    Flood Map Modernization: Program Strategy Shows Promise, but
    Challenges Remain (31-MAR-04, GAO-04-417).

    Flood maps identify areas at greatest risk of flooding and
    provide the foundation for the National Flood Insurance Program
    (NFIP) managed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
    The maps are used by (1) communities to establish minimum
    building standards designed to reduce the impact of flooding, (2)
    FEMA to set insurance rates, and (3) lenders to identify property
    owners who are required to purchase flood insurance. Nearly 70
    percent of all flood maps are more than 10 years old, according
    to FEMA. In an effort to update its flood maps, FEMA is
    implementing a $1 billion, 5-year map modernization program. GAO
    was asked to review the progress of FEMA's map modernization
    program.
    -------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
    REPORTNUM:   GAO-04-417
        ACCNO:   A09659
      TITLE:     Flood Map Modernization: Program Strategy Shows Promise,
    but Challenges Remain
         DATE:   03/31/2004
      SUBJECT:   Emergency preparedness
    	     Flood control
    	     Flood control management
    	     Flood insurance
    	     Strategic planning
    	     Insurance premiums
    	     Standards and standardization
    	     Data collection
    	     Intergovernmental relations
    	     Maps
    	     FEMA National Flood Insurance Program

    ******************************************************************
    ** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
    ** GAO Product.                                                 **
    **                                                              **
    ** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
    ** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
    ** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
    **                                                              **
    ** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
    ** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
    ** document's contents.                                         **
    **                                                              **
    ******************************************************************
    GAO-04-417

    United States General Accounting Office

     GAO	Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity,
               Committee on Financial Services, House of Representatives

    March 2004

    FLOOD MAP MODERNIZATION

                 Program Strategy Shows Promise, but Challenges Remain

    GAO-04-417

    March 2004

    FLOOD MAP MODERNIZATION

    Program Strategy Shows Promise, but

    Highlights of GAO-04-417, a report to the Challenges RemainChairman,
    Subcommittee on Housing and

    Community Opportunity, Committee on Financial Services, House of
    Representatives

    Flood maps identify areas at Through its map modernization program, FEMA
    intends to use advanced
    greatest risk of flooding and technologies to produce more accurate and
    accessible digital flood maps
    provide the foundation for the available on the Internet. These maps are
    expected to improve community
    National Flood Insurance Program efforts to reduce the impact of floods,
    increase property owners' use of flood

    (NFIP) managed by the Federal
    Emergency Management Agency insurance, and improve community, state and
    federal efforts to reduce the
    (FEMA). The maps are used by risks of other natural and man-made hazards.

    (1) communities to establish
    minimum building standards In developing digital flood maps, FEMA plans to
    incorporate data that are of

    designed to reduce the impact of a level of specificity and accuracy
    commensurate with communities' relative
    flooding, (2) FEMA to set insurance flood risk. According to FEMA, there
    is a direct relationship between the
    rates, and (3) lenders to identify types, quantity, and detail of the data
    and analysis used to develop maps and
    property owners who are required the costs of obtaining and analyzing
    those data. Although FEMA ranked the
    to purchase flood insurance. Nearly nation's 3,146 counties from highest
    to lowest risk, it has not yet established
    70 percent of all flood maps are data standards that describe the
    appropriate level of detail, accuracy, and
    more than 10 years old, according analysis required to develop digital
    maps based on risk level. Without such

    to FEMA. In an effort to update its
    flood maps, FEMA is implementing standards, FEMA cannot ensure that it
    uses the same level of data collection
    a $1 billion, 5-year map and analysis for all communities in the same risk
    category. Such standards
    modernization program. GAO was can also help FEMA to target its map
    modernization resources more
    asked to review the progress of efficiently by matching the level of data
    collection and analysis with the level

    FEMA's map modernization of flood risk.

    program. FEMA has developed partnerships with states and local entities
    that have

    begun mapping activities and has a strategy on how to best work with these
    To help ensure that FEMA's map entities. However, the overall
    effectiveness of FEMA's future partnering modernization program achieves
    efforts is uncertain because FEMA has not yet developed a clear strategy
    for its intended benefits, GAO is partnering with communities with less
    resources and little or no experience making several recommendations. in
    flood mapping. By developing such a strategy, FEMA will be better able to
    FEMA should address differences identify and use the most effective
    approaches to engage all of its partners in among the communities for
    which map modernization. flood maps are being developed- Comparison of Old
    Paper and New Digital Map Sections in North Carolina whether those
    differences arise

    from different levels of flood risk

    or different levels of capacity and

    resources to assist with flood

    mapping.

    www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-417.

    To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on
    the link above. For more information, contact William O. Jenkins,
    202-512-8777, jenkinswo@gao.gov.

               Source: North Carolina Department of Emergency Management.

    Contents

      Letter

    Results in Brief	Background	Map Modernization Intends to Use Advanced
    Technologies to

    Produce More Accurate and Accessible Digital Flood Maps FEMA Expects Map
    Modernization to Increase the Likelihood Maps Will Be Used for Risk
    Management FEMA's Strategy for Map Modernization Shows Promise, but

    Challenges Remain Conclusions Recommendations Agency Comments

                                           1

                                          3 5

                                           9

    16

    29 40 41 42

    Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

    Appendix II Users of Flood Maps

      Appendix III GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments 49

    GAO Contacts 49 Staff Acknowledgments 49

      Table

    Table 1: FEMA's Objectives for Map Modernization and Our Observations on
    the Objectives and Challenges

      Figures

    Figure 1: Age of the Nation's Current Flood Map Inventory 9 Figure 2: Key
    GIS Layers or Themes for Digital Flood Maps 11 Figure 3: Comparison of
    Original and Updated Floodplain for Plum

    Creek in Douglas County, Colorado 13 Figure 4: Use of LIDAR Technology 15
    Figure 5: Comparison of Old Paper and New Digital Map Sections

    in North Carolina 16 Figure 6: Expected Benefits of Map Modernization 18

    Figure 7: Comparison of FEMA and Sarasota County Floodplain after
    Remapping 20

    Figure 8: Impact of Capital Improvement Project on Floodplain in Sarasota
    County 22

    Figure 9: Expanded Floodplain Boundary for Regulating New Construction in
    Mecklenburg County, North Carolina 23

    Figure 10: Flooding in Greenville, North Carolina, during Hurricane Floyd
    27

    Figure 11: Example of Spill Response Model in Harris County, Texas 28

    Figure 12: Comparison of Cumulative FEMA Funding for Mapping Data with the
    Total Cumulative Dollar Value of Mapping Data Produced through CTP Program
    36

    Figure 13: Status of Remapping in North Carolina 38

    Abbreviations

    CTP Cooperating Technical Partner 	DHS Department of Homeland
    Security	FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency 	GIS Geographic
    Information Systems 	LIDAR Light Detection and Ranging 	NFIP National
    Flood Insurance Program

    This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
    protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
    its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this
    work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
    copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material
    separately.

    United States General Accounting Office Washington, DC 20548

    March 31, 2004

    The Honorable Robert W. Ney 	Chairman 	Subcommittee on Housing and
    Community Opportunity	Committee on Financial Services 	House of
    Representatives

    Dear Mr. Chairman:

    Floods inflict more damage and economic losses upon the United States	than
    any other natural disaster. During the 10 years from fiscal year 1992
       	through fiscal year 2001, flooding caused over 900 deaths and resulted in
       	approximately $55 billion in damages.1 Since its inception 36 years ago,
    the 	National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) has combined the
    development	of flood maps to identify the areas at greatest risk of
    flooding with	mitigation2 efforts to reduce or eliminate flood risks to
    people and 	property and the availability of insurance that property
    owners can 	purchase to protect themselves from flood losses. To date, the
    flood 	insurance program has paid about $12 billion in insurance claims,
       	primarily from policyholder premiums, that otherwise would have been
       	paid, at least in part, from taxpayer-funded disaster relief.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is responsible for
       	managing the NFIP, including the development of flood maps.3 Accurate
       	flood maps that identify the areas at greatest risk of flooding are the
       	foundation of the NFIP. The maps are principally used by (1) the

    1Data are from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in cooperation with the
    National Weather Service.

    2Mitigation is defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency as
    sustained action that reduces or eliminates long-term risk to people and
    property from hazards and their effects.

    3Prior to March 2003, FEMA was an independent agency whose Federal
    Insurance and Mitigation Administration was responsible for managing the
    flood insurance program. The Homeland Security Act of 2002, P.L. 107-296
    (Nov. 25, 2002), transferred FEMA and all its responsibilities to the
    Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate within the new Department
    of Homeland Security. This transfer was effective March 1, 2003.
    Currently, the Mitigation Division within FEMA is responsible for the
    flood insurance program, including flood map modernization.

    approximately 20,000 communities participating in the NFIP to adopt and
    enforce the program's minimum building standards for new construction
    within the maps' identified floodplains, (2) FEMA to develop accurate
    flood insurance policy rates based on flood risk, and (3) federally
    regulated mortgage lenders to identify those property owners who are
    statutorily required to purchase federal flood insurance. Under the
    National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended,4 property owners whose
    properties are within the designated floodplain and have a mortgage from a
    federally regulated financial institution are required to purchase federal
    flood insurance. Flood maps can become outdated for a variety of reasons,
    such as erosion or community growth and development that can affect the
    drainage patterns of rainwater. Thus, flood maps must be periodically
    updated to assess and map changes in the boundaries of floodplains that
    result from community growth, development, erosion, and other factors that
    affect the boundaries of areas at risk for flooding. According to FEMA,
    limited funding for flood mapping has resulted in a backlog of outdated
    maps. FEMA estimates that as of March 2004 nearly 70 percent of the
    nation's flood maps were more than 10 years old and reflected outdated
    data that could affect the ability to accurately identify current flood
    hazard areas.

