Geospatial Coordination

High Resolution Topographic

Inventory

Version 1.0

May 31, 2010

Table of Contents

1. Overview ............................................................................................................................................... 3

2. Approach ............................................................................................................................................... 3

3. Results ................................................................................................................................................... 5

3.1. Region I (CT, MA, ME, NH, RI, VT) ................................................................................................. 5

3.2. Region II (NJ, NY, PR, VI) ................................................................................................................ 8

3.3. Region III (DE, DC, MD, PA, VA, WV) ........................................................................................... 10

3.4. Region IV (AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TN) .................................................................................. 12

3.5. Region V (IL, IN, OH, MI, MN, WI) ............................................................................................... 14

3.6. Region VI (AR, LA, NM, OK, TX) ................................................................................................... 16

3.7. Region VII (IA, KS, MO, NE) ......................................................................................................... 18

3.8. Region VIII (CO, MT, ND, SD, UT, WY) ......................................................................................... 20

3.9. Region IX (AZ, CA, NV, HI, American Samoa, Northern Mariana Islands) ................................... 22

3.10. Region X (AK, ID, OR, WA) ........................................................................................................... 24

4. Conclusions ......................................................................................................................................... 27

Appendix A – Data Dictionary ..................................................................................................................... 28

Appendix B – Points of Contact................................................................................................................... 31

Document Tracking

Date Author/Team

5/25/10 E. Danielson/BakerAECOM

5/25/10 Review – Jeff Burm, BakerAECOM

5/26/10 Review – Josh Price, STARR

5/27/10 Review – Sue Hoegberg, RAMPP

5/27/10 Final Edits – Jeff Burm, BakerAECOM

1. Overview

Elevation data is one of the foundational elements of Risk MAP, which will help FEMA create a current

and accurate picture of flood risk in communities. High-quality elevation data is essential for developing

reliable base flood elevations, delineating flood hazard areas, and assessing risk. Digital elevation data is

also important in developing actionable mitigation plans and communicating community flood risks to

local officials and the public. As a crucial element of Risk MAP, the data will be used to develop valuable

products that address gaps in existing flood hazard data. Knowledge and availability of existing high

quality elevation data can provide FEMA with significant cost savings when creating new Digital Flood

Insurance Rate Maps (DFIRMs). If FEMA can leverage existing elevation data, they will not have to pay

for the acquisition of new elevation data and can use their resources elsewhere.

FEMA tasked the Risk MAP Production and Technical Services (PTS) contractors to develop a Geospatial

Data Inventory (GDI) of available high-quality elevation data across the Nation. This effort created a

baseline of available data to be used for identifying areas of the Nation for which there is no high-quality

topography readily available. The baseline is not intended to be updated continuously. When the GDI

baseline is applied to areas of high risk, as identified by the Risk MAP program, FEMA is able to identify

areas of high flood risk that lack quality elevation data and thus should be the focus of future data

collection efforts.

Each of the Regional Support Centers (RSCs) assessed the elevation data available within the region. The

following primary sources of elevation data were targeted:

1. Elevation data that were acquired and used for mapping projects under FEMA’s Map Modernization

(Map Mod) program.

2. High-quality elevation data developed by Federal, state, local, or tribal agencies.

3. Data acquisition projects in progress or planned for the near future by Federal or state agencies.

The information collected for each region was documented in a geodatabase providing an approximate

outline of the data’s spatial extent and key attributes regarding data quality. The data dictionary for the

GDI Geodatabase can be found in Appendix A of this report.

2. Approach

The approach to identify available high quality elevation data was to first investigate the data produced

during the FEMA Map MOD program. The RSC’s then coordinated with Federal, state, and local

authorities directly to identify any datasets that currently exist and that are planned in the near future.

It was also important to identify ownership and quality of the data to determine that it meets FEMA’s

standard for developing DFIRMs. Once the data was identified, geospatial footprints were developed to

show the extent of the elevation data and compiled regionally. Each Region’s database has been rolled

up to a national dataset.

FEMA FY10 Elevation

Priorities:

Highest flood risk locations

Identified flood data update needs

Lack of recent and accurate elevation data

The following sources for Map Mod data were leveraged:

Information received from RMCs

Previously published Geospatial Data Coordination Reports

MIP Metadata files

NDEP data worksheets

MIP Terrain folders (Topographic TSDNs and SHP files of spatial extents)

Available FIS Text documents

Other available TSDNs

CTPs and Study Managers

Information about other available elevation data or data development projects that are in progress or

planned came from the following sources:

USGS’s CLICK Website (http://LiDAR.cr.usgs.gov/)

Data provided by NOAA from the Topographic Bathymetric Inventory

(http://www.csc.noaa.gov/topobathy/viewer/index.html)

FEMA Regional engineers

State GIS coordinators

USGS State Liaisons

Several LiDAR vendors were contacted and asked for information about their recent or planned projects.

A small amount of information was provided by Fugro/Earth Data, Inc.

Contacts were initiated with each of the USGS State Liaisons and others in each state to obtain

information about their available data holdings and planned projects. Coordination with each of the

USGS liaisons and state contacts will be held to present the results of this inventory with intent to share

this project’s results with other Federal and State agencies as well as gaining any additional information

they may have that was not previously recorded. Any additional data holdings will be added to the

Geospatial Data Inventories before they are finalized.

Specific points of contact for each Region are listed in Appendix B.

3. Results

This section provides a summary of the information obtained for each state, organized by FEMA Region.

A graphic that depicts the findings is also provided for each Region. Please note that there are

cartographic differences between regions on the maps below, but the geodatabase was developed in a

standard way using the data dictionary in Appendix A. In addition some of the footprints in the inventory

are not visible at the current scale of the maps, but are captured in the inventory.

3.1. Region I (CT, MA, ME, NH, RI, VT) The RSC was able to obtain information about the data holdings within each state in the Region.

A summary of the findings is provided below.

Connecticut – Light Detection And Ranging (LiDAR) covering the entire coastline and the

Connecticut River supports 2 foot (ft) contour intervals and was acquired during Map

Mod. The Hartford Metropolitan District Commission owns photogrammetric data with

a vertical accuracy of 0.67ft. An American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)

funded project with the United States Geological Survey (USGS) will collect topography

covering Fairfield County and portions of New London County and will be completed in

2011. The scale of this project impacts all the other states in New England except

Vermont. The entire state of Connecticut is covered by the University of Connecticut

Center for Land Use Education and Research (CLEAR) LiDAR collection from 2000, but

the vertical accuracy of this data is unclear and the metadata is lacking.

Maine – LiDAR exists for the coastlines of Cumberland and York (National Map Accuracy

Standard (NMAS) of 1.0), Androscoggin County (0.327 ft vertical accuracy), and the

Augusta-Manchester area (0.067m vertical accuracy). There is a LiDAR dataset available

in the USGS Center for LiDAR Information Coordination and Knowledge database (CLICK)

that covers portions of western Maine, but its accuracy is unknown at this time due to a

lack of metadata in the CLICK holding. LiDAR covering the rest of the Maine coastline

will be collected by the USGS in the 2010/2011 ARRA funded LiDAR collection project.

