Page 1

FEMA POLICY Standards for Flood 

Risk Analysis and Mapping

FEMA Policy #FP 204-078-1 (Rev 6)

BACKGROUND 

This policy is applicable to Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 

staff delivering Risk Mapping Analysis and Planning (Risk MAP), all mapping 

partners (contractors, cooperating technical partners, and other federal agencies) 

who perform flood risk projects on behalf of FEMA, and the National Flood 

Insurance Program (NFIP). Additionally, this policy may be pertinent to states, 

tribes, communities, homeowners and their consultants who are interested in the 

flood insurance rate map process. 

This policy updates and supersedes the Standards for Flood Risk Analysis 

and Mapping – FP 204-078-1 (Rev 5) approved May 30, 2016.

The changes with this revision are:

SID # Change Description

169 Revised

Removes conflicting requirements that existed between the original 

standards 169 and 368 related to the incorporation into a study or 

PMR. All valid LOMRs that are effective prior to the LOMC cutoff data 

must be incorporated.

368 Rescinded See above.

227 Revised

Adds the option for making corrections to the National Flood Hazard 

Layer (NFHL) through the NTU process, and also to clarifies the 

accreditation status of a levee cannot be updated by an NTU.

268 Revised

Requires that all communities included in a revised FIS, regardless of 

whether they are affected by the revision, must receive a copy of the 

updated FIS or receive a notice of how to download an updated FIS.

440 Revised

Requires that the Flood Risk Map and Flood Risk report agree with 

Flood Risk Database, but removes the requirement that production be 

automated.

444 Revised

Clarifies the requirement for emergency operation and public 

evacuation procedures be documented for levee systems to be 

accredited.
Page 2

SID # Change Description

551 Revised

 Clarifies that Risk MAP Program providers are responsible for the 

quality of the entire FIRM panel when working on a PMR project that 

might only affect a small portion of a panel.

623 New

Clarifies that LOMR-Fs, CLOMR-Fs and LOMR-FWs should not be 

issued within jurisdictions that are not participating in the NFIP and 

therefore cannot complete the required Community 

Acknowledgement Form.

624 New

Defines the basis for approval or denial of requests to remove the 

SFHA designation from a structure or property based on the elevation 

of the lowest adjacent grade at the structure or naturally occurring 

intervening high ground between the flooding source and the 

structure of property

626 New

This is a new standard to clarify that any proposed or existing 

structures must be located inside of the area for which an MT-1 

determination has been requested and that portions of a property may 

not include flooding sources or waterways that are shown on the 

effective Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM).

PURPOSE 

The purpose of this policy is to enable consistent performance by identifying the 

standards that must be followed in the delivery of the Risk MAP program. 

PRINCIPLES 

1) Ensure consistency in the deliverables of all flood risk projects so that they 

can support the NFIP and all of its stakeholders.

2) Ensure a standard level of quality is met for all deliverables of a flood risk 

project.

3) Provide appropriate flexibility to FEMA Regional Offices and Mapping 

Partners to accommodate regional and local variability across the country.

4) Enhance the credibility of the NFIP and all flood risk mapping efforts.

REQUIREMENTS

Flood risk projects, regulatory NFIP map changes and other Risk MAP activities 

shall be performed in a consistent manner resulting in quality data and 

deliverables. The attached set of standards shall be followed in the delivery of 

Risk MAP.

Standards must be implemented based on the effective date and implementation 

description. The implementation description is chosen to avoid cost or scope 

impacts on existing task orders, cooperative agreements, or interagency 

agreements. If the implementation of a new standard as mandated by this policy 
Page 3

requires a change to an existing agreement, coordinate with FEMA to modify the 

existing agreement as necessary. New standards may be implemented sooner in 

coordination with the FEMA Project Officer and Contracting Officer’s 

Representative.

FEMA publishes substantial additional guidance to support implementation of 

and compliance with these standards. Users of these standards should also 

reference this guidance published on FEMA’s web site.

____________________________________

Nicholas A. Shufro

Assistant Administrator

Risk Management Directorate

Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration

November 22, 2016___________________
Page 4

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

REVIEW CYCLE

FEMA policy Standards for Flood Risk Analysis and Mapping #FP 204-078-1 

(Rev 5) will be reviewed, reissued, revised, or rescinded every six months. 

AUTHORITIES

The mapping program for the NFIP, implemented through Risk MAP, is 

established through The National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended and 

the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012, as amended (42 U.S.C. 

4001 et seq.). The mapping program is governed by the implementing regulations 

at 44 CFR parts 59-72. The statutes and regulations establish the core 

requirements for the mapping program.

This policy represents FEMA’s interpretation of these statutory and regulatory 

requirements and/or sets forth standard operating procedures. The policy itself 

does not impose legally enforceable rights and obligations, but sets forth a 

standard operating procedure or agency practice that FEMA employees and 

contractors follow to be consistent, fair, and equitable in the implementation of the 

Agency’s authorities.

These standards are to be applied in addition to the legal requirements set out in 

the applicable statutes and regulations. For the most part, the applicable statutory 

and regulatory requirements are not repeated in this policy. Readers must refer to 

the statutes and regulations in addition to these standards.

DEFINITIONS

Flood risk projects are projects implemented under the Risk MAP program to 

engage with communities and provide flood risk information.

Guidance is a recommended method to meet the standard. Guidance assumes a 

working knowledge of common industry terminology and methodologies. 

Accepted approaches are not limited to this recommended approach; mapping 

partners may use other methods to meet or exceed the standard.

Guidelines and Standards Steering Committee is a team of FEMA 

headquarters and regional employees and contractors responsible for 

maintenance and coordination of Risk MAP standards and guidance.

Mapping Partners are FEMA Production and Technical Services Contractors, 

Cooperating Technical Partners, and other Federal Agencies performing tasks on 

a flood risk project.
Page 5

Program standards are a required element that supports the vision, goals and 

objectives of the Program. Exceptions must be obtained through coordination 

with FEMA headquarters Risk Management Directorate leadership. 

Risk MAP is the FEMA program that maintains flood maps for the NFIP and 

engages with local governments to increase awareness of flood risk and provide 

flood risk information that leads to actions to reduce risk.

Standards exceptions are project-specific variances to Risk MAP standards, 

approved by appropriate Risk MAP officials.

Working standards are required elements of a project that are typically applied 

by specialists (such as engineers, planners, GIS specialists, etc.). A complete list 

of acronyms and abbreviations is attached as Appendix B.

MONITORING AND EVALUATION

Compliance will be monitored through the Risk MAP Quality Assurance 

Management Plan. 

QUESTIONS

Direct questions to paul.rooney@fema.dhs.gov
Page 6

Appendix A

Standards for Flood Risk Analysis and Mapping

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

1 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Project 

Initiation

Program 

Standard All Flood Risk Projects and LOMCs must be tracked in the MIP.

2 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Project 

Initiation

Working 

Standard

A Project Management Team shall be formed as soon as a Flood Risk Project 

is initiated, and this team shall manage the project for its entire lifecycle.

3 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Project 

Initiation

Program 

Standard

When a community is initially considered for a Flood Risk Project involving a 

new or revised flood hazard analysis, FEMA must establish and maintain a 

community case file per 44 CFR 66.3.

4 10/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Project 

Initiation

Program 

Standard

All newly initiated Flood Risk Projects must be watershed-based, with the 

exception of coastal and small-scale Flood Risk Projects related to levee 

accreditation status.

5 7/13/2010

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Project 

Planning

Working 

Standard

No flooding source will receive a lower level of regulatory flood map product 

than what currently exists on effective maps.

6 11/30/2015

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

CNMS Working 

Standard

Both flood hazard validation and needs assessment processes must follow the 

CNMS Technical Reference and the results must be stored within the national 

CNMS database.

7 6/17/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

CNMS Working 

Standard

Community-specific requests to update the FIRM outside of the NVUE 

validation process and LOMR process must be documented in the CNMS 

database as mapping requests for FEMA Regional review and consideration.

8 6/17/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

CNMS Working 

Standard

The CNMS database shall be updated for engineering reference information, 

validation status, and map issues throughout all pertinent phases of the Flood 

Risk Project.

9 6/17/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

CNMS Program 

Standard

The CNMS database shall be the sole authority for reporting flood map update 

needs.
Page 7

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

10 6/17/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

CNMS Working 

Standard

For a studied flooding source to go from ‘UNVERIFIED’ to ‘“VALID” status within 

the CNMS database, the flooding source must be re-analyzed.

11 6/17/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

CNMS Working 

Standard

When the last assessment date of the Modernized or Paper Inventory exceeds 

5 years, the Validation Status shall be changed by FEMA HQ or its designee to 

‘Unknown’ and shall require reassessment.

12 6/17/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Project 

Planning

Program 

Standard

Each fiscal year, the Regions shall have a plan to evaluate all CNMS flooding 

sources within a 5-year period.

13 6/17/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

CNMS Working 

Standard

NVUE status must be reported by each FEMA Region to FEMA HQ at least 

quarterly.

14 6/17/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Project 

Planning

Working 

Standard

Regional decisions to prioritize, assess, and perform engineering analyses 

along various flooding sources must be supported by the data contained in 

CNMS.

15 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Coordination Working 

Standard

FEMA shall provide technical and programmatic assistance and prepare 

responses to inquiries received from Mapping Partners, NFIP constituents and 

other interested project stakeholders.

16 6/11/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Project 

Planning

Program 

Standard

Each flooding source must be evaluated in CNMS at least once within a 5-year 

period.

17 5/31/2016 Effective 

immediately

Project 

Planning

Program 

Standard

Discovery is a mandatory element of all Flood Risk Projects, and must be 

conducted on the same scale at which the Flood Risk Project is initiated. All 

watershed-based Discovery must be initiated at a geographic footprint that 

encompasses the hydrologic characteristics of the area of interest.

18 7/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Stakeholder 

Engagement

Working 

Standard

All communities and tribes must be given an opportunity to review and make 

corrections to any data and information collected during Discovery prior to 

distribution of final Discovery products.

19 7/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Stakeholder 

Engagement

Working 

Standard

Flood Risk Project stakeholders must be contacted prior to the Discovery 

Meeting.
Page 8

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

20 7/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Stakeholder 

Engagement

Working 

Standard

Discovery must engage all communities and stakeholder organizations within 

the project area and must engage practitioners across relevant disciplines.

21 7/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Discovery Working 

Standard

The types of data and information obtained during Discovery must demonstrate 

a holistic picture of flooding issues, flood risk, and flood mitigation priorities, 

opportunities, efforts and capabilities.

22 7/31/2013

Implemented with 

all new flood risk 

projects initiated 

in FY13.

Project 

Planning

Program 

Standard

Decisions to perform additional analyses, data development activities, and/or 

community engagement within the Flood Risk Project area must be supported 

by the outcomes from Discovery. These decisions shall be communicated to 

project stakeholders prior to executing those activities.

23 7/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Discovery Working 

Standard

A pre-meeting Discovery Map and Report that incorporates appropriate 

background research must be provided to the communities and Tribes prior to 

the Discovery Meeting and presented at the Discovery Meeting to facilitate 

discussions.

24 7/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Discovery Working 

Standard

A post-meeting Discovery Map and Report will be provided to the communities 

and Tribes after the Discovery Meeting.

26 7/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Discovery Working 

Standard

A Discovery Report must include a section listing the data and information 

collected, when they were received, data sources, and an analysis of the data 

and information. The Post-Meeting Report must include the outcomes and 

decisions made at the Discovery Meeting.

27 7/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Discovery Program 

Standard

A Discovery Meeting with project stakeholders is a required activity of 

Discovery.

29 7/31/2013

Implemented with 

all new flood risk 

projects initiated 

in FY13.

Discovery Program 

Standard

During Discovery, data must be identified that illustrates potential changes in

flood elevation and mapping that may result from the proposed project scope. If 

available data does not clearly illustrate the likely changes, an analysis is 

required that estimates the likely changes. This data and any associated 

analyses must be shared and results must be discussed with stakeholders.
Page 9

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

30 7/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Stakeholder 

Engagement

Working 

Standard

The Flood Risk Project scope of work must be developed in coordination with 

project stakeholders.

The purchased Flood Risk Project scope of work must be shared with project 

stakeholders.

31 7/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Stakeholder 

Engagement

Working 

Standard

Discovery must include a discussion with stakeholders regarding risk 

identification, mitigation capabilities and actions, planning, and risk 

communication.

33 7/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Stakeholder 

Engagement

Working 

Standard

For coastal Flood Risk Projects that will begin with a storm surge analysis, 

stakeholder coordination must occur by the end of the storm surge study effort 

and continue throughout the remainder of the coastal Flood Risk Project.

34 7/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Stakeholder 

Engagement

Working 

Standard

When storm surge analyses are included in a Flood Risk Project, Discovery 

efforts must include a discussion of how storm surge estimates have changed 

since the effective Flood Risk Project.

35 7/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Stakeholder 

Engagement

Working 

Standard

The FEMA Regional Office must be consulted as to how Tribal Nations should 

be included in the overall Discovery efforts.

36 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

CNMS Program 

Standard

A CNMS database that is compliant with the CNMS Technical Reference must 

be updated and submitted at the completion of Discovery or Project Initiation, at 

Preliminary, and at Revised Preliminary if applicable, based on the information 

and data collected.

40 11/30/2015

All FY16 task 

orders that 

include new lidar 

collection.

Elevation 

Data

Program 

Standard

New elevation data purchased by FEMA must comply with the current USGS 

National Geospatial Program Base Lidar Specification Version 1.2, except 

hydroflattening is not required and a classified point cloud and a bare earth 

DEM deliverable are not required.

41 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Elevation 

Data

Working 

Standard

For areas within the Continental United States field surveys and aerial data 

acquisition must be referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 

(NAVD88) and the North American Datum 1983 (NAD83) and connected to the 

NSRS.

42 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Elevation 

Data

Working 

Standard

All ground and structure surveys must be certified by a registered professional 

engineer or a licensed land surveyor.
Page 10

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

43 5/31/2016

Implemented for 

all projects that 

have not yet 

begun data 

development

Elevation 

Data

Working 

Standard

All updated flood hazard data shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), 

in the FIRM Database and Flood Insurance Study (FIS) must be based on the 

most accurate existing topographic data available to FEMA before the start of 

data development and the data must have documentation that it meets the 

following vertical accuracy requirements: 

If data is not available that meets these requirements, new elevation data must 

be obtained.

44 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Elevation 

Data

Working 

Standard

FEMA requires all elevation data to be processed to the bare earth terrain in the 

vicinity of floodplains that will require hydraulic modeling.

45 9/27/2010

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Elevation 

Data

Working 

Standard

FEMA does not require the elevation data to be hydro-flattened, as specified in 

USGS Lidar Specification.

46 11/30/2015

All FY16 task 

orders that 

include new lidar 

collection.

Elevation 

Data

Working 

Standard

When a classified point cloud and a Digital Elevation Model (DEM) deliverable 

are included in a new elevation data collection, checkpoints for Vegetated 

Vertical Accuracy (VVA) must fall within the DEM footprint.
Page 11

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

49 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Elevation 

Data

Working 

Standard

All FEMA funded aerial mapping must be certified by a licensed professional or 

certified photogrammetrist.

50 11/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

2D Models Working 

Standard

The digital terrain model input for a two-dimensional model must cover the 

entire 2D study area and the derivation or development of the grid must be 

clearly documented.

54 7/31/2013

Implemented with 

all new flood risk 

projects initiated 

in FY13.

H&H 

Analyses

Working 

Standard

Where flood elevations are produced from a hydraulic model, they can be 

published as BFEs unless the responsible engineer documents why they should 

not be issued.

56 7/31/2013

Implemented with 

all new flood risk 

projects initiated 

in FY13.

Alluvial Fan Program 

Standard

Written approval from the FEMA Regional Risk Analysis Branch Chief regarding 

the alluvial fan methodology must be obtained before the commencement of full 

analysis. To inform this decision, sufficient field data and analysis and records 

of community engagement relative to the scope and methodology must be 

provided.

