FIS Report - Guidance for Flood Risk Analysis and Mapping

Guidance for Flood Risk

Analysis and Mapping

Flood Insurance Study (FIS) Report

December 2020

FIS Report December 2020

Guidance Document 37 Page i

Requirements for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Risk Mapping,

Assessment, and Planning (Risk MAP) Program are specified separately by statute, regulation,

or FEMA policy (primarily the Standards for Flood Risk Analysis and Mapping). This document

provides guidance to support the requirements and recommends approaches for effective and

efficient implementation. Alternate approaches that comply with all requirements are acceptable.

For more information, please visit the FEMA Guidelines and Standards for Flood Risk Analysis

and Mapping webpage (

www.fema.gov/flood-maps/guidance-partners/guidelines-standards

Copies of the Standards for Flood Risk Analysis and Mapping policy, related guidance, technical

references, and other information about the guidelines and standards development process are

all available here. You can also search directly by document title at

www.fema.gov/multimedia-

library.

FIS Report December 2020

Guidance Document 37 Page ii

Table of Revisions

The following summary of changes details revisions to this document subsequent to its most

recent version in November 2016.

Affected Section or

Subsection

Date Description

Section 2.1

December

2020

This guidance has been updated to correct information

regarding font specifications.

Section 5.4

December

2020

This guidance has been updated to revise information

regarding Table 8: Levee Systems.

Section 6.3

December

2020

This guidance has been updated to add information

regarding 2D evaluation lines.

Throughout document

December

2020

This guidance has been updated to revise table

numbers after the removal of CBRS layers from

regulatory products.

FIS Report December 2020

Guidance Document 37 Page iii

Table of Contents

1.0 Overview ............................................................................................................................ 1

2.0 General Formatting and Guidance ..................................................................................... 1

2.1 Adding Text to Body of FIS Report ................................................................................. 1

2.2 Table Formatting ............................................................................................................ 2

3.0 Report Cover ...................................................................................................................... 3

4.0 Report Text ........................................................................................................................ 5

5.0 Table Guidance .................................................................................................................. 5

5.1 Community Names ......................................................................................................... 6

5.2 FIRM Panel Numbers ..................................................................................................... 6

5.3 Table 2: Flooding Sources Included in this FIS Report .................................................. 6

5.4 Table 8: Levee Systems ................................................................................................. 8

5.5 Table 9: Summary of Discharges ................................................................................... 9

5.6 Table 11: Stream Gage Information used to Determine Discharges .............................. 9

5.7 Table 12: Summary of Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analyses ............................................ 9

5.8 Table 13: Roughness Coefficients ................................................................................ 10

5.9 Table 20: Stream-Based Vertical Datum Conversion ................................................... 10

5.10 Table 23: Floodway Data .............................................................................................. 10

5.11 Table 27: Community Map History ............................................................................... 11

5.12 Table 28: Summary of Contracted Studies Included in this FIS Report ....................... 13

6.0 Figure Guidance ............................................................................................................... 13

6.1 FIRM Notes to Users .................................................................................................... 13

6.2 Flood Profiles ................................................................................................................ 14

6.3 FIS Inserts for 2D modeling .......................................................................................... 14

List of Figures

Figure 1: FIS Report Cover – Option 1 (Preferred) ....................................................................... 3

Figure 2: FIS Report Cover – Option 2 ......................................................................................... 4

Figure 3: FIS Report Cover – Option 3B ....................................................................................... 5

Figure 4: Example of Flooding Source Studied by Multiple Methods............................................ 7

Figure 5: Example of Flooding Source with Multiple Mapped Zones on FIRM ............................. 8

Figure 6: Floodway Data Table Example for Cross-Sections with No Floodway ........................ 10

FIS Report December 2020

Guidance Document 37 Page iv

Figure 7: Annotated grid presented in place of profile in FIS report ........................................... 15

List of Tables

Table 1: Footnote Numbering Guidance ....................................................................................... 3

Table 2: Example of FIS Report Table 2 – Flooding Sources Included in this FIS Report ........... 6

Table 3: Example of FIS Report Table 8 – Levee Systems .......................................................... 9

Table 4: Example of FIS Report Table 27 – Community Map History ........................................ 12

Table 5: Example of FIS Report Table 28 – Summary of Contracted Studies Included in

this FIS Report .............................................................................................................. 13

FIS Report December 2020

Guidance Document 37 Page 1

1.0 Overview

The Flood Insurance Study (FIS) Report is a companion to the Flood Insurance Rate Maps

(FIRMs) and FIRM Database in the depiction and communication of regulatory flood hazard

information within a county or jurisdiction. Whereas the FIRMs depict regulatory flood hazard

information in graphical format, the FIS Report presents communities and end users with

information on the study methodology, data, and results in tabular format. This document

supplements the FIS Report Technical Reference and provides additional guidance to support

the preparation of FIS Reports in accordance with the Technical Reference.

