1990-93: While vice chair, Doug was on point to deliver the first Multi Objective Management workshop in cooperation with EPA and the Association of Wetland Managers. This led into being part of the team that began to move natural and beneficial functions from a concept to an activity. Relationships built during that time in particular with National Wildlife Federation, American Rivers, Environmental Defense Fund, World Wildlife Federation and others that were foundational in creating coalitions that came together following the great Midwest floods in 1993 and later in gaining trust for initiatives such as NAI.

Doug also played a critical role countering the mischaracterizations appointees of the George H.W. Bush administration were making about the NFIP Reform Act at that time. Doug challenged their misstatements (notably Bud Schuarte) at conferences in Houston and Boulder. This brought the wrath of Bud Schuarte, but likewise garnered respect for the ASFPM organization from long-term FEMA staff, such as Frank Riley and Frank Thomas.

1992-95: The Great Midwest Floods of 1993 dominated Doug’s agenda while chair. Working with Larry Larson and Jon Kusler, the trio seized the opportunity to use this high-profile disaster to gain access to the White House, appointed officials in various agencies, career staff and Congress and urged them to rethink flood control policy and begin to embrace a more multi-objective approach to flood risk management. They pushed hard for nonstructural alternatives and open space creation (through buyouts), natural and beneficial functions and other things that today we take for granted as being part of reducing flood risk. ASFPM hosted two state-federal workshops in Midwest communities that flooded, which brought the most senior federal agency staff together to discuss alternative solutions and laid the groundwork for improved coordination between state and federal activities. From this they urged the administration to create a new federal approach to flood risk management; recommendations that ultimately became the Galloway Report (Sharing the Challenge). From there, Doug, Larry and Jon provided input to the administration for shaping the report via what we called in 1994 Flood Policies in Review, the precursor to the current ASFPM document National Flood Policies and Programs in Review 2015. This 1994 document was a combination of policy positions but also came from the “parking lot AdCo” from a conference in San Antonio, where over a weekend a small group (Plasencia, Larson, Wetmore, Mary Fran Myers, Jacki Monday, George Hosek) hammered out a cohesive evaluation of flood policy that was subsequently and vigorously debated by the ASFPM Board over several meetings.  

The draft of the Galloway Report was warmly embraced on both sides of the aisle in Congress, but unfortunately the ability to gain an omnibus approach towards implementation was blown up when a junior staff member at an environmental NGO was touting to the press the environmental aspects of the report, which immediately pushed key conservative members away from the report and created controversy around the final report. Over time however, many of the recommendations have found their way into policy, practice, and legislation.

Post 95 contributions: USACE introduced a new risk and uncertainty methodology for evaluating levees and dams. In the mid-1990s, it was clear that the theory was valid but that there was more work needed on the application. The concern of ASFPM was twofold. First it provided a degree of subjectivity on the 1% flood standard because there was no guidance on an acceptable limit of uncertainty when providing an estimate. Working with FEMA, a boundary was placed for purposes of the NFIP. Secondarily, ASFPM was concerned that this approach, if left unbounded, would open the door for smaller and smaller protection structures that could be justified as providing 1% protection but with a higher level of uncertainty. Doug attended workshops and various meetings, assisted in getting a national academies study authorized on risk and uncertainty and testified to that committee recognizing that what we were pushing for was improvements in application and were not necessarily attempting to throw out the approach. Overall the stalling tactic, while irritating to some in USACE, did result in providing better methodologies and approaches in modeling the uncertainty.

In 1999-2000, Doug and Larry created the No Adverse Impact Floodplain Management approach, which is widely accepted and embraced today. Doug played a key role in the shaping of support materials, but more importantly in debating the merits of this approach. The environmental community was concerned that the approach was too silent on the beneficial functions where Doug’s counter was that if we are successful with NAI we will actually protect the ecosystems via open space. Some who opposed said it was impossible to not have an impact in the floodplain which we countered that, while true, we are just looking for a broad range of mitigations, and finally those that did not like the name finally admitted they could not come up with anything better.

Working with the foundation, Doug shaped the program for all major Gilbert F. White Forums, which were influential within their topical area but also helped brand the ASFPM Foundation’s efforts to lead analysis and discussions on critical topics of the day.

For 10 years Doug served as foundation president, moving the foundation into a much stronger business-like standing. We progressed from being doers to being a catalyst for results; restructured activities and provided the ability to expand the scholarship program’ and implemented a mechanism to keep retired or nearing end of career professionals engaged via the fellows program. Doug also recognized that fundraising was going to require an investment in someone that knows the organization and the mission vs purely relying on volunteers. Understanding that the organization needs to appeal to donors in a manner that resonates with their charitable giving and that the efforts of the foundation should not be seen as merely supporting the programs of ASFPM.

Doug’s affiliation with ASFPM also led to a number of appointments, including being a member of the FEMA Advisory Board to the Director, a member on several national academy studies and reviewer on several more.