57 5/31/2016

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Engineering Program 

Standard

The regulatory products and non-regulatory flood risk products must be based 

on H&H or coastal analyses using existing ground conditions in the watershed 

and floodplain. The multiple profile and floodway runs must have the same 

physical characteristics in common for existing ground conditions.

However, a community may choose to include flood hazard information that is 

based on future conditions on a FIRM (shown as shaded Zone X); in an FIS 

Report; or non-regulatory flood risk products in addition to the existingconditions.

59 11/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

H&H 

Analyses

Working 

Standard

Hydrologic and hydraulic analyses must be calibrated using data from welldocumented flood events, if available.

61 11/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Engineering Program 

Standard

Engineering analyses must be documented and easily reproducible and must 

include study methods, reasoning for method selection, input data and 

parameters, sources of data results, and justifications for major changes in 

computed flood hazard parameters.
Page 12

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

62 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

H&H 

Analyses

Program 

Standard

New or updated flood hazard data used for the regulatory products must be 

supported by modeling or sound engineering judgment and all regulatory 

products must be in agreement.

65 11/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

BFEs Working 

Standard

BFEs must agree with those of other contiguous studies of the same flooding 

source within 0.5 foot, unless it is demonstrated that it would not be appropriate. 

Please see 44 CFR 65.6a(2).

66 11/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Flood Profiles Working 

Standard

Each modeled split or diverted flow path must be plotted with individual Flood 

Profiles.

67 11/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

2D Models Working 

Standard

Grids or cells must not be artificially removed when two- or three-dimensional 

models are used.

69 11/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Floodway Program 

Standard

Floodway surcharge values must be between zero and 1.0 ft. If the State (or 

other jurisdiction) has established more stringent regulations, these regulations 

take precedence over the NFIP regulatory standard. Further reduction of 

maximum allowable surcharge limits can be used if required or requested and 

approved by the communities impacted.

70 11/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Floodway Working 

Standard

If a stream forms the boundary between two or more States and/or tribes, either 

the 1.0-foot maximum allowable rise criterion or existing floodway agreements 

between the parties shall be used.

71 11/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Floodway Working 

Standard

Revised floodway data must match any effective floodways at the limits of the 

Flood Risk Project.

72 11/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Floodway Working 

Standard

An equal conveyance reduction method must be used to establish the minimal 

regulatory floodway.

73 11/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Floodway Working 

Standard

To calculate floodways using methodologies other than steady-state, onedimensional models, pre-approval must be received from the FEMA Project 

Officer and impacted communities and states with floodway authorities.

74 7/31/2013

For all ongoing 

and newly 

initiated projects.

H&H 

Analyses

Program 

Standard

The hydrologic, hydraulic, and coastal analyses and the final regulatory 

products must be certified by a registered professional engineer.
Page 13

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

75 11/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS Tables Working 

Standard

For each stream with cross sections where a floodway was determined under

the scope of work, a Floodway Data Table compliant with the FIS Report 

Technical Reference must be prepared as part of the hydraulic analysis. The 

Floodway Data Table must contain an entry for each lettered, mapped cross 

section that includes the following information:

• Cross-section identification shown in a georeferenced spatial file;

• Stream or profile baseline station of the cross section;

• Width of the floodway at the cross section;

• Wetted area of the cross section under encroached conditions;

• Average velocity of the floodwaters at the cross section under encroached 

conditions;

• The greater of BFEs from all flooding sources, including from backwater, 

affecting the cross section (regulatory elevation);

• The BFE from the existing conditions model (without-floodway elevation);

• The BFE from the encroached existing conditions model (with-floodway 

elevation); and 

• Difference between with- and without-floodway elevations (surcharge).

76 11/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

H&H 

Analyses

Working 

Standard

If previously-modeled storage areas are removed or filled, the models must be 

updated to reflect the loss in storage.

77 11/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Floodway Working 

Standard

Floodway computations for tributaries must be developed without consideration 

of backwater from confluences.

78 11/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Flood Profiles Working 

Standard

The water-surface profiles of different flood frequencies must not cross one 

another.

79 11/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Flood Profiles Working 

Standard

Water-surface elevations shown on the Flood Profiles shall not rise from an 

upstream to downstream direction.
Page 14

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

80 11/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Profile 

Baseline

Working 

Standard

If a flow path other than the stream centerline is more representative of the 

direction of flow, the case must be documented and the flow path shown and 

labeled on the FIRM as the "Profile Baseline". Flow distances in onedimensional models must be referenced to the profile baseline.

81 11/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

H&H 

Analyses

Working 

Standard

Ineffective and non-conveyance areas must be designated to reflect the actual 

conditions (such as topography and surface roughness) as closely as practical.

82 9/28/2010

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Project 

Management

Program 

Standard

Final invoices shall not be paid until a TSDN is submitted, and certification is 

provided that contract or grant requirements are met.

83 9/28/2010

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Project 

Planning

Program 

Standard

The FEMA Regional staff initiating a Flood Risk Project shall first engage all 

stakeholders in order to fully understand the impacted communities, leverage 

other FEMA activities in the area, and thereby avoid duplication of benefits 

through funding to CTPs.

84 7/31/2013

Implemented with 

all new flood risk 

projects initiated 

in FY13.

H&H 

Analyses

Program 

Standard

All riverine engineering Flood Risk Projects shall consist of a hydraulic model 

with multiple frequencies: 0.2 percent, 1-percent, 2-percent, 4-percent, and 10-

percent-annual-chance exceedance events.

In addition, the “1-percent plus” flood elevation shall be modeled for all riverine 

analyses. The 1% plus flood elevation is defined as a flood elevation derived by 

using discharges that include the average predictive error for the regression 

equation discharge calculation for the Flood Risk Project. This error is then 

added to the 1% annual chance discharge to calculate the new 1% plus 

discharge. The upper 84-percent confidence limit is calculated for Gage and 

rainfall-runoff models for the 1% annual chance event.

The “1-percent plus” flood elevation must be shown on the Flood Profile in the 

FIS Report to best understand and communicate the uncertainty of the flood 

elevation.

The mapping of the “1-percent plus” floodplain is optional and will only be 

produced when it is determined to be appropriate.
Page 15

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

85 7/31/2013

Implemented with 

all new flood risk 

projects initiated 

in FY13.

Project 

Planning

Working 

Standard

Deviations from standards must be approved by FEMA, tracked for exception 

reporting, and documented.

86 2/1/2007

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Coastal Working

Standard

For coastal Flood Risk Projects, wave runup analyses shall compute the wave 

runup elevation as the value exceeded by 2 percent of the runup events.

87 5/1/2012

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Coastal Working 

Standard

For coastal Flood Risk Projects, intermediate data submissions to FEMA are 

required at key milestones during the coastal analysis process.

88 5/1/2012

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Coastal Working 

Standard

All coastal processes and flooding sources that contribute to the 1-percentannual-chance flood condition both at a regional and local scale must be 

considered.

89 2/1/2007

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Coastal Working 

Standard

For coastal Flood Risk Projects, non-levee coastal structures must be evaluated 

and the profile adjusted as necessary to reflect expected storm impacts on the 

structure for the purpose of establishing appropriate risk zone determinations 

for NFIP maps.

90 7/31/2013

Implemented with 

all new flood risk 

projects initiated 

in FY13.

Engineering Program 

Standard

Methods and models used to evaluate the flood hazard must be technically 

reliable, must be appropriate for flood conditions and produce reasonable 

results. All computer models must adhere to 44 CFR 65.6 a(6).
Page 16

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

91 11/1/2004

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Coastal Program 

Standard

For Pacific coastal Flood Risk Projects, VE Zones are identified using one or 

more of the following criteria for the 1% flood conditions: 

1. The wave runup zone occurs where the (eroded) ground profile is 3.0 feet or 

more below the TWL. 

2. The wave overtopping splash zone is the area landward of the crest of an 

overtopped barrier, in cases where the potential wave runup exceeds the barrier 

crest elevation by 3.0 feet or more.

3. The high-velocity flow zone is landward of the overtopping splash zone (or 

area on a sloping beach or other shore type), where the product of depth of flow 

times the flood velocity squared is greater than or equal to 200 ft3/sec2. 

4. The breaking wave height zone occurs where 3-foot or greater wave heights 

could occur (this is the area where the wave crest profile is 2.1 feet or more 

above the static water elevation).

5. The primary frontal dune zone, as defined in 44 CFR 59.1 of the NFIP 

regulations.

92 5/1/2012

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Coastal Working 

Standard

For coastal Flood Risk Projects, regional surge and wave model performance 

shall be successfully validated for the Flood Risk Project area.

93 11/1/2004

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Engineering Program 

Standard

Flood Risk Projects shall use the best available, quality-assured data that meets 

the needs of the study methodology.

96 5/1/2012

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Coastal Working 

Standard

Coastal analyses shall not account for future impacts due to long term erosion. 

Episodic, storm-induced erosion must be included in the flood hazard analysis.
Page 17

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

98 2/1/2007

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Coastal Program 

Standard

For Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico Flood Risk Projects, VE zones shall be mapped 

when one or more of the following criteria for the base flood conditions exist: 

• The wave runup zone occurs where the (eroded) ground profile is 3.0 feet or 

more below the 2-percent wave runup elevation; 

• The wave overtopping splash zone is the area landward of the crest of an 

overtopped barrier, in cases where the overtopping rate exceeds 1 cfs/ft; 

• The breaking wave height zone occurs where 3-foot or greater wave heights 

could occur; 

• The primary frontal dune zone, as defined in 44 CFR 59.1 of the NFIP 

regulations under Coastal High Hazard Area and Primary Frontal Dune.

99 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Shallow 

Flooding

Working 

Standard

Areas of shallow flooding shall not have modeled/computed floodways due to 

the inherent uncertainties associated with their flow patterns. However, 

communities can choose to have administrative floodways for such areas.

100 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Shallow 

Flooding

Working 

Standard

Ponding areas with depths between 1 and 3 feet shall be designated and 

delineated as Zone AH.

101 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Shallow 

Flooding

Working 

Standard

Sheet runoff areas shall be delineated as Zone AO with average flooding 

depths above the ground surface, rounded to the nearest whole foot, indicated 

on the work map or digital GIS data.

103 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

PMR Working 

Standard

For areas where new regulatory maps are being issued, flood hazard 

information on the effective NFIP map (i.e., FIRM, FBFM, FHBM) that is not 

being updated through a separate flood hazard analysis or floodplain boundary 

redelineation shall be “carried over” to the new or updated FIRM.

104 7/31/2013

Implemented with 

all new flood risk 

projects initiated 

in FY13.

Redelineation Working 

Standard

Redelineation shall only be used when the terrain source data is better than 

effective and the stream reach is classified as VALID in the CNMS database.

105 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

BFEs Working 

Standard

BFE placement standard exceptions may be made where BFEs are expressed 

in metric increments, such as in Puerto Rico.
Page 18

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

106 11/30/2014

Implemented for 

all projects 

beginning data 

development after 

effective date

BFEs Working 

Standard

BFEs for ponding and lacustrine areas must be expressed to the 10th of a foot if 

they have been calculated to that level of precision; otherwise they should be 

shown as whole-foot rounded elevations. Unrevised lake and ponding 

elevations may be converted to 10th foot elevations if supported by technical 

data on a project-by project basis in coordination with the FEMA Project Officer. 

BFEs for coastal flood zones must be shown as whole foot elevations.

107 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

BFEs Working 

Standard

BFEs must be shown within 1% annual chance floodplains; the exception shall 

be for Zone A, Zone V, Zone AO and Zone A99.

108 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Floodway Working 

Standard

Regulatory floodways must be mapped within the 1-percent-annual-chance 

floodplain and must meet the minimum standards outlined in Paragraph 

60.3(d)(3) of the NFIP regulations.

109 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Floodplain 

Boundaries

Working 

Standard

Stream channel boundaries or centerlines must be shown within the identified 

1-percent-annual-chance floodplain; if a regulatory floodway is developed, the 

stream must be shown within the regulatory floodway boundaries.

110 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Project 

Planning

Program 

Standard

Flooding sources with contributing drainage area less than 1 square mile and/or 

with an average flood depth of less than one foot shall not be included in the 

Flood Risk Project scope of work, unless they have been analyzed on the 

effective FIRM or a justified need is identified during Discovery.

111 7/31/2013

Implemented with 

all new flood risk 

projects initiated 

in FY13.

Project 

Planning

Program 

Standard

At the conclusion of a flood risk project, all SFHA designations—existing, 

revised, and new—in the project area must be supported by documentation or 

agreed to by the community.

112 1/10/2010

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FBS Working 

Standard

For all Flood Risk Projects contracted in 2006 and beyond, all floodplain 

boundaries for new or revised flooding sources within the PMR footprint shall 

pass the Floodplain Boundary Standard.
Page 19

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

113 1/10/2010

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FBS Working 

Standard

The flood risk class must be determined for each flooding source to identify 

what Floodplain Boundary Standard must be met and what level of analysis is 

required.

114 1/10/2010

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FBS Working 

Standard

A horizontal tolerance of +/- 38 feet will be used to determine the compliance 

with the vertical tolerances defined for each risk class. This horizontal tolerance 

will address varying floodplain delineation techniques (automated versus nonautomated) and map scale limitations.

115 1/10/2010

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FBS Working 

Standard

For the FBS audit, the terrain data source that was used to create the flood 

hazard boundary must be used to conduct the audit.

118 3/1/2006

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Vertical 

Datum

Program 

Standard

For areas within the continental United States, all new flood maps and updates 

must be referenced to NAVD88.

119 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Vertical 

Datum

Working 

Standard

If the final average countywide or flooding source-based datum conversion 

value is less than +/- 0.1 foot, the datum conversion shall be considered to be 

executed and the flood elevations for those flooding sources on the FIRM, 

Flood Profiles, and in the FIS Report tables shall not be adjusted.

Zone A All Other Zones

A

High population and densities w ithin the floodplain and/or 

high anticipated grow th +/- 1/2 contour 95% +/- 1.0 foot / 95%

B

Medium populate and densities w ithin the floodplain and/or 

modest anticipated grow th +/- 1/2 contour 90% +/- 1.0 foot / 90%

C

Low population and densities w ithin the floodplain, small or 

no anticipated grow th +/- 1/2 contour 85% +/- 1.0 foot / 85%

D Undetermined Risk, likely subject to flooding N/A N/A

E Minimal risk of flooding; area not studied N/A N/A

Characteristics Risk 

Class

Delineation Reliability of the floodplain 

boundary per study methodology1

1The difference betw een the ground elevation (defined from topographic data) and the computed flood elevation
Page 20

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

120 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Vertical 

Datum

Working 

Standard

The published flood elevations for all flooding sources within a community must 

be referenced to a single vertical datum. 

121 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Vertical 

Datum

Working 

Standard

The vertical datum conversion factors shall be applied to flood elevations 

reported on the FIRM, Flood Profiles shown in the FIS Report, and all data 

tables in the FIS Report that report flood elevations.

All unrevised hydraulic models and supporting backup information shall also be 

clearly labeled in the Technical Support Data Notebook (TSDN) to indicate that 

the FIRM and FIS Report reflect a datum conversion, and document the 

process used to determine the applied conversion factor.

122 7/31/2013

Implemented for 

all projects 

beginning data 

development in 

FY13.

Vertical 

Datum

Working 

Standard

Either a single countywide vertical datum conversion factor or an average 

flooding source-based conversion factor must be used for a grouping of flooding 

sources, for individual flooding sources, or for flooding source segments.

123 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Vertical 

Datum

Working 

Standard

A single countywide vertical datum conversion factor shall be applied when the 

maximum offset from the average conversion factor does not exceed 0.25 foot.

124 7/31/2013

Implemented for 

all projects 

beginning data 

development in 

FY13.

Vertical 

Datum

Working 

Standard

When calculating a single countywide vertical datum conversion, USGS 

topographic Quadrangle corners falling within the land area of the county must 

be used to calculate the vertical datum conversion factor.
Page 21

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

125 7/31/2013

Implemented for 

all projects 

beginning data 

development in 

FY13.

Vertical 

Datum

Working 

Standard

When a single countywide conversion is not possible, an average vertical datum 

conversion factor shall be calculated using a flooding source-based method for 

a grouping of flooding sources, an individual flooding source, or segments of a 

flooding source.