    With congressional support and funding, FEMA has embarked on a $1 billion,
    5-year effort to update the nation's flood maps. Recognizing that FEMA is
    currently in the early stages of its map modernization effort, our
    objectives for this review were to answer the following questions: (1) How
    is map modernization intended to improve the accuracy and accessibility of
    the nation's flood maps? (2) What are the expected benefits of more
    accurate and accessible flood maps? (3) To what extent does FEMA's
    strategy for managing the map modernization program support the
    achievement of these benefits and what, if any, limitations could affect
    the implementation of the strategy?

    To answer these questions, we analyzed available information from FEMA on
    the program's purpose, objectives, and status and met with agency
    officials in headquarters and in the regional offices to discuss the
    program's progress. We also conducted site visits to states and
    communities that have already begun to modernize their flood maps and
    interviewed industry organizations such as the Association of State Flood
    Plain Managers, the National Association of Flood and Stormwater

    4See 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.

      Results in Brief

    Management Agencies, and the National Emergency Management Association. We
    conducted our work from April 2003 to March 2004 in accordance with
    generally accepted government auditing standards. See appendix I for more
    details on our scope and methodology.

    Through map modernization, FEMA intends to produce more accurate and
    accessible flood maps by using advanced technology to gather accurate data
    and make the flood maps, and the digital information on which they are
    based, available on the Internet. For example, displaying map data in
    digital Geographic Information Systems format permits consistent, accurate
    display and ready electronic retrieval of a variety of map features,
    including elevation data and the location of key infrastructure, such as
    utilities. According to FEMA, nearly 70 percent of the nation's
    approximately 92,222 flood maps are more than 10 years old, and many of
    these maps no longer reflect current flood hazard risks because of such
    changes as erosion and development that can alter drainage patterns and
    thus the areas at highest risk of flooding. Moreover, since many flood
    maps were created or last updated, there have been improvements in the
    techniques for assessing and displaying flood risks.

    FEMA expects that by producing more accurate and accessible digital flood
    maps through map modernization, the nation will benefit in three ways.
    First, communities can use more accurate digital maps to reduce flood risk
    within floodplains by more effectively regulating development through
    zoning and building standards. Second, accurate digital maps available on
    the Internet will facilitate the identification of property owners who are
    statutorily required to obtain or who would be best served by obtaining
    flood insurance. Third, accurate and precise data will help national,
    state, and local officials to accurately locate infrastructure and
    transportation systems (e.g., power plants, sewage treatment plants,
    railroads, bridges, and ports) to help mitigate and manage risk for
    multiple hazards, both natural and man-made.

    FEMA's strategy for managing map modernization is designed to support the
    expected program benefits, but FEMA's approach to implementing the
    strategy raises several concerns that could hamper the agency's efforts.
    FEMA's implementation approach is based on four objectives: (1) establish
    and maintain a premier data system, (2) expand outreach and better inform
    the user community, (3) establish and maintain effective partnerships, and
    (4) achieve effective program management.

    o  Establish and maintain a premier data system: Although FEMA's efforts
    to establish a new data system could result in more accurate

    flood maps and make it easier to access and use the revised flood maps,
    FEMA has not yet established clear standards for the types, quantity, and
    specificity of data collection and analysis associated with different
    levels of flood risk. FEMA has ranked the nation's 3,146 counties from
    highest to lowest flood risk. According to FEMA, communities at the
    highest risk of flooding require the most extensive, detailed data and
    analysis, but the same level of data collection and analysis may not be
    necessary to create accurate, useful maps for communities with lower flood
    risks. Defining the level of data collection and analysis for different
    levels of risk is important because obtaining and analyzing flood map data
    is time-consuming and expensive, and the more detailed and specific the
    data, generally the greater the effort and costs required to obtain it. By
    identifying the types, quantity, and specificity of the data and analysis
    needed for communities based on their risk, FEMA can better ensure that
    data collection and analysis is consistent for all communities with
    similar risk and that it is using its resources efficiently while
    producing maps that are accurate and useful for communities at different
    levels of flood risk. FEMA acknowledges the need to develop such
    standards, but has not yet developed draft standards or included this task
    into its map modernization implementation plan.

    o  Expand outreach and better inform the user community: FEMA's planned
    expanded outreach efforts are intended to increase public awareness and
    obtain community acceptance of the updated flood maps because the updated
    information could potentially identify changes in floodplain boundaries
    and, therefore, affect property owners, including whether or not their
    property's location may require them to purchase federal flood insurance.
    FEMA's intended outcome for these outreach efforts is to reduce community
    vulnerability to natural and man-made hazards and increase participation
    in the flood insurance program. Because FEMA does not have the authority
    to require that affected property owners take steps to mitigate their
    properties against flood risks or to ensure that owners whose properties
    are in the floodplain purchase flood insurance, effective outreach is
    essential to ultimately achieve these benefits.

    o  Establish and maintain effective partnerships: FEMA's objective for
    building and maintaining mutually beneficial partnerships is designed to
    facilitate and support the efficient production and effective use of maps.
    FEMA recognizes that local, state, and federal agencies, that have been
    working on mapping activities for years, have the resources and potential
    to positively affect the quality and quantity of the data collected and
    improve the way these data are used. In

    addition, these partnerships can enable FEMA to leverage its resources and
    reduce the federal costs of map modernization. FEMA has developed a
    strategy for partnering with these agencies to encourage greater
    involvement in map modernization, including the contribution of resources.
    However, the overall effectiveness of the agency's future partnering
    efforts is uncertain because FEMA has not yet developed a clear strategy
    for partnering with communities that have few resources, limited mapping
    capability, and little history of flood mapping activities.

    o  Achieve effective program management: In March 2004, FEMA awarded a
    performance-based contract to a single contractor to oversee map
    modernization that includes performance measures to gauge the success of
    its efforts. Through a staffing analysis, FEMA has determined that it
    needs 75 staff with specific, identified skills to effectively monitor and
    manage the contract and overall map modernization program. As of March
    2004, FEMA had hired 1 of the 75 staff, had developed plans to hire or
    transfer 43 others, but had not yet determine how it would acquire the
    remaining 31 positions. FEMA has not clearly defined performance measures
    related to whether (1) the revised maps meet any established standards for
    accuracy and (2) outreach efforts have been successful in increasing the
    community and individual awareness and use of flood maps.

    To help ensure that FEMA's map modernization program achieves its intended
    benefits, we make recommendations to the Secretary of Homeland Security to
    direct the Undersecretary of Emergency Preparedness and Response to
    address data and analysis standards, partnering with state and local
    governments, and program management. We provided a copy of our draft
    report to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for comment. In its
    oral comments, DHS generally concurred with the report's findings and
    recommendations and provided technical comments that we incorporated where
    appropriate.

    Background FEMA is the primary federal agency responsible for assisting
    state and local governments, private entities, and individuals to prepare
    for, mitigate, respond to, and recover from natural disasters, including
    floods. FEMA's NFIP has served as a key component of the agency's efforts
    to minimize or mitigate the damage and financial impact of floods on the
    public, as well as to limit federal expenditures needed after floods
    occur.

    In 1968, to address the increasing amount of flood damage, the lack of
    readily available insurance for property owners, and the cost to the
    taxpayer for flood-related disaster relief, the National Flood Insurance
    Act of 1968,5 created the NFIP. Since its inception, the program has
    sought to minimize flood-related property losses by making flood insurance
    available on reasonable terms and encouraging its purchase by people who
    need flood insurance protection-particularly those living in the areas at
    highest risk of flooding known as special flood hazard areas. The program
    identifies and maps flood-prone areas in the country, makes flood
    insurance available to property owners in the nearly 20,000 communities
    that currently participate in the program,6 and requires floodplain
    management efforts to mitigate flood hazards on the part of participating
    communities.

    FEMA's flood maps are one of the basic, essential tools for flood hazard
    mitigation in the United States. FEMA estimates that the maps are used an
    estimated 30 million times annually in the private and public sectors.
    FEMA uses the maps to identify the floodplain boundaries in which flood
    insurance is required and to set flood insurance rates. Mortgage lending
    institutions use the maps to determine who is required to purchase flood
    insurance and ensure that flood insurance is purchased and maintained for
    these properties. Community planning officials, land developers, and
    engineers use the maps for designing new buildings and infrastructure to
    be safe from flooding. See appendix II for more information on the various
    stakeholders that use and rely upon flood maps.

    Flood maps provide the basis for establishing floodplain building
    standards that participating communities must adopt and enforce as part of
    the program. For a community to participate in the program, any structures
    built within special flood hazard areas-also known as 100-year
    floodplains7-that have a 1 percent or greater chance of experiencing
    flooding in any given year must be built according to the program's
    building standards whose purpose is to minimize flood losses. A key
    component of the program's building standards that must be followed by
    participating communities is a requirement that the lowest floor of the

    5P.L. 90-448, (Aug. 1, 1968).

