Prepared for the 

Federal Emergency Management Agency, Region I and 

the Maine Floodplain Management Program, State Planning Office 

Scoping of Flood Hazard Mapping Needs for 

Lincoln County, Maine 

By Robert W. Dudley and Charles W. Schalk

Open File Report 2007–1130 

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

1 
2 

Contents 

Section 1. Introduction .....................................................................................................................................................4

Background .....................................................................................................................................................................4

Scope of Work.................................................................................................................................................................5

Description of Lincoln County ......................................................................................................................................7

Section 2. Available Flood-Mapping Data and Mapping Needs.............................................................................10

Community FISs and FIRMs ........................................................................................................................................10

State of Maine Best Available Data (BAD) for Unnumbered A-Zones ...............................................................10

Letters of Map Change (LOMCs) ...............................................................................................................................10

LOMCs in Lincoln County ............................................................................................................................................11

Community Flood Ordinances.....................................................................................................................................12

Mapping Needs Update Support System (MNUSS) ..............................................................................................12

Community Assistance Visits (CAVs) and Community Assistance Contacts (CACs).......................................14

GIS Data .........................................................................................................................................................................14

Base Map Data .............................................................................................................................................................15

Topographic Data.........................................................................................................................................................17

Hydrography Data ........................................................................................................................................................18

Community GIS Contact Information.........................................................................................................................18

Community Meetings and Contacts ..........................................................................................................................18

Scope and Prioritization of Mapping Needs in Lincoln County ...........................................................................19

Prioritization of Towns in Lincoln County.............................................................................................................19

Prioritization of Waterbodies in Lincoln County..................................................................................................21

Project Time and Costs for Identified Mapping Needs .........................................................................................26

Project Alternatives .....................................................................................................................................................26

Section 3. Options for Future Mapping and DTM Preparation................................................................................27

Mapping Requirements ...............................................................................................................................................27

Base Map.......................................................................................................................................................................28

Digital Terrain Models (DTMs)...................................................................................................................................29

Flood-Insurance Risk Zones .......................................................................................................................................30

Section 4. References Cited ..........................................................................................................................................31

Appendices........................................................................................................................................................................32

Appendix A: Community Contacts and Best Available Data: Lincoln County......................................................33

Appendix B: Community Scoping Interview Data: Lincoln County........................................................................54

Appendix C: Existing MNUSS Data Entries: Lincoln County...................................................................................72

Appendix D: Attachments ............................................................................................................................................101

Appendix E: Census Block-Group Data.....................................................................................................................107

 
3 

CONVERSION FACTORS AND ABBREVIATIONS

Multiply By To obtain

Length

inch (in.) 25.4 millimeter (mm)

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

Area

square foot (ft2) 0.09290 square meter (m2)

square mile (mi2) 2.590 square kilometer (km2)

Volume

cubic foot (ft3) 0.02832 cubic meter (m3)

Slope

foot per mile (ft/mi) 0.1894 meter per kilometer (m/km)

Velocity and Flow

foot per second (ft/s) 0.3048 meter per second (m/s)

cubic foot per second (ft3/s) 0.02832 cubic meter per second (m3/s)

OTHER ABBREVIATIONS USED IN REPORT

BAD Best Available Data 

BFE Base Flood Elevation 

CAC Community Assistance Contact 

CAV Community Assistance Visit

DFIRM Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map

FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency

FHBM Flood Hazard Boundary Map 

FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map 

FIS Flood Insurance Study

GIS Geographic Information System 

LOMC Letter of Map Change 

MEGIS Maine Office of Geographic Information Systems

MFMP Maine Floodplain Management Program 

MNUSS Mapping Needs Update Support System 

NFIP National Flood Insurance Program

USGS United States Geological Survey
4 

Scoping of Flood Hazard Mapping Needs for 

Lincoln County, Maine 

By Robert W. Dudley and Charles W. Schalk

Section 1. Introduction 

This report was prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Maine Water Science Center as the 

deliverable for scoping of flood hazard mapping needs for Flood Insurance Study revision in Lincoln 

County, Maine, under Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Inter-Agency Agreement 

Number HSFE01-06-X-0020. This section of the report explains the objective of the task and the 

purpose of the report.

Background 

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) developed a plan in 1997 to modernize 

the FEMA flood mapping program. FEMA flood maps delineate flood hazard areas in support of the 

National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). FEMA’s plan outlined the steps necessary to update 

FEMA’s flood maps for the nation to a seamless digital format and streamline FEMA’s operations in 

raising public awareness of the importance of the maps and responding to requests to revise them. The 

modernization of flood maps involves conversion of existing information to digital format and 

integration of improved flood hazard data as needed. To determine flood mapping modernization 

needs, FEMA has established specific scoping activities to be done on a county-by-county basis for 

identifying and prioritizing requisite flood-mapping activities for map modernization. The U.S. 

Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with FEMA and the Maine Floodplain Management 

Program (MFMP) State Planning Office, began scoping work in 2006 for Lincoln County. Scoping 

activities included assembling existing data and map needs information for communities in Lincoln 

County, documentation of data, contacts, community meetings, and prioritized mapping needs in a 

final scoping report (this document), and updating the Mapping Needs Update Support System 

(MNUSS) database with information gathered during the scoping process. 

The average age of the FEMA floodplain maps in Lincoln County, Maine is at least 17 years. 

Many of these studies were published in the mid- to late-1980s, and some towns have partial maps 

that are more recent than their study. However, in the ensuing 15–20 years, development has occurred 

in many of the watersheds, and the characteristics of the watersheds have changed with time. 

Therefore, many of the older studies may not depict current conditions nor accurately estimate risk in 

terms of flood heights or flood mapping.
5 

Scope of Work 

The following is the scope of work as defined in the FEMA/USGS Statement of Work:

Task 1: Collect data from a variety of sources including community surveys, other Federal 

and State Agencies, National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) State Coordinators, Community 

Assistance Visits (CAVs) and FEMA archives. Lists of mapping needs will be obtained from the 

MNUSS database, community surveys, and CAVs, if available. FEMA archives will be inventoried 

for effective FIRM panels, FIS reports, and other flood-hazard data or existing study data. Best 

available base map information, topographic data, flood-hazard data, and hydrologic and hydraulic 

data will be identified. Data from the MFMP database also will be used.

Task 2: Contact communities in Lincoln County to notify them that FEMA and the State have 

selected them for a map update, and that a project scope will be developed with their input. Topics to 

be reviewed with the communities include (1) Purpose of the Flood Map Project (for example, the 

changes that have prompted the map update); (2) The community's mapping needs; (3) The 

community’s available mapping, hydrologic, hydraulic, and flooding information; (4) target schedule 

for completing the project; and (5) The community’s engineering, planning, and geographic 

information system (GIS) capabilities. 

On the basis of the collected information from Task 1 and community contacts/meetings in 

Task 2, the USGS will develop a draft project scope for the identified mapping needs of the 

communities in Lincoln County. The draft project scope will summarize available information, 

evaluate effective FIS data in the new project, and identify other data and data sources needed to 

complete the project. The draft project scope will establish prioritized mapping needs according to 

census and waterbody criteria and estimate schedules and associated costs for completion of the 

components of flood mapping.

The following subject areas are documented in this report as set forth in the statement of work: 

available flood-mapping-related data and documented mapping needs, community meetings and 

contacts, scope and prioritization of mapping needs, and project methods. Scoping-level time and 

costs for identified mapping needs will be provided as a document separate from this report. The 

appendix section of this report provides a community by community summary of information 

obtained and used in the scoping process for all 18 communities in Lincoln County that have Flood 

Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), Flood Insurance Studies (FISs), or Flood Hazard Boundary maps 

(FHBMs) (table 1). Three communities have FHBMs rather than FIRMS or FISs. Two communities, 

Westport and Whitefield, are not in the program. 

Lincoln County contains 16 islands that are part of towns but have their own community 

identifier (CID). These islands and the towns to which they belong are appended to table 1; most of 

the islands are part of the town of Bristol. The rest of this report will regard these islands as part of the 

towns to which they belong unless specific flood-related information is on file for them.
6 

Table 1. Organized communities and unorganized territories in Lincoln County, Maine. 

[CID, Community identification number; FIRM, flood insurance rate map; FHBM; flood hazard boundary map; *, 

Community has a published flood insurance study; NSFHA, no specific flood hazard area; --, not applicable; NIP, not in 

program] 

Community name CID 

Area, in 

square 

miles 

Population, 2000 

census (or 

governing town) 

Population 

density, per 

square mile Map type 

Effective map 

date 

Alna, Town of 230083 21.0 675 32.1 FIRM 01-Mar-05 

Boothbay Harbor, Town of 230213 22.5 2,334 104 FIRM 17-Jun-86 

Boothbay, Town of 230212 22.5 2,960 132 FIRM 03-Jun-86* 

Bremen, Town of 230214 18.2 782 43.0 FHBM 04-Feb-87 

Bristol, Town of 230215 36.2 2,644 73.0 FIRM 04-Jan-02* 

Damariscotta, Town of 230216 13.8 2,041 148 FIRM 30-Sep-88* 

Dresden, Town of 230084 30.5 1,625 53.3 FIRM 06-Jul-98* 

Edgecomb, Town of 230217 18.2 1,090 59.9 FIRM 18-Jul-78 

Hibberts Gore Township 230712 0.75 1 1.33 -- NSFHA 

Jefferson, Town of 230085 58.5 2,388 40.8 FIRM 18-Oct-88* 

Monhegan Island Plantation 230511 0.86 75 87.2 -- NSFHA 

Newcastle, Town of 230218 29.8 1,748 58.7 FIRM 01-Apr-03 

Nobleboro, Town of 230219 22.8 1,626 71.3 FIRM 15-Nov-89* 

Somerville, Town of 230512 22.8 509 22.3 FIRM 19-Aug-91* 

South Bristol, Town of 230220 13.1 897 68.5 FIRM 16-Jul-90* 

Southport, Town of 230221 5.41 684 126 FIRM 17-May-88* 

Waldoboro, Town of 230086 72.7 4,916 67.6 FIRM 03-Apr-85* 

Westport, Town of 230222 8.92 745 83.5 FHBM (NIP) 03-Jan-75 

Whitefield, Town of 230087 47.5 2,273 47.9 FHBM (NIP) 26-Jul-74 

Wiscasset, Town of 230223 24.8 3,603 145 FIRM 16-Apr-91* 

Bar Island 230916 -- Bristol -- FIRM 04-Jan-02 

Haddock Island 230918 -- Bristol -- FIRM 04-Jan-02 

Hungry Island 230917 -- Bremen -- FIRM NSFHA 

Indian Island 230919 -- Bristol -- FIRM 04-Jan-02 

Jones Garden Island 230925 -- Bristol -- FIRM 04-Jan-02 

Killick Stone Island 230927 -- Bristol -- FIRM 04-Jan-02 

Louds Island 230915 -- Bristol -- FIRM 04-Jan-02 

Marsh Island 230921 -- Bristol -- FIRM 04-Jan-02 

Polins Ledges Island 230929 -- Bristol -- FIRM NSFHA 

Ross Island 230922 -- Bristol -- FIRM 04-Jan-02 

Thief Island 230920 -- Bristol -- FIRM 04-Jan-02 

Thrumcap Island 230928 -- Boothbay -- FIRM NSFHA 

Webber Dry Ledge Island 230930 -- Bristol -- FIRM NSFHA 

Western Egg Rock Island 230926 -- Bristol -- FIRM 04-Jan-02 

Wreck Island 230924 -- Bristol -- FIRM 04-Jan-02 

Wreck Island Ledge 230923 -- Bristol -- FIRM NSFHA 
7 

Description of Lincoln County 

Lincoln County in midcoast Maine (fig. 1) encompasses an area of 474 square miles (mi2) and 

comprises 18 towns, Monhegan Island Plantation, and Hibberts Gore Township (table 1, fig. 1). The 

population in Lincoln County reported by the 2000 census was approximately 33,620 people. The 

population for the 2000 census represents an 11-percent increase over the population reported in the 

1990 census (30,360 people) and a 31-percent increase over the population reported in the 1980 

census (25,690 people) (University of Maine, 2004). 

Lincoln County contains or borders 916 mapped ponds and lakes ranging in surface area from 

less than 0.1 acre to 4,660 acres (7.28 mi2

) for a total surface area of 12,330 acres (19 mi2), from GIS 

analysis. Mean pond size is 13.5 acres; Damariscotta Lake in Jefferson, Nobleboro, and Newcastle is 

the largest waterbody. Adams Pond and Knickerbocker Lake in Boothbay and Little Pond in 

Damariscotta and Newcastle serve as water-supply sources for undisclosed numbers of people (Maine 

Department of Health and Human Services, 2006). Lincoln County includes approximately 690 mi of 

rivers and streams and about 510 mi of coastline, including islands in the Atlantic Ocean (fig. 2). 

Major rivers include Eastern, Sheepscot, Damariscotta, and Medomak, all flowing roughly north to 

south across the county. The drainage area of Sheepscot River is about 285 mi2

. 
Figure 1. Communities in Lincoln County, Maine. 

8 
Figure 2. Hydrology of Lincoln County, Maine. 

9 
10 

Section 2. Available Flood-Mapping Data and Mapping Needs 

Flood-mapping data and mapping needs were compiled as part of this effort by means of state 

and community contacts, community scoping meetings, and manual and on-line data searches. This 

report is a comprehensive compilation of data acquired for scoping tasks relating to Lincoln County. 

Community FISs and FIRMs 

Lincoln County includes 11 communities that have FIRMs with active FIS reports, 4 

communities that have FIRMs without FIS reports, and 3 communities that have FHBMs with only 

unnumbered A-zones (two of which are not in the program) (table 1). Monhegan Island Plantation, 

Hibberts Gore Township, and several islands have no specific flood hazard areas identified. 

The effective FIS map dates of communities in the program range from July 18, 1978 

(Edgecomb) to March 1, 2005 (Alna). Seventeen percent of the maps in Lincoln County are 20 years 

old or older; 67 percent are 10 years or older. The oldest FIRM is 28 years old, the most recent is 

2 years old, and the average age is approximately 17 years. It is important to note that the effective 

map date is the date the map was last revised or the date on which an FHBM was converted to a 

FIRM. Some revisions were minor adjustments and did not affect entire map panels. As a result, much 

of the information depicted on the county’s floodplain maps is likely to be older than 17 years.

State of Maine Best Available Data (BAD) for Unnumbered A-Zones 

The MFMP has developed, over several years, a data set that tabulates information about the 

best available data (base flood elevations) for water bodies designated as unnumbered “A” zones on 

flood maps for communities throughout the State. The base flood elevations tabulated in this data set 

are derived from hydrologic and(or) hydraulic studies of water bodies that may be published in FISs 

for adjacent communities or published as part of flood studies not directly related to FEMA FISs 

(e.g. Army Corps of Engineer projects, Natural Resources Conservation Service projects, and Letter 

of Map Changes). These data are used in this report as part of the prioritization of mapping needs for a 

community (see section: Scope and Prioritization of Mapping Needs in Lincoln County). These data 

are documented in the appendix of this report on a community-by-community basis. Information 

about these data is available from the MFMP web site at: http://www.state.me.us/spo/flood/bad/, 

accessed on September 8, 2006.

Letters of Map Change (LOMCs) 

A Letter of Map Change (LOMC) is a letter issued by FEMA in response to a request to revise 

or amend an effective National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) map to remove a property or reflect 

changed flooding conditions on the effective map. LOMCs may include Letters of Amendments 

(LOMAs), Letters of Map Revisions (LOMRs), and Letters of Map Revision based on Fill (LOMR-F) 

as defined below:

• LOMAs: A LOMA is an official amendment, by letter, to an effective NFIP map. A LOMA 

establishes the property location in relation to the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA). There is 

no appeal period for LOMAs, and the letter becomes effective the date that it is sent.

• LOMRs: A LOMR is an official revision, by letter, to an effective NFIP map. A LOMR may 

change flood-insurance risk zones, floodplain and(or) floodway boundary delineations, 

planimetric features, and(or) Base Flood Elevations (BFEs). The effective date of a LOMR 
11 

depends on the type of change requested. For example, some LOMRs are effective on the date 

that the letter is issued and others become effective following an appeal period (typically 30 to 

90 days or 6 months).

• LOMR-F: A Letter of Map Revision based on Fill (LOMR-F) may be filed as a special case 

of the LOMR. A LOMR-F provides FEMA’s determination concerning whether a structure or 

parcel has been elevated on fill above the BFE and excluded from the SFHA. A LOMR-F is an 

official revision, by letter, to an effective NFIP map. The letter becomes effective on the date 

that it is sent.