When a flooding source-based conversion is executed, 3 evenly distributed 

points along each flooding source (or segment of a flooding source) shall be 

selected to be included the datum conversion calculation.

The maximum offset from the average conversion factor determined for the 

flooding source, grouping of flooding sources or flooding source segment may 

not exceed 0.25 foot.

126 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Vertical 

Datum

Working 

Standard All flood elevations must be tied in when performing datum conversions.

127 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS Tables Working 

Standard

The datum conversion factors (countywide or stream-based) must be clearly 

documented in the FIS Report tables.

128 11/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

2D Models Working 

Standard

For floodplains mapped from 2-D models, separate Flood Profiles for significant 

flow paths must be created. 

131 11/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

2D Models Working 

Standard All non-conveyance areas considered in the model must be mapped.

132 11/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Floodway Working 

Standard

The regulatory floodway must be terminated at the boundary of the VE or V 

Zone, or where the mean high tide exceeds the 1-percent-annual-chance 

riverine flood elevation, whichever occurs further upstream. 

133 11/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Floodplain 

Boundaries

Program 

Standard

Floodplain boundaries of the 1-percent-annual-chance flood must be 

delineated. If it is calculated, the 0.2-percent-annual-chance flood must be 

delineated.
Page 22

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

134 6/17/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Redelineation Working 

Standard

If the re-delineation topographic data indicates that the effective hydraulic 

analyses are no longer valid, further actions must be coordinated with the 

FEMA Project Officer and the CNMS database must be updated.

136 7/31/2013

Implemented with 

all new flood risk 

projects initiated 

in FY13.

National 

Flood Hazard 

Layer (NFHL)

Program 

Standard

RFHL to NFHL submissions must pass NFHL QC checks at submission and 

study data must be submitted before the study effective date.

137 2/1/2007

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Coastal Working 

Standard

Redelineation of coastal flood hazard areas requires the revision of the 1-

percent-annual-chance SFHA boundary, the 0.2%-annual-chance floodplain 

boundary, and the primary frontal dune delineation.

138 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Coastal Working 

Standard

Coastal Flood Risk Projects shall produce, at a minimum, a 1%-annual-chance 

and 0.2%-annual-chance floodplain and base flood elevations that include the 

contribution of wave effects.

139 11/30/2015 Effective 

Immediately.

Coastal Program 

Standard

For coastal Flood Risk Projects, where topographic data reflects a temporary 

disturbance due to recent beach nourishment and/or dune construction projects, 

and beach berm or dune geometry are not representative of anticipated natural 

conditions nor have long-standing vegetative cover as per 44CFR 65.11, the 

data shall be adjusted to be representative of anticipated natural conditions 

prior to conducting the storm-induced erosion and onshore wave hazard 

analyses..

140 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Shallow 

Flooding

Working 

Standard

Shallow flooding areas shall not contain non-SFHA islands based on small 

scale topographic variations.

141 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Ice Jam Working 

Standard

In regions of the United States where ice jams are typical, the project shall 

include investigation of historical floods for evidence of ice-jam contribution and 

coordination of the methodology with the impacted communities and State as 

part of the Discovery process.

142 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Ice Jam Working 

Standard Where ice jams occur, backwater effects must be taken into account.
Page 23

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

143 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Ice Jam Working 

Standard

The appropriate methodology for the floodway designation in areas mapped 

with an ice-jam analysis shall be determined in coordination with the 

community.

145 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS Report Working 

Standard

A transect location map must be provided in the FIS Report narrative if 

transects are not shown on the FIRM.

146 2/17/2000

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Coordination Working 

Standard

FEMA must be notified of any potential floodplain management violations 

identified through the submittal of new or revised flood hazard data. Pending 

mapping changes affected by the potential violation will be suspended until the 

issue is resolved.

147 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Base Map Working 

Standard

The minimum resolution requirement for raster data files (ortho-imagery) is 1-

meter ground distance.

148 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Base Map Working 

Standard

The minimum horizontal positional accuracy for new FIRM base map 

hydrographic and transportation features is the NSSDA radial accuracy of 38 

feet.

149 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Base Map Working 

Standard

The base map used for the Flood Insurance Rate Map must clearly show 

sufficient current ground features to enable clear interpretation of the flood 

hazard data displayed on the base map.

150 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Map Format 

and Layout

Working 

Standard

The FIRM paneling scheme shall follow that used by the USGS for the 7.5-

minute-series quadrangle, or subdivisions thereof.

151 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Map Format 

and Layout

Working 

Standard

All digital FIRMs must be oriented so that grid north points to the top of the map 

sheet.

152 8/23/2005

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

GDC Program 

Standard

Geospatial data for use in Flood Risk Projects must be coordinated, collected, 

documented and reported with standardized, complete and current information 

in compliance with Federal geospatial data reporting standards.

153 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

GDC Working 

Standard

Details of cost, leverage, and project scope must be reported to FEMA's 

geospatial data tracking systems.
Page 24

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

154 8/23/2005

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

GDC Program 

Standard

All unnecessary duplication of Federal, State or local mapping efforts must be 

avoided.

155 1/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

GDC Working 

Standard

State Geospatial Data Coordination Procedures and Points of Contact must be 

reported to FEMA as new sources of Federal or State data are identified.

157 1/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Project 

Planning

Program 

Standard

FEMA will not provide funding for new base map data collection as part of a 

specific Flood Risk Project.

158 8/23/2005

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Elevation 

Data

Program 

Standard

Elevation data created using FEMA funding must allow unlimited free 

distribution by FEMA and partners.

161 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Data Capture Program 

Standard

All deliverables and supporting data must be uploaded to the MIP as each 

workflow step is completed for each project task. If any of these data are 

modified subsequently, the revised data must be uploaded to the MIP before 

the effective date of the FIRMs or the completion of the project, if no regulatory 

products are produced.

163 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Prelim 

Distribution

Working 

Standard

The Preliminary digital FIRM Database shall be distributed for review with the 

Preliminary FIRM and FIS Report.

164 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Prelim 

Distribution

Program 

Standard

The FEMA Regional office must approve distribution of preliminary and revised 

preliminary products.

165 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Prelim 

Distribution

Program 

Standard

Preliminary/Revised Preliminary copies of the FIRM, FIS Report, SOMAs (if 

modified during Revised Preliminary), and Letters shall be distributed to the 

community CEO and floodplain administrator; State NFIP Coordinator; and 

other identified stakeholders as appropriate.

166 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already

implemented.

Prelim 

Distribution

Working 

Standard

Following issuance of the Preliminary copies of the FIRM and FIS Report, 

FEMA shall provide a period (usually 30 days) for community officials, 

community residents, and other interested parties / stakeholders to review the 

Preliminary copies of the FIRM and FIS Report.
Page 25

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

168 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

SOMA Program 

Standard

All effective LOMCs located on affected FIRM panel(s) shall be reviewed and 

categorized: 

1. through a draft SOMA before the Preliminary copies of the affected FIRM 

panel(s) are prepared and sent to the community for review and comment; 

2. through a revised draft SOMA before Revised Preliminary copies of the 

affected FIRM panel(s) are prepared and sent to the community for review and 

comment; 

3. through a Final SOMA before the LFD letter is sent to the community; and 

4. through a revalidation letter before the effective date of the new or revised 

FIRM panels.

169 11/30/2016 Effective 

immediately

LOMR 

Incorporation

Program 

Standard

All valid LOMRs that are effective during post-preliminary for a study or PMR 

prior to the LOMC cutoff date (which is 60 days before the project's LFD date) 

must be incorporated into the new FIS Report, FIRM, and FIRM Database. 

LOMRs that are issued after this time must be re-issued after the revised FIRM 

date, if they are still valid.

170 8/17/2007

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Coastal 

Barrier 

Resources 

System

Program 

Standard

CBRS units shown on all new and revised FIRMs must be provided by the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service.

172 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Prelim 

Distribution

Working 

Standard

All Preliminary Title Blocks shall be stamped “Preliminary” or “Revised 

Preliminary” as appropriate.

173 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Prelim 

Distribution

Working 

Standard

No effective date or map revised date shall be shown on the preliminary or 

revised preliminary title blocks.

174 7/31/2013

For all ongoing 

and newly 

initiated projects.

Data Capture Program 

Standard

Certification of completeness of all submitted data for FEMA-funded Flood Risk 

Projects must be provided when work on a project is complete. (via the 

certification forms provided in www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=7577)
Page 26

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

175 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Data Capture Working 

Standard

The preliminary FIS Report must be submitted with the other required 

submittals at the completion of the Floodplain Mapping task.

176 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Data Capture Working 

Standard

All spatial data must be georeferenced, have a standard coordinate system and 

projection defined and documented, and specify the horizontal and vertical 

datums used. 

178 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Data Capture Working 

Standard

For each data development task prior to Develop [D]FIRM Database, the data 

for flooding sources receiving new or revised flood hazard analyses must be 

submitted in accordance with the FIRM Database Submittal Table, and 

following the schema of the FIRM Database Technical Reference. Non-FEMA 

funded external data studies are excluded from this requirement.

Data submittals for all new, revised, and existing analyses must include the 

S_Submittal_Info table compliant with the schema in the FIRM Database 

Technical Reference.

180 5/31/2016

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Data Capture Working 

Standard

All regulatory product deliverables, non-regulatory flood risk product 

deliverables, and relevant supporting data must be submitted in one of the 

acceptable file format(s) and in the directory structure outlined in the Data 

Capture Technical Reference.

If data are collected that are not specifically mentioned in the Data Capture 

Technical Reference but are relevant to the project, or data is obtained from 

existing flood hazard analyses, those data must be submitted, but do not have 

to follow the file format and directory structure requirements.

181 5/31/2016

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Data Capture Working 

Standard

A metadata file in XML format must be submitted that complies with the 

Metadata Profiles Technical Reference for each applicable task for regulatory 

product deliverables, non-regulatory flood risk product deliverables, or relevant 

supporting data submittals.

182 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Data Capture Working 

Standard Copies of all project-related data must be retained for a period of three years.
Page 27

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

183 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Data Capture Working 

Standard

A file that compiles general correspondence must be submitted for each project 

task. 

184 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Data Capture Working 

Standard

Any supporting data that are tiled must have an accompanying index spatial file. 

Tiles must be topologically correct and have only one part, and cannot selfintersect (must be simple). Adjacent tiles must not overlap or have gaps 

between them.

185 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Data Capture Working 

Standard

PDF files must be created using the source file (e.g., MS Word file). Created 

PDF files must allow text to be copied and pasted to another document.

186 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Data Capture Working 

Standard

A narrative must be submitted that summarizes the work performed (streams 

analyzed, type of Flood Risk Project, etc.), direction from FEMA, assumptions 

and issues, and any information that may be useful for the other mapping 

partners working on the project or subsequent users of the Flood Risk Project 

backup data for each task. 

187 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Data Capture Program 

Standard

All relevant data must be submitted that fully documents the flood risk project 

including the engineering analyses, input and output files for the models used; a 

report that documents the methodology, assumptions, and data used in the 

engineering analyses; applicable draft FIS Report text sections, tables, 

graphics, Flood Profiles; quality records in the form of (at a minimum) QR3 SelfCertification Forms, and QR3, QR5, QR7, & QR8 Checklists; input and output 

files associated with the flood risk assessments; the Flood Risk Report; the 

Flood Risk Map; the MXD(s) for the Flood Risk Map; and any other backup 

data. These data comprise the TSDN.

188 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Base Map Working 

Standard

FEMA must be able to distribute the base map data and floodplain information 

freely to the public in hardcopy and digital formats.

189 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

CNMS Working 

Standard

Effective and revised flood hazard data must be tied in with no discontinuities. 

Where discontinuities cannot be resolved, they must be documented in the 

CNMS database, but not until the discontinuity is accepted by the FEMA Project 

Officer.
Page 28

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

190 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Quality 

Management

Program 

Standard

All technical review comments associated with the FIS Report, FIRM, or FIRM 

database must be fully addressed and resolutions must be fully documented.

191 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Corresponden

ce

Working 

Standard

All standard correspondence, letters, and enclosures distributed during the life 

of a Flood Risk Project must be prepared in accordance with the templates 

located at www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=7577.

192 5/13/2002

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Project 

Initiation

Working 

Standard

Unique FEMA Case Numbers (e.g., 01-05-1234R) shall be assigned for all 

initiated LOMCs and Flood Risk Projects.

193 3/5/2007

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

PostPreliminary 

Deliverables

Program 

Standard

The Flood Hazard Determinations-on-the-Web tool is the authoritative source 

for creating and publishing Flood Hazard Determination Notices for Flood Risk 

Projects and LOMRs that result in new or modified flood hazard information.

195 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Letter of Map 

Change 

(LOMC)

Working 

Standard

LOMC requestors shall submit requests, including the required review and 

processing fee if applicable, to the appropriate processing address. The 

address is provided in the application forms package that must be used in 

preparing a LOMC request for submittal.

196 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Letter of Map 

Revision 

(LOMR)

Program 

Standard

If required by state law, State concurrence with the LOMR or CLOMR shall be 

required.

197 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Letter of Map 

Change 

(LOMC)

Working 

Standard

Upon receipt of a LOMC, the following shall be done:

• Make an initial determination as to the expected processing procedure

• Assign a case number

• Create a case file

• Enter the request into the MIP

• Record the date of receipt

198 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Letter of Map 

Change 

(LOMC)

Working 

Standard

When processing a LOMC, any ongoing, past, or future map actions affecting 

the case shall be taken into consideration.

199 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Letter of Map 

Change 

(LOMC)

Program 

Standard

LOMC submittals must include certifications by a licensed professional 

authorized to certify the data under state law.
Page 29

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

200 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Letter of Map 

Revision 

(LOMR)

Working 

Standard

A LOMR or CLOMR must be supported by a topographic map or digital data 

that includes all relevant information required by FEMA.

201 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Letter of Map 

Revision 

(LOMR)

Working 

Standard

A LOMR or CLOMR must include proposed floodplain and/or floodway 

boundary delineations shown on an annotated FIRM.

202 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Letter of Map 

Revision 

(LOMR)

Working 

Standard

All LOMRs including new grading or structures must include certified as-built 

construction plans, grading plans, or survey data.

203 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Letter of Map 

Revision 

(LOMR)

Working 

Standard

If the discharges in the effective FIS Report are not used in the LOMR or 

CLOMR submittal, the revision requester shall provide sufficient data to support 

the use of the new discharges for the 1-percent-annual-chance flood and other 

published flood frequencies.

204 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Letter of Map 

Revision 

(LOMR)

Working 

Standard

A LOMR or CLOMR in riverine areas must submit a model duplicating the 

effective hydraulic model (multiple profile and floodway if appropriate). The 

revision requester shall use it to establish the baseline condition unless an 

existing conditions hydraulic model is required.

205 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Letter of Map 

Revision 

(LOMR)

Working 

Standard

For a LOMR or CLOMR, an existing conditions hydraulic model is required if the 

duplicate effective model does not reflect the floodplain conditions prior to the 

start of the project.

206 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Letter of Map 

Revision 

(LOMR)

Working 

Standard

If the revision is submitted as the result of a project, a post-project revised 

hydraulic model reflecting as-built conditions must be submitted.

207 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Letter of Map 

Revision 

(LOMR)

Working 

Standard

At a minimum, the analyses and other supporting data provided in support of a 

revision request must be equivalent to or better than the scientific and technical 

data employed by FEMA for the preparation of the effective analyses.

210 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Letter of Map 

Revision 

(LOMR)

Working 

Standard

For floodplain boundary revisions based on new or more detailed topographic 

information, the revision requester will not be required to submit revised 

hydraulic analyses unless the changes in ground contours have significantly 

affected the geometry of cross sections used for the effective FIS Report and 

FIRM or have altered effective-flow areas.
Page 30

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

213 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Notice-toUserProgram 

Standard

During the Notice-to User revision process, approval of the action taken shall be 

obtained from the FEMA HQ due process lead and the decision must be 

documented in writing.