    6Also included are Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.

    7For clarity and ease of discussion throughout the report, we use the term
    "floodplain" in all discussions where we address the special flood hazard
    area or 100-year floodplain.

    structure be elevated to or above the base flood level-the elevation at
    which there is a 1 percent chance of flooding in a given year. The
    administration has estimated that local governments' compliance with the
    program's standards for new construction is saving over $1 billion
    annually in flood damage avoided.

    Flood maps also provide the basis for setting insurance rates and
    identifying properties whose owners are required to purchase flood
    insurance. When the NFIP was created, the purchase of flood insurance was
    voluntary. To increase the impact of the program, however, Congress
    amended the original law in 1973 to require the purchase of flood
    insurance in certain circumstances. Flood insurance is required for
    structures in special flood hazard areas of communities participating in
    the program if (1) any federal loans or grants were used to acquire or
    build the structures or (2) the structures have outstanding mortgage loans
    made by lending institutions that are regulated by the federal government.
    Owners of properties without mortgages or properties with mortgages held
    by unregulated lenders were not, and still are not, required to purchase
    flood insurance, even if the properties are in special flood hazard areas.

    Federal regulations require that FEMA communicate potential changes in
    flood risk to the public when it decides to initiate a flood mapping study
    and when it is ready to release preliminary maps. At the beginning of the
    mapping process, FEMA is required to notify community stakeholders.8 When
    FEMA is ready to release preliminary maps, the agency must publish the
    proposed base flood elevations in the Federal Register for public comment
    and notify the community of the results of the study.9 When the final map
    is approved and implemented, FEMA publishes another Federal Register
    notice.10

    8FEMA is required to contact community stakeholders, such as the state
    coordinating agency and other appropriate community officials, to discuss
    the scope and methodology for the proposed flood map study. 44 C.F.R. sec.
    66.5.

    9FEMA is required to publish the proposed flood elevations in a prominent
    local newspaper at least twice during the 10-day period following the
    notification of the community chief executive officer. Property owners
    have 90 days from the second newspaper publication to appeal the proposed
    flood elevations. 44 C.F.R. secs. 67.4, 67.5.

    10Final flood elevations must be published in the Federal Register and
    copies sent to the community chief executive officer, all individual
    appellants, and the state-coordinating agency. 44 C.F.R. 67.11.

    In the early 1990s, some of the data and information FEMA collected to
    develop flood maps were becoming available in digital format. In 1994, the
    President issued Executive Order 12906, which mandated that standards for
    digital geographic data be applied uniformly across the federal
    government. Anticipating that electronic data would soon become the
    standard vehicle for information delivery and in an attempt to make flood
    map production more cost-effective and efficient, FEMA developed a
    prototype for a digital flood map.

    In 1997, FEMA developed its initial flood map modernization plan that
    outlined the steps necessary to update the nation's flood maps to digital
    format and streamline FEMA's operations in raising public awareness of the
    importance of the maps and responding to requests to revise them. This
    initial plan and subsequent updates to the plan reflected the
    recommendations of the Technical Mapping Advisory Council created by
    Congress and active from 1995-2000. The council provided a number of
    recommendations which were aimed at making the digital flood map the
    future method for assessing flood hazard risk and setting federal
    insurance rates. Recognizing the importance of updating the nation's flood
    maps, Congress appropriated additional funds in fiscal years 2000-2002.
    FEMA used these funds to launch its map modernization program through such
    activities as developing new flood mapping standards and procedures,
    expanding the Cooperating Technical Partner (CTP) program that recognizes
    and encourages state and local participation in flood hazard data
    development and maintenance and developing some digital flood maps. In
    fiscal year 2003, Congress appropriated $150 million, allowing FEMA to
    initiate a full-scale update of the nation's flood maps called the
    Multi-Hazard Flood Map Modernization Program,11 an effort FEMA expects to
    take about 5 years and cost about $1 billion. In fiscal year 2004,
    Congress appropriated an additional $200 million for map modernization,
    and the administration has requested an additional $200 million for fiscal
    year 2005 to continue the program. FEMA has established four primary
    objectives for implementing map modernization: (1) establish and maintain
    a premier data collection and delivery system, (2) expand outreach and
    better inform the user community, (3) build and maintain mutually
    beneficial partnerships, and (4) achieve effective program management. In
    March 2004, FEMA awarded a performance-based

    11For clarity and ease of discussion throughout the report, we use the
    term "map modernization" in all discussions where we address the
    Multi-Hazard Flood Map Modernization Program.

      Map Modernization Intends to Use Advanced Technologies to Produce More
      Accurate and Accessible Digital Flood Maps

    contract for overseeing map modernization that includes contractor
    performance measures for each of these objectives.

    Through map modernization, FEMA intends to produce more accurate and
    accessible flood maps by using advanced technology to gather accurate data
    and make the resulting information available on the Internet. Currently,
    many of the flood maps in FEMA's inventory do not accurately reflect the
    true flood hazard risks because over time, new development and other
    factors altered watersheds and floodplains faster than the maps could be
    updated. For the most part, the $35 million to $50 million in annual flood
    insurance policy fees has been the only source of funding for updating
    flood maps, and according to FEMA, the agency has not been able to keep
    the maps updated with the funds available. As a result, nearly 70 percent
    of the nation's approximately 92,222 flood maps12 are more than 10 years
    old and many of these maps reflect inaccurate data, according to FEMA.
    Figure 1 shows the age distribution of the current map inventory.

    Figure 1: Age of the Nation's Current Flood Map Inventory

    <5 years old

                                     5-10 years old

                                    10-15 years old

                                     >15 years old

                                     Source: FEMA.

    Over time, physical conditions in watersheds and floodplains can change,
    and improvements in the techniques for assessing and displaying flood

    12The 92,222 flood maps represent nearly 20,000 communities.

    risks are made. FEMA plans to use the latest technology, such as
    Geographic Information Systems (GIS), to create accurate digital flood
    maps. GIS technology provides the foundation for achieving FEMA's goals of
    melding different types and sources of data to create the new digital
    flood maps and making the new digital flood maps available to a variety of
    users over the Internet.

    The primary function of GIS is to link multiple digital databases and
    graphically display that information as maps with potentially many
    different types of "layers" of information. When layers of information are
    formatted using the same standards, users can potentially overlay various
    layers of information about any number of specific topics to examine how
    the layers interrelate. Each layer of a GIS map represents a particular
    "theme" or feature, and one layer could be derived from a data source
    completely different from the other layers. For example, one theme could
    represent all the streets in a specified area. Another theme could
    correspond to the topography or elevation data of an area, and others
    could show aerial photography and streams in the same area. These themes
    are all key elements needed to create flood maps that accurately depict
    floodplains and can be used to identify properties in these areas. In
    preparing for full-scale implementation of map modernization, FEMA has
    established standards and graphic specifications for digital flood maps
    created with GIS. Figure 2 shows the concept of data themes in GIS for
    flood maps.

               Figure 2: Key GIS Layers or Themes for Digital Flood Maps

                                     Source: FEMA.

    GIS technology also enables the creation of more accurate and accessible
    maps than would be possible with older mapping methods and technology. The
    majority of FEMA's flood map inventory was produced using manual
    techniques that have inherent accuracy and accessibility limitations. For
    example, in creating traditional paper flood maps, field measurements
    taken by surveyors would have been transferred by hand to paper base maps.
    If the paper base map contained any inaccuracies, then the fieldsurvey
    data could be shown in the wrong place on the final flood map. This would
    then result in floodplain boundaries being shown in the wrong place.

                                Douglas County, Colorado

    Recent remapping efforts in Douglas County, Colorado, show the accuracy of
    digital maps using GIS technology compared with paper maps created using
    manual techniques. As seen in figure 3, some areas (around cross section
    J) shown outside the floodplain on the original map will be shown in the
    floodplain based on the updated flood hazard information from a new
    mapping study using GIS technology. More critically, some areas shown
    outside the floodplain on the original map will now be shown in the
    floodway, the most dangerous area of the floodplain (greatest depth,
    highest flood water velocity). According to FEMA and community officials,
    the limitations of the manual techniques used to create the original map
    contributed to the resulting inaccuracy.

    Figure 3: Comparison of Original and Updated Floodplain for Plum Creek in
    Douglas County, Colorado

    Source: FEMA and Denver Urban Drainage and Flood Control District.

    Using GIS technology to create digital flood maps minimizes mapping errors
    and improves accuracy because each data component (e.g., streams, streets,
    etc.) would have a common geographic reference system.

    By their nature, paper flood maps have limited accessibility as compared
    with a digital map that can be made available on the Internet. The
    expansion of Internet connectivity in recent years has substantially

    enhanced the potential value of digital maps created with GIS because now
    it is possible to locate and connect data from many distinct GIS databases
    to develop analytical information on almost any topic that is associated
    with physical locations. Digital flood maps created according to FEMA's
    standards are intended to provide users not only with the ability to
    determine the flood zone and base flood elevations for a particular
    location, but also with the ability to access other information like road,
    stream, and public land survey data. Communities could use this
    information for a variety of purposes, including decisions on future
    development and evacuation routes.

