- federal emergency management agency fema 100… · - federal emergency management agency fema...

137
- FEDERALEMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY FEMA 100/March 1986 A Unified National Program for Floodplain Management :

Upload: hoangngoc

Post on 07-May-2018

229 views

Category:

Documents


3 download

TRANSCRIPT

- FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY FEMA 100/March 1986

A UnifiedNational Programfor FloodplainManagement :

The Interagency Floodplain ManagementTask Force was established in 1975 to carryout the responsibility of the President toprepare for the Congress a Unified NationalProgram for Floodplain Management. Since1982 the Task Force has been chaired by theFederal Emergency Management Agency.Membership of the Task Force consists ofthe Departments of Agriculture, Army,Commerce, Energy, Housing and UrbanDevelopment, Interior, Transportation; theEnvironmental Protection Agency; and theTennessee Valley Authority.

The Federal Emergency Management Agencyis located at600 C Street, NWWashington, D.C., 20472

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

National Program

March !986i

Federal Emergency Management Agency

Interagency Task Force onFloodplain Management

Federal Emergency Management AgencyWashington, D.C. 20472

WM I 7 1986

Dear Mr. President:

In response to Section 1302(c) of the National Flood InsuranceAct of 1968 (P. L. 90-448), I am pleased to commend to you fortransmission to the Congress the report "A Unified NationalProgram for Floodplain Management." This report updates a1979 report of the same title concurred in by the eight cabinetlevel agencies constituting the Water Resources Council andforwarded to the Congress. The report sets forth a conceptualframework and identifies strategies fundamental to implementinga balanced approach to floodplain management. It appraises theimplementation of current programs and recommends Federal andState and local actions needed to achieve a unified program ofplanning and action at all levels of government to reduce floodlosses and losses of floodplain natural values. The revisedreport has been prepared by the Interagency Task Force onFloodplain Management, concurred in by member agencies, and hasbenefited from the advice and suggestions of recognized authoritiesin the field of floodplain management.

Respectfully,

Jlus W. Bec on Jr.Director

The PresidentThe White HouseWashington, D.C. 20500

Enclosures

i

FOREWORD

During the past two decades, recognition of unacceptablyhigh losses of lives, property and natural values in theNation's floodplains has led all levels of government toprovide new and more effective floodplain managementtools through legislative and administrative program ini-tiatives. Risk assessment programs generally are completinginitial hazard identification activities and are movingtoward an information maintenance phase. Loss reductionprograms are proceding more slowly because many of thenew tools require a period of assimilation by all affectedparties before their full potential can be realized.Also, these tools generally have not been articulatedwithin an overall coordinated loss reduction effort.Thus, the current status of floodplain management indicatesa need for the improvement and more effective applicationof existing tools and little need for new legislation.

This report recognizes the goals of floodplain managementto be wise use, conservation and development of theinterrelated lands and waters of the Nation's floodplainssubject to the constraint of reducing loss exposure to anacceptable level, It offers a conceptual framework toguide local, State, and Federal decisionmakers toward abalanced consideration of alternative goals, loss reduc-tion strategies and tools. It provides recommendationsfor each level of government to improve and coordinatefloodplain management. It should lead to better decisionsaffecting the use of our Nation's floodplains, reducedlosses of life, property and natural values, and a reducedburden upon governments to compensate for losses causedby unwise decisions of individual citizens as well asgovernments.

This report asserts that a unified national program onlycan be achieved through a partnership among all levels ofgovernment wherein each carries out its responsibilitiesunder the Federal and State constitutions. The re-commendations in this report are directed at each levelof government with the intent of moving the Nation towarda more effective Unified Program. I urge all who makedecisions affecting floodplains to pursue implementationof these recommendations in the spirit of partnership aswe continue to progress toward achieving a unified approachto floodplain management.

effrey S. Bragg, AdministratorFederal Insurance Administration

ii

PREFACE

Section 1302(C) of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968(Public Law 90-448, 82 Stat. 476) stipulated that "theobjectives of a flood insurance program should be integrallyrelated to a unified national program for floodplain managementand... the President should submit to the Congress for itsconsideration any further proposals necessary for such aunified program..." Responsibility for the development ofthe Unified National Program was first assigned by the Officeof Management and Budget to the Water Resources Council whichin 1976 adopted and in 1979 revised the report "A UnifiedNational Program for Floodplain Management." In 1982 thisresponsibility was reassigned to the Federal EmergencyManagement Agency. The 1979 report became dated by therelative success and changes in Federal programs and by thestrengthening of floodplain management capability at theState and local government levels. The status of Federal,State and local floodplain management activity as of mid-1985is reflected in the following revised report and in itsfindings and recommendations. Like its predecessors, therevised report does not seek to provide specific guidance formeeting Federal program requirements.

This report seeks wise decisions and management for theNation's floodplains to reduce losses of life and propertyfrom flooding and losses of natural and beneficial floodplainvalues from unwise land use. A conceptual framework is setforth to provide general guidance for the decisionmakingprocesses of Federal, State, and local officials as well asfor private parties. The strategies and tools for flood lossmitigation and for the preservation and restoration of naturalfloodplain values are presented in detail, Actions arerecommended to facilitate the coordination of managementprograms dispersed among all levels of governments.

For their contributions to this report, we are indebted tothe many public officials, private consultants, and agencystaff members whose conscientious and dedicated efforts wereresponsible for the 1976 report and to the members of theFederal Interagency Floodplain Management Task Force underwhose auspices the 1979 revision was prepared, A specialrecognition is due to the members of the drafting team listedbelow who carried the primary burden of preparing this revision,

iii

Members of the 1985 drafting team:

Gordon Leish, Department of InteriorRoss MacKay, Federal Emergency Management AgencyBen Mieremet, Department of CommerceRobert Plott, Department of ArmyClive Walker, Department of AgricultureJames Wright, Tennessee Valley AuthoritySylvia Gause, Task Force Secretary,

Federal Emergency Management AgencyFrank H. Thomas, Federal Emergency Management Agency

Members of the 1979 drafting team:

Richard Leisher, Department of AgricultureDale Manty, Environmental Protection AgencyTerry Martin, Department of the InteriorTimothy Maywalt, Department of Housing and Urban DevelopmentMarjorie McGlone, Task Force Secretary, Water Resources CouncilGeorge Phippen, Department of the Army, Corps of EngineeresFrank Thomas, Task Force Leader, Water Resources CouncilHerbert Thompson, Department of CommercePhilip Thompson, Department of TransportationJames Wright, Tennessee Valley Authority

4 2Lrp/t"Frank H. ThomasChairman, Federal InteragencyTask Force on Floodplain Management

iv

CONTENTS

Paq

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL TO THE PRESIDENT .............. i

FOREWORD ee,.e.,Deexo,,,.e~o..eoooooeooocooo ii

PREFACE .,..,e,.. ...,,e..e .,eoeoooe iii

CHAPTER I -- DIGEST AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............. I-

A. Digest ...... 00..e.....ee..oo....o.e....... I 1

B. Federal Level Recommendations *. ............ o... I-3

C. State Level Recommendations ....o.....o.......... I-8

D. Local Level Recommendations .... ................. I-10

E. Conclusion .... ...... ooeooeoo.oe 111

CHAPTER II -- BACKGROUND AND SETTING ................ II-1

CHAPTER III -- CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FORFLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT .............. III-1

A. General Principles ... ....................................... III-1

B. Working Principles .III-3

1. Definitions ... G...,*..*oo...*,0*ooe * III-32. General Statements ... .... .................. III-4

CHAPTER IV -- STRATEGIES AND TOOLS FOR ACHIEVINGFLOOD LOSS REDUCTION ......... o..... IV-1

A. Modify Susceptibility to Flood Damageand Disruption .o ................. o.. IV-2

1. Floodplain Regulations ........ .... IV-3

v

Page

a. State Regulations for FloodHazard Areas ****.... **�*.*.. *.e... IV-4

b. Local Regulations for FloodHazard Areas ***..................9. IV-4

(1) Zoning ........................ IV-4(2) Subdivision Regulations ....... IV-5(3) Building Codes ................ IV-6(4) Housing Codes ................. IV-6(5) Sanitary and Well Codes .......: IV-6(6) Other Regulatory Tools ........ IV-6

2. Development and Redevelopment Policies ...... IV-7

a. Design and Location of Servicesand Utilities ..... .............. . .... . IV-7

b. Land Rights Acquisition andOpen Space Use *99**99...9............ IV-7

c. Redevelopment .... .... ...... IV-8d. Permanent Evacuation .................... IV-8

3. Disaster Preparedness ....................... IV-84. Disaster Assistance .... ..................... IV-95. Floodproofing *.................... ....... ..... IV-96. Flood Forecasting and Warning Systems

and Emergency Plans ....................... IV-10

B. Modify Flooding so9999999*9**99999...... 9 * . IV-11

1. Dams and Reservoirs .. 1..... IV-ll2. Dikes, Levees, and Floodwalls ............... IV-123. Channel Alterations ......................... IV-124. High Flow Diversions .................... ...... IV-135. Land Treatment Measures ..................... IV-136. Onsite Detention Measures ....... ........ IV-13

C. Modify the Impact of Flooding on Individualsand the Community .................. ......... . IV-14

1. Information and Education ................... IV-142. Flood Insurance ......... . . ... IV-143. Tax Adjustments ............ .. ............. . IV-154. Flood Emergency Measures .................... IV-165. Postflood Recovery .......................... IV-16

vi

Page

CHAPTER V -- FLOODPLAIN NATURAL VALUES, STRATEGIES ANDTOOLS FOR MANAGEMENT .................... V-1

A. Natural and Beneficial Floodplain Values ........... V-1

1 Water Resources Values ......................... V-1

a. Natural Flood Storage and Conveyance .... V-1b. Water Quality Maintenance .................. V-2c. Groundwater Recharge ...................... 6 V-3

2. Living Resources and Habitat Values o o....oo0606 V-3

3. Cultural Resources Values ...................... V-4

B. Vulnerability of Natural Floodplain Values ....... V-5

1. Water Resources .............. o................. V-62. Living Resources *0000000 *000000000000000000000 V-73. Cultural Resources .............................0 0 V-7

C. Strategies for Managing Floodplain Natural Values .. V-8

1. Restoration of Natural Values ............... V-82. Perservation of Natural Values ................. V-8

D. Tools for Managing Floodplain Natural Values ....... V-9

1. Floodplain, Wetland and Coastal BarrierResource Regulations .......................... V-9

2. Development and Redevelopment Policies ..0...... V-93. Information and Education ...................... V-94. Tax Adjustments *00000000000000000000000000000 V-95. Administrative Measures ....................... V-9

E. Examples of Floodplain Natural Values Management ... V-10

1. Natural Flood Storage and Conveyance 0000....00 V-102. Water Quality Maintenance .............. oo...... V-l13. Groundwater Recharge ........................... V-li4. Living Resources ..... 0...............0o....0..0. V-l1

5. Cultural Resources 00 00.....00..0..0... 000000000 V-126. Agricultural Resources .................... .0.. V-127. Aquacultural Resources ....................... V-128. Forestry Resources 00000000000 *0000000000000000 V-13

vii

Page

CHAPTER VI -- DEVELOPMENT OF THE FEDERAL CONCERN ....... VI-1

A. Flood Loss Reduction Activities .................... VI-1

1. Flood Control Programs Prior to 1966 ............ VI-12. House Document 465 - The Foundation ............ VI-23. The National Flood Insurance Program - A

Management Approach Focused on Long-TermFlood Loss Reduction .......................... VI-7

4. Principles and Guidelines for Planning Waterand Related Land Resources - A PlanningApproach Focused on Federal Participationin Water Resources Programs .................. VI-lI

B. Natural Floodplain Values ......................... VI-12

1. Environmental Protection Prior to 1969 ......... VI-122. The National Environmental Policy

Act of 1969 ...... ..... .... . VI-13

C. Significant Related Legislation ..................... VI-13

D. Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management ....... VI-16

E. Subsequent Administrative and Legislative Actions . VI-19

1. The 1978 Water Policy Message VI-192. Federal Flood Hazard Mitigation Teams VI-203. The Coastal Barrier Resources Act VI-21

F. Summary .............................. .............. VI-21

CHAPTER VII -- IMPLEMENTATION OF A UNIFIED NATIONALPROGRAM FOR FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT ....... VII-1

A. Coordination of Existing Programs .................. VII-1

1. Federal Role ............... ................................. VII-2

a. Federal Coordination ....................... VII-5b. Regional Coordination ...................... VII-6

2. State Role ................................................. VII-73. Local Role ............ ........... ........... VII-10

B. Operational Considerations ......................... VII-13

1. Information ............. ...................... VII-132. Research Coordination ............. .............................. VII-16

viii

Evaluation Guidelines and Analysisof Alternatives SOLO eoneooo0ooo0eovoooo00ooo

Federal Financial Programs ........... D * 6* *

Substate Institutional Arrangements

Current Situation and the Conceptual Framework

Intragovernmental Coordination .............Intergovernmental Coordination .. O0oe0-o-

List of Exhibits

Exhibit 1

Exhibit 2

Exhibit 3

- House Document 465, Summary of Findingsand Recommendations ..0. ..0 0 0 0 0660 060 0

- Federal Floodplain Management andRelated Programs by Agency .................

- State Floodplain Management .............

Appendix

Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management ...........

Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands . .

Floodplain Management Publications 000 00000000000000000

Trends for Floodplain Management .65.090000*00 ** O*

Page

VI-4

VII-4

VII-8

A-1

B-1

C-1

D- 1

ix

3.

4 .

5.

C. The

1.2.

Page

VII-17VII-18VII-19

VII-20

VII-21VII-22

CHAPTER I

DIGEST AND RECOMMENDATIONS

A. Digest

Background. Responding to the magnitude and continuedincrease in the Nation's flood losses, the Congressenacted legislation in 1968 providing for new tools tocope with flood risk and called for "A Unified NationalProgram for Floodplain Management" (Public Law 90-448,Section 1302). In 1977 the President issued ExecutiveOrder 11988, Floodplain Management, which reinforcedthe need to strengthen Federal policies to reduce therisk of flood loss; to minimize the impact of floods onhuman safety, health, and welfare; and to restore andpreserve natural floodplain values.

This report recognizes subsequent Congressional andPresidential directives and updates the Unified Programtransmitted by the President to the Congress in 1979.This report: (1) sets forth a conceptual framework forfloodplain management; (2) identifies available manage-ment strategies and tools for reducing the risk offlood loss, minimizing the impact of floods on humansafety, health, and welfare, and restoring and preservingnatural and beneficial floodplain values; (3) assessesthe implementation capability and status of existingFederal and State agencies and programs and local unitsof government; and (4) makes recommendations forcontinuing efforts toward achieving "A Unified NationalProgram for Floodplain Management." The concepts andstrategies of this report are presented from a nationalperspective and offer guidance to all governmental andnongovernmental interests

Conceptual Framework. The conceptual framework (ChapterIII) contains general and working principles that relateriverine, coastal, and other floodplains to the totalnatural, economic and social systems of which they are apart. It also describes the potential for flood lossesand environmental harm associated with the use of flood-plains. Each level of government has legal programresponsibilities within this framework. The conceptualframework is developed from and based on accepted, broadnational objectives for water and related land resourceplanning. It recognizes that wise use of the Nation'sfloodplain must be consistent with (1) an explicit con-cern for reduction of flood losses and threats to health,safety, and welfare; (2) the preservation and restoration

I-1

of natural and beneficial floodplain values; (3) abalanced view that in general promotes consideration ofof uses that minimize or eliminate exposure to flood lossrather than floodplain development or abandonment; and(4) careful consideration of all relevant factors andthe weighing of all reasonable alternatives. Theconceptual framework fills a void previously hinderingconsistent articulation of programs functioning at alllevels of government.

Management Strategies and Tools. The means and tools(Chapter IV) for flood loss reduction are organizedaround three strategies directed at modifying (1)susceptibility to flood damage, (2) the impacts offlooding, and (3) flooding itself. Each of the meansis comprised of a wide variety of tools that rangefrom land acquisition, land use and development regula-tions, and floodproofing, to flood control works.These tools are evaluated to assist in selection ofthe appropriate means to reduce flood losses whileachieving the desired management goals. The array ofmeans and tools available is deemed generally adequatefor an effective unified national program. It shouldalso be noted that some of these strategies and toolsoperate to protect natural and beneficial floodplainvalues.

The means and tools (Chapter V) for reducing loss ofnatural floodplain values support four major strate-gies: (1) avoiding actions that affect adversely thefloodplain whenever there is a practicable alterna-tive; (2) minimizing the adverse impacts of actionsthat affect the floodplain; (3) restoring previouslydegraded floodplains to serve their natural functions;and (4) preserving those floodplains whose naturalfunctions are relatively undisturbed. These fourstrategies are directed at natural and beneficialvalues associated with the water, living, and culturalresources of floodplains. A variety of examples areincluded to provide general guidance in serving thisprogram goal.

Implementation. Assessment of the development of Fed-eral programs (Chapter VI) and the institutionalframework for implementing a unified program (ChapterVII) reveals significant progress since the firstunified program was set forth in 1976. Of majorsignificance, a minimum national standard for delineatingflood hazard hazard -- the 100 year base flood -- and aprocedure for evaluating flood hazard and minimizing

I-2

flood loss potential -- Federal Executive Order 11988,Floodplain Management -- have been established andaccepted. The conceptual framework of the UnifiedProgram has become more widely accepted as havenonstructural loss reduction strategies and tools.Almost all States have established floodplain managementprograms and most have gained experience and arebecoming more effective in achieving program goals.Almost all flood prone communities have at leastestablished floodplain regulatory programs and arebeginning to develop program experience. Consequently,the relative role of the Federal government is decreasingas States and local governments become more self reliantin dealing with the problems of flooding. Thisassessment, however, also reveals that achievement ofa unified program still requires considerable additionalprogress.

Assessment of the institutional framework concludesthat many of the necessary facets of the conceptualframework exist and have been functioning at alllevels of government, but coordination and effective-ness needs improvement. Effective implementation ofa unified national program requires of all levels ofgovernment: (1) a review of and renewed commitment toexisting policies that contribute to such a program,(2) appropriate rearrangement of priorities in exist-ing organizational and operational policies, and (3)a continuous coordination effort.

Recommendations. The recommendations which follow aredirected toward recognition, acceptance and implementa-tion of the conceptual framework at all levels ofgovernment. They should provide the basis for achiev-ing the institutional coordination necessary to carrythrough" A Unified National Program for FloodplainManagement ."

B. Federal Level Recommendations

Actions are required to establish coordination at thenational level for floodplain management activities,specifically for research, data collection, and in-formation dissemination; to strengthen managementtools; and to support State and local programs. TheFederal level recommendations follow. (Pertinentpages from the text and Appendix D where the recommenda-tions from another study are presented are noted inparentheses. (For example, in recommendation 1 below,the cross references refer to Chapter VII, pages 5,6, 7 and 23, and to Appendix D, Strategy A, item 14.)

I-3

1. Assure that all Federal programs for water, land,and related resources support and implement theprecepts of Executive Order 11988; FloodplainManagement and of "A Unified National Program forFloodplain Management", as enunciated in thisreport. RESPONSIBILITY - All Federal agencies.(VII-5, 6, 7, 23; DA-14).

2. Improve Federal support of States as they exercisetheir primary role in floodplain management. RE-SPONSIBILITY - All Federal agencies.

Continue to:

a. Encourage well defined State roles in Federalprogram activities. (VII-5, 10, 20; DA-8).

b. Provide States with clear incentives forestablishing the necessary legislative and ad-ministrative provisions and staff assignmentsfor carrying out statewide floodplain manage-ment activities. (VII-5, 10; DA-8).

c. Provide basic information and analysis support-ed by expanded basic and specific technicaland planning assistance and guidance commensu-rate with agency expertise and the particularneeds of the State and local agencies.(VII-5, 10; DC-4, 6-7, 8, 9, 10).

d. Provide support for improving programsand capabilities to implement them at the Statelevel as authorized by statute. (VII-5, 10, 22;DA-8).

e. Work directly with the States in dealing withlocal entities to assure consistent adminis-tration of floodplain management activities.(VII-5, 10; DA-8).

3. Centralize floodplain data sources at the Statelevel. RESPONSIBILITY - The Federal InsuranceAdministration and the Geological Survey shouldtake the lead. (VII-16).

4. Improve Federal support of local government'srole in floodplain management. RESPONSIBILITY -All Federal agencies.

I-4

Working with the States:

a. Provide local governments with incentives forenactment and enforcement of floodplain managementregulations and other flood loss reduction measures.(VII-12; DA-18; DB-1; DC-i).

b. Encourage and assist local governments in es-tablishing and carrying out comprehensivefloodplain management programs. (VII-12;DA-8; 19).

c. Provide basic information, technical and plan-ning assistance and guidance commensurate withagency expertise and the particular needs oflocal government. (VII-12, 13; DA-15, 19;DC-8, 10).

5. Accelerate floodplain and hazard studies and im-prove dissemination of information to States andlocal users through:

a. Completion of the flood insurance studies ini-tial study program and establishment of asystem for periodic updating and maintenanceof the data base. RESPONSIBILITY - FederalInsurance Administration. (VII-14, 15).

b. Provision of updated floodplain and hazardinformation studies, especially for thehydrologic and hydraulic conditionsassociated with the major sources of flooding,the impact of development on flooding levels,and more effective, simpler methodologies fordelineating flood hazard areas. RESPONSIBILITY- Corps of Engineers, Federal InsuranceAdministration, Soil Conservation Service,Tennessee Valley Authority, and GeologicalSurvey. (VII-17; DA-5; DC-4, 6, 7, 9).

c. Provision of floodplain management and technicalassistance programs. RESPONSIBILITY - Corps ofEngineers, Federal Insurance Administration,Soil Conservation Service, Tennessee ValleyAuthority, and Geological Survey. (VII-14).

d. Provision and interpretation of detailed soilsurvey data to assist in tentative identifica-tion of flood prone areas and in planningappropriate uses of floodplains, especially

I-5

in rural areas. RESPONSIBILITY - SoilConservation Service. (VII-14).

e. Support of increased social research on flood-plain occupancy, hazard perception, andresponse as recommended in House Document 465.RESPONSIBILITY - All Federal agencies.(VI-3; VII-15; DA-19; DC-6, 7).

6. Support cost sharing policies and project evalua-tion procedures that facilitate achievement of adesirable mix of structural and nonstructuralapproaches to flood hazard adjustment. RESPONSI-BILITY - All Federal agencies. (VII-19, 20;DA-12, 15; DB-2).

7. Require appropriate non-Federal segments of flood-plain management programs, including regulationsor control measures and local stormwater managementplans as a prerequisite to Federal expendituresfor the modification of flooding or of the impactsof flooding. RESPONSIBILITY - All Federal agencies.(VII-12; DA-1, 6; DB-1; DC-1).

8. Continue to evaluate the nature, size and trendof the Federal subsidy to the National FloodInsurance Program and develop policies and proceduresto decrease or eliminate the subsidy in highhazard areas after repetitive losses have beenexperienced. RESPONSIBILITY - Federal InsuranceAdministration. (DC-2, 5).

9. Improve flood and flash flood forecasting and warn-ing systems to include -- but not be limited to --real -- time data collection, forecast preparation anddissemination, and public education in the use ofsystem outputs. RESPONSIBILITY - The NationalOceanic and Atmospheric Administration and theFederal Emergency Management Agency. (VII-14;DA-ll, 17; DC-3).

