<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:contributor>Marla H. Stuckey</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>James E. Colgin</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Mark A. Roland</dc:contributor>
  <dc:creator>Mitchell R. Weaver</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>2024</dc:date>
  <dc:description>&lt;p&gt;Flood-flow estimates were computed at over 5,000 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood insurance study (FIS) flow locations across Pennsylvania for the 1-percent annual exceedance probability flood event (1-percent AEP). Depending on a point of interest’s proximity to a streamgage, weighting techniques may be applied to obtain flood-flow estimates for ungaged flow locations using observed peak-flow data from a nearby streamgage. Following the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) published guidance, stream segments were identified where the drainage-area ratio method could be leveraged. Using updated regional regression equations and recently published flood-flow estimates at USGS streamgage locations following USGS Bulletin 17C guidelines, weighted and transferred flood flows were computed, where appropriate. For locations not applicable for the drainage-area ratio method, regression equations were used to compute flood-flow estimates. These flood-flow estimates were then compared to FEMA FIS 1-percent AEP flood-flow estimates. Percentage-difference values were computed for 3,599 FIS flow locations determined to be suitable for analysis, finding that USGS-derived flood-flow estimates were consistently lower than FEMA FIS flood-flow estimates with a statewide median percentage difference of −10.1 percent. The dataset was normally distributed with a standard deviation of 45.7 percent. Allegheny County was found to have 74 FIS flow locations with percentage-difference values greater than or equal to 67 percent or less than or equal to −67 percent. The flood-flow region in which Allegheny County is contained, Region 2, had a median percentage-difference value of −39 percent. Although removed from the final analysis, flow locations with drainage-area values above the recommended threshold for regression-based estimation (about 1,000 square miles [mi&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;]) were observed to have consistently higher percentage-difference values; a reminder of the limitations of use for regression-based flood-flow estimates. This report, the comparisons within, and a companion data release are intended to serve as tools to FEMA in assisting with the ongoing assessment of FIS flow locations across Pennsylvania.&lt;/p&gt;</dc:description>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:identifier>10.3133/sir20235133</dc:identifier>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <dc:publisher>U.S. Geological Survey</dc:publisher>
  <dc:title>Estimation and comparison of 1-percent annual exceedance probability flood flows at Federal Emergency Management Agency flood insurance study flow locations across Pennsylvania</dc:title>
  <dc:type>reports</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>