    As part of map modernization, FEMA has promoted the use of a variety of
    advanced technologies to improve the accuracy of flood maps. In recent
    years, for example, where it deems it appropriate, FEMA has promoted the
    use of Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) remote sensing technologies to
    generate highly detailed, digital elevation data. Elevation data are a key
    component needed to determine flood risk and identify floodplain
    boundaries. According to FEMA, for very flat areas where small changes in
    elevation can have a large impact on where flood plain boundaries are
    drawn, LIDAR can provide the level of detail needed to accurately
    delineate these boundaries. Communities can also use detailed, digital
    elevation data for planning and land development purposes. Figure 4 shows
    an airplane equipped with laser-pulsing sensors using LIDAR to gather
    digital elevation data to measure the contours and crevices that determine
    where floodwaters collect.

    Figure 5: Comparison of Old Paper and New Digital Map Sections in North
    Carolina

    Source: North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Program.

    FEMA Expects Map FEMA expects map modernization to increase the likelihood
    that the more

    accurate and accessible maps will be used for risk management purposes.
    Modernization to Specifically, FEMA expects the new maps to be used to (1)
    improve flood Increase the mitigation, (2) increase flood insurance
    participation, and (3) improve

    "multi-hazard" mitigation and risk management capabilities. First, FEMA
    Likelihood Maps Will expects communities to be able to use these new and
    revised maps to Be Used for Risk better manage and mitigate flood risk by
    regulating floodplain

    development through building codes, ordinances, and regulations. Second,

    Management 	the new maps also have the potential to help increase flood
    insurance participation because they will more accurately identify those
    properties that are in the floodplain and whose owners would be required
    to purchase flood insurance. Compared with the existing paper maps,
    accessing the new maps through the Internet will make it much easier for
    lenders to identify property owners who should have flood insurance. In
    addition, the newly revised flood maps should more accurately identify all

    properties in the floodplain, including those whose owners do not have a
    mortgage or whose mortgage is held by a lender that is not federally
    regulated. Accurately identifying these property owners should assist FEMA
    and communities in targeting their outreach about the importance of flood
    insurance. Third, the data and infrastructure developed by map
    modernization is also expected to help national, state, and local
    officials mitigate and manage risk from multiple hazards, both natural and
    manmade. Accurate digital maps can provide more precise data on such
    things as the location of hazardous material facilities, power plants,
    railroads, and airports to state and national officials for planning
    development as well as to assess internal weaknesses and evacuation
    routes. (Fig. 6 highlights these expected benefits.)

    Figure 6: Expected Benefits of Map Modernization Map Modernization

    Source: GAO.

        Map Modernization Is Expected to Improve Flood Mitigation

    The more accurate and updated flood hazard information produced through
    map modernization is expected to help improve flood mitigation in
    participating communities. The NFIP requires participating communities to
    adopt and enforce building standards based on the floodplain boundaries
    and base flood elevations when maps are updated. For example, the lowest
    floor of structures in new construction must be elevated to at least the
    base flood elevations identified on the maps. FEMA's policy is to monitor
    communities to ensure that they have adopted building standards that meet
    the minimum NFIP criteria and to ensure that they are effectively
    enforcing these standards. If communities fail to establish and enforce
    minimum NFIP flood plain building standards, FEMA can suspend availability
    of federal flood insurance.

    Communities also may use updated flood hazard data to take actions to
    mitigate flooding that go beyond adopting the building standards required
    by the NFIP. For example, communities may use the data from the maps to
    identify where to conduct capital improvement projects designed to

    Sarasota County's Use of Flood Map Data for Storm Water Capital
    Improvement Projects

    mitigate flooding of structures in the floodplain. In addition, FEMA has
    established a Community Rating System that provides discounts on flood
    insurance premiums for those communities that take mitigation actions
    beyond those required by the NFIP.

    Sarasota County, Florida, is in the process of modernizing its flood maps
    and has been using the maps and the models behind them to implement
    stormwater capital improvement projects whose purpose is to mitigate the
    flood risk for structures now located in the floodplain. These efforts
    have also resulted in lower insurance premiums for property owners.

    In the late 1990s, because Sarasota County officials believed that current
    maps did not accurately reflect changes to the floodplain that had
    occurred due to development and other factors, they began an effort to
    aggressively remap the county's watersheds using GIS and new flood
    modeling technologies. At the time, the county had experienced several
    significant flooding events where hundreds of properties not depicted in
    the floodplain on its 11-year old maps were damaged. Figure 7 shows both
    the increase and decrease in the floodplain based on the county's
    remapping efforts.

    Figure 7: Comparison of FEMA and Sarasota County Floodplain after
    Remapping

    Source: Sarasota County Center for Watershed Management.

    The county has been using the maps to implement storm water improvement
    projects such as retention ponds and levees that are designed to improve
    drainage and, therefore, alter the floodplain. Ultimately, these projects
    would result in structures no longer being in the floodplain. County
    officials estimate that they have reduced the number of structures in the
    floodplain by 75 percent (from 800 to under 200) through

    these projects. According to these officials, the reduction in their
    Community Rating System rating from an 8 to a 6 was due in large part to
    their remapping efforts. They estimate that this reduction is saving the
    community over $1 million a year in flood insurance premiums. Figure 8
    shows an example of the impact one such capital improvement project had on
    the floodplain in Sarasota County.

    Figure 8: Impact of Capital Improvement Project on Floodplain in Sarasota County

    Mecklenburg County, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, provides another
    example of how

    North Carolina 	communities may use revised maps as a basis for adopting
    and enforcing building standards that exceed the standards required by the
    NFIP.

    In February 2004, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, issued final digital
    maps that not only show the floodplain boundaries and base flood
    elevations used by FEMA to set insurance rates, but also include local
    land use maps designed to guide future development. (See fig. 9.) These
    maps are more restrictive than the FEMA maps, which are used for setting
    insurance rates. The county uses these maps to require that the lowest
    floor of all new construction is built an additional foot above the future
    minimum base flood elevation identified by the map. Engineering and
    economic studies estimate that this higher standard will save over $300
    million in structure and content losses due to future flooding. As in the
    case of Sarasota County, adopting these higher standards should result in
    a better Community Rating System rating for the county and reduce
    insurance rates for property owners.

    Figure 9: Expanded Floodplain Boundary for Regulating New Construction in
    Mecklenburg County, North Carolina

                  Source: Charlotte-Mecklenburg Storm Water Services.

    Map Modernization Is Map modernization has the potential to help increase
    flood insurance Expected to Help Increase participation. The accuracy of
    the new maps should better identify at-risk Flood Insurance property
    owners who would be best served by obtaining flood insurance

    whether or not the owners would be required to purchase insurance
    underParticipation the NFIP's mandatory purchase requirement. Moreover,
    the digital, GISbased maps should make flood risk information more
    accessible to a

    Outreach Efforts in Wilson and Johnston Counties, North Carolina

    variety of users such as lenders and community officials who could conduct
    targeted outreach at these property owners.

    Recent outreach activities conducted during remapping in Wilson and
    Johnston counties in North Carolina provide an example of the types of
    information that can be provided to communities and property owners
    through outreach efforts during map modernization.

    As part of its map modernization program, the state of North Carolina
    holds two meetings. The first meeting is held with the county and
    community officials and floodplain administrators, and the second meeting
    is open to the general public. The purpose of the meetings is to provide
    an overview of the state's program; an outline of flood hazard data
    changes between the current maps and preliminary revised maps; and
    guidance on the use of the maps, including how to view and download data
    from the state's Web site. After the state had completed preliminary
    studies and maps for Wilson and Johnston counties, community officials
    used the digital, GIS-based maps to identify structures that are located
    in the newly identified floodplain. The counties then sent out letters to
    these property owners that

    o  notified them that their property was in a floodplain,

    o  provided a telephone number to call for more information,

    o  	announced upcoming public meetings where the preliminary maps would be
    discussed, and

    o  	identified the state's Internet site where the flood maps could be
    viewed (Wilson County).

    By providing this information in advance, property owners could know
    before the meeting whether their property was in the newly designated
    floodplain. According to community officials, their outreach activities
    provided the information necessary for the public to become aware of their
    risk and know what actions could be taken to mitigate these risks.

    It is important to note, however, that FEMA, states, and communities do
    not have the authority to ensure that property owners who are subject to
    the mandatory purchase of flood insurance requirement actually purchase
    flood insurance. It is the federally regulated lenders' responsibility to
    ensure that borrowers purchase flood insurance and that the insurance
    policy is maintained throughout the loan's life as each new lender

    servicing the loan becomes aware that the affected property is at risk for
    flooding. Furthermore, owners of properties without mortgages or
    properties with mortgages held by unregulated lenders are not required to
    purchase flood insurance, even if the properties are in floodplains.

        Map Modernization Is Expected to Improve Multi-Hazard Mitigation and Risk
        Management Capabilities

    Flood-Inundation Application Developed by North Carolina

    FEMA expects that the data developed, collected, and distributed through
    map modernization will help national, state, and local emergency managers
    mitigate and manage risk posed by other natural and man-made hazards.
    Accurate digital base maps provide more precise data to state and national
    officials for planning, such as the location of hazardous material
    facilities, power plants, utility distribution facilities, and other
    infrastructure (bridges, sewage treatment plants, buildings, and
    structures). According to FEMA, map modernization will also support DHS's
    overall goal to reduce the nation's vulnerability to terrorism by
    providing GIS data and capabilities to other departmental functions. For
    example, more accurate information on transportation systems such as
    railroads, airports, harbors, ports, and waterways should be helpful in
    assessing internal weaknesses and evacuation routes.