10. Utilize the Federal Interagency FloodplainManagement Task Force under the auspices of theFederal Insurance Administration to:

a. Facilitate communication and encourage con-sistency among Federal programs includingthe Delaware and Susquehanna River BasinCommissions. (VII-6).

I-6

b. Establish a mechanism for a periodic (asnecessary) national conference/workshop ofFederal, State, local, and regional officialsfor the purpose of fostering coordination offloodplain management activities. (VII-16).

c. Provide evaluation of floodplain managementactivities with periodic reporting to thepublic and to the Congress on progresstoward implementation of "A Unified NationalProgram for Floodplain Management." (VII-23).

d. Establish mechanisms whereby State and localofficials can report periodically on the sta-tus of floodplain management programs andthe use of Federal resources in their programs.(VII-ll, 13).

e. Provide overall assistance for State programdevelopment and liaison with the responsi-ble State floodplain management offices.(VII-7).

f. Provide for coordination of and encourageintegrated Federal floodplain, wetland, andcoastal barrier island management activitiesaffecting the same geographic areas. (VII-3,23; DA-2, 9, 13, 20).

g. Assist the Federal Emergency Management Agencyin carrying out the Office of Management andBudget's directive to provide implementationguidance for Executive Order 11988, FloodplainManagement. (VI-18; DA-3, 7).

h. Coordinate with and support the efforts of theFederal Interagency Hazard Mitigation Team TaskForce to evaluate and improve the effectivenessof Federal pre- and postflood disaster mitigationplanning. (VI-20; DA-16).

i. Coordinate with and support the efforts of the Fed-eral Hydrology Committee to standardize thetechniques for collection and analysis of hydrologicdata, especially through regionalization ofstreamflow characteristics, so that recorded datamay be applied at ungauged sites. (VII-17, 23).

j. Develop and promote standards for the collection,analysis, and reporting of experienced flood lossdata and projected flood loss data. (VII-16).

I-7

k. Assess the amount, location, and condition of theNation's floodplain lands to provide a basis forestablishing national and regional policies toguide their preservation, restoration, and theiroptimal use. (VII-16).

1. Assess the extent of community needs for assistancein the adoption and administration of floodplainmanagement measures, and identify the appropriateFederal-State-local relationships that would bestfulfill these needs. (VII-l1, 12, 16; DA-19).

m. Assess the need for and identify the level ofdetail for floodplain data relating to the inter-relationships between land, water, and relatedresources, and environmental values. (VII-15;DC-6, 7, 8).

n. Cooperate in periodic assessments of research needsand, when appropriate, in the review of ongoing researchprojects and programs. (VII-18; DA-6, 19, 20; DC-ll).

11. Utilize the Federal Interagency Post-Flood Hazard MitigationTask Force, under the auspices of Federal EmergencyManagement Agency's State and Local Programs Directorateto:

a. encourage the preparation of pre-disaster plans forreducing future flood losses and encouraging wise useof floodplains;

b. provide assistance in the preparation and reviewof post-disaster plans.

c. assist agency efforts to develop and implementhazard mitigation teams' recommendations.

C. State Level Recommendations

Actions are required for State governments to morefully achieve their pivotal role working with boththe Federal and local governments toward a unifiednational program.

Recommended actions follow.

1. Enact enabling legislation specifically address-ing floodplain management programs and regulationsin those States where such legislation does not

I-8

exist or is inadequate for the purpose. (VII-10;DA-1).

2. Establish or designate a single State agency (oranother effective mechanism of coordination) toassure responsibility for floodplain managementand to issue State standards as floodplain manage-ment guides for State agencies and local entities.(VII-7, 10; DA-8).

a. Maintain liaison with a designated Federal co-ordinating body. See Federal RecommendationB-10-e. (VII-7).

b. Establish a program that would annually assesscoordination and the establishment of Statepriorities and budgets related to floodplainmanagement. See Federal RecommendationB-10-d. (VII-10, 11; DA-8).

c. Maintain an assessment of the status of localfloodplain management efforts. See FederalRecommendation B-10-1. (VII-9, 13; DC-7).

d. Monitor and encourage effective coordinationamong the offices in each State responsiblefor coastal zone management, emergency prepar-edness, wetlands management and floodplainmanagement. (VII-7, 10).

3. Develop an information program to supplement Fed-eral efforts to inform the public and localdecisionmakers about flood hazards and floodplainmanagement. (DC-4, 6, 7, 9, 10).

a. Establish a centralized floodplain data source.See Federal Recommendation B-3. (VII-16).

b. Publish a floodplain management document tosupplement the Floodplain Management Handbookpublished by the Water Resources Council bydescribing in detail State programs andregulations for use by local officials inimplementing "A Unified National Program forFloodplain Management." (VII-16).

4. Improve management tools by applying the conceptsof Federal Executive Order 11988, FloodplainManagement to all State agencies and programs.(VII-10; DA-4).

I-9

5. Establish a hazard mitigation team mechanism forState agencies similar to the Federal hazardmitigation team for the purpose of improving theeffectiveness of pre- and postflood disastermitigation planning. (VI-20; DA-16).

6. Establish a mechanism to identify and monitorunsafe dams and levees and to provide hazardinformation to communities subject to potentialflooding from failure of unsafe dams and levees.(VI-14; DA-1O, 11, 16, 17).

7. Support regional, substate, and local entitiesin implementing their floodplain managementactivities. (VII-20, 21).

a. Provide information, technical assistance,and financial support for improving managementactivities. (VII-10, 20, 21).

b. Develop review procedure, to evaluate andsupport the overall implementation and assurethe effectiveness of local floodplain manage-ment regulations and ordinances. (VII-10,13).

D. Local Level Recommendations

Local governments have a primary role in floodplainmanagement because they oversee decisions affectingfloodplain use and they act to initiate local,floodplain management programs using State and Federalguidelines and policies. Recommendations to strengthenlocal government programs follow.

1. Designate a single point of contact with leadresponsibility to coordinate floodplain managementactivities and provide liaison with State andFederal floodplain managment programs. (VII-11).

2. Adopt and enforce floodplain management measuresincluding zoning subdivision and building codesthat at a minimum meet standards recommended bynational and State code organizations. (VII-l, 12;DA-18; DC-8).

3. Coordinate with adjacent communities to assurethat floodplain management practices do not shiftthe flood hazard to adjacent communities. (VII-7, 11; DA-18).

I-10

4. Develop review procedures to periodically assessthe effectiveness of the local floodplain manage-ment programs. (VII-12; DC-7).

E. Conclusion

Decisionmakers in the appropriate levels and branchesof government should give serious and immediate con-sideration to the preceding action recommendations.Success in carrying out Federal level recommendatonsdepends upon followup by all Federal agencies.Responsibility for implementing these action recommen-dations, however, falls most heavily upon those withextensive programs affecting utilization of flood-plains, especially the Departments of Agriculture,Army, Commerce, Energy, Interior, and Transporation;the Environmental Protection Agency; the FederalEmergency Management Agency; and the Tennessee ValleyAuthority. In each case lead responsibility oraction required is directed to one or more of theagencies named to the Federal Interagency FloodplainManagement Task Force under the auspices of FederalEmergency Management Agency. Success in effectuatingState and local government recommendations dependsupon followup by each entity acting within its ownlegal and institutional framework. Appropriatecooperation and support from the concerned Federalagencies as well as State and local government arealso important.

I-l1

CHAPTER II

BACKGROUND AND SETTING

The Unified National Program for Floodplain Managementhas its origins in the 1966 report of the Task Force onFederal Flood Control Policy known as House Document 465.1/ It is supported by a continuing recognition of theneed for a coordinated Federal-State-local program formanaging the Nation's floodplains. House Document 465recognized that traditional flood control measures alonewere not sufficient to achieve flood loss reduction.That document also provided the first major policylevel recommendations for alternative techniques includ-ing flood insurance, floodproofing, relocation, forecast-ing and warning, and floodplain regulations.

House Document 465 was accompanied by PresidentialExecutive Order 11296. This Executive Order directed allFederal agencies to "provide leadership in encouraginga broad and unified effort to prevent uneconomic usesand development of the Nation's floodplains and, inparticular, to lessen the risk of flood losses inconnection with Federal lands and installations andfederally financed or supported improvements."

The National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (Public Law90-448) called for the President to develop a unifiednational program for floodplain management. Thisresponsibility was delegated to the Water ResourcesCouncil. The first report on "A Unified NationalProgram for Floodplain Management" was published in1976. That report set forth a conceptual framework andrecommended Federal and State actions with emphasis onreducing losses through floodplain management.

In May 1977 the President issued Executive Order 11988,Floodplain Management, which superseded and greatlyexpanded upon its 1966 predecessor. The new ExecutiveOrder brings together Federal policies that protectagainst both flood hazards and natural floodplaindegradation.

To reflect the increased concern for natural floodplainvalues enunciated in Executive Order 11988, the Water

1/ Task Force on Federal Flood Control Policy. AUnified National Program for Managing Flood Losses,House Document 465, 89th Congress, 2nd Session, U.S.Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 1966.

II-1

Resources Council in 1979 revised its 1976 unified programby modifying the conceptual framework and the recommenda-tions. This document updates the 1979 document to re-flect floodplain management progress and modifies asso-ciated recommendations.

Since House Document 465 was issued in 1966, State andlocal governments have increased their awareness offloodplain problems and exercised additional responsibilityfor flood prone lands. Each State has taken some kind ofenabling action allowing local communities to establishfloodplain management regulations. More than 17,500 ofapproximately 20,000 identified flood prone communitieshave adopted such regulations.

Floodplain management is concerned with the future roleof the floodplain as an integral part of a community andof an entire natural river, shore, or coastal system.The list of floodplain uses and management purposes isextensive. These uses include provision for recreation,fish and wildlife habitat, navigation, agriculture,housing, and municipal and industrial water supply.Multiple uses are common, with some uses being incompatiblewith each other. However, with each use, considerationof losses of lives, property, and natural values is everpresent, as are the consequences of adjustment to theselosses. Thus, the focus of floodplain management is awise choice among uses competing for a limited number oflocations, Many of these locations are subject to lossesthat could result in serious disruption of floodplainvalues. An accounting must be made for the consequencesof various adjustments to development in these floodplainimpacting locations.

Coastal and riverine floodplains include widespread areasof natural hazard that are present in thousands of commu-nities. Floodplains have been and continue to be underpressure for change to more intensive uses. Pressure tointensify floodplain use is increasing as desirable un-developed land becomes less abundant, especially nearurban areas. At the same time, there is increasing re-cognition that the natural and beneficial values served bythe floodplain represent valuable environmental resources.

The present state of floodplain use and development derivesfrom the period in which full range of impacts of uncon-trolled growth were poorly understood. Flood losses area conscious concern primarily during and shortly after aflood experience. The normal reaction to flood loss hasbeen to attempt to control or modify the flood and to

II-2

repair flood damage to preflood conditions. However, thepublic has become increasingly concerned about floodplaindevelopment decisions, the rising exposure to flood losses,and the resultant public costs. These costs haveseveral facets: those measured as flood losses and thecosts of protective works and disaster relief; thoseassessed as threats to life, health, and welfare; andthose associated with a loss of natural and beneficialfloodplain values. Conversely, there may be an economiccost from not providing for more intensive uses of flood-plains to increase employment and income where alternativelocations are absent.

It was the concern for rising flood losses that focusednational attention on floodplain management through thepublication of House Document 465 in 1966. This documentemphasized the fact that flood damage continued to grow,having exceeded $1 billion yearly at that time, eventhough over $7 billion had been spent for flood controlworks during the previous 30-year period. Since publica-tion of House Document 465, the dollars spent for floodcontrol works have nearly doubled. Average annual flooddamages are now estimated to exceed $3 billion and arecontinuing to rise. The customary sequence of eventsgenerally continues to be (1) flooding, (2) flood losses,(3) disaster relief, (4) flood control projects attemptingto modify the flood potential through provisions for stor-ing, accelerating, blocking, or diverting flood waters,(5) renewed encroachment and development onto the flood-plain and upstream watershed, (6) flooding, (7) floodlosses, (8) disaster relief, (9) more projects, (10)more encroachment and development, ad infinitum. Althoughthe construction of dams, levees, and channel projectshas saved many lives and prevented billions of dollars ofdamage, protective works alone have not been able to keeppace with the rate of floodplain development and resultantincreases in flood losses. In some situations, flood con-trol works have encouraged additional unsound floodplaindevelopment, resulting in further losses.

In his letter of August 10, 1966, transmitting HouseDocument 465, the President said that we can and mustreduce flood losses. He also stated: "The key to theproblem lies, above all else, in the intelligent planningfor the State and local regulation of use of lands exposedto flood hazard." Noting that the Nation would continueto support established programs for essential floodcontrol works, the President said that "...to hold theNation's toll of flood losses in check and to promotewise use of its valley lands requires new and imaginative

II-3

action' (emphasis added). At the same time, the Presidentissued Executive Order 11296.

Subsequently, significant new Federal legislation andactivities affected the role of State and local governmentsin floodplain management.

Preparation of flood hazard maps was accelerated andFederal flood insurance was made available in return forcommunity exercise of floodplain regulation. Funds weremade available for flood disaster preparedness planning.Federal planning, technical assistance, and constructiongrants were made available to States along with areawidewaste treatment facility planning. Financial assistancewas made available for defining and enforcing permissibleland and water uses in the coastal zone. A Federalpermit system was utilized to monitor more closely dredgeand fill activity, which often affects floodplains.Federal cost sharing was extended in principle toKnonstructural" measures directed primarily at flood lossreduction. "Nonstructural" refers to all actions otherthan those seeking to modify floodwaters. (See explanationon page IV-1.) Federal water resources planning principlesand standards and procedures moved toward a more consistentevaluation of federally funded management measures. Therequirements of environmental impact assessments andstatements forced consideration and public display ofalternative plans affecting floodplain use and development.

On May 24, 1977, the President issued a comprehensiveenvironmental message calling for better management ofthe Nation's floodplains, wetlands, coastal barrierislands, and marine sanctuaries. The message was accompaniedby Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management, whichreplaces the earlier, less encompassing 1966 ExecutiveOrder. The new Executive Order is a broader and strongerpolicy directive. It ties together the establishedobjective of protecting lives and property with theobjective of protecting natural and beneficial floodplainvalues. The central thrust of the Executive Order isthat the Federal agencies shall provide leadership andtake action to ensure the practice of sound floodplainmanagement. The Executive Order was reinforced by thePresident's Water Policy Message of June 6, 1978, whichcalled for implementation of "nonstructural" measuresand water conservation. In 1982, legislation was enactedwhereby a system of undeveloped coastal barriers wasestablished and a general prohibition was placed on allFederal activities which might assist development ofthese barriers. In 1983, the impact of the Executive

II-4

Order on more than 50 Federal agencies was reviewed andthe Office of Management and Budget reaffirmed the needfor the Executive Order. Thus, Federal agencies areplaced in the position of leading, by example, otherlevels of government and public and private organizations.By inference, State and local governments are urged toexercise their own floodplain management prerogativeswith new incentives, regulatory tools, and a comprehensivemanagement philosophy.

Since 1966, the philosophy of floodplain management hasmatured in the following ways: (1) it is explicitlyrecognized that conditions at one floodplain locationare generally interdependent upon locations and eventselsewhere in the river or coastal system, and in thetotal community of which the floodplain is a part; (2)multiple purpose management has replaced single purposemanagement, even though flood losses and threats tolife and health remain priority concerns; (3) evaluationof alternative flood loss reduction strategies followingfrom House Docment 465 has replaced a predisposition torely upon physical structures for flood protection; (4)the responsibility to preserve and restore natural andbeneficial floodplain values is recognized; and (5) theneed to provide for public involvement in tradeoffsaffecting floodplain use decisions is recognized.

Consideration of alternative intensities of floodplainutilization has replaced automatic assumptions thatfloodplains should be developed to their highest economicuse or that the public interest is limited to floodloss reduction. Thus, the current philosophy of floodplainmanagement indicates a need for a comprehensive unifiedprogram which embodies these new management elements.The public interest in floodplain management is thesame as for other land and water resource planning. Itincludes a concern for (1) economic efficiency, (2)environmental quality, (3) individual safety, peace ofmind, and social well-being, and (4) economic andenvironmental health of regions and localities. Preliminarymanagement plans in this context may in fact be alternatives,with some emphasizing one concern and others respondingto various combinations to two or more concerns. Thetime frame -- near future or long range -- for floodplainmanagement and the need for flexibility are also importantto program composition and achievement. Decisionsaffecting floodplains must consider economic develop-ment consistent with protecting the environment, com-pliance with environmental statutes, and the need toprotect lives, property, and natural floodplain values.

II-5

The constitutional right to reasonable use of privateproperty should be a factor in the public interest review.

In a practical sense, decisionmakers are to test theconsequences of proposed actions and assess theirfindings. The assessment is not to be confined to thefloodplain. It must encompass a larger area in orderto provide a basis for evaluating actions that mightaffect the floodplain. Such assessments will evaluateand identify adjustments necessary to minimize the lossof lives, property, and natural floodplain values. Theloss of lives and property can be reduced by modifying,to the extent practicable, each of the three aspectsof flood hazard -- flooding, susceptibility to flooding,and the impact of flooding on the individual and thecommunity. The overall loss of floodplain values can bereduced by preservation of existing natural functions aswell as by restoration of those degraded by prior humanactions. In attempting to reduce losses, some combi-nation of adjustments rather than reliance upon a singleadjustment will generally be the most effective approachto meeting the problems of a particular situation. Withthe evolution of floodplain management have come strategiesthat are needed in all of its phases -- actions to be takenin the interflood period, during the inevitable flood,and in the postflood recovery phase.

Implementation of a unified national program for flood-plain management depends on successfully resolving severalproblems, the more serious of which are the following.The first is fragmented and uncoordinated responsibilityfor floodplain management at all levels of government.This leads to lack of consistency among public programsdesigned to meet flood problems within and between areasand among those plans designed to meet the other needs ofthe affected areas. Fragmentation contributes to inade-quately conceived measures to solve flood problems. Thisresults in destruction of resources that the public valuesand generation of costs that are as undesirable as thedamages that they attempt to relieve. Such inadequatelyconceived measures are frequently accompanied by inadequateand misdirected commitments of program resources.

Overreliance upon public investment to solve all problemsis the second difficulty. There has been a nationaltendency to seek solutions to individual problems in thefloodplain through public investment, without adequateconsideration of other actions. This trend has developedfrom an overreliance upon the Flood Control Act of 1936and subsequent legislation: however, this has been muted

II-6

somewhat by a decrease in the authorization and appropria-tion for new Federal flood control projects since 1976.Nevertheless, emphasis must be placed upon recognizing theappropriate responsibility of all levels of government andof private individuals concerned.

Inability to resolve conflicts of private property rightswith local, State, and national interests is the thirdproblem. This tends to prevent implementation of judi-cious land use regulations enacted in the public interest.Attempts to strike a balance between the public interestand private property rights increasingly have led tolitigation.

Insufficient awareness of alternative strategies due toa lack of adequate technical and procedural informationavailable to guide floodplain decisionmakers is thefourth problem. This tends to encourage simplistic,single strategy, or single tool responses to complexfloodplain situations. In spite of recent progress,continued efforts to disseminate information and providefloodplain managment technical assistance are neededat all levels of government.

"A Unified National Program for Floodplain Management"calls for continuing efforts that seek to reduce andkeep flood losses at acceptable levels while recognizing,preserving, and restoring the floodplain's naturalvalues through wise use of water and related landresources. The program includes planning, research,education, legislation, regulation, administration,construction, and operation and maintenance activities.In the following chapters, the conceptual frameworkof a unified national program is presented and asystem described in which the program can operate.

II-7

CHAPTER III

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT

This chapter presents a conceptual framework within whichpublic and private floodplain policies are being formulat-ed to implement a unified national program for floodplainmanagement. This basic framework provides decisionmakerswith a management perspective that encourages a comprehen-sive assessment of alternative floodplain uses. Moreover,this framework fosters the judicious selection and applica-tion of the many available strategies and tools to promotefloodplain use harmonious with flood hazards and naturalfloodplain values.

The conceptual framework consists of both general andworking principles. Aspects of these principles mayoverlap, reflecting the complex web of interdependenciesamong land, water, atmosphere, and human activities bothoff and on floodplains.

A. General Principles

General principles set forth the context and the elementsof floodplain management.

1. The Federal Government has a fundamental interest inhow the Nation's floodplains are used and managed, butthe basic responsibility for regulating use of floodplainslies with State and local government.

2. The floodplain, a definite area of interrelated waterand land, must be considered in the context of totalcommunity, regional, and national planning and management.

3. Floodplains can be managed to achieve acceptable levelsof (a) protection and maintenance of natural floodplainvalues and (b) reduction of existing and future floodloss potential. Both floodplain values and flood lossesmust be viewed within the larger context of water andrelated land resource management.

4. Sound floodplain management embodies:

a. Goals and Objectives. A decisionmaking processwherein the goals of wise use, conservation, anddevelopment of interrelated land and waterresources serve the diverse and frequentlycompetitive objectives of economic efficiency,environmental quality, and the quality of life,notably health and safety.

III-1

b. Shared Decisionmaking Responsibility. Responsi-bility distributed under the Federal and Stateconstitutions among various levels of govern-ment and private individuals.

c. Image of the Future. Recognition of future needsand the role of the floodplain in the context ofthe physical, ecological, and socioeconomic systemsof which it is a part. An image of the expectedand desired future is prerequisite to selectionand implementation of management strategies andtools.

d. Unique Decision Constraints. Mitigation of lossesof life, health, and property from flooding andlosses of natural floodplain values by unwisepractices. Decisions affecting floodplainsshould seek to minimize these losses by evaluatingindividual strategies and combinations of allalternative strategies for:

(1) Mitigating flood losses by modifying:

-- floods or flooding

-- the susceptibility of people and theirproperty to flood damage

-- consequences of flooding for theindividual, the community, and theNation; and

(2) Mitigating the loss of natural andbeneficial floodplain values by modifyingor designing actions to:

-- preserve existing floodplain values

-- restore degraded floodplain values

-- minimize harm to or within thefloodplain.

e. Accounting. Accounting for (1) public and private,economic, social, and environmental benefits,costs values; (2) interrelated impacts likelyto result from actions taken both within andoutside the jurisdiction of local governments;and (3) tradeoff procedures used in arriving atdecisions.

III-2

f. Motivation. Motivation of decisionmakers throughuse of incentives and disincentives. This includessuch management tools as insurance and tax rates,grant and permit conditions, cost sharing ratios,and standards for alterations designed to preventincreased flood hazards, to minimize adverse impacts,and to restore and preserve natural floodplainvalues.

g. Coordination. Program coordination at and amongall levels of government by agencies and theirsubunits charged with: (1) planning, (2) regula-tion, (3) implementation, (4) enforcement,(5) different functional areas such as waterquality and water supply, (6) pre-disaster, duringdisaster, and post-disaster responsibilities, and(7) citizen participation and public information.

h. Evaluation. Evaluation of the floodplain manage-ment effort through a continuous program ofmonitoring and periodic reporting to the publicand local officials.

B. Working Principles

Working principles set forth definitions and generalstatements providing guidance for floodplain management.