For information on FIS Report distribution, please reference the Preliminary Distribution and

Revised Preliminary Guidance, and the FIRM Index Guidance.

2.0 General Formatting and Guidance

An FIS Report Template (available at www.fema.gov/media-collection/flood-risk-templates-and-

other-resources) has been provided, which complies with all the formatting guidance contained

below. The FIS Report Technical Reference provides instruction regarding how to use the

template and how to distinguish between text that should be included in each FIS Report vs.

text that should be updated or removed depending on the specifics of the Flood Risk Project.

While the FIS Report contains some information that may be reported on a non-countywide

basis (i.e., for Physical Map Revisions (PMRs)) effective FIS Reports that are already in

countywide format must remain in countywide format. For example, the Map Repository

information reported for an effective countywide study must remain countywide in the FIS

Report Table 30, Map Repositories. The FIS Report Technical Reference specifically identifies

the pieces of information that may be reported on a non-countywide basis, such as Table 26,

Incorporated Letters of Map Change (LOMCs). The remainder of the existing countywide

information in the FIS Report must remain in its countywide format in the revised FIS Report.

2.1 Adding Text to Body of FIS Report

In certain circumstances, it may be necessary or desired to add additional text within the body of

the report to document unique situations. For example, certain states or communities may

impose more restrictive floodway surcharge thresholds than the typical 1.0 foot minimum FEMA

standard. In this case, it would be appropriate to add text to section 6.3 of the FIS Report—

“Floodplain and Floodway Delineation”—to document these distinctions. The font and formatting

guidance below should be followed in those circumstances.

The styles within the FIS Report Template should be used to preserve consistency from section

to section. Text within the body of the report should use the “Body Text” style and is based on

Arial font, 11 point. Body text font size should not decrease smaller than 11 point. The FIS

Report Technical Reference should be referenced for more detail regarding type specifications

for text.

FIS Report December 2020

Guidance Document 37 Page 2

2.2 Table Formatting

Tables should be sized to the width of the preceding text block. If a table needs to be wider than

the previous text block to be readable, insert section breaks before and after the table and

change the page orientation to landscape. Centered page numbers should be included at the

bottom of tables in landscape orientation. Column width can be adjusted as needed to

accommodate data.

If a table is split between two pages, consider adding a header for each page with “(continued)”

next to the title. In general, rows should not be allowed to split between pages unless this

causes too many page breaks and large areas of white space. For example, the Principal Flood

Problems table may contain rows with long descriptive passages, so the rows are permitted to

split between pages.

It is preferred that text in tables should be Arial, 11 point, single spaced with 3 point before and

after (row height not specified) except for the Floodway Data Table (FDT). The FDT is 0 point

before and after each row—row height is governed by paragraph spacing rather than specifying

row height. However, text size in tables may be reduced to accommodate data as long as

readability is not reduced.

Table captions should be formatted as follows:

• Arial, 11 point

• Bold and centered

• 12 point spacing before and 6 point spacing after the caption

Text or dates in tables should be left aligned (for running text or longer content that wraps in the

cell) or centered. Headings in tables should be centered at the bottom of the cell.

Numeric data in tables should be aligned on decimal points or right-aligned (if no decimals are

present in the entire column). Numbers greater than 999 should include a comma appropriately

placed. Numbers using decimal points should be rounded to the tenth place.

When using numbered footnotes, the numbers should be assigned in order starting at the top-

left table cell and working top to bottom, column by column. The example table below shows

how this should look. Any variations from this should be consistently applied within the FIS

Report.

Footnote numbers are applied in the context of the entire table when a table spans multiple

pages. Please see the FIS Report Technical Reference for full information on footnote

numbering requirements.

