro, NC l April 25th — New Bern, NC u All impacted counties & communities invited u Provides final opportunity for input

6. Final Scoping Meetings u Two separate meetings are planned for the Pasquotank River Basin. Proposed dates and locations include: l May 17th — Elizabeth City, NC l May 18th — Manteo, NC u Draft Plan for Pasquotank River Basin under preparation

7. After the Final Meetings u Draft Basin Plan may be revised u State’s Floodplain Mapping Contractor will develop business and technical proposals u Basin Plan will be finalized and notification provided to all impacted counties and communities u Production phase will then begin

8. Flood Data and Mapping Development Status Updates:

9. White Oak River Basin u Negotiations completed u Delivery Order finalized u Field survey of hydraulic structures and streams completed u Engineering analyses underway l Expected completion mid-May 2001

10. Lumber River Basin u Negotiations completed u Delivery Order finalized u Field survey of hydraulic structures and streams underway u Engineering analyses underway l First of three phases expected to be completed end of May 2001

11. Tar-Pamlico River Basin u Negotiations completed u Delivery Order finalized u Field survey of hydraulic structures and streams underway u Engineering analyses underway l First of three phases expected to be completed end of May 2001

12. Cape Fear River Basin u Negotiations completed u Delivery Order finalized u Field survey of hydraulic structures and streams underway u Engineering analyses underway l First of three phases expected to be completed end of May 2001

13. LIDAR Surveys and DEM Development Status Updates:

14. Task 1 — LIDAR Data Acquisition as of 4/10/01 Watershed Concepts: u Data collection is 100% complete for the White Oak, Tar-Pamlico, Neuse, and Pasquotank River Basins Greenhorne & O’Mara: u Data collection is 90% complete for the Lumber and Cape Fear River Basins

15. Task 2 — Generation of Bare-Earth DEMs Watershed Concepts

16. Task 2 — Generation of Bare-Earth DEMs Greenhorne & O’Mara

17. Task 3 — Generation of TINs and Breaklines Watershed Concepts: u Green = Completed u Orange = In Progress u Blue = Approved u Awaiting shipment of new DOQQs from CGIA

18. Task 3 — Generation of TINs and Breaklines Greenhorne & O’Mara: u Breaklines for Scotland, Hoke, Montgomery, Moore, and Richmond Counties are complete u TIN development has begun for 21 grids of the Lumber River Basin

19. LIDAR Quality Control Surveys Selected Firms for RFQ #19-000018 Status Updates:

20. Quality Control Surveys u LIDAR quality control field work has been completed for the White Oak and Lumber River Basins u LIDAR quality control field work is in progress for the Tar-Pamlico, Cape Fear, and Neuse River Basins

21. DFIRM Graphic Specifications Status Updates:

22. NC DFIRM Prototype NC DFIRM Prototype u North Carolina DFIRM prototype has been developed for review: l Three colors l Customized border, legend, and title block l Customized map symbology l 10,000’ x 10,000’ grid tiling l “Statewide” mapping u One panel includes all communities/counties in that tile

23. DFIRM Database Specifications Status Updates:

24. NC DFIRM Database u North Carolina DFIRM database design underway: l Incorporates FEMA’s standard DFIRM database items u Base map data u DFIRM features l Enhanced features u Field inventory u H&H model input and results l Supports future map updates

25. Partnering Status Updates:

26. Information Technology Requirements Analysis and Preliminary Design

27. User Requirements Analysis u User Requirements Document produced in draft form l Summarizes survey and interview results l Establishes set of functional and data requirements l Will serve as basis for system design u Review needed by CTS Committee u Location is www.ncfloodmaps.comwww.ncfloodmaps.com

28. Preliminary System Design u Preliminary System Design Document available in draft form by April 18th l Builds on content of User Requirements Document l Establishes initial design parameters l Enumerates options for future detailed consideration l Outlines potential implementation risks