1. Definitions

a. Floodplains are the lowland and relatively flatareas adjoining inland and coastal waters, andthose other areas subject to flooding.

b. Flood or flooding is a general and temporarycondition of (1) partial or complete inundationof normally dry land areas from the overflow ofinland and/or tidal waters and/or (2) the unusualaccumulation of waters from any source.

c. Floodplain values are those natural and bene-ficial attributes associated with the relativelyundisturbed state of the floodplain and includevalues primarily associated with water, living,and cultural resources.

d. Floodplain preservation is the prevention ormodification of the natural floodplain environ-ment or maintenance of the floodplain environmentin a condition as close as possible to its naturalstate using all practicable means.

III-3

e. Floodplain restoration is the reestablishmentof a setting or environment in which thenatural functions of the floodplain can againoperate.

f. Flood hazard is the potential for inundationand involves the risk to life, health, property,and natural floodplain values. Two referencebase floods are commonly used: (I) For most sit-uations, the base flood is that flood which has aone percent chance of being exceeded in any givenyear (also known as the 100-year flood); (2) forcritical actions, an activity for which a onepercent chance of flooding would be too great, ata minimum the base flood is that flood which hasa 0.2 percent chance of being exceeded in anygiven year (also known as the 500-year flood).

g. Flood disaster assistance includes developmentof comprehensive preparedness and recoveryplans, program capabilities, and organization ofFederal agencies and of State and local govern-ments to mitigate the adverse impacts of dis-asterous floods. It may include maximum hazardreduction, avoidance, and mitigation measures,as well as policies, procedures, and eligibilitycriteria for Federal grant or loan assistance toState and local governments, private organizations,or individuals as the result of the major disaster.

2. General Statements

a. Regarding floodplain use:

(1) Development in or adversely affecting flood-plains should be avoided unless it is consid-ered necessary from a public interest stand-point and unless no suitable alternative exists.Avoidance of development in high hazard areasis the preferred approach for minimizing lossesto people, property and natural floodplain values.

(2) Existing and new developments should betreated differently. For much of theexisting development, consideration shouldbe given to appropriate modification of theflood hazard and restoration of floodplainvalues. In contrast, proposed developmentand new uses should be carefully regulated

III-4

to insure the harmonious development offloodplains by minimizing the hazards presentand preserving the natural values.

(3) In selecting and implementing alternativeactions, consideration must be given toimmediate and long-term problems of developedand undeveloped floodplains in urbanized aswell as rural areas.

(4) There is a moral responsibility upon alllevels of government and nongovernmentalinterests to attempt to minimize thepotential environmental and human lossesassociated with decisions affectingfloodplains. Minimize means to reduce tothe smallest amount possible using allpracticable means.

(5) An acceptable degree of hazard differs withtype of floodplain use. Selected uses areor can be made harmonious with certain floodcharacteristics.

(6) Capital and operating costs of floodplainmanagement programs should be sharedequitably among the beneficiaries, with aminimum of shifting of costs from the indi-vidual to the public and from local andState governments to Federal agencies.

(7) Consideration should be given to all toolsto modify human occupancy of floodplains(nonstructural measures) and to modifyflooding (structural measures) in seekingto manage flood losses and floodplain values.Some combination of these tools is oftenthe desirable management strategy.

(8) Water conservation management opportunitiesshould be identified and evaluated as partof the impact analysis for proposed actionsthat would significantly affect the quantityand quality of floodplain waters.

b. Regarding flood loss reduction:

(1) Complete control of floods is seldomrealized -- there is always the threat offloods in excess of design standards.

III-5

(2) Severe loss is possible from larger floods ofless frequency and from smaller floods ofgreater frequency than a standard base flood.Determining factors include onsite considera-tions such as valley shape, level of develop-ment, and type of use.

(3) Flood characteristics are likely to changeas development and changes in land use takeplace in the watershed. Actions taken ina floodplain area can affect floodcharacteristics in other areas. Conversely,actions taken outside the floodplain canaffect flood characteristics within thefloodplain.

(4) Flooding on developed floodplains produceseconomic losses not only to the propertiesinundated but also in areas serving, servedby, or accessible through a given floodplain.

(5) A variety of means, including regulatory toolsadopted at national, State, and/or local levels,is needed to reduce flood losses and serveother aspects of floodplain management.(See Chapter IV.)

(6) Mitigation of flood disasters is most effec-tive where a coordinated, site-appropriate mixof management tools is fully implementedbefore, during, and after a flood disaster.

(7) Flooding constitutes a threat to life, health,property, and peace of mind that should becarefully analyzed in planning floodplain use.

c. Regarding natural floodplain values:

(1) Floodplains provide for the natural modera-tion of floods, the maintenance of waterquality, and the recharge of groundwaters.

(2) Floodplains support large and diverse popu-lations of plants and animals which representimportant renewable resources.

(3) The wetlands areas of floodplains arebiologically very productive, because theycontain elements of both terrestrial andaquatic habitats and provide vital breedinggrounds for fish and wildlife.

III-6

(4) Floodplains contain cultural resources in-cluding archeological and historical sites,unique habitats for ecological study, openspace, and recreation opportunities.

(5) Floodplains generally provide excellentresources for agricultural, aquacultural,and forestry production.

(6) Esthetic and other intangible attributesof floodplains have important social andeconomic values.

III-7

CHAPTER IV

STRATEGIES AND TOOLS AND ACHIEVINGFLOOD LOSS REDUCTION

At a period when the Nation is particularly aware of alloca-ting scarce resources among competing economic, environ-mental, and social needs, public and private decisionsaffecting floodplains must give explicit consideraton tothe hazards to life and property. Proposed solutions toflood hazard problems must be evaluated in the context ofall alternative strategies and of the technical, financial,and legal capabilities of all affected parties to carryout their responsibilities.

Legislative and administrative policies frequently citetwo approaches -- structural and nonstructural -- for adjust-ing to the flood hazard. In this context, "structural"is usually intended to mean adjustments that modify thebehavior of floodwaters through the use of measures suchas public works dams, levees and channel work. "Non-structural" is usually intended to include all otheradjustments (e.g., regulations, insurance, etc.) in theway society acts when occupying or modifying a floodplain.Both structural and nonstructural tools are used for achievingdesired future floodplain conditions. There are threebasic strategies which may be applied individually or incombination: (1) modifying the susceptibility to flooddamage and disruption, (2) modifying the floods themselves,and (3) modifying (reducing) the adverse impacts offloods on the individual and the community.

Because the land and water resources of the floodplainand the flood-related problems and needs are highlyvaried, different strategies must be used to achievedesired objectives in different settings. Within thesestrategies are a large variety of options or "tools" forenabling desired uses or changing the uses of the flood-plain. Each situation is different, but the basic objec-tives of floodplain management cannot be realized withoutalso lowering the direct or indirect adverse impacts offlood losses on the individual and the community to anacceptable level. In almost every community, some combi-nation of strategies and tools is required to achieve thedesired management objectives. Provision for each of thethree phases of floodplain management -- interflood, duringflood, and postflood recovery -- is essential.

Although these strategies and associated tools for flood-plain management may be used to guide public and privatedecisionmakers, there is a prerequisite and perhaps less

IV-1

obvious challenge, that of understanding the overall area'sneeds and goals, in identifying the likely role of thefloodplain. Meeting this challenge requires formulationof assumptions about the future development of the areaand region as well as sensitivity to impacts beyond theimmediate consequences of an action. For example, in thepast, flood-modifying works frequently failed to accountfor indirect social costs and environmental values destroy-ed, although both represent costs passed on to the public.

In recent years, there has been a trend toward increasingreliance on nonstructural measures and less reliance onstructural measures. Section 73 of the Water ResourceDevelopment Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-251) has encouragedthis trend by providing for cost sharing for nonstructuralmeasures. Section 1362 of the National Flood InsuranceAct of 1968 (Public Law 90-448) has also encouraged thistrend by providing authority to purchase high risk flooddamaged properties after a flood. Present actions byFederal agencies to reduce the Federal level of financialassistance and to require-non-Federal interests to sharemore of the costs of implementing structural measures mayalso tend to encourage local agencies to implement theirown nonstructural measures.

It must be realized, however, that some degree of floodloss potential remains, regardless of how carefully flood-plain management programs are formulated. Appropriateselection from the following strategies and tools ispredicated on these understandings.

A. Modify Susceptibility to Flood Damage and Disruption

The strategy to modify susceptibility to flood damage anddisruption consists of actions to avoid dangerous, uneco-nomic, undesirable, or unwise use of the floodplain.Responsibility for implementing such actions rests largelywith the non-Federal sector.

These actions include restrictions in the mode and thetime of day and/or season of occupancy; in the ways andmeans of access; in the pattern, density, and elevation ofstructures and in the character of their materials (struc-tural strength, absorptiveness, solubility, corrodibility);in the shape and type of buildings and in their contents;and in the appurtenant facilities and landscaping of thegrounds. The strategy may also necessitate changes inthe interdependencies between floodplains and surroundingareas not subject to flooding, especially interdependenciesregarding utilities and commerce.

IV-2

Implementing tools for these actions include land useregulations, development and redevelopment policies,floodproofing, disaster preparedness and response plans,and flood forecasting and warning systems. Land treatmentmeasures, though discussed as part of the strategy to"Modify Flooding" (Section IV-B-5), can also function tomodify susceptibility to flood damage. Different toolsmay be more suitable to developed or underdeveloped flood-plains or to urban or rural areas. Special effort hasbeen made here to increase the public's use, awareness,and understanding of these tools.

1. Floodplain Regulations

Floodplain regulations are efficient tools for modifyingfuture susceptibility to damage both on floodplains thatare not fully developed and on highly developed flood-plains where older structures are being rehabilitated.By providing direction to growth and change, regulationsare particularly well-suited to preventing unwise flood-plain occupancy. Land use regulation requires that in-dividuals recognize the general welfare when making deci-sions. Because extensive legal treatment of floodplainregulations and their adoption is given in prior studies,only the essential ideas are presented here. 2/ A combin-ation of regulatory tools is necessary to control develop-ment in floodplains, and regulatory tools are frequentlyutilized in combination with other techniques.

Floodplain regulations which are part of broader land useregulations can be applied effectively only by State andcommunity action; they are increasingly required underongoing Federal programs as a prerequisite to otherassistance. Administration of floodplain regulationsadds only a small incremental cost where other ordinancesare already being administered and these costs arecharacteristically small in relation to the flood damageproblem.

To some degree, individual opportunity foregone is a costof all land use regulations. The net economic cost, i.e.,

2/ Water Resources Council, Regulation of Flood HazardAreas, Vols. 1, 2, and 3, 1971, 1972, and 1983; FederalInsurance Administration; "Statutory Land Use Control En-abling Authority in the States: (Mimeo), 1975; and Corpsof Engineers, A Perspective on Floodplain Regulationsfor Floodplain Management, 1976.

IV-3

reflecting externality costs, of reducing the intensityof use may be large or small. This cost depends on theavailability of alternatives to a floodplain location.

To be effective regulations must be based on suitabledata, must be equitably applied, and should permit reasonableuse of the land (not necessarily highest economic return).Nonconforming uses can be handled by recognition in theordinance, by amortization provisions that lead to removalover a predetermined period, or by purchase.

The regulatory aspects of floodplain management programsare sensitive to political pressures for change in favorof individuals, but they can be effective when equitablyreinforced at all government levels. Several types ofpolice power regulation are in use at some State or locallevels to regulate land uses in flood hazard areas. A briefdiscussion of these tools follows.

a. State Regulations for Flood Hazard Areas

A variety of State level regulations for land use in floodhazard areas have been enacted. (Also see pages VII-7-11.)In some States general legislation establishes floodplainregulatory programs that provide the basic framework ofguidelines and provisions for local implementation. Underthese programs States provide advice, assistance, andmodel ordinance provisions which may be incorporated intolocal regulations compatible with statewide objectivesand standards. Generally, State programs require a permitfrom a technically staffed State agency for specifiedproposed uses that would interfere with the channel orfloodplain capacity for passing floodwaters. For theseregulations, floodway or encroachment line standards aremost significant. Many State boards of health regulatethe use of private and public waste disposal systems.Some health boards prohibit private systems in areassubject to high ground water or flooding. Floodplain,wetlands, water quality, and coastal zone managementoften have common objectives and reinforce each other.

b. Local Regulations for Flood Hazard Areas

The principal local control of flood hazard areas isthrough zoning, subdivision regulations, building andhousing codes, and sanitary codes with specific floodhazard provisions.

(1) Zoning divides a government unit into specifiedareas for the purpose of regulating (a) the use of

IV-4

structures and land, (b) the height and bulk ofstructures, and (c) the size of lots and density ofuse, Zoning may be used to set special standards forland uses in flood hazard areas including specificationof minimum floor elevations. Floodplain zoning maybe single district, two-district, or multi-district,but single and two-district are the most common(i.e., "floodway" and "flood fringe").

Administration of riverine floodplain zoning ordinancesis simplified by the designation of floodway orfloodplain encroachment limits. Floodway limits aredesignated so that any development which is permittedin the remainder of the floodplain (i.e., within theflood fringe) will not result in a stage increase(i.e., height) over a prescribed amount of a specificfrequency flood at any location along the stream. Theallowable stage increase that is prescribed is usuallythe flood having a one percent chance of being exceededin any given year.

Although the floodway as such does not apply in coastalareas, there is a parallel for high hazard coastaland lakeshore areas where the major forces of tidesand waves come into play and where the erosionalchanges are at a maximum during flooding. The coastalarea maps prepared by the National Flood InsuranceProgram identify such areas as "coastal high hazardareas."

(2) Subdivision Regulations guide the division oflarge parcels of land into smaller lots for thepurpose of sale or building. Often the community'sjurisdiction is extended beyond its boundaries bysubdivision-enabling legislation. Such extensionprovides coverage usually unavailable through zoning.

Subdivision regulations guide the process of landdivision to assure that lots are suitable for intendeduse without putting a disproportionate burden on thecommunity. They also control improvements such asroads, sewers, water, and recreation areas. Sub-division regulations often require (a) installingadequate drainage facilities, (b) showing the locationof flood hazard areas on the plat, (c) avoidingencroachment into floodplain areas, (d) determiningthe most appropriate means of elevating a buildingabove the regulatory flood height in accordance with

IV-5

sound engineering practice, and (e) placing streetsand public utilities relative to the selected floodprotection elevation.

(3) Building Codes regulate neither the locationnor the type of development; rather, they controlbuilding design and use of construction materials.Building codes can reduce flood damages to structuresby setting specifications to (a) require suitableanchorage to prevent flotation of buildings duringfloods, (b) establish minimum protection elevationsfor the first floor of structures, (c) require elec-trical outlets and mechanical equipment to be aboveregulatory flood levels or to be appropriately flood-proofed, (d) restrict use of materials that deterioratewhen wetted, and (e) require an adequate structuraldesign, one that can safely withstand the effects ofwater pressure and flood velocities. General flood-proofing requirements (as performance standards) aresometimes included in floodplain zoning ordinancesrather than in building codes. Building codes havean added value in that they also may be used torequire flood protection to below-ground spaces inareas beyond the regulatory area but still within thezone of sewer backup and flood-elevated groundwater.

(4) Housing Codes, like building codes, set minimumstandards for construction, but they also set minimumstandards for maintenance of structures. These maybe used to require repair of flood-damaged structuresin a manner that will ensure the safety of occupantsand prevent blight.

(5) Sanitary and Well Codes establish minimum standardsfor water disposal and water supply. Sanitary codescommonly prohibit onsite waste disposal facilities suchas septic tank systems in areas of high groundwater andflood hazards. Sometimes elevation or floodproofingrequirements are established for public sewer systems.Well codes often establish special floodproofing require-ments for facilities located in flood hazard areas inorder to reduce their potential for contamination duringflooding.

(6) Other Regulatory Tools are available to reduce floodlosses and promote sound management of floodprone lands.Special statutes might require that sellers or real estatebrokers disclose flood hazards on marketed lands. Forexample, the Department of Housing and Urban Developmentprogram for Interstate Land Sales Registration now requires

IV-6

that natural hazards be included in the statement filedwith the Department of Housing and Urban Development andthat such information be made available to the purchaseror potential purchasers. Official maps might be morewidely used to reduce land acquisition costs by designatingareas where structural development is planned for reservoirs,dikes, levees, parks, or other public uses.

2. Development and Redevelopment Policies

Other public actions not necessarily employing the policepower can modify susceptibility to flood damage and guidedevelopment in a manner that takes into account the floodhazard and the natural characteristics of the floodplain.Such actions may be applied at the local, State, and Federallevels through the design and location of utilities andservices, through policies of open space acquisition andeasement, and through redevelopment or permanent evacuation.These measures are normally required in any viable community,but in this context they should reflect the flood hazard.

a. Design and Location of Services and Utilities reduceflood loss potentials by guiding private and public devel-opments (hence public services and utilities) to low riskareas or areas not subject to flooding. Local governmentscan exercise discretion in extending roads or sewer andwater mains or their access in flood hazard areas. Stateand Federal agencies also can impose conditions on loans,grants, and permits in order to restrict service in floodhazard areas. Locating libraries, schools, post offices,and other public and government facilities away from theflood hazard area not only lessens the possibility offlood damages to such buildings but prevents them fromotherwise encouraging private development in areas proneto flooding.

b. Land Rights, Acquisition, and Open Space Use lessenthe potential for flood losses and their consequences.Land is purchased directly, or control is purchased througheasements or development rights, for the purpose of pre-cluding future uses incompatible with floodplain manage-ment programs and for the purpose of providing openspace. In the short run, acquisition may be a costlysubstitute for regulation but the best tool in certaincircumstances, and it may be the only acceptable approachif the proposed use has a specific non-flood-relatedpurpose, such as for public use areas. Easements arebeing used in some situations to continue agriculturaluse of the land. Regulations cannot be used to changeownership from private to public.

IV-7

c. Redevelopment may offer tool for improving floodplainareas blighted for reasons that may or may not includeexposure to flooding. Usually the motives for redevelop-ment are broader than just flood damage reduction.However, the principles of floodplain management can beaccomplished in the process. Disaster assistance, urbanredevelopment, economic development, and other communitydevelopment activities as well as flood insurance supportshould be coordinated in such situations. The oppor-tunities for and justification of redevelopment shouldnot be overlooked. Redevelopment may help to achieve atleast some of the floodplain management objectives byimproving both economic efficiency and the natural environ-ment.

d. Permanent Evacuation, like redevelopment, of which itmay in fact be part, is presently less common than othertools except perhaps for small, isolated sectors ofnonconforming uses. To the extent permitted by statute,Federal agencies should provide encouragement for reloca-tion of structures and facilities from floodways andperilous floodprone areas, leaving such areas for openspace uses. It is important that existing opportunitiesare not overlooked. In some instances, permanent evacua-tion of floodplain areas may be the only economicallyfeasible alternative. At a minimum, this tool provides ameans of evaluating the options for using other tools.

3. Disaster Preparedness

Preparedness plans and programs provide for pre-disastermitigation, warning and emergency operations. Trainingat all levels, public information activities, and readi-ness evaluations are all tools available within disasterpreparedness. Other concerns include research, reviewand coordination of Federal, State, and local disasterpreparedness plans and programs, and post disasterevaluation. Success of this planning is closelyassociated with the degree to which individuals, localgovernments and States protect themselves by takingappropriate hazard mitigation measures and obtainingflood insurance coverage to supplement or replacegovernment assistance. Such plans and programsusually involve the designation by the mayor or countyexecutive of a coordinating officer to work with Stateand Federal program officials. While it is mostdesirable to develop preparedness and recovery programsprior to flood disasters the opportunity should beseized when such disasters occur to design recoveryand redevelopment activities that will reduce or elimi-nate future flood hazards.

IV-8

4. Disaster Assistance

Disaster assistance may be provided by Federal, State,or local governments and certain nonprofit organizationsto repair, replace, or restore facilities damaged ordestroyed by a disaster. Flexibility may exist aftera disaster to construct other needed facilities inlieu of restoring the damaged or destroyed facilities.Post disaster evaluation may provide the opportunityfor the implementaton of innovative hazard mitigationstrategies. Permanent restorative work to restoredamaged facilities should be in conformity withcurrent applicable codes, specifications, plans, andstandards. Acquisition of properties that have beenfrequently or extensively damaged also should beconsidered.

5. Floodproofing

Floodproofing can provide for development in lower riskfloodplain areas by keeping damage within acceptablelimits. It can be chosen by an individual, a community,or State or Federal agency for existing structures aswell as new construction.

Floodproofing consists of modifications of structures,their sites, and building contents to keep water outor reduce effects of water entry. Such adjustmentscan be installed when buildings are under constructionor during repair, remodeling, or expansion of existingstructures. Floodproofing may be permanent (e.g.,bricked-in openings) or it may be contingent on someaction at the time of flood. The adjustment may beby elevation (on fill or open work such as piling),by appropriately constructed ring dikes or their equiva-lent, or by waterproofing (closure, seals, pumps, valvesor pipes, etc.), or other measures.

Like other methods of adjusting to floods, floodproofinghas limitations. It can generate a false sense of security,and residual losses may be very high. A primary purposeof floodproofing structures is to reduce property lossesand to provide for early return to normalcy after floodshave receded rather than for continuous occupancy. Onlyvery substantial and self-contained structures should beoccupied during a flood. Unless correctly used, flood-proofing can increase unwise use of floodplains. Appliedto structurally unsound buildings, it can result in moredamage than would occur without floodproofing. The appli-

IV-9

cation of economic criteria is more likely to justify flood-proofing for commercial structures than for residentialstructures. Usually it is applied to individual structures,but it is only partially effective unless it is alsoapplied to means of access. Access to buildings shouldbe passable at least in floods up to the magnitude usedin setting floodproofing elevations. For example, tomeet National Flood Insurance Program criteria, flood-proofing of structures must protect against the floodwith a one percent chance of being exceeded during anygiven year. Floodproofing should never protect someproperty owners while aggravating the hazard for others.

6. Flood Forecasting and Warning Systems and Emergency Plans

Flood forecasting systems have been established for themajor river systems in the United States. These systemsprovide information on the time of occurrence and magnitudeof flooding to be expected. On major rivers where theflood crest moves slowly, warnings are provided severaldays to a few weeks in advance of the event. For smallertributaries, warning times decrease to a matter of a fewhours and probably not more than a day or two at a maximum.On short headwater streams with steep channel gradients,flash flood warnings may be possible only a few hours oreven a few minutes in advance of the event. Communitywarning systems can be established for such conditions,but the short interval available for warning and responsedemands even tighter advance planning and preparednessthan is required areas with longer warning periods.

The effectiveness of flood warnings depends upon theeffectiveness of their dissemination to the public, thetime available, and the actions taken in response. At aminimum, local officials, police, fire and rescue squads,and radio and television stations are notified. Warningsmust be effectively presented.

The success of flood forecasting and flood warning systemsdepends upon having an emergency action plan and attendantimplementing organization in place before a flood occurs.The emergency action plan must be looked upon by the floodprone community as its plan since only the local communitycan make the plan work. The emergency action plan mustrecognize that as the length of warning period decreases,the opportunity for emergency action including temporaryevacuation diminishes accordingly. In many casescontingency and emergency floodproofing and the removal ofgoods and inhabitants are possible with sufficient warnings,but flash floods may permit only the evacuation of inhabitants.

IV-10

B. Modify Flooding

The traditional strategy of modifying floods relies uponthe construction of dams; dikes, levees, and floodwalls;channel alterations; high flow diversions and spillways;and land treatment measures. These tools permit changesin the volume of runoff, in the peak stage of the flood,in the time of rise and duration, in the extent of thearea flooded, in the velocity and depth of floodwaters,and consequently in the amount of debris, sediment, andpollutants that floods carry. While the effectiveness ofthese tools in protecting property and saving lives hasbeen demonstrated repeatedly, sole reliance upon a floodmodification strategy is neither possible nor desirable.