FIS Report December 2020

Guidance Document 37 Page 3

Table 1: Footnote Numbering Guidance

Name Community Value

Notes

Entry A Community A 4.5 Text here

Entry B Community A

5.6 Text here

Entry C

Community A 2.2 Text here

Entry D Community B 10.1 Text here

Entry E Community B 8.3 Text here

Footnote 1

Footnote 2

Footnote 3

3.0 Report Cover

The FIS Report Template provides two examples of different covers that can be used. Figure 1

shows the preferred option, whereas Figure 2 shows the option that can be used when there are

more communities within the county than can be shown on the cover in the Figure 1 style.

Figure 1: FIS Report Cover – Option 1 (Preferred)

FIS Report December 2020

Guidance Document 37 Page 4

For Option 1, community names and Community Identifiers (CIDs) are shown in Arial, 12 point.

For Option 2, community names and CIDs are shown in Arial, 10 point.

Figure 2: FIS Report Cover – Option 2

Regardless of which cover format is used, the effective date and “VOLUME X of X” text on the

cover should use Arial, 14 point, bold font. The FIS number is shown in Arial, 12 point, bold.

If all the community names do not fit in their entirety on the cover following the Option 2 format,

the following two alternatives may be used, in order of preference:

FIS Report December 2020

Guidance Document 37 Page 5

1. Option 3A: Reduce the font size for the “COMMUNITY NAME” and “NUMBER” headings

and for the community names and CIDs to Arial, 8 point font. If all the community names

still do not fit on the cover, then

2. Option 3B: Do not list any communities on the cover, and instead include the following

note on the cover referencing Table 1: Listing of National Flood Insurance Program

(NFIP) Jurisdictions for the complete listing of communities. Figure 3 shows how this

would look on the cover.

“See Table 1: Listing of NFIP Jurisdictions for a complete listing of the

communities represented in this Flood Insurance Study Report.”

Figure 3: FIS Report Cover – Option 3B

4.0 Report Text

As outlined in the FIS Report Technical Reference and shown in the FIS Report Template,

some sections contain bold, blue text to represent text that could be used if applicable, but that

can be changed if not relevant to the Flood Risk Project. As an example, much of section 5.3

“Coastal Analyses” in the FIS Report Template is written this way. Since there are variations in

how coastal studies are performed depending on the coast (Pacific, Atlantic, and Gulf of Mexico,

or Great Lakes), it is appropriate that the text in this section be updated as necessary to

communicate the specifics of the coastal analysis performed.

5.0 Table Guidance

The FIS Report Technical Reference should be referenced for table-specific information that

must be followed in the preparation of the FIS Report. However, additional guidance for select

tables is presented below.

FIS Report December 2020

Guidance Document 37 Page 6

5.1 Community Names

Community names appear as one of the columns in Tables 1, 2, 3, 8, 10, 22, 27, 28, 29, and 30.

In these tables, it is preferred that community names be entered in the format of “Floodville,

Town of” rather than “Town of Floodville.” This should help the reader locate their community

more quickly. However, regardless of which approach is used, the depiction of community

names within the FIS Report tables should be consistent.

5.2 FIRM Panel Numbers

FIRM panel numbers appear as one of the columns in Tables 1, 8, and 26. In these tables,

where more than one panel number must be entered in a cell, panel numbers can be separated

by commas, semi-colons, or carriage returns. Whichever approach is selected should be

applied consistently throughout the FIS Report.

5.3 Table 2: Flooding Sources Included in this FIS Report

The following guidance provides examples to help clarify how to populate this table, and the

conditions that define when a unique record should be added to this table.

Table 2: Example of FIS Report Table 2 – Flooding Sources Included in this FIS Report

Flooding

Source Community

Downstream

Limit Upstream Limit

HUC-8

Sub-

Basin(s)

Length (mi)

(streams or

coastlines)

Area (mi

)

(estuaries

or ponding)

Floodway

(Y/N)

Zone

shown

on FIRM

Date of

Analysis

Big Ocean

Coastland, City of;

Flood County,

Unincorporated Areas

Entire Coastline Entire Coastline N/A 16.3 N

VE, AE,

1989

Culvert Creek

Flood County,

Unincorporated Areas

Confluence with

Inundation River

2.3 miles upstream

of confluence of

Ripple Creek

99999998 0.7 N AE 1997

Inundation

River

Flood County,

Unincorporated Areas;

