What's Hot In Washington?

Mitigation Planning Nov 1, 2004 "Deadline" Consequences

ASFPM Letter to Members regarding the elimination of HMGP

Letters from States regarding the elimination of HMGP

Arizona Association's Letter
LSU Agricultural Extension Letter
North Carolina's Letter
Ohio Association's Letter
Oklahoma Association's Letter

Executive Director's Report - Larry Larson, CFM

The past two months have seen an avalanche of activity for your Association, all the way from significant funding of flood maps, changes in mitigation programs, and a new Project Manager at ASFPM (see following article), to a new partnership between ASFPM and RedVector to provide web based training opportunities for CFMs. I�ll cover the highlights of some of these.

Map Modernization Funding Approved!

ASFPM has worked for many years to convince Congress and the Administration of the wisdom of general revenue support for producing flood maps in the nation. The maps are used for multiple purposes, thus justifying the use of general revenues in addition to the fees from flood insurance policy holders. This becomes all the more critical in a Homeland Security environment, where all hazard flood maps can provide the base layer for many other needs related to homeland security. Now that the President has signed a budget with $150 million for flood mapping, FEMA�s partners need to actively work with FEMA to implement the map mod program. A memo on our website from Al Lulloff, Chair of the Mapping and Engineering Standards Committee, explains meetings and actions which are underway. At the same time, the Flood Map Production Coordination Contractor (MCC) contracts are up for renewal, and FEMA is in the procurement process for the next few years. That selection will probably happen by summer, so the current MCC contracts will be extended from four to eight months, according to recent Federal Register notice. The President also put $200 million funding for mapping in his proposed FY04 budget, and your Association will work hard to keep that as the budget works its way through Congress. The Congressional Committees that deals with Homeland Security budgets has many members who have not dealt with FEMA in the past. It is extremely important that ASFPM members provide their Congressional representatives with some background and education on the importance of the mapping programs to communities and to the nation�s effort to reduce flood losses.

Mitigation Cost Share Programs (HMGP and FMA)

The funding news on these programs is much less favorable. This fiscal year (FY03), the President�s budget request zeroed out funding for post-disaster mitigation programs. Congress restored half (15% to 7 � %) of the funding for HMGP, but the Administration hasn�t changed their minds. The FY04 budget request has no funding allocated for post-disaster mitigation programs. Congress believes the mitigation funding was kept level, because they put $150 million into the pre-disaster mitigation competitive grant program while cutting the post disaster HMGP in half.

As an association that represents primarily states and local government, we reflect those legitimate concerns about the cut in post-disaster mitigation (HMGP) funds. We remember how little use was made of HMGP before the funding was increased in 1994 � there was too much competition for too little money. Thus, few communities feel the work of developing plans and proposals will ever get funding, so they don�t bother. That is particularly true for communities that haven�t experienced a flood in several years. Years of experience now show that immediately following a flood, a community is much more willing to implement an HMGP project. A number of staff in Congress and in the President�s budget office (OMB) think citizens and communities are more than willing to take mitigation actions, like buyouts and elevation of buildings, when there has been no recent flooding disaster. Unfortunately, that attitude is not based on the real world perspective that comes from working with state legislators, city councils and County Boards to cost share mitigation when no disaster exists. We certainly encourage pre-disaster mitigation, but experience shows leverage of funds and actions occur mostly in the post disaster setting.

Funding for Other Important Federal Programs

This is covered in the Washington Liaison report elsewhere in this issue.

Key New Legislation

Two important bills introduced this year include the repetitive loss legislation and the bill to clarify which waters are covered by the Clean Water Act, thus addressing the negative ruling of the Supreme Court in the SWANCC case. We are working with our partner organizations to support these bills by providing the local and state viewpoint important to making them workable federal legislation.