Flood modification (structural) measures acting aloneleave a residual flood loss potential within the remainingfloodplain and add the risk of rare but potentiallydevastating damages from structural failure or from un-controlled flows of major storms. Unless accompanied byappropriate nonstructural measures, the structural measurescould lead to a false sense of security and encouragefloodplain landowners to develop inappropriate uses oftheir lands. For this reason, some form of land useregulations and other appropriate nonstructural measuresshould accompany the implementation of structural measures.

1. Dams and Reservoirs

Storage of floodwaters in reservoirs causes the broadestrange of flood-modifying effects such as reduction inflood flow rate, extent of area flooded, timing, etc.Except in the area immediately downstream from the dam,however, storage may not provide as high a degree ofrelief from flood damage in specific areas as may beachieved by other more localized tools. Flood storagemay function alone, in groups, or with other tools.

Release of water detained by dams may be at a fixed rate,or it may be varied to accommodate changing downstreamconditions during a flood. Dams and reservoirs also havepotential for wide multiple-purpose uses that morelocalized measures may not achieve. In some already well-developed valleys, storage provides the only significantmeans of reducing the flood damage potential for widespreadareas short of removing the potential for damage from thefloodplain.

In addition to the large areas of land that they occupy,reservoirs may also modify stream behavior and habitat in

IV-11

both beneficial and adverse ways. These facilities mayreduce or contribute to downstream erosion, and sedimentaccumulation in the reservoir is a significant considera-tion in engineering design for long-term effectiveness.

2. Dikes, Levees, and Floodwalls

Dikes, levees, and floodwalls protect a portion of thefloodplain from flooding, up to a design level. Theseworks may have adverse as well as beneficial effects.They can increase the height of the flood immediatelyupstream, across the stream, and downstream by reducingthe amount of floodplain area available for overbankfloodwater conveyence and/or storage. Their appeal liesin their direct and specific results. Sometimes emergencydikes are built following a flood forecast; although theymay be effective for the emergency, they should not beconsidered as permanent flood protection measures.

Dikes, levees, and walls cannot feasibly be built highenough to provide protection against all floods, and theconsequences of their overtopping and failure during amajor flood may be grave. They may require expensivepumping facilities to handle the storm water collectingbehind them. They can cut off river views and access andare not as adaptable to multiple-purpose uses as arereservoirs. Experience shows that levees often have to beincreased in height if channel aggradation takes place orif originally planned upstream storage reservoirs are notbuilt because of loss of the sites to development orlack of public support for their construction.

3. Channel Alterations

In some situations channel alterations may be the onlyfeasible structural tool for protecting the area subjectto flooding. Because channel alterations can acceleratethe quantity and/or velocity of flow through an area,they may increase the flood impacts on downstream reaches.Enlarging a channel and shortening its course disturbsthe stream regimen and in turn, the existing ecology. Toassure proper channel functioning, snagging and clearingoperations may be necessary. Maintenance costs may behigh unless the channel and stream banks are stable. Useof concrete or stone where necessary for stabilizationincreases construction costs and may be esthetically unde-sirable in some locations.

IV-12

4. High Flow Diversions

High flow diversions typically redirect excess flowsaway from developed areas using natural or artificiallyconstructed bypass channels or conduits. Physicalopportunities for application of flood flow diversionsare limited. Where such measures can be employed, theymay be least objectionable from an environmental standpointif they minimize the destruction of the land-water inter-face in the natural channel. However, in some circum-stances, such diversion may sharply alter downstream flowpatterns and discharges, thereby producing unwanted en-vironmental effects. Where communities are not adequate-ly protected from flooding by diversion, additionalmeasures may be required.

5. Land Treatment Measures

Land treatment measures modify floods by increasing in-filtration and decreasing the amount and rate of runoff.These measures may also be viewed as modifying susceptibil-ity to flood damage. They include vegetative cover,runoff interceptors and diversions, small detention anderosion control structures, terraces, and cropping manage-ment practices (which also serve to modify susceptibilityto flood damage). They are effective in small headwaterareas and function in combination with other measures toameliorate flood conditions in larger watersheds. Inmost respects, land treatment measures produce changes inthe broad range of flooding effects, although they becomeless effective as flood size increases. They can beespecially important in reducing erosion and the resultingamount of sediment and pollutants carried downstream.

6. Onsite Detention Measures

Whereas land treatment measures are appropriate primarilyin non-urban areas, onsite detention measures can providetemporary storage of urban runoff waters, extending theperiod of runoff with the intent of reducing flood peaks.The temporary storage of runoff may also result in in-creased infiltration. These measures may take the formof earthen or paved holding areas integral to or adjacentto the site. A growing number of urban communities are in-cluding onsite detention requirements in land developmentordinances. Effective implementation of these measuresincludes providing for continuous maintenance, determiningthe drainage area to be served by a single structure, anddetermining the effects of detention on the timing of run-off in different segments of the watershed.

IV-1 3

C. Modify the Impact of Flooding on Individualsand the Community

A third strategy for mitigating flood losses consists ofactions designed to assist individuals and communities intheir preparatory, survival, and recovery responses tofloods. Tools include information dissemination andeducation, arrangements for spreading the costs of theloss over time, and purposeful transfer of some of theindividual's loss to the community. The distinctionbetween a reasonable and unreasonable transfer of costsfrom the individual to the community, as described underthe preceeding section on regulations, is a key to flood-plain management.

1. Information and Education

Flood hazard information is a prerequisite to sound flood-plain management. The development of needed technicalinformation and public education, especially by or forthe officials and planners who will have the major taskof interpreting and applying it, are essential in aneffective floodplain management program. Although avail-able in many forms and from many sources, such informationunfortunately is neither of uniform quality nor availablefor all areas. Vital information includes the hydrologyand hydraulics of small, large, and very large floods onthe areas subject to inundation, on the floodplain'sresource attributes, on the role of the floodplain withinits region, and on the potential impact of land usedecisions on expected flooding. From this information,alternative floodplain management approaches can beformulated by the responsible government and privatedecisionmakers. Better information on property at riskand probabilities of various levels of loss can help totranslate the hazard into terms that stimulate appropriatelocal action. Federal, State, and local agencies andprivate consultants are all providing this sort of informa-tion with major emphasis on the more technical aspects ofhydrology and hydraulics provided by the Federal agencies.

2. Flood Insurance

Insurance is a mechanism for spreading the cost of lossesboth over time and over a relatively large number ofsimilarly exposed risks. Until 1969, insurance againstflood loss was generally unavailable. Under the NationalFlood Insurance Program, initiated in 1968 and signifi-cantly expanded in 1973, the Federal government makes

IV-14

flood insurance available for existing property in theflood hazard area in return for enactment and enforcementof floodplain management regulations designed to reducefuture flood losses and regulate new development in thedesignated flood hazard area. Under the 1973 legislation,communities must become eligible under the program withinone year after identification of floodprone areas by theFederal Insurance Administration or risk the denial ofdirect Federal financial assistance for buildings andmobile homes in areas identified as being floodprone. Tobecome eligible for participation in the National FloodInsurance Program, communities must agree to adopt andenforce floodplain management regulations consistent withprogram criteria.

By emphasizing the long-term advantages of wise flood-plain use and by providing a mechanism for widespreadrisk sharing, the National Flood Insurance Program pro-vides persuasive strength and beneficial emphasis tofloodplain management. First layer insurance coverageis made available at subsidized rates to property ownerswhose location decisions and building construction werecompleted before identification of the specific natureand extent of their flood hazard. First and second layerinsurance coverage is made available at actuarial ratesto property owners of new buildings. Insurance may not besold in areas designated under the Coastal Barrier ResourcesAct. Specific information is provided to potentialowners of floodprone properties about the economic costsof locational decisions, and thus serve to discourageunwise construction in hazardous floodplain areas. Theprogram's floodplain managment provisions help reduceflood losses and the dependency upon public support andshould make continuation of its insurance features manageablethrough cooperating private insurers.

3. Tax Adjustments

Tax adjustments at the Federal, State, or local levelcan play an important role both in influencing decisionsabout floodplain occupancy and in providing relief toindividuals. Tax provisions can be used to encourageappropriate use and discourage inappropriate use. It ishighly important that the tax structure recognize theregulatory aspects of the program so that the latter arereinforced; e.g., low density use achieved by regulationscan be supported by low tax for such use. Amortizationprovisions can be applied to nonconforming uses. Financialrelief can be found in provisions for claiming losses inFederal and State income taxes and through special allow-ances on real estate taxes following a flood.

IV-15

4. Flood Emergency Measures

Preparation for floods and flood-fighting plans, includingcontingency and emergency floodproofing, can be completedin anticipation of flooding for areas where flood warningtime permits these actions. They must be properly inte-grated with emergency evacuation plans of the type men-tioned previously in Section A.3. Temporary earthen dikesare an examples of an emergency measure. Flood fightinghas been effective in helping communities to survive aflood. But opportunities for successful flood fightingare limited by flood characteristics, the physical natureof some flood problem areas, and the large manpower, fiscal,supply, and equipment requirements. It should also berecognized that one of the functions of overall floodplainmanagement is to reduce the need for this type ofemergency action, which at best is stopgap.

5. Postflood Recovery

Like other aspects of floodplain management, postfloodrecovery requires a plan. Public facilities and servicesare restored and aid given to individuals. Aid frompublic and quasi-public agencies is often in the form ofdonations of flood and clothing or grants and loans (whichmay be counterproductive if used to rehabilitate damagedstructures or property located in high hazard areas).Relief may also be in the form of tax adjustments. Althoughrelief does not directly reduce flood losses, it doesreduce the overall loss impact by shortening the periodof disruption and by accelerating the return tonormalcy. Under the provisions of Public Laws 92-234(Flood Disaster Protection Act) and 93-288 (Disaster ReliefAct of 1974), property owners in a flooded community maybe required to purchase and maintain flood insuranceas a condition for obtaining Federal financial assistance.

Accordingly, a Federal interagency agreement providesthat following a presidentially declared disaster, aninteragency hazard mitigation team will assess theflooding situation and recommend ways in which Federalprogram funds should be used to avoid action which willrecreate previous high risk conditions and will takeadvantage of existing long term area and basin plansfor reducing flood losses.

In addition, it is essential that plans for post-floodrecovery recognize opportunities to eliminate submar-ginal development and proceed with reconstruction ina way that will minimize future flood exposure. Whenthere is a presidentially declared flood disaster, an

IV-16

Interagency Flood Hazard Mitigation Team is assignedto prepare a Post-Flood Hazard Mitigation Report.These reports identify opportunities for breakingthe cycle of destruction, reconstruction of structuresat risk, and destruction again. The plans includesuggestions as to how these opportunities can beimplemented. Flood disaster and emergency responseplanning should consider both economic and socialdisruption and inflated construction costs that mayresult from a disaster of significant size.

IV-17

CHAPTER V

FLOODPLAIN NATURAL VALUES, STRATEGIES, AND TOOLS FOR MANAGEMENT

Floodplains, including their land and water ecosystems,have evolved from natural forces over tens of thousandsof years. Yet, after two centuries of our Nation'shistory, the natural values of most of our floodplainshave been significantly altered by human actions and inmany cases degraded or destroyed. Thus, there is anational concern to carefully manage the remaining naturalvalues of floodplains. However, before careful managementcan be undertaken, it is necessary to understand flood-plain natural values, their vulnerability, the two basicstrategies of preservation and restoration, and theavailable management mechanisms and tools.

A. Natural and Beneficial Floodplain Values

Surface waters, their floodplains and their watershedsmust be viewed as parts of one ecological system. Thissystem exists in a state of dynamic equilibrium. If oneof the parts of the system is disturbed, the entiresystem will readjust toward a new equilibrium. This istrue of coastal, river, and lake systems. The geologicaland biological effects of the system's readjustmentstoward its new equilibrium are often felt far from theoriginal site of the distrubance and can last for decades.For this reason, if for no other, floodplain developmentand modification should be viewed with caution and withcareful assessment of the potential adverse impacts onnatural values.

Floodplains in their natural or relatively undisturbedstate provide three broad sets of natural and beneficialresources and hence resource values: (1) water resourcesvalues including natural moderation of floods, waterquality maintenance, and groundwater recharge; (2) livingresources values including large and diverse populationsof plants and animals; and (3) cultural resource valuesincluding historical, archeological, scientific, recrea-tional, and esthetic sites in addition to sites generallyhighly productive for agriculture, aquaculture, andforestry where these uses are compatible with naturalvalues.

1. Water Resources Values

a. Natural Flood Storage and Conveyance.

V-1

The characteristics of the floodplain and of flooding areclosely interdependent. Floods shape floodplain topographyand soils and influence ecology. In turn, the physicalcharacteristics of the floodplain shape flood flows.Except in narrow, steep valleys and areas of coastal bluffs,floodplains provide a broad area to spread out and tempo-rarily store floodwaters. This reduces flood peaks andvelocities and the potential for erosion. In theirnatural vegetated state, floodplains slow the rate atwhich the incoming overland flow reaches the main waterbody. They also accommodate the natural phenomena ofstream meander and beach drifting.

b. Water Quality Maintenance.

Floodplains serve important functions in protecting thephysical, biological, and chemical integrity of water.Water that runs off quickly over the surface, as on abarren floodplain, is capable of carrying with it largeamounts of sediment and debris to the main water body. Avegetated floodplain, however, slows the surface runoff,causing it to drop most of its sediment load on thefloodplain. Vegetation also filters incoming floodwaters.Much of the sediment originating on the land drops out, aswell as some of that scoured from the channel bank andbed. This filtering process may add rich nutrients tothe floodplain soil. However, excess nutrients enteringthe stream in runoff can accelerate eutrophication indownstream lakes and reserviors.

Some of the specific water quality maintenance effectsserved by undisturbed floodplain include:

- Pathogens and toxic substances entering the mainwater body through surface runoff and accompanyingsediments are decreased.

- Burial of biologically suitable sand and gravelstream bottoms by silts and clays is less likely.

- Damaging temperature rises caused by absorptionof radient energy in muddied waters are reduced.

- Dissolved oxygen levels needed for desirable aquaticspecies are enhanced.

- The rate of photosynthesis in the stream is improved.

V-2

Another example of water quality maintenance is thebeneficial shading effect of riparian (streambank)vegetation, which helps to avoid temperature stress onnatural biota.

c. Groundwater Recharge

The natural floodplain has surface conditions favoringlocal ponding and flood detention, plus subsurfaceconditions favoring infiltration and storage. The slow-ing of runoff across the floodplain allows additionaltime for the runoff to infiltrate and recharge availablegroundwater aquifiers, when there is unused storagecapacity. The slowing of runoff provides the additionalbenefit of natural purification of water as local runoffor overbank floodwater infiltrates through the floodplainalluvium. Natural purification comes from filtration, ionexchange, adsorption, absorption, and aerobic and anaerobicbiological action. This value extends into nonflood periodsas groundwater discharge acts to naturally regulate theflow in a river or the level of a pond. In other words,during periods of abundant water, the water can enter thegroundwater system whenever there is available capacityrather than contribute to seasonal flood peaks; duringlow flow periods, the water flows from the higher ground-water system into lower surface waters, so that thefrequency and duration of extremely low flows is reduced.

2. Living Resources and Habitat Values

The Nation's coastal and riverine floodplains support largeand diverse populations of plants and animals. In addition,they provide habitat and critical sources of energy andnutrients for organisms in adjacent and downstream ter-restrial and aquatic ecosystems. The wide variety ofplants and animals supported directly and indirectly byfloodplains constitutes an extremely valuable, renewableresource important to economic welfare, enjoyment, andphysical well-being.

The floodplain is biologically important because it isthe place where land and water meet and the elements ofboth terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems mix. The detritusprovided by headwater woodlands frequently provides themajor source of nutrients and energy that sustain produc-tion in woodland streams. Nutrients and energy thatenter these upstream areas find their way far downstreaminto larger rivers and lake via the aquatic food chain.Shading of the stream by floodplain vegetation moderates

V-3

water temperatures; roots and fallen trees provide instreamhabitat, and near stream vegetation filters runoff, re-moving harmful sediments and buffering pollutants, tofurther enhance instream environments.

Coastal floodplains are widely recognized for their valueto many estuarine and marine fisheries. Here also flood-plains, both riverine and coastal, provide much of thenutrients and energy for aquatic estuarine environments.Estuarine wetlands serve as breeding, nursery, and feedinggrounds for estuarine and marine fisheries, and coastalfloodplains are extremely important to waterfowl, fur-bearers, and other wildlife species.

It is apparent from the foregoing discussion that flood-plain wetlands and other riparian areas play an extremelyimportant role in maintaining fish and wildlife populationsin adjacent uplands and in supplying energy and nutrientsto riverine, lacustrine, and estruarine systems. Yet, itis probably reasonable to assume that from 70 to 90percent of all natural floodplain habitats have beenextensively altered. To protect those remaining willrequire the best efforts of all involved in floodplainplanning and management.

3. Cultural Resources Values

Floodplains contain cultural resources important to theNation and to individual localities. Native Americansettlements and early cities located along the coasts andrivers in order to have access to water supply, wastedisposal, water transportation, and transshipment.Consequently, floodplains include most of the Nation'searliest archeological and historical sites. In additionto their historical richness, floodplains may containinvaluable resources for scientific research. For example,where floodplains contain unique ecological habitats, theymake excellent areas for scientific study. The bedrockgeology of the area may also be exposed in the floodplain.The bedrock geology of the area may also be exposed in thefloodplain. Floodplains may provide open space communityresources. In urban communities they may provide greenbelt areas to break urban develoment monotony, absorbnoise, clean the air, and lower temperatures. Floodplainparks can also serve as nature study centers and labora-tories for outdoor learning experiences.

Because of their scenic value and locational and otherbeneficial characteristics, some of which are unique,floodplains are attractive for recreation. Water-oriented

V-4

sports, boating, and swimming can be based in a naturalfloodplain park which also may be suitable for hiking andcamping. Floodplain wildlife resources can be managed forobservation as well as for recreational hunting andfishing. Finally, natural floodplains are valued asconstituents of the "wilderness experience" important inthe American culture.

It should be noted that most of the natural water, plantand animal, and cultural values of floodplains discussedabove do not benefit just one specific site. The naturalvalue benefits extend throughout the river system orcoast, affecting many citizens and communities. Further,most of these primary benefits have secondary benefitsconnected with them.

Floodplains also provide an excellent resource base foragricultural, aquacultural, and forest production.However, the flood risk must be considered for these usesand operations adjusted accordingly. The natural processesof sediment transport and deposition tend to replenishfloodplain soils with nutrients. Agricultural operationsare made easier by gently rolling terrain, and surfaceand groundwater supplies are more readily available.Aquacultural operations have grown into a viable industryproducing a wide variety of aquatic crops. Bottomlandhardwoods and associated species, which flourish in closeproximity to water, are important to the timber industryand the overall economy of the country. Thus, soundmanagement of agricultural, aquacultural and forestresources in the floodplain is essential.

B. Vulnerability of Natural Floodplain Values

Natural system processes are not constant. Streams,lakes, and oceans flood adjacent lands. Earthquakesalter land forms and drainage. Much thinking aboutresource values, specifically floodplain resources,however, fails to recognize the effects of these naturalinterruptions, but rather is concerned with interveningrelatively stable periods when the long-term effects ofphysical processes tend toward equilibrium and the bio-logical processes of recovery.

Human intervention in the floodplains can be equated inpart to these extremes of nature, in that it can lead tomajor disruptions, largely accelerations, of natural pro-cesses. But whereas recovery ordinarily proceeds followingnatural interruptions, recovery is not likely after humaninterventions. The major difference is that the changes

V-5

brought about by human intrusions and their accompanyingworks remove conditions under which natural processes cancontinue. Natural spaces occupied by buildings, roads,farmlands, and various facilities are altered in at leasta semipermanent way.

Construction projects on the floodplains cause anacceleration in erosion, as though the floodplains weresubjected to large floods and waters were largely cut offthereafter in the manner of a prolonged drought. Thetrend toward equilibrium between erosion and depositionerosion and deposition in the stream system and from thevalley slopes is no longer possible. In the worst case,poisons not found in nature are introduced, but mosteffects of pollution are untimely contributions ofconcentrated pathogens, chemicals, and heat.

Nature's extremes are as much a part of its processas are the period of adjustment in between. It is notpossible nor desirable from the standpoint of naturalfloodplain values to eliminate these extremes. It isonly where man has invested in the development offloodplain resources that these extremes of naturebecome important. However, human occupancy can bemanaged to minimize the effects of natural disruptionsand even to help nature heal the wounds of natural aswell as manmade disruptions. The following descriptionsof resource vulnerability should be viewed in thiscontext.

1. Water Resources

Three general kinds of adverse outcomes from developmentand modification of natural floodplains bear on thecondition or degree of resource vulnerability: (1)increased runoff generally accompanies any activityinvolving widespread clearing (with or without compaction),wetlands destruction, dune removal, paving, and roofing;(2) runoff is blocked or groundwater movement is interrupt-ed; and (3) pollution loadings on the resources areincreased.

Actions that accelerate runoff reduce the amount of waterentering the ground unless the ground is already saturated.Frequently, these actions may cause increases in floodpeaks, in stream erosion, and in the sediment loading ofreceiving waters. During warmer months, when watertemperature may be critical to oxygen levels, runofftemperatures are raised in flowing over pavement or roofs.Also, the cleansing action of vegetation on runoff isdiminished in proportion to these accelerating factors.

V-6

Blocked runoff or interrupted groundwater flow may resultfrom deep foundations, buildings, road and other fills,dikes, and dams. To the extent that these structuresimpede stream flow, they can raise floodwater profiles.If structures retard runoff, they contribute to saturatedconditions and 'closed' ponding, as well as increasedtemperatures and pollution loadings. If structures extenddeeply into floodplain alluvium, intentionally or not, theycan cut off the movement of groundwater (some are intendedto do so) and hence interfere with both groundwater rechargeand discharge of groundwater into streams or other waterbodies. If structures intercept the shorezone, theyinterfere with the distribution of sediment, which is soimportant to natural shore development.

Increased pollution loadings further degrade the surfacewater ecosystem. Fertilizers, chemical and petroleum spills,and leached products of waste disposal areas can go directlyinto receiving waters either in solution or carried onsediments. They concentrate in ponds and combine withhigher temperatures and lowered photopenetration to burdenthe dissolved oxygen in receiving waters.

2. Living Resources

Development and modification of the floodplain have directimpacts on living resources. In addition to problemsrelated to sedimentation, which may bury food sources andspawning areas; and pollution, which can poison and depriveliving resources of oxygen; human use and development canhave the following effects. First, human actions typicallyremove cover, and hence shelter, for game. Second, barriersto movement of animals are inserted between their preferredhabitat and water bodies. Third, food sources are eliminated.Some of these impacts may not be localized, but may extendwell beyond the site of a development actions. This is sobecause floodplain wetlands are major sources of flood andbreeding habitat for both saltwater and freshwater fish andfor many types of wildlife.

3. Cultural Resources

The adverse impacts of floodplain development and modifica-tion on values associated with cultural resources haveoften been overlooked. Accelerated runoff, blocked runoff,interrupted groundwater flow, and increased pollutionloadings frequently destroy or degrade educational sites(historical, archeological and scientific) and estheticqualities (urban open space and sound absorption). Pooragricultural, aquacultural, and forestry land use practices

V-7

can be just as destructive of floodplain values as the moreobvious structural forms of development.