Massachusetts – Several coastal counties in Massachusetts are covered by high quality

LiDAR data which supports 2 ft contour intervals. These data are available from Map

Mod projects and the Massachusetts Office of Geographic and Environmental

Information (MassGIS) collections. The majority of the remainder of the coastal areas

will be collected by the USGS in the upcoming ARRA funded LiDAR collection. There are

also several riverine collections that support 2 ft contours on the Connecticut River,

Blackstone River, and Shawsheen River.

New Hampshire – LiDAR covering the New Hampshire coastline and some inland

portions of Rockingham and Strafford Counties will be collected by the USGS in the

2010/2011 ARRA funded LiDAR collection project. There are several small LiDAR

datasets in Rockingham and Strafford Counties that are from 2007 to 2009 but these will

be superseded by the new USGS data and become obsolete.

Rhode Island – There are many small LiDAR datasets from various sources in Rhode

Island, but LiDAR covering the entire state will be collected by the USGS in the

2010/2011 ARRA funded LiDAR collection project.

Vermont – There are LiDAR data available for all of Essex County (0.15 m vertical

accuracy) and a large portion of Franklin County (supports 2 ft contours). There is a

LiDAR dataset that covers much of Chittenden County, but it has not been subjected to

quality control, and its vertical accuracy has not been validated. There are several

riverine corridors with LiDAR data including the Browns and Winooski Rivers and Otter

and East Creeks (NMAS 1.0). A further data collection is planned in Franklin and Orleans

Counties.

As there are many overlapping datasets in Region I, the newest (including in-work or proposed)

and/or highest quality are displayed for any given area in Figure 1.

Figure 1 - Region I Topographic Inventory

3.2. Region II (NJ, NY, PR, VI) The RSC was able to inventory elevation datasets in New York and New Jersey, but found it

somewhat difficult to gather data for Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. A summary of the

findings for each state within the Region is provided below.

New Jersey - All counties are covered by LiDAR data with a vertical accuracy of 13-18.5

cm which supports 1-2 foot contours. Most of this data is available on the USGS

National Elevation Dataset (NED) or CLICK websites.

New York – Much of the elevation data available in New York has a vertical accuracy

ranging from 13- 18.5 cm which supports 1-2 ft contours. Most of the high accuracy

data exists in counties whose LiDAR has been collected within the last three years, in

addition to those that are part of FEMA’s HMTAP (Hazard, Mitigation and Technical

Assistance Program) as a result of the 2006 flood that occurred in the Mohawk,

Delaware, and Susquehanna Watersheds. The remainder of the counties with available

elevation data support 4-5 foot contours. The New York City metro area lacks high

accuracy elevation data, as do rural areas and non-Map MOD counties.

Puerto Rico - While there is elevation data for all of Puerto Rico from a number of

sources, most of these data have known geoid and vertical datum problems that

prevent a definitive assessment of the vertical accuracy of the data. A new geoid for

Puerto Rico is anticipated in the next few months, which should make it possible to

assess the available data and determine its accuracy.

Virgin Islands - Information is still outstanding.

Figure 2 - Region II Topographic Inventory (In-work vs planned is not specified on this map)

3.3. Region III (DE, DC, MD, PA, VA, WV) The RSC was able to obtain information about the data holdings within each state in the Region.

A summary of the findings is provided below.

Delaware – Statewide data that was compiled to meet 15-centimeter vertical accuracy

at the 95% confidence level is available.

District of Columbia – City-wide data were compiled using 4 foot contours.

Maryland – Most of the state is covered by LiDAR data completed by Maryland

Department of the Environment with a vertical accuracy of 14.3 cm RMSE at the 95%

confidence level. Projects not using this data were completed using 2 to 5 foot contour

lines.

Pennsylvania – Statewide LiDAR data with a vertical accuracy of 18.5 cm RMSE is either

complete or funded and in progress.

Virginia – Most projects in rural areas occurring through Map MOD were completed

using USGS data or completed through digital lift up. Countywide Digital Terrain Models

(DTMs) were developed for the Terrain Virginia Base Mapping Program (VBMP) in 2002.

These DTMs were developed to support the creation of 6-inch or 1-foot orthoimages at

scales of 1"=200' (1:2,400) or 1"=100' (1:1,200). Additionally, USGS elevation collection

projects are in progress for a number of counties in Virginia.

West Virginia - Most projects occurring through Map MOD were completed using

existing USGS data or completed through digital lift up. Some small Zone A studies and

a few detailed studies were completed with 4 to 5 foot contours. New LiDAR data that

will meet 1-foot accuracy requirements are currently in production for almost half of the

state by the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection.

Figure 3 - Region III Topographic Inventory

3.4. Region IV (AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TN) The RSC was able to obtain information about the data holdings within each state in the Region.

A summary of the findings is provided below.

Alabama – High accuracy elevation data is available for the coastline due to post-Katrina

LiDAR coverage. Most of the remaining areas mapped during Map MOD were

completed using USGS data and is available on the USGS NED website.

Florida – A mosaic of statewide Florida Division of Emergency Management (FDEM)

LiDAR sources with vertical accuracy of 2-ft NMAS contours (0.6-ft/18.5-cm NSSDA

RMSEz) for all land covers and 1-ft NMAS contours (0.3-ft NSSDA RMSEz) for bare earth ,

has being acquired (flown) since 2002 on an ongoing basis. It is available statewide with

the exception of inland areas near south-central Georgia/Florida border counties.

Georgia – High accuracy elevation data (LiDAR or photogrammetrically collected

topography) is available for much of the northern Georgia-Atlanta metro, Macon,

Albany and the coastal regions. In rural areas, USGS sources (30-meter DEMs) were

utilized for Map MOD products. Most of this data is available on the USGS NED website.

There are on-going efforts to acquire high accuracy elevation data for counties from

Middle Georgia (Macon) to Northeast Georgia (Athens). The Georgia Mountains region

has recently-acquired LiDAR data, or is currently being processed.

Kentucky – High accuracy elevation data (LiDAR) is available for approximately several

counties, most of which was collected in spring 2010 through state funded efforts. A

handful of the counties have acquired LiDAR through local/combined efforts. USGS

sources were implemented during Map MOD for the majority of the counties.

Mississippi – High accuracy elevation data, in the form of LiDAR, is available for the

coastline due to post-Katrina coverage. Most of the remaining areas mapped through

Map MOD were completed using USGS data. Most of this data is available on the USGS

NED website. The Yazoo/Delta coverage data was made available through the states

study contractor.

North Carolina – High accuracy elevation data (LiDAR) is available statewide with

vertical accuracy of 18.5cm, supporting 2-ft contours state-wide.

South Carolina – High accuracy elevation data (LiDAR) is available for most counties.

Collection began during Map MOD – the South Carolina Department of Natural

Resources (SCDNR) and local efforts have contributed to the LiDAR coverage available.

A number of counties require processing for elevation data already flown. They are

waiting on additional funding to process the LiDAR in Saluda, Sumter, Kershaw counties.

Tennessee – High accuracy elevation data (LiDAR) is available for Anderson, Davidson,

Hamilton, and Knox counties. All other counties have high accuracy DTM supporting 10-

ft contours, and 2-ft contours in some areas. Currently, Williamson County data is being

processed.

