Revision History for Open-File Report 2017-1047

Jonathan W. Musser, Kara M. Watson, and Anthony J. Gotvald 

Characterization of Peak Streamflows and Flood Inundation at Selected Areas in North Carolina Following 
Hurricane Matthew, October 2016

-----------------------------------------------------
Posted online May 5, 2017

-----------------------------------------------------
Revised and reposted June 7, 2017

Footnotes in table 3 on p. 8-10 were changed as follows:

Footnotes designated c were changed to d
Footnote designated d was changed to e
Footnote designated e was changed to c

-----------------------------------------------------

Revised and reposted August 29, 2017 (ver. 2.0)

-----------------------------------------------------

p. v – NCGS   North Carolina Geodetic Survey was added to the list of Abbreviations.

p. 1, 6, 13, and 22 – References to “six flood-inundation maps” were changed to “seven flood-inundation maps.”

Figures 2 and 3, p. 3 and 5 – The outline designating the area of flood-inundation mapping near the town of Princeville 
was revised.

Table 1, p. 6 – Reach length for Princeville was changed from 8.6 miles to 2.1 miles. Number of HWMs for Princeville 
was changed from “No flood-inundation map was generated” to 12. The footnote was deleted.

p. 7, Estimated Magnitudes and Flood Exceedance Probabilities of Peak Streamflows – Three sentences were added after 
the fourth sentence:

The estimated AEP for the October 2016 flood for each streamgage was determined using log-linear interpolation of the 
weighted discharge estimates following equation 1 in USGS Office of Surface Water Technical Memorandum 2013.01 
(Mason, 2012). The estimated AEP provides a reasonably accurate estimate of the flood magnitude; however, uncertainty 
in this estimate can increase when a specific AEP is assigned to an observed flood. To show the uncertainty range, the 
AEP estimate is bracketed by a 90-percent confidence interval that is likely to include the true AEP.

Table 3, p. 8–10 – Estimated annual exceedance probability percentages and lower and upper 90 percent confidence 
interval values were added. Footnote b was added.

Table 4, p. 11–12 – Numerous values were changed. 2-, 1-, 0.5-, and 0.2-percent chance annual exceedance probabilities 
were added on p. 12.