No Adverse Impact (NAI) Initiatives

ASFPM continues to develop materials and promote this important concept, now focusing on tools, ideas and approaches which can assist locals in implementingNAI. New products we are working on include an NAI Toolkit, with some detail for communities to use in their day to day activities, and a legal paper detailing how NAI fits into property rights issues and the community liability picture. Chair George Riedel intends to have many of these materials available for you at our conference in St. Louis, May 11-16. A number of us continue to give presentations on NAI to numerous groups around the nation. We find citizens and community officials nodding their heads at the common sense NAI concepts. People understand that dumping more flood water on other communities or properties is inappropriate. In many communities, people feel the flooding on their property has worsened as the impacts of development on other properties have been ignored. We are finding that they embrace the concept of altering that practice!

National Water Policy Issues

ASFPM is involved in discussing a number of these issues that affect the work of our members. Association leadership has put forth a paper discussing what we believe to be the appropriate federal role in water resource development and management to share with those in Washington who deal with these issues, along with suggestions to modify current policy. If you would like a copy of that paper, contact the ASFPM office. Specifically, we are preparing a response for the Administration�s Advanced Notice of Proposed Rule Making on Federal Jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, which is the federal program to protect wetlands in the nation. There are many who are concerned that the proposed rules could restrict federal protection beyond the singular restriction on the migratory bird rule in the SWANCC case. Details on this were covered by Vice Chair Chad Berginnis in the February News and Views. We urge those with an interest to send in comments to the notice in the January 15 Federal Register. There was a 45 day extension, comments are now due April 16.

Status of State and Local Floodplain Management Programs

This project, funded by FEMA and the ASFPM Foundation, will update the FPM State & Local Programs publication last produced in 1995. The report will build understanding and support of adequate floodplain management programs. Collection of data from the state floodplain management offices on state laws, policies and programs is well underway. States compiling that information should call George Hosek at 517-676-5614 for help with any questions. The assistance of the states is critical in this very important report, and much appreciated.

See YOU in St. Louis!

As you can see, we have a myriad of key issues to discuss during our conference in St. Louis. We look forward to the opportunity to talk to many of you there.

WASHINGTON LEGISLATIVE REPORT

Meredith R. Inderfurth, Washington Liaison, and Rebecca Quinn, Legislative Officer

Congressional Organization For Homeland Security

Congressional organization at the beginning of the 108^th Congress has been very slow to take shape. Left over business on the FY�03 budget of the last Congress, along with the creation of new committee structures to deal with homeland security, have complicated and delayed assignments of Representatives and Senators to committees, as well as staffing decisions. Consequently, for a number of committees, the schedule for consideration of legislation or budget proposals has been delayed as well.

Notably, the House of Representatives has created a Select Committee on Homeland Security. While standing committees have clear areas of jurisdiction over authorizing legislation, select committees may or may not have authorizing legislation jurisdiction. At this point, it appears that the new House Select Committee on Homeland Security will have some legislative jurisdiction over areas being folded into the new Department of Homeland Security, but not all. The very large select committee had its organizational meeting March 4^th, hopefully clarifying some of these jurisdictional and agenda matters. While the Select Committee's Chairman Christopher Cox (R-CA) had hoped to have a small committee of about 25 members, intense interest in membership necessitated expansion to 48 members.

The House Appropriations Committee has formed a new Subcommittee on Homeland Security, reportedly to bring all the disparate pieces of the budget for the new department together and to make sure that new Secretary Tom Ridge doesn't have to spend time dealing with a variety of appropriations subcommittees. Creation of the new subcommittee involved considerable juggling of other subcommittee memberships and jurisdiction. Staffing matters are still being decided following their organizational meeting on February 25^th.

The Senate has decided, for now, to keep the authorizing jurisdiction over the new Department in its standing Committee on Governmental Affairs. At least some of the component parts of the new department will remain with original committees of jurisdiction. It appears, for example, that matters related to the Stafford Act will remain under the Committee on Environment and Public Works, and matters related to the NFIP will remain under the Senate Banking Committee. Senate Governmental Affairs is chaired by Senator Susan Collins (R-ME).