214 5/31/2016 Effective 

immediately

Notice-toUserProgram 

Standard

During the Notice-to-User revision process:

• the FIS, FIRM panel(s), FIRM database, and NFHL must be corrected as 

appropriate;

• the corrected components must indicate the appropriate date;

• the corrected components must be distributed to the communities affected by 

the correction; and 

• the corrected components must be updated on the MSC site.

215 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Letter of Map 

Change 

(LOMC)

Program 

Standard

Conditional LOMCs are subject to the same standards of a LOMA, LOMR-F, or 

LOMR except:

• Because Conditional LOMCs are based on proposed construction, as-built 

information is not required.

• The Conditional Comment Documents that are issued by FEMA do not amend 

the effective FHBM or FIRM.

• Conditional LOMRs and CLOMR-Fs must demonstrate compliance with the 

Endangered Species Act.

216 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Letter of Map 

Change 

(LOMC)

Working 

Standard

A letter shall be mailed to the requester acknowledging receipt of the LOMC 

request within business three days of receiving the data.

217 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Letter of Map 

Change 

(LOMC)

Program 

Standard

If all information is not received within 90-days from the date of the request for 

additional data, the processing of the LOMC shall be suspended.
Page 31

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

218 7/31/2015 Effective 

immediately

Letter of Map 

Change 

(LOMC)

Program 

Standard

LOMA, CLOMA, LOMR-F, CLOMR-F, LOMR and CLOMR determinations must 

be issued based on the effective FIRM and FIS for a community and may not be 

issued based on preliminary data for a FEMA-contracted Flood Risk Project or 

community-initiated map revision. Except, a one percent water surface elevation 

may be calculated during an LOMA, CLOMA, LOMR-F, or CLOMR-F review 

using data from these sources if the effective SFHA does not have BFEs or 

flood depths established and the preliminary data is the best available.

219 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Letter of Map 

Change 

(LOMC)

Working 

Standard

Following the preparation of the LOMC determination document, the LOMC 

shall be included in the list of determinations that is to be sent to FEMA for 

official approval. Following approval, the requester shall be provided with 

FEMA's final determination. A copy of the LOMC determination document shall 

also be sent to the community CEO and floodplain administrator and to the 

requester when applicable.

220 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Letter of Map 

Change 

(LOMC)

Program 

Standard

The reviews of LOMC requests shall be processed in accordance with Parts 65, 

67, 70, and 72 of the NFIP regulations.

222 7/31/2013

Applicable to all 

ongoing and 

future Flood Risk 

Projects.

Letter of Map 

Revision 

(LOMR)

Working 

Standard

When processing a LOMR for a FIRM that has been modernized (i.e., has a 

FIRM database), the map (FIRM and/or FBFM panels), Flood Profile, and data 

tables (i.e., Floodway Data and Summary of Discharges) enclosures shall be 

prepared in accordance with the FIRM Panel Technical Reference and the FIS 

Report Technical Reference. If the FIRM that is having a LOMR issued for it 

has not been modernized, either the current standards may be used (as 

indicated in the FIRM panel and FIS Report Technical References), or the 

standards in effect when the effective map and attachments were created.

223 7/31/2013

Implemented for 

LOMCs 

processed after 

the effective date.

Letter of Map 

Revision 

(LOMR)

Working 

Standard

If a LOMR changes stillwater elevations, transect data, flood elevations, 

discharges, and/or floodway information, the supporting information in the FIS 

Report and FIRM Database shall be revised as necessary.

224 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Special 

Conversions

Working 

Standard

For all Special Conversions, coordination and documentation activities shall be 

performed to convert the community to the Regular Phase of the NFIP.
Page 32

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

225 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Special 

Conversions

Working 

Standard

FEMA management system databases shall be maintained for Special 

Conversions.

226 7/16/2004

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Letter of Map 

Change 

(LOMC)

Working 

Standard

LOMC requests involving below-grade crawlspaces constructed within the 

SFHA shall follow guidance provided in FEMA Technical Bulletin 11-01. 

227 11/30/2016 Effective 

immediately

Notice-toUserProgram 

Standard

The Notice-to-Users process shall only be used for corrections of errors or 

omissions in the FIS Report, FIRM Database, NFHL, or on the FIRM that do not 

require administrative appeal. The Notice-to-Users revision process shall not 

change the accreditation status of a levee or the effective date of the FIRM and 

FIS.

228 11/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Stakeholder 

Engagement

Working 

Standard

All regulatory floodway changes must be coordinated with affected community 

officials and other stakeholders as early as possible.

229 7/31/2015 Effective 

immediately Flood Profiles Working Standard

Profiles shall be plotted as the projection of the stream invert and the flood 

surface(s) onto the flow path. The plots should show the locations of and clearly 

label:

• Each lettered mapped cross section;

• Splits and diversions;

• Confluences with tributaries splits, and diversions;

• Each stream crossing with symbology depicting the top of road and low chord 

elevations of modeled bridges and culverts along with the name of the 

bridge/culvert (e.g., Pine Street);

• Extents of modeled hydraulic structures adjacent to the flooding source; 

• Upstream and downstream study limits of the flooding source; 

• Extent of backwater or flooding controlling the receiving stream and depiction

of the backwater elevation along the Profile.

230 12/8/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS/FIRM Working 

Standard

The FIRM panels must be derived directly from the FIRM database and must be 

in agreement with the information shown in the FIS Report.
Page 33

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

232 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Flood Profiles Working 

Standard

Unless it can be demonstrated that the vertical and horizontal scale of the 

effective Flood Profiles are inadequate, re-analyzed streams must be produced 

using the same horizontal and vertical scales that were used in the effective 

Flood Profiles.

234 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS Report Working 

Standard

FIS Reports exceeding 150 pages in length shall be subdivided into two or more 

volumes.

235 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS Report Working 

Standard

If an FIS Report is published in 2 or more volumes, no volume shall exceed 100 

pages.

236 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS Report Working 

Standard

For multi-volume FIS Reports, a single Table of Contents shall be produced for 

the entire report, and shall be included in all volumes.

237 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS Report Working 

Standard

Preliminary FIS Reports must include a stamp on the cover to indicate the 

Preliminary status and the date of the Preliminary issuance.

238 12/8/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS Report Working 

Standard

As outlined in the FIS Report Technical Reference, all numbered sections, 

tables and figures are required for every FIS Report prepared in compliance 

with the FIS Report Technical Reference, regardless of whether the topic 

addressed by that element is applicable to the Flood Risk Project.

239 12/8/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS/FIRM Working 

Standard

Table columns and names in the FIS Report must comply with the most current 

FIS Report Technical Reference unless FEMA Regional approval has been 

given to retain the prior FIS Report format.

240 12/8/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS Report Working 

Standard

When revising the FIS Report in compliance with the current FIS Report 

Technical Reference (as opposed to appending information to the former FIS 

report format), the FIS Report template at

www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=7577 must be used.

241 12/8/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS Report Working 

Standard

References used within the FIS Report text must match the citation listed in the 

Bibliography and References table.
Page 34

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

242 12/8/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS Report Working 

Standard

FIS Reports created in compliance with the FIS Report Technical Reference 

must use an "(Author Year)" format for inline citations.

243 12/8/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS/FIRM Working 

Standard

If a future conditions analysis is incorporated into the Flood Risk Project, the 

results shall be included in the FIRM database, FIRM, and FIS Report.

245 12/8/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS Tables Working 

Standard

The "Listing of NFIP Jurisdictions" and "Community Map History" tables in the 

FIS Report shall include all communities that fall within the county or jurisdiction 

whose FIS Report is being produced.

246 12/8/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS Tables Working 

Standard

Communities that have no Special Flood Hazard Areas identified shall be noted 

in the "Listing of NFIP Jurisdictions" and "Community Map History" FIS Report 

tables with a footnote.

247 12/8/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS Tables Working 

Standard

For FIS Reports produced in compliance with the FIS Report Technical 

Reference, all accredited levees, PALs, and non-accredited levees must be 

included in the "Levees" table of the FIS Report. 

248 12/8/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS Tables Working 

Standard

All lettered or numbered cross sections must be shown on the Flood Profiles 

and, if a floodway was computed, must also be shown in the Floodway Data 

Table. Unlettered cross sections shown on the FIRM are not to be included on 

the Floodway Data Table or Flood Profiles.

249 12/8/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS Tables Working 

Standard

In the "Community Map History" table for FIS Reports produced in compliance 

with the FIS Report Technical Reference, the "FIRM Revisions Date(s)" column 

shall include all FHBM and FIRM revisions, and must be updated during each 

revision to reflect the new PMR effective date. All PMR effective dates must be 

included for the communities that received updated FIRM panels, even if the 

PMR did not revise all the panels within that community.

250 12/8/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Index Working 

Standard

The FIRM Index shall be included in the FIS Report at a size of 11" x 17" for FIS 

Reports produced in compliance with the FIS Report Technical Reference.

251 12/8/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Index Working 

Standard

For FIRM Indexes which require more than 1 page, the page number shall be 

indicated in the title block in the following manner: FLOOD INSURANCE RATE 

MAP INDEX (Sheet 1 of 2). A county locator map shall be added with a 

rectangle showing the extent of the current FIRM Index sheet.
Page 35

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

252 12/8/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Index Working 

Standard

For FIRM Indexes produced in compliance with the FIS Report Technical 

Reference, base map features that must be shown and labeled on the FIRM 

Index are HUC-8 watersheds and political jurisdictions. Community labels must 

also include the CID.

253 12/8/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Index Working 

Standard

For FIRM Indexes produced in compliance with the current FIS Report 

Technical Reference, FIRM panels shown on the FIRM Index shall be labeled 

only with the four-digit panel number and suffix. The effective date must also be 

included and shall be placed directly beneath the FIRM panel number in 

"mm/dd/yyyy" format.

254 12/8/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Index Working

Standard

The FIRM Index shall identify unprinted panels with asterisks and footnotes that 

define the reason(s) for the panel(s) not being printed. 

255 12/8/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS Report Working 

Standard

For FIS Reports produced in compliance with the FIS Report Technical 

Reference, every note that is shown on the Notes to Users on one or more 

FIRM panels must be included once in the Notes to Users section in the FIS 

Report.

256 12/8/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Flood Profiles Working 

Standard

Flood Profiles for Zone AE must show data for each of the 5 standard (10%-, 

4%-, 2%-, 1%-, and 0.2%-annual-chance) flood events if they were calculated 

as part of the Flood Risk Project.

257 12/8/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS Report Working 

Standard

The FIS Report deliverable to the MSC must be an unsecured PDF file, with as 

much searchable text as possible, and must be bookmarked in accordance with 

the direction outlined in the FIS Report Technical Reference. Embedded 

graphics, where necessary, must have a resolution of 400 dpi.

259 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS Report Working 

Standard

A description of all dams and other non-levee flood protection measures 

affecting the communities represented in the project area shall be included in 

the FIS Report.

260 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS Report Working 

Standard

A description of any unusual floodway procedures that deviate from national 

policy, such as State-imposed or locally imposed surcharge limits of less than 

1.0 foot for regulatory floodway, must be listed in the "Floodways" section of the 

FIS Report.
Page 36

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

261 12/8/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS Report Working 

Standard

Counties that have an effective countywide FIS Report must remain 

countywide, regardless of whether they are updated to comply with the FIS 

Report Technical Reference or not.

264 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS Tables Working 

Standard

For cross-sections shown in areas of backwater flooding, elevations in the 

“Without Floodway” column of the Floodway Data Table shall not include 

backwater effects. The "Without Floodway" values must include a footnote 

stating, "Elevation Computed Without Consideration of Backwater Effects From 

(Source of Flooding)". The words “Backwater Effects” are to be replaced with 

“Tidal Effects,” “Overflow Effects,” “Ice Jam Effects,” or “Storm Surge Effects,”, 

as needed, to reference the appropriate flooding situation.

265 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS Tables Working 

Standard

When a part of a regulatory floodway lies outside the jurisdiction, both the total 

floodway width, and the width within the jurisdiction, shall be listed in the FIRM 

database and Floodway Data Table.

267 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Flood Profiles Working 

Standard Only one stream shall be shown on any given Flood Profile panel.

268 11/30/2016 Effective 

immediately FIS Report Working Standard

All communities addressed by the FIS (typically the county and all communities 

within) must be sent or provided a means to access the new FIS Report during 

distribution of the final products, regardless of whether they are affected by the 

new Flood Risk Project or are outside the project area.

270 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Flood Profiles Working 

Standard

On the Flood Profiles for tributary streams, the 1-percent-annual-chance flood 

backwater from the main watercourse or water body shall be labeled as 

"Backwater From (Main Stream Name)."

272 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Flood Profiles Working 

Standard

A vertical elevation scale of 1 inch equals 1, 2, 5, 10, or 20 feet is to be used for 

the Flood Profiles. Elevations shall be shown on the left side of the grid at 1-

inch intervals within the profile elevation range.

273 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Flood Profiles Working 

Standard

The 1%-annual-chance Flood Profile plots shall agree with the distances and 

elevations shown in the Floodway Data Table, with a maximum tolerance of 

1/20 inch on the printed Flood Profile panel. Other features shown on the 

Profiles, such as cross-section labels and hydraulic structures, shall also be 

accurately plotted to within the 1/20 inch tolerance.
Page 37

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

274 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Flood Profiles Working 

Standard

The horizontal and vertical scales of the Flood Profiles shall be chosen so that 

Flood Profile slopes are reasonable and can be easily interpreted by the user.

275 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Flood Profiles Working 

Standard

The horizontal scale of the Flood Profile shall be labeled at 1-inch intervals 

along the bottom edge of the grid and legend box.

277 12/8/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIS Report Working 

Standard

For FIS Reports prepared in compliance with the FIS Report Technical 

Reference, any information that was included in Section 10 of a previous FIS 

Report using an approach known as "Revisions by Addendum" shall be 

incorporated into the relevant sections and tables of the current FIS Report.

278 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Flood Profiles Working 

Standard

River stationing is to be referenced from a physical location such as a 

confluence or structure.

279 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Flood Profiles Working 

Standard Downstream flood elevations are to begin on the left edge of the Flood Profile.

280 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Flood Profiles Working 

Standard

Stream distances reported in the Floodway Data Tables, Profiles, and FIRM 

database must be measured along the profile baseline.

281 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Flood Profiles Working 

Standard

Distance and elevation units used on a Flood Profile must be consistent with the 

units used in the Floodway Data Table.

282 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Graphic 

Standards

Working 

Standard

All FIRM panel symbology and labels must be clear and readable and clearly 

communicate the flood hazard information needed for insurance and mitigation 

purposes.

283 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Graphic 

Standards

Working 

Standard

The FIRM panel "Notes to Users" section must contain notes referring the user 

to the FIS Report for a detailed legend and FIRM Index, to the MSC website for 

other digital products providing the NFIP contact information, and to the base 

map data source.

284 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Graphic 

Standards

Working 

Standard

The LiMWA note in the FIRM panel "Notes to Users" section shall include a 

legend.
Page 38

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

285 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Graphic 

Standards

Working 

Standard

All elements of the FIRM title block must be present and must adhere to the 

specifications in the FIRM Panel Technical Reference.

286 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Graphic 

Standards

Working 

Standard

The jurisdiction names in the FIRM panel title block must include, at a minimum, 

the jurisdiction prefix (e.g., city, town, or village), jurisdiction name, and full 

State name. FIRM panels for individual jurisdictions shall also include the name 

of the county, except for jurisdictions that are officially classified as 

“Independent.”

287 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Graphic 

Standards

Working 

Standard

When each new edition of a FIRM panel is prepared, the suffix for each revised 

FIRM panel shall be changed to the next alphabetical letter while skipping the 

letters "I" and "O".

For first time countywide or partial countywide FIRMs, the map suffix should be 

one letter higher than the highest suffix of all jurisdictions included.

288 4/18/2002

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Graphic 

Standards

Working 

Standard

FIRM panels, FIRM Indexes, and FIS Reports shall follow the ID numbering 

schemes outlined in the FIRM Panel and FIS Report Technical References.