C. Strategies for Managing Floodplain Natural Values

In some cases, the floodplain is the only practicablelocation for a proposed activity, as in the case of waterintakes and outlets, stream gauging stations, port facil-ities, and the like.

If such a location is necessary, care should be taken tobuild, wherever possible, in an area where development hasalready taken place, so that the remaining natural andbeneficial floodplain values will be disrupted as littleas possible.

Where location in the floodplain is the only practicablealternative, care must be taken to identify both thebeneficial and the adverse impacts to existing natural andbeneficial floodplain values and to design or modify theaction to avoid or minimize potential harm to or within thefloodplain. A floodplain management goal is to minimizethe adverse environmental impacts on natural floodplainvalues, as well as to minimize potential risk to the propos-ed action itself and to lives and property.

1. Restoration of Natural Values

Restoration, as a strategy for protection of natural andbeneficial floodplain values, focuses on conditions existingas a result of prior actions. This strategy calls forproposed actions to provide reestablishment of a setting orenvironment in which these values can again operate. Wherefloodplain values have been degraded by past activities,identification and evaluation of the diminished or lostvalues should be made so that remedial actions may be takento restore those values.

2. Preservation of Natural Values

The preservation strategy focuses on the immediate impactsof the proposed floodplain actions. This strategy involvesprevention of alteration to the natural and beneficialfloodplain values or maintenance of the floodplain environ-ment as close to its natural state as possible using allpracticable means. This strategy is most effectivelyapplied to floodplains showing little or no previous disrup-tion by man, but may be appropriate for other floodplains.The best strategy for preserving and protecting the remain-ing natural values of floodplains is avoidance i.e., develop-ing alternative measures or locations.

V-8

D. Tools for Managing Floodplain Natural Values

Where it is not practicable to avoid actions affectingfloodplains, a selection of tools is available to minimizeenvironmental harm and to carry out the strategies torestore and preserve natural floodplain values. Thesetools and their application may not be as well documentedor understood as those for flood loss reduction, butthey should be used to support one another and may beintegrated with flood loss reduction tools. Detaileddescription of the first four of the following tools isprovided in Chapter IV and not repeated here.

1. Floodplain, Wetland and Coastal Barrier Resource Regulations

Many State and local regulations for floodplains and forflood hazard areas -- zoning, subdivision regulations,building codes, housing codes, sanitary and wellcodes -- already contain provisions that indirectlypreserve floodplain values. In other instances provisionsfor preservation and restoration of floodplain valuesmay be added to such regulations. (See pages IV-4-6).

2. Development and Redevelopment Policies

All levels of government can incorporate policies toprotect floodplain values in the design and locationof utilities and services in open space acquisitionand easement, and in redevelopment or permanentevacuation. (See pages IV-7-9).

3. Information and Education

The development of needed technical information andpublic education is essential to effective planning,public input, and decisions affecting floodplainvalues. (See page IV-14).

4. Tax Adjustments

All levels of government can seek opportunities toprovide positive incentives for the preservation andrestoration of floodplain values. (See pages IV-15, 16).

5. Administrative Measures

All levels of government can provide support for therestoration and preservation of floodplain values by

V-9

adopting the following administrative measures whereagency programs and authority permit:

a. Restrictions or conditions in contract, grants,loans, permits, and licenses;

b. Applications of appropriate encumbrances during landconveyance;

c. Delegation of responsibility for floodplainactivities to a specific office with sufficientauthority to play an active leadership role bothwithin and outside the agency;

d. Systematic review of existing agency programs toidentify opportunities for floodplain value pre-servation and restoration;

e. Surveys of stream and coastal reaches and sites toidentify opportunities for floodplain preservationand restoration; and

f. Cordination within and among agencies to implementunified floodplain management efforts.

E. Examples of Floodplain Natural Values Management

Application of the tools for managing floodplain naturalvalues should be considered for all stages in a proposedaction -- planning, design construction, operationand maintenance -- and for each of the floodplainvalues identified under Section V-A. Some examplesof practices to maintain floodplain naturalvalues follow:

1. Natural Flood Storage and Conveyance

--Minimize floodplain fills and other actions thatrequire fills such as construction of dwellings,factories, highways, etc.

--Require that structures and facilities on wetlandsprovide for adequate flow circulation.

--Use minimum grading requirements and save as muchof the site from compaction as possible.

--Relocate nonconforming structures and facilitiesoutside of the floodplain.

--Return site to natural contours.

V-10

--Preserve free natural drainage when designing andconstructing bridges, roads, fills and large built-upcenters.

--Prevent intrusion on and destruction of wetland,beach, and estuarine ecosystems, and restore damageddunes and vegetation.

2. Water Quality Maintenance

--Maintain wetland and floodplain vegetation buffersto reduce sedimentation and delivery of chemicalpollutants to the water body.

-- Support agricultural practices that minimizenutrient flows into water bodies.

-- Control urban runoff, other storm water, and pointand nonpoint discharges of pollutants.

-- Support methods used for grading, filling, soilremoval, and replacement, etc. to minimize erosionand sedimentation during construction.

-- Restrict the location of potential pathogenic andtoxic sources on the floodplain, such as sanitaryland fills and septic tanks, heavy metal wastes, etc.

3. Groundwater Recharge

-- Require the use of previous surfaces where practi-cable.

-- Design construction projects for runoff detention.

-- Dispose of spoils and waste materials so as not tocontaminate ground or surface water or significantlychange land contours.

4. Living Resources

-- Identify and protect wildlife habitat and othervital ecologically sensitive areas from disruption.

-- Require topsoil protection programs during con-struction.

-- Restrict wetland drainage and channelization.

-- Reestablish damaged floodplain ecosystems.

-- Minimize tree cutting and other vegetation removal.

V-l1

-- Design floodgates and seawalls to allow naturaltidal activity and estuarine flow.

5. Cultural Resources

-- Provide public access to and along the waterfrontfor recreation, scientific study, educational in-struction, etc.

-- Locate and preserve from harm historical andcultural resources; consult with appropriategovernmental agencies or private groups.

6. Agricultural Resources

-- Minimize soil erosion on cropped areas withinfloodplains.

-- Control use of pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizer.

-- Limit the size of fields and promote fence rows,shelter belts, and stripcropping for improvedwildlife habitat.

-- Strengthen water bank and soil bank type programsin a manner consistent with alternate demands forthe use of agricultural land.

-- Minimize irrigation return flows and excessiveapplications of water.

-- Eliminate feedlot type operations.

-- Discourage new agricultural production requiringuse of drainage.

-- Retain agricultural activity on highly productivesoils where flood risks is compatible with the value

of crops grown.

7. Aquacultural Resources

-- Construct impoundments in a manner that minimuzesalteration in natural drainage and flood flow.Existing natural impoundments such as oxbow lakesand sloughs may be used with proper management.

-- Limit the use of exotic species, both plant andanimal, to those organisms already common to thearea or those known not to compete unfavorably withexisting natural populations.

V-12

--Discourage mechanized operations causing adverseimpacts. Machinery such as dredges, weeders, andlarge-scale harvesting equipment may lead toenvironmental problems such as sediment loadingin adjacent watercourses.

--Use extreme caution in the disposal of animal waste.

8. Forestry Resources

--Control the practice of clear-cutting, dependingupon the species harvested, topography, and location.

--Complement State law governing other aspects ofharvest operations; proximity to watercourses,limits on roadbuilding, equipment intrusions, etc.

--Include fire management in any overall managementplans. Selective burning may reduce theprobability of major destructive fires.

--Require erosion control plans on all timber allot-ments, roads, and skidways.

V-13

CHAPTER VI

DEVELOPMENT OF THE FEDERAL CONCERN

Federal concern with floodplain management has evolvedfrom the coalescence of two kinds of activity, eachmarked by a major catalytic action during the 1960's.The 1966 report of the Task Force on Federal Flood ControlPolicy, published as House Document 465, was the catalystfor coordinated flood loss reduction efforts. 3/ TheNational Environmental Policy Act (Public Law 91-190)prompted efforts to restore and preserve natural floodplainvalues. These two floodplain management objectives werebrought together by the 1977 Executive Order, 11988Floodplain Management. Since the Order was issued,several administrative and legislative actions havefurther advanced the development of a unified nationalprogram. It is the purpose of this chapter to discussFederal activity and provide an understanding of thecurrent Federal concern for floodplain management.

A. Flood Loss Reduction Activities

Federal floodplain managment programs prior to 1966 aresummarized, followed by discussion of three landlandmarkactions toward a coordinated approach: publication ofHouse Document 465; passage of the National Flood InsuranceAct, as amended, and associated legislation; and promulgationof the Water Resources Council's Principles and Standardsfor Planning Water and Related Land Resources (1973).

1. Flood Control Programs Prior to 1966

Congressional acceptance of limited Federal responsi-bility for flood control began in 1927 following majorfloods on the Mississippi River. It subsequently expandedgeographically to nationwide scope and functionally toinclude coastal hurricane flooding. Earlier, in 1890,Congress had accepted Federal responsibility for floodforecasting and warning. Beginning with the Flood ControlAct of 1936, the Congress accepted national responsibility,and the Corps of Engineeers was assigned responsibilityfor flood control engineering works and later for floodplain

3/ Task Force on Federal Flood Control Policy.A Unified National Program for Managing Flood Losses,House Document 465, 89th Congress, 2nd Session, U.S.Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 1966.

VI-1

information services. In the early 1930's, Congresscreated the Tennessee Valley Authority as a regionalresource development agency. Flood control, through theconstruction of dams and reservoirs, was included amongits duties. In the late 1930's, Congress expanded Bureauof Reclamation authority to include building reservoirsfor flood control purposes. In the 1940's, the Congressauthorized the Department of Agriculture to construct 11specifically authorized projects for flood control, andin the 1950's the department was authorized to carry outa nationwide program for upstream watershed projects.

Despite these programs and rapidly rising Federal expendi-tures for-flood control, flood losses continued to riserapidly. Federal programs continued to rely predominantlyon engineering works for modifying floods, although TheTennessee Valley Authority had initiated a local floodplainmanagement assistance program in the early 1950's and the1960 Flood Control Act had authorized the Corps of Engineersto provide States and localities with information andtechnical assistance needed to regulate floodplain lands.Thus it was, that in its review of Federal programs, theTask Force on Federal Flood Control Policy in 1966 urgeda policy that emphasized modification of susceptibilityto flooding and of the impacts of flooding.

2. House Document 465 - The Foundation

The Presidential Task Force whose recommendations werereported in House Document 465, A Unified National Programfor Managing Flood Losses, went a long way toward identi-fying problems and needs with regard to existing Federalprograms and their impact at the State and local levels.The associated Executive Order 11296, issued in August1966, directed Federal agencies to evaluate the floodhazard before funding construction projects or acquiringor disposing of Federal property. Because of these twodocuments, progress has been made in alleviating hazards,but other problems identified by the Task Force remain.Further, the Executive Order became dated by enactmentof legislation such as the National Flood InsuranceAct. These shortcomings were cited in a 1975 GeneralAccounting Office report. 4/

4/ General Accounting Office. "National Attemptsto Reduce Losses From Floods by Planning for andControlling the Uses of Flood-Prone Lands," Washington,D.C. March, 1975.

VI-2

The Task Force report suggested the need for new planningattitudes and a unified approach for floodplain managment,but it stopped short of describing such a framework.Lack of a framework was judged at least partly responsiblefor the problems related to agency indecision and nonuni-form Federal practices. Chapter III of this reportattempts to lay out a conceptual framework.

The "Summary of Findings and Recommendations" of HouseDocument 465 is reproduced in Exhibit 1. Sixteen specificrecommendations were directed toward achieving fivegoals: "To improve the basic knowledge about floodhazard; To coordinate and plan new developments on thefloodplain; To provide technical services to managers offloodplain property; To move toward a practical nationalprogram for flood insurance; To adjust flood control policyto sound criteria and changing needs." The current statusof each recommendation is shown in the right hand columnand catagorized as: (A) largely implemented, (B) someprogress (often legislated but not implemented), and (C)little or no accomplishment.

Four specific recommendations address the goal of improvingour basic knowledge about floods and flood hazards. Thefirst recommendation -- define and outline the floodhazard -- has led to a Federal expenditure of almost $700million which has resulted in publication of flood hazardmaps for more than 20,000 communities of which more than7,500 have detailed flood hazard studies. The secondrecommendation -- determination of flood frequencies -- hasled to Federal agency adoption of a uniform technique fordetermining flood flow frequencies and application of thetechnique in flood hazard studies. The third recommenda-tion -- establish a national program for collecting moreuseful flood damage data -- has been the object of frequentdiscussion but little action and the recommendationremains valid today. The fourth recommendation -- establisha program for research on floodplain occupance and urbanhydrology -- has been met in part by several nationallevel efforts.

Four specific recommendations address the goal of im-proving coordination and planning for new floodplaindevelopment. The first of these recommendations -- specifycriteria for using flood information and encourage Statecoordination of floodplain regulation -- .has been met byadoption of the 100 year base flood standard and use ofthis standard by all states in the regulation and manage-ment of floodplains. The second recommendation -- assurethat State and local planning take proper account of flood

VI-3

Exhibit 1

House Document 465

I. SUMMARY OP FINDINGS AND ROMiMZDA=ONB

The Nation needs a broader and more unified national program formanaging flood losses. Flood protection has been immensely helpfulin many parts of the country-and must be continued. Beyond thisadditional tools and integrated policies are required to promote soundand economic development of the flood plains.

Despite substantial efforts, flood losses are mounting and uneco-nomic uses of the Nation's flood plains are inadvertently encouraged.The country is faced with a continuing sequence of losses, protectionand more losses. While flood protection of existing property shouldreceive public support, supplemental measures should assume thatfuture developments in the flood plains yield benefits .in excess of theircosts to the INation. This would require a new set of initiatives byestablished Federal agencies with the aid of State agencies to stimu-late and support sound planning at the local government and citizenlevel.

Statutory Federal policy dealing with cost sharing, land acquisition,and loan authority would need to.be modified, bat most of the measureswould be taken by the Corps of Engineers, the Department of Agrinculture, the Department of:-Housing and Urban Development, thtGeological Survey, and the Environmental Science Services .&dmii-Pistration under existing authority. Modest additional expendituresover the next 10 years and reorientation of Government effortwouldgreatly reduce flood losses and demands for Federal relief.

Thp specific actions recommended by the task force- may be sum-marized as follows:To improve basic knowledge aboutflood hazard

1. A three-stage program of delimiting hazards should be initiatedby the Corps of Engineers, the Geological Surrey, and other competentagencies.

2. A uniform technique of determining flood, frequency should be'developed by a panel of the Water Resources Council.

3. A new national program for collecting more useful flood damagedata should be launched by the interested agencies, including Acontinuing record and special appraisals in census years. -

4. Research on flood plain occupance and urban hydrology shouldbe sponsored by the Department of Housing and Urban Development,the Department of Agriculture, and the Geological Survey.To coordinate and plan new developments on te ltood plain

5. The Federal Water Resources Council should specify criteria forusing flood information and should encourage State agencies to dealwith coordination of flood plain planning, and with flood plain regula-tion.

Category ofProgress

A

A

C

B

B

VI-4

Category ofProgress

6. Under the following Federal programs steps should be taken toassure that State and Tocal planning takes proper and consistent Baccount of flood hazard:

Federal mortagage insuranceComprehensive local planning assistanceUrban transport planningRecreational open space and development planningUrban open space acquisitionUrban renewalSewer and water facilities(Many of the necessary coordinating actions were accomplished

during final preparation of this report.)7. Action should be taken by the Office of Emergency Planning,

the Small Business Administration, and the Treasury Departmentand other agencies to support consideration of relocation and flood- Bproofing as alternatives to repetitive reconstruction.

8. An Executive order should be issued directing Federal agenciesto consider flood hazard in locating new Federal installations and in Adisposing of Federal land.To promide technical services to managers offlood plain property

9. Programs to collect, prepare, and disseminate information andto provide limited assistance and advice on alternate methods of re-ducing flood losses, including flood plain regulation and floodproofing,should be undertaken by the Corps of Engineers in close coordination Awith the Department of Rouse and Urban Development, and theDepartment of Agriculture.

1o. An improved national system for flood forecasting should bedeveloped by the Environmental Science Services Administration as Bpart of a disaster warning service.To move toward a practical national program forflood insurance

11. A five-stage study of the feasibility of insurance under variousconditions should be carried forward by the Department of Housing Aand Urban Development.To adjust Federal flood control policy to sound criteria and changing

needs12. Survey authorization procedure and instructions should be A

broadened in concept.13. Cost-sharing requirements for federally assisted Rrojects should

be modified to provide more suitable contributions by State and local Bgroups.

14. Flood project benefits should be reported in the future so as todistinguish protection of existing improvements from development of Anest.- property.

15. Authority should be given by the Congress to include land Bacquisition as a part of flood control plans.

16. Loan authority for local contributions to flood control projectsshould be broadened bv the Congress. B

VI-5

hazard -- has been met in large measure through the require-ments of the National Flood Insurance Act and the DisasterRelief Act of 1974. The third recommendation -- supportconsideration of relocation and floodproofing as alternativesto repetitive construction -- has been met in part by therequirements of the National Flood Insurance Program, bythe Federal postflood hazard mitigation team program,and by limitations placed on the amount of casualtylosses that may be claimed under Federal income taxdeductions. The fourth recommendation -- issue a Federalexecutive order directing Federal agencies to considerflood hazard -- has led directly to a 1966 order which wassuperceded and strengthened by a 1977 order.

Two recommendations address the goal of providing technicalservices to managers of floodplain property. The firstrecommendation -- establish programs to disseminate infor-mation, provide technical assistance and advice on altern-ative methods for reducing losses -- has been met throughnew and strengthened Federal and State programs to providespecial studies and technical assistance and by publicationof numerous handbooks and guidance documents (Appendix C).The second recommendation -- improvement of a nationalflood forecasting system -- has been met in part by improveddata collection and communication systems and flood fore-casting models.

A single recommendation addresses the goal of movingtoward a practical national program for flood insuranceby calling for an insurance feasibility study. Thisrecommendation resulted in a feasibility study which inturn led to the passage of the National Flood InsuranceAct resulting in the participation of 17,500 communitiesand almost 2 million insured properties.

Five recommendatons address the goal of adjusting Federalflood control policy to sound criteria and changingneeds. The first recommendation -- broaden Federal floodcontrol authority -- has been met in part by administrativeprocedures requiring evaluation of alternative plans in-cluding nonstructural measures. The second recommendation-- modify Federal cost sharing requirements -- is the subjectof extensive studies, and although a trend toward increasednon-Federal cost sharing has been established, basicdifferences remain to be resolved. The third recommenda-tion -- report flood control benefits in the future distinctfrom benefits to existing property -- has been met in partby administrative procedures specifying benefit classes.

VI-6

The fourth recommendation -- give authority to includeland acquisition as part of Federal flood control plans --has been met in part through individual project authorizations and through authority in the National Flood InsuranceAct to permit purchase of insured, severely damagedproperties. The fifth recommendation -- broaden the loanauthority to allow local contributions to flood controlprojects -- has been partially addressed by existinglegislation and by administrative initiatives taken toincrease local contributions.

Viewed 20 years later, the Task Force report must beregarded as a powerful catalyst and benchmark for majoradvances in the Nation's efforts to reduce flood losses.Because of the Task Force Report and subsequent mitigatingactions, the intensive development of the Nation's flood-plains since 1965 has been accompanied by a growingnumber of flood loss mitigating actions.

3. The National Flood Insurance Program - A ManagementApproach Focused on Long-Term Flood Loss Reduction

A direct response to several Task Force recommendationsis found in the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968(Public Law 90-448), as amended, and the closely relatedFlood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-234),as amended.

The National Flood Insurance Program was designed toreduce future flood losses through State and local flood-plain management efforts and to transfer the costs ofresidual flood losses from the general taxpayer to thefloodplain occupant. This program represented a majorshift in strategy from previous structural flood controland disaster relief efforts.

Even in the early stages of the National Flood InsuranceProgram, Congress had recognized the need for flood riskstudies to provide data upon which local floodplain manage-ment and actuarial insurance rates would be based. The1968 Act authorized a program of risk studies to becompleted over a 15-year period following passage of theAct.

In 1983, when this 15-year period was to expire, many riskstudies had yet to be conducted due to budget limitationsduring that period. As a result, the Federal EmergencyManagement Agency requested Congress to extend thisperiod. In 1983, Congress passed Public Law 98-181 which

VI-7

extended authorization for flood risk studies untilSeptember 30, 1985, and also required the Agency to submitto Congress, by September 30, 1984, a plan for bringingall remaining unstudied communities into full programstatus. The plan submitted incorporates a 1991 completiondate.

The National Flood Insurance Program consists of twophases, emergency and regular programs. In the emergencyprogram, insurance coverage may be provided at non-actuarial, federally subsidized rates in limited amountsduring the period prior to completion of a community'sflood risk study. To participate in the emergency program,communities are required to adopt and enforce onlyminimal floodplain management standards.

Although only minimal measures are required under theinitial phase of the program -- i.e., the EmergencyProgram -- these measures are more than most communitieshave required. They are a start in the right direction.Once the definitive limits of the area that would beinundated by the flood with a one-percent chance of beingexceeded during any given year and elevations for such aflood have been provided, the participating communitymust enact and enforce more specific measures to reducethe potential for flood losses. It is expected that theEmergency Program will be terminated in the next few years.

When local flood risk studies are completed, communitiesenter the regular program, at which time risk premium(actuarial) rates are charged for all new construction.In exchange for the increased amounts of insurance eligi-bility under the regular program, communities enact com-prehensive floodplain management ordinances which arecommensurate with the flood risk. Floodplain manage-ment and technical assistance services are provided to helpprogram communities establish and implement floodplainmanagement programs consistent with the conceptual frame-work presented in Chapter III.

Where high hazard areas have been delineated and riskzones have been identified, special criteria must beimplemented. High hazard areas include riverine flood-ways and coastal high hazard areas. Where floodway dataare provided, the community is required to (1) select andadopt floodway boundaries as encroachment limits and (2)prohibit future encroachments within the floodway thatwould result in any further increase in flood levels. Incoastal high hazard areas, structures must be built to

VI-8

withstand storm waves and currents and hurricane wavewash. These floodplain management requirements areprimarily regulatory, as opposed to structural, dealingas they do with land use, public facilities, floodproofing,and construction measures.

Through financial and technical assistance the FederalEmergency Management Agency has enabled most States toenhance their capability to implement sound floodplainmanagement programs; thus, local communities are able toreceive guidance from the States on ways to adopt andenforce sound floodplain management programs includingthe insurance program's regulatory provisions.

In Section 2(a)(5) of the Flood Disaster Protection Actof 1973 (Public Law 93-234), the Congress found that "theNation cannot afford the tragic losses of life causedannually by flood occurrences, not the increasing lossesof property suffered by flood victims, most of whom arestill inadequately compensated despite the provision ofcostly disaster relief benefits." Section 102(a) of theAct requires the purchase of flood insurance in communitieswhere such insurance is available in connection with anyform of Federal "financial assistance" for acquisition orconstruction located in identified special flood hazardareas. Section 102(b) of The Flood Disaster ProtectionAct of 1973 requires purchase of flood insurance whenproperty located in the floodplain is to be secured by aconventional mortgage from a federally related lender.In effect, Federal financial assistance includes anyFHA-insured or VA-guaranteed loan as well as loanssecured by a federally insured bank, savings institution,or credit union for acquisition of improved land for amobile home, for building construction, or for any improvedreal property in the floodplain -- further defined inPublic Law 93-234, Section (3)(a)(4)1. Federal financialassistance is broadly defined as any form of loan, grant,guaranty, insurance, payment, rebate, subsidy, disasterassistance loan or grant, or any form of direct or indirectFederal assistance other than general or special revenuesharing or formula grants made to States. The constructionreferred to is essentially confined to walled and roofedbuildings affixed to a permanent site, including mobilehomes.