Figure 4 - Region IV Topographic Inventory

3.5. Region V (IL, IN, OH, MI, MN, WI)

This section provides a summary of the information obtained for each state. A graphic that

depicts the findings is also provided for Region V.

Illinois – Most of the high resolution data available in Illinois exists in the northern

counties of the state. The University of Illinois maintains a geospatial data clearinghouse

where most of the high resolution data in the state is available. The available data meets

FEMA specifications to produce 2 ft contours. The Illinois Department of Transportation

is planning LiDAR acquisition for almost a quarter of the state over the next two years.

Indiana – In 2005, Indiana coordinated a statewide orthophotography project. In

addition to orthophotography, the project delivered DEMs capable of producing 10 ft

contours and may be able to support 2-5 ft contours if additional data processing is

undertaken. There are a few data processing issues for the contours produced from the

statewide orthophotography and it is recommended to discuss the data with Indiana

Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) before leveraging the data. Other high

resolution data is scattered among the state and was utilized during Map Mod.

Michigan –Michigan is lacking high resolution elevation data but there are some smaller

LiDAR datasets available from Map Mod projects. Several LiDAR projects are in-process

along the east and southeast sections of the State. These projects should meet FEMA

specifications for 2 ft contour equivalency.

Minnesota – The state maintains a digital elevation committee that is focused on

statewide LiDAR data collection. LiDAR projects are concluding in the northwestern

part of the state. LiDAR data is currently available in the southeastern portion of the

state, yet the data along the Mississippi River is proprietary. The remainder of the State

is planned for LiDAR acquisition projects through 2012. These projects should meet

FEMA specifications for 2 ft contour equivalency. The public domain LIDAR projects are

available on the Minnesota Geographic Data Clearinghouse website.

Ohio – Statewide high resolution elevation data was gathered as part of the Ohio

Statewide Imagery Program. The statewide data is capable of producing 5 ft contours

but could support 2-5 ft contours with additional processing. Many counties have

chosen to purchase contour data through Ohio Statewide Imagery Program (OSIP).

There are other LiDAR projects throughout the State that were leveraged during Map

Mod.

Wisconsin – As a result of severe floods in 2008, a grant to produce LiDAR data in the

south half of Wisconsin was secured for counties without existing data. Projects are

planned through 2010 and should produce 2 ft contour equivalency. Other high

resolution elevation data is available in parts of the state and is mostly compiled from

photogrammetric data capable of producing 4 ft contours.

Figure 5 - Region V Topographic Inventory

3.6. Region VI (AR, LA, NM, OK, TX) The RSC was able to obtain information about the data holdings within each state in the Region.

A summary of the findings is provided below.

Arkansas – With the exception of a few urban areas, high quality elevation data is

lacking.

Louisiana – Statewide LiDAR data with a vertical accuracy of .61ft or 18.5cm, flown

between 2004 and 2006 is available.

Oklahoma – New topographic data is currently being collected for the Greater

Oklahoma City Area, the Panola Gap and the Washita Watershed.

New Mexico – LiDAR data has been and continues to be collected for the Rio Grande

River throughout the higher population areas in New Mexico.

Texas – The Texas Water Development Board has been collecting and is still in the

process of collecting LIDAR data throughout the State of Texas. Locations for LIDAR

collection include the higher population areas of Houston, Austin, and the Dallas

Metroplex (currently in process), as well as the coastal areas.

Figure 6 - Region VI Topographic Inventory

3.7. Region VII (IA, KS, MO, NE) The RSC was able to obtain information about the data holdings within each state in the Region.

A summary of the findings is provided below.

Iowa – The state has funded an initiative to collect and process statewide LiDAR data

with a vertical accuracy of .61 ft or 18.5 cm. Flights were conducted between the spring

of 2009 and the spring of 2010. Approximately 85% of the state LiDAR data is either

available for use or in-process as of the date of this report.

Kansas – Locations for LiDAR collection include the Kansas River corridor and

surrounding counties. Some southern county efforts are also underway to provide LiDAR

data. The USACE is funding a study for LiDAR data collection in the area around seven

named lakes.

Missouri – Multiple agencies including the USDA, NRCS, USACE, STLWSD, and USGS have

funded LiDAR data collection along the Mississippi and Missouri River corridors. A

handful of cooperatively funded county studies have also been provided or are in-

process.

Nebraska – LiDAR data was collected for many south central Nebraska counties as well

as the Platte River corridor; the City of Scotts Bluff; and the Douglas and Lancaster

County areas. The Nebraska Department of Natural Resources (NDNR) also provided

information on a LiDAR study conducted in four northern Kansas counties.

Figure 7 - Region VII Topographic Inventory

3.8. Region VIII (CO, MT, ND, SD, UT, WY) The RSC was able to obtain information about the data holdings within each state in the Region.

A summary of the findings is provided below.

Colorado – Topographic data has been collected for a majority of the Denver Metro

area, but high quality elevation data is lacking for most of the State. A handful of

communities and specific reaches outside of the Metro area also have pockets of

topographic data.

Montana – Topographic data has been collected across the State for particular

communities or reaches, but overall high quality elevation data is lacking for a majority

of the State.

North Dakota – High quality topographic data has been collected for a vast majority of

the Red River basin. Outside of that region, a handful of communities or reaches are the

only other areas where topographic data is available for the rest of the State.

South Dakota - Topographic data has been collected across the State for particular

communities or reaches, but overall high quality elevation data is lacking for a majority

of the State.

Wyoming – With the exception of a few particular reaches where topographic data has

been collected, high quality elevation data is lacking for most all of the State.

Utah - Topographic data has been collected for a good portion of the Salt Lake Metro

area, but high quality elevation data is lacking for most of the State. A handful of

communities and specific reaches outside of the Metro area also have pockets of

topographic data.

Figure 8 - Region VIII Topographic Inventory

3.9. Region IX (AZ, CA, NV, HI, American Samoa, Northern Mariana Islands) The RSC was able to obtain information about the data holdings within each state in the Region.

A summary of the findings is provided below.

Arizona – Countywide high-quality topographic data is available for the counties of

Santa Cruz (LiDAR) and Maricopa (photogrammetric). Pima County has also been

actively pursuing development of LiDAR data for areas with high population and

identified flood risk. LiDAR coverage for the rest of the state remains spotty.

California – Countywide LiDAR data is available for at least 5 of the 9 Bay Area counties

in Northern California. USACE and CA DWR have contributed to several LiDAR collection

projects for the Central Valley, while FEMA has funded LiDAR development in the

coastal portion of the Bay Area. In Southern California, countywide high-quality

topographic data is less prevalent, although the majority of LA County and Ventura

County have good LiDAR coverage.

Nevada – State has LiDAR coverage for part of the Carson River Watershed and the

populated areas of Clark County. Countywide high-quality topographic data has not

been discovered through this inventory effort.

Hawaii – Of the 4 Hawaiian Islands, Oahu and Maui have good countywide LiDAR

coverage. Some shorelines of Kauai is also known to have LiDAR projects completed as

part of FEMA coastal studies, but exact data extent has not been determined through

this inventory effort.

American Samoa – American Samoa has countywide topographic data that supports 5-ft

contours, although the data was from the 1970s.

