“Ignoring reality doesn’t make it go away. Rebuilding hospitals, highways and sewage plants in the path of floods puts people in danger when the next storm hits and means the federal government will be back, paying to rebuild this infrastructure again and again,” said Rob Moore, director of flooding solutions at NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council). “We already know what the cycle of flood-rebuild-repeat looks like. This means that billions of dollars in disaster aid will be wasted and people will be put in harm’s way.” 

The flood protection standard ensures that public buildings, bridges and roads, public utilities, and other infrastructure that are damaged in a flood are sited and rebuilt so they are less vulnerable to future flood damages. The standard requires that facilities be rebuilt with an additional margin of safety for flooding and, in coastal areas, that projects be sited and designed with future sea level rise in mind.

Between 2015 and 2024 FEMA spent more than $60 billion to rebuild public buildings and infrastructure in the aftermath of flood disasters, the majority of which were built to local or state codes that proved inadequate and do not take into account future flood risks or sea level rise.  This includes:

• $9.9 billion for roads and bridges
• $1.1 billion for levees, seawalls, and other water management infrastructure
• $27.3 billion for utilities, including water and sewer plants
• 19.1 billion for public buildings, including publicly owned affordable housing units
• $3.0 billion for parks and other facilities

Failing to implement this standard means the federal government will continue to throw good money after bad, rebuilding public buildings and infrastructure to a less protective design standard that a recent disaster has already demonstrated to be inadequate.  

“The Trump administration will squander billions in taxpayer dollars to rebuild things that are very likely to be washed away again — not to mention knowingly putting people in harm’s way,” said Chad Berginnis, executive director of the Association of State Floodplain Managers. 

FEMA is not the only agency likely impacted. President Trump revoked the executive order establishing the flood protection standard upon assuming office in January. This is the second time he’s revoked this standard, undermining federal efforts to make the nation more prepared for rising seas and flood risks. 

###

BACKGROUND MATERIAL

The FFRMS was developed because it is no longer safe or adequate to build for the flood risks of the past. More extreme rainfall and rising seas are exacerbating flood risk across the nation. FEMA already spends billions of dollars per year helping communities rebuild flood damaged infrastructure, but is not built to FFRMS standards. Since 2015, the federal government, through FEMA, has spent $60 billion to rebuild flood-damaged public buildings, roads, and water and electric utilities to standards that are less safe than FFRMS standards. As climate change exacerbates flooding, federal taxpayers will increasingly be on the hook for post-flood recovery. 

Public Assistance for 2020-2024 Flood-Related Disasters* (millions)

Categories C through G only. Incident types: coastal storm, dam/levee break, flood, hurricane, severe storm(s), tropical storm, tsunami, typhoon.

Public Assistance for 2015-2019 Flood-Related Disasters (millions)

Categories C through G only. Incident types: coastal storm, dam/levee break, flood, hurricane, severe storm(s), tropical storm, tsunami, typhoon.

Top 10 States: Public Assistance for 2015-2024 Flood-Related Disasters

Categories C through G only. Incident types: coastal storm, dam/levee break, flood, hurricane, severe storm(s), tropical storm, tsunami, typhoon. Excludes U.S. territories.

Top 10 Counties: Public Assistance for 2015-2024 Flood-Related Disasters

Categories C through G only. Incident types: coastal storm, dam/levee break, flood, hurricane, severe storm(s), tropical storm, tsunami, typhoon. Excludes U.S. territories.

The post FEMA Halts Rule That Protects Against Future Floods first appeared on Association of State Floodplain Managers.

ASFPM’s comments on the guidelines are largely favorable. We noted that we appreciate the user-friendly design and comprehensive approach, which make it a valuable resource for decision-making in levee and broader flood risk management. ASFPM also commended the inclusion of case studies and the recognition of the importance of natural floodplains and the needs of underserved populations.

However, ASFPM also raised a few concerns:

1. Overemphasis on Levees: While the guidelines do discuss alternative flood risk reduction options, ASFPM feels there is too much focus on levees as the primary solution. The potential downsides of relying on levees, such as operational and maintenance costs, design limitations in a changing climate, and the misconception that levees eliminate all flood risk, are not sufficiently emphasized.
2. Conflict Resolution and Impact Outside Levees: The document does not adequately address conflicts that can arise when the levee owner is not the community affected by the levee. Additionally, the impact of levees on people and natural systems outside the levee should be more prominently discussed.
3. National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Requirements: ASFPM noted that the guidelines do not sufficiently address the requirements for levees in the NFIP, particularly how levee condition and function impact certification and the potential need for changes to Flood Insurance Rate Maps.

Overall, ASFPM supports the guidelines but suggests these concerns be addressed to ensure a more balanced and comprehensive approach to flood risk management.

Download ASFPM’s comments

Learn more about the National Levee Safety Program

The post ASFPM Comments on National Levee Safety Guidelines first appeared on Association of State Floodplain Managers.