Communities identified by the Director of the FederalEmergency Management Agency as flood prone communitieshave a one-year period in which to enroll in the NationalFlood Insurance Program or thereafter be denied direct

VI-9

Federal financial assistance for acquisition or construc-tion purposes in identified flood hazard areas (Section202 of Public Law 92-234).

The provisions of Section 102 mandating the purchase ofinsurance and Section 202 requiring the participation offloodprone communities apply only to the identified areasof special flood hazards in those communites. The sameis true for the floodplain management measures requiredby Sectio 1305(c)(2) of Public Law 93-234. Insurance isavailable to all insurable structures within the entirecommunity, and the floodplain management regulationsapply only to the areas of special flood hazard but maybe applied to all floodplains in the community.

In effect, therefore, except for a few communities whichchose to risk the denial of certain Federal financialassistance in their flood hazard areas and those whoseflood problems have not yet been called to the agency'sattention, most of the Nation's floodprone communitieshave been notified and encouraged to enroll in theNational Flood Insurance Program with its mandatory re-quirements for effective floodplain management. Of theapproximately 20,000 identified flood-prone communities,over 17,500 are enrolled in the National Flood InsuranceProgram.

Finally, the insurance aspect of the program reinforcesflood loss reduction in at least three ways:

(1) Once the flood insurance rate making study has beenprepared, actuarial rates for new constructionshould indicate to prospective builders and buyersthe extent of the hazard that they face, and thecost of insurance should discourage building inhazardous areas or at vulnerable elevations.Obviously, rate levels can influence buildingand buying decisions.

(2) The requirement that the structures which havebeen substantially damaged, if rebuilt, must beelevated or floodproofed and can be insured onlyat full actuarial rates may discourage both thenonconforming uses of floodplains not otherwiseforbidden by ordinance and the repair and recon-struction of structures exposed to flood damage.

(3) The use of Section 1362 of the Act to acquirestructures covered by flood insurance, if substan-tially or repetitively flood damaged, has become animportant floodplain management tool.

VI-lo

4. Principles and Guidelines for Planning Water andRelated Land Resources - A Planning Approach Focused onFederal Participation in Water Reslurces Programs.

The Economic and Environmental Principles and Guidelinesfor Water and Related Land Resources for ImplementationStudies guide the principal Federal water resourcesagencies in the formulation and evaluation of Federal andfederally assisted water resources projects. Issued bythe Chairman of the U.S. Water Resources Council on March10, 1983, these guidelines provide for standardization ofplanning methods and procedures while allowing considerableflexibility regarding the application of the procedures andthe decision making processes. They provide for consid-deration of economic, environmental, regional, and socialconcerns and effects of proposed actions. The Federalobjective for water resources projects as stated in theguidelines is to contribute to national economic developmentconsistent with protecting the Nation's environment,pursuant to national environmental statutes, applicableexecutive orders, and other Federal planning requirements.

Application of the Principles and Guidelines provides forconsistent and critical evaluation of floodplain managementmeasures, as well as other alternatives for reducing floodhazard and damages. Federal water resources planning isto be responsive to State, local, and national as well asinternational concerns. Accordingly, State and localparticipation is to be encouraged in all aspects of waterresources planning. The plan that recommends Federalaction is to be the plan that achieves the Federal objectiveunless the Secretary of a Department or head of an inde-pendent agency grants an exception. Exceptions may begranted when there are overriding reasons for recommendinganother plan, based on other Federal, State, local, orinternational concerns. In addition to evaluation ofexisting activities, available services, and other attri-butes of the floodplain, the Principles and Guidelinesdeclare that the potential of the floodplain for naturaland beneficial values, including open space, recreation,wildlife, natural flood storage, and wetlands should berecognized and displayed in the valuation of alternatives.

Nonstructural alternatives are encouraged where theytend to achieve most effectively the Federal objectivefor water resource projects stated above. Section 73 ofthe Water Resources Development Act of 1974 (Public Law93-251) provides for cost sharing for nonstructural aswell as structural flood damage reduction measures.

VI-ll

Similarly, the implementation of the authority to purchasehigh risk, substantially damaged properties after aflood, as provided under Section 1362 of the NationalFlood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, can contributeto the appropriate consideration of nonstructuralalternatives.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Soil ConservationService and other Federal agencies, through their variousprograms have awakened the public to the alternative ofimplementing nonstructural flood control measures. A fewprojects have been approved incorporating nonstructuralmeasures such as floodproofing, relocating of damageableproperties and flood warning systems. In other caseswhere communities discovered other options were available,they have sought and received block grants to permanentlyevacuate flood prone areas. Others have received grantsand/or special financing to install flood warning systemsand to assist home and business owners to floodprooftheir structures.

B. Natural Floodplain Values

Federal concern for natural floodplain values developedincrementally from a series of essential single-purposepublic laws into a broad national policy objective ofenvironmental quality set forth in the National Environ-mental Policy Act of 1969. This act is supported by aprocedural requirement to assess the environmental impactsof all proposed Federal actions. The Council on Environ-mental Quality was established to set and monitor environ-mental policy. The Environmental Protection Agency wasestablished to monitor and regulate individual componentsof environmental quality. More recently, Presidentialmessages in 1977 and 1978 focused attention on the needto protect the natural values of the Nation's floodplainsand associated wetlands and coastal barrier islands.

1. Environmental Protection Prior to 1969

After a century of Federal policy directed almost exclu-sively at development of the Nation's natural resources,the late 19th century saw the first major pieces ofFederal legislation designed to protect individual naturalresources and resource areas. The period of 1870-1910witnessed creation of individual national parks such asYellowstone, the reservation of Federal forest reserves,and the first wildlife refuge. The interwar period ofthe 1920's and 1930's was marked by passage of the Fish

VI-12

and Wildlife Coordination Act and other wildlife legisla-tion. The 1960's were marked by emergence of a broaderbased concern for natural resources and passage of theWilderness Act, the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, the Landand Water Conservation Act, the Fish and Wildlife ServiceOrganic Act, the Multiple Use-Sustained Yield (Forestry)Act, and the creation of the National Wildlife RefugeSystem. By the end of the 1960's a concern for thequality of individual natural resources gradually hadgiven way to recognition of ecological systems and aconcern for the quality of the environment as a whole.

2. The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.

In enacting the National Environmental Policy Act, theCongress formalized recognition that the values of envi-ronmental resources are dependent upon the function ofcomplex natural systems. This Act declared environmentalquality to be a national goal and established a procedurefor environmental impact assessment for proposed Federalprojects and programs that may significantly affect theenvironment. Inherent in the environmental review processprior to a final decision to carry out a proposed actionare: (1) public involvement and (2) notice that bringsbefore the public an accounting for the various alterna-tives considered and their respective impacts. The goalof environmental quality and the accounting for planningalternatives and their various impacts is embodied in theaforementioned Principles and Guidelines of the WaterResources Council.

Federal agencies are required by the Act to developprocedures, and most have assigned supporting staff forthis purpose. These procedures are monitored by theCouncil on Environmental Quality, also established by theAct to set and monitor environmental policy. Thus, thelegislative and administrative foundation was formallyset in place for an evaluation of the environmentalvalues associated with water resources and floodplains.

C. Significant Related Legislation

Following passage of the Act in 1969, emphasis on pro-tecting and enhancing environmental quality was embodiedin important new legislation affecting water resources.These acts included the Endangered Species Act, theForest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Act, and theSoil and Water Resources Conservation Act. Of specialimportance are the Coastal Zone Management Act (PublicLaw 92-583 as amended), the Dam Safety Act (Public Law

VI-13

Public Law 95-217), and the Disaster Relief Act of 1974(Public Law 93-288) which offer significant potentialto minimize adverse impacts on lives, property, andnatural floodplain values. Implementation of this legis-lation helped set the stage for the 1977 Executive Order11988, Floodplain Management.

The Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (Public Law92-583) authorized the first national program topromote the wise use and protection of coastal land andwater resources. The Act provides funds, policy guidance,and technical assistance to coastal State and territorialgovernments to help them establish and maintain coastalmanagement programs that meet Federal requirements. In1980 amendments, Congress further clarified the goals ofthe Act by identifying nine national interest areas whichthe States are required to address as part of theirapproved programs. Included among these is the requirementto provide for "the management of coastal development tominimize the loss of life and property caused by improperdevelopment in flood-prone, storm surge, geologicalhazard, and erosion-prone areas and in areas of subsidenceand saltwater intrusion, and by the destruction of naturalprotective features such as beaches, dunes, wetlands, andbarrier islands." (Section 303(b)(B)). Twenty-eight of the35 eligible coastal States and territories are currentlyparticipating in the Federal program.

The Federal Dam Safety Act (Public Law 92-367) authorizedthe Secretary of Army to undertake a national program ofinspection of dams to identify those dams which constitutea danger to human life or property. Under the directionof the Corps of Engineers, 68,000 dams were inventoriedand about 10,000 were inspected to identify those withdeficiencies which might lead to structural failure orfloods exceeding spillway design. 5/ Reports furnishedto the Governor of each State identified a total of about3,000 unsafe dams. Less than one-half of the States havetaken steps to adequately ensure the regulation andinspection of dams. The Federal Emergency Management Agencyhas worked closely with the Association of State Dam SafetyOfficials to develop and encourage States to adopt a modelState dam safety program.. The Interagency Committee on DamSafety has prepared and issued emergency action planningguidelines and other technical assistance materials for theuse of federal and nonfederal dam owners and operators. 6/

5/ U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, National Program forInspection of Non Federal Dams - Final Report to Congress,1982.

6/ Federal Emergency Management Agency, Emergency ActionPlanning Guidelines for Dams, 1985.

VI-14

The Clean Water Acts of 1972 and 1977 (Public Law 92-500and Public Law 95-217) assign important responsibilitiesaffecting floodplains to the Corps of Engineers and theEnvironmental Protection Agency. Section 404 authorizesthe Corps of Engineers to issue permits for the dischargeof dredged or fill material into waters of the UnitedStates, in place of or in addition to any permits thatmay be issued under Section 10 of the Rivers and HarborsAct of 1899. It also expands jurisdiction for issuingsuch permits from navigable waters-in-fact to all watersof the United States, including adjacent wetlands orisolated wetlands which affect or could affect interstatecommerce, such as prarie potholes used by migrating waterfowl.

Dredged or fill material may be produced for discharge asa part of maintaining navigation or for such things asdocks, piers, bridges, sewer outfalls, water intakes, fillsto create fastland and discharge associated with agricul-tural conversions.

Before issuing a Section 404 permit, the Corps of Engineersconsults with the appropriate State governments, andFederal resource agencies, including the EnvironmentalProtection Agency, Fish and Wildlife Service, and theNational Marine Fisheries Service. Under certain condi-tions the Environmental Protection Agency may allowindividual States to issue these permits for all watersexcept those that are traditionally navigable in fact.In addition, Section 404(b)(1) requires that the Environ-mental Protection Agency issue guidelines for protectingthe aquatic environment, including wetlands, which areused in determining the acceptability of proposed dischargesof dredged or fill material. Section 404(c) authorizesthe Environmental Protection Agency to prohibit or restrictdischarges with unacceptable adverse environmental impactson fish, shellfish, wildlife, water supply or recreation.

In addition, the water quality management program underSection 208 of the Clean Water Act requires an areawidesystem for planning waste treatement facilities. Section209 calls for accelerating preparation of Level B basinplans under the Water Resources Planning Act (Public Law89-80). Each of these programs along with other programsof the Clean Water Act mandate planning coordinationwithin and between levels of government on matters ofvital concern to floodplain management.

The Disaster Relief Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-288), asamended, deals with floods as well as other naturaldisasters or emergencies. Federal funding is provided

VI-15

for planning by State and local governments and for otherdisaster preparedness program or activities. After adeclaration by the President of a major disaster, floodinsurance to cover insurable facilities against futurelosses is a condition for approval of grant assistance andpayments. Each federally funded nonemergency project isreviewed prior to approval for environmental clearance,floodplain management, control of wetlands, and appropriatehazard mitigation measures. The concerns of the Act fordisaster preparedness and prevention relate the planningemphasis directly to disaster response and to the regulatoryrequirements in the insurance program and in varioushazard mitigation programs.

The new land and water planning tools afforded by theClean Water, Dam Safety, Coastal Zone Management, andDisaster Relief Acts (Public Laws 92-500, 95-217, 92-367,93-288) offer an opportunity to use Federal assistance tostrengthen the role of the States. These Acts challengethe Federal and State governments to coordinate floodplainmanagement activities. The National Environmental PolicyAct, as one of the legislative items mandating considera-tion of alternative actions associated with flood risk,has already contributed to improvement of the floodplainmanagement decisionmaking process.

D. Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management

Attention of the Executive Branch was sharply focused onenvironmental values and floodplain management by thePresident's May 23, 1977 Message on the Environment andaccompanying Executive Order 11988, FloodplainManagement. 7/

The Message to Congress stressed the scope of environmentalissues and pledged firm support to environmental protec-tion. In a section on water policy, the President direct-ed that there be an overall review of water policy andthat Federal agencies take leadership in emphasizingprotection of the environment in the management of flood-plains, wetlands, coastal barrier islands, and marinesanctuaries. Concurrent with the Message, the Presidentissued Executive Orders 11988 and 11990 (see Appendices Aand B), directing Federal agencies to seek alternatives

7/ "The Environment - Message to the Congress, May 23,1977." Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents,Monday, May 30, 1977; Vol. 13, No. 22, pp. 782-808.(This includes Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Managementand Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands).

VI-16

to avoid locating or supporting activity in floodplainsor wetlands. While not stated in the Message, it isimportant to note that most of the Nation's wetlands,coastal barrier islands, and marine sanctuaries are locat-ed within riverine and coastal floodplains. Thus, theFloodplain Management Order is central to these otherareas of environmental values.

Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Mangement, replaces a1966 Order that encouraged Federal agencies to avoiduneconomic, unnecessary, and hazardous uses of floodplains.The new Order establishes a general policy bringingtogether concerns for human safety, health and welfare,and property with concerns for restoring and preservingnatural and beneficial floodplain values and drawing itsauthority from the National Flood Insurance Act, the FloodDisaster Protection Act, and the National EnvironmentalPolicy Act. The policy directive of the Order is to (1)avoid directly or indirectly supporting floodplain develop-ment, (2) avoid actions located in or affecting thefloodplain, unless the floodplain location is the onlypracticable alternative, and (3) in the absence of apracticable alternative, require that actions must bedesigned or modified in order to minimize potential harmto or within the floodplain. The Order applies to allproposed actions of all Federal agencies and requiresagencies to issue implementing procedures. An interpreta-tion of the Order has been issued by the Water ResourcesCouncil. 8/

The Order's requirements, as interpreted by the WaterResources Council, constitute a decisionmaking processhaving the following sequential elements:

(1) the determination of whether a proposed action iswithin the one-percent chance floodplain or has thepotential to affect or be affected by the floodplain;

(2) the informing and involvement of the public in thefloodplain management decisionmaking process atthe earliest possible time;

(3) the identification of practicable alternativesto carrying out an action in the floodplain;

8/ U.S. Water Resources Council "Floodplain ManagementGuidelines for Implementing Executive Order 11988," FederalRegister, February 10, 1978 (44FR6030).

VI-17

(4) where there is no practicable alternative to proposedactions affecting the floodplain, the identificationof the potential adverse impacts of and support foradditional development resulting from the proposedaction;

(5) the identification of the steps necessary to minimizepotential adverse impacts of and support for additionaldevelopment, and of the steps necessary to restore andpreserve natural floodplain values;

(6) the reevaluation of the proposed action, in lightof the potential adverse impacts of and support foradditional development, the steps necessary tominimize such development and the steps necessary torestore and preserve natural floodplain values;

(7) the notification to the public of any final decisionto locate in the floodplain and the explanation of thebasis for this decision; and

(8) the review of actions which affect or are affectedby the floodplain to assure that they are implementedin a manner which is consistent with the requirementsof Executive Order 11988.

These are the key substantive and procedural requirementsthat make up the foundation of the Federal policy onfloodplain management. Federal government agencies mustcomply with these requirements and must maintain a leader-ship posture in all of their actions affecting floodplains.The Order also provides that opportunity for publicparticipation in Federal decisions affecting floodplainsbe extended by early public notice, impact evaluation,and statement-of-findings requirements. Public scrutinyof agency decisions, the primary enforcement mechanism,is supported by a budget certification requirement andperiodic evaluation of agency procedures. Finally,agency procedures implementing the Order are to incorporatethe concepts of "A Unified National Program for FloodplainManagement. "l

In 1982 the Office of Management and Budget directedthe Federal Emergency Management Agency to carry out areview of the implementation of Executive Order 11988 andthe appropriateness of its associated 100-year base floodstandard. The review found the Order to be reducing exposureto potential flood losses and that retention of the Orderwas supported by nearly all agencies. The review founda need for improved implementation of the Order by Federalagencies. The review also found the 100-year base flood

VI-18

standard to be strongly supported and being implementedat all levels of government. The Office of Managementand Budget reaffirmed its commitment to the Order anddirected that the Federal Interagency Task Force onFloodplain Management and the Federal Emergency ManagementAgency carry out several follow-up activities. 9/ Theseactivities include development of training material foragency field personnel and in specified instances, theimprovement or adoption of final agency implementingprocedures.

Agency efforts to develop implementing procedures andto comply with the Order have heightened the awareness ofthe need for floodplain management. This is true ofFederal agency personnel and also State and privateindividuals concerned with decisions affecting thefloodplain. Consequently, floodplain management isregarded as a process by which decisions are made ratherthan simply a set of floodplain regulations or floodcontrol structures. Implementation of the Order would begreatly supported by the operation of a strong floodplainmanagement programs in all States.

Agency efforts to implement the Floodplain ManagementOrder also highlight its close relationship to ExecutiveOrder 11990, Protection of Wetlands. Both orders aresimilar in structure; although one major difference isthat the wetlands Order does not apply to Federal permitsor licenses involving wetlands on non-Federal property.However, most wetlands are located within coastal andriverine floodplains and are thus covered by the FloodplainManagement Order. Field level experience with bothOrders strongly suggests the need for integrated managementof wetlands and floodplains and other closely relatednatural features, such as barrier islands.

E. Subsequent Administrative and Legislative Actions

1. The 1978 Water Policy Message sets forth many waterpolicy initiatives affecting floodplain management. 10/Among these initiatives, the two areas of greatest impact

9/ "The 100-year Base Flood Standard and the FloodplainManagement Executive Order: A Review Prepared for theOffice of Management and Budget by the Federal EmergencyManagement Agency." September, 1983.

10/ "Federal Water Policy - Message to the Congress,June 6, 1978." Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents,Monday, June 12, 1978, Vol. 14, No. 23, pp. 1044-1051.

VI-19

deal with Executive Order 11988, nonstructural measures,and water conservation. First, the need for full andrapid implementation of Executive Order 11988 is reempha-sized. Second, greater utilization of nonstructuralfloodplain measures is encouraged by specific directivesto: (1) modify Federal water resource planning proceduresto require formulation of at least one primarily nonstruc-tural alternative plan where a structural project isbeing considered; (2) restructure Federal cost sharing toremove biases against nonstructural floodplain managementmeasures; and (3) utilize Federal programs to help reducefuture flood losses by acquisition of flood prone land andproperty.

Follow-up on these initiatives resulted in importantprogress toward coordinating and advancing a unifiedapproach to floodplain management and the enhanced aware-ness of the need for floodplain management. As indicatedabove, the Executive Order 1988, Floodplain Managementfostered acceptance of a uniform flood hazard standardand a procedure for evaluating proposed actions affectingfloodplains. Water resource planning procedures havebeen modified to assure that consideration will be givento nonstructural loss reduction measures. The decisionto provide funds to-implement the National Flood InsuranceProgram authority to purchase severely damaged insuredproperty was prompted by these initiatives.

2. Federal Flood Hazard Mitigation Teams were establishedpursuant to a July 1980 memorandum from the Office ofManagement and Budget and the ensuing interagency implemen-ting agreement executed by 13 department level agencies.11/ The memorandum directed "...that all Federal programsthat provide construction funds and long term recoveryassistance must use common flood disaster planning postflood recovery practices." Interagency hazard mitigationteams are activitated following Presidential declarationof flood disaster. The teams, which include State andlocal representatives, conduct a field level assessment

11/ "Interagency Agreement for Nonstructural Damage Reduc-tion Measures as Applied to Common Flood Disaster Planningand PostFlood Recovery Practices"; December 15, 1980(signed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency; theDepartments of Agriculture, Army, Commerce, Health andHuman Services, Housing and Urban Development, Interiorand Transportation; Environmental Protection Agency;Small Business Administration; and the Tennessee ValleyAuthority).

VI-20

of damage and develop a long term recovery concept planwhich provides the basis for specific mitigation recommen-dations to be achieved through the use of Federal recoveryassistance funding. Examples of recommendations success-fully implemented include: purchase or relocation ofseverely damaged properties; relocation of washed outhighways; construction of flood control structures; andfloodproofing of structures. The first five years ofexperience with the hazard mitigation teams has shown theteam mechanism to be an effective coordination and lossreduction device.

3. The Coastal Barrier Resources Act (Public Law 97-348)was passed in 1982 for the purpose of minimizing the lossof human life and natural resources by restricting thoseFederal expenditures that would have the effect of encouragingthe development of coastal barriers along Atlantic andGulf coasts. Undeveloped coastal barriers were identifiedon maps and designated as part of the Coastal BarrierResources System. Locations within the system generallyare not eligible for Federal expenditures for constructingor purchasing any structures, infrastructure or accessway;to carry out any erosion control or shoreline stabilizationprojects; or to provide financial assistance includinginsurance under the National Flood Insurance Program.The impact of this legislation is to unify Federal Programsin an effort to eliminate Federal subsidies for developmentin high risk coastal areas, and the destruction of naturalcoastal barrier resources.

F. Summary

The Federal concern for floodplain management has beenshaped since 1966, largely by House Document 465 and theNational Environmental Policy Act. The growing acceptanceof a holistic conceptual framework for floodplain manage-ment and the strong Executive Order 1988, FloodplainManagement are important strides toward establishing asolid Federal component for a unified program. Thehazard mitigation team mechanism, implementation of theCoastal Barrier Resources Act, and administrative emphasison nonstructural measures have each served to draw Federalprograms toward a unified program. However, as Chapter VIIdemonstrates, improvement is needed in many program areasat the Federal level as well as at other levels of government.

VI-21

CHAPTER VII

IMPLEMENTATION OF A UNIFIED NATIONAL PROGRAMFOR FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT

The chapter explains how floodplain management can beunified through coordination and utilization of existinginstitutional and legislative arrangements. Existing in-stitutions and the relevant characteristics of organiza-tional and operational considerations are described.These include information, research, consistent evaluationconcepts, and financial assistance.

This chapter concludes that the role of the Federalgovernment in floodplain management is decreasing relativeto that of the States, which in most instances haveestablished programs, gained experience and become increas-ingly effective. At the same time, almost all communitieshave established rudimentary floodplain management programsand are beginning to develop expertise. As this evolutiontoward a national program progresses, there continues tobe a need for coordination of policy and programs and asharing of information and experience within the agenciesat each level of government and among the levels ofgovernment.