Northern Mariana Islands – Northern Mariana Islands has 4-ft contour coverage for 3 of

its islands funded by USACE in 2000.

Figure 9 - Region IX Geospatial Inventory

3.10. Region X (AK, ID, OR, WA) The RSC was able to obtain information about the data holdings within each state in the Region.

A summary of the findings is provided below:

Alaska – A majority of existing elevation data is located within the Kenai Peninsula

Borough including several LiDAR datasets for the City of Seward flown in 2006 and 2009

(15 cm RMSE vertical accuracy) as well as several USGS-provided datasets covering a

majority of the peninsula. Age and vertical accuracy information for this data is

currently unknown. Additional LiDAR data is available for the North Slope and Yukon-

Koyukuk Boroughs in northern Alaska. Vertical accuracy (where known) for most

elevation data in Alaska ranges from 5-30 cm RMSE and would support 0.5-4 foot

contours. Existing datasets were created in 2007 or more recently. Major source

contributors included USGS’s CLICK website, OpenTopography.com, state and local

contacts. Very little high-resolution topographic data exists for Alaska. Several

important LiDAR projects are planned for 2011 in areas within Mat-Su Borough as well

as coastal areas within the Municipality of Anchorage.

Idaho – New LiDAR data is publicly available from the Idaho LiDAR Consortium. The

University of Idaho and Idaho State University have received funding from the National

Science Foundation (NSF) to process and compile LiDAR data within Idaho. Sources for

data provided by the consortium include the USDA ARS, USGS, BOR, Coeur d’Alene

Tribe, state and local jurisdictions. Most of the compiled datasets are available for

download from the USGS CLICK website. Datasets include areas west of Boise through a

joint collection effort from the Bureau of Reclamation and National Resource

Conservation Service (NRCS). The Coeur d’Alene Tribe has also collected high-res

resolution LiDAR for the reservation and some outlying areas. The USGS CLICK website

was an important source of elevation data. In 2008, USGS hired Aero-Metric to collect

112 square miles of LiDAR data along the Coeur d’Alene River and several of its

tributaries in support of the NFIP. Several other riverine corridors containing LiDAR data

exist throughout the State. High-resolution topographic data currently is sparse in Idaho

and metadata availability is limited, therefore the vertical accuracy is unclear. Most of

the data was collected between 2002 and 2008.

Oregon – Oregon’s Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI) is the

primary data repository for LiDAR. All data collected by DOGAMI was collected within

the last 5 years; has equal to or less than 7 cm vertical accuracy; and supports 1 foot

contours. Available LiDAR data from DOGAMI includes: Lower Columbia River; Portland

Metro area; Willamette and Deschutes River systems; and the coastline. Numerous

riverine corridors throughout the state have LiDAR data with varying sources including:

DOGAMI, USFS, BLM, BOR, NPS, NOAA, USFW, USGS, and local tribes. Little metadata

was available for topographic datasets at the time of inventory so information regarding

vertical accuracy and specific time of collection remains limited. Most of this data was

collected between 2000 and 2009.

Washington – The Puget Sound LiDAR Consortium (PSLC) serves as the primary data

repository for all LiDAR data within the state. The vertical accuracy of this data is 15-30

cm and supports 2-4 foot contour equivalency. Other data sources included the

Southwest Washington Coastal Erosion Study showing bathymetry and monitoring sites

with beach profiles. Additional data exists for south I-5 corridor, southwest Washington

coast, and along the Lower Columbia River (7cm RMSE vertical accuracy, supports 1 foot

contours). Data is available in the Greater Puget Sound Region, coastal shorelines, I-5

corridor, Lower Columbia River, and along portions of the Chehalis River system in

southwestern Washington and the Columbia and Yakima River systems in eastern

Washington.

The USACE Columbia River Treaty 2014/2024 Project will provide high resolution elevation data with

a vertical accuracy of <13cm for the Columbia and Snake River systems through Washington and

Oregon. Portions of the Pend Oreille River in Washington and the Kootenai River in Idaho are also

included in this project. The project has an expected completion date of August 1, 2010. The data is

expected to be hosted on the USGS National Map and Seamless server.

Figure 10 - Region X Topographic Inventory

4. Conclusions

The methodology used to inventory the available high-quality elevation data was reasonably

effective for creating a baseline of existing data and planned data collection from Federal and State

sources. The resulting data from this project should be reviewed and used with some caution. The

results are not meant to be comprehensive of every high quality topographic dataset that exists

across the Nation. Rather the effort was to provide a reasonable baseline of high quality

topographic data that may be used for FEMA’s Risk MAP program to produce high quality flood

hazard studies. The results are adequate to help FEMA plan future LiDAR collection efforts from a

National perspective.

Appendix A – Data Dictionary

FIELD DESCRIPTION Required Domain

STATE_NAME Whole State Name where the project was done. Example: Illinois, Michigan, New York Y

STATE_FIPS FIPS code for the state. Example: 17, 26, 18 Y

COUNTY_NAM Whole County Name of the project Example: De Kalb, Clinton Y

CNTY_FIPS FIPS code for the county. Example 001, 055, 123 Y

PCOMM Community Identification Number for the entity. The state and county FIPS code combined. Example: 17001C

CITY_NAME Whole City Name for the city where the project was done. Example: New York, Detroit

TITLE Title of the project when data was collected. Example: King County Partial Countywide LiDAR Project, NAIP State of Texas Project. Y

VENDOR Vendor that collected the data. Example: Sanborn

COLLECTION_DATE

Date that the data set was collected. Specific dates if possible. Example: 4/2/10 to 4/5/10 Y

COLLECTION_METHOD Collection Technology used. Example: LiDAR, IFSAR, photogrammetry, soundings, etc. Y

DATA_FORMAT Format Data is currently in. Example: Contours, DEM Y

PROJECT_FOOTPRINT Footprint that the data covers. Example: Partial Countywide, Countywide, Community

VERTICAL_DATUM Vertical Datum as reported in survey report of metadata. Example: NAVD88, MSL, etc. Y

VERTICAL_ACCURACY Vertical Accuracy reported in survey report or metadata. Example: 10 cm RMSE or FVA Y

HORIZONTAL_DATUM Horizontal Datum as reported in the survey report or metadata. Example: NAD83, etc. Y

HORIZONTAL_ACCURACY Horizontal Accuracy as reported in the survey report or metadata. Example: 2 meters

PROJECTION Current projection of the data. Example: Geographic NAD83, decimal degrees, Z units = meters

QA Was quality assurance conducted on this data set? Yes or No Y

METADATA Are metadata available for this data set? Yes or no Y

METADATA_LINK Hyperlink to the metadata online. Example: http://ned.usgs.gov

FIELD DESCRIPTION Required Domain

CONTACT_NAME

Person to contact to request data or ask questions about the data. Example: John Smith, GIS specialist at Jackson County Planning Dept.