29. Next Steps for IT Component u Finalize User Requirements Document u Finalize Preliminary System Design Document u Develop schedule and work content for Detailed Design and Implementation Phase u Prepare and issue Delivery Order for next phase

30. Base Map Data Collection/Community Partnering

31. Working Group Reports/Updates: Higher Standards

32. Preliminary/Post-Preliminary Processing for NC FISs and FIRMs

33. Current FEMA Processing u Preliminary FIS and FIRM issued u 30-day comment period u Final Community Meeting u Publication of proposed flood elevation determination in Federal Register and twice in local newspaper u Community notified by letter (continued)

34. Current FEMA Processing u 90-day appeal period initiated by second newspaper publication u Any appeal/protests resolved u Letter of Final Determination issued (establishes effective date of FIS and FIRM and begins 6-month compliance period u FIS and FIRM become effective; distributed by Map Service Center Process typically requires 1 to 1½ years

35. 6-Month Compliance Period u To participate in the NFIP, communities must comply with Section 60.3 of the NFIP regulations u Section 60.2 requires that FEMA give communities 6 months to adopt/update ordinances that comply with Section 60.3 criteria.

36. Land Management and Use Criteria Yes 60.3(d) & (e) YesNoYes 60.3(e) NoYes 60.3(d) No Yes 60.3(c) No Yes 60.3(b) No 60.3(a) V ZonesFloodwaysBFEs100-Year Flooding Land-Use Classification Type of Flood Hazard Information Shown on FIRM

37. Compliance with 60.3 Criteria u Most North Carolina communities have adopted 60.3(d)- and 60.3(e)-level model ordinances even without a floodway and V zones u Most NC community ordinances specify that they apply as of the date of initial community NFIP map and “to any subsequent revisions” u For these communities, current ordinances will be adequate, and 6-month compliance period will not be needed u Others will have to update ordinances

38. Post-Preliminary Processing for NC Counties in More than 1 Basin u Majority of Phase I North Carolina counties located in more than one basin u Engineering for basins will not be completed at the same time u Engineering for portions of counties may be completed as much as a year before the other portions (longer for counties located partially in Phase II basins)

39. Post-Preliminary Processing for NC Counties in More than 1 Basin u Method of post-Preliminary processing must: l Meet all statutory and regulatory requirements for due process l Reduce time frames as much as possible l Be cost effective

40. Recommended Method u Issue a Preliminary when the basin is completed, but include only the portion of the county in the basin u Initiate the 90-day appeal period for the Preliminary u When the other basin(s) are complete, issue a revised Preliminary(s) that includes the rest of the county and proceed with 90-day appeal period

41. Recommended Method u If a basin affects only a portion of a panel, the Preliminary will be issued for all panels affected by the basin u For portion of panel not affected by basin, base map information will be shown but not flooding information—Note on FIRM will refer users to effective map for flood hazard information in that area

42. Recommended Method u To Expedite Processing: l Schedule news releases to take place within 1 week of issuance of the Preliminary l With Preliminary, notify community that 90-day appeal period will begin with the second news release and that the Final Meeting will be conducted during the first month of issuance of Preliminary (continued)

43. Recommended Method u To Expedite Processing: l Thorough outreach should reduce number of technical appeals and protests, thus making it safe to initiate the appeal period prior to the final meeting l When the basins for other parts of county are completed, use the same process (continued)

44. Recommended Method u To Expedite Processing: l When State initiates engineering and mapping for subsequent basins, give priority to areas within the basin that will complete the county l When last Preliminary for county is issued, provide notice of the appeal period and provide the effective date of the FIS and FIRM to begin the 6-month compliance period(continued)

45. Recommended Method u To Expedite Processing: l 6-month compliance period and last 90-day appeal period will run concurrently l Final Meeting will be conducted during first month of issuance of Preliminary FIRM l Appeals will be processed on a case-by-case basis, depending on extent of area affected (continued)