It seems likely that the Senate Appropriations Committee will follow the lead of the House Committee in creating a new Subcommittee on Homeland Security. Although Chairman Ted Stevens (R-AK) had expressed a preference not to do so, it seems that he will propose this to facilitate coordination with the House on appropriations for the new department. The Senate Appropriations Committee is expected to resolve this matter by March 7^th. At that point, all subcommittee assignments can be finalized. Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge has created an Office of State and Local Coordination, to be headed by Josh Filler.

Implications �

Of the various federal agencies with which floodplain managers work, FEMA is the one dramatically affected by these Congressional reorganizations. Other agencies, such as Army Corps of Engineers, EPA, USGS, National Park Service, NOAA and NRCS, all remain within their traditional committees of jurisdiction, both for authorizing legislation and for appropriations. Early indications are that the authorizing jurisdiction for the NFIP will remain with the Banking Committee in the Senate and with the Financial Services Committee in the House. It seems likely that the Stafford Act programs, i.e. Disaster Relief and HMGP, will remain under the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. Keeping these jurisdictions within their traditional committees is helpful to mitigation programs and the NFIP since they will continue to be dealt with by Members and staff who know the programs. On the House side, a hearing will be held April 1 on NFIP oversight and on the revised proposal to address repetitive loss problems introduced by Reps. Bereuter (R-NE) and Blumenauer (D-OR) (H.R. 253).

Appropriations for FEMA will be considered as part of the entire budget of the Department of Homeland Security. Since FEMA technically no longer exists, there was no FEMA budget proposal for FY�04 as such. The budgets for the programs with which floodplain managers are primarily concerned can be found within the Emergency Preparedness and Response (EPR) Directorate of Homeland Security (see article on FEMA / DHS re-organization). FEMA Deputy Director Michael Brown has been nominated to be Undersecretary of Homeland Security in charge of that Directorate. Only two members of the VA-HUD-Independent Agencies Subcommittee in the House will serve on the new Homeland Security subcommittee. Many staff assigned to the subcommittee will be new to FEMA programs. Consequently, there will be very little knowledge or understanding of the NFIP or mitigation programs as the FY�04 budget is considered. Because the subcommittee will understandably be caught up in the many issues associated with homeland security, terrorism and pulling together a huge new department, it will be a challenge to ensure attention to the natural disaster programs.

FY�04 Budget Proposals

FEMA � The President's budget request continues to reflect a strong commitment to updating and modernizing the flood maps. Despite efforts (partially successful) with the FY�03 budget to urge some balance between pre- and post- disaster mitigation, the President's budget again proposes a $300 million pre-disaster competitive grant program (this time folding FMA into the fund) and zeroing out HMGP.

	'03 requested	'03 appropriated	'04 requested
Mapping	$300 million	$150 million	$200 million
Pre-disaster mitigation	$300 million	$150 million	$300 million
HMGP	0	7 1/2%	0
FMA	$20 million	$20 million	$20 million, but as part of the $300m fund for pre-disaster mitigation

US Army Corps of Engineers � The overall appropriation requested for the Corps is $4.2 billion, down from the $4.6 billion appropriated for FY'03 (that was $457 million over the FY'03 request, but still $28 million below the FY'02 level). Budget documents state a focus on completing ongoing construction projects rather than starting new ones, only those with a very high benefit/cost ratio would be approved. The budget also proposes independent review of projects by outside experts. In general, the Army Corps programs most utilized by floodplain managers are all down a bit in the FY'04 budget proposal, below FY'03 requested and appropriated levels.