CONTACT_PHONE Contact phone number of the person whose office holds the data. Example: (123) 456-7890

CONTACT_EMAIL Contact email for the person whose office holds the data. Example: john.smith@usgs.gov

DATA_LOCATION Current location of the data. Example: A state or local entity, MIP, website, etc. Y

AGENCY Agency that holds the data. Example: Minnesota DNR, USGS

MAILING_ADDRESS Mailing address of the contact person or entity

CONSTRAINTS Were there constraints with the project? Yes, or no. Example: Financial, Environmental, etc. Y

HORIZONTAL_POSTING Horizontal point spacing for the data. Example: 1 meter, 3 meter

CONTOURS The contour information for the data. Example: 1ft, 2ft, 4ft

FEMA_REGION The FEMA Region for the county/community. Example: 1, 2, 3, 10

SHAPEFILE A shapefile that indicates the boundary of your data set. Example: footprint.shp

WEBLINK_TO

Either a hyperlink to the download mechanism or contact information for an organization that distributes the data. Example: http://www.co.dakota.mn.us/DoingBusiness/MapsAndServices/Download/LiDAR.htm

CONT_SUPP

RESTRICTION_TYPE More information about what type of restrictions to distribution. Example: Free to fed and state entities, can purchase data, restrictions undetermined, none.

RESTRICTIONS Are there any restrictions on distributing these data sets? Yes or No.

PROGRESS Progress of the data project. Example: Planned, Complete Y

EXPECTED_COMPLETION Expected date of completion. Specific dates if possible. Example: 4/5/10

COMPLETION_DATE Date completed. Specific dates if possible. Example: 4/5/10

DATASET_NAME Name that describes the collection - include year, technology, and maybe owner. Example: 2009 USGS LiDAR collection

FIELD DESCRIPTION Required Domain

POINT_SPACING

Average distance between points or the contract specification for point spacing. Example: 1-3 meter, 10 meter

OWNER Owner of the data either through purchase or custodian of the data. Example: USGS, Lake County

ISLAND Often not applicable, but denotes specific islands if necessary.

PRODUCTS_AVAILABLE Additional products available related to the data. Example: shapefiles, additional studies, etc.

ADDITIONAL_NOTE

Any ancillary information about the dataset that may be useful to the user. Example: existence of coordinating hyperspectral imagery, funding source, etc.

Appendix B – Points of Contact

Geospatial Key Contacts

State Name Title Agency Email Phone

Region 1

CT

Lynn

Bjorklund USGS Geospatial Liaison USGS lcbjorklund@usgs.gov 508-490-5074

CT

Michael

Howser GIS Librarian UConn MAGIC Michael.howser@uconn.edu 860-486-4589

CT

Jackie

Mickiwicz Connecticut DEP Jacqueline.mickiewicz@ct.gov 860-424-3085

CT Emily Wilson GIS Specialist UConn CLEAR Emily.wilson@uconn.edu

ME Dan Walters USGS Geospatial Liaison USGS danwalters@usgs.gov 207-622-8201 x128

ME Michael Smith OIT Chair State Michael.smith@maine.gov 207-215-5530

ME Joseph Young Mapping Coordinator Maine Floodplain Mgmt. Program Joseph.Young@maine.gov 207-287-8051

MA

Lynn

Bjorklund USGS Geospatial Liaison USGS lcbjorklund@usgs.gov 508-490-5074

MA

Neil

MacGaffey MassGIS Neil.macgaffey@state.ma.us 617-626-1057

Geospatial Key Contacts

State Name Title Agency Email Phone

MA Philip John MassGIS Philip.john@state.ma.us 617-626-1185

NH Lin Neifert USGS Geospatial Liaison USGS lneifert@usgs.gov 802-229-4384

NH Fay Rubin Director NH GRANIT Fay.rubin@unh.edu 603-862-4240

NH

Rick

Chormann Senior Hydrogeologist NH Geological Survey rchormann@des.state.nh.us 603-271-1975

RI

Lynn

Bjorklund USGS Geospatial Liaison USGS lcbjorklund@usgs.gov 508-490-5074

RI Greg Bonynge GIS Specialist URI Geospatial Ext. Program greg@edc.uri.edu 401-874-2180

VT Lin Neifert USGS Geospatial Liaison USGS lneifert@usgs.gov 802-229-4384

VT

David

Brotzman Executive Director VCGI davidb@vcgi.org 802-882-3003

VT

Ned

Swanberg

Flood Plain Mapping

Coordinator VT DEC Ned.swanberg@state.vt.us 802.241.4596

Region 2

NJ Roger Barlow USGS Geospatial Liason USGS rbarlow@usgs.gov (703) 648-5189

NJ John Tyrawski NJDEP John.Tyrawski@dep.state.nj.us (609) 777-0151

NJ Roger Kerin NJ Highlands Commission

Geospatial Key Contacts

State Name Title Agency Email Phone

NJ Andy Rowan State GIO NJOIT andrew.rowan@oit.state.nj.us

NY Sam Wear Westchester County stw1@westchestergov.com

NY David Terrell USGS Geospatial Liason USGS dterrell@usgs.gov 717-702-2027

NJ Richard Dean Fort Dix richard.dean@mcguire.af.mil (609) 754 -6520

NY Tim Daly GIS Lead

NYS Department of Environmental

Conservation Division of Water tmdaly@gw.dec.state.ny.us (518) 402-8260

NY Paul Weberg Senior Engineer FEMA Region II paul.weberg@dhs.gov (212) 680-3638

NY

Wassim

Nader VP Civil Department T.Y.LIN International/Medina naders@medinaconsultants.com (908) 850-3366

NY Alex Sandoval Surveyor T.Y.LIN International/Medina sandovala@medinaconsultants.com (908) 850-3366

NY Hani Rimawi

Project Engineer- East

District T.Y.LIN International/Medina rimawih@medinaconsultants.com (908) 850-3366

NY

Matt

Mampara Associate Dewberry MMampara@Dewberry.com (703) 849 0612

NY Jason Fenn Program Specialist FEMA Region II Jason.Fenn@dhs.gov (212) 680-3624

NY Brian Shumon GIS Lead FEMA Region II Brian.Shumon@dhs.gov (212) 680-3631

Geospatial Key Contacts

State Name Title Agency Email Phone

Region 3

DE, DC,

MD Roger Barlow USGS Geospatial Liason USGS rbarlow@usgs.gov (703) 648-5189

Bruce Bauch USGS Geospatial Liason USGS bbauch@usgs.gov 502-493-1945

VA Diane Eldridge USGS Geospatial Liason USGS deldridge@usgs.gov (703) 648-4521

WV Craig Neidig USGS Geospatial Liason USGS cneidig@usgs.gov 304-347-5130 x237

PA David Terrell USGS Geospatial Liason dterrell@usgs.gov 717-702-2027

Region 4

AL

George

Heleine USGS Geospatial Liaison USGS gheleine@usgs.gov 601-933-2950

AL Mike Vanhook Geospatial Contact Geospatial Office (ALGO) mike.vanhook@isd.alabama.gov 334-242-4799

AL Leslie Durham State CTP Coordinator AL Dept. of Water Resources Leslie.Durham@adeca.alabama.gov 334-242-5506

FL

Richard

Butgereit State GIS Coordinator FL Div. of Emergency Mgt. richard.butgereit@dca.state.fl.us 850-413-9907

FL Louis Driber USGS Geospatial Liaison USGS ldriber@usgs.gov 850-553-3645

FL John Crowe Associate Hydrologist Northwest FL WMD John.Crowe@nwfwmd.state.fl.us 850-539-5999 x226