Metropolis, City of

Confluence with

Big Ocean

Approximately 2,000

feet upstream of

State Highway 999

99999998 12.5 Y AE 2007

Inundation

River

Flood County,

Unincorporated Areas;

Metropolis, City of

Approximately

2,000 feet

upstream of

State Highway

999

Confluence of North

Fork Inundation

River and South

Fork Inundation

River

99999998 3.8 N A 1997

Lily Pond Metropolis, City of Pear Tree Circle Westwood Lane 99999997 1.6 N AE 2002

North Fork

Inundation

River

Coastland, City of;

Flood County,

Unincorporated Areas

Confluence with

Inundation River

0.7 miles upstream

of Lilac Stream

99999998 4.2 Y AE 2010

South Fork

Inundation

River

Flood County,

Unincorporated Areas

Confluence with

Inundation River

3.2 miles upstream

of confluence of

Culvert Creek

99999998 3.8 Y AE 2010

West River

and Zone A

Tributaries

Flood County,

Unincorporated Areas

Confluence of

West River with

Inundation River

1 square mile

drainage area of all

Zone A streams

99999998 206.8 N A 2010

Wood Branch

and Zone A

Tributaries

Flood County,

Unincorporated Areas;

Floodville, Town of

Confluence of

Wood Branch

with North Fork

Inundation River

1 square mile

drainage area of all

Zone A streams

99999998 58.7 N A 2009

FIS Report December 2020

Guidance Document 37 Page 7

Each record in FIS Report Table 2 reflects a unique engineering study performed on a certain

date. Each flooding source should have its own entry in the table. The exception to this can be

for Zone A streams. If more than 20 Zone A streams are included, consider listing only large

named streams and combine other Zone A streams into one entry, assuming that entry reflects

the same study date. “West River and Zone A Tributaries” and “Wood Branch and Zone A

Tributaries” are examples of how multiple Zone A flooding sources within a watershed can be

grouped together. Similarly, due to the nature of the engineering methodology by which shallow

flooding or ponding areas are often identified on FIRMs, it may be appropriate to group these

areas together as one or several entries in the table, so long as the total length/area columns

reflect the engineering study in whole. Flexibility is allowed in determining the best way to

communicate these types of studies in this table.

Flooding sources that have more than one study from which the mapping on the FIRM is based

should be split accordingly into multiple entries.

Figure 4 shows an example of this type of

situation for Inundation River, which is mapped on the FIRM as both Zone A and AE, based on

two separate studies performed. Note in the example for Table 2 above that rather than

combine those details into one entry, Inundation River is separated into two entries in the table,

to reflect the corresponding limits shown in

Figure 4.

Figure 4: Example of Flooding Source Studied by Multiple Methods

FIS Report December 2020

Guidance Document 37 Page 8

Due to the nature of the topography, flooding situations, and/or study methodologies for certain

flooding sources, it may be necessary to list multiple flood zones in the “Zone shown on FIRM”

column for certain entries in the table. In the example in Figure 5, if (for whatever reason) the

decision was made to map the Flood Creek study results in this area as both Zone AE and Zone

AO, then the Flood Creek entry in Table 2 should report “AE, AO” in the “Zone shown on FIRM”

column. However, if the AO Zone was determined and mapped based on a study separate from

the Flood Creek analysis (such as from an interior drainage analysis, shallow flooding analysis,

etc.), then that should be reported as its own entry in Table 2.

Figure 5: Example of Flooding Source with Multiple Mapped Zones on FIRM

For streams whose downstream limits terminate within the backwater of a larger stream, it is not

necessary to determine the point at which the stream comes out of backwater as the

“Downstream Limit” in this table. The downstream limit can be reported as “Confluence with…”

in those cases.