    North Carolina's use of information collected during flood mapping to
    develop a flood-inundation application exemplifies how the data collected
    through map modernization can be used for other risk management purposes.

    Leveraging the work done through the floodplain mapping program, North
    Carolina is in the process of establishing a real-time flood-inundation
    and flood forecast mapping Web application that will provide the public
    with valuable safety information during weather events. During a storm,
    the application will provide maps and information over the Internet that
    display which land area, roads, and bridges are inundated by floodwaters.
    Furthermore, to help ensure that the public is aware of high flood risk
    areas, the state plans to develop an automated alert network that will
    utilize different media to notify and warn emergency managers, law
    enforcement, and the general public. North Carolina is currently working
    with television broadcasters in the region to broadcast warnings and
    upto-date safety information based upon information provided through the
    Web application. The majority of deaths during Hurricane Floyd, which hit
    North Carolina in 1999, occurred to individuals driving over
    floodinundated roads and bridges. North Carolina hopes that their
    real-time and forecasted inundation mapping application will help to
    prevent such deaths during future storm events.

    The flood forecasting component of North Carolina's flood-inundation and
    forecasting application was recently tested during Hurricane Isabel, which
    struck in September of 2003. Using data collected by North Carolina, the
    National Weather Service released an experimental Peak Forecast Inundation
    Web site for predicting the flooding effects of the hurricane. This was a
    new level of capability for the National Weather Service by forecasting
    flood-inundation throughout a major portion of the river basin rather than
    focusing solely on fixed forecasting locations. The implementation of this
    new flood forecasting technology will greatly enhance North Carolina's
    flood warning Web application.

    Figure 10 shows an example of how the flood-inundation application is
    intended to work. As floodwaters rise and spread out over the landscape,
    the flood-inundation application will produce maps to show the extent of
    flooding and when roads, critical facilities, and other structures will
    become flooded. The following maps show flooding in Greenville, North
    Carolina, and are based on flood levels caused by Hurricane Floyd.

    Harris County, Texas, offers another example of how the digital data
    developed through map modernization could be used to plan for and respond
    to man-made disasters.

    To demonstrate the multi-hazard use of the digital data, community
    officials showed how a spill response model could be developed to
    determine the path of a petroleum spill at a Houston area refinery. The
    model, developed with digital data by a private consultant, uses both
    elevation data and aerial imagery collected through map modernization to
    provide officials and emergency response personnel critical information to
    determine the path of a chemical spill and potentially impacted waterways.
    This information should provide local officials with valuable

                   Source: North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Program.

                             Harris County, Houston, Texas

    information to aid in their mitigation and evacuation efforts and to
    protect natural habitats. The figure shows how petroleum at a Houston area
    refinery would probably flow from specific tanks if ruptured.

    Source: Harris County Flood Control District.

    LIDAR data also provide a basis for three-dimensional modeling of the
    location of buildings, tanks, and equipment that could be used to
    determine the optimal location for fire-fighting equipment at the same
    refinery. The reach of a water jet can be placed against the 3-D model to

        FEMA's Strategy for Map Modernization Shows Promise, but Challenges
        Remain

    determine the extent of coverage and identify obscured structures in the
    "shadow" of other structures that would limit or block the reach of the
    water jet. This same 3-D model could also be used in a vulnerability
    analysis to locate potential targets within a given area that are at risk
    from gunfire or hand-held rockets.

    FEMA's strategy for managing map modernization is intended to support the
    achievement of the expected program benefits of improved flood mitigation,
    increased NFIP insurance participation, and improved multihazard
    mitigation and risk management capabilities. However, FEMA's approach to
    implementing the strategy poses several challenges that could hamper the
    agency's efforts. FEMA's approach is based on four objectives. Two
    objectives FEMA hopes to achieve through map modernization- building and
    maintaining a premier data collection and delivery system and expanding
    outreach and better informing the user community-have the potential to
    improve the use of flood maps for improved flood mitigation and increased
    NFIP participation, as well as multi-hazard risk management. The other two
    objectives-building and maintaining mutually beneficial partnerships and
    achieving effective program management-are intended to facilitate the
    achievement of the first two objectives and their intended benefits
    efficiently and effectively. Table 1 provides a brief description of
    FEMA's four objectives for map modernization and the challenges facing
    implementation.

      Table 1: FEMA's Objectives for Map Modernization and Our Observations on the
                               Objectives and Challenges

    Objective Description GAO Observations

    Establish and maintain a premier data collection and delivery system
    Create a GIS- and Internet-based system that provides easy access to
    reliable flood hazard data and other data collected during the mapping
    process. The system will be available to states and communities to input
    and use data, therefore, enabling easier and less time-consuming data
    maintenance and the use of the information for multi-hazard risk
    management purposes. FEMA has ranked the nation's counties based on risk.
    However, FEMA has not yet established data collection and analysis
    standards for communities with similar risk. Without such standards, FEMA
    cannot ensure that the level of data collection and analysis is consistent
    across all communities with similar risk.

    Expand outreach and better inform the Raise the awareness of flood map
    users FEMA's outreach strategy is based on a

    user community of their risk of flooding through increased recognition
    that it has no direct authority to outreach efforts and educate the public
    on ensure that many map modernization how they can use flood maps and
    other benefits are achieved, but must rely on hazard data to mitigate
    natural and man-others-e.g., mitigation efforts by individual made
    disasters. property owners and lender enforcement of mandatory flood
    insurance purchase.

    Build and maintain mutually beneficial partnerships

    Develop strategies for forming and enhancing relationships with all states
    and communities resulting in their active participation in the production
    of flood hazard data. This is intended to help improve the long-term
    quality of flood data, ensure that the maps meet local needs, and
    capitalize on local and regional knowledge and resources to achieve the
    effective production and efficient use of flood maps at a reduced cost to
    the federal government.

    States and communities with limited resources and technical capabilities
    are likely to pose a challenge to FEMA's ability to fund and implement
    mapping activities. FEMA has not yet developed a strategy for how to
    partner with communities that do not have the resources, capabilities, or
    motivation to initiate and sustain mapping activities.

    Using current staffing levels, FEMA may be challenged to effectively
    oversee the contract and the map modernization program. In addition,
    although FEMA has established measures to assess achievement of its
    program objectives, its measures for its objectives to develop a premier
    data system and to expand outreach and better inform the user community
    are not clearly defined or fully developed.

    Achieve effective program management 	Develop a flexible program
    management structure that clearly evaluates the program's performance and
    identifies continuous improvement strategies to most effectively and
    efficiently conduct mapping activities that result in highquality flood
    maps.

                                 Source: GAO analysis.

    In Its Efforts to Establish a The goal of FEMA's objective to develop a
    new data system using the New Data System, FEMA latest technology is more
    efficient production, delivery and, thereby, the Has Not Yet Established
    use of flood maps. As discussed previously, FEMA hopes to accomplish Data
    Standards for this by using geographic information systems technology that
    provides the

    foundation for the production and delivery of more accurate digital
    floodDifferent Levels of Risk maps and multi-hazard data that is more
    accessible over the Internet.

    In developing the new data system to update flood maps across the nation,
    FEMA's intent is to develop and incorporate flood risk data that are of a
    level of specificity and accuracy commensurate with communities' relative
    flood risks. According to FEMA, there is a direct relationship between the
    types, quantity, and detail of the data and analysis used for map
    development and the costs associated with obtaining and analyzing those
    data. FEMA believes it needs to strike a balance between the relative
    flood risk faced by individual communities and the level of analysis and
    effort needed to develop reliable flood hazard data if it is to update the
    nation's maps efficiently and effectively.

    FEMA has ranked all 3,146 counties from highest to lowest based on a
    number of factors, including, among other things, population, growth
    trends, housing units, flood insurance policies and claims, repetitive
    loss properties, and flood disasters. On the basis of this ranking, FEMA
    established mapping priorities. However, FEMA has not yet established
    standards on the appropriate data and level of analysis required to
    develop maps based on risk level. FEMA has historically applied the same
    minimum standards for all flood maps and supporting data.13 FEMA's
    Guidelines and Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners

    provides guidance for selecting the level of analysis and effort to
    produce flood hazard data and have generally been used on a case-by-case
    basis.14 The guidelines do not specify standards to be used for all
    mapping projects within a given risk category. Without establishing
    standards for different categories of risk, FEMA cannot ensure that it
    uses the same level of data collection and analysis across all communities
    within the same risk category. These standards could also provide a
    consistent basis for estimating the costs of developing maps in each risk
    category. According to FEMA, the agency plans to develop standards that
    can be applied to different levels of flood risk as part of a 5-year map
    modernization implementation plan. FEMA expects this plan to be completed
    by the end of fiscal year 2004; however, at the time of our review, FEMA
    had not yet developed draft standards or incorporated this task into its
    implementation plan.

    13For example, FEMA implemented digital base map standards in 1998 and
    LIDAR standards in 2000.

    14These guidelines describe detailed methods of analysis used for
    high-risk areas and less detailed methods used in low-risk areas.