	�04 request	�03 level	�02 level
Section 22 Planning Assistance to States	$6 million	$6.5 million	$6.9 million
Flood Plain Management Services	$7.5 million	$8 million	$9.5 million
Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration (Section 206)	$10 million	$14 million
National Dam Safety Program	$45 million
National Dam Security Program	$30 million

USDA/Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) � Conservation program funding is up by $582 million over the FY '03 level. The requested funding is $3.9 billion, which includes $432 million for conservation technical assistance for Farm Bill implementation. There is some question, however, about whether the technical assistance funds will actually be taken from otherwise dollar capped programs, resulting in a loss of actual program monies. Programs increased in the request include $250 million for the Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP), which would enroll 200,000 more acres. $850 million is requested for the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), a $255 million increase over FY '03. The Conservation Reserve Program would be funded at $2 billion, an increase of $139 million. Ground and Surface Water Conservation would be funded at $51 million, which is a $13 million increase from FY '03. The Grassland Reserve Program is funded at $85 million, which is also a $13 million increase. The Land and Water Conservation Fund is fully funded at $900 million.

EPA � The EPA budget focuses on its core programs � overall request is for $7.63 billion which includes a $10 million increase from the FY'03 request, with almost $21million increase for enforcement and compliance. It is expected to fund an additional 100 employees. Core water programs are increased by $55 million to $470 million, including a $20 million increase in Clean Water Section 106 grants to states and tribes and $5 million increase in Wetland program grants. The Watershed pilot project program which was a major initiative in the FY '03 budget would again be funded at $20 million.

USGS � The budget request for USGS is $895.5 million, up by $28 million from FY '03's requested level, but down by $18.5 million from the FY '02 appropriated level. Mapping programs are varied as to how they fared. America View, which makes remote sensing data available to the public, is increased by $3 million. The Urban Dynamics Program for understanding the effects of urbanization on the environment is increased by $800,000. On the other hand, lower priority mapping research is decreased by $2.8 million and data collection activities associated with the National Map program are reduced by $4.4 million. The budget calls for closure of the Center for Integration of Natural Disaster Information, transferring its functions to other parts of the agency. Water Resources and Investigations is up by $22.2 million from the FY '03 requested level for a request of $200.1 million. Within that, the stream gage program or National Streamflow Information Program (NSIP) is increased by $2.1 million from the FY '03 requested level for a funding request of $14.6 million. Hydrologic Research and Development is increased slightly to a request level of $13.7 million and Hydrologic Monitoring, Assessments and Research is also increased slightly to a request level of $6.5 million.

National Park Service - Rivers and Trails Conservation Assistance (RTCA) � Details of the NPS budget are still being researched and will be reported in the next News and Views.

NOAA � Details of the NOAA budget will be provided in the April News and Views.

Other Bits of Information

The Flood Map Coalition, the diverse group of associations which worked to successfully support funding for improved flood maps, will reconvene to work in support of the President's request for $200 million in FY '04.
A coalition is forming to work on preserving the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program and focus on related issues associated with reauthorization of the Stafford Act this year.
The Congressional Natural Hazards Caucus is seeking to expand and reinvigorate to address issues involving the inclusion of natural hazards programs in the new Department of Homeland Security. The Caucus Work Group is organizing a forum to be held on Capitol Hill with DHS Undersecretary-designate Mike Brown.
Several interesting pieces of legislation have been introduced:
H.R. 253 � reintroduction of "Two Floods and You're Out of the Taxpayer's Pocket" bill, by Reps. Bereuter and Blumenauer. It has been referred to the House Committee on Financial Services, possible hearing on this bill and other NFIP oversight issues on April 1^st.
H.R. 268 � U.S. Weather Research Program Act introduced by Rep. Vernon Ehlers (R-MI) to improve weather forecasting, specifically to include flood forecasting.
S.473 and H.R. 962 � Amendment to the Federal Water Pollution Control by Senator Russell Feingold (D-WI), Rep. James Oberstar and 21 co-sponsors. This bill addresses and seeks to resolve the differences of interpretation in the definition "waters of the United States" in order to clarify jurisdiction over "isolated waters" following the SWANCC decision.