gregkogan, post: 413997, member: 9416 wrote: Stephen,
Everyone really appreciate you are doing this for all of us.
I do have one comment if you don't mind.
I didn't find the way to split a field you created for photos insertion or add additional page if more than 4 photos are required.
Is that possible to add one more page (the same as page 6) so we could utilize in case if we need to have more photos?
This last page could be disregarded if it is not required.
The photo layout (two per page) came from FEMA, so they won't like me messing with it, and some bureaucrat will kick it back if they notice. I can add an additional photo page but I don't know how to handle the page numbering. I'm thinking of making a separate document with the page number removed or maybe label it "Additional Photos" instead of giving it a page number. What's the max number of photos that any of you have included in an EC?
[USER=35]@Randy Rain[/USER] [USER=9416]@gregkogan[/USER]
I've fixed the leading zero issue that Randy pointed out by switching those fields from decimal to text and limiting them to three characters.
I can add an additional photo page but I don't know how to handle the page numbering. I'm thinking of making a separate document with the page number removed or maybe label it "Additional Photos" instead of giving it a page number. What's the max number of photos that any of you have included in an EC? Thoughts?
Thanks again for all of your help Stephen.
The most I've ever personally had to add was 2 additional pages of photos.
RRain
Stephen Ward, post: 414723, member: 1206 wrote: The photo layout (two per page) came from FEMA, so they won't like me messing with it, and some bureaucrat will kick it back if they notice. I can add an additional photo page but I don't know how to handle the page numbering. I'm thinking of making a separate document with the page number removed or maybe label it "Additional Photos" instead of giving it a page number. What's the max number of photos that any of you have included in an EC?
Stephen,
I did have 2 pictures in the same field working with previous Elevation Certificate form and never had problems with that as soon as minimum allowable size of the pictures was provided. However it was again the work around. I am very confident if we provide more pictures we are doing better job for clients and have less phone calls from insurance companies. I do like your idea to add a separate page "Additional Photos" so if we need to add more photos we could utilize it. I think one page with additional 2 fields (2 photos) will be sufficient.
Thanks again for your great help.
I'll try to finalize the revised form with the decimal fields fixed and a separate document for the additional photo page later today. Thanks for the feedback.
I'd like to see an additional 2 pages maybe even 3. Commercial buildings and complex structures require additional pictures.
Thanks Stephen!
Larry
While I believe Mr. Ward did an excellent job creating a form we could use while the Department of Homeland Security worked on something that didn't need to be fixed, I have been using the actual FEMA form from their website for a number of months and don't have a problem with it. As for photos, 2 will fill a page, and there are numerous sheets to print them. The only problem I have are those sheets before the photos (E-G) are just unfilled pages but include them with any submittals.
Stephen,
You are the man.
Thanks
After ASFPM Input, FEMA Revises Elevation Certificate
FEMA announced in a March 1 bulletin that the newly revised Elevation Certificate (FEMA form 086-0-33) can now be accessed at: https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/160
Bruce Bender, ASFPM Insurance Committee co-chair, said of the announcement, "After the initial release of the Elevation Certificate, the ASFPM Insurance Committee began gathering feedback about issues users were having. Last October at a Flood Insurance Producers National Committee (FIPNC) meeting, which the Insurance Committee sits on, FEMA stated they were aware of issues with the EC (including a major rounding issue), and were addressing them. The Insurance Committee continued to gather EC issues and ASFPM formally shared them with FEMA in January (view document here: http://www.floods.org/ace-files/documentlibrary/committees/Insurance/ASFPM_Comments_EC_Memo_1-20-17.pdf )."
Bender said, "At the Feb. 28 FIPNC meeting, FEMA announced they were issuing a corrected EC. This reflects some of the recommended changes, including the rounding issue. Here is the Bulletin that was issued. As you use the Elevation Certificate, please provide any suggested changes or comments to InsuranceCorner@floods.org."
"One comment received already is that C2.a-h, Section E and G8-G10 forces the entry of two decimal places (whether the data was captured to 2 place-accuracy or not). Section E instructions have been updated to reference the two decimal places (ÛÏnearest hundredthÛ); however, C2 was not," he said.
"This form expires November 2018. FEMA officials at the FIPNC meeting agreed that it would be good to have industry users 'test drive' future forms before officially releasing it," Bender said.
Other than minor formatting changes with the fillable form, was there any substance changes that would prevent me from using Stephen's version?
Dan B. Robison, post: 416542, member: 34 wrote: After ASFPM Input, FEMA Revises Elevation Certificate
FEMA announced in a March 1 bulletin that the newly revised Elevation Certificate (FEMA form 086-0-33) can now be accessed at: https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/160
Bruce Bender, ASFPM Insurance Committee co-chair, said of the announcement, "After the initial release of the Elevation Certificate, the ASFPM Insurance Committee began gathering feedback about issues users were having. Last October at a Flood Insurance Producers National Committee (FIPNC) meeting, which the Insurance Committee sits on, FEMA stated they were aware of issues with the EC (including a major rounding issue), and were addressing them. The Insurance Committee continued to gather EC issues and ASFPM formally shared them with FEMA in January (view document here: http://www.floods.org/ace-files/documentlibrary/committees/Insurance/ASFPM_Comments_EC_Memo_1-20-17.pdf )."
Bender said, "At the Feb. 28 FIPNC meeting, FEMA announced they were issuing a corrected EC. This reflects some of the recommended changes, including the rounding issue. Here is the Bulletin that was issued. As you use the Elevation Certificate, please provide any suggested changes or comments to InsuranceCorner@floods.org."
"One comment received already is that C2.a-h, Section E and G8-G10 forces the entry of two decimal places (whether the data was captured to 2 place-accuracy or not). Section E instructions have been updated to reference the two decimal places (ÛÏnearest hundredthÛ); however, C2 was not," he said.
"This form expires November 2018. FEMA officials at the FIPNC meeting agreed that it would be good to have industry users 'test drive' future forms before officially releasing it," Bender said.
Gotta love that Memorandum to FEMA that consistantly addresses them as FIMA...
I've taken FEMA's fillable pdf and removed the cover page, instructions, etc. I also made it so that you can save the filled form even if you're using Adobe Reader. FEMA actually did a great job on the form. Not sure if they rose to the challenge of my earlier effort or if they finally got someone who knew the software well enough to create fields for the seal and photos that allow you to click and load an image. Those who prefer to wet stamp the form can upload the attached blank seal to the seal field and it will cover the pre-printed text so that field will appear blank when the form is printed. Let me know if you all spot any issues.
I think this link works.
The new FEMA Elevation Certificate can't be saved with the inputted data.
Why would they incorporate such a feature?
Any work around developed?