289 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Map Format 

and Layout

Working 

Standard

The FIRM panel map collar must include a North Arrow, Scale Bar, and map 

projection and datum information.

290 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Map Format 

and Layout

Working 

Standard

First-time modernized FIRM panels must be in countywide format unless the 

FIRM is for a multi-county jurisdiction that will retain its community-based FIRM 

format.

291 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Map Format 

and Layout

Program 

Standard

A determination to use Partial-Countywide FIRM panel and FIRM Database 

format must be coordinated with and approved by the FEMA Region and FEMA 

Headquarters.

292 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Map Format 

and Layout

Working 

Standard

If partial countywide FIRM panel mapping is pursued, the FIRM title block will 

list all of the jurisdictions on the FIRM panel, but the ones not included in the 

partial countywide mapping will be noted as having their FIRMs and FIS 

Reports published separately. 
Page 39

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

294 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Map Format 

and Layout

Working 

Standard

For partial countywide FIRM panel mapping, panel numbers must be assigned 

for the entire county, just as for a full countywide panel layout. Numbering of 

countywide FIRM panels must consider the numbering of the existing panels so 

as not to create two panels with the same number (e.g. 0250). If there would be 

two panels with the same number, start countywide numbering by going up to 

the first even thousand above the highest existing FIRM panel number.

295 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Map Format 

and Layout

Working 

Standard

When partial countywide mapping is processed, any existing community-based 

FIRM panels that overlap the partial countywide must be reissued with the 

overlapping area blanked out and the blanked out area must include a note 

referring the users to the partial countywide FIRM.

296 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Map Format 

and Layout

Working 

Standard

If a FIRM revision is being processed when there is a separate FBFM, the two 

maps should be combined into the new format FIRM using the new flood zone 

designations and the FBFM shall no longer exist as a separate map.

297 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Graphic 

Standards

Working 

Standard

On FIRM panels, symbolization and labeling of all base map, hydraulic, and 

flood theme features must be standardized as shown in the FIRM Panel 

Technical Reference.

300 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Map Format 

and Layout

Working 

Standard

All FIRM panels shall be printed to full page, portrait orientation, ARCH D map 

frames with a trimmed paper size of: Height 36” x Width 24. The title block 

must appear in the bottom right corner and be 5.3 inches wide by 9 inches in 

height.

301 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Map Format 

and Layout

Working 

Standard

FIRM panels must include a white border on all sides and must contain a title 

block on the bottom right corner, a legend, a Notes to Users section, and a 

Panel Locator section across the bottom of the panel, as outlined in the FIRM 

Panel Technical Reference.

304 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Base Map Working 

Standard

All raster base maps used for FIRM panel preparation must be georeferenced 

and orthorectified.

305 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Map Format 

and Layout

Working 

Standard

A countywide FIRM must provide seamless spatial base map and flood hazard 

coverage within the county area for all jurisdictions shown on the FIRM.
Page 40

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

306 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Floodplain 

Boundaries

Working 

Standard

Any existing mismatches in floodplains and flood hazard information between 

communities and counties must be resolved as part of a FIS Report/FIRM 

update. 

307 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Base Map Working 

Standard

Raster base map image(s) used for FIRM panel preparation shall cover the 

entire jurisdiction being analyzed except in the cases of open water areas 

and/or areas that may be restricted due to security concerns.

308 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Base Map Working 

Standard

The FIRM base map is the horizontal reference data shown on the FIRM to 

assist in interpreting the areas impacted by the flood risk information shown. 

The term base map does not include topographic or elevation data.

The following types of base map features must be depicted on the FIRM panel if 

they occur within the community:

• transportation features, including roads and railroads, hydrographic features, 

hydraulic structures 

• boundaries that identify county and State boundaries, corporate limits, ETJ 

areas, military lands, and tribal lands, and 

• U.S. PLSS features.

309 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Graphic 

Standards

Working 

Standard

Any transportation feature shown and labeled on a Flood Profile shall be 

labeled on the FIRM panel.

310 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Graphic 

Standards

Working 

Standard

Primary roads, as defined by the MAF/TIGER data, shall be shown and labeled 

on the FIRM panel.

311 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Graphic 

Standards

Working 

Standard

On FIRM panels, all hydrographic features (streams, lakes, ponds, bays, and 

oceans) that have an identified flood hazard associated with them shall be 

labeled.
Page 41

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

312 7/31/2013

Implemented with 

all new flood risk 

projects initiated 

in FY13.

Profile 

Baseline

Working 

Standard

A profile baseline must be shown on FIRM panels for all flooding sources with 

profiles or otherwise established riverine BFEs (static elevations excluded), and 

for modeled riverine Zone A areas.

313 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Graphic 

Standards

Working 

Standard

In areas of riverine flooding where no profile baseline is available but a flood 

hazard has been identified, the bank or centerline representation of the 

hydrographic feature must be shown on vector-based FIRM panels.

314 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Profile 

Baseline

Working 

Standard

Hydrographic feature lines represented on FIRM panels must not obscure the 

Profile Baseline symbology.

315 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Levee Working 

Standard

All levees stored in the FIRM Database shall be labeled and symbolized on the 

FIRM panel as outlined in the FIRM Panel Technical Reference, with the 

appropriate accreditation status noted.

316 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Graphic 

Standards

Working 

Standard

Hydraulic structures other than levees shall be labeled on the FIRM panel only if 

shown on the Flood Profile of the FIS Report. The label name must match what 

is shown on the Flood Profile. If 1%, 0.2%-annual-chance-flood discharge, 

and/or floodway are contained in the structure, a note must be placed on the 

FIRM panel near the feature to refer to the highest contained discharge.

317 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Graphic 

Standards

Working 

Standard

All political entities (including Extra-Territorial Jurisdictions) shall be depicted 

and labeled on the FIRM panel with the appropriate jurisdiction names and 

CIDs or area designator.

319 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Graphic 

Standards

Working 

Standard

Any area shown on the FIRM panel as an Area Not Included shall be labeled 

with the entity’s name and the notation “Area Not Included”.

320 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Graphic 

Standards

Working 

Standard Vector base map features are not required on the FIRM in Areas Not Included.

322 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Graphic 

Standards

Working 

Standard

On FIRM panels, when boundaries of different types are coincident with each 

other or with base map features, only the highest priority feature shall be 

shown.
Page 42

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

323 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Projections 

and 

Coordinate 

Systems

Working 

Standard

FIRM panels must show horizontal reference grids and corner coordinates 

selected, displayed and labeled as directed in the FIRM Panel Technical 

Reference.

332 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Graphic 

Standards

Working 

Standard

If a printed FIRM panel falls within the area of a smaller-scale panel that is also 

printed, the smaller-scale panel shall show a breakout note in the blank area 

represented by the larger-scale panel (the breakout panel area). This note is 

placed in the center of the breakout panel area and specifies the larger-scale 

panel’s map number and scale. The suffixes shall not be used in breakout 

panel notes (to avoid unnecessary updates in PMRs).

334 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Graphic 

Standards

Working 

Standard

Each flood hazard zone shall be bounded by a SFHA/FLOOD ZONE 

BOUNDARY line type when adjacent to another flood hazard area of a different 

type or elevation.

335 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Floodway Working 

Standard

Regulatory floodways shall be shown on the FIRM panel within the SFHA and, 

at lettered or numbered cross-section locations, floodway widths must agree 

with the values shown on the FDT in the FIS Report and the FIRM Database 

tables, within a maximum tolerance of 5 percent of the map scale or 5 percent 

of the distance, whichever is greater.

338 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Graphic 

Standards

Working 

Standard

Special Flood Hazard Areas shall be labeled at least once with the flood zone 

on a FIRM panel and, if appropriate, with the static elevation, velocity, or depth.

339 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Graphic 

Standards

Working 

Standard

Zone X areas that represent future conditions or areas protected by accredited 

levees shall be labeled on the FIRM panel in accordance with the FIRM Panel 

Technical Reference.

340 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Graphic 

Standards

Working 

Standard

SFHAs with assigned static elevations, depths, or velocities shall have their 

static BFE, depth, or velocity value labeled on the FIRM panels in accordance 

with the FIRM Panel Technical Reference.

341 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

BFEs Working 

Standard All BFE lines stored in the FIRM Database must be shown on FIRM panels.
Page 43

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

342 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

CrossSectionsWorking 

Standard

Cross sections stored in the FIRM Database must be shown on the FIRM 

panels if they are attributed as one of the following line types: LETTERED, 

MAPPED and NOT LETTERED, MAPPED.

343 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

CrossSectionsWorking 

Standard

On FIRM panels and in FIRM Databases, lettered or numbered cross sections 

for each stream analyzed by detailed methods shall be labeled alphabetically or 

numerically from downstream to upstream.

345 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

CrossSectionsWorking 

Standard

On FIRM panels, lettered or numbered cross sections shall be symbolized and 

labeled as outlined in the FIRM Panel Technical Reference.

346 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

CrossSectionsWorking 

Standard

On FIRM panels, all LETTERED, MAPPED and NOT LETTERED, MAPPED 

cross sections must be labeled with the regulatory WSEL value, rounded to the 

nearest tenth of a foot. All lettered or numbered cross section WSEL values 

must match the FDT in the FIS Report.

347 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

CrossSectionsWorking 

Standard

If unlettered cross sections and BFEs cannot be shown on the FIRM panel 

because of crowding due to steep terrain, a note shall be placed referring the 

user to the Flood Profiles in the FIS Report.

348 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

CrossSectionsWorking 

Standard

In the event that a cross section contains multiple water surface elevations the 

cross section shall be segmented and each segment labeled on the FIRM panel 

with its corresponding WSEL value and a hexagon.

349 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Graphic 

Standards

Working 

Standard

On the FIRM panels and in the FIRM Database, LIMIT LINES shall be placed at 

the beginning and at the end of flow in every area analyzed by detailed methods 

and shall be depicted as specified in the FIRM Panel Technical Reference.

351 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Graphic 

Standards

Working 

Standard

If transect lines are shown in the FIRM database they must be delineated and 

labeled on the FIRM panels.

352 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Graphic 

Standards

Working 

Standard

The LiMWA must be included in the FIRM Database if it has been calculated as 

part of a coastal Flood Risk Project, and shall normally be shown on FIRM 

panels. All community requests to have the LiMWA removed from the FIRM 

must be received at least 2 months prior to the issuance of the LFD.
Page 44

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

356 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Coastal 

Barrier 

Resources 

System

Working 

Standard

All FIRM panel notes, labels, and symbolization associated with CBRS and 

Otherwise Protected Areas shall conform to the specifications outlined in the 

FIRM Panel Technical Reference.

357 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Graphic 

Standards

Working 

Standard

Each FIRM panel must have a map legend that includes all the required 

elements and complies with the symbology as outlined in the FIRM Panel 

Technical Reference.

359 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM 

Database

Working 

Standard

Data sources in the FIRM Database must be documented with Source Citations 

in the database and the metadata.

361 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM 

Database

Working 

Standard

The FIRM Database digital data must be submitted in a series of layers that 

cover the entire geographic area being mapped and not in individual small tiles 

that cover limited geographic areas.

363 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

National 

Flood Hazard 

Layer (NFHL)

Working 

Standard

The NFHL must be used as the source for effective digital FIRM Database data 

when starting FIRM updates, and used for mandatory edge matching at 

county/community boundaries.

364 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM 

Database

Working 

Standard The FIRM Database must not contain duplicate spatial features.

365 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM 

Database

Working 

Standard

All included tables of the FIRM Database shall be documented in the metadata 

in accordance with the Metadata Profiles Technical Reference, and the software 

release of the personal geodatabase submitted shall also be documented.

366 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Projections 

and 

Coordinate 

Systems

Working 

Standard

FIRM Database tables must comply with the following database schema 

properties defined in the FIRM Database Technical Reference:

• Tables and Feature Classes

• Spatial Reference Systems

• Topology Rules

• Domains

367 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM 

Database

Working 

Standard

In the FIRM Database, all final revised FIRM panels shall get new FIRM panel 

Map Number suffixes and effective dates in the S_FIRM_Pan feature class.
Page 45

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

369 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM 

Database

Working 

Standard

Floodplain boundary lines in the FIRM Database must be generalized to no 

more than an average of one vertex every 10 feet while still meeting FBS 

standards.

370 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM 

Database

Working 

Standard

FIRM Database Flood Theme and Base Map features shall not have 

disconnects, jogs, or missing features during edge matching and at community 

boundaries.

371 11/30/2014

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Data Capture Working 

Standard

The following Regulatory deliverables must be submitted using the file formats 

and directory structure specified in the Data Capture Technical Reference. 

• Transmittal Form

• FIRM Database

• Orthophotos (if applicable)

• FIRM Scans

• World Files

• FIS Report

• Transmittal to Community CEO

• Community Map Action List

• Inventory Worksheet for Each Community

372 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM 

Database

Working 

Standard

Coincident features must share the same geometry, vertex for vertex, within the 

FIRM database files.

373 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM 

Database

Program 

Standard

The FIRM Database must be submitted using the schema found in the FIRM 

Database Technical Reference.

374 11/30/2014

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

BFEs Working 

Standard

BFEs (i.e., cross-section values supplemented with BFE lines where needed) 

must be shown at appropriate locations to allow map users to accurately 

interpolate flood elevations both horizontally and vertically.

375 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Levee Working 

Standard

The S_Levee table is required for any Preliminary or Final FIRM Database that 

includes levees, floodwalls, closure structures, berms, embankments, or dikes 

that have been designed for flood control, whether or not they have been 

demonstrated to meet the NFIP requirements in 44 CFR 65.10.
Page 46

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

377 7/31/2013

Implemented for 

all projects where 

the FIRM 

Database has not 

yet been 

submitted to the 

NFHL

National 

Flood Hazard 

Layer (NFHL)

Working 

Standard

For PMRs, once the NFHL for a community is converted to the latest FIRM 

Database schema, all database submissions will also be required to conform to 

this schema. For non-FEMA funded external data studies and for portions of a 

study where the engineering is unrevised, attribute data associated with the 

schema that is not needed for FIRM production may be excluded from the study 

submittal with permission from the FEMA Regional Office. Each exclusion 

should be documented in the FIRM Database metadata file that accompanies 

the FIRM Database.

378 7/31/2013

Implemented for 

any project not 

yet at preliminary.

PMR Working 

Standard

For PMRs where updated political boundaries are available for the entire extent 

of the FIRM database, the S_Pol_AR feature class shall be incorporated into 

the RFHL and shown on the FIRM Index.

379 6/1/2012

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

National 

Flood Hazard 

Layer (NFHL)

Working 

Standard

For PMRs, the revised FIRM database layers within the PMR panel footprint 

shall be incorporated into the RFHL. Certain layers such as watershed 

boundaries, nodes, and political areas may extend outside of the PMR footprint.

383 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Coordination Working 

Standard

After preliminary issuance of the FIS Report and FIRM, any major changes 

must be coordinated with the FEMA Regional office.

384 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Corresponden

ce

Working 

Standard

In the absence of a final CCO meeting a letter shall be sent to the community 

and interested stakeholders to document the decision to forego the meeting.

385 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Fed Register Program 

Standard

Per 44 CFR 67.4, the News Release and Federal Register Proposed Flood 

Hazard Determination Notice shall include all communities affected by new or 

modified flood hazard information. The newspaper notice shall be published 

twice within the 10-days of notification of the community CEO, after publication 

of the Federal Register Proposed Flood Hazard Determination Notice.

386 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Fed Register Program 

Standard

The community and other affected stakeholders must be notified when 

corrections to the News Release or Federal Register are required, including 

timelines for publishing corrections.
Page 47

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

387 5/31/2014

Implemented for 

all projects where 

the Federal 

Register Flood 

Hazard 

Determinations 

Notice has not yet 

been published.

Fed Register Program 

Standard

The appropriate Federal Register Flood Hazard Determinations Notice 

proposing changes to flood hazard information shall be compiled for all 

communities affected by the addition or modification of flood hazards (i.e., the 

Proposed Notice for flood risk studies and the Interim Notice for LOMRs). The 

Notice shall include a hyperlink for the official FEMA website through which 

stakeholders can access the products depicting the proposed flood hazard 

changes. The Notice shall be submitted to the designated FEMA coordinator to 

route for concurrence and signature.