46. Recommended Method u To Expedite Processing: l Approach for counties partially in Phase II basins will be more flexible l If time lag might be more than a year, effective information for portion in Phase II might be digitized and used to develop the initial county FIS and FIRM l When Phase II basin is complete, a revision would be processed

47. Recommended Method u Final maps will become effective within approximately 7 months after issuance of final Preliminary for the county as compared to 1 to 1½ years with FEMA’s standard process

48. Recommended Method u For 7 of the counties that are split between basins, Watershed Concepts is going to make complete county submissions. u For these counties, the complete countywide Preliminary FIS and FIRM can be issued and the 6-month compliance period will begin as soon as the Preliminary is issued. The 90-day appeal period will begin with the second Public Notice.

49. Preparation for Preliminary and Post-Preliminary Processing u State and FEMA will begin researching community ordinances to identify communities that will have to update their ordinances

50. DFIRM Production: Priority Listing of Counties

51. Phase I Counties u Engineering, mapping, and DFIRM production in the White Oak, Lumber, and Tar-Pamlico River Basins prioritized by county u Priority consideration given to (1) the anticipated impact of new mapping, (2) if the county is within multiple basins, and (3) contractor’s ability to complete county study by 09/30/2001

52. White Oak River Basin Priority Listing 1.Carteret 2.Onslow 3.Jones Yes No Mid-July Mid-July* Complete County? Estimated Prelim. Date *For the portion of the White Oak River Basin County

53. Lumber River Basin Priority Listing 1.Columbus 2.Brunswick 3.Scotland 4.Robeson 5.Hoke No End of Sept* End of Oct* Mid-Sept* Complete County? Estimated Prelim. Date *For the portion of the Lumber River Basin County

54. Lumber River Basin Priority Listing (cont’d) 6.Bladen 7.Montgomery 8.Richmond 9.Moore No Mid-Sept* End of Aug* Mid-Sept* Complete County? Estimated Prelim. Date *For the portion of the Lumber River Basin County

55. Tar-Pamlico River Basin Priority Listing 1.Edgecombe 2.Franklin 3.Pitt 4.Nash 5.Beaufort Yes Mid-Aug Mid-Sept Mid-Aug End of Sept Complete County? Estimated Prelim. Date County

56. Tar-Pamlico River Basin Priority Listing 6.Hyde 7.Warren 8.Halifax 9.Granville 10.Martin 11.Vance Yes No End of Sept End of Sept* Mid-Oct* End of Oct* Complete County? Estimated Prelim. Date *For the portion of the Tar-Pamlico River Basin County

57. Overall County Priority 12) Beaufort 13) Hyde 14) Warren* 15) Halifax* 16) Hoke* 17) Granville* 18) Martin* 19) Vance* 20) Bladen* 21) Montgomery* 22) Richmond* 23) Moore* 1) Carteret 2) Onslow* 3) Columbus* 4) Jones* 5) Brunswick* 6) Edgecombe 7) Franklin 8) Pitt 9) Scotland* 10) Nash 11) Robeson* *DFIRM production completed for only a portion of the county by September 30, 2001.

58. How Will Flood Elevation Data for Approximate Areas Be Depicted on North Carolina FIRMs?

59. How were Zone A Areas on FEMA’s FIRMs determined? u Designate a Special Flood Hazard Area where FEMA has not determined Base Flood Elevations l Regulatory definition of Zone A in 44 CFR 64.3 u Typically based on rudimentary calculations or other data source l For example, regression equations and normal depth computations; USGS floodprone quadrangle maps; hydric soils data

60. What is Approximate Study Method for NC Flood Mapping Program? u Based on H&H analyses using DEMs l Regression equations for discharges l HEC-RAS models for flood profiles u Key difference from Detailed Study Method—bridge geometry will not be surveyed and cross sections will not include bathymetric data l Where bridge geometry is readily available, coding of bridge geometry will be attempted u “Buildable” analyses—can be upgraded later to full detailed study