5.4 Table 8: Levee Systems

For levee systems that have multiple owners or maintaining agencies, or if multiple levee

segment sponsors, the “Levee Owner(s) / Sponsor(s)” field can be appended to display all

entities. For example, if Floodville Waterworks was the levee owner, but the levee was

maintained by Flood County Department of Public Works, the entry in the “Levee Owner(s) /

Sponsor(s)” field might look something like the following:

FIS Report December 2020

Guidance Document 37 Page 9

Table 3: Example of FIS Report Table 8 – Levee Systems

NLD Levee Levee System

Flooding NLD Levee System Status on Levee Owner(s)

Community Source System ID Name Effective FIRM FIRM Panel(s) / Sponsor(s)

Floodville,

Town of

Inundation

River

1901990990

Floodville

Levee

System

Non-

Accredited

12345C0245X

Floodville

Waterworks

(maintained by

Flood County

Dept. of Public

Works)

When applying a levee seclusion zone to a study, levee systems that have not been

demonstrated to meet the requirements of 44CFR 65.10 should be properly identified in this

table.

FIS narrative text for Section 4.4 (corresponding to the information in this table) is provided in

the FIS Report Template.

5.5 Table 9: Summary of Discharges

The Summary of Discharges table is primarily intended to report discharges for streams

mapped as Zone AE on the FIRMs. It is, therefore, not required to be populated for Zone A

streams. However, adding Zone A streams to this table is not a restriction. It may be desired to

add discharge entries for larger Zone A streams within the Flood Risk Project.

Typically, seclusion mapping should not affect the discharges for the secluded flooding source

and therefore no seclusion mapping notation would be needed for the Summary of Discharges

Table. Please see the FIS Report Technical Reference for full details on applying Levee

Seclusion to the “Summary of Discharges” table.

5.6 Table 11: Stream Gage Information used to Determine Discharges

The Stream Gage Information table provides information to assist in identifying and locating the

referenced gage as well as the reported drainage area and period of record used for the gage

discharge analysis. If historic peaks are used in the discharge analysis in combination with a

systematic record, the historic peaks should be listed in a footnote to Table 11.

5.7 Table 12: Summary of Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analyses

Consider Table 12 as the additional engineering data to supplement the non-coastal flooding

source entries in Table 2. As such, there should be a 1:1 match between the entries in Table 12

with the non-coastal flooding sources in Table 2. For example, if a stream was split into two

entries in Table 2 to reflect the different study methodologies, then Table 12 should show the

same two entries.

The following list provides recommendations for the type of information that could be included in

the “Special Considerations” column of the table, depending on the specifics of the study.

• Unique methods for capturing hydraulic structure or stream channel dimensions in the

engineering models

FIS Report December 2020

Guidance Document 37 Page 10

• Method used for obtaining starting water-surface elevations in the model

• Methods used for estimating channel and overbank roughness values (Manning’s “n’)

• Methods used to analyze and map levee systems

• Methods used to analyze ice jam effects

• Model calibration information

• Use of gage records for hydrologic analysis along with any unique considerations that

may have been applied of that analysis

• Anything else that would help the reader more fully understand the hydrologic and/or

hydraulic results for that particular flooding source

5.8 Table 13: Roughness Coefficients

As with Table 2, as opposed to listing each model-backed Zone A stream as its own entry in this

table, it is acceptable to group Zone A streams together into one (or several) entries. In this

case, the Channel and Overbank Manning’s “n” values reported should be representative of the

entire range of n-values used for all the listed streams.

5.9 Table 20: Stream-Based Vertical Datum Conversion

If the same vertical datum conversion factor was applied to multiple flooding sources within the

Flood Risk Project, those flooding sources can be grouped together as one entry within Table

20. In this case, flooding source names can be separated by commas, semicolons, or carriage

returns within the table cell.

5.10 Table 23: Floodway Data

As depicted below, one of the Floodway Data Table (FDT) examples shown in the FIS Report

Technical Reference and FIS Report Template illustrates how asterisks can be used for cross-

sections where a floodway was not computed or mapped.

Figure 6: Floodway Data Table Example for Cross-Sections with No Floodway

As a point of clarification, this does not mean that a FDT must be prepared for streams that

have mapped cross-sections, but for which a floodway has not been computed or mapped at all

(such as for some “limited detail” streams). Rather, for study reaches that have a mapped

floodway, the use of asterisks is a way to identify the cross-sections where a floodway was not

FIS Report December 2020

Guidance Document 37 Page 11

modeled or mapped, for whatever reason. However, if a flooding source has a mapped

floodway and mapped cross-sections on the FIRM, then it should have a FDT in the FIS Report.