FEMA shall coordinate with Office of Federal Register to ensure timely 

publication of the Notice in the Federal Register. The published Notice must be 

reviewed to ensure accuracy; if needed, corrections must be made, and other 

Project Team members must be notified of the correction.

388 12/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Appeals

Process

Program 

Standard

The statutory 90-day administrative appeal period cannot be extended; no 

appeals will be accepted after the 90-day appeal period.

389 12/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Appeals

Process

Program 

Standard

Written acknowledgement of all data submitted during the statutory appeal 

period shall be provided to the affected community.

390 12/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Appeals

Process

Working 

Standard

When performing new analyses and developing revised flooding information, 

appellants must tie the new BFEs, base flood depths, SFHA boundaries, SFHA 

zone designations, and/or regulatory floodway boundaries into those shown on 

the FIRM and in the FIS Report for areas not affected by the appeal.

391 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Appeals

Process

Program 

Standard

FEMA shall evaluate appeal submittals, and prior to LFD, FEMA or its designee 

must provide the community with a resolution letter and must provide a copy of 

the revised FIRM if changes were made as a result of the appeal.

392 11/1/2010

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Scientific 

Resolution 

Panel (SRP)

Program 

Standard

The Scientific Resolution Panel must be made available to communities that 

submit qualifying scientific and/or technical data during the 90-day 

administrative appeal period.

393 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

PostPreliminary 

Deliverables

Program 

Standard

A copy of the final FIRM must be delivered to affected communities 90 days 

before the effective date.
Page 48

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

394 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

PostPreliminary 

Deliverables

Working 

Standard

The Engineering Library shall be the official repository for all technical 

engineering data including any LOMCs, TSDN and related Flood Risk Project 

documentation. Information shall be archived and maintained in accordance 

with FEMA records management standards.

395 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

PostPreliminary 

Deliverables

Working 

Standard

FEDD files must be submitted to FEMA for review 60 days before the LFD is 

scheduled to be issued.

396 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

PostPreliminary 

Deliverables

Working 

Standard

During post-preliminary processing the FEDD and all associated 

correspondence must be compiled for each affected community in accordance 

with all relevant regulations. When more than one entity is responsible for postpreliminary activities, each entity must ensure the FEDD and all related 

documentation is complete at the time the responsibility is transferred to the 

next entity.

397 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

PostPreliminary 

Deliverables

Working 

Standard

The following data must be submitted at the end of each mapping project:

• FBS Self-Certification Document (submitted within 30 days after issuance of 

preliminary maps);

• QA report stating compliance with the FBS standard.

• Revised Floodplain Boundary Standard Self-Certification Document (submitted 

within 30 days after issuance of the LFD if floodplain boundaries were revised 

during the post-preliminary phase);

• Correspondence file including any documentation not previously submitted 

during earlier tasks or as part of the FEDD file related to coordination and 

processing decisions made during the course of the Flood Risk Project. 

• FEDD for each affected community

• FEDD Checklist for each FEDD file

• TSDN Checklist and Certification form 

398 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

PostPreliminary 

Deliverables

Working 

Standard The FEDD files must be separate for each community.
Page 49

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

400 6/1/2010

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

PostPreliminary 

Deliverables

Working 

Standard

Map Service Center deliverables must be uploaded through the MIP for all 

Flood Risk Projects.

401 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

LFD Program 

Standard

The LFD date must be no sooner than 60 days after the end of the 90-day 

administrative appeal period or following resolution of all appeals, whichever is 

later.

402 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

LFD Program 

Standard

The LFD package shall be submitted to FEMA HQ for review and approval prior 

to issuing LFDs to affected communities.

403 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

LFD Program 

Standard

FEMA shall publish a final FHD notice in the Federal Register no later than 

three (3) months following issuance of the LFD. 

404 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Letter of Map 

Change 

(LOMC)

Working 

Standard

The Compendium of Flood Map Changes shall be published every 6 months. 

Publication shall occur within 15 days of the close of the 6-month reporting 

period.

405 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Revalidation Program 

Standard

2-4 weeks before the effective date of the revised map, the revalidation 

package shall be submitted to FEMA for review and approval prior to issuing the 

revalidation letters.

406 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Revalidation Program 

Standard

The LOMC-VALID letter shall be provided to the community CEO and floodplain 

administrator and the LOMC Subscription Service Coordinator before the 

effective date of the revised FIRM(s).

407 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Letter of Map 

Change 

(LOMC)

Program 

Standard

FEMA will widely distribute the following at regular intervals:

• final LOMCs with attachments

• final SOMAs

• revalidation letters.

408 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Letter of Map 

Change 

(LOMC)

Working 

Standard Requests for Letters of Determination Review (LODRs) shall be processed.

409 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Due Process Program 

Standard

Suspension notification letters shall be distributed to communities that have not 

yet adopted NFIP compliant ordinances within 90 and 30 days prior to the FIRM 

effective date.
Page 50

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

410 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Corresponden

ce

Working 

Standard

Over the life of a Flood Risk Project, NFIP eligibility shall be reviewed and 

related correspondence shall be prepared for newly-eligible communities.

411 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Fed Register Program 

Standard FEMA will publish a notice of community eligibility in the Federal Register.

412 12/3/2008

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Coastal Working 

Standard

For coastal Flood Risk Projects, the LiMWA must be calculated, where 

appropriate.

413 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

NonRegulatory 

Datasets

Working 

Standard

Locally-provided, -sourced, or -validated building footprint, location, and/or 

population data shall be the only acceptable data sources to be used to 

populate structure and population count attributes within the CSLF dataset.

414 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

NonRegulatory 

Datasets

Working 

Standard

Flood risk datasets derived from new or updated data must reflect the 

regulatory elevations as shown on the preliminary FIRM, if applicable. If 

floodplain delineations are altered as a result of appeals or other changes 

during the post-preliminary process, the Changes Since Last FIRM dataset shall 

be updated to reflect those changes.

415 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

NonRegulatory 

Datasets

Working 

Standard

Flood risk datasets derived from effective data must reflect the effective 

regulatory elevations as shown on the FIRM.

416 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

NonRegulatory 

Datasets

Working 

Standard

Depth and Analysis Grids must share the same terrain and bathymetry source

datasets as the engineering models.
Page 51

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

417 5/31/2016

Implemented with 

all new flood risk 

projects initiated 

in FY16. 

NonRegulatory 

Datasets

Program 

Standard

The minimum datasets associated with the Flood Risk Project are defined as 

follows:

418 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

NonRegulatory 

Datasets

Working 

Standard Depth grids for open water shall reflect the depth of flooding above normal pool.
Page 52

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

419 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

NonRegulatory 

Datasets

Working 

Standard

The extent of water surface elevation change grids shall, at a minimum, reflect 

those areas that were both SFHA before and after the revision.

420 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Flood Risk 

Report

Working 

Standard

The Flood Risk Report will only report on the extent of the flood risk data that 

lies within the Flood Risk Project area.

421 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

NonRegulatory 

Datasets

Program 

Standard

To ensure privacy, sensitive claims data will be aggregated and/or generalized 

at the centroid of the census block and represented as a point.

424 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Flood Risk 

Database

Working 

Standard As an outcome of Discovery, a tiling structure must be defined for products.

425 5/31/2016

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

NonRegulatory 

Datasets

Working 

Standard

The National Flood Hazard Layer (or other comparable dataset with all effective 

FIRMs and LOMRs incorporated) shall be the source for the effective flood 

hazard area data used to develop non-regulatory flood risk products.

426 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Flood Risk 

Report

Working 

Standard

Each Flood Risk Report shall include the following sections:

i. Preface

ii. Table of Contents 

1. Introduction

2. Risk Analysis

3. Flood Risk Analysis Results

4. Actions to Mitigate Flood Risk

5. Acronyms and Definitions

6. Additional Resources

7. Data Used to Develop Flood Risk Products
Page 53

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

427 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Flood Risk 

Report

Working 

Standard

The Flood Risk Report must include the following tables:

Project Specific Tables:

• List of all the communities in the project area;

• CSLF summary;

• Risk Assessment summary;

Community Specific Tables:

• Community overview;

• CSLF summary;

• Risk Assessment summary;

• AoMI summary

428 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Flood Risk 

Map

Working 

Standard

The Flood Risk Map must illustrate flood risk in the project area, potential 

mitigation opportunities, and include the following elements:

• Map body

• Title block

• Map legend

• Project locator

• North arrow

• Map scale

429 5/31/2016

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Data Capture Working 

Standard

The following non-regulatory flood risk product deliverables must be submitted 

using the file formats and directory structure specified in the Data Capture 

Technical Reference. 

* Flood Risk Database

* Depth and Analysis Grids

* Metadata file 

* Full text of the Flood Risk Report with bookmarks, a hyperlinked table of 

contents and section headings.

* Flood Risk Map

432 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Flood Risk 

Database

Working 

Standard

Datasets in the FRD must be delivered in their entirety even if a portion of the 

dataset lies outside the define project footprint.
Page 54

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

433 5/31/2016

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Flood Risk 

Database

Working 

Standard

Non-regulatory flood risk datasets must be delivered within the Flood Risk 

Database and must not be tiled or subdivided.

440 11/30/2016 Effective 

immediately

Flood Risk 

Database

Working 

Standard

The Flood Risk Database must be in agreement with the information shown in 

the Flood Risk Report and on the Flood Risk Map.

442 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Flood Risk 

Database

Program 

Standard

Non-regulatory flood risk datasets must comply with the following database 

schema properties defined in the Flood Risk Database Technical Reference:

• Tables and Feature Classes

• Raster Datasets 

• Spatial Reference Systems

• Topology Rules

• Relationship Classes

• Domains

443 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Flood Risk 

Database

Program 

Standard

In order to maintain privacy, the L_Claims table, if there are less than five (5) 

claims, five (5) repetitive loss claims, or five (5) severe repetitive loss claims in a 

community, then the relevant value field shall be set to null.

444 11/30/2016

Effective for new 

applications 

submitted to 

FEMA for levee 

accreditation

Levee Program 

Standard

Levee systems can only be accredited when compliance with 44 CFR Part 

65.10 is demonstrated. Compliance includes demonstrating that an emergency 

preparedness plan has been adopted by the community that at a minimum, 

includes the area impacted by the levee system, and includes procedures for 

emergency operation and public evacuation, meeting the standards of 

65.10(c)(3).

445 4/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Levee Program 

Standard FEMA will not grant extensions to the 24-month PAL period.

446 4/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Levee Program 

Standard Levee accreditation must be based upon detailed H&H analyses.

447 4/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Levee Program 

Standard

If the levee system does not continue to meet the criteria within 44 CFR Section 

65.10, FEMA shall initiate the levee de-accreditation process.
Page 55

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

448 9/1/2006

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Levee Program 

Standard

A levee system shall only be designated by FEMA as a PAL if the levee system 

is already accredited on the effective FIRM and, the owner of the levee system 

or the community is attempting to compile levee accreditation documentation to 

demonstrate continuation of compliance with 44 CFR 65.10. The opportunity 

for a PAL designation is only offered one time for any given system.

449 9/1/2006

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Levee Program 

Standard

If a levee system qualifies for the PAL designation, the affected communities 

will be given an opportunity to sign a PAL agreement.

450 2/1/2009

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Levee Program 

Standard

A structure shall only be considered a levee when it can be demonstrated that 

the structure was designed and has been operated and maintained as a levee. 

Structures that cannot meet these requirements cannot be considered for 

accreditation under 44 CFR 65.10. 

452 7/31/2013

Implemented with 

all new flood risk 

projects initiated 

in FY13.

Floodway Working 

Standard

Floodway boundaries shall be placed on the riverside of a levee unless the 

community specifically requests otherwise, or where hydraulic calculations 

demonstrate a floodway is warranted elsewhere.

501 7/31/2013

Implemented for 

all projects once 

the NFHL for a 

community is 

converted to the 

latest FIRM 

Database 

schema

FIS Report Working 

Standard

For Flood Risk Projects that have at least one FIRM panel produced in 

compliance with the current FIRM Panel Technical Reference, but whose FIS 

Report is not produced in compliance with the current FIS Report Technical 

Reference (i.e., the FIS Report is retaining its legacy format) the FIRM Legend 

and Notes to Users must be included as an appendix to the FIS Report per the 

current FIS Report Technical Reference. 

502 12/8/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Index Working 

Standard

For FIRM Indexes produced in compliance with the current FIS Report 

Technical Reference, all required elements of the FIRM Index title block and 

Index collar shall be present and symbolized as outlined in the Technical 

Reference.

503 12/8/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM Index Working 

Standard

For FIRM Indexes produced in compliance with the current FIS Report 

Technical Reference, the symbology and labeling of all features depicted on the 

FIRM Index shall adhere to the specifications outlined in the Technical 

Reference.
Page 56

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

504 7/31/2013

Implemented for 

all projects once 

the NFHL for a 

community is 

converted to the 

latest FIRM 

Database 

schema

FIS Tables Working 

Standard

For FIS Reports produced in compliance with the FIS Report Technical 

Reference, map repositories for all communities must be present and correct in 

the "Map Repositories" FIS Report table. Flood Risk Projects whose FIS 

Reports are not produced in compliance with the current FIS Report Technical 

Reference (i.e., the FIS Report is retaining its legacy format per FEMA Regional 

approval), but whose FIRM Index is produced in compliance with the FIS Report 

Technical Reference, must include a correctly populated "Map Repositories" 

table in the FIS Report. FIRM Indexes that are not produced in compliance with 

the FIS Report Technical Reference must include the map repository 

information on the Index.

505 7/31/2013

Implemented for 

all projects once 

the NFHL for a 

community is 

converted to the 

latest FIRM 

Database 

schema

FIS Tables Working 

Standard

FIS Reports not produced in compliance with the FIS Report Technical 

Reference (per FEMA Regional approval), but whose FIRM Index is produced 

in compliance with the Technical Reference, must include a correctly populated 

"Listing of NFIP Jurisdictions" table in the FIS Report. FIRM Indexes that are 

not produced in compliance with the FIS Report Technical Reference must 

include the Listing of Communities table on the FIRM Index.

506 2/1/2002

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Flood Profiles Working 

Standard

Flood Profile notes and labels must be correct and agree with the FIRM and 

Floodway Data Table (if applicable).

507 5/31/2016

Effective for all 

projects that have 

not started QR5

FIS/FIRM Working 

Standard

The FIRM, FIRM database, NFHL, Flood Profiles and Floodway Data Tables 

must all be in agreement with each other, including decimal point precision, as it 

relates to the depiction of flood hazards and hydraulic structures.
Page 57

508 7/31/2013

Implemented with 

all projects not 

yet final

Quality 

Management

Program 

Standard

Quality Reviews 1 through 8 must be conducted. Associated requirements for 

each review are as follows:

- QR1: The draft FIRM database shall be uploaded to the MIP for autovalidation and must pass before QR2 is conducted.

- QR2: The preliminary FIRM database shall be uploaded to the MIP for autovalidation and must pass before QR3 is conducted. 

- QR3: The preliminary FIS Report, FIRM, and SOMA shall be reviewed using 

standardized checklists located at 

www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=7577 after the work has been selfcertified as meeting FEMA standards. The FIS Report, SOMA, FIRM and FIRM 

database shall not be issued at preliminary until written certification is provided 

indicating that all issues cited at this review were properly addressed and 

resolved. 

- QR4: This review validates the Proposed FHD Notice, Appeal Period Docket, 

and 90-day Start Letter(s). If a 90-day appeal period is required, the proposed 

flood hazard determination notice information must be entered into the FHD 

Notices on the Web tool. An approved docket must be received from FEMA 

prior to the issuance of the 90-day Start Letter(s)

- QR5: The FIRM database shall be auto-validated in the MIP and a visual 

review shall be conducted using standardized checklists located at 

www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=7577 to compare the FIRM database 

to the printed FIRM and all cited issues must be resolved before the LFD will be 

distributed.