In addition to the categories above, conditional LOMAs, LOMRs, and LOMR-Fs may be 

issued by FEMA to comment on a proposed project or change. The letter does not revise an effective 

NFIP map, but indicates whether the project, if built as proposed, would be recognized by FEMA. 

LOMCs in Lincoln County 

The presence and number of LOMCs in a community can be an indication of increasing 

development in a community and(or) problematic flood hazard boundaries. LOMCs are used in this 

report as part of the prioritization of mapping needs for a community (see section: Scope and 

Prioritization of Mapping Needs in Lincoln County). LOMC data for Lincoln County are summarized 

in table 2. A Geographic Information System (GIS) digital data set representing georeferenced 

locations of LOMCs in Lincoln County was created as part of the scoping effort and uploaded to the 

Watershed Information System (WISE, a software package used by FEMA to catalogue scoping 

needs) database. 

Table 2. Summary of letters of map change (LOMCs) in Lincoln County, Maine. 

[CID, Community Identification number; NSFHA, no specific flood hazard; NIP, not in program; LOMC, letter of map 

change; --, not applicable] 

Community name CID 

Current map 

date 

Map age 

(years) 

Number of 

LOMCs 

Alna, Town of 230083 01-Mar-05 2 5 

Boothbay Harbor, Town of 230213 17-Jun-86 21 9 

Boothbay, Town of 230212 03-Jun-86* 21 14 

Bremen, Town of 230214 04-Feb-87 20 0 

Bristol, Town of 230215 04-Jan-02* 5 7 

Damariscotta, Town of 230216 30-Sep-88* 19 2 

Dresden, Town of 230084 06-Jul-98* 9 1 

Edgecomb, Town of 230217 18-Jul-78 29 0 

Hibberts Gore Township 230712 NSFHA -- -- 

Jefferson, Town of 230085 18-Oct-88* 19 3 

Monhegan Island Plantation 230511 NSFHA -- -- 

Newcastle, Town of 230218 01-Apr-03 4 3 

Nobleboro, Town of 230219 15-Nov-89* 18 2 

Somerville, Town of 230512 19-Aug-91* 16 2 

South Bristol, Town of 230220 16-Jul-90* 17 4 

Southport, Town of 230221 17-May-88* 19 6 

Waldoboro, Town of 230086 03-Apr-85* 22 4 

Westport, Town of 230222 03-Jan-75 32 (NIP) 0 

Whitefield, Town of 230087 26-Jul-74 33 (NIP) 1 

Wiscasset, Town of 230223 16-Apr-91* 16 0 
12 

Community Flood Ordinances 

The MFMP provides all participating communities (92 percent of the State’s communities) 

with model floodplain management ordinances, guidance and review, and maintains all community 

flood ordinances on file. The contact for community flood ordinances is the MFMP: 

Brigitte Ndikum-Nyada 

Planning and Research Associate 

Maine Floodplain Management Program 

State Planning Office 

184 State Street, 38 SHS 

Augusta, ME 04333 

Tel: 207-287-8932 

Fax: 207-287-6489 

Mapping Needs Update Support System (MNUSS) 

In accordance with section 575 of the National Flood Insurance Reform Act of 1994 (Federal 

Emergency Management Agency, 1994), FEMA assesses “...the need to revise and update all 

floodplain areas and flood risk zones identified, delineated, or established based on an analysis of all 

natural hazards affecting flood risks.” FEMA initiated the Mapping Needs Assessment (MNA) 

process, which identifies and prioritizes flood hazard mapping needs for communities nationwide. As 

part of this effort, FEMA developed the Mapping Needs Update Support System (MNUSS), which is 

an interactive, web-based software application that maintains an inventory of needs for future map 

updates. In particular, MNUSS stores information on the following two types of update needs:

• Map Maintenance Needs: Includes changes to base map information, such as the addition of 

new roads, changes to corporate limits, and incorporation of LOMCs.

• Flood Data Update Needs: Includes changes to flood hazard areas as a result of changes in 

hydrologic and hydraulic conditions, changes to Base Flood Elevations (BFEs), and(or) 

changes in the floodplain delineation.

Mapping needs may be viewed and entered into MNUSS by a variety of parties, including 

FEMA, state NFIP coordinators, study contractors, Cooperating Technical Partners (CTPs), and other 

Federal agencies, such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the USGS. All potential 

entries are reviewed and approved by the FEMA MNUSS controller prior to entry into the system. 

MNUSS entries for Lincoln County are summarized in table 3. MNUSS records exist for six 

towns, including Boothbay Harbor, Bremen, Bristol, South Bristol, Southport, and Waldoboro. Of the 

83 MNUSS entries on record, 30 (36 percent) appear to be placeholders (one per community or 

island), 22 (27 percent) appear to be duplicate entries, and 31 (37 percent) appear to be unique entries. 

Of the unique MNUSS entries, eight (about 26 percent) are not valid (asking for reference 

marks that are no longer included on the maps), 12 (about 39 percent) will be addressed by the 

DFIRM process (mislabeled roads and so forth), and 11 (about 35 percent) are valid entries that 

require restudy in the future. All of the 11 unique MNUSS entries that could affect base flood 

elevations (BFEs) are expected to increase the BFE by more than 5 ft. 
13 

For the scoping process, existing entries in MNUSS were retrieved by USGS and reviewed 

with the MFMP and community representatives. The review process resulted in the identification of 

duplicate, outdated, missing, and(or) erroneous entries. Two of the placeholder entries will be 

modified to reflect MFMP’s assessment that the towns of Newcastle and Edgecomb need floodinsurance studies. These findings will provide the basis for updates to MNUSS upon completion of 

the scoping report. Existing MNUSS entries are compiled in Appendix C. 

Table 3. Summary of entries in the Mapping Needs Update Support System (MNUSS) for Lincoln 

County, Maine. 

[CID, Community Identification number; MFMP, Maine Floodplain Management Program; BFE, base flood elevation; 

DFIRM, digital flood insurance rate map; FIS, flood insurance study; --, not applicable] 

CID Community name Number MFMP comment Anticipated BFE change 

230083 Alna, Town of 0 -- -- 

230213 Boothbay Harbor, Town of 4 Requires restudy Increased by greater than 5 feet 

230212 Boothbay, Town of 0 -- -- 

230214 Bremen, Town of 1 DFIRM -- 

230215 Bristol, Town of 1 DFIRM -- 

230215 Bristol, Town of 2 Requires restudy Increased by greater than 5 feet 

230216 Damariscotta, Town of 0 -- -- 

230084 Dresden, Town of 0 -- -- 

230217 Edgecomb, Town of 0 FIS needed -- 

230712 Hibberts Gore Township 0 -- -- 

230085 Jefferson, Town of 0 -- -- 

230511 Monhegan Island Plantation 0 -- -- 

230218 Newcastle, Town of 0 FIS needed -- 

230219 Nobleboro, Town of 0 -- -- 

230512 Somerville, Town of 0 -- -- 

230220 South Bristol, Town of 2 Requires restudy Increased by greater than 5 feet 

230220 South Bristol, Town of 8 DFIRM -- 

230221 Southport, Town of 2 DFIRM -- 

230221 Southport, Town of 3 Requires restudy Increased by greater than 5 feet 

230086 Waldoboro, Town of 8 Not valid -- 

230222 Westport, Town of 0 -- -- 

230087 Whitefield, Town of 0 -- -- 

230223 Wiscasset, Town of 0 -- -- 
14 

Community Assistance Visits (CAVs) and Community Assistance Contacts (CACs) 

CAVs and CACs provide assistance to communities regarding the administration and 

enforcement of their floodplain management ordinances. A CAV is a scheduled visit (on the date 

opened) to an NFIP community for the purpose of conducting a comprehensive assessment of the 

community’s floodplain management program. A CAC is used to establish a contact with a 

community for the purpose of determining if any problems or issues exist and to offer the community 

assistance if necessary. CACs can be conducted by means of a telephone call or brief visit. “Date 

opened” refers to the date that the visit or call was initiated, whereas “date closed” refers to the date 

that the results of the assistance call or visit is finalized. CAV and CAC data for Lincoln County are 

presented in table 4. 

Table 4. Summary of Community Assistance Visits (CAVs) and Community Assistance Contacts (CACs) 

in Lincoln County, Maine. 

[CID, Community Identification number; FEMA, Federal Emergency Management Agency; --, no close date] 

CID Community name Date opened Agency Type Date closed 

230213 Boothbay Harbor October 10, 2003 FEMA CAV -- 

230213 Boothbay Harbor March 22, 1991 STATE CAC March 27, 1991 

230213 Boothbay Harbor July 29, 1998 STATE CAC August 25, 1998 

230212 Boothbay July 5, 2001 STATE CAC -- 

230214 Bremen September 26, 1995 STATE CAC -- 

230215 Bristol June 6, 1992 STATE CAV September 9, 1992 

230216 Damariscotta August 1, 2000 STATE CAC December 15, 2000 

230084 Dresden September 28, 1993 STATE CAV October 13, 1993 

230084 Dresden September 23, 1992 STATE CAC September 29, 1992 

230084 Dresden August 20, 2003 STATE CAC -- 

230085 Jefferson July 17, 1992 STATE CAC -- 

230218 Newcastle September 19, 2003 STATE CAC -- 

230219 Nobleboro August 27, 1993 STATE CAC -- 

230512 Somerville August 28, 1996 STATE CAC August 4, 1997 

230220 South Bristol July 6, 1993 STATE CAV November 23, 1993 

230220 South Bristol September 19, 2003 FEMA CAV October 5, 2004 

230221 Southport September 14, 1999 STATE CAV -- 

230221 Southport September 15, 2005 STATE CAC -- 

230086 Waldoboro September 6, 1991 STATE CAC October 10, 1991 

230086 Waldoboro September 9, 1998 STATE CAC August 6, 1999 

230223 Wiscasset March 15, 1994 STATE CAC March 29, 1994 

230223 Wiscasset September 23, 2004 STATE CAC -- 

GIS Data 

Most GIS data in Maine reside with the Maine Office of GIS (MEGIS) as the agency acts as a 

central repository for these data. Although not every community shares their GIS data with MEGIS, 

many data sets are shared and served over the Internet. Data can be accessed on the MEGIS web site 

at: http://apollo.ogis.state.me.us/. Community-specific data that is not shared with MEGIS are 

documented as part of the community scoping-meeting process (see interview data in Appendix B). 

All data served by MEGIS are referenced to North American Datum 1983 (NAD83), Universal 

Transverse Mercator (UTM) Zone 19, in meters, and are available to FEMA. 
15 

Base Map Data 

Base map layers maintained by MEGIS include features such as roads, streams, and political 

boundaries. Base map data layers have been acquired from a variety of sources including the USGS 

data and represent many of the feature types found on USGS topographic maps. More recently 

developed data were derived from various sources providing improved base map accuracy. Existing 

coverages maintained by MEGIS can be linked to or viewed at the following URL: 

http://apollo.ogis.state.me.us/ 

Nearly all of Lincoln County has detailed digital orthophotography available at 1-ft resolution; 

the 1-ft (each image pixel representing a planimetric square 1 ft on a side) imagery data set is a truecolor mosaic of high-resolution digital orthophotographs produced from aerial photos collected over 

areas of southwest Maine in spring 2003 (fig. 3). Much of the remainder of the county is covered by 

2-ft resolution digital orthophotographs produced from aerial photos collected over southwest Maine 

in spring 2003. A small part of the county, including Hibberts Gore and Monhegan Island Plantations, 

are covered by 1-meter resolution grayscale aerial photography. Community-specific aerial 

photographs are documented as part of the community scoping-meeting process (see Appendix B). 

The following towns indicated during the interview process that they have or will acquire 

base-map data in some form: 

Boothbay – plans to acquire aerial photography in the future. 

Boothbay Harbor – 1991, black and white, coastal areas only, unknown scale. 

Bremen – 2005, black and white, 10 panels, high detail. Frequent updates. 

Somerville – recently, but no details. 

Waldoboro – 2003 or so, color. 
Figure 3. Orthophotography indices for Lincoln County, Maine. Indices indicate coverage of 1-foot 

(yellow; each image pixel representing a planimetric square 1 foot on a side), 2-foot (blue), and 1-meter 

(white) orthophotography archived and served through the internet by the Maine Office of Geographic 

Information Systems (MEGIS). 

16 
17 

Topographic Data 

Digitally scanned USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles provide topographic data for the entire state 

of Maine with 10- and 20-ft contour intervals, variable by location. Digital Elevation Models (DEM) 

also are available through the USGS National Elevation Dataset (NED). The NED has been developed 

by merging the highest-resolution, best quality elevation data available across the United States into a 

seamless raster format. NED horizontal datum for Maine is NAD83 and vertical datum is North 

American Vertical Datum 1988 (NAVD88). The NED is continually updated as best available DEM 

data become available. DEM data with 30 meter (m) resolution (each raster pixel represents a 

planimetric square 30 meters on a side) are available for the entire state of Maine. DEM data with 

10-m resolution (1/3 arc second) are available for the entire state of Maine except for extreme 

northern Somerset and Oxford Counties. DEM data can be downloaded through the USGS Seamless 

Data Distribution Web site at http://seamless.usgs.gov/web site/seamless/viewer.ph. 

As part of the map modernization process, the State Planning Office and the Maine Geological 

Survey completed an assessment of topographic changes in coastal areas by coastal erosion (Dickson, 

2003). This report is available online at 

http://www.state.me.us/doc/nrimc/mgs/explore/marine/firms/contents.htm.

The Maine Department of Transportation (MDOT) routinely collects detailed topographic data 

for highway projects. The data are typically limited to an area within 300 ft of the centerline of the 

highway. The scope, scale, and accuracy of the data are project specific and depend on the flight level 

of the survey. MDOT does not maintain any kind of searchable database cataloging these data. The 

MDOT Survey and Photogrammetric Group is willing to search their files for available data if they 

are provided a GIS shapefile of an area of interest. The primary contact for topographic data from the 

MDOT Survey and Photogrammetric Group is Tim Liseige, Photogrammetric and Control Engineer, 

(207) 624-3493, tim.liseige@maine.gov. 

Four MDOT projects, dated 1957–77, intersect streams that have been identified as needing 

updated flood-insurance studies for Lincoln County (in section Prioritization of Waterbodies in 

Lincoln County). One MDOT project, dated 1969, intersects a coastal zone in South Bristol that has 

been identified as needing updated flood-insurance studies. Details about the studies and affected 

waterbodies are shown in table 5. Lengths of affected streams and coastal zones that overlap with 

MDOT projects were not computed. 

Table 5. Maine Department of Transportation mapped projects that intersect streams in 

Lincoln County identified as needing updated flood-insurance studies.

Community Description Project Waterbody Date 

Dresden Route 27 S-0163(4) Eastern River 5/6/1971 

Nobleboro, Waldoboro U.S. Route 1 26-1(34) Medomak River, Oyster Creek 11/11/1964 

Newcastle Newcastle project None Sherman Lake, Marsh River 11/1/1957 

South Bristol Route 130 160(503) Atlantic Ocean 5/2/1969 

Wiscasset U.S. Route 1 26-1(42)&(511) Back River, Sheepscot River 6/1/1977 

Community-specific topographic data are documented as part of the community scopingmeeting process (see Appendix B). In Lincoln County, however, no municipalities indicated during 

the interview process that they have topographic data. 
18 

Hydrography Data 

MEGIS, in cooperation with the USGS, is currently enhancing Maine’s 1:24,000 digital 

hydrography data to create National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) high-resolution data (spatial data 

describing hydrologic features). The NHD data are partitioned into the following layers: streams, 

ponds, rivers, coast, and National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) data. Progress in this effort is ongoing—

the current status of these data can be determined by contacting MEGIS at (207) 624-8800 or by 

visiting their web site http://apollo.ogis.state.me.us/. NHD data are available for download from the 

NHD geodatabase at http://nhdgeo.usgs.gov/viewer.htm. 

Community-specific hydrography data are documented as part of the community scopingmeeting process (see Appendix B). The following towns indicated during the interview process that 

they have hydrography data available in some form: 

Boothbay – some, but no details. 

Boothbay Harbor – for small areas, BFEs were established during land development. 

Damariscotta – town center waterfront, done by Pine Tree Engineering, Brunswick, Maine. 

South Bristol – expecting a hydraulic study for a new bridge on Rt 129 in the next few years. 

Waldoboro – some, in local areas. 

Westport Island – a few years ago, in relation to water supply for the island. 

Community GIS Contact Information 

GIS contact information obtained through community scoping meetings is provided in 

Appendix B for each community as part of the interview data. The towns of Boothbay, South Bristol, 

and Waldoboro indicated that they have or are developing GIS resources. 