The FIS Report Technical Reference also contains an example FDT for flooding sources

containing cross-sections that are in areas controlled by coastal flooding processes and where

the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) is the product of a coastal and riverine combined rate of

occurrence analysis. Because a riverine cross section may traverse more than one coastal flood

zone with differing static BFEs due to varying surge elevations or differences in wave action, it is

often difficult to list a regulatory BFE in the FDT. Therefore, for cross sections that are located in

a coastal floodplain, the regulatory water surface elevation is not populated, and a footnote is

added indicating that the BFE at the cross section is controlled by coastal flooding and the user

must refer to the FIRM for the regulatory BFE (e.g., “Controlled by coastal flooding—see Flood

Insurance Rate Map for regulatory base flood elevation”).

In areas where the BFE is based on the coastal and riverine combined rate of occurrence

results, a footnote is added to the regulatory water surface elevation for the applicable cross

sections indicating “Combined probability with coastal flooding from [coastal flooding source].”

The example FDT in the FIS Report Technical Reference shows how these footnotes would be

used.

The FIS Report Technical Reference also contains an example FDT for flooding sources

affected by a levee system seclusion zone. In some circumstances, a seclusion boundary may

cover a portion or all of a flooding source that was restudied and will be shown as such on the

non-secluded portion of the FIRM. It is necessary to seclude information for these streams in

this case. Additional information and notes must also be added to the FIS Report which are

covered in the FIS Report Technical Reference, as well as the FIS Report Template.

Lastly, The FIS Report Technical Reference also contains example FDTs where a 2-D model, or

hybrid 1-D, 2-D model was used to compute the floodway extents. For these analyses, cross

section references are not available, or in the case of hybrid 1-D, 2-D models, may not span the

entire width of the floodway. As a result, the information displayed on the FDT are referenced to

evaluation lines set within the floodway extent. See the Floodway Analysis and Mapping

Guidance document for additional information on evaluation lines. Footnotes are included in the

FIS Report Technical Reference example FDTs to inform users that the data contained in the

table is based off of 2-D model results.

5.11 Table 27: Community Map History

The following guidance provides examples to help clarify how to populate this table, and the

specific situations represented by several of the entries in the table.

FIS Report December 2020

Guidance Document 37 Page 12

Table 4: Example of FIS Report Table 27 – Community Map History

Community Name

Initial

Identification

Date

Initial FHBM

Effective Date

FHBM Revision

Date(s)

Initial FIRM

Effective Date

FIRM Revision

Date(s)

Coastland, City of 02/15/1973 02/15/1973

10/10/1980

06/23/1975

09/28/1984

12/31/2011

07/23/2008

02/14/2005

09/02/1998

Flood County,

Unincorporated

Areas

11/01/1974 11/01/1974 09/06/1977 08/15/1984

12/31/2011

07/23/2008

10/26/2002

02/18/1998

Floodville, Town of 04/15/1975 04/15/1975 N/A 12/15/1984

07/23/2008

01/05/2003

05/26/1998

Metropolis, City of

11/01/1974 11/01/1974 09/06/1977 08/15/1984

12/31/2011

07/23/2008

10/26/2002

02/18/1998

Upland, Village of

2, 3

07/23/2008 N/A N/A 07/23/2008 12/31/2011

Water, City of

07/23/2008 N/A N/A 07/23/2008 N/A

Dates for this community were taken from Flood County, Unincorporated Areas

No Special Flood Hazard Areas Identified

This community did not have a FIRM prior to the first countywide FIRM for Flood County

In the example Community Map History table, 7/23/2008 is the date when the first countywide

FIRMs were produced.

The City of Metropolis could be an example of a community that was newly incorporated from

within another jurisdiction (normally the unincorporated areas of a county) or a community that

has simply been using the unincorporated county FIRM without being formally recognized on

the FIRM panel(s). In either case, the footnote shown for Metropolis should be used. If a

community becomes flood-prone solely due to the annexation of flood-prone lands shown on a

published FIRM, the same would apply.

Although the Village of Upland has no Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs) identified, the

example showing a FIRM revision date of 12/31/2011 reflects a situation where at least one of

the FIRM panels upon which the Village of Upland is located has been updated, most likely due

to a PMR that revised a flooding source outside the Village of Upland corporate limits.

The City of Water example reflects a community that never had a community-based Flood

Hazard Boundary Map (FHBM) or FIRM. Its first time being shown on a map was when the

countywide FIRMs were produced.