        FEMA's Objective to Expand Outreach Efforts Recognizes the Agency Must Rely
        on Others to Achieve Map Modernization Benefits

    FEMA's objective to expand the scope and frequency of its outreach efforts
    is intended to increase community and public acceptance of revised maps
    and use of those maps. Historically, FEMA has only contacted communities
    when initiating remapping and again when preliminary maps are completed.
    These expanded outreach efforts reflect FEMA's understanding that it is
    dependent on others to achieve the benefits of map modernization. For
    example, under the structure of the NFIP, FEMA is dependent on communities
    to adopt and enforce FEMA's minimum building standards and on mortgage
    lenders to ensure compliance with mandatory flood insurance purchase
    requirements. To expand the scope of its outreach efforts, FEMA plans to
    involve a wide variety of community participants-e.g., mayors, emergency
    managers, lenders, property owners, insurance agents, and developers-in
    the mapping process. To expand the frequency of outreach, FEMA intends to
    increase community involvement, awareness, and participation throughout
    the entire flood mapping process. Through a continual education process,
    FEMA's goal is to inform property owners and others potentially affected
    by remapping efforts of steps they can take to mitigate the risk of
    flooding, the types of damage and costs caused by flooding, and the
    benefits of flood insurance.

    According to FEMA, if a community is involved in and understands the map
    modernization process, the community is more likely to accept and trust
    the accuracy of the final, revised maps and is more likely to use the
    maps' hazard data to mitigate natural and man-made disasters. Conversely,
    if affected property owners do not understand why their communities are
    being mapped (or remapped) or why their property is now in a flood zone,
    the unexpected additional expense of new or increased flood insurance
    premiums can form the basis of significant community opposition to map
    modernization activities and lead to formal appeals, litigation, and
    delays in implementing map changes.

    We visited several communities that have nearly completed or are engaged
    in revising flood maps and talked with relevant officials about recent
    mapping projects and the importance of outreach efforts. The experience of
    Pinellas County, Florida, shows the potential consequences of a limited
    outreach effort while the experiences of the Harris County Flood Control
    District in Houston, Texas, and Hillsborough County, Florida, show the
    potential benefits of a more expanded outreach strategy.

    Pinellas County, Florida 	Officials in Pinellas County, Florida, rejected
    revised flood hazard maps developed by FEMA that raised base flood level
    elevations and placed

                             Harris County, Houston, Texas

                              Hillsborough County, Florida

    areas in newly established flood zones. According to community and FEMA
    officials, FEMA did little to communicate with the community and the
    public during the mapping process. According to FEMA, the agency was only
    required to inform the community when the remapping project was initiated
    in 1993 and again after the proposed maps were completed and provided to
    the community for comment in December 1997. County officials subsequently
    appealed the preliminary maps. According to local officials, expanded
    outreach efforts by FEMA throughout this process could have helped the
    community understand why the county was being mapped and how the new maps
    reflected the true flood risks of the properties shown in revised flood
    zones. After working closely with FEMA and mapping contractor officials,
    the community finally accepted and implemented the maps by establishing
    new building standards in September 2003.

    The Harris County Flood Control District in Houston, Texas, took steps to
    expand stakeholder and community outreach by releasing up to date flood
    hazard map information on its Web site (http://www.tsarp.org). County
    officials have also worked closely with the local newspaper to release
    information on the updated flood hazard information to the public. In
    addition, the county has held individual meetings with the county's 35
    flood plain managers to ensure that they understood the new flood maps and
    were able to convey that information to citizens; hired a public relations
    consultant to provide guidance on how to better utilize the media to
    disseminate flood map information; and conducted a poll survey to
    ascertain public opinion about flood hazard risk and to develop strategies
    to better convey flood hazard information. County officials also developed
    several committee groups to relay flood maps information that is
    audience-specific, such as a technical discussion group that reviews
    technical issues related to revising the flood maps and verifies
    methodological assumptions.

    Hillsborough County officials have conducted extensive outreach while
    continuing to work with FEMA throughout the remapping process. To help
    ensure that insurance companies, real estate agents, county workers, and
    citizens utilize flood maps in a more efficient and effective manner, a
    stakeholders outreach coalition was formed in March of 2003. The purpose
    of this coalition is to create an information campaign for individual
    property owners and businesses that will be directly impacted by the new
    maps. The coalition includes representatives from the county's Citizen
    Advisory Committee, the insurance industry, real estate brokers, builders,
    lenders, engineers, surveyors, and various county departments.
    Hillsborough County is working in cooperation with FEMA to have final

    maps in late 2004 and create a successful outreach program that could be
    duplicated throughout the nation.

    FEMA's expanded outreach efforts are intended to educate the public of the
    potential flood risk in communities and to encourage them to take action.
    Communities that participate in the NFIP are required to establish
    floodplain management ordinances that require new and substantially
    improved structures in newly designated floodplains to meet NFIP building
    standards. However, if a property was not located in the floodplain in the
    old map, but is in the floodplain in the new revised map, NFIP floodplain
    management regulations do not require those owners to implement mitigation
    measures unless they make substantial improvements to the structure.15
    FEMA cannot compel affected property owners to take steps to mitigate
    their properties against flood risks or to purchase flood insurance. Under
    current notification requirements, federally regulated lenders, not FEMA,
    serve as the primary channel for notifying property owners whose mortgaged
    properties are subject to flood insurance requirements. When property
    owners seek new financing-through purchase or refinancing-federally
    regulated mortgage lenders are required to determine if the property is in
    the floodplain, and, if so, require the purchase of flood insurance.
    Lenders are not required to monitor map changes or to notify property
    owners with existing mortgages whose properties are identified in a
    floodplain by remapping if they are not aware of the change in status.16

    Nonetheless, if federally regulated lenders become aware of flood map
    changes that affect properties for which they hold mortgages through FEMA
    notifications or flood zone determination companies,17 then they must
    notify the property owner and require the purchase of flood insurance. The
    information that must be provided to property owners is

    15If a community determines that the cost of improvements to a home or
    business equals or exceeds 50 percent of the market value of the building,
    the building is considered a "substantial improvement" and must meet the
    NFIP's minimum requirements.

    16In making loans, federally regulated lenders are required to ensure that
    property owners purchase flood insurance if their mortgages are secured by
    a structure located in a floodplain. Lenders are also required to check
    the flood hazard status of a property when triggered by statutory
    tripwires, such as loan renewal or extension.

    17Many lenders use flood zone determination companies to determine whether
    properties require flood insurance as a result of loan origination, loan
    assumption, or map changes. These companies use FEMA flood maps and other
    data to ascertain if properties are situated in flood zones.

    limited to notifying property owners that their structure is in a
    floodplain, providing a definition of a flood plain, and requiring the
    purchase of flood insurance if they live in a participating NFIP
    community. As a result, FEMA's outreach efforts are important for
    supplementing the formal requirements for notifying communities and
    property owners of map changes.

        FEMA's Strategy for Partnering with States and Local Communities Does Not
        Include Communities with Few Resources to Assist in Flood Mapping

    FEMA's objective for building and maintaining mutually beneficial
    partnerships is intended to facilitate and support the efficient
    production and effective use of flood maps. According to FEMA, local,
    state, and federal partners that have invested resources and assisted in
    managing mapping activities have the potential to positively affect the
    detail, accuracy, and quantity of the data collected and improve how these
    data are used. As part of their strategy for partnering, FEMA provides
    guidance to the states on how to develop "business plans" that document
    planned efforts to develop states' and communities' capability and
    capacity to oversee the collection, analysis, and implementation of flood
    data in their state and community and to justify funding for these
    efforts. According to FEMA, 38 states have begun drafting such plans. FEMA
    intends to use these state business plans to help prioritize its
    continuing efforts to develop map modernization partners.

    Through its Cooperating Technical Partners (CTP) program, FEMA has
    developed partnerships with a variety of states and communities that have
    developed their own data and provided their own funds to help update local
    flood maps. Since 2000, FEMA has leveraged millions of dollars in funding
    from 171 partners (states and local communities) for producing maps
    through its CTP program. For example, from fiscal years 2000 to 2002, FEMA
    used $70 million of its federal map modernization funding along with state
    and local funds to develop what FEMA has estimated to be more than $155
    million worth of new mapping data. Figure 12 compares FEMA's cumulative
    funding for new mapping data through the CTP program with the total
    cumulative dollar value of data produced with partner contributions since
    the program was established in 2000.

    Figure 12: Comparison of Cumulative FEMA Funding for Mapping Data with the
    Total Cumulative Dollar Value of Mapping Data Produced through CTP Program

    Dollars (in millions) 200

    150

    100

    50

    0 2000 2001 2002 Year

    Cumulative FEMA funding for new mapping data Total cumulative dollar value
    of data produced with partner contributions Source: FEMA.

    According to FEMA, partnering has other benefits as well. For example, in
    the long-term, those states and communities with whom FEMA has established
    partnerships may be more likely to accept final map changes, expand their
    capabilities, and assume greater responsibility for

    periodically developing and incorporating updated flood data, resulting in
    cost savings to FEMA. FEMA's partnership with the state of North Carolina
    provides an example of a state assuming greater responsibility for
    producing and maintaining flood maps.