A. Coordination of Existing Programs

A basic condition necessitating coordination of flood-plain management activity is the diversity of floodsituations across the Nation. These situations arederived from four broad classes of flooding, each withits own distinguishable characteristics and requiring asomewhat different mix of loss reduction strategies, tools,and government actions. The most common source of floodingis over-the-bank flooding of streams which ranges fromthe flash floods of small streams in hilly terrain to therelatively slow rising, extensive floods of large rivers.This riverine flooding is a concern for almost all the20,000 flood prone communities in the Nation. The secondsource is coastal flooding associated with hurricane orother storm driven waters reaching over-the-shore inlandand affecting approximately 600 communities, most ofwhich are also subject to riverine flooding. The thirdsource is rising groundwater levels often associatedwith land subsidence and this source affects pos-sibly 100 communities which may also be subject toriverine and coastal flooding. The last source, localstorm drainage, results from failure to plan and provideadequate storm water drainage and is most frequently

VII-1

associated with the 3,000 most rapidly growing urbancommunities in the Nation. Efforts to implement aunified program must address these sources individuallyor in combination as the local situation dictates.

Because of the complexity of the Nation's flood problems,the diffusion of responsibility under constitutionaland legislative frameworks between levels of governmentand among agencies results in an approach that lendsitself to being uncoordinated, fragmented, and inconsis-tent. This major problem should be met through continu-ing efforts towards improved coordination and coopera-tive development of information and other related tech-nical planning and implementation assistance among allconcerned interests at the local, State and Federallevels.

1. Federal Role

Although the major responsibility for regulating flood-plain use is non-Federal, the programs of the Federalgovernment frequently influence floodplain managementdecisions either directly or indirectly. SpecificFederal interests include (a) transferring the burdenof flood losses from the general public back to thefloodplain occupants; (b) reducing flood losses andlosses of natural floodplain values while pursuinggoals of wise use and conservation; (c) maintainingagricultural, mineral, and biological resources; (d)using waterways as arteries of commerce; (e) providingwater supply and waste treatment; (f) recognizing re-creational and esthetic opportunities of open space;and (g) providing disaster relief. Among the lossreduction programs, most were established to deal withriverine and coastal flooding because flooding causedby inadequate stormwater drainage or rising groundwater/subsidence is, for the most part, considered localresponsibility.

Fragmentation exists throughout Federal and non-Federalrelationships. It may lead to indecision and inactionor to "shopping" among Federal agencies for the "best"programs as judged by favorable local cost sharing,rather than a full consideration of local needs.Although Exhibit 2 is not complete it indicates thecurrent Federal effort is diffused through 27 agenciesand nine program purposes.

Because of inadequate coordination, or focusing onnarrow agency missions, the numerous Federal programs

VII-2

sometimes have worked at cross purposes. One exampleis postflood emergency rehabiltation of structures inhigh flood hazard areas where alternative locationshad been identified in planning programs. Anothersignificant problem has been that the policy andcorresponding rules for action are so varied that thenon-Federal sector has been unsure'about how the Federalgovernment is going to respond to a given flood relatedsituation. These problems and issues have been addressedin part by agency implementation of Executive Order 11988,Floodplain Management and the interagency hazardmitigation teams. However, continued progress requiresfurther reflection of basic floodplain management prin-ciples in agency policies and procedures.

One area of concern is the need for consistent policiesfor the protection of natural floodplain values.Floodplains include most of the Nation's wetlands, andcoastal barrier islands. Wetlands and barrier islandsare undergoing rapid development and are the object ofvarious policies including Executive Order 11990,Protection of Wetlands and the Coastal Barrier ResourcesAct. Integration of floodplain, wetlands, and barrierisland policies is essential if field level implementa-tion of these policies is to be expedited.

Another area of concern is the continuing need for moreconsistent policies regarding housing and related con-struction grants and loans, and support for publicfacilities such as roads and waste treatment systems.Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management, is provid-ing a successful basis for decisionmaking in (1)acquiring, managing and disposing of Federal lands andfacilities; (2) providing federally undertaken, financed,or assisted construction and improvements; and (3)conducting Federal activities and programs affectingland use, including but not limited to water andrelated land resources planning, regulating, and licens-ing activities. The Executive Order and Federal agencyprocedures for implementing the Order can serve asmodels from which States can strengthen their ownmanagement programs.

To attain a unified national program, the Federalagencies must continue to develop consistent policiesand activities, including those which would encourageand support the States and local goverments in developingeffective programs of their own. This is especiallyimportant as Federal budget and program levels are

VII-3

ExhibitS 2 V1§C 4 O

Federal Floodplain 'ZEManagement and Related d0Programs by Agency 4 dW~S '~d

H Flood Insurance Studies*_* * _ _ _ __ _ _ * _ - _ S -

Flood Plain Management Services - - - - - S S -_- ---_- -_ ---- - - S -

Flood Plain Information Studiesand Reports

Riverine - - - - - S S ---_ _ - -- SS - - - - F -Coastal - - - - - I S G-- - - I - -- Is --- F -

Technical and Planning Services**Full Program - - - - - S S -- _ _ _ _-_- ---_ F -Program Elements - - I G I S S I S S I _ -S ITS- -II I I

Flood Modifying Gonstruction - - - G I S S - F - - - _ ---- -I-- -FFlood Preparedness, Emergency,and Recovery - F - G S S S G - - S G - -- 5 -_- G s

Warning and Forecasting - - - - - - S - --_ - I

Research S - S - I I S SS- -SS - - - - -Open Space - - - - I S -G-- - - - S -I-

'Administered by the Federal Insurance Administration through reimbursable technical studies by agency shown. S. Staff and Funds"Land and Water Resources. F. Funds

G. Grants and Loans1. Incidental

reduced. In a practical sense, the Federal role shouldcontinue to be strong in information gathering, develop-ing floodplain management criteria, floodplain mappingand in technical planning and implementation services.The Federal role should continue to become more suppor-tive of ongoing State floodplain management activitiesand encourage adoption of similar programs in Stateswhere these are absent. In brief, Federal encouragementand support can be carried out by actions that:

- provide overall objectives and principles as guide-lines for consistent State program development, recog-nizing that, until and unless the States have acquiredthe capabilities, direct and widespread Federalassistance may be necessary, although not necessarilydesirable;

- provide basic information and interpretative analysisfor use by State agencies in administering floodplainmanagement programs;

- provide consistent program action, evaluation, anddevelopment criteria;

- provide consistent technical, planning, programcriteria, and implementation assistance responsesthrough agency actions;

- provide continued, coordinated efforts to developand implement hazard mitigation strategies andpolicies;

- provide financial support to the States for establish-ing or improving floodplain management capabilitiesas authorized by statue;

- provide for well-defined and active State roles inFederal program activities;

- provide for working directly with the States in deal-ing with local entities to insure consistent adminis-tration of floodplain management programs.

a. Federal Coordination

The primary mechanism for coordination of Federal pro-grams is the Interagency Floodplain Management TaskForce which has operated under the auspices of theFederal Emergency Management Agency since 1982 andprior to that date under the Water Resources Council.

VII-5

The Task Force is responsible for maintaining andencouraging the implementation of "A Unified NationalProgram for Floodplain Management." It has facilitatedcommunications among agencies and assisted in thedevelopment of consistency among Federal programs.This coordination has been effective where technicalissues were involved and has been enhanced throughworkshops and seminars, multiagency projects, andparticularly through more than 20 publications such asthe Floodplain Management Executive Order Guidelines, theHandbook for Flood Plain Management, and the Regulationof Flood Hazard Areas. 12/ The success of the TaskForce in fostering progress toward achievement of aUnified National Program argues for the continuation ofthe Task Force effort.

As Exhibit 2 suggests, however, there continues to be agreat need for coordination among Federal agencies forall types of programs. Effective coordination ofFederal assistance programs encourages State efforts todevelop and maintain their own floodplain managementcapability. It also encourages local efforts to implementsound and effective floodplain management programs.

b. Regional Coordination

At the regional level, the Delaware and the SusquehannaRiver Basin Commissions and the Tennessee Valley Author-ity encourage both statewide and interstate planning offlood-related matters. Established as permanent regionalinstitutions, and in the case of the commissions composedof Federal and State members, these institutions are ina strategic position to guide, coordinate, and unifyboth Federal and State programs for managing floodplains.Because they are continuing institutions with full-timeprofessional staff, much can be expected of them incoordinating the schedules, priorities, and resourcesnecessary to implement floodplain management programs intheir regions. For example, the Delaware and SusquehannaFederal-interstate compact commissions carry out flood-plain information and hazard studies. The TennesseeValley Authority provides a unique high degree ofcoordination of flood-related activities in its region ofthe country. In addition, programs such as the areawideand statewide water quality management programs underthe Clean Water Act, and the coastal planning programsunder the Coastal Zone Management Act, further promotethe regional coordination of floodplain management.

12/ See list of publications in Appendix C.

VII-6

2. State Role

State programs dealing with floodplain management, likethose of the Federal government, are the responsibilityof a multiplicty of agencies and may be housed indepartments such as natural resources, planning, humanresources, public works and urban affairs. Also, likethe Federal government, States are mostly concerned withriverine and coastal sources of flooding, currentlytending to regard stormwater drainage as a local re-sponsibility.

States have the responsibility for coordination withintheir jurisdiction. The States are vested with thepolice power, which, by specific delegations to localgovernment, provides the framework within which much ofthe decisionmaking takes place. State government isclose enough to the problems to deal with specifics andyet can handle intrastate floodplain problems that tran-scend community lines. Likewise, multijurisdictionalproblems not manageable at the local level can usuallybe resolved at the State level.

The States are in a position to set strategy for .coordi-nation of management programs by establishing statewidestandards and procedures for aggregating local programsinto subbasin and basin management programs. For theNational Flood Insurance Program, the Governors haveappointed State coordinators who often serve ascoordinators in other water resources programs. Theyhave demonstrated how water resources planning can ben-efit from State guidance even as the block grant approachhas reduced Federal direction. There is a continuingneed for a single statewide coordinating office in eachState to foster vigorous management programs that willencourage floodplain management in local and regionalcomprehensive planning; that will monitor and encourageeffective coordination among the various offices in theState responsible for other floodplain impacting programssuch as coastal zone and wetlands management and pre-andpost-flood planning; and that will maintain liaison withFederal agencies, including the Interagency FloodplainManagement Task Force.

Especially since the mid 1970s, State capability tocarry out floodplain management activity has expandedand now many states have vigorous and comprehensiveFloodplain management programs that recognize the fullrange of alternatives discussed in the conceptualframework. These States have (1) established minimum

VII-7

standards for local programs; (2) provided floodplaininformation and training programs; (3) coordinatedfloodplain management activities at all governmentallevels; (4) assisted localities in evaluating variousflood damage reduction alternatives, in drafting localfloodplain regulations and in solving administrativeproblems encountered in regulating floodplain develop-ment; and (5) established programs for the monitoringand evaluation of the effectiveness of local administra-tion (Exhibit 3).

EXHIBIT 3

STATE FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT 13/

Activities Number of States

Information Distribution 47Hydrologic and Hydraulic Studies 22Assistance with Local Ordinances 39Training Local Officials 34Monitoring Local Program Administration 27Enforcement of Violations 16Insurance Activities 22Training Insurance Agents and Lenders 10

Regulatory Statutes Adopted 31

A survey of specific State activities indicates the rela-tive importance-of eight types of floodplain managementactivities (Exhibit 3). Almost all (47) States carryout the basic activity of floodplain management informa-tion distribution. Almost half of the States (22)conduct hydraulic and hydrologic studies associatedwith flood hazard identification. Most States (39)assist with the establishment of local ordinances andthe training of local officials having responsibilityfor ordinance implementation (34). About half of theStates (27) monitor local program implementation while

13/ Adapted from Chapter V "State Programs," Regulation ofFlood Hazard Areas to Reduce Flood Losses, Vol. 3.U. S. Water Resources Council, 1982.

VII-8

only 16 States actually enforce ordinances. Almosthalf of the States (22) provide assistance with floodinsurance activities and only 10 assist by traininginsurance agents and lenders.

Some States have enacted legislation that directs theState to step in, solve problems, and regulate areasif communities are not performing their statutory re-sponsibilities. In many States, the functions of flood-plain management and related land and water resourcesconcerns have been consolidated under one department.Among the rest of the States, some have merely enabledcommunities to adopt floodplain regulations, and othershave taken no specific actions. In a few of thoseStates that have taken no specific action, the generalenabling legislation is often broad enough that zoningand subdivision regulations render specific legislationenabling floodplain regulation unnecessary.

In some States, the legislative basis for floodplainregulation has been present for many years and hasstimulated significant action. However, it has onlybeen during the past decade that major State regulatoryand zoning programs have emerged, some prompted andfostered by Federal programs.

A total of 31 States have adopted legislation estab-lishing direct State regulation of flood hazardareas or State standard setting for local regulations,including eight which have adopted regulatory or mappingstandards surpassing the minimum National FloodInsurance Program's standards. Ten additional Statesprovide technical assistance to local governmentson loss reduction techniques such as floodproofing,flood warning, and stormwater management.

Enactment of enabling legislation explicitly addressingfloodplain regulations in all States, where such legisla-tion does not exist, should be a primary element inState strategy for coordinating floodplain managementprograms. This legislation should be buttressed byestablishment of a single statewide coordinating officeand assignment of staff to carry out floodplain manage-ment activities together with application of the conceptsfound in Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management,and Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands.

VII-9

Thus, the importance of the State role in floodplainmanagement is well recognized. However, some Stateshave not taken the active role expected of them. Onecontributing factor has been that in the administrationof some programs Federal agencies essentially bypassState governments and deal directly with local govern-ments. As a result, some States have seen little needto become involved. Federal agencies should continueto seek ways to develop well-defined States roles intheir program activities and to work directly with theStates in dealing with local governments.

Another contributing factor has been the increasedfiscal burden that would have to be assumed by theStates under the floodplain management approach. It isapparent that thin or nonexistent funding of thisactivity at the State level will have to be bolsteredand that the States will have to establish budgetarypriorities supportive of floodplain management.

Realistically, State legislatures will find it necessaryto accept more responsibility to provide levels offunding needed to carry out a comprehensive Statefloodplain management program, especially as Federalfinancial assistance is limited in accord with currentFederal deficit reduction policies. Floodplain manage-ment assistance to States should be supported by provi-sion of floodplain data and information in order to:(1) accelerate the adoption of regulatory controls andother management measures, and provide for their admin-istration, and (2) more effectively utilize ongoingprograms as well as the particular expertise possessedby the various Federal agencies. This assistanceshould be both technical and financial.

To evaluate these efforts, information on the progress ofState efforts to increase their floodplain managementactivities should be periodically assessed and reportedto the Congress. This activity should be undertakenjointly by the Interagency Floodplain Management TaskForce and the Association of State Floodplain Managers.The Association was established in 1978 to provide aforum for each of the States to share experience and toassist one another to improve the effectiveness of theirfloodplain management programs.

3. Local Role

Like other levels of government, local responsibilityfor programs dealing with floodplain management tend to

VII-10

be fragmented. Unlike other levels of government,local government must deal directly with all sources offlooding and especially stormwater drainage whichnationally has become a major source of flood losses.

Because flood-related problems cross local communityboundaries, local management efforts need to be guidedby State, and Federal standards. Nearly all localitiescan carry on basic floodplain management efforts. Somehave a separate office to administer this type ofeffort; others rely on traditional offices such asthose of the city engineer, director of public works;zoning administrator, or building inspector. However,many small communities have only part-time officialsand employees. It is in this latter situation wherelocal floodplain management capabilities are mostseverely limited, that continuing efforts toward coordi-nated State-Federal support are critically required.

In spite of many limiting factors, thousands of communi-ties have adopted requlations in conjunction with map-ping and floodplain information programs of Federalagencies (Exhibit 2) and a significant number haveresponded to State programs. By January 1986, over 17,500communities were enrolled in the National Flood InsuranceProgram and therefore were committed to adopting andenforcing floodplain management measures that at aminimum were consistent with National Flood InsuranceProgram criteria. Of that number, over 8,500 in theRegular Program had been furnished detailed flood hazardmaps, and therefore are responsible for application ofmore stringent regulatory measures. These same locallyenacted regulations are an essential complement tomeasures taken to modify flooding and the impacts offlooding if floodplain management is to be effective inmitigation flood losses. The existence of local regula-tory programs should be used by Federal and Stateagencies as a condition of providing financial assistanceto locally initiated management programs and projects.This is particularly important where local governmentshave not adequately addressed stormwater drainagemanagement because of limited resources, resistance toland use planning, and a tendency to deal with urbangrowth incrementally, rather than through long termmaster planning. The phasing of such requirements intoongoing programs and currently authorized projects willhave to be dealt with by each agency.

VII-11

Local adoption of land use and construction controls isbut the start of the regulatory process in floodplainmanagement. To assure that these regulatory measuresand objectives are readily understood and accepted bygovernmental officials and the public, and therebyeffectively carried out, there should be a continualassessment of local capabilities and need for assistance.Some of the States have gained considerable expertiseand insight through their work with various Federalagencies and localities in developing comprehensiveflood damage reduction programs. Because of theirexperience and relationship to localities, the Statesare the logical governmental unit to provide the aboveassessments and assistance. Existing State capabilitiesshould continue to be utilized in this effort. Federalincentives should be provided to encourage other Statesto provide local assessments and assistance.

For most floodplain management activities, the localgovernment has the responsibility to initiate applica-tion to State and Federal agencies for participation inand assistance from the various programs. The localgovernment must also enact and enforce land and wateruse regulations and in some cases maintain and operatestructures on the floodplain. Thus, to achieve effectivefloodplain management decisions by obtaining needed levelsof technological planning, and financial assistance, localgovernments must be provided with complete and currentinformation about State and Federal programs. Converse-ly, State and Federal agencies must continue to beknowledgeable about the goals and decisions of localgovernments to exercise effective subbasin and basin widemanagement activites. Furthermore, to respond adequate-ly to program needs, the Congress and the State legisla-tures must continue to be provided with informationabout progress in achieving more effective floodplainmanagement.

For their part, a number of local governments havedeveloped innovative programs to mitigate recurrentand serious flooding in both coastal and inland situa-tions. This innovation has "...involved not only adop-tion of particularly stringent or unique floodplainregulations but also ancillary ones such as wetlandregulations, dune protection ordinances and shorelandzoning restrictions that establish lot sizes, regulatetree cutting, and control other aspects of land use.These collectively reduce losses and serve broadercommunity objectives. Innovative local programs arealso characterized by particularly effective administra-

VII-12

tion and enforcement. Regulations are often combinedwith nonregulatory approaches such as acquisiton." 14/Experience with these innovations needs to be sharedamong local floodplain managers through newsletters andprofessional meetings with the encouragement and supportof State and Federal agencies.

B. Operational Considerations

Those performing the technical and administrative func-tions of a floodplain management program must giveadequate attention to organizational and operationalconsiderations if the program is to be effective.Although these needs are somewhat similar at all levelsof government, the existence of differences among thelevels must be acknowledged and resolved by makingadequate provision for the requirements of each. Forexample, at the Federal level, agency policy and legis-lative support are required; they are also needed atthe State level in addition to a stregthening of capab-ilities in resource planning areas; and at the locallevel, participation in the planning process is requiredof public officials and local citizens.

1. Information

Effective planning is the key to "A Unified NationalProgram for Floodplain Management," and planning isbased on information. Therefore, one of the mostimportant organizational and operational needs isadequate and reliable data in a relevant and usableform.

During the past decade, flood data and floodplaininformation have been gathered and analyzed at anincreased rate, especially through ongoing Federalprograms. However, of the estimated 20,000 communitieswith flood hazards, fewer than 50 percent, to date,have been furnished detailed flood and flood relatedinformation by various Federal and State agencies inorder to provide a basis for implementing a floodplainmanagement program. Even where data related to floodingexist, potential users are not always aware of all the

14/ Innovation in Local Floodplain Management,Appendix B, Regulation of Flood Hazard Areas to ReduceFlood Losses, Volume 3. Special Publication 4. NaturalHazards Research and Applications Center, University ofColorado, Boulder, 1982, p. 16.

VII-13

information that is available or where to find it (andoften how to use it). For example, the Soil ConservationService has prepared detailed soil maps and interpreta-tions for more than 72 percent of the Nation, and thisinformation could be used to determine appropriate usesof floodplains and to assist in tentative or preliminarydelineation of flood hazard areas in the absence ofengineering evaluations, especially in rural areas.Similar soil surveys are carried out by public landmanagement agencies including the Bureau of IndianAffairs, Bureau of Land Management, and the ForestService. In another example, the Fish and WildlifeService has carried out a National Wetlands Inventoryproviding descriptions and maps of the Nation's wetlands,areas generally found within floodplains.

The Geological Survey also assists in defining floodhazards by analysis of flood records collected for manyyears, especially for small streams during the last 20or 30 years. Thus, there is a critical need to developinformation dissemination programs to make potentialfloodplain users aware of data sources and the means ofaccessing data.

A full range of flood-related technical services andplanning guidance is provided by the Corps of Engineersthough its Floodplain Management Services Program.Similar services are provided by the Soil ConservationService and for a limited geographical area by theTennessee Valley Authority. The Federal EmergencyManagement Agency has established a technical assistanceprogram for communities participating in the NationalFlood Insurance Program and through its interagency hazardmitigation team responsibilities is encouraging post-flood disaster mitigation activity. Flood forecastingand warning services provided by the National Oceanicand Atmospheric Administration depend upon publicawareness and response to have meaning. The latterillustrates that improved information dissemination andutilization are as important as improved data, and bothare needed. The need for including the costs of installingand maintaining a flood alarm system and/or data collectionnetwork and disseminating a flood or flash flood warningshould be evaluated as part of any floodplain managementplan.

As recognized in the review of House Document 465, therehas been a major deficiency in research and informationon floodplain occupancy. While this deficiency hasbeen partially addressed, a National Science Foundation

VII-14

sponsored study shows that among Federally supportedresearch projects on floods and their mitigation, only15 per cent deal with floodplain occupancy. 15/ Inform-ation is needed about the perception of and response toflood risk and about the social effectiveness of flood-plain land use and other management tools. Interpretationof the information on floodplain occupancy is closelyassociated with cultural, biological, and physical datarelevant to the interrelationships of land, water re-sources, and environmental values; the types and spec-ificity of data remain to be determined.

House Document 465 notes further that consistent proce-dures are needed for reporting both experienced andprojected flood losses. Consistent data on experiencedflood losses compiled on a yearly basis, by State,andfor specific events, such as individual hurricanes orlarge regional floods would permit more effectiveevaluation of current programs to reduce flood losses.The latter requires a national compilation of the amount,location, physical type, and nature of the human occupancyof floodplains and would provide information basic todevelopment of sound policies for future floodplainmanagement. National and regional policy objectivescould be established to guide decisions about floodplaindevelopment, preservation, and restoration. Betterchoices could be made among alternative actions andpriorities for resource allocation. Compilation of anational assessment of programs could be coordinatedwith the National Water Assessment Program of the U.S.Geological Survey and the Community Assistance Programof the Federal Insurance Administration.