FIS Report December 2020

Guidance Document 37 Page 13

5.12 Table 28: Summary of Contracted Studies Included in this FIS Report

If a flooding source has more than one study from which the mapping on the FIRMs is based

(such as Inundation River in the Table 2 example), then additional text may be added below the

“Flooding Source” name to distinguish the studies from one another. The example below shows

how this could be accomplished.

Table 5: Example of FIS Report Table 28 – Summary of Contracted Studies Included in

this FIS Report

Flooding Source

FIS Report

Dated

Contractor Number

Work

Completed

Date

Affected Communities

Inundation River

(Zone AE)

07/23/2008 State DNR MAS-B-1234 March 2007

Flood County,

Unincorporated Areas;

Metropolis, City of

Inundation River

(Zone A)

02/18/1998

ABC

Engineers,

Inc.

MAS-B-1234 March 1997

Flood County,

Unincorporated Areas;

Metropolis, City of

6.0 Figure Guidance

The FIS Report now includes the FIRM Index as Figure 1. The FIRM Notes to Users that were

previously printed on the FIRM Index and individual panels are now included in the FIS Report

as Figure 2. The Legend that was printed on individual FIRM panels is included as Figure 3.

Refer to the FIRM Panel Technical Reference for Notes to Users and Legend elements that are

still shown on the FIRM.

Figures should be the width of the preceding text block. If they need to be wider than the

previous text block to be readable, or to be on their own page (such as for the FIRM Index,

coastal transect map, etc.), section breaks can be inserted before and after the figure so that

there is more room to display the figure. The orientation of pages that contain figures can only

be portrait or landscape. Include centered page numbers at the bottom of figures in landscape

orientation.

Captions are Arial, 11 point, bold; centered; with 12 point spacing before and 6 point spacing

after. Text in figures should be at least the size of body text.

If a figure is not relevant to the study, the figure does not need to be included in the report. As

outlined in the FIS Report Technical Reference, the figure heading number should remain in the

report, but the figure itself can be replace by the words “Not Applicable to this Flood Risk

Project”.

6.1 FIRM Notes to Users

The FIS Report Technical Reference contains the list of required and potential notes that should

be included as Figure 2 in the FIS Report, depending on the specifics of the Flood Risk Project.

As shown in the Technical Reference and the FIS Report Template, notes that are shown in

bold navy font should only be included if they are applicable to the Flood Risk Project. If

necessary, these notes can be customized or modified slightly from how they are written in the

FIS Report December 2020

Guidance Document 37 Page 14

FIS Report Technical Reference, if doing so would improve the communication of information.

However, it is expected that this will be the exception rather than the norm, and the study-

specific notes can be used as-is for most Flood Risk Projects.

6.2 Flood Profiles

The FIS Report Technical Reference should be referenced for additional information regarding

the flood profiles in the FIS Report. The Flood Profile Guidance document contains additional

guidance regarding the creation and display of flood profile information for select flooding

sources in the FIS Report.

The FIS Report Technical Reference also contains an example profile for flooding sources

affected by a levee system seclusion zone. In some circumstances, a seclusion boundary may

cover a portion or all of a flooding source that was restudied and will be shown as such on the

non-secluded portion of the FIRM. It is necessary to seclude information for these streams in

this case. Additional information and notes must also be added to the FIS Report which are

covered in the FIS Report Technical Reference, as well as the FIS Report Template.

6.3 FIS Inserts for 2D modeling

If the water surface elevation is not adequately captured by the published BFEs and evaluation

line elevations on the FIRM, an insert will be added to the FIS to better convey the results of 2D

modeling. One option is the annotated grid, where water surface elevations are published at set

locations throughout the modeled 2D area. The water surface elevation at an area of interest

can be determined by measuring the distance from known landmarks.

The figure below provides an example of an annotated grid presented in place of a profile in the

FIS Report. Currently other options to better define the water surface elevations and replace the

flood profile requirement are being evaluated. The appropriate FIS grid insert and format should

be discussed with community officials and the FEMA Project Officer.If a different option besides

those defined here, The FEMA Project Officer must concur prior to development.

The page format of the FIS grid insert can be 11” x 17” format and an index can be included if

more than one page is needed to capture entire 2D area.

FIS Report December 2020

Guidance Document 37 Page 15

Figure 7: Annotated grid presented in place of profile in FIS report