- QR6: This review validates the LFD prior to the distribution of the final 

products. As part of the “Prepare LFD Docket” MIP task, the LFD Summary 

Sheet/Docket, FEDD Files, and LFD Questionnaire must be prepared and 

submitted, concurrent with QR5 and QR7. All cited issues must be resolved 

before the LFD will be distributed.

- QR7: The final FIS Report, FIRM and associated paperwork shall be 

reviewed using standardized checklists located at 

www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=7577 before delivery to the MSC and 

all cited issues must be resolved before the LFD will be distributed.

- QR8: A review of the FIS Report, FIRM, MSC paperwork, and delivery 

manifest shall be conducted by the FEMA Map Service Center using 
Page 58

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

standardized checklists located at 

www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=7577 and all cited issues must be 

resolved before delivery of the final products to the end users.

509 7/31/2013

Implemented with 

all projects not 

yet final

Quality 

Management

Program 

Standard

All Quality Compliance Check issues noted during the QR1 through QR8 

process must be fully addressed, documented and resolved.

510 7/31/2013

Implemented with 

all projects not 

yet final

Quality 

Management

Program 

Standard

Standardized checklists must be used at FEMA-designated Quality Reviews. 

Those checklists, which are located at

www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=7577 must be retained as quality 

records, and delivered as part of the TSDN.

512 7/31/2013

Implemented with 

all projects not 

yet final

Quality 

Management

Program 

Standard

Self-Certification of compliance with FEMA standards must be provided before 

a QR3 review may be executed. A template for this requirement is available 

here (www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=7577).

513 7/31/2013

Implemented with 

all projects not 

yet final

Quality 

Management

Program 

Standard

Written certification must be provided, documenting that all QR3 noncompliance citations were properly addressed and resolved, in order to 

complete the QR3 process. A template for this requirement is available at

www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=7577.

514 12/1/2008

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Quality 

Management

Program 

Standard

Following the QR4 review, any identified errors must be corrected prior to the 

90-day Start letter distribution. 

515 12/1/2008

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Due Process Program 

Standard

The 90-day comment period for the Federal Register Proposed FHD Notice and 

the 90-day statutory appeal period must overlap by at least one day. If the 90-

day appeal period does not begin prior to the end of the Federal Register 90-

day comment period, in coordination with FEMA, the Federal Register 

publication must be withdrawn and the FHD notice must be republished.

516 12/1/2008

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Due Process Working 

Standard

The standard FHD Notice must be posted with the correct newspaper 

publication dates and appeal period start and end dates on FEMA’s website 

prior to issuing the 90-day start letters.

517 12/1/2008

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

PostPreliminary 

Deliverables

Working 

Standard

The FIRM Database (including metadata) and the georeferenced FIRM image 

files must be submitted to the MIP and FEMA (or their designee) must be 

notified at least 60 days prior to the anticipated LFD date.
Page 59

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

518 12/1/2008

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Quality 

Management

Program 

Standard

All outstanding map changes must be incorporated into the FIRM before 

proceeding with the QR5 database and visual review.

519 12/1/2008

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

LFD Program 

Standard

The FIS Report, FIRM, and FIRM database must pass QR5, QR6, and QR7 

before the LFD may be distributed.

520 12/1/2008

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

PostPreliminary 

Deliverables

Program 

Standard

At least 45-days before the projected LFD date the final LFD letters, Part 67 

Final Notice, and Final SOMAs must be submitted. No less than 4-weeks 

before the LFD the final LFD Summary Sheet/Dockets and LFD Questionnaires 

must be consolidated and sent to FEMA HQ for approval.

521 12/1/2008

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Quality 

Management

Program 

Standard

At least 60-days prior to the projected LFD date after receiving a passing QR5 

auto-validation report for the FIRM database, the QR5 visual, QR6, and QR7 

reviews at the “Produce Final Map Products” MIP task must be conducted.

522 12/1/2008

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

LFD Working 

Standard

As part of the “Prepare LFD Docket” MIP task, the LFD Summary Sheet/Docket, 

FEDD Files, and LFD Questionnaire must be submitted, concurrent with Quality 

Reviews 5 and 7.

523 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

SOMA Working 

Standard

On the SOMA, structure removals must not be included in Category 1; LOMRs 

must not be included in Category 2; and LOMRs and single-determination 

LOMCs must not be included in Category 4.

524 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

SOMA Working 

Standard

When multiple determination LOMAs and LOMR-Fs include both removal and 

non-removal determinations, and all determinations remain the same based on 

the new or revised mapping, the case must be included in Category 2 and the 

new zone must be listed as 'X' in the MIP SOMA Tool; on the Revalidation 

Letter the new zone must be changed to 'Multiple' if it was formerly shown as 

"X".

525 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

SOMA Working 

Standard

On the SOMA, the map number and map suffix must be listed in the new map 

panel field for each LOMC and the old map panel must be listed for the old 

panel field.

526 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

SOMA Working 

Standard

All cases included on the SOMA in Category 2 must be listed with the new zone 

listed as 'X' in the MIP SOMA Tool.
Page 60

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

527 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

SOMA Working 

Standard

Any LOMCs issued prior to the effective date of the current respective FIRM 

panel must be included on the SOMA if they are listed on a current revalidation 

letter for the community.

528 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

SOMA Working 

Standard

The SOMA must include the community name, CID, case number, date issued 

and project identifier for each LOMC listed.

529 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

SOMA Working 

Standard The FIRM Effective date must be listed on the Final SOMA.

530 7/31/2013

Applicable for 

LOMCs initiated 

after the effective 

date, but not 

retroactively for 

ongoing or 

completed 

LOMCs.

Coastal Working 

Standard

All requests for flood map revisions based upon new or modified flood control 

structures shall include an analysis of the potential adverse impacts of the 

structure on flooding within, and adjacent to, the area protected by the structure. 

For coastal structures, this analysis must also evaluate the impacts of the 

structure on erosion within, and adjacent to, the protected area.

531 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

NonRegulatory 

Datasets

Program 

Standard

Metadata for non-regulatory flood risk datasets must comply with the Metadata 

Technical Reference.

532 1/1/2013

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

NonRegulatory 

Datasets

Program 

Standard

Attribute domains for non-regulatory flood risk datasets must comply with the 

Domain Tables Technical Reference.

533 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM 

Database

Program 

Standard

Metadata for FIRM databases must comply with the Metadata Profiles 

Technical Reference.

534 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

FIRM 

Database

Program 

Standard

Attribute domains for FIRM databases must comply with the Domain Tables 

Technical Reference.
Page 61

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

535 7/31/2013

Implemented for 

all projects once 

the NFHL for a 

community is 

converted to the 

latest FIRM 

Database 

schema

LOMR 

Incorporation

Working 

Standard

When a PMR is processed that will only partially include an effective LOMR, all 

FIS Report components of the LOMR (including Flood Profiles and Floodway 

Data Tables) must be included in the revised FIS Report that is issued with the 

PMR. When the partially-included LOMR is re-issued, it must not include any 

FIS Report components and it will only include revisions for the FIRM panel(s) 

not revised with the PMR. The LOMR must be re-issued within three days of 

the FIS Report / FIRM effective date.

536 7/31/2013

Applicable for all 

coastal Flood 

Risk Projects in 

the data 

development 

stage where the 

erosion analyses 

have not been 

completed yet.

Coastal Working 

Standard

For Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico coastal Flood Risk Projects, the 1-

percent-annual-chance water level datum, above which the dune reservoir 

volume will be calculated for erosion analyses, will include storm surge, tidal 

effects, and wave setup components. 

537 7/31/2013

Applicable for 

LOMCs initiated 

after the effective 

date, but not 

retroactively for 

ongoing or 

completed 

LOMCs.

Coastal Working 

Standard

LOMRs for Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico study areas where wave setup 

was evaluated as part of the effective coastal analysis shall use the effective 

still water elevations (including wave setup) for the calculation of dune reservoir 

volume in the dune erosion analysis. LOMRs where wave setup was not 

evaluated as part of the effective coastal analysis shall use the effective still 

water elevations (without wave setup) from the FIS Report for calculating dune 

reservoir volumes, unless the revision request includes new analyses of still 

water elevations and wave setup, in which case the reference water level shall 

include the wave setup component.
Page 62

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

538 7/31/2013

For all nonaccredited levee 

projects that were 

previously onhold and for 

newly initiated 

flood risk projects 

after the effective 

date, or after 

Congressional 

LAMP briefing. 

(whichever is 

later)

Levee Program 

Standard

FEMA will not fund any efforts solely related to certifying data for levee 

accreditation or making determinations of the levee’s structural conditions.

539 7/31/2013

For all nonaccredited levee 

projects that were 

previously onhold and for 

newly initiated 

flood risk projects 

after the effective 

date, or after 

Congressional 

LAMP briefing. 

(whichever is 

later)

Levee Program 

Standard

The natural valley floodplain behind non-accredited levee systems shall be 

modeled and depicted as an SFHA, except when additional analysis indicates 

an alternate treatment. The natural valley floodplain behind non-accredited 

levee systems shall only be depicted as Zone D when freeboard deficient, 

sound reach, overtopping, and structural-based inundation procedures are 

implemented.
Page 63

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

540 7/31/2013

For all nonaccredited levee 

projects that were 

previously onhold and for 

newly initiated 

flood risk projects 

after the effective 

date, or after 

Congressional 

LAMP briefing. 

(whichever is 

later)

Levee Working 

Standard

Levee systems must be hydraulically independent whereby if one system fails, 

the area behind another system is not inundated.

541 7/31/2013

For all nonaccredited levee 

projects that were 

previously onhold and for 

newly initiated 

flood risk projects 

after the effective 

date, or after 

Congressional 

LAMP briefing. 

(whichever is 

later)

Levee Working 

Standard

A Local Levee Partnership Team (LLPT) must be established with participation 

of diverse stakeholders based on the complexity and scope of the levee system 

under evaluation. The options discussed by the LLPT members and FEMA's 

decisions regarding the appropriate analysis and mapping procedures to be 

used, must be documented and made available to stakeholders.
Page 64

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

542 7/31/2013

For all nonaccredited levee 

projects that were 

previously onhold and for 

newly initiated 

flood risk projects 

after the effective 

date, or after 

Congressional 

LAMP briefing. 

(whichever is 

later)

Levee Working 

Standard

If there are levee systems on both sides of a flooding source, or multiple 

systems that overlap, the extents of the natural valley area and reach specific 

SFHAs for each system will be analyzed independently assuming the other 

systems remain in place.

543 7/31/2013

For all nonaccredited levee 

projects that were 

previously onhold and for 

newly initiated 

flood risk projects 

after the effective 

date, or after 

Congressional 

LAMP briefing. 

(whichever is 

later)

Levee Working 

Standard

The following reach analysis approaches and corresponding data requirements 

shall be utilized when analyzing non-accredited levee systems:

Data Element Link to CFR Sound Reach Freeboard 

Deficient

Overtopping

StructuralBased 

Inundation

Natural Valley

Elevation Information for the 

Levee Crest and Toe N/A Required Required Required Required N/A

BFE + Freeboard Less than 

Levee Crest 44CFR65.10(b)(1) Required N/A N/A N/A N/A

BFE Less than Levee Crest N/A Required Required N/A N/A N/A

Operations and Maintenance 

Plan 44CFR65.10(c) Required Required Required Recommended N/A

Structural Design 

Requirements

44CFR65.10(b)(2)

44CFR65.10(b)(4)

44CFR65.10(b)(5)

44CFR65.10(b)(6)

44CFR65.10(b)(7)

Required Required Required N/A N/A

Inspection Reports 44CFR65.10(c)(2)(iv) Required Required Required Recommended N/A

Evaluation of Overtopping 

Erosion Potential N/A N/A N/A Required N/A N/A

Reach Analysis Procedures
Page 65

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

544 7/31/2013

For all nonaccredited levee 

projects that were 

previously onhold and for 

newly initiated 

flood risk projects 

after the effective 

date, or after 

Congressional 

LAMP briefing. 

(whichever is 

later)

Levee Working 

Standard

The final SFHA delineation shown on the FIRM landward of the non-accredited 

levee system shall be based on a composite of flooding results from each 

independently analyzed reach, any interior drainage flooding of the system, and 

ponding against the landward side of the levee.

545 7/31/2013

For all nonaccredited levee 

projects that were 

previously onhold and for 

newly initiated 

flood risk projects 

after the effective 

date, or after 

Congressional 

LAMP briefing. 

(whichever is 

later)

Levee Working 

Standard

The resulting floodplain from the analysis of a Structural Based Inundation 

reach must reflect the fact that a breach could occur at any location along the 

reach.
Page 66

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

546 7/31/2013

For all nonaccredited levee 

projects that were 

previously onhold and for 

newly initiated 

flood risk projects 

after the effective 

date, or after 

Congressional 

LAMP briefing. 

(whichever is 

later)

Levee Working 

Standard

If BFEs are to be shown on the FIRM landward of non-accredited levee 

systems, they shall be based on the highest elevation of the composite analysis 

and mapping.

547 11/30/2014

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Elevation 

Data

Working 

Standard

If topographic breaklines are produced and submitted, the Topographic 

Breakline Topology Rules outlined in the Data Capture Technical Reference 

must be followed.

549 11/30/2014

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Metadata Working 

Standard

The metadata files submitted for each applicable task must comply with the 

Metadata Profiles Technical Reference and must document the data being 

submitted and include the following elements:

• Identification Information

• Data Quality Information

• Spatial Reference Information

• Entity and Attribute Information

• Distribution Information

• Metadata Reference Information

550 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Letter of Map 

Revision 

(LOMR)

Program 

Standard

If a LOMR results in a new or increased BFE or a new or increased SFHA, the 

requester must notify the property owner(s) of the impact of the LOMR on their 

property.
Page 67

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

551 11/30/2016

Effective for all 

newly funded 

PMR preliminary 

map processing 

or newly initiated 

PMRs

PMR Working 

Standard

When FEMA is processing a PMR, the footprint shall be defined as the 

boundary of the FIRM panel(s) affected by the PMR's study area. All FIRM 

Database and FIRM Graphic standards, as well as appropriate DVT checks and 

quality reviews, apply to the footprint and are not limited to the PMR’s study 

area.

552 12/1/2008

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Quality 

Management

Program 

Standard

A Quality Management Plan that prescribes protocols for ensuring consistent 

compliance with FEMA Standards must be in place.
Page 68

553 4/1/2003

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

SOMA Program 

Standard

LOMCs shall be categorized on the SOMA as follows: 

Category 1 (LOMCs Incorporated) - Includes those LOMRs (and some LOMAs 

and LOMR-Fs) whose results are unaffected by new or revised flood hazard 

data, and whose results can and will be incorporated into the revised FIRM 

panel(s). Large metes-and-bounds or multi-lot property removal LOMR-Fs are 

sometimes incorporated through Category 1 when scale limitations do not 

prohibit it; although typically, these LOMAs and LOMR-Fs will be revalidated 

through Category 2. Structure removal (both single and multiple determination) 

LOMCs cannot be incorporated due to scale limitations and therefore shall not 

be included in Category 1.

Category 2 (LOMCs Not Incorporated) - Includes those LOMAs and LOMR-Fs 

whose results are unaffected by new or revised flood hazard data but could not 

be incorporated into the revised FIRM panel because of map scale limitations, 

or because the property or structure was determined to be outside the SFHA as 

shown on the effective FIRM panel and remains outside the SFHA on the 

revised FIRM panel(s). These LOMCs are included on the Revalidation Letter 

that becomes effective one (1) day after the revised FIRM panels become 

effective. Multiple-determination LOMCs that include denials may be included in 

this category if all determinations in the LOMC are unaffected by the new or 

revised flood hazard data.

Category 3 (LOMCs Superseded) - Includes those LOMCs whose results will 

not be reflected on the revised FIRM panel because the flood hazard data on 

which the determinations are based are being superseded by new detailed flood 

hazard data, or the information available was not sufficient to make a 

determination.

Category 4 (LOMCs To Be Redetermined) - Includes those LOMAs and LOMRFs issued for multiple lots or structures for which new determinations must be 

made because the determination for one or more properties or structures has 

changed as a result of the new or revised flood hazard information, and 

therefore cannot be revalidated.
Page 69

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

555 10/1/2011

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

National 

Flood Hazard 

Layer (NFHL)

Working 

Standard

RFHL to NFHL submissions must include all up-to-date revisions and study 

data inclusive in a DFIRM ID.