Community Meetings and Contacts 

A community scoping meeting was held for Lincoln County at the Damariscotta Town Office 

on Thursday, December 7, 2006, from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. An invitation letter (with agenda) 

specifying the time and place and purpose of the meeting was mailed to at least two community 

officials in every municipality. The letters were addressed to the community code enforcement officer 

and to the community manager or first select person. Example copies of the letter and meeting agenda 

are attached to this report in Appendix D. All communities participated either by meeting, mail, or 

phone. 

The goals of these meetings were to:

• Inform the communities of the nature and the intent of the flood map update process, and

• Solicit community input and discuss the flood-prone areas that communities would like to 

include as a part of the flood map update.

Robert Dudley, USGS Maine Water Science Center, and Tom Marcotte, MFMP, conducted 

the meeting. Seven representatives from USGS and MFMP were on hand to conduct the interviews. 

Twenty-two representatives from 15 communities were provided an overview of the Map 

Modernization program, the map production schedule, and the technical process. 

The latter part of the meeting involved breaking out into small groups of community 

representatives with group leaders from USGS and MFMP. The group leaders administered and 
19 

assisted with the completion of map needs interview forms (example attached, Appendix D). 

Community representatives were provided copies of their community’s flood maps and were 

encouraged to document problem areas, concerns, and so forth, as necessary. Community 

representatives were asked to explain and prioritize their needs if possible. The marked-up flood maps 

reside with the MFMP. 

MNUSS entries were reviewed with community representatives for verification. The town of 

South Bristol disagreed with one of its MNUSS records; the other towns had few comments about the 

MNUSS data. 

During the scoping meetings, MFMP’s Best Available Data (BAD) were reviewed with each 

community representative if BAD data existed for that community. The review was done to make the 

community aware of the information if they were not already aware of it, and to solicit input on BAD 

if any additional information was available to the community that was not listed in the State Planning 

Office’s BAD database. 

The following three subject areas encompass the data gathered from the scoping meeting 

process and completion of interview forms: (1) community contact information, (2) areas of the 

existing flood maps where there are significant problems (poor mapping or development pressures) or 

changes to hydrologic/hydraulic conditions, and (3) community mapping resources. Communities that 

did not attend the meetings sent this information to USGS by mail or communicated their needs by 

telephone. The data from the scoping meetings were entered into the WISE scoping tool and are 

reported for each community in Appendix B as part of the interview data. 

Scope and Prioritization of Mapping Needs in Lincoln County 

Two prioritization schemes are presented in this section. The first scheme uses criteria 

provided by FEMA and MFMP to rank communities in Lincoln County having the greatest need for 

updated mapping on the basis of risk, as quantified in census block-group data. This ranking meets the 

goals of the map modernization process as described in FEMA’s mid-course adjustment (Federal 

Emergency Management Agency, 2006). The second scheme uses the results of the first, plus 

additional information about waterbodies according to community and MFMP representatives, to rank 

flood hazards (waterbodies) in Lincoln County having the greatest need for updated mapping. This 

ranking can be used by FEMA to maximize the benefit of any future engineering studies. 

Prioritization of Towns in Lincoln County 

USGS staff (Robert Dudley, Charles Schalk) met with MFMP staff (Lou Sidell, Tom 

Marcotte) in July 2006 as an initial kick-off meeting for the scoping process. An action item resulting 

from that meeting involved MFMP staff arriving at a list of criteria that should be considered for 

prioritizing potential mapping needs of towns in the county. MFMP decided that the 8 criteria 

identified by FEMA during their midcourse adjustment were adequate for assessment of priority by 

town and(or) census block. These 8 criteria are based on block-group data provided by the U.S. 

Census Bureau and are used to compute census block group risk scores. Table 6 lists the criteria and 

their data source. 
20 

Table 6. Maine Floodplain Management Program criteria for prioritization of community-based flood 

mapping needs in Lincoln County. 

[FIA, Federal Insurance Administration] 

Criterion Data source 

Population density Census block group data 

Housing unit density Census block group data 

Claims density FIA Claims dataset 

Repetitive losses claims density FIA Claims dataset 

Repetitive loss properties density FIA Claims dataset 

Policies density County distribution 

Disasters County distribution 

Population growth from 1990-2000 County distribution 

Scores for each of the criteria listed in table 6 were calculated and normalized for each census 

block group included in Lincoln County. The normalization process encompassed two steps. First, the 

calculated value for each block group was compared with the range of values calculated for all block 

groups in the State of Maine. In this way, scores calculated for Lincoln County would be scaled 

consistently with those calculated for every other county in Maine. Second, the logarithm of the 

calculated and scaled value for each block group was taken to place the scaled values in the range of 

0 to 10. This was to equalize the weight of each of the scoring criteria. After the data had been 

normalized, the maximum census block group risk score for each town was recorded. 

Results of the community-based flood mapping assessment on the basis of census block 

groups are shown in table 7. The communities of Boothbay, Bristol, and Boothbay Harbor scored 

highest. After reviewing the results, MFMP determined them to be reasonable; however, MFMP felt 

that on the basis of the type of maps (unnumbered A zones only), the important waterbodies bordering 

the towns, and the degree of development in the towns, Edgecomb and Newcastle should be given 

some priority in mapping needs. Scoring results by census block group are provided in Appendix E. 
21 

Table 7. Maine Floodplain Management Program criteria for prioritization of community-based flood 

mapping needs in Lincoln County. 

[CID, community identification number; CBG, census block group] 

Community CID Maximum CBG risk score 

Boothbay, Town of 230212 34.89 

Bristol, Town of 230215 34.55 

Boothbay Harbor, Town of 230213 34.17 

Southport, Town of 230221 32.48 

Damariscotta, Town of 230216 31.54 

Bremen, Town of 230214 30.47 

South Bristol, Town of 230220 30.38 

Nobleboro, Town of 230219 29.39 

Jefferson, Town of 230085 29.22 

Waldoboro, Town of 230086 28.99 

Wiscasset, Town of 230223 28.63 

Alna, Town of 230083 28.08 

Newcastle, Town of 230218 27.79 

Dresden, Town of 230084 27.70 

Hibberts Gore TWP 230712 27.60 

Somerville, Town of 230512 27.60 

Monhegan PLT 230511 27.50 

Edgecomb, Town of 230217 27.32 

Whitefield, Town of 230087 25.56 

Westport Island, Town of 230222 25.14 

Prioritization of Waterbodies in Lincoln County 

Many towns and(or) census blocks in Lincoln County are separated from neighboring towns 

and(or) census blocks by bodies of water that may need new or revised studies. In cases such as these, 

ranking the waterbodies in order of priority can promote most efficient use of limited resources for 

study in Lincoln County. When a waterbody that serves as a boundary among several towns receives 

funding for study, then all of the towns that have that waterbody as a boundary can benefit from the 

results of the study. 

Mapping needs for waterbodies were grouped into one of four different types of studies 

required to create or update flood hazard zones.

• Baseline–DFIRM only: The most economical method of creating a countywide DFIRM is 

through digitizing flood-hazard information from the effective FIRMs and FISs onto new 

mapping. This baseline option is currently being undertaken by MEGIS and other FEMA 

contractors.

• Redelineation: Existing hydrologic and hydraulic studies of the water body are adequate and 

the water body requires only the redelineation of the base flood elevations using updated 

topographic data.
22 

• Limited Detailed Study: Automated tools are used to produce digital information or flood 

mapping for the water body in question has already been studied in detail and requires limited 

technical reworking of the hydrologic and(or) hydraulic analysis or the water body in question 

has not been studied in detail but it is expected that approximate methods would suffice to 

adequately map the flood hazard.

• Detailed Study: Can be performed to develop the digital information, including field surveyed 

cross-sections and structures. Because this is the most expensive type of study that FEMA can 

perform, the scope of the detailed study may be limited.

Note that Detail and Limited Detail studies are also assumed to need redelineation using 

updated topographic data, incorporating results from the new hydrologic and(or) hydraulic analyses. 

USGS staff (Robert Dudley, Charles Schalk) met with MFMP staff (Lou Sidell, Tom 

Marcotte) on December 22, 2006, to review interview data and marked-up maps and to arrive at an 

initial list of mapping needs by waterbody for the county. The mapping needs derived through these 

meetings were entered into the WISE scoping application. During this meeting, the criteria listed in 

table 8 were identified as necessary to the ranking of waterbodies and the type of study needed for 

each waterbody was identified. Descriptions of these criteria are provided in the text following table 8. 

Table 8. Maine Floodplain Management Program criteria and qualitative weight for prioritization of 

waterbody-based flood mapping needs in Lincoln County. 

[MFMP, Maine Floodplain Management Program; LOMC, Letter of Map Change] 

Community prioritization criteria Weight Range Score 

Ranking from census block-centered 

analysis 3 27.3 – 34.6 One-eighth of value; theoretical maximum = 10 points 

Community and(or) MFMP priority 1 1 - 3 

1 = highest = 10 points 

2 = medium = 6 points 

3 = lowest = 3 points 

Connectivity 1 1 – 4 One point per connected community 

Map age, in years 1 2 – 28 0.3 point per year 

Map type 1 b, c, d, e 

b = unnumbered A-Zone : 10 points 

c = map with elevations : 6 points 

d = map with elevations and floodways: 3 points 

e = map with coastal velocity zones: 3 points 

Number of LOMCs 1 0 – 2 0.5 point per LOMC 

Presence of best available data 1 Yes / No Yes = 10, No = 0 

In most cases, towns identified their highest waterbody mapping priorities during the scoping 

meeting. In some cases, priority was indicated by MFMP during the December 22 meeting on the 

basis of historically documented mapping needs of the towns. Higher priority was given to A-zone 

waterbodies with existing BAD where maps could be created or greatly improved by simply 

collecting improved topographic information and redelineating existing detailed base flood elevations. 

Higher priority was given to waterbodies that had been historically documented as a mapping need in 

either the MFMP’s Database or MNUSS or both. Historical documentation of a mapping need is 

indicative of an ongoing need that has been known to be a need in the past. Priority was ranked from 1 

(highest) to 3 (lowest). Many towns indicated more than three waterbodies that need to be addressed; 

in these cases, all waterbodies ranked as lowest priority were given a priority ranking of 3. 
23 

Higher priority was given to waterbodies with high connectivity, where connectivity is a 

measure of the number of neighboring communities that are adjacent to or would otherwise benefit 

from improved mapping of a particular water body. For example, an A-zone river reach that 

connected to a detailed study upstream or spanned multiple communities or a lake that bordered 

multiple communities would receive higher priority than a pond contained within the corporate limits 

of a single community. 

Map age was calculated as the difference between December 2006 and the effective date of the 

map, in years. Several towns in Lincoln County still operate with the “flat maps,” or FHBMs that had 

been converted to FIRMs by letter. 

Type of map also was included as a criterion. Maps that do not include studies and contain no 

BFEs are (b). Maps with BFEs but no delineated floodways are (c). Maps with BFEs and floodways 

are (d). Maps that include coastal velocity zones are (e). Highest scores were assigned to those maps 

with least amount of detail (b, then c, then d and e). 

Because the number of LOMCs issued for a community is indicative of flooding issues, 

LOMCs were included in the scoring criteria. LOMCs that were included in the scoring were (a) those 

that contained coordinate information and could be plotted with some degree of certainty on a map, 

and (b) those determined from the map to relate to a particular waterbody. Other LOMCs (those that 

could not be located or assigned to a particular waterbody) were not included in the scoring. 

As described above, the presence of BAD is helpful to prioritize the mapping needs of 

waterbodies. Waterbodies for which BAD were available were given a score of 10, whereas those for 

which BAD were not available were given a score of 0. BAD that required engineering investigation 

to determine its validity received a score of 5. 

Summing the scoring criteria produced a waterbody-based prioritized list of mapping needs 

involving redelineation, limited detail study, or detail study for each community that responded to the 

survey (table 9, fig. 4). For example, the redelineation of Damariscotta River in Newcastle scored as 

follows: 

Census-block ranking (* 3) = 3.4 * 3 = 10.3 

Community/MFMP priority = 10 (highest priority) 

Connectivity = 4 

Map age (scaled by years) = 1.2 

Map type = 10 

Number of LOMCs (* 0.5) = 0.5 

Presence of BAD = 10 

Sum = 46.0 

The high priority given to Edgecomb and Newcastle by MFMP (previous section) were 

verified in the ranking of waterbodies, as waterbodies in Edgecomb and Newcastle ranked highest. 

Note that many towns identified Damariscotta and Sheepscot Rivers as needing attention; detailed 

studies on these two rivers would no doubt produce the highest return on investment by FEMA. 
24 

Table 9. Prioritized waterbody-based flood mapping needs in Lincoln County requiring redelineation, 

limited detail study, or detail study. 

Rank Waterbody 

Community 

identifying need CID Study type Score 

1 Sheepscot River/ Cod Cove Edgecomb 230217 Detail Study 51.85 

2 Sheepscot River/ Cod Cove Edgecomb 230217 Detail Study 47.85 

3 Damariscotta River Newcastle 230218 Detail Study 46.04 

4 Damariscotta River Edgecomb 230217 Detail Study 43.85 

5 Back River Westport Island 230222 Detail Study 42.25 

6 Sheepscot River Newcastle 230218 Detail Study 40.54 

7 Unnamed Stream to Webber Pond Bremen 230214 Detail Study 39.46 

8 Jewett Cove, Sheepscot River Westport Island 230222 Detail Study 38.25 

9 Damariscotta River/Days Cove Damariscotta 230216 Detail Study 36.34 

10 Penny Lake (wetland) Boothbay Harbor 230213 Detail Study 33.53 

11 Back River/Montsweag Bay Wiscasset 230223 Redelineation 33.49 

12 Oyster Creek Nobleboro 230219 Detail Study 33.20 

13 Pinkham Pond Stream Alna 230083 Detail Study 32.07 

14 Sheepscot River Somerville 230512 Limited Detail Study 32.02 

15 Kennebec River Dresden 230084 Redelineation 31.96 

16 Medomak River Waldoboro 230086 Detail Study 31.95 

17 Sheepscot River Wiscasset 230223 Detail Study 30.49 

18 The Gut South Bristol 230220 Detail Study 30.39 

19 Muddy Pond Damariscotta 230216 Detail Study 30.34 

20 Duck Puddle Pond Nobleboro 230219 Detail Study 30.20 

21 West Harbor Pond Boothbay Harbor 230213 Detail Study 29.53 

22 Trout Brook (western branch) Alna 230083 Detail Study 29.07 

23 Atlantic Ocean Bristol 230215 Detail Study 28.97 

24 Back Meadow Brook Damariscotta 230216 Detail Study 28.34 

25 Medomak Pond Waldoboro 230086 Detail Study 27.95 

26 Eastern River Dresden 230084 Detail Study 27.46 

27 Atlantic Ocean South Bristol 230220 Limited Detail Study 26.89 

28 Unnamed Pond Boothbay Harbor 230213 Detail Study 26.03 

29 Sherman Lake / Marsh River Newcastle 230218 Detail Study 25.54 

30 Station Brook Alna 230083 Detail Study 25.07 

31 Atlantic Ocean Bristol 230215 Detail Study 24.47 

32 Dresden Bog Dresden 230084 Redelineation 22.96 

33 Nequasset Brook Dresden 230084 Detail Study 22.96 
Figure 4. Communities in Lincoln County identifying mapping needs by waterbody. 

25 
26 

Project Time and Costs for Identified Mapping Needs 

The USGS Maine Water Science Center will provide scoping-level time and cost estimates for 

the identified study needs for each water body listed in table 9. The time and cost estimates will 

include costs for hydrologic, hydraulic, and topographic data collection; analyses; and mapping, 

depending on the identified type of study needed for each water body. Detailed information about 

each waterbody being scoped, including spatial limits and affected length, will be included in the time 

and cost estimates. The time and cost estimates will be submitted to the cooperating agencies (FEMA, 

MFMP) as a separate document as set forth in the scope of work. 

Project Alternatives

Costs can be reduced by cutting back on the level of effort for the hydrologic and hydraulic 

(H&H) analyses and(or) reducing the number of DFIRM panels.

Alternative H&H options that would help FEMA to reduce costs include reducing the study 

scope from a detailed study to a limited detail study or redelineation of current flood information only. 

Reducing the number of DFIRM panels by altering the mix of panel scales would lower the total panel 

count and reduce the estimated DFIRM production cost.
27 

Section 3. Options for Future Mapping and DTM Preparation 

Mapping Requirements 

This section provides an assessment of the costs and benefits of utilizing the data cataloged in 

the previous section for the preparation of Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps (DFIRMs) for Lincoln 

County. Options are presented for using these data sets in various combinations and supplementing 

them with new data sets.