    FEMA's Cooperating Technical Partnership with the State of North Carolina

    According to North Carolina officials, the devastating flooding and
    subsequent damage that occurred from Hurricane Floyd in 1999 led the state
    of North Carolina to take action to address the limitations of the
    existing FEMA flood maps. Approximately 80 percent of the homes damaged or
    destroyed during Hurricane Floyd were not depicted in the floodplain on
    the state's flood maps. In 2000, North Carolina became the first
    Cooperating Technical State under FEMA's CTP program, agreeing to assume
    primary ownership and responsibility of flood maps for all North Carolina
    communities. Since then, according to state floodplain mapping officials,
    the state has contributed approximately $41 million towards the overall
    floodplain mapping program. On the basis of this amount, North Carolina
    has covered approximately 65 percent of the total cost to date for the
    remapping effort. To date, 8 counties had received new effective flood
    maps and 28 counties received new preliminary maps, which are now under
    community review. (See fig. 13.)

                   Source: North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Program.

    Some states and communities with few resources and technical capacities or
    little history of flood mapping activities are likely to pose a challenge
    to FEMA's ability to fund and implement mapping activities. For example,
    we talked with flood management officials in several smaller communities
    in Montgomery County, Texas; Santa Cruz County, Arizona; and Larkspur,
    Colorado. These officials said that their communities lacked either the
    funding needed to develop flood data, the technological capability to
    develop digital flood data and use geospatial information systems, or, in
    some cases, the community support needed to conduct mapping activities.
    One approach for obtaining additional resources, capabilities, and
    community support would be for FEMA to facilitate coordination with other
    agencies within the state that have a stake in, or could benefit from,
    mapping activities. For example, state departments of transportation can

    benefit from information in FEMA's geospatial information system, such as
    elevation data, in developing and implementing state roads and bridges.
    North Carolina was able to get its state transportation department to help
    fund the development of elevation data used for flood maps. FEMA has not
    yet developed a strategy for how to partner with communities that do not
    have the resources, capabilities, or motivation to initiate and sustain
    mapping activities. Such a strategy could focus on how to assist these
    potential partners in garnering community resources and developing
    technological capabilities, how to coordinate with other agencies in their
    state, and how to integrate these efforts with FEMA's community outreach
    efforts to gain community support for mapping activities.

        New Program Management Contract Is Performance-Based, but FEMA May Have
        Difficulty Overseeing the Contract and Measuring Achievement of Program
        Objectives

    In March 2004, FEMA awarded a performance-based contract to obtain
    assistance from a nationwide mapping contractor to manage tasks associated
    with the significant expansion of the map modernization program. Unlike
    many traditional government service contracts, which emphasize inputs
    rather than outcomes, a performance-based contracting approach gives the
    contractor the flexibility to determine how best to achieve the outcomes
    and links payment to the contractor's ability to achieve these outcomes-an
    approach supported by our past work in federal contracting. Overseeing
    these types of contracts requires agency staff with the knowledge, skills,
    and abilities to monitor the contractor's efforts using performance
    measures that accurately measure agreed-upon outcomes.

    FEMA may be limited in its ability to effectively manage the contract, as
    well as the significant expansion of tasks associated with a five fold
    increase in funding and related mapping activities that will continue to
    be performed by agency staff. These tasks include managing grants for many
    new mapping partners and administering contracts with independent firms to
    develop and process a significantly larger quantity of flood data to
    support local efforts. A staffing needs assessment completed by FEMA in
    December 2003 identifies a need for an additional 75 staff with additional
    skills, including contracting and program management capabilities. In
    appropriating fiscal year 2004 map modernization funds, Congress included
    a provision that would allow FEMA to use up to 3 percent, or $6 million,
    for administrative purposes. As of March 2004, FEMA had filled 1 of the 75
    positions by reallocating existing resources. According to FEMA, it plans
    to fill another 33 positions using the administrative funding identified
    in the fiscal year 2004 budget. In addition, FEMA also plans to fill an
    additional 10 positions by moving staff from other FEMA departments or
    filling vacancies. However, at the time of our review,

    FEMA had not yet established a plan for filling the remaining 31
    headquarters and regional positions.

    One element of effective program management is establishing performance
    measures to determine how well FEMA is achieving its map modernization
    program objectives. FEMA has established performance measures for all four
    of its program objectives. However, FEMA's measures for two of those
    objectives that directly support the use of flood maps for risk
    management-to develop a premier data system and to expand and better
    inform the user community are not clearly defined or fully developed.

    FEMA's principal measure for developing and maintaining a premier data
    collection and delivery system is the percent of the national population
    with community-adopted, GIS data-based flood maps. However, this measure
    does not indicate whether the maps themselves meet any FEMAestablished
    standards for accuracy. As noted earlier, FEMA has not yet defined the
    minimum level of data collection and analysis for communities with similar
    risk.

    To measure the progress and success of expanding and better informing the
    user community, FEMA established performance measures related to the
    percent increase in communities' awareness and use of new maps. FEMA plans
    to use surveys as the primary means of measuring increased community
    awareness and use of the new maps. However, FEMA has not yet fully
    developed an operational definition of how it plans to measure "awareness"
    or "use," for example, that reflect mitigation steps taken or the purchase
    of flood insurance. Because the link between revising maps and the use of
    maps in terms of increased NFIP participation is not direct, we recognize
    that it may be a challenge to develop a performance measure that
    accurately reflects the impact on NFIP participation rates of efforts to
    expand and improve outreach. Nonetheless, without developing such a
    measure (or measures), FEMA will be less able to ensure that its map
    modernization program will have resulted in one of FEMA's primary intended
    benefits.

    Conclusions 	FEMA's map modernization strategy recognizes the limits of
    the agency's authority to directly achieve such key intended map
    modernization benefits as increased, effective flood mitigation efforts
    and increased flood insurance participation rates by property owners whose
    properties are within the most hazardous flood areas-those in which there
    is at least a 1 percent chance of flooding in any given year. At the same
    time, FEMA recognizes that it has finite resources for completing map
    modernization

    and needs to leverage its resources with assistance from state and local
    communities. Both the credibility of the maps as accurate and useful and
    stakeholders' understanding of how the maps can be used to reduce flood
    risk and flood damage will be instrumental in enhancing the probability
    that the maps will be used to achieve their intended benefits.

    FEMA's outreach strategy for involving stakeholders in map modernization
    appears to be reasonable. Even with these outreach efforts, the
    credibility and likely use of the maps can be compromised if there is a
    perception that similar communities are not treated similarly during map
    modernization. Establishing and implementing data collection and analysis
    standards for communities with similar risk can help to assure communities
    that map development for all communities within the same risk category
    will be consistent and comparable. Such standards can also help FEMA to
    target its map modernization resources more efficiently by matching the
    level of data collection and analysis with the level of flood risk.
    Similarly, by developing strategies for partnering with state, and local
    flood management stakeholders with lower levels of capabilities and
    resources, FEMA will be better able to leverage available resources and
    identify the most effective approaches to engaging its partners in the
    remapping process.

    To the extent that FEMA does not have appropriate numbers of staff with
    the requisite skills, it may have limited ability to provide effective
    monitoring and oversight of its new performance-based contract, whose
    contractor has been charged with much of the day-to-day work of map
    modernization that formerly FEMA performed. Finally, in some cases, the
    performance measures established for the program and the contractor may
    not be sufficient to permit FEMA to measure whether map modernization is
    achieving its intended benefits. Without useful operational definitions
    for its planned surveys to measure map acceptance and use, FEMA cannot
    reasonably measure and demonstrate whether map modernization has achieved
    its intended benefits in such areas as community and individual flood
    mitigation efforts or increased flood insurance purchase rates.

    Recommendations 	To help ensure that FEMA's map modernization achieves the
    intended benefits of improved flood mitigation, increased flood insurance
    participation, and improved multi-hazard mitigation and risk management
    capabilities through the production of more accurate and accessible flood
    maps, we recommend that the Secretary of Homeland Security direct the
    Undersecretary of Emergency Preparedness and Response to take the
    following four actions:

        Agency Comments

    o  	Develop and implement data standards that will enable FEMA, its
    contractor, and its state and local partners to identify and use
    consistent data collection and analysis methods for communities with
    similar risk.

    o  	Develop and implement strategies for partnering with state and local
    entities with varying levels of capabilities and resources.

    o  	Ensure that it has the staff capacity to effectively implement the
    nationwide mapping contract and the overall map modernization program.

    o  	Develop and implement useful performance measures that define FEMA' s
    progress in increasing stakeholders' awareness and use of the new maps,
    including improved mitigation efforts and increased participation rates in
    purchasing flood insurance.

    We provided a draft of this report to DHS for its review and comment. We
    met with DHS and FEMA officials, including FEMA's Mitigation Division
    Acting Deputy Director, to discuss the report. In providing oral comments,
    DHS and FEMA generally agreed with the report's contents and provided us
    with minor technical comments, which we have incorporated where
    appropriate. In addition, DHS and FEMA generally agreed with our
    recommendations and provided the following comments:

    o  	To address the data standard recommendation, FEMA said that it plans
    to refine existing standards, in coordination with stakeholders, to ensure
    consistent data collection and analysis for all communities commensurate
    with their flood risk.

    o  	To address the recommendation concerning partnering strategies to
    address varying levels of capabilities and resources, FEMA said that it
    would continue to collaborate with stakeholder groups to develop an
    effective strategy to include states and communities with varying levels
    of capabilities and resources.

    o  	To address the recommendation to ensure that the agency has the staff
    capacity to effectively implement map modernization and oversee the
    contract, FEMA said that it has begun to take steps not only to fill 44
    positions for fiscal year 2004, as noted in the report, but is also
    developing a plan to ensure that additional staffing needs are met in
    fiscal year 2005 and beyond.

    o  	To address the recommendation to develop and implement performance
    measures for increasing stakeholders' awareness and use of flood maps,
    FEMA said that it plans to refine performance measures

    for this map modernization objective to make them more useful and
    quantifiable.