556 7/31/2013

Implemented with 

all new flood risk 

projects initiated 

in FY13.

Stakeholder 

Engagement

Program 

Standard

All Flood Risk Projects must have a communications plan designed to keep 

project stakeholders informed of all key decisions, draft findings and finished 

outputs. The plan shall also be designed to regularly engage key stakeholders 

in dialog about local risks and potential actions to manage and reduce those 

risks.

600 11/1/2010

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

Appeals

Process

Program 

Standard

An administrative appeal period must be offered for physical map revisions and 

letters of map revision where:

• New BFEs or base flood depths are proposed or currently effective BFEs or 

base flood depths have been modified;

• New SFHAs are proposed or the boundaries of currently effective SFHAs have 

been modified;

• New SFHA zone designations are proposed or currently effective SFHA zone 

designations have been modified; or

• New regulatory floodways are proposed or the boundaries of currently 

effective floodways that have been modified.

In order to qualify as an appeal, scientific and/or technical data demonstrating 

these changes are incorrect must be provided.

601 5/31/2014

Implemented for 

all projects where 

the 90 day 

statutory appeals 

period has not yet 

begun.

Fed Register Program 

Standard

The Community Map Repository address for each community listed in the 

Federal Register Flood Hazard Determination notice must be a physical 

address (i.e., not a P.O. Box) confirmed by the community. Additionally, the 

repository address must be consistent among all related products (FIS, FIRM 

Index, FIRM Database, FHD Web tool, and Federal Register), both hard copy 

and online versions, before starting the statutory 90-day appeal period.

602 5/31/2014

Implemented for 

any project not 

yet at preliminary.

Levee Program 

Standard

For the analysis and mapping of flood hazards associated with levee systems, if 

available, data and documentation in the USACE National Levee Database 

(NLD) or from local communities, tribal entities or other Federal/State agencies 

should be leveraged.
Page 70

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

603 11/30/2014

Implemented for 

any new 

community 

request received 

after March 21, 

2014

Levee Program 

Standard

Requests for a determination of adequate progress toward completion of flood 

protection systems must meet the data and documentation requirements 

outlined in 44 CFR 61.12, except where superseded by Section 19, Part a, of 

the Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act, 42 U.S.C. § 4014(e). Zone 

A99 requests may be submitted for projects constructing or reconstructing flood 

protection systems. Requests will not be limited to projects with Federal 

funding, and the present value of the system can be used to meet the 

requirements of 44 CFR 61.12.b.

604 11/30/2014

Implemented for 

any new 

community 

request received 

after March 21, 

2014

Levee Program 

Standard

Map revision requests to reflect flood control system restoration projects with a 

Zone AR designation must meet the data and documentation requirements 

outlined in 44 CFR 65.14, except where superseded by Section 19, Part b, of 

the Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act, 42 U.S.C. § 4014(f). Zone 

AR requests may be submitted for levees in riverine and coastal areas, except 

when the landward flood zone of the existing structure would be defined as a 

Coastal High Hazard Area. Requests will be reviewed without regard to Federal 

funding or participation, and restoration projects must be complete or meet the 

requirements of 44 CFR 61.12 within a specified timeframe, not to exceed 10 

years, from the date the community submits the request for a Zone AR 

determination by FEMA.

605 11/30/2014 Effective 

immediately

National 

Flood Hazard 

Layer (NFHL)

Program 

Standard

Flood Insurance Rate Maps, FIRMettes, and NFHL Databases are the official 

FEMA digital products. The official FEMA digital products and printed versions 

produced from the official digital products are all equivalent to each other and 

represent official FEMA designations of the areas of special flood hazard, base 

flood elevations, insurance risk zones and other regulatory information, 

provided that all other geospatial data shown on the printed product meets or 

exceeds any accuracy standard promulgated by FEMA. Products using 

FEMA's regulatory data must include a statement that they conform to this 

standard in order to be used in place of the official FEMA digital products.
Page 71

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

606 11/30/2014

Existing standard. 

Already 

implemented.

National 

Flood Hazard 

Layer (NFHL)

Program 

Standard

When a coordinate grid is shown on the FIRM or when the FIRM or NFHL 

Database version is available, the horizontal location of the flood hazard 

information is defined with respect to the primary coordinate system shown on 

the FIRM or stored in the FIRM or NFHL Database product. The horizontal 

location of the flood hazard information is not defined by its relationship to the 

base map features such as streets. If there are conflicting interpretations of the 

precise horizontal location of the areas of special flood hazard, the conflict shall 

be resolved using the grid coordinates shown on the printed FIRM or stored in 

the FIRM or NFHL Database products rather than the base map features.

607 11/30/2014

For all projects 

where the FIRM 

database has not 

yet been 

submitted to the 

NFHL

National 

Flood Hazard 

Layer (NFHL)

Working 

Standard

NFHL submittals must not contain a single dataset (i.e. DFIRM_ID) which 

includes future-effective LOMRs with effective dates separated by more than 

one business day.

608 11/30/2014

For all projects 

where the FIRM 

database has not 

yet been 

submitted to the

NFHL

National 

Flood Hazard 

Layer (NFHL)

Working 

Standard

rFHL submittals must be submitted in a geodatabase format that matches the 

current NFHL schema in the FIRM Database Technical Reference.

609 11/30/2014

For all projects 

where the FIRM 

database has not 

yet been 

submitted to the 

NFHL

National 

Flood Hazard 

Layer (NFHL)

Working 

Standard

DFIRM study data incorporated into the NFHL must be obtained from the 

FINAL_DFIRM_DB task MIP folder for the associated Risk MAP project case 

number.
Page 72

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

610 11/30/2014

For all projects 

where the FIRM 

database has not 

yet been 

submitted to the 

NFHL

National 

Flood Hazard 

Layer (NFHL)

Working 

Standard

All NFHL data superseded by a Risk MAP or LOMR project must be removed 

from the rFHL prior to submission, and the NFHL must replace all data for a 

submitted dataset (i.e. DFIRM_ID) in its entirety.

611 11/30/2014

For all projects 

where the FIRM 

database has not 

yet been 

submitted to the 

NFHL

National 

Flood Hazard 

Layer (NFHL)

Working 

Standard

NFHL submittals must contain a unique identifier within the primary key fields 

for all records within a dataset (i.e. DFIRM_ID) and maintain all primary and 

foreign key relationships as defined in the FIRM Database Technical Reference. 

612 7/31/2015 Effective 

immediately

Key Decision 

Points (KDPs)

Program 

Standard

Flood Risk Projects must follow the Key Decision Points (KDPs) process and 

each KDP must be documented. A Flood Risk Project shall not advance in its 

project lifecycle beyond a KDP without Regional and HQ approval. The 6 

distinct KDPs:

- KDP 0: decision to initiate a Flood Risk Project or group of Flood Risk 

Projects.

- KDP 1: decision to move forward with a Flood Risk Project through data 

development, risk awareness, and/or outreach tasks 

- KDP 2: decision to develop Preliminary FIRM products

- KDP 3: decision to distribute Preliminary FIRM products to communities

- KDP 4: decision to initiate the Appeal Period

- KDP 5: decision to issue the LFD

613 7/31/2015 Effective 

immediately Coastal Program Standard

FEMA does not issue CLOMA or LOMA determinations in V zones where the 

primary frontal dunes (PFDs) define the inland limits of V zones.

614 7/31/2015 Effective 

immediately Coastal Program Standard

FEMA will only use whole foot BFEs for LOMA or CLOMA determinations where 

effective flood hazard areas are the result of coastal flood hazard analysis.
Page 73

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

615 7/31/2015 Effective 

immediately

Appeals

Process

Program 

Standard

The Scientific Resolution Panel must issue a report detailing the panel findings 

in writing to the community and FEMA no later than 90 days after being formed. 

The Panel Sponsor must publicly identify the date that an SRP was formed on 

the SRP website.

616 7/31/2015 Effective 

immediately

Letter of Map 

Revision 

(LOMR)

Program 

Standard

A LOMR or CLOMR requester shall be exempt from submitting a review or 

processing fee for a request that is based on a project where: (1) the primary 

purpose is habitat restoration; and (2) where the habitat restoration project is 

funded in whole or in part with Federal or State funds. For the purposes of this 

fee exemption, “habitat restoration” will have the same meaning as the term 

“habitat restoration” in the Partners for Fish and Wildlife Act, 16 U.S.C. § 

3772(5). This exemption includes projects for dam removal, culvert redesign or 

installation, or the installation of fish passage if the primary purpose is habitat 

restoration.

617 7/31/2015 Effective 

immediately

Prelim 

Distribution

Program 

Standard

Congressional notifications required under 42 USC 4101b (d)(1)(G) and (H) 

related to issuance of preliminary maps shall be provided in the monthly “Notice 

to Congress: Monthly Update on Flood Mapping” report. Issuance of initial 

preliminary maps and revised preliminary maps must be included.

618 11/30/2015

Applicable for 

LOMCs initiated 

after the effective 

date, but not 

retroactively for 

ongoing or 

completed 

LOMCs.

Letter of Map 

Revision 

(LOMR)

Program

Standard

All LOMRs issued shall have all revised FIRM Database items prepared in 

accordance with the FIRM Database Technical Reference and incorporated into 

the National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL) with a polygon showing a LOMR area 

of revision.

619 11/30/2015 Effective 

Immediately Coastal Program Standard

When revising the dune feature identified as the Primary Frontal Dune in an 

effective FIS, the revised feature must be as continuous as, or more continuous 

than, the effective PFD. This is especially important in areas with multiple 

ridges throughout a dune field, areas with man-made dunes, and propertyspecific revisions, including requests that the PFD designation be removed 

altogether. Community coordination may be required to make this assessment.
Page 74

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

620 5/31/2016

Effective for all 

new work funded 

in FY16

Coordination Program 

Standard

Before commencing the analysis and mapping activities that take place during 

the Data and Product Development Phase of a flood risk study, Project FEMA 

shall provide a written notification to community Chief Executive Officers and 

Floodplain Administrators that explains the selected modeling, explains why the 

selected modeling is appropriate, and provides a 30-day period for communities 

to consult on the appropriateness of the modeling. 

621 5/31/2016

Effective for all 

new work funded 

in FY16

Coordination Program 

Standard

Prior to completion of Quality Review 1, FEMA shall transmit a copy of the draft 

FIRM database and other contributing data as requested to the affected 

community Chief Executive Officers and Floodplain Administrators, provide a 

30-day period during which the affected communities may provide data to 

FEMA that can be used to supplement or modify the existing data, and 

incorporate any data that are consistent with prevailing engineering principles.

622 5/31/2016

Effective for all 

new work funded 

in FY16

Stakeholder 

Engagement

Program 

Standard

During the Preliminary NFIP Map Release and Due Process phases of the 

lifecycle for a flood risk study, the Project Team shall work with the FEMA 

Regional Office of External Affairs, other FEMA staff, community officials, and 

local radio and television outlets to further educate property owners about flood 

map revisions and appeals processes.

623 11/30/2016 Effective 

immediately

Letters of 

Map 

Amendment 

(LOMA)

Program 

Standard

Within non-participating communities, the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) 

designation shall not be conditionally or effectively removed by letter from a 

structure or property that 1) has or will be elevated by the placement of fill, or 2) 

encroaches the regulatory floodway on the effective FIRM. This is because 

these reviews require the submission of a completed, signed, and dated 

Community Acknowledgement Form, which confirms compliance with the 

participating community’s adopted floodplain management ordinance.

624 11/30/2016 Effective 

immediately

Letters of 

Map 

Amendment 

(LOMA)

Program 

Standard

The Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) designation shall not be conditionally or 

effectively removed from a structure or property by letter when the lowest 

adjacent grade to the structure or lowest point on the property is or would be 

below the applicable one-percent annual chance flood elevation, unless certified 

data can be presented to demonstrate that naturally occurring intervening high 

ground exists between the structure or property and the source of flooding.
Page 75

SID 

#

Effective 

Date

Implementation 

Description Category Standard Type Standard

626 11/30/2016 Effective 

Immediately

Letters of 

Map 

Amendment 

(LOMA)

Program 

Standard

The Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) designation may only be conditionally 

or effectively removed by letter from a property or portion-of-property that 1) 

includes the complete footprint of any proposed or existing structures impacted 

by the removal; and 2) does not include any flooding sources identified on the 

effective NFIP map.
Page 76

Appendix B

Acronyms and Abbreviations Used in the Risk MAP Standards

Item Full Translation

2D Two-Dimensional

AoMI Areas of Mitigation Interest

BFE Base Flood Elevation

BW-12 Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012

CBRS Coastal Barrier Resources System

CCO Consultation Coordination Officer

CDS Customer and Data Services

CEO Chief Executive Officer

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CID Community Identifier

CIS Community Information System

CLOMA Conditional Letter of Map Amendment

CLOMR Conditional Letter of Map Revision

CLOMR-F Conditional Letter of Map Revision based on Fill

CNMS Coordinated Needs Management Strategy

CRS Community Rating System

CSLF Changes Since Last FIRM

CTP Cooperating Technical Partner

CVA Consolidated Vertical Accuracy

DBF Database File

DEM Digital Elevation Model

DFIRM Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map

DVT Database Verification Tool

ESRI Environmental Systems Research Institute

ETJ Extraterritorial Jurisdiction
Page 77

Item Full Translation

FBFM Flood Boundary and Floodway Map 

FBS Floodplain Boundary Standard

FDT Floodway Data Table

FEDD Flood Elevation Determination Docket 

FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency

FHBM Flood Hazard Boundary Map

FHD Flood Hazard Determination

FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map

FIS Flood Insurance Study

FRD Flood Risk Database

FRM Flood Risk Map

FRR Flood Risk Report

FVA Fundamental Vertical Accuracy 

GCS Geographic Coordinate System

GIS Geographic Information System

H&H Hydrologic & Hydraulic

HFIAA Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act of 2014

HQ Headquarters

HUC Hydrologic Unit Code

KDP Key Decision Point

LFD Letter of Final Determination

LIDAR Light Detection and Ranging or Laser Imaging Detection and Ranging

LiMWA Limit of Moderate Wave Action

LLPT Local Levee Partnership Team

LODR Letter of Determination Review

LOMA Letter of Map Amendment

LOMC Letter of Map Change
Page 78

Item Full Translation

LOMR Letter of Map Revision

LOMR-F Letter of Map Revision based on Fill

LOMR-FW Letter of Map Revision based on Floodway

MAF/TIGER Master Address File/Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and 

Referencing

MIP Mapping Information Platform

MSC Map Service Center

MXD ArcMap Document (file extension)

NAD83 North American Datum 1983

NAVD88 North American Vertical Datum 1988

NFHL National Flood Hazard Layer

NFIP National Flood Insurance Program

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

NPS Nominal Pulse Spacing

NSRS National Spatial Reference System

NSSDA National Standard for Spatial Data Accuracy 

NTU Notice-to-User

NVA Non-vegetated Vertical Accuracy

NVUE New, Validated, or Updated Engineering

OFA Other Federal Agency

PAL Provisionally Accredited Levee

PDF Portable Document Format

PFD Primary Frontal Dune

PLSS Public Land Survey System

PMR Physical Map Revision

QA Quality Assurance

QA/QC Quality Assurance / Quality Control
Page 79

Item Full Translation

QR Quality Review

RFHL Regional Flood Hazard Layer

RPO Regional Project Officer

SFHA Special Flood Hazard Area

SHMO State Hazard Mitigation Officer

SHP Shapefile (file extension)

SOMA Summary of Map Actions

SRP Scientific Resolution Panel

SVA Supplemental Vertical Accuracy 

TIN Triangulated Irregular Network

TSDN Technical Support Data Notebook

TWL Total Water Level

USGS United States Geological Survey

UTM Universal Transverse Mercator

VVA Vegetated Vertical Accuracy

WSEL Water Surface Elevation

XML Extensible Markup Language (file extension)

XS Cross Section