DFIRMs are produced from three broad categories of geospatial data: (1) Base Map, (2) 

Digital Terrain Model (DTM), and (3) Flood-Insurance Risk Zones. The spatial accuracy of each of 

these three categories is fixed by the specifications contained in the Guidelines and Specifications for 

Flood Hazard Mapping Partners, April 2003 (Guidelines and Specifications). Proposed DFIRM panels 

for Lincoln County are presented in fig. 5.

• Base Maps: Base maps are acquired from MEGIS and will be used by FEMA as a “backdrop” 

to the flood-insurance risk zones shown on the DFIRMs. 

• Digital Terrain Models (DTMs): DTMs are used in conjunction with hydrologic and hydraulic 

models to interpret the limits of flood-insurance risk zones. DTMs represent terrain with 

irregularly-spaced spot elevations (x, y, z) and breaklines that indicate changes in ground slope 

at features such as the toe or top of channel banks or ridge lines. These data sets are generally 

photogrametrically compiled by a mapping contractor from stereo photos and utilized in the 

form of a Triangulated Irregular Network (TIN) or a Digital Elevation Model (DEM). A DEM 

uses a regular grid, or raster, spacing of (x, y, z) points to represent the land surface. Each grid 

cell is assigned an average elevation to represent the elevation of the ground that is covered by 

the grid cell. A DEM represents the terrain surface with a mesh of regularly spaced points, 

whereas a TIN uses contiguous triangular planes.

• Flood-Insurance Risk Zones: Geographic boundaries produced by FEMA and provided in 

digital format.
Figure 5. Proposed digital flood insurance rate map panels for Lincoln County.

Base Map

Base maps are defined in the Guidelines and Specifications as the “map of the community that 

depicts cultural features (roads, railroad, bridges, dams, and culverts), drainage features, and corporate 

limits.” Depending on the source of the base map, the specific features found on DFIRMs may include 

the following data and features:

• Roads: centerlines, edge-of-pavement, right-of-way, names.

• Railroads: names.

• Bridges: names.

• Flood Control Structures: headwall, dam, levee, names.

• Airport Boundaries: names.

• Rivers: centerlines, banks, names.

28 
• Streams: names.

• Lakes: names.

• Political Boundaries: county, municipality, special districts, wards, military reservations, 

Native American lands, names.

• Land Use: parks, individual land parcels, names.

The Guidelines and Specifications specify “absolute horizontal accuracy” for base map 

features to establish horizontal accuracy for the position of the digital data set to its actual location 

on the earth’s surface. The horizontal accuracy is specified as a statistical error distribution at the 

95-percent confidence level and is specified in the Guidelines and Specifications as a function of 

finished map scale, as shown in table 10:

Table 10. Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Horizontal Accuracy.

FIRM map scale Absolute horizontal 

accuracy at the 95-percent 

confidence level, in feet

1 in = 500 feet 19.0

1 in = 1,000 feet 38.0

1 in = 2,000 feet 45.6

MEGIS can provide digital mapping data for Lincoln County for DFIRM production. 

Digital Terrain Models (DTMs)

FEMA typically develops DTMs for the production of DFIRMS as they are not widely 

available at the accuracies required by FEMA. The DTMs are used in conjunction with hydrologic 

and hydraulic models to interpret flood boundaries and can be used by the community for many other 

purposes other than flood management.

Guidelines and Specifications identify the following four types of DTMs: (1) Digital contours, 

(2) Digital Elevation Models (DEMs), (3) Mass points and breaklines, and (4) Triangulated Irregular 

Networks (TIN). Each of these models can be created from the other and their use is application 

dependent.

Under FEMA guidelines, the allowable DTMs are as follows:

• Digital contours: continuous, nonintersecting lines of equal elevation separated by a specified 

elevation interval.

• Digital Elevation Model (DTM): x, y, and z coordinates of regularly spaced points that form a 

grid.

• Mass Points and Breaklines: x, y, and z coordinates of irregularly spaced points.

• Triangulated Irregular Network (TIN): contiguous triangles with x, y, and z values at the 

vertices and faces with slope and aspect.

29 
30 

The Guidelines and Specifications specify what is referred to as “absolute vertical accuracy” 

for DTMs, which relates the elevation of the land surface in the digital data set to its actual elevation 

relative to a specific vertical datum. The National Standard for Spatial Data Accuracy (NSSDA) is 

specified as a statistical error distribution at the 90- and 95-percent confidence level as a function of 

the specified contour interval as shown in table 11:

Table 11. National Standard for Spatial Data Accuracy (NSSDA).

NSSDA 

contour 

interval

NSSDA 90-percent 

confidence interval

NSSDA 95-percent 

confidence interval

2 feet 1 foot 1.2 feet

4 feet 2 feet 2.4 feet

Contouring and DEMs are not printed on DFIRMS so their vertical accuracy is not labeled on 

the DFIRMS, but it is recorded in the metadata of elevation datasets used for hydrologic and hydraulic 

modeling. 

Neither USGS nor MEGIS has elevation data suitable for hydraulic modeling by detailed 

methods and communities were contacted to find topographic or elevation data suitable for hydraulic 

modeling (e.g. 2-foot or 4-foot contours) (approximate and limited-detailed studies can often be done 

with less rigorous topographic standards). Community specific topographic data will be used if it 

meets FEMA standards. New elevation data will be developed as necessary. 

DTM development options include (1) obtaining countywide DTM data that covers all 

communities and (2) obtaining DTM data only for selected floodplain areas as needed to support a 

detailed study, limited detailed study, restudy or re-delineation of flood hazard areas. Obtaining DTM 

data on a countywide basis is expensive; most of the acquired data would be outside of the floodplain 

and not needed for hydraulic analysis. If FEMA obtains new DTM data for selected areas as needed, 

keeping in mind that is most cost effective to consolidate areas, where possible, and optimizes flights, 

the unit costs could be reduced.

Flood-Insurance Risk Zones

Flood-insurance risk zones are created by FEMA to set insurance rates and manage the 

floodplain. Flood-insurance risk zone accuracy requirements are not specified in the Guidelines and 

Specifications but can be described in terms of the combined accuracies of the base map, DTM, and 

the hydrology and hydraulic simulation models. 

FEMA flood insurance rate 100- and 500-year flood zones are being converted to digital data 

layers by MEGIS for each community participating in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) 

in Maine. These datasets were developed by direct digitization of FIRM maps using data registration 

techniques that produced the best-fit registration to community boundaries or other suitable features.

The most common comment by community representatives was that a better base map is 

needed to allow easier determination of where the risk zone boundaries are relative to the existing 

features such as roads and buildings. 
31 

Section 4. References Cited 

Federal Emergency Management Agency, 1994, Title V–National Flood Insurance Reform; available 

on the Web at URL http://www.fema.gov/pdf/nfip/riegle.pdf, accessed January 8, 2007. 

Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2006, Flood map modernization mid-course adjustment: 

accessed on December 12, 2006, at http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=2195

Maine Department of Health and Human Services, 2006, web page 

http://www.maine.gov/dhhs/eng/water/forms/County%20Lists/July2006/Lincoln.htm, accessed 

October 23, 2006. 

University of Maine, 2004, Maine census data, population totals: Fogler Library, University of 

Maine, accessed on October 23, 2006, at http://www.library.umaine.edu/census/
32 

Appendices 
33 

Appendix A: Community Contacts and Best Available Data: Lincoln County 
34 

 COMMUNITY CONTACTS AND BEST AVAILABLE DATA: LINCOLN COUNTY

Alna, Town of CID 230083 Community Profile

Map Type: Unnumbered A-zone Current FIRM/FIS Map Date: 3/1/2005

Participating=Yes LURC: No Ordinance Date:

Total No. NFIP Policies=3 No. Claims Since 1978= 0 All LOMCs: 5

Community Official Contact Information:

Billie Willard 207-586-5313

Selectmen

Town of Alna

1568 Alna Rd.

Alna ME 04535

Community Code Enforcement Contact Information:

Merle West, CEO 207-882-7216

1098 West Alna Rd

Alna ME 04535

Maine Floodplain Mgt. Best Available Data and supporting information:

Best Available Data:

Mapping Status: really a 1/3/75 map - converted by letter 3/1/05

Mapping Needs:

ND, No Data 
35 

 COMMUNITY CONTACTS AND BEST AVAILABLE DATA: LINCOLN COUNTY

Boothbay Harbor, Town of CID 230213 Community Profile

Map Type: Coastal Current FIRM/FIS Map Date: 6/17/1986

Participating=Yes LURC: No Ordinance Date:

Total No. NFIP Policies=72 No. Claims Since 1978= 19 All LOMCs: 9

Community Official Contact Information:

Carlo Pilgrim 207-633-3671

Town Manager

Town of Boothbay Harbor

11 Howard St.

Boothbay Harbor ME 04538

Community Code Enforcement Contact Information:

Dabney Lewis, CEO 207-633-3671

11 Howard St.

Boothbay Hbr. ME 04538

Maine Floodplain Mgt. Prog. Best Available Data and supporting information:

Best Available Data:

Mapping Status:

Mapping Needs:

ND, No Data 
36 

 COMMUNITY CONTACTS AND BEST AVAILABLE DATA: LINCOLN COUNTY

Boothbay, Town of CID 230212 Community Profile

Map Type: Coastal Current FIRM/FIS Map Date: 6/3/1986

Participating=Yes LURC: No Ordinance Date:

Total No. NFIP Policies=51 No. Claims Since 1978= 17 All LOMCs: 14

Community Official Contact Information:

John Anderson 207-633-2051

Town Manager

Town of Boothbay

PO Box 106

Boothbay ME 04537

Community Code Enforcement Contact Information:

Marian Cadrette-Anderson, 207-633-2192

P.O. Box 334

Boothbay ME 04537

Maine Floodplain Mgt. Prog. Best Available Data and supporting information:

Best Available Data:

Mapping Status:

Mapping Needs:

ND, No Data 
37 

 COMMUNITY CONTACTS AND BEST AVAILABLE DATA: LINCOLN COUNTY

Bremen, Town of CID 230214 Community Profile

Map Type: Unnumbered A-zone Current FIRM/FIS Map Date: 2/4/1987

Participating=Yes LURC: No Ordinance Date:

Total No. NFIP Policies=15 No. Claims Since 1978= 1 All LOMCs: 0

Community Official Contact Information:

Karl Berger 207-529-5945

Selectmen Chair

Town of Bremen

PO Box 171

Bremen ME 04551

Community Code Enforcement Contact Information:

Roger Grover, CEO 207-529-5945

PO Box 171

Bremen ME 04551

Maine Floodplain Mgt. Prog. Best Available Data and supporting information:

Best Available Data:

Mapping Status:

Mapping Needs:

ND, No Data 
38 

 COMMUNITY CONTACTS AND BEST AVAILABLE DATA: LINCOLN COUNTY

Bristol, Town of CID 230215 Community Profile

Map Type: Coastal Current FIRM/FIS Map Date: 1/4/2002

Participating=Yes LURC: No Ordinance Date:

Total No. NFIP Policies=60 No. Claims Since 1978= 10 All LOMCs: 7

Community Official Contact Information:

Kristine Poland 207-563-5270

Administrator

Town of Bristol

PO Box 147

Bristol ME 04539

Community Code Enforcement Contact Information:

Merle West, CEO 207-563-5271

PO Box 147

Bristol ME 04539

Maine Floodplain Mgt. Prog. Best Available Data and supporting information:

Best Available Data:

Mapping Status:

Mapping Needs:

ND, No Data 
39 

 COMMUNITY CONTACTS AND BEST AVAILABLE DATA: LINCOLN COUNTY

Damariscotta, Town of CID 230216 Community Profile

Map Type: No Floodways Current FIRM/FIS Map Date: 9/30/1988

Participating=Yes LURC: No Ordinance Date:

Total No. NFIP Policies=9 No. Claims Since 1978= 3 All LOMCs: 2

Community Official Contact Information:

Gregory Zinser 207-563-5168

Town Manager

Town of Damariscotta

27 Church St

Damariscotta ME 04543

Community Code Enforcement Contact Information:

Neiland Campbell, Sr., CEO 207-586-6176

553 N. Newcastle Rd.

Newcastle ME 04553

Maine Floodplain Mgt. Prog. Best Available Data and supporting information:

Best Available Data:

Mapping Status:

Mapping Needs:

ND, No Data 
40 

 COMMUNITY CONTACTS AND BEST AVAILABLE DATA: LINCOLN COUNTY

Dresden, Town of CID 230084 Community Profile

Map Type: No Floodways Current FIRM/FIS Map Date: 7/6/1998

Participating=Yes LURC: No Ordinance Date:

Total No. NFIP Policies=5 No. Claims Since 1978= 7 All LOMCs: 1

Community Official Contact Information:

John Ottum 207-737-4335

Selectmen

Town of Dresden

PO Box 30

Dresden ME 04342

Community Code Enforcement Contact Information:

Bruce Engert, CEO 207-633-2113

58 Roads End

Boothbay Harbor ME 04538

Maine Floodplain Mgt. Prog. Best Available Data and supporting information:

Best Available Data:

Mapping Status:

Mapping Needs:

ND, No Data 
41 

 COMMUNITY CONTACTS AND BEST AVAILABLE DATA: LINCOLN COUNTY

Edgecomb, Town of CID 230217 Community Profile

Map Type: Unnumbered A-zone Current FIRM/FIS Map Date: 7/18/1978

Participating=Yes LURC: No Ordinance Date:

Total No. NFIP Policies=4 No. Claims Since 1978= 0 All LOMCs: 0

Community Official Contact Information:

Joanna Cameron 207-882-7018

Selectmen

Town of Edgecomb

PO Box 139

Edgecomb ME 04556

Community Code Enforcement Contact Information:

Dabney Lewis, CEO 207-633-3671

11 Howard St.

Boothbay Harbor ME 04538

Maine Floodplain Mgt. Prog. Best Available Data and supporting information:

Best Available Data:Damariscotta River (South Bristol FIRM, 7/16/90)

Sheepscot River (Wiscasset FIRM 4/16/91, Boothbay FIRM

 6/3/86)

Mapping Status:

Mapping Needs: priority-xds-detailed data bordering town

ND, No Data 
42 

 COMMUNITY CONTACTS AND BEST AVAILABLE DATA: LINCOLN COUNTY

Hibberts Gore TWP CID 230712 Community Profile

Map Type: Current FIRM/FIS Map Date:

Participating=Yes LURC: No Ordinance Date:

Total No. NFIP Policies=ND No. Claims Since 1978= ND All LOMCs: 0

Community Official Contact Information:

Fred Todd

Manager

Land Use Regulatory Commission

SHS 22

Augusta ME 04333

Community Code Enforcement Contact Information:

Maine Floodplain Mgt. Prog. Best Available Data and supporting information:

Best Available Data:

Mapping Status:

Mapping Needs:

ND, No Data 
43 

 COMMUNITY CONTACTS AND BEST AVAILABLE DATA: LINCOLN COUNTY

Jefferson, Town of CID 230085 Community Profile

Map Type: No Floodways Current FIRM/FIS Map Date: 10/18/1988

Participating=Yes LURC: No Ordinance Date:

Total No. NFIP Policies=9 No. Claims Since 1978= 0 All LOMCs: 3

Community Official Contact Information:

Rosa Sinclair 207-549-7401

Selectmen

Town of Jefferson

PO Box 77

Jefferson ME 04348

Community Code Enforcement Contact Information:

Neiland Campbell, Sr., CEO 207-586-6176

553 N. Newcastle Rd.

Newcastle ME 04553

Maine Floodplain Mgt. Prog. Best Available Data and supporting information:

Best Available Data:

Mapping Status:

Mapping Needs:

ND, No Data 
44 

 COMMUNITY CONTACTS AND BEST AVAILABLE DATA: LINCOLN COUNTY

Monhegan PLT CID 230511 Community Profile

Map Type: Current FIRM/FIS Map Date:

Participating=Yes LURC: No Ordinance Date:

Total No. NFIP Policies=4 No. Claims Since 1978= 4 All LOMCs: 0

Community Official Contact Information:

Fred Todd

Manager

Land Use Regulatory Commission

SHS 22

Augusta ME 04333

Community Code Enforcement Contact Information:

Maine Floodplain Mgt. Prog. Best Available Data and supporting information:

Best Available Data:

Mapping Status:

Mapping Needs:

ND, No Data 
45 

 COMMUNITY CONTACTS AND BEST AVAILABLE DATA: LINCOLN COUNTY

Newcastle, Town of CID 230218 Community Profile

Map Type: Unnumbered A-zone Current FIRM/FIS Map Date: 4/1/2003

Participating=Yes LURC: No Ordinance Date:

Total No. NFIP Policies=7 No. Claims Since 1978= 1 All LOMCs: 3

Community Official Contact Information:

Jim Brinkler 207-563-3105

Selectmen

Town of Newcastle

PO Box 386

Newcastle ME 04553

Community Code Enforcement Contact Information:

Neiland Campbell, Sr., CEO 207-586-6176

553 N. Newcastle Rd.

Newcastle ME 04553

Maine Floodplain Mgt. Prog. Best Available Data and supporting information:

Best Available Data:Damariscotta Lake BFE 57.8' NGVD per Nobleboro FIS 

11/89, Sheepscot Riv per Wiscasset FIRM, Damariscotta 

Riv per Damariscotta FIS, Salt Bay per Nobleboro FIRM

Mapping Status:

Mapping Needs: 1/03 Do XDS if money allows in future

ND, No Data 
46 

 COMMUNITY CONTACTS AND BEST AVAILABLE DATA: LINCOLN COUNTY

Nobleboro, Town of CID 230219 Community Profile

Map Type: No Floodways Current FIRM/FIS Map Date: 11/15/1989

Participating=Yes LURC: No Ordinance Date:

Total No. NFIP Policies=3 No. Claims Since 1978= 0 All LOMCs: 2

Community Official Contact Information:

Richard Spear 207-562-8816

Selectmen

Town of Nobleboro

192 U.S. Hwy 1

Nobleboro ME 04555

Community Code Enforcement Contact Information:

Kenneth Morang, Jr., CEO 207-563-5270

76 Morang Cove Rd

Nobleboro ME 04555

Maine Floodplain Mgt. Prog. Best Available Data and supporting information:

Best Available Data:

Mapping Status:

Mapping Needs:

ND, No Data 
47 

 COMMUNITY CONTACTS AND BEST AVAILABLE DATA: LINCOLN COUNTY

Somerville, Town of CID 230512 Community Profile

Map Type: No Floodways Current FIRM/FIS Map Date: 8/19/1991

Participating=Yes LURC: No Ordinance Date:

Total No. NFIP Policies=13 No. Claims Since 1978= 2 All LOMCs: 2

Community Official Contact Information:

David Stanley 207-549-3828

Selectmen

Town of Somerville

665 Patricktown Rd

Somerville ME 04348

Community Code Enforcement Contact Information:

Mike Dostie, CEO 207-549-7353

116 Frye Rd

Somerville ME 04348

Maine Floodplain Mgt. Prog. Best Available Data and supporting information:

Best Available Data:

Mapping Status:

Mapping Needs:

ND, No Data 
48 

 COMMUNITY CONTACTS AND BEST AVAILABLE DATA: LINCOLN COUNTY

South Bristol, Town of CID 230220 Community Profile

Map Type: Coastal Current FIRM/FIS Map Date: 7/16/1990

Participating=Yes LURC: No Ordinance Date:

Total No. NFIP Policies=27 No. Claims Since 1978= 4 All LOMCs: 4

Community Official Contact Information:

Chester Rice 207-563-3977

Selectmen

Town of South Bristol

470 Clarks Cove Rd.

Walpole ME 04573

Community Code Enforcement Contact Information:

Glenn Estabrook 207-563-3977

324 St Rt 129

Walpole ME 04573

Maine Floodplain Mgt. Prog. Best Available Data and supporting information:

Best Available Data:

Mapping Status:

Mapping Needs:

ND, No Data 
49 

 COMMUNITY CONTACTS AND BEST AVAILABLE DATA: LINCOLN COUNTY

Southport, Town of CID 230221 Community Profile

Map Type: Coastal Current FIRM/FIS Map Date: 5/17/1988

Participating=Yes LURC: No Ordinance Date:

Total No. NFIP Policies=36 No. Claims Since 1978= 10 All LOMCs: 6

Community Official Contact Information:

Gerald Gamage 207-633-3318

Selectmen

Town of Southport

PO Box 149

Southport ME 04576

Community Code Enforcement Contact Information:

Henry Berne, CEO 207-633-3318

PO Box 158

West Southport ME 04576

Maine Floodplain Mgt. Prog. Best Available Data and supporting information:

Best Available Data:

Mapping Status:

Mapping Needs:

ND, No Data 
50 

 COMMUNITY CONTACTS AND BEST AVAILABLE DATA: LINCOLN COUNTY

Waldoboro, Town of CID 230086 Community Profile

Map Type: Floodways Current FIRM/FIS Map Date: 4/3/1985

Participating=Yes LURC: No Ordinance Date:

Total No. NFIP Policies=8 No. Claims Since 1978= 1 All LOMCs: 4

Community Official Contact Information:

Lee Smith 207-832-5369

Town Manager

Town of Waldoboro

PO Box J

Waldoboro ME 04572

Community Code Enforcement Contact Information:

John Black, CEO 207-832-5369

P.O. Box J

Waldoboro ME 04572

Maine Floodplain Mgt. Prog. Best Available Data and supporting information:

Best Available Data:Goose River, Back River Cove: Bfe 10' (Friendship FIS 

7/16/90)

Mapping Status:

Mapping Needs:

ND, No Data 
51 

 COMMUNITY CONTACTS AND BEST AVAILABLE DATA: LINCOLN COUNTY

Westport Island, Town of CID 230222 Community Profile

Map Type: Unnumbered A-zone Current FIRM/FIS Map Date: 1/3/1975

Participating=No LURC: No Ordinance Date:

Total No. NFIP Policies=ND No. Claims Since 1978= ND All LOMCs: 0

Community Official Contact Information:

George Richardson 207-882-8477

First Selectman

Town of Westport Island

6 Fowles Point Rd.

Westport Island ME 04578

Community Code Enforcement Contact Information:

Gary Richardson, CEO 207-882-8477

1595 Main Rd

Westport ME 04578

Maine Floodplain Mgt. Prog. Best Available Data and supporting information:

Best Available Data:

Mapping Status:

Mapping Needs:

ND, No Data 
52 

 COMMUNITY CONTACTS AND BEST AVAILABLE DATA: LINCOLN COUNTY

Whitefield, Town of CID 230087 Community Profile

Map Type: Unnumbered A-zone Current FIRM/FIS Map Date: 7/26/1974

Participating=No LURC: No Ordinance Date:

Total No. NFIP Policies=ND No. Claims Since 1978= ND All LOMCs: 1

Community Official Contact Information:

Gwyn Dixon 207-549-5175

Selectmen

Town of Whitefield

PO Box 58

Whitefield ME 04353

Community Code Enforcement Contact Information:

Arthur Strout, CEO 207-549-5175

PO Box 57

Windsor ME 04363

Maine Floodplain Mgt. Prog. Best Available Data and supporting information:

Best Available Data:

Mapping Status:

Mapping Needs:

ND, No Data 
53 

 COMMUNITY CONTACTS AND BEST AVAILABLE DATA: LINCOLN COUNTY

Wiscasset, Town of CID 230223 Community Profile

Map Type: No Floodways Current FIRM/FIS Map Date: 4/16/1991

Participating=Yes LURC: No Ordinance Date:

Total No. NFIP Policies=1 No. Claims Since 1978= 0 All LOMCs: 0

Community Official Contact Information:

Andrew Gilmore 207-882-8200

Town Manager

Town of Wiscasset

51 Bath Rd.

Wiscasset ME 04578

Community Code Enforcement Contact Information:

Stuart Wyman, CEO 207-882-8200

51 Bath Rd

Wiscasset ME 04578

Maine Floodplain Mgt. Prog. Best Available Data and supporting information:

Best Available Data:

Mapping Status:

Mapping Needs:

ND, No Data 
54 

Appendix B: Community Scoping Interview Data: Lincoln County 
55 

SCOPING INTERVIEW DATA FOR: Alna

CID: 230083 Council Govt: Annual Town Meeting Date:

Town Govt: 3rd Saturday March

Community Representative Interviewed

Merle West 

CEO & LPI 

Email: Tel: (207) 586-5313 Fax:

Floodplain Management Community Contact (if different from above)

Known problems with flood maps for your community

Do you have specific areas that don't flood (1% chance) but are currently in the floodplain?

Yes. Many areas have the flat maps which are very inaccurate. 

Do you have specific areas that flood (1% chance) but are not mapped in the floodplain?

Yes. Indicated on Station Brook along Alna Road. 

Note any significant changes in hydraulic structures (bridges, culverts, dams)

No 

Do you have (or are you proposing) high-development areas where you need new or restudied 

flood elevations or improved map scale?

No 

Community Resources

Do you have aerial photography (or plans for any) (flight date, scale, color/bw)?

No 

Do you have any topographic data (or plans for collecting) (digital terrain, contour maps)?

No 

Do you have any data related to hydrologic/hydraulic studies (or plans for such studies)?

No 

Do you have dedicated GIS capabilities (if so, provide contact information)?

No 

Notes

Detailed studies requested for Pinkham Pond stream and western branch of 

Trout Brook.

Need to add E-911 road names to the maps for accuracy. 
56 

SCOPING INTERVIEW DATA FOR: Boothbay

CID: 230212 Council Govt: Annual Town Meeting Date:

Town Govt: 1st Monday May

Community Representative Interviewed

Marian Anderson 

CEO 

Email: buildingcode@town.boothbay.me Tel: (207) 633-2192 Fax: (207) 633-6620

Floodplain Management Community Contact (if different from above)

Known problems with flood maps for your community

Do you have specific areas that don't flood (1% chance) but are currently in the floodplain?

No 

Do you have specific areas that flood (1% chance) but are not mapped in the floodplain?

No 

Note any significant changes in hydraulic structures (bridges, culverts, dams)

No 

Do you have (or are you proposing) high-development areas where you need new or restudied 

flood elevations or improved map scale?

No 

Community Resources

Do you have aerial photography (or plans for any) (flight date, scale, color/bw)?

Yes. Future acquisition planned. 

Do you have any topographic data (or plans for collecting) (digital terrain, contour maps)?

No 

Do you have any data related to hydrologic/hydraulic studies (or plans for such studies)?

Yes. Some. 

Do you have dedicated GIS capabilities (if so, provide contact information)?

Yes. Coordinating with Boothbay Region Water District. 

Notes

Awaiting more information. Took maps and MNUSS records to evaluate at home. 

Would like more road names on maps. 
57 

SCOPING INTERVIEW DATA FOR: Boothbay Harbor

CID: 230213 Council Govt: Annual Town Meeting Date:

Town Govt: 1st Monday May

Community Representative Interviewed

Dabney Lewis, Harry Pinkham, 

CEO, EMA, EMA 

Email: dabney@boothbayharbor.org Tel: (207) 633-3671 Fax: (207) 633-7712

Floodplain Management Community Contact (if different from above)

Dabney Lewis 

Known problems with flood maps for your community

Do you have specific areas that don't flood (1% chance) but are currently in the floodplain?

No 

Do you have specific areas that flood (1% chance) but are not mapped in the floodplain?

Yes. The Meadows area (A), panel 2B (#1 priority). Unnamed pond (D), panel 2B 

 (beaver issues) (#3 priority). Road (E), panel 2B (#2 priority).

Note any significant changes in hydraulic structures (bridges, culverts, dams)

No 

Do you have (or are you proposing) high-development areas where you need new or restudied 

flood elevations or improved map scale?

Yes. Panel 2b: Areas B and C need elevations for Penny Lane (priority 1). 

Areas F and G are priority 2.

Community Resources

Do you have aerial photography (or plans for any) (flight date, scale, color/bw)?

Yes. 1991 aerial photography, B&W, coast only, unknown scale. 

Do you have any topographic data (or plans for collecting) (digital terrain, contour maps)?

No 

Do you have any data related to hydrologic/hydraulic studies (or plans for such studies)?

Yes. Areas H and I on panel 2B. BFEs were established for development. 

Do you have dedicated GIS capabilities (if so, provide contact information)?

No. May have it soon. Contact John Ziegra, Boothbay region Water District, 

Boothbay, ME, 04537, 207-633-4723.

Notes

Note LOMAs along the coast. Coast Guard keeps track of tide levels in town. 
58 

SCOPING INTERVIEW DATA FOR: Bremen

CID: 230214 Council Govt: Annual Town Meeting Date:

Town Govt: Last Saturday March

Community Representative Interviewed

Karl Berger 

Board of Selectmen 

Email: Tel: (207) 529-5945 Fax:

Floodplain Management Community Contact (if different from above)

Known problems with flood maps for your community

Do you have specific areas that don't flood (1% chance) but are currently in the floodplain?

No 

Do you have specific areas that flood (1% chance) but are not mapped in the floodplain?

Yes. Map 6, Rial Herald Road, border of Bristol and Bremen - #1 priority. Map 

4, #2 priority.

Note any significant changes in hydraulic structures (bridges, culverts, dams)

Yes. Culvert change on Medomak Rd, about 2005 - might not affect elevations. 

Do you have (or are you proposing) high-development areas where you need new or restudied 

flood elevations or improved map scale?

No 

Community Resources

Do you have aerial photography (or plans for any) (flight date, scale, color/bw)?

Yes. Continually updated, last in 2005. B&W, high detail, 10 panels. 

Do you have any topographic data (or plans for collecting) (digital terrain, contour maps)?

No 

Do you have any data related to hydrologic/hydraulic studies (or plans for such studies)?

No 

Do you have dedicated GIS capabilities (if so, provide contact information)?

No 

Notes

Need updates to road names. 
59 

SCOPING INTERVIEW DATA FOR: Bristol

CID: 230215 Council Govt: Annual Town Meeting Date:

Town Govt: 3rd Monday March

Community Representative Interviewed

Merle West 

CEO, LPI, HO 

Email: Tel: (207) 563-5271 Fax: (207) 563-6103

Floodplain Management Community Contact (if different from above)

Known problems with flood maps for your community

Do you have specific areas that don't flood (1% chance) but are currently in the floodplain?

No 

Do you have specific areas that flood (1% chance) but are not mapped in the floodplain?

No 

Note any significant changes in hydraulic structures (bridges, culverts, dams)

Yes. Culvert installed in 2005 at Fish Point. 

Do you have (or are you proposing) high-development areas where you need new or restudied 

flood elevations or improved map scale?

No 

Community Resources

Do you have aerial photography (or plans for any) (flight date, scale, color/bw)?

No 

Do you have any topographic data (or plans for collecting) (digital terrain, contour maps)?

No 

Do you have any data related to hydrologic/hydraulic studies (or plans for such studies)?

No 

Do you have dedicated GIS capabilities (if so, provide contact information)?

No 

Notes

Very high "V" (coastal) zones may be accurate, but restudy would be needed to 

 confirm this.

Road name problems. 
60 

SCOPING INTERVIEW DATA FOR: Damariscotta

CID: 230216 Council Govt: Annual Town Meeting Date:

Town Govt: 2nd weekend June

Community Representative Interviewed

Greg Zinser, Dick McLean 

Town manager, Selectmen chair 

Email: scotty@midcoast.com Tel: (207) 563-5168 Fax: (207) 563-6862

Floodplain Management Community Contact (if different from above)

Known problems with flood maps for your community

Do you have specific areas that don't flood (1% chance) but are currently in the floodplain?

No 

Do you have specific areas that flood (1% chance) but are not mapped in the floodplain?

Yes. Back Meadow Rd and Biscay Road, by Back Meadow Brook. Miles Hospital 

(Days Cove) inside 100-yr zone? Could use base elevation for Muddy Pond.

Note any significant changes in hydraulic structures (bridges, culverts, dams)

No 

Do you have (or are you proposing) high-development areas where you need new or restudied 

flood elevations or improved map scale?

Yes, Biscay Rd, probably not in a flood zone. 

Community Resources

Do you have aerial photography (or plans for any) (flight date, scale, color/bw)?

No 

Do you have any topographic data (or plans for collecting) (digital terrain, contour maps)?

No 

Do you have any data related to hydrologic/hydraulic studies (or plans for such studies)?

Downtown waterfront, done by Pinetree Engineering, Brunswick 

Do you have dedicated GIS capabilities (if so, provide contact information)?

No 

Notes

Unofficial high water marks by Belknap Hdwre, 50-yr record, in a diary 

Inaccuracy of road names a concern, as is age of map. Some subsidence and 
61 

SCOPING INTERVIEW DATA FOR: Dresden

CID: 230084 Council Govt: Annual Town Meeting Date:

Town Govt: June

Community Representative Interviewed

Bruce Engert, Rick Lang 

CEO, alt CEO/LPI 

Email: engertbbh@verizon.net Tel: (207) 737-4335 Fax:

Floodplain Management Community Contact (if different from above)

Bruce Engert, 58 Roads End, Boothbay Harbor, ME, 04538 

Known problems with flood maps for your community

Do you have specific areas that don't flood (1% chance) but are currently in the floodplain?