    We will send copies of this report to the Secretary of Homeland Security.
    We will also make copies available to others upon request. In addition,
    this
    report will be available at no charge on GAO's Web site at
    http://www.gao.gov. If you or your staff have any questions about this
    report, please contact me at (202) 512-8777 or at jenkinswo@gao.gov.
    Major contributors to this report are listed in appendix III.

    Sincerely yours,

    William O. Jenkins, Jr.
    Director, Homeland Security and Justice Issues

      Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

    To describe how map modernization is intended to improve the accuracy and
    accessibility of the nation's flood maps, we interviewed Federal Emergency
    Management Agency (FEMA) headquarters officials and agency officials in
    three of the regional offices: Region IV in Atlanta, Georgia; Region VIII
    in Denver, Colorado; and Region VI in Denton, Texas. To assess the
    reliability of FEMA's data regarding the number and age of the nation's
    flood maps, we interviewed officials knowledgeable about the data and the
    systems that produced them and determined that the data were sufficiently
    reliable for the purposes of this report. We also reviewed key FEMA
    documents that describe how map modernization is intended to use advanced
    technology to improve the accuracy and accessibility of flood maps.

    Realizing that map modernization is in the early stages of implementation
    and information on its impact is limited, we conducted site visits in
    states and communities that have already begun to modernize their flood
    maps. To identify potential locations for site visits, we spoke with FEMA
    Mitigation Division officials and representatives from the following
    professional organizations: Association of State Flood Plain Managers,
    National Association of Flood and Stormwater Management Agencies, National
    Emergency Management Association, and the Mapping Coalition. The selected
    site visits represent areas that have recently experienced considerable
    population growth, a high National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) base, or
    a high number of repetitive flood loss claims. Over 64 percent of all NFIP
    policies are located in the states selected for site visits, and over 40
    percent of all repetitive loss properties are located in the states in
    which we conducted site visits.

    Our site visits involved reviewing key documents, graphics, and other
    information related to our reporting objectives. Site visits included the
    following locations:

    o  Hillsborough, Sarasota, and Pinellas counties of Southwest Florida

    o  Maricopa County, Arizona

    o  State of North Carolina

    o  Mecklenburg County, North Carolina

    o  Harris County, Texas

    o  State of Colorado

    To describe the expected benefits of map modernization, we interviewed
    FEMA officials in their Mitigation Division in Washington, D.C., and
    obtained documents and graphics from FEMA officials describing the
    benefits the agency expects to result from map modernization activities.

    Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

    We also interviewed state and local officials on the potential
    multi-hazard benefits of map modernization and obtained documents and
    graphics illustrating the expected benefits.

    To determine the extent to which FEMA's strategy for managing the map
    modernization program supports the achievement of the expected benefits of
    more accurate and accessible maps, we first reviewed previous documents
    published by FEMA and others on map modernization. Throughout our review,
    we remained in constant contact with FEMA officials in their Mitigation
    Division to monitor the development of FEMA's prioritization of fiscal
    year 2003 funded mapping projects and the implementation of the overall
    map modernization approach.

    To identify areas where FEMA's implementation of map modernization is
    limited, we gathered and synthesized the experiences and challenges
    identified through documentation and interviews provided from various
    sources, including:

    o  FEMA headquarters and regional officials;

    o  site visits and selective review participants;

    o  	professionals in the Association of State Floodplain Managers,
    National Association of Stormwater Management Agencies, the National
    Emergency Management Agency, and Arizona Association of Floodplain
    Managers; and

    o  	private industry representatives in the fields of flood zone
    determinations, engineering, technology and program consulting, real
    estate sales and development, and home mortgage lending.

    We also conducted additional research to determine whether limitations
    existed in FEMA's implementation of its outreach approach for its map
    modernization program. We obtained information on the roles and
    responsibilities of FEMA and lenders to communicate changes in flood
    hazard status. We also reviewed and synthesized applicable laws,
    regulations, and guidance regarding notification of flood hazard risk to
    identify all parties designated to inform property owners of changes in
    the flood hazard maps. We interviewed FEMA mapping and insurance
    officials, state, community, and National Flood Determination Association
    officials as well as conducted site visits to ascertain information on
    current processes for communicating changes in flood hazard status.
    Additionally, we interviewed FEMA's general counsel to obtain the agency's
    position on statutory requirements for notification of property owners
    after remapping.

    Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

    To further analyze the strengths and limitations of FEMA's implementation
    approach, we also reviewed FEMA's Inspector General's reports related to
    flood mapping and reviewed our previous work and guidance in the areas of
    performance-based contracting and performance measurement that relate to
    the objectives of map modernization.

    The information regarding deaths and damages due to floods was considered
    background information and was not verified. We conducted our review from
    April 2003 through March 2004 in accordance with generally accepted
    government auditing standards.

                            Appendix II: Users of Flood Maps

    The principal stakeholders that use FEMA flood maps and the nature of
    their use are described in this appendix.

    State and local floodplain managers/community planners: use flood maps to
    make floodplain management decisions for each of the nearly 2 million
    development permits issued for new structures nearly 20,000 NFIP
    participating communities that have maps. They are responsible for
    establishing and enforcing land-use and construction ordinances that
    comply with minimum NFIP standards.

    Insurance companies and agents: use flood maps to determine actuarial
    rates for flood insurance policies. Private insurance companies that sell
    NFIP-backed flood insurance use the flood maps to determine the proper
    premium rate for a flood insurance policy. There are approximately 250,000
    new policies rated and sold each year.

    Lenders: use flood maps to determine the flood risk status of mortgaged
    properties at loan origination and through the entire life of the
    mortgage. Each of the 10 to 15 million federally related mortgage
    transactions each year requires that the flood maps be consulted to
    determine whether the structure secured by the loan is located in the
    floodplain on the current flood map.

    Flood zone determination companies: use flood maps to determine property
    locations relative to flood hazard areas on behalf of mortgage lenders
    that typically contract this service to companies with expertise in making
    flood zone determinations and the capability to make many determinations
    quickly.

    Individual property owners: use flood maps to better understand their
    flood risk status.

    Land developers: use flood maps to assist in designing developments that
    are safe from flood hazards.

    Surveyors: use flood maps to prepare elevation certificates for
    structures. These help owners determine their flood risk by comparing the
    mapped flood elevations to the building's lowest floor elevation.

    Engineers: use flood maps when designing flood mitigation projects and to
    site and design new buildings and infrastructure.

    Appendix II: Users of Flood Maps

    Real estate professionals: use flood maps to determine the flood risk
    status of properties in the community.

    State and local disaster and emergency response officials: use flood maps
    to prepare for all disasters, issue hazard warnings, and implement
    emergency response activities and aid in the rebuilding and reconstruction
    phases.

    Other federal agencies: use flood maps in implementing Executive Order
    11988, Floodplain Management, for federal actions proposed in or affecting
    floodplains.

      Appendix III: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments

    GAO Contacts

        Staff Acknowledgments

    (440190)

    William O. Jenkins, Jr. (202) 512-8777 Christopher Keisling (404) 679-1917

    In addition to those named above, Mark Abraham, Leo Barbour, Mark Braza,
    Grace Coleman, Christine Davis, Michelle Fejfar, Brian James, Kirk
    Kiester, and Meg Ullengren made key contributions to the report.

        GAO's Mission

    Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony

    The General Accounting Office, the audit, evaluation and investigative arm
    of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional
    responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability of
    the federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use of
    public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides
    analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make
    informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's commitment to
    good government is reflected in its core values of accountability,
    integrity, and reliability.

    The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
    is through the Internet. GAO's Web site (www.gao.gov) contains abstracts
    and fulltext files of current reports and testimony and an expanding
    archive of older products. The Web site features a search engine to help
    you locate documents using key words and phrases. You can print these
    documents in their entirety, including charts and other graphics.

    Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and
    correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as "Today's Reports," on its
    Web site daily. The list contains links to the full-text document files.
    To have GAO e-mail this list to you every afternoon, go to www.gao.gov and
    select "Subscribe to e-mail alerts" under the "Order GAO Products"
    heading.

    Order by Mail or Phone 	The first copy of each printed report is free.
    Additional copies are $2 each. A check or money order should be made out
    to the Superintendent of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard.
    Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25
    percent. Orders should be sent to:

    U.S. General Accounting Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM Washington, D.C.
    20548

    To order by Phone: 	Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax: (202)
    512-6061

    To Report Fraud,	Contact: Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

        Waste, and Abuse in E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

    Federal Programs Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202)
    512-7470

    Jeff Nelligan, Managing Director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800

    Public Affairs 	U.S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
    Washington, D.C. 20548
    *** End of document. ***