Geospatial Key Contacts

State Name Title Agency Email Phone

FL Karen Kebert

Associate Water Resource

Planner Northwest FL WMD Karen.Kebart@nwfwmd.state.fl.us 850-539-5999 x248

FL

Paul

Buchanan Geospatial Contact Suwannee River WMD PJB@srwmd.org 386-362-1001

FL

Christine

Mundy GIS Program Coordinator St. Johns River WMD cmundy@sjrwmd.com 386-329-4145

FL

Ekaterina

Fitos Geospatial Contact Southwest FL WMD Ekaterina.Fitos@swfwmd.state.fl.us 352-796-7211 x4219

FL

Diana

Umpierre Senior Geographer South FL WDM dumpier@sfwmd.gov 561-682-6822

GA

Keith

McFadden USGS Geospatial Liaison USGS keithmc@usgs.gov 770-903-9150

GA Lisa Weston Sr. GIS Specialist Dept. of Community Affairs lwestin@dca.state.ga.us 404-679-3125

GA Eric McRae Associate Director

Carl Vinson Institute of Govt. at

Univ. of Georgia mcrae@cviog.itos.uga.edu 706-542-5308

GA Tom ShillocK State GIS Coordinator Environmental Protection Division tom.shillock@dnr.state.ga.us 404-463-0606

KY Bruce Bauch USGS Geospatial Liaison USGS bbauch@usgs.gov 502-493-1945

KY Kent Anness

Kentucky Division of Geographic

Information Kent.Anness@ky.gov 502-564-1450 x291

Geospatial Key Contacts

State Name Title Agency Email Phone

MS

George

Heleine USGS Geospatial Liaison USGS gheleine@usgs.gov 601-933-2950

MS

Stephen

Champlin Geospatial Contact

Mississippi Department of

Environmental Quality Stephen_Champlin@deq.state.ms.us 601-961-5521

NC Steve Strader USGS Geospatial Liaison USGS sstrader@usgs.gov 919-571-4092

NC Jeff Brown GIS Program Manager

Center for Geographic information

and Analysis jeff.brown@nc.gov 919-754-6584

SC Gary Merrill USGS Geospatial Liaison USGS glmerrill@usgs.gov 803-750-6124

SC Jim Scurry

SC Dept. of Natural

Resources scurryj@dnr.sc.gov 803-734-9494

TN

Dennis

Pederson Division Director Office for Information Resources dennis.pedersen@tn.gov 615-741-9356

TN Bruce Bauch USGS Geospatial Liaison USGS bbauch@usgs.gov 502-493-1945

Region 5

IL Shelly Silch USGS Liaison USGS ssilch@usgs.gov 217-328-9732

IL David Mick GIS Analyst IDNR/Office of Water Resources David.Mick@illinois.gov 217-782-4486

IL

Sally

McConkey Illinois State Water Survey -INRS sally@illinois.edu 217-333-5482

Geospatial Key Contacts

State Name Title Agency Email Phone

IL Kingsley Allan GIS Manager Illinois State Water Survey -INRS kingsley@illinois.edu 217-333-0545

IN David Nail USGS Liaison USGS dnail@usgs.gov 317-290-3333

IN David Knipe

Section Head/Central Basin

Eng. Services Indiana DNR dknipe@dnr.in.gov 317-232-4173

IN Scott Morlock Supervisory Hydrologist

USGS Indiana Water Sciences

Center http://in.water.usgs.gov 317-290-3333 ext 153

MI Steve Aichele USGS Liaison USGS saichele@usgs.gov 517-887-8918

MI Les Thomas NFIP Coordinator Michigan DNR Thomasl@michigan.gov 517-335-3448

MI Bruce Menery Hydrologic Studies Unit Michigan DNR Menereyb@michigan.gov 517-335-3181

MN Ronald Wencl USGS Liaison USGS rwencl@usgs.gov 763-783-3207

MN

Suzanne

Jiwani

Floodplain Mapping

Hydrologist Minnesota DNR Suzanne.Jiwani@state.mn.us 651-259-5681

MN Tim Loesch GIS Operations Supervisor Minnesota DNR tim.loesch@dnr.state.mn.us 651-259-5475

OH

Charles

Hickman USGS Liaison USGS chickman@usgs.gov 614-430-7768

OH Jeff Smith

Spatial Data Framework

Manager

Ohio Office of Information

Technology Jeff.Smith@ohio.gov 614-466-8862

Geospatial Key Contacts

State Name Title Agency Email Phone

OH Jonathan Sorg Environmental Specialist

Ohio DNR Div. of Soil and Water

Res. Jonathan.Sorg@dnr.state.oh.us 614-265-6780

WI Dick Vraga USGS Liaison USGS rsvraga@usgs.gov 608-821-3896

WI

Amanda

Schwoegler WI CTP Project Lead Wisconsin DNR Amanda.Schwoegler@Wisconsin.gov 608-267-7571

WI

Robert

Watson Floodplain Engineer

Wisconsin DNR, Bureau of

Watershed Robert.Watson@wisconsin.gov 608-266-8037

Region 6

AR

Luis

Hernandez MLRA Leader NRCS luis.hernandez@ar.usda.gov (501) 301-3116

AR Pam Cooper GIS Coordinator NRCS pam.cooper@ar.usda.gov (501) 301-3146

AR Learon Dalby

Arkansas Geographic

Information Office

Arkansas Geographic Information

Office Learon.Dalby@arkansas.gov

(501) 682-2767

NM

Laura

Gleasner MRGCD laura@edac.unm.edu (505) 277-3622 ext.230

NM

Douglas

Strech GIS Manager MRGCD doug@mrgcd.us

(505)247-0234 ext.

1344

NM Gary Kress Geospatial Contact NM USGS gekress@usgs.gov (303)202-4451

Geospatial Key Contacts

State Name Title Agency Email Phone

OK Greg Scott Soil Scientist NRCS greg.scott@ok.usda.gov

(405) 742-1249

OK

Dr. Mike

Sharp

Director, Information

Technology Division

Oklahoma Conservation

Commission msharp@okcc.state.ok.us (405) 521-4813

OK

Darryl

Williams

USGS Geospatial Liaison

for Oklahoma USGS dwilliams@usgs.gov (405) 810-4403

TX Felicia Retiz StratMap Team Leader TNRIS fretiz@tnris.state.tx.us (512) 463-8862