Yes. Kennebec R near Court House Rd, panel 5, #1 priority. Raised roadbed on 

Bog Road near Dresden Bog.

Do you have specific areas that flood (1% chance) but are not mapped in the floodplain?

Yes. Pond near Hunter Rd off Rt 197, #2 priority. Rt 127 flood near Eastern R 

 (panel 15). Parts of upper reaches of Nequasset Bk (panel 15) (#3 and #4 

priorities).

Note any significant changes in hydraulic structures (bridges, culverts, dams)

Yes. Bog Rd culvert (panel 10), Indian Rd sleeved culverts (panel 10), Calls 

Hill Rd culvert (panel 15)

Do you have (or are you proposing) high-development areas where you need new or restudied 

flood elevations or improved map scale?

Some development along Alexander Rd near Eastern River. Hunter Rd potential 

subdivision may provide better topographic data.

Community Resources

Do you have aerial photography (or plans for any) (flight date, scale, color/bw)?

No 

Do you have any topographic data (or plans for collecting) (digital terrain, contour maps)?

No 

Do you have any data related to hydrologic/hydraulic studies (or plans for such studies)?

No 

Do you have dedicated GIS capabilities (if so, provide contact information)?

No 

Notes

Work closely with Lincoln Co EMA. 
62 

SCOPING INTERVIEW DATA FOR: Edgecomb

CID: 230217 Council Govt: Annual Town Meeting Date:

Town Govt: 3rd Saturday May

Community Representative Interviewed

Dabney Lewis 

CEO 

Email: dabney@boothbayharbor.org Tel: (207) 633-3671 Fax: (207) 633-7712

Floodplain Management Community Contact (if different from above)

Edgecomb Planning Board chair or Selectman Chair Joanna Cameron (PO Box 139, 

Edgecomb, ME, 04556, 207-882-7018)

Known problems with flood maps for your community

Do you have specific areas that don't flood (1% chance) but are currently in the floodplain?

No 

Do you have specific areas that flood (1% chance) but are not mapped in the floodplain?

No 

Note any significant changes in hydraulic structures (bridges, culverts, dams)

Yes. Wiscasset Ridge area 

Do you have (or are you proposing) high-development areas where you need new or restudied 

flood elevations or improved map scale?

Yes. Davis Island (priority 1), Cod Cove (priority 2), River Road (priority 3) 

Community Resources

Do you have aerial photography (or plans for any) (flight date, scale, color/bw)?

No 

Do you have any topographic data (or plans for collecting) (digital terrain, contour maps)?

No 

Do you have any data related to hydrologic/hydraulic studies (or plans for such studies)?

No 

Do you have dedicated GIS capabilities (if so, provide contact information)?

No 

Notes

MFMP comments that FIS is needed for Edgecomb. 
63 

SCOPING INTERVIEW DATA FOR: Jefferson

CID: 230085 Council Govt: Annual Town Meeting Date:

Town Govt: 2nd Saturday March

Community Representative Interviewed

Neiland Campbell 

CEO/LPI 

Email: neil@tidewater.net Tel: (207) 586-6176 Fax: (207) 549-7709

Floodplain Management Community Contact (if different from above)

Known problems with flood maps for your community

Do you have specific areas that don't flood (1% chance) but are currently in the floodplain?

No 

Do you have specific areas that flood (1% chance) but are not mapped in the floodplain?

No 

Note any significant changes in hydraulic structures (bridges, culverts, dams)

No 

Do you have (or are you proposing) high-development areas where you need new or restudied 

flood elevations or improved map scale?

No 

Community Resources

Do you have aerial photography (or plans for any) (flight date, scale, color/bw)?

No 

Do you have any topographic data (or plans for collecting) (digital terrain, contour maps)?

No 

Do you have any data related to hydrologic/hydraulic studies (or plans for such studies)?

No 

Do you have dedicated GIS capabilities (if so, provide contact information)?

No 

Notes

No comments or mark-ups 
64 

SCOPING INTERVIEW DATA FOR: Newcastle

CID: 230218 Council Govt: Annual Town Meeting Date:

Town Govt: Last Monday March

Community Representative Interviewed

Alan Pooley, Jim Brinkler, 

Planning board, selectman, CEO 

Email: pooley@tidewater.net Tel: (207) 563-6557 Fax:

Floodplain Management Community Contact (if different from above)

Alan Pooley, 207-563-6557. Neil Campbell, 207-563-3441. Jim Brinkler, 207- 

563-3105.

Known problems with flood maps for your community

Do you have specific areas that don't flood (1% chance) but are currently in the floodplain?

Yes. No details. 

Do you have specific areas that flood (1% chance) but are not mapped in the floodplain?

Yes. Panel 1: along Dyer Neck Road. Panel 2: Between Rt 1 and RR tracks. Near 

 Rt 1 downtown. Panels 1-2: Old Sheepscot Rd (now called Old County Road), 

flooding sources Deer Meadow Brook and marshy trib of Marsh River; could 

Note any significant changes in hydraulic structures (bridges, culverts, dams)

Yes. Dam that created Sherman Lake is gone, now an estuary. Culvert on Lynch 

Rd was replaced (both panel 2).

Do you have (or are you proposing) high-development areas where you need new or restudied 

flood elevations or improved map scale?

Yes. Just west of Newcastle Village, #1 priority. Near Sheepscot Village, #2 

priority. Both need elevations.

Community Resources

Do you have aerial photography (or plans for any) (flight date, scale, color/bw)?

No 

Do you have any topographic data (or plans for collecting) (digital terrain, contour maps)?

No 

Do you have any data related to hydrologic/hydraulic studies (or plans for such studies)?

No 

Do you have dedicated GIS capabilities (if so, provide contact information)?

No 

Notes

Damariscotta Lake Watershed Assn has some high water data for the Lake. Power 

 company allows Lake levels to change sometimes.

MFMP comments that FIS is needed for Newcastle. 
65 

SCOPING INTERVIEW DATA FOR: Nobleboro

CID: 230219 Council Govt: Annual Town Meeting Date:

Town Govt: 3rd Saturday March

Community Representative Interviewed

Stanley Waltz 

CEO, shoreland zone officer 

Email: townofnobleboro@tidewater.net Tel: (207) 563-8816 Fax:

Floodplain Management Community Contact (if different from above)

Known problems with flood maps for your community

Do you have specific areas that don't flood (1% chance) but are currently in the floodplain?

No 

Do you have specific areas that flood (1% chance) but are not mapped in the floodplain?

Yes. Large flooded area 0.2 mi west of East Neck Rd on the south side of 

Upper Cross Rd (priority 1). WNW of Palmer Hill.

Note any significant changes in hydraulic structures (bridges, culverts, dams)

No 

Do you have (or are you proposing) high-development areas where you need new or restudied 

flood elevations or improved map scale?

Yes, The west shore of Duck Puddle Pond. 

Community Resources

Do you have aerial photography (or plans for any) (flight date, scale, color/bw)?

Yes. B&W, 1"=400', April 16, 1977. 

Do you have any topographic data (or plans for collecting) (digital terrain, contour maps)?

No 

Do you have any data related to hydrologic/hydraulic studies (or plans for such studies)?

No 

Do you have dedicated GIS capabilities (if so, provide contact information)?

No 

Notes

Ridgewood Power & Light, Damariscotta Lake Watershed Assn collect high water 

marks.

Work with Newcastle and Jefferson to manage boundary areas. 
66 

SCOPING INTERVIEW DATA FOR: Somerville

CID: 230512 Council Govt: Annual Town Meeting Date:

Town Govt: March

Community Representative Interviewed

Michael Dostie 

CEO 

Email: mowertoolman@aol.com Tel: (207) 549-7353 Fax:

Floodplain Management Community Contact (if different from above)

Known problems with flood maps for your community

Do you have specific areas that don't flood (1% chance) but are currently in the floodplain?

No 

Do you have specific areas that flood (1% chance) but are not mapped in the floodplain?

Yes. Beaver problem, Coopers Mills Rd, Panel 5. 

Note any significant changes in hydraulic structures (bridges, culverts, dams)

Yes. Installed 4-ft culvert and 2 overflows at Coopers Mills Rd in response 

to beaver problem.

Do you have (or are you proposing) high-development areas where you need new or restudied 

flood elevations or improved map scale?

No 

Community Resources

Do you have aerial photography (or plans for any) (flight date, scale, color/bw)?

Yes, recently (no details) 

Do you have any topographic data (or plans for collecting) (digital terrain, contour maps)?

No 

Do you have any data related to hydrologic/hydraulic studies (or plans for such studies)?

Not sure. 

Do you have dedicated GIS capabilities (if so, provide contact information)?

No 

Notes

#1 priority - adjustment of western town boundary during mapping. 
67 

SCOPING INTERVIEW DATA FOR: South Bristol

CID: 230220 Council Govt: Annual Town Meeting Date:

Town Govt: 1st Tuesday March

Community Representative Interviewed

Glenn Estabrook 

CEO 

Email: Tel: (207) 563-3977 Fax:

Floodplain Management Community Contact (if different from above)

Frank King, Ralph Norwood (planning board), Lynette Naler (planning board) 

Known problems with flood maps for your community

Do you have specific areas that don't flood (1% chance) but are currently in the floodplain?

Yes. Along Shipyard Rd and West Side Road. 

Do you have specific areas that flood (1% chance) but are not mapped in the floodplain?

Yes. Bridge on Rt 129 entering Rutherford Island (priority 1). Rt 129 on 

Rutherford Island affected by high water during storm surge at several 

locations not mapped in flood zone (priority 2). Sand Cove Rd covered by 

Note any significant changes in hydraulic structures (bridges, culverts, dams)

No 

Do you have (or are you proposing) high-development areas where you need new or restudied 

flood elevations or improved map scale?

No 

Community Resources

Do you have aerial photography (or plans for any) (flight date, scale, color/bw)?

No 

Do you have any topographic data (or plans for collecting) (digital terrain, contour maps)?

No 

Do you have any data related to hydrologic/hydraulic studies (or plans for such studies)?

Next few years, MDOT to do a new bridge on Rt 129. 

Do you have dedicated GIS capabilities (if so, provide contact information)?

Yes. Retired man doing some local work. 

Notes

Communication problem: LOMAs being issued without town being notified. Town 

requests physical mailings to all planning board members from county planning

 office.

Town disagrees with notes on MNUSS record 100000000010109. Town depends on 
68 

SCOPING INTERVIEW DATA FOR: Southport

CID: 230221 Council Govt: Annual Town Meeting Date:

Town Govt: 1st Monday March

Community Representative Interviewed

Henry Berne 

CEO 

Email: hberne@gwi.net Tel: (207) 633-3169 Fax:

Floodplain Management Community Contact (if different from above)

Known problems with flood maps for your community

Do you have specific areas that don't flood (1% chance) but are currently in the floodplain?

No 

Do you have specific areas that flood (1% chance) but are not mapped in the floodplain?

No 

Note any significant changes in hydraulic structures (bridges, culverts, dams)

No 

Do you have (or are you proposing) high-development areas where you need new or restudied 

flood elevations or improved map scale?

No 

Community Resources

Do you have aerial photography (or plans for any) (flight date, scale, color/bw)?

Maybe - will check. 

Do you have any topographic data (or plans for collecting) (digital terrain, contour maps)?

No 

Do you have any data related to hydrologic/hydraulic studies (or plans for such studies)?

No 

Do you have dedicated GIS capabilities (if so, provide contact information)?

No 

Notes

High water marks are collected in Cozy Harbor. No comments on MNUSS records. 

No markings on maps.
69 

SCOPING INTERVIEW DATA FOR: Waldoboro

CID: 230086 Council Govt: Annual Town Meeting Date:

Town Govt: June

Community Representative Interviewed

John W. Black 

CEO 

Email: ceo@waldoboromaine.org Tel: (207) 832-5369 Fax: (207) 832-6061

Floodplain Management Community Contact (if different from above)

Known problems with flood maps for your community

Do you have specific areas that don't flood (1% chance) but are currently in the floodplain?

No. 

Do you have specific areas that flood (1% chance) but are not mapped in the floodplain?

No. 

Note any significant changes in hydraulic structures (bridges, culverts, dams)

P22, culverts over small streams. Anticipated culvert change on Back Bk (Zone 

 A). Dam removed on Medomak R (Zone A5), needs restudy. P15, 2 culverts in A

 Zones. P10, 3 culverts in A Zones. P8, 2 culverts in A Zones. P6, culverts 

enlarged 1980s in A6 Zone, Medomak Pond. P30, Zone A culvert.

Do you have (or are you proposing) high-development areas where you need new or restudied 

flood elevations or improved map scale?

Possibly. 

Community Resources

Do you have aerial photography (or plans for any) (flight date, scale, color/bw)?

Yes. 2003? Color. 

Do you have any topographic data (or plans for collecting) (digital terrain, contour maps)?

No 

Do you have any data related to hydrologic/hydraulic studies (or plans for such studies)?

Yes, in local areas. 

Do you have dedicated GIS capabilities (if so, provide contact information)?

Yes, being developed. 

Notes

Some road-labeling issues. MNUSS records were reviewed; those requesting ERMs 

 were deemed not valid by MFMP.
70 

SCOPING INTERVIEW DATA FOR: Westport Island

CID: 230222 Council Govt: Annual Town Meeting Date:

Town Govt: March

Community Representative Interviewed

Ruth Nelson 

Planning board vice chair 

Email: rjnelson@prexar.com Tel: (207) 882-6829 Fax:

Floodplain Management Community Contact (if different from above)

Gary Richardson (CEO), George Richardson (1st selectman), 207-882-8477 for 

both

Known problems with flood maps for your community

Do you have specific areas that don't flood (1% chance) but are currently in the floodplain?

Yes. Area north of Ferry Rd (#1 priority), Jewett Cove area (#2 priority) 

Do you have specific areas that flood (1% chance) but are not mapped in the floodplain?

No 

Note any significant changes in hydraulic structures (bridges, culverts, dams)

No 

Do you have (or are you proposing) high-development areas where you need new or restudied 

flood elevations or improved map scale?

Yes. 300 acres could be developed. Need better definition of low areas for 

potential flooding; Map 5 between Rt 144 and Sheepscot R.

Community Resources

Do you have aerial photography (or plans for any) (flight date, scale, color/bw)?

No 

Do you have any topographic data (or plans for collecting) (digital terrain, contour maps)?

No 

Do you have any data related to hydrologic/hydraulic studies (or plans for such studies)?

Yes. * years ago, related to water supply for the island 

Do you have dedicated GIS capabilities (if so, provide contact information)?

No 

Notes

Work closely with Wiscasset. 

Note that official name is Westport Island. 
71 

SCOPING INTERVIEW DATA FOR: Wiscasset

CID: 230223 Council Govt: Annual Town Meeting Date:

Town Govt:

Community Representative Interviewed

Stuart Wyman 

CEO 

Email: wiscasset@wiscasset-me.gov Tel: (207) 882-8200 Fax: (207) 882-8228

Floodplain Management Community Contact (if different from above)

Known problems with flood maps for your community

Do you have specific areas that don't flood (1% chance) but are currently in the floodplain?

Yes. P5, Back River/Montsweag Bay, steep area along shore yet shown in 

floodplain, highest priority (confirmed with phone call)

Do you have specific areas that flood (1% chance) but are not mapped in the floodplain?

Yes. P10, Sheepscot R near Water St, shows no floodplain but shore is gradual 

 and some flooding occurs at high tide.

Note any significant changes in hydraulic structures (bridges, culverts, dams)

No 

Do you have (or are you proposing) high-development areas where you need new or restudied 

flood elevations or improved map scale?

No 

Community Resources

Do you have aerial photography (or plans for any) (flight date, scale, color/bw)?

No 

Do you have any topographic data (or plans for collecting) (digital terrain, contour maps)?

No 

Do you have any data related to hydrologic/hydraulic studies (or plans for such studies)?

No 

Do you have dedicated GIS capabilities (if so, provide contact information)?