61. How can NC’s Flood Elevation Data for Approximate Areas be used? u Floodplain management u Flood insurance policy rating l Rates are typically higher in A zones than in AE zones because risk is less well known l If BFE can be provided, rates are more actuarially based

62. How Will Flood Elevation Data for Approximate Areas will be depicted on NC FIRMs? u Publish on the FIRM as BFEs u Designate zones as AE u Provide Statutory 90-day appeal period l As required by 42 USC § 4104[a] l Appeals must be based on scientific or technical data

63. How will BFEs in Approximate Areas be distinguishable from Detailed Areas? u On FIRM: l No floodway or 500-year floodplain l Considering alternate symbology for BFEs u In Flood Insurance Study Report: l Profiles will have only 100-year profile l Peak discharge table will only have 100-year discharge l No Floodway Data Table l Different methodology for determining BFEs will be explained

64. What are the Benefits of this Approach? u Elevation data for approximate areas will be readily available for floodplain managers and flood insurance agents u Elevation data will carry more weight l Communities will be required to follow more stringent 60.3(c) requirements versus 60.3(b) “best available data” requirements

65. What are the potential drawbacks of this approach? u Showing BFEs may imply higher degree of accuracy than warranted u May result in more appeals l Impacts time and cost

66. Why not show the approximate flood elevations as “AFEs” and treat them as “Best Available Data”? u FEMA’s regulations and governing statutes do not permit this. u In order to portray the AFEs on the FIRMs and treat them as “Best Available Data,” an extensive rulemaking process would be required. Scheduling does not permit this.

67. Local Contributions to the NC Mapping Effort

68. Potential Pilot for LOMA Delegation

69. Potential Pilot for LOMA/LOMR-F Delegation u FEMA is considering delegation of LOMA/LOMR-F issuing authority to engineers and surveyors u North Carolina Society of Surveyors has volunteered to work with North Carolina Geodetic Survey on a potential pilot

70. FEMA’s Community Rating System (CRS)

71. CRS Background u Founded in 1990 and Codified in the Flood Insurance Reform Act of 1994 u Flood insurance premiums are adjusted to reflect reduced risk resulting from activities that meet the three CRS goals : l Reduce flood losses l Facilitate accurate insurance ratings l Promote awareness of flood insurance

72. Benefits u Reduced flood insurance premiums for property owners u Enhanced Public Safety u Reduction in damage to property, public infrastructure, and human suffering u Avoidance of economic disruption and losses u Protection of the environment u Allows a community to evaluate itself against a nationally recognized benchmark u Provides technical assistance in providing and implementing activities

73. Benefits (cont’d) u Reduced Premiums l Class 1 — 45% l Class 2 — 40% l Class 3 — 35% l Class 4 — 30% l Class 5 — 25% l Class 6 — 20% l Class 7 — 15% l Class 8 — 10% l Class 9 — 5% l Class 10 — n/a

74. CRS Recognized Activities u 18 recognized activities eligible for CRS credit points l 300 Series Activities — Public information activities l 400 Series Activities — Mapping and regulatory programs focused on new development l 500 Series Activities — Damage reduction programs where current development is at risk l 600 Series Activities — Flood preparedness programs, flood warning and levee and dam safety programs

75. Participating Communities u Communities receive a ranking between 1 and 10 u 9 is for the minimum amount of activities required to receive a reduced premium (5%) u As of October 1, 2000, there were 926 participating communities nationwide: l 5 with a Class 10 rating l 431 with a Class 9 rating l 352 with a Class 8 rating l 110 with a Class 7 rating l 27 with a Class 6 rating l 1 with a Class 3 rating

76. Participating North Carolina Communities u North Carolina currently has 74 participating communities that are Class 9 and lower, including: l 44 Class 9 l 24 Class 8 l 4 Class 7 l 2 Class 6 (the Towns of Southern Shores and Wrightsville Beach)

77. Action Items/Wrap Up