Region 7

MO

Timothy

Haithcoat State GIS Coordinator

Geographic Resource Center &

MSDIS HaithcoatT@missouri.edu (573) 882-1404

MO Ray Fox USGS Geospatial Liaison USGS rfox@usgs.gov (573) 308-3744

MO Mark Duewell Senior GIS Specialist

Geographic Resource Center &

MSDIS DuewellM@missouri.edu (573) 882-6734

MO Jim Harlan Assistant Program Director

Geographic Resource Center &

MSDIS HarlanJ@missouri.edu (573) 882-1356

MO Levi Boettler

Research Specialist, FEMA

flood mapping

Geographic Resource Center &

MSDIS BoettlerL@missouri.edu (573) 882-2149

Geospatial Key Contacts

State Name Title Agency Email Phone

MO Josh Bullock

Office of Administration,

Information Technology Services

Division (513)-751-3290

MO

Elizabeth

Cook GIS Specialist USDA-NRCS elizabeth.cook@mo.usda.gov (573) 876-9396

MO Chad Markin

US Army Corps of Engineers Rock

Island District (RID) chad.a.markin@usace.army.mil (309)-794-4200

MO

Jason

Schneider Project Manager

Greenhorne & O’Mara – Kansas

City jschneider@g-and-o.com (913)-498-00500

MO Frank Nelson

Missouri Department of

Conservation frank.nelson@mdc.mo.gov 573.222.2432

MO

Marty

Comstock

USDA Natural Resource

Conservation Service marty.comstock@mo.usda.gov (573)-876-9387

MO Tony Spicci GIS Coordinator

Missouri Department of

Conservation Tony.Spicci@mdc.mo.gov 573.882.9909

MO

Jason

Warzinik GIS Manager Boone County Gov. Cntr jwarzinik@boonecountymo.org 573.886.4325

MO

Jonathan

Bode GIS Analyst Boone County jbode@boonecountymo.org 573.886.4303

Geospatial Key Contacts

State Name Title Agency Email Phone

MO

Erin Kemper

Information Services Greene County

ekemper@springfieldmo.gov

416.864.1876

MO

Sheila

McCarthy

St. Louis District, Corps of

Engineers Sheila.McCarthy@usace.army.mil (314) 331-8149

MO

Dale

Schmutzler

Floodplain Management

Officer dale.schmutzler@sema.dps.mo.gov 573.526.9135

MO

Karen

McHugh

Floodplain Management

Officer

MO State Emergency

Management karen.mchugh@sema.dps.mo.gov 573.526.9129

MO Alicia Williams

Amec Earth & Environmental

615.333.0630

MO Dennis Lawler Amec Earth & Environmental

785.272.6830

MO Lisa Chapman GIS Coordinator Cass County lisac@casscounty.com 816-380-8190

MO Steve Marsh

Information Technology

Director Jackson County smarsh@jacksongov.org (816) 881-4584

MO Julia Cole Metro St. Louis Sewer District jcole@stlmsd.com 314.768.2744

MO

Patsy

Alexander GIS Manager Taney County patsya@co.taney.mo.us 417.546.7210

Geospatial Key Contacts

State Name Title Agency Email Phone

IA Alan D. Jensen State GIS Coordinator

Iowa Geographic Information

Council (IGIC) adjensen@iastate.edu 641-782-8426

IA Chris Kahle

Iowa DNR-Geological

Survey Chris.Kahle@dnr.iowa.gov (319) 335-1583

KS Ivan Weichert State GIS Coordinator

Kansas Information Technology

Office ivan.weichert@da.ks.gov (785) 296-0257

KS

Ingrid

Landgraf USGS Geospatial Liaison USGS imlandgraf@usgs.gov (785) 832-3566

KS Tom Morey State NFIP Coordinator Kansas Department of Agriculture tom.morey@kda.ks.gov (785) 296-5440

KS Ken Nelson Manager Kansas Geological Survey Nelson@kgs.ku.edu (785)-864-2164

KS Eileen Battles Kansas Geological Survey

Battles@kgs.ku.edu

(785)-864-200

KS Travis Rome State GIS Contact

Natural Resource Conservation

Service travis.rome@ks.usda.gov 785.823.4587

KS Andy Megrail Kansas Dept. of Agriculture amegrail@kda.state.ks.us (785) 296-2513

KS

Ingrid

Landgraf U.S. Geological Survey imlandgraf@usgs.gov (785) 832-3566

OK Sarah Harris USACE – Tulsa Sarah.J.Harris@SWT03.usace.army.mil 918.669.7366

Geospatial Key Contacts

State Name Title Agency Email Phone

KS John Rogers GIS Manager

Sedgwick County Geographic

Information Services jrogers@sedgwick.gov 316.660.9290

KS Andy Smith GIS Administrator Ford County asmith@fordcounty.net 620.227.4673

KS Joe Finley

Director, Engineering

Services City of Dodge City joef@dodgecity.org 620.225.8106

KS Daryl Reeves GIS Coordinator City of Dodge City darylr@dodgecity.org

KS Samuel Seeley

Lyon County Floodplain

Manager Lyon County Floodplain Manager sseeley@lyoncounty.org 620-341-3471

NE Larry K. Zink State GIS Coordinator Nebraska GIS Steering Committee larry.zink@nebraska.gov 402-471-3206

NE Jim Langtry USGS Geospatial Liaison Nebraska Water Science Center jlangtry@usgs.gov (402) 328-4128

NE Shuhai Zheng Division Head Nebraska DNR Shuhai.zheng@nebraska.gov (402)-471-3936

NE Josh Lear Natural Resources Planner Nebraska DNR Josh.lear@nebraska.gov 402-471-3954

NE Staci Parent

Floodplain Mapping

Specialist Nebraska DNR Staci.parent@nebraska.gov (402)-471-1737

NE

Tony D.

Krause Hydraulic Engineer

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers-

Omaha District tony.d.krause@usace.army.mil (402) 995-2326

NE Chad Nabity Director City of Grand Island cnabity@grand-island.com (308)-385-5240

NE Rose Braun GIS Manager rose.braun@nebraska.gov (402)479-3696

Geospatial Key Contacts

State Name Title Agency Email Phone

NE

Michael

Schonlau GIS Coordinator Douglas County- City of Omaha mschonlau@douglascounty_ne.gov 402.444.3982

NE

James

Gaspers

Information Technology

Manager City of Scotts Bluff jimg@scottsbluff.org (308)-630-6202

Region 8

CO Jon Gottsegen State GIS Coordinator

Colorado Governor’s Office of

Information Technology Jon.gottsegen@state.co.us

CO Carol Griffin USGS Geospatial Liaison USGS clgiffin@usgs.gov

MT

Stu

Kirkpatrick State GIS Coordinator

Montana Department of

Administration - Information

Technology Services Division skirkpatrick@mt.gov

MT

Lance

Clampitt USGS Geospatial Liaison USGS lsclampitt@usgs.gov

ND Bob Nutsch State GIS Coordinator

North Dakota Information

Technology Department bnutsch@nd.gov

ND Steve Shivers USGS Geospatial Liaison USGS spshivers@usgs.gov

SD Erik Nelson State GIS Coordinator

South Dakota Bureau of

Information and

Telecommunication Erik.Nelson@state.sd.us

Geospatial Key Contacts

State Name Title Agency Email Phone

SD Steve Shivers USGS Geospatial Liaison USGS spshivers@usgs.gov

UT Bert Granbert

Manager – State

Geographic Information

Database

Utah’s Automated Geographic

Reference Center bgranberg@utah.gov

UT Dave Vincent USGS Geospatial Liaison USGS dmvincent@usgs.gov

WY

Jeffery

Hamerlinck

Director – University of

Wyoming GIS Center University of Wyoming itasca@uwyo.edu

WY Barbara Ray USGS Geospatial Liaison USGS baray@usgs.gov

Region 9

AZ Eugene Trobia State Cartographer Arizona State Land Department gtrobia@land.az.gov (602) 542-3190