No 

Notes
72 

Appendix C: Existing MNUSS Data Entries: Lincoln County 
73 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

BOOTHBAY HARBOR, TOWN OF CID 230213 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010192 Date of Need: 8/4/1997

unnamed Panel: 2302130002B 

Need Desc: Changes to BFEs Length: 0.31 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: NEED FLOOD HAZARD AREAS DETERMINED FOR UNNAMED STREAMS ALONG

 RT 27. 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010192 Date of Need: 8/4/1997

unnamed Panel: 2302130002B 

Need Desc: Changes to BFEs Length: 0.31 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: NEED FLOOD HAZARD AREAS DETERMINED FOR UNNAMED STREAMS ALONG

 RT 27. 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy
74 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

BOOTHBAY HARBOR, TOWN OF CID 230213 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010192 Date of Need: 8/4/1997

unnamed Panel: 2302130002B 

Need Desc: Changes to BFEs Length: 0.31 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: NEED FLOOD HAZARD AREAS DETERMINED FOR UNNAMED STREAMS ALONG

 RT 27. 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010112 Date of Need: 4/26/1999

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302130001B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 3.18 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Runup BFEs are too high, ranging from 10 to 21 feet, while 

stillwater elevation is 9.8 feet. This is b/c the runup 

elevations were determined using Stone and Webster 

methodology. Runup needs to be computed using current 

methodology which will lower bfes more than 5 feet. 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy
75 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

BOOTHBAY HARBOR, TOWN OF CID 230213 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010112 Date of Need: 4/26/1999

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302130003B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 3.18 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Runup BFEs are too high, ranging from 10 to 21 feet, while 

stillwater elevation is 9.8 feet. This is b/c the runup 

elevations were determined using Stone and Webster 

methodology. Runup needs to be computed using current 

methodology which will lower bfes 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010112 Date of Need: 4/26/1999

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302130003B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 3.18 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Runup BFEs are too high, ranging from 10 to 21 feet, while 

stillwater elevation is 9.8 feet. This is b/c the runup 

elevations were determined using Stone and Webster 

methodology. Runup needs to be computed using current 

methodology which will lower bfes more than 5 feet. 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy
76 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

BOOTHBAY HARBOR, TOWN OF CID 230213 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010112 Date of Need: 4/26/1999

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302130002B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 3.18 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Runup BFEs are too high, ranging from 10 to 21 feet, while 

stillwater elevation is 9.8 feet. This is b/c the runup 

elevations were determined using Stone and Webster 

methodology. Runup needs to be computed using current 

methodology which will lower bfes more than 5 feet. 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010112 Date of Need: 4/26/1999

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302130002B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 3.18 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Runup BFEs are too high, ranging from 10 to 21 feet, while 

stillwater elevation is 9.8 feet. This is b/c the runup 

elevations were determined using Stone and Webster 

methodology. Runup needs to be computed using current 

methodology which will lower bfes 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy
77 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

BOOTHBAY HARBOR, TOWN OF CID 230213 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010112 Date of Need: 4/26/1999

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302130002B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 3.18 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Runup BFEs are too high, ranging from 10 to 21 feet, while 

stillwater elevation is 9.8 feet. This is b/c the runup 

elevations were determined using Stone and Webster 

methodology. Runup needs to be computed using current 

methodology which will lower bfes more than 5 feet. 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010112 Date of Need: 4/26/1999

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302130001B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 3.18 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Runup BFEs are too high, ranging from 10 to 21 feet, while 

stillwater elevation is 9.8 feet. This is b/c the runup 

elevations were determined using Stone and Webster 

methodology. Runup needs to be computed using current 

methodology which will lower bfes more than 5 feet. 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy
78 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

BOOTHBAY HARBOR, TOWN OF CID 230213 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010112 Date of Need: 4/26/1999

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302130001B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 3.18 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Runup BFEs are too high, ranging from 10 to 21 feet, while 

stillwater elevation is 9.8 feet. This is b/c the runup 

elevations were determined using Stone and Webster 

methodology. Runup needs to be computed using current 

methodology which will lower bfes 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010112 Date of Need: 4/26/1999

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302130003B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 3.18 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Runup BFEs are too high, ranging from 10 to 21 feet, while 

stillwater elevation is 9.8 feet. This is b/c the runup 

elevations were determined using Stone and Webster 

methodology. Runup needs to be computed using current 

methodology which will lower bfes more than 5 feet. 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy
79 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

BREMEN, TOWN OF CID 230214 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000025855 Date of Need: 8/29/2001 

Panel: 230214 B 

Need Desc: Align map panels Length: 0 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Not Applicable 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: The community was converted by letter 2/2/87. However, panel

 0011 is still labeled as a FHBM. It needs to be labeled as 

a FIRM. All 10 other panels are correct. 

MFMP Comments: DFIRM
80 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

BRISTOL, TOWN OF CID 230215 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010242 Date of Need: 11/11/1997

Panel: 2302150015C 

Need Desc: Add LOMCs (per panel) Length: 0 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Not Applicable 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes:

MFMP Comments: DFIRM

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010110 Date of Need: 4/26/1999

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302150015B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 14.5 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Run up BFE's are too high, ranging from 10 to 43 feet, while

 stillwater elevation is 10 feet. Runup elev. were 

determined using Stone and Webster methodology. New 

elevations need to be computed which will lower BFEs more 

than 5 feet. 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy
81 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

BRISTOL, TOWN OF CID 230215 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010110 Date of Need: 4/26/1999

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302150015B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 14.5 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Run up BFE's are too high, ranging from 10 to 43 feet, while

 stillwater elevation is 10 feet. Runup elev. were 

determined using Stone and Webster methodology. New 

elevations need to be computed which will lower BFEs more 

than 5 feet. 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010110 Date of Need: 4/26/1999

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302150015B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 14.5 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Run up BFE's are too high, ranging from 10 to 43 feet, while

 stillwater elevation is 10 feet. Runup elev. were 

determined using Stone and Webster methodology. New 

elevations need to be computed which will lower BFEs more 

than 5 feet. 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy
82 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

BRISTOL, TOWN OF CID 230215 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010110 Date of Need: 4/26/1999

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302150005B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 14.5 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Run up BFE's are too high, ranging from 10 to 43 feet, while

 stillwater elevation is 10 feet. Runup elev. were 

determined using Stone and Webster methodology. New 

elevations need to be computed which will lower BFEs more 

than 5 feet. 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010110 Date of Need: 4/26/1999

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302150005B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 14.5 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Run up BFE's are too high, ranging from 10 to 43 feet, while

 stillwater elevation is 10 feet. Runup elev. were 

determined using Stone and Webster methodology. New 

elevations need to be computed which will lower BFEs more 

than 5 feet. 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy
83 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

BRISTOL, TOWN OF CID 230215 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010110 Date of Need: 4/26/1999

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302150005B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 14.5 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Run up BFE's are too high, ranging from 10 to 43 feet, while

 stillwater elevation is 10 feet. Runup elev. were 

determined using Stone and Webster methodology. New 

elevations need to be computed which will lower BFEs more 

than 5 feet. 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy
84 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

SOUTH BRISTOL, TOWN OF CID 230220 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010109 Date of Need: 12/9/1996

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302200020B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 3.8 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Run up BFE's are too high, ranging from 10-26 feet, while 

stillwater elevation is 9.9 feet. This is because runup 

elevations were determined using Stone and Webster 

methodology. Runup needs to be computed using current 

methodology which will lower BFEs 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010109 Date of Need: 12/9/1996

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302200015B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 3.8 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Run up BFE's are too high, ranging from 10-26 feet, while 

stillwater elevation is 9.9 feet. This is because runup 

elevations were determined using Stone and Webster 

methodology. Runup needs to be computed using current 

methodology which will lower BFEs more than 5 feet. 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy
85 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

SOUTH BRISTOL, TOWN OF CID 230220 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010109 Date of Need: 12/9/1996

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302200015B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 3.8 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Run up BFE's are too high, ranging from 10-26 feet, while 

stillwater elevation is 9.9 feet. This is because runup 

elevations were determined using Stone and Webster 

methodology. Runup needs to be computed using current 

methodology which will lower BFEs 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010109 Date of Need: 12/9/1996

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302200015B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 3.8 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Run up BFE's are too high, ranging from 10-26 feet, while 

stillwater elevation is 9.9 feet. This is because runup 

elevations were determined using Stone and Webster 

methodology. Runup needs to be computed using current 

methodology which will lower BFEs more than 5 feet. 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy
86 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

SOUTH BRISTOL, TOWN OF CID 230220 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010109 Date of Need: 12/9/1996

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302200020B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 3.8 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Run up BFE's are too high, ranging from 10-26 feet, while 

stillwater elevation is 9.9 feet. This is because runup 

elevations were determined using Stone and Webster 

methodology. Runup needs to be computed using current 

methodology which will lower BFEs more than 5 feet. 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010109 Date of Need: 12/9/1996

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302200020B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 3.8 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Run up BFE's are too high, ranging from 10-26 feet, while 

stillwater elevation is 9.9 feet. This is because runup 

elevations were determined using Stone and Webster 

methodology. Runup needs to be computed using current 

methodology which will lower BFEs more than 5 feet. 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy
87 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

SOUTH BRISTOL, TOWN OF CID 230220 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010164 Date of Need: 8/4/1997

Panel: 2302200015B 

Need Desc: Add streets to panel Length: 0 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Not Applicable 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes:

MFMP Comments: DFIRM

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010164 Date of Need: 8/4/1997

Panel: 2302200020B 

Need Desc: Add streets to panel Length: 0 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Not Applicable 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes:

MFMP Comments: DFIRM
88 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

SOUTH BRISTOL, TOWN OF CID 230220 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010164 Date of Need: 8/4/1997

Panel: 2302200005B 

Need Desc: Add streets to panel Length: 0 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Not Applicable 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes:

MFMP Comments: DFIRM

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010164 Date of Need: 8/4/1997

Panel: 2302200010B 

Need Desc: Add streets to panel Length: 0 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Not Applicable 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes:

MFMP Comments: DFIRM
89 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

SOUTH BRISTOL, TOWN OF CID 230220 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000036669 Date of Need: 10/27/2004

Panel: 2302200005B 

Need Desc: Add streets to panel Length: 0 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Not Applicable 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: During Sept. 19, 2003 CAV, FEMA rep noted need for update of

 street names on FIRM. 

MFMP Comments: DFIRM

MNUSS NeedID 100000000036669 Date of Need: 10/27/2004

Panel: 2302200010B 

Need Desc: Add streets to panel Length: 0 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Not Applicable 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: During Sept. 19, 2003 CAV, FEMA rep noted need for update of

 street names on FIRM. 

MFMP Comments: DFIRM
90 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

SOUTH BRISTOL, TOWN OF CID 230220 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000036669 Date of Need: 10/27/2004

Panel: 2302200015B 

Need Desc: Add streets to panel Length: 0 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Not Applicable 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: During Sept. 19, 2003 CAV, FEMA rep noted need for update of

 street names on FIRM. 

MFMP Comments: DFIRM

MNUSS NeedID 100000000036669 Date of Need: 10/27/2004

Panel: 2302200020B 

Need Desc: Add streets to panel Length: 0 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Not Applicable 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: During Sept. 19, 2003 CAV, FEMA rep noted need for update of

 street names on FIRM. 

MFMP Comments: DFIRM
91 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

SOUTHPORT, TOWN OF CID 230221 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010219 Date of Need: 11/6/1997

Panel: 2302210004B 

Need Desc: Add LOMCs (per panel) Length: 0 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Not Applicable 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes:

MFMP Comments: DFIRM

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010219 Date of Need: 11/6/1997

Panel: 2302210003B 

Need Desc: Add LOMCs (per panel) Length: 0 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Not Applicable 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes:

MFMP Comments: DFIRM
92 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

SOUTHPORT, TOWN OF CID 230221 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010138 Date of Need: 4/27/1999

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302210003B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 6.3 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Runup BFE's are too high, ranging from 14 to 26 feet, while 

the stillwater elevation is 10 feet. This is because the 

runup elevations were determined using Stone and Webster 

methodology. Runup needs to be computed using current 

methodology which will lower BFEs more than 5 feet. 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010138 Date of Need: 4/27/1999

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302210004B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 6.3 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Runup BFE's are too high, ranging from 14 to 26 feet, while 

the stillwater elevation is 10 feet. This is because the 

runup elevations were determined using Stone and Webster 

methodology. Runup needs to be computed using current 

methodology which will lo 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy
93 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

SOUTHPORT, TOWN OF CID 230221 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010138 Date of Need: 4/27/1999

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302210004B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 6.3 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Runup BFE's are too high, ranging from 14 to 26 feet, while 

the stillwater elevation is 10 feet. This is because the 

runup elevations were determined using Stone and Webster 

methodology. Runup needs to be computed using current 

methodology which will lower BFEs more than 5 feet. 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010138 Date of Need: 4/27/1999

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302210003B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 6.3 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Runup BFE's are too high, ranging from 14 to 26 feet, while 

the stillwater elevation is 10 feet. This is because the 

runup elevations were determined using Stone and Webster 

methodology. Runup needs to be computed using current 

methodology which will lo 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy
94 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

SOUTHPORT, TOWN OF CID 230221 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010138 Date of Need: 4/27/1999

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302210003B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 6.3 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Runup BFE's are too high, ranging from 14 to 26 feet, while 

the stillwater elevation is 10 feet. This is because the 

runup elevations were determined using Stone and Webster 

methodology. Runup needs to be computed using current 

methodology which will lower BFEs more than 5 feet. 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010138 Date of Need: 4/27/1999

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302210002B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 6.3 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Runup BFE's are too high, ranging from 14 to 26 feet, while 

the stillwater elevation is 10 feet. This is because the 

runup elevations were determined using Stone and Webster 

methodology. Runup needs to be computed using current 

methodology which will lo 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy
95 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

SOUTHPORT, TOWN OF CID 230221 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010138 Date of Need: 4/27/1999

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302210002B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 6.3 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Runup BFE's are too high, ranging from 14 to 26 feet, while 

the stillwater elevation is 10 feet. This is because the 

runup elevations were determined using Stone and Webster 

methodology. Runup needs to be computed using current 

methodology which will lower BFEs more than 5 feet. 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010138 Date of Need: 4/27/1999

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302210002B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 6.3 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Runup BFE's are too high, ranging from 14 to 26 feet, while 

the stillwater elevation is 10 feet. This is because the 

runup elevations were determined using Stone and Webster 

methodology. Runup needs to be computed using current 

methodology which will lower BFEs more than 5 feet. 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy
96 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

SOUTHPORT, TOWN OF CID 230221 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010138 Date of Need: 4/27/1999

Atlantic Ocean Panel: 2302210004B 

Need Desc: Changes to coastal elevations Length: 6.3 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Increased By Greater Than 5 feet 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes: Runup BFE's are too high, ranging from 14 to 26 feet, while 

the stillwater elevation is 10 feet. This is because the 

runup elevations were determined using Stone and Webster 

methodology. Runup needs to be computed using current 

methodology which will lower BFEs more than 5 feet. 

MFMP Comments: Requires Restudy
97 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

WALDOBORO, TOWN OF CID 230086 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010167 Date of Need: 8/4/1997

Panel: 2300860030B 

Need Desc: Add an ERM Length: 0 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Not Applicable 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes:

MFMP Comments: Not Valid

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010167 Date of Need: 8/4/1997

Panel: 2300860006B 

Need Desc: Add an ERM Length: 0 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Not Applicable 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes:

MFMP Comments: Not Valid
98 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

WALDOBORO, TOWN OF CID 230086 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010167 Date of Need: 8/4/1997

Panel: 2300860008B 

Need Desc: Add an ERM Length: 0 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Not Applicable 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes:

MFMP Comments: Not Valid

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010167 Date of Need: 8/4/1997

Panel: 2300860010B 

Need Desc: Add an ERM Length: 0 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Not Applicable 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes:

MFMP Comments: Not Valid
99 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

WALDOBORO, TOWN OF CID 230086 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010167 Date of Need: 8/4/1997

Panel: 2300860015B 

Need Desc: Add an ERM Length: 0 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Not Applicable 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes:

MFMP Comments: Not Valid

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010167 Date of Need: 8/4/1997

Panel: 2300860021B 

Need Desc: Add an ERM Length: 0 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Not Applicable 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes:

MFMP Comments: Not Valid
100 

 EXISTING MNUSS ENTRIES FOR LINCOLN COUNTY

WALDOBORO, TOWN OF CID 230086 MNUSS Summary

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010167 Date of Need: 8/4/1997

Panel: 2300860022B 

Need Desc: Add an ERM Length: 0 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Not Applicable 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes:

MFMP Comments: Not Valid

MNUSS NeedID 100000000010167 Date of Need: 8/4/1997

Panel: 2300860025B 

Need Desc: Add an ERM Length: 0 mi

Anticipated BFE Change: Not Applicable 

Location of Floodplain:

Need Notes:

MFMP Comments: Not Valid
101 

Appendix D: Attachments 
To: Tom Marcotte, CFM 

State Planning Office 

Floodplain Management Program 

184 State Street, 38 State House Station 

Augusta, Maine 04333-0038 

Fax Number: (207) 287-6489

FAX back date: ____/____ /2006

Sign-up FAX From:

Community Name: 

_________________________ 

Primary Community Contact 

For Floodplain Management: 

Name:_______________Ph #:________

Regarding: Attendance at Flood Map Modernization Scoping Meeting 

Comments: 

The following community official(s) will attend the scoping meeting indicated below: 

Lincoln County: Damariscotta Town Office, 21 School St. December 7th 2006 

From 11:00 A.M. to 3:00 P.M. 

Name: Title and Phone Number 

1) _________________________________ , __________________________________ 

2) _________________________________ , ___________________________________ 

3) _________________________________ , ___________________________________ 

4) _________________________________ , ___________________________________ 

102 
STATE O F MAINE

EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT

MAINE STATE PLANNING OFFICE

38 STATE HOUSE STATION

AUGUSTA, ME 04333 

103 

 

, Code Enforcement Officer November 14, 2006 

Town of 

Street 

, Maine 04 

Dear 

Subject: Important Meeting on Updating Your Community’s Flood Maps 

Flooding has caused more than $150,000,000 in damages to Maine’s cities and towns during 

the past twenty years. Coastal and riverine floods impact the lives of our citizens almost 

annually. Recently completed County Hazard Mitigation Plans identify flooding as the 

foremost natural hazard in the majority of our sixteen counties. 

When the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) was established in 1968 it provided for a 

three part approach to reducing damage from flooding. The first part was the establishment of 

a flood insurance program overseen by the Flood Insurance Administration (FIA). The second 

part was the identification and mapping of the flood hazard. The third part was a requirement 

for communities that wanted to participate in the NFIP to adopt and enforce floodplain 

management regulations designed to control development in flood prone areas. Of the three 

parts of the NFIP the second component, mapping the hazard, is the glue that holds the 

program together. Communities cannot control development if they do not know what areas of 

their municipality are threatened by flooding. Flood insurance cannot be provided equitably 

unless insurance agents are able to determine the level of risk for a specific property. 

Nationwide the current Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) are aging and some states, such as 

Maine, have maps that are on average more than twenty years old. Congress realized that this 

was a problem and in 2004 provided funding to FEMA to begin a comprehensive updating of 

the maps. This updating effort is called “Flood Map Modernization”, Map Mod for short. 

Maine has actively participated in Map Mod since its inception. To date we have remapping 

projects underway in York, Cumberland and Oxford counties and have met with community 

officials to discuss their flood mapping needs in Kennebec and Somerset counties. During this 

fall and winter we will be gathering information on mapping issues and concerns in Penobscot, 

Lincoln and Hancock counties. These meetings are designed to give municipal officials a 

chance to share with us any problems they have with their FIRMs and are called “Scoping 

Meetings” by FEMA. 

Thursday, December 7th from 11:00 AM to 3:00 PM we will meet with officials from 

Lincoln County communities at the Damariscotta Town Office, located at 21 School St. 
During the Scoping Meeting we will meet with communities and review their current FIRM and 

discuss possible changes to the map to improve floodplain management at the local level. 

We have attached three documents to this letter. One document is a FAX-Back form to allow you 

to sign up for the meeting. We ask that you reply to us by November 29th. The second document is 

a brief overview of the Map Mod process which can also be seen at our web-site 

www.maine.gov/spo/flood and the third document is the agenda for the meeting. 

In preparation for the Scoping Meeting, we would like your community to identify flood mapping 

issues to be considered for study or review. It will be helpful to have the flooding issues prioritized

and for you to be able to locate the areas of concern on the flood maps. In addition, it will also be 

beneficial to bring a brief narrative describing the reasons you would like to request that changes be 

made to the maps. This information will help us help you at the meeting and assist us in finalizing

the scope of work necessary to update the maps. If your community is unable to attend the Scoping

Meeting, this information may also be sent to the lead scoping agency working in collaboration with 

the Maine Floodplain Management Program and FEMA: USGS, 196 Whitten Road, Augusta, ME

04330. 

If you have any questions regarding the Scoping Meeting or need additional information please feel 

free to contact Tom Marcotte at the State Planning Office (207-287-8051), Rob Dudley at USGS

(207-622-8201 ext. 115) or Chuck Schalk at USGS (207-622-8201 ext. 111). 

Thank you for your assistance with Map Mod. 

Tom Marcotte, CFM G. Fred Vanderschmidt IV. CFM 

Maine Floodplain Management Program FEMA Region I 

Rob Dudley, P.E. 

USGS Maine Water Science Center 

104 
105 
106 
107 

Appendix E: Census Block-Group Data 

[CID, Community identification number]
108 

Census block 

group 

CID Community name 

Area, in 

square 

miles 

Population 

density 

Population 

density 

score 

Population 

growth 

Population 

growth 

score 

230159751001 230512 Somerville 23.52 21.69 5.20 11.14 5.86 

230159751002 230085 Jefferson 33.07 50.98 5.78 13.12 6.17 

230159751003 230085 Jefferson 25.57 27.45 5.36 13.12 6.17 

230159751004 230087 Whitefield 19.20 64.57 5.94 17.71 6.73 

230159751005 230087 Whitefield 28.33 36.46 5.55 17.71 6.73 

230159752001 230086 Waldoboro 37.17 57.31 5.86 6.85 4.94 

230159752002 230086 Waldoboro 20.28 79.99 6.08 6.85 4.94 

230159752003 230086 Waldoboro 15.23 76.43 6.05 6.85 4.94 

230159753001 230219 Nobleboro 15.87 62.27 5.91 11.75 5.96 

230159753002 230219 Nobleboro 7.46 85.49 6.13 11.75 5.96 

230159753003 230216 Damariscotta 7.68 142.78 6.47 12.70 6.11 

230159753004 230216 Damariscotta 6.90 136.76 6.45 12.70 6.11 

230159754001 230083 Alna 21.39 31.55 5.45 18.21 6.79 

230159754002 230218 Newcastle 32.57 53.67 5.81 13.65 6.24 

230159754004 230217 Edgecomb 20.78 52.45 5.80 9.77 5.61 

230159755001 230084 Dresden 33.16 49.01 5.75 22.00 7.14 

230159755002 230223 Wiscasset 12.28 132.25 6.42 7.91 5.21 

230159755003 230223 Wiscasset 7.68 156.74 6.54 7.91 5.21 

230159755004 230223 Wiscasset 7.75 100.12 6.23 7.91 5.21 

230159755005 230222 Westport 12.82 58.11 5.87 12.37 6.06 

230159756001 230214 Bremen 17.23 45.38 5.70 16.02 6.54 

230159756002 230215 Bristol 13.98 55.95 5.84 13.67 6.24 

230159756003 230215 Bristol 1.74 0.00 0.00 13.67 6.24 

230159756004 230215 Bristol 17.06 71.56 6.01 13.67 6.24 

230159756005 230215 Bristol 3.78 168.93 6.59 13.67 6.24 

230159757001 230220 South Bristol 16.30 55.02 5.83 8.73 5.40 

230159758001 230212 Boothbay 3.41 213.94 6.75 11.78 5.96 

230159758002 230212 Boothbay 8.80 113.16 6.32 11.78 5.96 

230159758003 230212 Boothbay 8.51 66.61 5.96 11.78 5.96 

230159758004 230212 Boothbay 6.20 107.53 6.28 11.78 5.96 

230159759001 230213 Boothbay Harbor 1.63 342.29 7.07 0.00 0.00 

230159759002 230213 Boothbay Harbor 0.90 775.06 7.62 0.00 0.00 

230159759003 230213 Boothbay Harbor 2.43 228.90 6.79 0.00 0.00 

230159759004 230213 Boothbay Harbor 0.99 528.12 7.36 0.00 0.00 

230159760001 230221 Southport 5.18 132.16 6.42 6.05 4.70 

230159761001 230511 Monhegan Island 0.81 92.63 6.18 0.00 0.00 

Minimum 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Maximum 37.17 775.06 7.62 22.00 7.14 

Mean 13.82 124.26 5.98 10.40 5.10 

Median 12.55 73.99 6.03 11.78 5.96 
109 

Census block 

group 

CID Community name 

Area, in 

square 

mile 

Housing 

units 

density 

Housing 

units 

density 

score 

Claims 

density 

Claims density 

score 

230159751001 230512 Somerville 23.52 12.29 4.03 0.00 0.00 

230159751002 230085 Jefferson 33.07 22.41 4.54 0.00 0.00 

230159751003 230085 Jefferson 25.57 26.83 4.69 0.00 0.00 

230159751004 230087 Whitefield 19.20 26.35 4.67 0.00 0.00 

230159751005 230087 Whitefield 28.33 15.81 4.24 0.00 0.00 

230159752001 230086 Waldoboro 37.17 23.14 4.56 0.00 0.00 

230159752002 230086 Waldoboro 20.28 42.85 5.08 0.00 0.00 

230159752003 230086 Waldoboro 15.23 41.43 5.05 0.00 0.00 

230159753001 230219 Nobleboro 15.87 44.24 5.11 0.00 0.00 

230159753002 230219 Nobleboro 7.46 52.26 5.25 0.00 0.00 

230159753003 230216 Damariscotta 7.68 81.61 5.62 0.00 0.00 

230159753004 230216 Damariscotta 6.90 75.91 5.56 0.00 0.00 

230159754001 230083 Alna 21.39 14.72 4.19 0.00 0.00 

230159754002 230218 Newcastle 32.57 27.02 4.69 0.06 1.88 

230159754004 230217 Edgecomb 20.78 27.53 4.71 0.00 0.00 

230159755001 230084 Dresden 33.16 22.29 4.53 0.03 1.15 

230159755002 230223 Wiscasset 12.28 53.83 5.27 0.00 0.00 

230159755003 230223 Wiscasset 7.68 74.14 5.54 0.00 0.00 

230159755004 230223 Wiscasset 7.75 49.29 5.20 0.00 0.00 

230159755005 230222 Westport 12.82 39.78 5.02 0.00 0.00 

230159756001 230214 Bremen 17.23 34.70 4.90 0.00 0.00 

230159756002 230215 Bristol 13.98 30.34 4.79 0.00 0.00 

230159756003 230215 Bristol 1.74 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159756004 230215 Bristol 17.06 59.08 5.35 0.00 0.00 

230159756005 230215 Bristol 3.78 214.40 6.43 0.00 0.00 

230159757001 230220 South Bristol 16.30 57.17 5.32 0.00 0.00 

230159758001 230212 Boothbay 3.41 252.33 6.57 0.00 0.00 

230159758002 230212 Boothbay 8.80 53.85 5.27 0.00 0.00 

230159758003 230212 Boothbay 8.51 33.72 4.88 0.00 0.00 

230159758004 230212 Boothbay 6.20 68.35 5.47 0.00 0.00 

230159759001 230213 Boothbay Harbor 1.63 264.52 6.61 0.00 0.00 

230159759002 230213 Boothbay Harbor 0.90 493.32 7.13 1.11 4.89 

230159759003 230213 Boothbay Harbor 2.43 223.13 6.46 0.00 0.00 

230159759004 230213 Boothbay Harbor 0.99 581.64 7.27 1.01 4.79 

230159760001 230221 Southport 5.18 176.21 6.27 0.00 0.00 

230159761001 230511 Monhegan Island 0.81 218.62 6.45 0.00 0.00 

Minimum 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Maximum 37.17 581.64 7.27 1.11 4.89 

Mean 13.82 98.20 5.19 0.06 0.35 

Median 12.55 46.76 5.15 0.00 0.00 
110 

Census block 

group 

CID Community name 

Area, in 

square 

miles 

Repetitive 

loss density 

Repetitive 

loss density 

score 

Repetitive 

loss 

property 

density 

Repetitive 

loss 

property 

density 

score 

230159751001 230512 Somerville 23.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159751002 230085 Jefferson 33.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159751003 230085 Jefferson 25.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159751004 230087 Whitefield 19.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159751005 230087 Whitefield 28.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159752001 230086 Waldoboro 37.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159752002 230086 Waldoboro 20.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159752003 230086 Waldoboro 15.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159753001 230219 Nobleboro 15.87 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159753002 230219 Nobleboro 7.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159753003 230216 Damariscotta 7.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159753004 230216 Damariscotta 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159754001 230083 Alna 21.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159754002 230218 Newcastle 32.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159754004 230217 Edgecomb 20.78 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159755001 230084 Dresden 33.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159755002 230223 Wiscasset 12.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159755003 230223 Wiscasset 7.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159755004 230223 Wiscasset 7.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159755005 230222 Westport 12.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159756001 230214 Bremen 17.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159756002 230215 Bristol 13.98 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159756003 230215 Bristol 1.74 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159756004 230215 Bristol 17.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159756005 230215 Bristol 3.78 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159757001 230220 South Bristol 16.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159758001 230212 Boothbay 3.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159758002 230212 Boothbay 8.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159758003 230212 Boothbay 8.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159758004 230212 Boothbay 6.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159759001 230213 Boothbay Harbor 1.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159759002 230213 Boothbay Harbor 0.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159759003 230213 Boothbay Harbor 2.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159759004 230213 Boothbay Harbor 0.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159760001 230221 Southport 5.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

230159761001 230511 Monhegan Island 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Minimum 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Maximum 37.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Mean 13.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Median 12.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 
111 

Census block 

group 

CID Community name 

Area, in 

square 

miles 

Policies 

density 

Policies 

density 

score 

Disasters Disasters 

score 

Final census 

 block group 

 score 

230159751001 230512 Somerville 23.52 0.30 4.43 10 5.88 25.40 

230159751002 230085 Jefferson 33.07 0.00 0.00 10 5.88 22.36 

230159751003 230085 Jefferson 25.57 0.55 4.90 10 5.88 27.00 

230159751004 230087 Whitefield 19.20 0.00 0.00 10 5.88 23.23 

230159751005 230087 Whitefield 28.33 0.00 0.00 10 5.88 22.41 

230159752001 230086 Waldoboro 37.17 0.00 0.00 10 5.88 21.24 

230159752002 230086 Waldoboro 20.28 0.39 4.65 10 5.88 26.63 

230159752003 230086 Waldoboro 15.23 0.26 4.33 10 5.88 26.26 

230159753001 230219 Nobleboro 15.87 0.06 3.22 10 5.88 26.08 

230159753002 230219 Nobleboro 7.46 0.13 3.81 10 5.88 27.02 

230159753003 230216 Damariscotta 7.68 0.13 3.78 10 5.88 27.87 

230159753004 230216 Damariscotta 6.90 0.72 5.12 10 5.88 29.11 

230159754001 230083 Alna 21.39 0.09 3.53 10 5.88 25.83 

230159754002 230218 Newcastle 32.57 0.09 3.52 10 5.88 28.03 

230159754004 230217 Edgecomb 20.78 0.05 3.01 10 5.88 25.01 

230159755001 230084 Dresden 33.16 0.12 3.73 10 5.88 28.18 

230159755002 230223 Wiscasset 12.28 0.08 3.42 10 5.88 26.21 

230159755003 230223 Wiscasset 7.68 0.00 0.00 10 5.88 23.17 

230159755004 230223 Wiscasset 7.75 0.00 0.00 10 5.88 22.53 

230159755005 230222 Westport 12.82 0.00 0.00 10 5.88 22.82 

230159756001 230214 Bremen 17.23 0.75 5.15 10 5.88 28.18 

230159756002 230215 Bristol 13.98 0.14 3.86 10 5.88 26.62 

230159756003 230215 Bristol 1.74 0.00 0.00 10 5.88 12.13 

230159756004 230215 Bristol 17.06 1.41 5.63 10 5.88 29.12 

230159756005 230215 Bristol 3.78 7.67 6.95 10 5.88 32.10 

230159757001 230220 South Bristol 16.30 1.41 5.64 10 5.88 28.07 

230159758001 230212 Boothbay 3.41 11.14 7.24 10 5.88 32.40 

230159758002 230212 Boothbay 8.80 0.00 0.00 10 5.88 23.44 

230159758003 230212 Boothbay 8.51 1.06 5.41 10 5.88 28.10 

230159758004 230212 Boothbay 6.20 0.64 5.03 10 5.88 28.63 

230159759001 230213 Boothbay Harbor 1.63 0.00 0.00 10 5.88 19.56 

230159759002 230213 Boothbay Harbor 0.90 17.82 7.61 10 5.88 33.13 

230159759003 230213 Boothbay Harbor 2.43 2.06 5.93 10 5.88 25.07 

230159759004 230213 Boothbay Harbor 0.99 14.14 7.43 10 5.88 32.73 

230159760001 230221 Southport 5.18 6.18 6.79 10 5.88 30.06 

230159761001 230511 Monhegan Island 0.81 4.94 6.61 10 5.88 25.12 

Minimum 0.81 0.00 0.00 10.00 5.88 12.13 

Maximum 37.17 17.82 7.61 10.00 5.88 33.13 

Mean 13.82 2.01 3.63 10.00 5.88 26.13 

Median 12.55 0.14 3.83 10.00 5.88 26.44