AZ/NV Tom Sturm USGS Geospatial Liaison USGS tsturm@usgs.gov (650) 329-4326

CA

Carol

Ostergren USGS Geospatial Liaison USGS costergren@usgs.gov (916) 278-9510

CA

David Harris

GIS Coordinator

CA Natural Resources Agency

david.harris@resources.ca.gov

(916) 445-5088

CA

Joel Dudas

GIS Coordinator

CA Department of Water

Resources

jdudas@water.ca.gov

(916) 651-7002

Geospatial Key Contacts

State Name Title Agency Email Phone

HI

Craig Tasaka

GIS Coordinator

State Office of Planning

CTasaka@dbedt.hawaii.gov

(808) 587-2899

HI

Henry Wolter

USGS Geospatial Liaison

USGS

hwolter@usgs.gov

(808) 587-2409

NV

Ron Hess

GIS Coordinator

Nevada Bureau of Mines and

Geology

rhess@unr.edu

(775) 784-6692

Region 10

AK Craig Seaver AK USGS Liaison USGS cseaver@usgs.gov (907) 786-7089

AK Anne Johnson GIS Coordinator DNR anne.m.johnson@alaska.gov (907) 269-8535

AK Jeff Urbanus

Flood Hazard

Administrator CTP - Municipality of Anchorage UrbanusJD@ci.anchorage.ak.us (907) 343-8023

AK

Ruth St.

Amour Development Specialist

DCRA/Planning and Land

Management Ruth.St.Amour@alaska.gov (907) 269-4527

AK

Bernardo

Hernandez

Community Development

Director

CTP -Fairbanks-North Star

Borough bhernandez@co.fairbanks.ak.us

Geospatial Key Contacts

State Name Title Agency Email Phone

AK

Taunnie

Boothby State NFIP Coordinator

DCRA/Planning and Land

Management Taunnie.Boothby@alaska.gov (907) 269-4583

AK Dan Mahalak Kenai Peninsula Borough dmahalak@borough.kenai.ak.us

AK Nicole Grewe Community Planner

DCRA/Planning and Land

Management Nicole.Grewe@alaska.gov (907) 465-8249

AK

Crane

Johnson USACE

AK Mary Azelton USACE Mary.T.Azelton@usace.army.mil

AK Marty Martin ASGDC Administrator

Alaska State Geo-spatial Data

Clearinghouse Marty.Martin@alaska.gov (907) 269-8837

ID Dan Katz USACE

ID

Scott

Stoddard USACE

ID

Ellen

Berggren USACE

ID

Mary

McGown State NFIP Coordinator IDWR Mary.McGown@idwr.idaho.gov (208) 287-4928

ID

Barbara

McEvoy State NFIP Coordinator IDWR Barbara.McEvoy@idwr.idaho.gov (208) 287-4926

Geospatial Key Contacts

State Name Title Agency Email Phone

OR

Sherri

Schneider OR Geospatial Liaison USGS sschneider@usgs.gov (503) 251-3210

OR Susan Nelson GIS Analyst BLM Susan_Nelson@or.blm.gov (503) 808-6139

OR Cy Smith State GIS Coordinator

DAS/EISPD Geospatial Enterprise

Office cy.smith@state.or.us (503) 378-6066

OR Jed Roberts Geospatial Coordinator CTP – DOGAMI jed.roberts@dogami.state.or.us (971) 673-1546

OR John English

LiDAR Database

Coordinator CTP – DOGAMI john.english@dogami.state.or.us (971) 673-1557

OR Ian Madin

Chief Scientist – Oregon

LiDAR Consortium Lead CTP – DOGAMI Ian.madin@dogami.state.or.us (971) 673-1542

OR Ian Reid GIS Specialist USDA/NRCS ian.reid@or.usda.gov (503) 414-3015

OR Anna Bennett Klamath Tribes anna.bennett@klamathtribes.com

OR Don Lewis

Assistant Director -

Geologic Survey and

Services Program CTP – DOGAMI don.lewis@dogami.state.or.us (971) 673-1541

OR Glen Hess Hydrologist (SW Spec) USGS gwhess@usgs.gov (503) 251-3470

OR Julie Ammann USACE Julie.H.Ammann@usace.army.mil

OR Seshu Vaddey USACE Seshagirir.V.Vaddey@usace.army.mil

Geospatial Key Contacts

State Name Title Agency Email Phone

OR

Christine

Shirley State NFIP Coordinator DLCD Christine.Shirley@state.or.us (503) 373-0050 x250

OR

Stephen

Lucker State NFIP Coordinator DLCD Stephen.Lucker@state.or.us (503) 373-0050 x269

WA Joy Paulus WA State GIS Coordinator DIS JoyP@DIS.WA.gov 360-902-3447

WA Tom Carlson WA USGS Liaison USGS tcarlson@usgs.gov

WA Tony Hartrich GIS Manager Quinault Tribe thartrich@quinault.org

WA Craig Weaver Seismic Expert USGS craig@ess.washington.edu (206) 685-3812

WA Bob Rose

Assistant Environmental

Manager Yakama Nation brose@yakama.com (509) 865-6262

WA Joseph Jones Hydrologist USGS jljones@usgs.giv (253) 428-3600

WA, OR, ID

Diana

Martinez Senior GIS Analyst/LiDAR PSRC/PSLC dmartinez@psrc.org (206) 971-3052

WA Dave Steele

Geodetic Survey Unit

Director DNR david.steele@DNR.WA.gov (360) 902-1171

WA, OR,

ID, AK Roger Parsons NOAA Roger.l.Parsons@noaa.gov

Geospatial Key Contacts

State Name Title Agency Email Phone

WA

David

Michalsen USACE David.r.michaelsen@usace.army.mil

WA, OR, ID Jennifer Bayer USGS jennifer_bayer@usgs.gov

WA Terry Curtis

Photogrammetry

Supervisor DNR terry.curtis@dnr.wa.gov (360) 902-1210

WA Tim Walsh Chief Geologist DNR tim.walsh@dnr.wa.gov (360) 902-1432

WA

Christopher

Magirl USGS magirl@usgs.gov (253) 552-1617

WA Jerry Franklin

Floodplain Mapping

Coordinator DOE JFRA461@ECY.WA.GOV (360) 407-7470

WA Dan Sokol State NFIP Coordinator DOE DSOK461@ECY.WA.GOV (360) 407-6902

WA

Scott

Campbell USACE Scott.W.Campbell@usace.army.mil

WA Alan Smith CGIS Manager WSDOT smitha@wsdot.wa.gov (360) 596-8925

WA, OR, ID

Melanie

Paquin Regional GIS Manager USBOR-PN MPaquin@usbr.gov (208) 378-5166

WA, OR, ID

Kristin

Swoboda USBOR-PN KSwoboda@usbr.gov (208) 378-5244

Geospatial Key Contacts

State Name Title Agency Email Phone

WA, OR, ID

Jennifer

Bountry Hydraulic Engineer USBOR jbountry@usbr.gov (303) 445-3614

ID Linda Davis

Senior GIS Analyst

(Principal Steward for NHD

in ID) IDWR Linda.Davis@idwr.idaho.gov (208) 387-4877

WA, OR, ID Tracy Schwarz USACE Tracy.Schwarz@usace.army.mil