Since the late 1970s, a wealth of information about howto assess floodplain resources and potential uses hasbeen published by Federal and State agencies. A flood-plain management handbook describing in detail flood-plain management objectives, tools, strategies, and theavailable Federal programs was prepared by the WaterResources Council for use by State and local officialsin implementing the conceptual framework of Chapter III.Supporting documents describing individual State programshave been prepared by some States and by the WaterResources Council to facilitate further information flow

15/ S.A. Changnon, Jr., et al. A Plan for Researchon Floods and their Mitigation in the United States.Illinois State Water Survey: Champaign, IL, 1983.pp 12-13.

VII-15

to the local level. Within each State there shouldbe a centralized source of floodplain data accessibleto local planners and floodplain decisionmakers. Annualconferences of the Association of State FloodplainManagers and the National Flood Insurance Programnow provide vehicles for exchange of knowledge, trainingand coordination among the States and between theStates and Federal agencies. However, a periodicnational conference also involving local and privatefloodplain managers should be convened to further evaluateand foster coordination of floodplain management activities.

More information is needed on the hydrologic and hydraulicconditions associated with the major sources of flooding(riverine, coastal, rising groundwater/subsidence, andlocal stormwater drainage), on the impact of development onflooding levels, and more effective, simpler methodologiesfor delineating flood hazard area. However, anotherproblem arises as data are analyzed. Although a uniformapproach has been devised for presenting hydrologic andhydraulic data for gauged reaches, streamflow records areavailable for relatively few locations, and differenttechniques must be employed to develop synthetic floodinformation at ungauged locations. (Similar problemsoccur with tidal flood data.) Hydrology, however, is notan exact science, and qualified studies for the same siteoccasionally result in inconsistencies that are difficultto resolve.

In spite of recent progress, all these difficultiesinteract to compound the information related problems,which in turn frustrate local planning and delay neededprograms. These difficulties must be overcome to ensurethat required planning information for riverine andcoastal areas is obtained and made readily accessible.

Previous chapters have suggested a management approachthat emphasizes comprehensive planning. To be effective,however, this approach requires continuing reinforcementby ongoing programs of training and information flows toplanners at all levels, and planners in turn must conveyinformation to their constituencies of decisionmakers andcitizens. For their part, planners need to continue toemphasize overall management of floodplains in the contextof community and regional planning and the conceptualframework described herein.

2. Research Coordination

A single program of floodplain management researchemploying modern scientific techniques does not exist,

VII-16

although a great deal of related research has been doneand progress has been made in identifying research needs.Coordination of research is needed. At the direction ofCongress, the National Science Foundation prepareda 1980 report setting forth the problems of floodhazard mitigation. 16/ A follow-up study in 1982 setforth a flood hazard mitigation research agendaby discipline. 17/ Thus, there has been recognition ofboth the need to coordinate research and to translateresearch into operatonal guidelines. To be effective, aresearch program requires the full cooperation and support,including funds, of concerned Federal, State, and localinterests. In such a program an annual assessment ofresearch needs and priorities would be identified bychief administrators of a coordinating body in conjunctionwith officials of State water resource and planningagencies. Research projects to satisfy these needs wouldbe defined by the chief administrators of the coordinatingbody, and when funded, qualified research agencies andindividuals would be selected by appropriate agencies tocarry on such research. Surveillance of research programswould be the responsibilities of the coordinating body.

Although major Federal water research programs includethose operated by the departments of Agriculture, Army,Commerce, and Interior; the Environmental ProtectionAgency; and the Federal Emergency Management Agency;there is room for improved coordination. To a limiteddegree the Interagency Floodplain Management Task Forceresponsible for implementing the Unified National Programfor Floodplain Management has provided a research coordi-nation function by encouraging multiagency support ofselected research activities. In keeping with its objec-tive of fostering implementation of a unified program,the Task Force should encourage establishment of a researchcoordination mechanism which would involve all levels ofgovernment as advocated above.

3. Evaluation Guidelines and Analysis of Alternatives

Achievement of the goals of floodplain management requiresanalysis of all alternative plans prior to selecting a courseof action. For many major Federal actions the timelyanalysis of alternative plans is also a requirement ofthe National Environmental Policy Act. There is a need to

16/ National Science Foundation. A Report on Flood HazardMitigation; Washington, D.C.; September 1980.

17/ Changnon, op. cit.

VII-17

apply accepted techniques of analysis and evaluationconsistently, regardless of the applicable legislation orlevel of jurisdiction involved, in order to encourage thedevelopment of objective, well-coordinated comprehensiveplans. These techniques should provide comparabilityfor investment decisions and a full display of allalternative strategies and tools within the conceptualframework of floodplain management. Uniform implementa-tion of such standard techniques would be instrumental inreducing inconsistencies in existing public programs andfragmented responsibilities in floodplain management.Use of the Economic and Environmental Principles andGuidelines for Implementation Studies publishedby the Water Resources Council for planning water andrelated land resources is facilitating realization ofmany of the objectives expressed in this section.

4. Federal Financial Programs

The terms of Federal loans and grants (including thosewhich may be used for community development assistance,cost sharing, and investment programs) should act asincentives for sound floodplain management. A consistentnational policy for providing Federal financial assistanceis needed to assist State and local government units infulfilling responsibilities for present and future useof floodplain and related resources. It must be emphasizedthat cost sharing can have wide-ranging implications forfloodplain related investments. Involved are not only therelative proportions of cost sharing and their impact onthe number and size of projects and programs permittedunder limited budgets, but also the question of whichtools of floodplain management are to be cost shared.Current emphasis upon the use of nonstructural tools mustbe accompanied by careful analysis of when, how much, andwhat form of Federal cost sharing is appropriate. Current-ly, the Federal Government bears a large share of thecost for programs that modify floodwaters and for programsthat modify the impact of flooding on communities andindividuals.

Given consistent Federal policy as a guide, Stategovernments can develop their own policies for flood-plain management that in time would provide guidance tolocal governments in implementing their programs. Plansand actions for floodplain management would then reflectenvironmental, esthetic, economic, and social consid-erations in an integrated approach, less biased byinconsistent funding and cost-sharing opportunities. It

VII-18

would encourage all applicants for grant, loan, andinvestment programs to give appropriate consideration toall alternatives, provide adequate information regardingeach, and specify measures to be taken to ensure thateach option will receive a fair and impartial evalua-tion. Before any proposal could be approved, each projectapplication would be accompanied by plans, specificationsand estimates, or description of the proposed work prepar-ed in sufficient detail to indicate the approach that isto be taken. Institutional arrangements among Federal,State, and local governments must be coordinated so thatrespective program standards and criteria may be satisfiedand individual programs can be administered with speedand flexibility. Development and management of programsat State and local levels usually require additionalfunding. If the Federal Government is to share in thisfunding, consistent cost sharing practices are alsoneeded.

5. Substate Institutional Arrangements

Many conflicts in floodplain management arise betweenlocal communities or between adjoining incorporated andunincorporated areas, between which or through which acommon stream flows. Diking or filling of floodplains inone jurisdiction may cause increased flood levels down-stream or across the stream. Constriction of the channelmay cause increased flood levels in upstream communities.On the other hand, communities which share a commonfloodplain may realize unexpected benefits in poolingtheir management efforts, as in joint acquisitions orregulatory programs. With increasing reliance placed onnonstructural floodplain management, the importance ofcoordination within individual watersheds and floodplainsis of critical importance. Counties, special districts,and interlocal agreements can be utilized to overcomeconflicts and achieve necessary coordination.

County governments in many States are potentially use-ful in the implementation of floodplain managementplans in small watersheds, especially around metropolitanareas where inadequate stormwater drainage is a majorcause of flooding. The powers of counties may be augmentedby State legislation as necessary to expand their func-tions, for instance, to acquire land as floodways.Together with regional planning agencies and councils ofgovernments, county planning offices may provide technicalassistance to local governments. Finally, countiesnormally exercise zoning and planning jurisdiction overunincorporated areas within their borders. Where adopted,strong county floodplain regulations may serve to inspirelocal municipalities to do the same.

VII-19

Special districts perform many floodplain managementfunctions throughout the United States. Traditionally,local drainage, flood control, and levee districts haveenabled the costs of such improvements to be charged tothe owners of benefitted land. Special districts at thecounty level in many States provide flood mitigation ben-efits through the acquisition and management of regionalparks and forest preserves. Sewage treatment districts,water districts, and other metropolitan service districtsmay exert important influence for better or worse onregional floodplain management efforts through their cor-porate policies and decisions. Certain districts havebeen formed under special acts of State legislatures forthe purpose of managing a particular watershed or streamvalley for a variety of objectives, including flood control.The potential utility of special districts for resolvinginterlocal floodplain problems has scarcely begun to beexplored.

Where the communities which share a floodplain agree asto the need for a coordinating mechanism, they may enterinto some form of interlocal agreement or contract accord-ing to the applicable State law. Municipalities haveentered into formal intergovermental contracts to establishflood control commissions or drainage districts with avariety of delegated powers relating to flood control andfloodplain management. Intergovernmental agreements arebeing much more widely accepted for diverse public func-tions ranging from libraries to medical care to wastedisposal. The use of such agreements for floodplainmanagement is long overdue.

C. The Current Situation and the Conceptual Framework

The foregoing discussion indicates that the relative roleof the Federal government in national floodplain managementis declining as local, but especially State, governmentshave begun to develop experience and effective programs.Viewed in the context of the major sources of floodingand the statements on sound floodplain mangement found inthe conceptual framework, attention is focused squarelyupon ineffective coordination as a major weakness in the useof the limited resources presently devoted to floodplainmanagement. Each of the interdependent components ofsound floodplain management -- goals, future needs, alternativestrategies, accounting, motivation, and evaluation -- dependsupon effective coordination. Institutional arrangementsorganized to satisfy the objectives and principles of

VII-20

floodplain management are necessary to coordinate policiesand programs within and among each level of government.The problem is to provide institutional arrangements thatcan effectively exercise authority, articulate policiesand programs, and provide the resources needed to carryout the respective responsibilities.

A system that can build on and incorporate the elementsof existing institutions is more likely to be successfulthan an entirely new set of institutional arrangements.For the most part, the tools of a floodplain managementsystem exist, but the authority to utilize them is dis-persed among different levels of government and amongvarious agencies.

1. Intragovernmental Coordination

At each level of government, statutory responsibilityfor programs integral to floodplain management is oftenspread across several agencies. Because Federal programsare a common source of funds for State and local programs,and because States are the primary source of necessarymanagement powers, leadership in coordinating programs atthe Federal and State levels is prerequisite to effec-tive coordination among all levels of government.

There are many ways of achieving coordination amongagencies at a given level of government. At the Federallevel the current Task Force under the auspices of FederalEmergency Management Agency should be retained to carryout a continuing evaluation of Federal programs for theirconsistency and to facilitate communication and encouragecoordination of floodplain management activities. Generalfunctions of this Task Force should include (1) preparingreports for the Congress and the public on progresstoward achieving "A Unified National Program for FloodplainManagement;" (2) developing and recommending a nationalplan of priorities for Federal assistance to State andlocal governments to assure wise management of the Nation'sfloodplains; and (3) providing leadership in solvingbroad problems such as standardization of techniques fordata collection, analysis, and dissemination. The house-keeping function for the Task Force, including maintainingnecessary files and records, providing clerical assistanceand meeting space, operating a clearinghouse for floodplainmanagement and related information, and providing otherservices, should be provided by the Federal EmergencyManagement Agency. A similar coordinating body, possiblythe Association of State Floodplain Managers could providean appropriate mechanism at the State level.

VII-21

2. Intergovernmental Coordination

Given effective coordination of agency programs at theFederal and State levels, the task of coordination betweenlevels of government becomes easier. Functions of theTask Force described above should include continuousliaison, overall assistance and guidance for programdevelopment, and a forum for the participation of multi-State regional organizations, the individual States, andlocal governments.

With active and coordinated Federal participation andsupport, State planning agencies could provide the nec-essary means to develop a set of institutional arrange-ments that can be focused through substate regionalorganizations and local governments on the floodplains ofthe Nation. The State, with the legislative authoritynecessary to initiate the programs, with firsthandknowledge of conditions, and with proximity to theproblems, is best situated to assume the lead role ofmanaging and directing a unified floodplain managementprogram. Institutional arrangements that the Stateswould have to develop are not set forth here. However,to be consistent with floodplain management, Federalsupport would have to be predicated upon institutionalarrangements within the State providing for:

- legislative direction to develop a statewide floodplainmanagement program and to assemble and maintain a flood-plain management staff; and

- legislation providing authority for the State tospecify a floodplain amangement program for communitiesthat do not respond in a reasonable time.

Intergovernmental and intragovernmental coordination,accompanied by adoption and utilization of the preceptsfound in the conceptual framework, are essential toachieving in practice the national goal of unifiedfloodplain management.

VII-22

APPENDIX A

Floodplain Management

Statement by the President Accompanying ExecutiveOrder 11988. May 24, 1977

The floodplains which adjoin the Nation's inland andcoastal waters have long been recognized as having spe-cial values to our citizens. They have provided us withwildlife habitat, agricultural and forest products, stableecosystems, and park and recreation areas. However, un-wise use and development of our riverine, coastal, andother floodplains not only destroy many of the specialqualities of these areas but pose a se ere threat to humanlife. health, and property.

Since the adoption of a national flood control policyin 1936, the Federal Government has invested about $10billion in flood protection works. Despite substantial ef-forts by the Federal Government to reduce flood hazardsand protect floodplains, annual losses from floods andadverse alteration of floodplains continue to increase.

The problem arises mainly from unwise land use prac-tices. The Federal Government can be responsible for orcan influence these practices in the construction of proj-

ects, in the management of its own properties, in the provi-sion of financial or technical assistance including supportof financial institutions, and in the uses for which itsagencies issue licenses or permits. In addition to minimiz-ing the danger to human and nonhuman communitiesliving in floodplains, active floodplain management rep-resents sound business practice by reducing the risk offlood damage to properties benefiting from Federalassistance.

Because unwise floodplain development can lead tothe loss of human and other natural resources, it is sim-ply a bad Federal investment and should be avoided. Inorder to avoid to the extent possible the long- and short-term adverse impacts associated with the occupancy andmodification of floodplains and to avoid direct or indi-rect support of floodplain development wherever there is apracticable alternative, I have issued an Executive orderon floodplain management.

Floodplain Management

Executive Order 11988. May24, 1977

By virtue of the authority vested in me by the Consti-tution and statutes of the United States of America, andas President of the United States of America, in further-ance of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969,as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the National FloodInsurance Act of 1968, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4001 etseq.), and the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973(Public Law 93-234, 87 Stat. 975), in order to avoid tothe extent possible the long and short term adverse im-pacts associated with the occupancy and modification offloodplains and to avoid direct or indirect support offloodplain development wherever there is a practicablealternative, it is hereby ordered as follows:

SECtION 1. Each agency shall provide leadership andshall take action to reduce the risk of flood loss, to mini-

mize the impact of floods on human safety, health andwelfare, and to restore and preserve the natural andbeneficial values served by floodplains in carrying out itsresponsibilities for (1) acquiring, managing, and disposingof Federal lands and facilities; (2) providing Federallyundertaken, financed, or assisted construction and im-provements; and (3) conducting Federal activities andprograms affecting land use, including but not limited towater and related land resources planning, regulating,and licensing activities.

SEC. 2. In carrying out the activities described in Sec-tion I of this Order, each agency has a responsibility toevaluate the potential effects of any actions it may takein a floodplain; to ensure that its planning programs andbudget requests reflect consideration of flood hazards and

A-1

floodplain management; and to prescribe procedures toimplement the policies and requirements of this Order,as follows:

(a) (1) Before taking an action, each agency shalldetermine whether the proposed action will occur in afloodplain-for major Federal actions significantlyaffecting the quality of the human environment, the eval-uation required below will be included in any statementprepared under Section 102(2) (C) of the National En-vironmental Policy Act. This determination shall be madeaccording to a Department of Housing and Urban Devel-opment (HUD) floodplain map or a more detailed mapof an area, if available. If such maps are not available,the agency shall make a determination of the location ofthe floodplain based on the best available information.The Water Resources Council shall issue guidance onthis information not later than October 1, 1977.

(2) If an agency has determined to, or proposes to,conduct, support, or allow an action to be located in afloodplain, the agency shall consider alternatives to avoidadverse effects and incompatible development in thefloodplains. If the head of the agency finds that the onlypracticable alternative consistent with the law and withthe policy set forth in this Order requires siting in a flood-plain, the agency shall, prior to taking action) (i) designor modify its action in order to minimize potential harmto or within the floodplain, consistent with regulationsissued in accord with Section' 2(d) of this Order, and(ii) prepare and circulate a notice containing an explana-tion of why the action is proposed to be located in thefloodplain.

(3) For programs subject to the Office of Manage-ment and Budget Circular A-95, the agency shall sendthe notice, not to exceed three pages in length includinga location map, to the state and areawide A-95 clear-inghouses for the geographic areas affected. The noticeshall include: (i) the reasons why the action is proposedto be located in a floodplain; (ii) a statement indicatingwhether the action conforms to applicable state or localfloodplain protection standards and (iii) a list of thealternatives considered. Agencies shall endeavor to allowa brief comment period prior to taking any action.

(4) Each agency shall also provide opportunity forearly public review of any plans or proposals for actionsin floodplains, in accordance with Section 2(b) of Execu-tive Order No. 11514, as amended, including the devel-opment of procedures to accomplish this objective forFederal actions whose impact is not significant enoughto require the preparation of an environmental impactstatement under Section 102(2) (C) of the National En-vironmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended.

(b) Any requests for new authorizations or appropria-tions transmitted to the Office of Management and Budgetshall indicate, if an action to be proposed will be locatedin a floodplain, whether the proposed action is in accordwith this Order.

(c) Each agency shall take floodplain management

into account when formulating or evaluating any waterand land use plans and shall require land and water re-sources use appropriate to the degree of hazard involved.Agencies shall include adequate provision for the evalua-tion and consideration of flood hazards in the regula-tions and operating procedures for the licenses, permits,loan or grants-in-aid programs that they administer.Agencies shall also encourage and provide appropriateguidance to applicants to evaluate the effects of theirproposals in floodplains prior to submitting applicationsfor Federal licenses, permits, loans or grants.

(d) As allowed by law, each agency shall issue oramend existing regulations and procedures within oneyear to comply with this Order. These procedures shalincorporate the Unified National Program for Flood-plain Management of the Water Resources Council, andshall explain the means that the agency will employ topursue the nonhazardous use of riverine, coastal and otherfloodplains in connection with the activities under its au-thority. To the extent possible, existing processes, suchas those of the Council on Environmental Quality andthe Water Resources Council, shall be utilized to fulfillthe, requirements of this Order. Agencies shall preparetheir procedures in consultation with the Water ResourcesCouncil, the Federal Insurance Administration, and theCouncil on Environmental Quality, and shall update suchprocedures as necessary.

SEc. 3. In addition to the requirements of Section 2,agencies with responsibilities for Federal real propertyand facilities shall take the following measures:

(a) The regulations and procedures established underSection 2(d) of this Order shall, at a minimum, requirethe construction of Federal structures and facilities to bein accordance with the standards and criteria and to beconsistent with the intent of those promulgated underthe National Flood Insurance Program. They shall deviateonly to the extent that the standards of the Flood Insur-ance Program are demonstrably inappropriate for a giventype of structure or facility.

(b) If, after compliance with the requirements of thisOrder, new construction of structures or facilities are tobe located in a floodplain, accepted floodproofing andother flood protection measures shall be applied to newconstruction or rehabilitation. To achieve flood protec-tion, agencies shall, wherever practicable, elevate struc-tures above the base flood level rather than filling in land.

(c) If property used by the general public has sufferedflood damage or is located in an identified flood hazardarea, the responsible agency shall provide on structuresand other places where appropriate, conspicuous delin-eation of past and probable flood height in order to en-hance public awareness of and knowledge about floodhazards.

(d) When property in floodplains is proposed for lease,easement, right-of-way, or disposal to non-Federal publicor private parties, the Federal agency shall (I ) referencein the conveyance those uses that are restricted under

A-2

identified Federal, State, or local floodplain regulations;and (2) attach other appropriate restrictions to the usesof properties by the grantee or purchaser and any suc-cessors, except where prohibited by law; or (3) withholdsuch properties from conveyance.

SEC. 4. In addition to any responsibilities under thisOrder and Sections 202 and 205 of the Flood DisasterProtection Act of 1973, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4106 and4128), agencies which guarantee, approve, regulate, orinsure any financial transaction which is related to an arealocated in a floodplain shall, prior to completing actionon such transaction, inform any private parties partici-pating in the transaction of the hazards of locating struc-tures in the floodplain.

SEC. 5. The head of each agency shall submit a reportto the Council on Environmentil Quality and to theWater Resources Council on June 30, 1978, regardingthe status of their procedures and the impact of this Orderon the agency's operations. Thereafter, the Water Re-sources Council shall periodically evaluate agency proce-dures and their effectiveness.

SEC. 6. As used in this Order:(a) The term "agency" shall have the same meaning

as the term "Executive agency" in Section 105 of Title 5of the United States Code and shall include the militarydepartments; the directives contained in this Order, how-ever, are meant to apply only to those agencies whichperform the activities described in Section 1 which arelocated in or affecting floodplains.

(b) The term "base flood" shall mean that flood which

has a one percent or greater chance of occurrence in anygiven year.

(c) The term "floodplain" shall mean the lowland andrelatively flat areas adjoining inland and coastal watersincluding floodprone areas of offshore islands, includingat a minimum, that area subject to a one percent orgreater chance of flooding in any given year.

SEC. 7. Executive Order No. 11296 of August 10, 1966,is hereby revoked. All actions, procedures, and issuancestaken under that Order and still in effect shall remain ineffect until modified by appropriate authority under theterms of this Order.

SEC. 8. Nothing in this Order shall apply to assistanceprovided for emergency work essential to save lives andprotect property and public health and safety, performedpursuant to Sections 305 and 306 of the Disaster ReliefAct of 1974 (88 Stat. 148, 42 U.S.C. 5145 and 5146).

SEC. 9. To the extent the provisions of Section 2(a)of this Order are applicable to projects covered by Sec-tion 104(h) of the Housing and Community Develop-ment Act of 1974, as amended (88 Stat. 640, 42 U.S.C.5304 (h) ), the responsibilities under those provisions maybe assumed by the appropriate applicant, if the applicanthas also assumed, with respect to such projects, all of theresponsibilities for environmental review, decisionmaking,and action pursuant to the National Environmental PolicyAct of 1969, as amended.

The White House,May 24,1977.

JIMMY CARTER

A-3

APPENDIX B

Protection of Wetlands

Sstaemen* by the President Accompanying ExecutiveOrder 11990. May 24, 1977

The Nation's coastal and inland wetlands are vitalnatural resources of critical importance to the people ofthis country. Wetlands are areas of great natural produc-nivers, and habitat for fish and wildlife resources Wet-lands contribute to the production of agricultural prod-ucts and timber, and provide recreational, scientific, andaesthetic resources of national interest.

The unwise use and development of wetlands will de-stroy many of their special qualities and important naturalfunctions. Recent estimates indicate that the United Stateshas already lost over 40 percent of our 120 million acresof wetlands inventoried in the 1950's. This piecemealalteration and destruction of wetlands through draining,dredging, filling, and other means has had an adversecumulative impact on our natural resources and on thequality of human life.

Protection of Wetlands

Executive Order 11990. May 24, 1977

By virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitu-tion and statutes of the United States of America, andas President of the United States of America, in further-ance of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969,as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), in order to avoidto the extent possible the long and short term adverseimpacts associated with the destruction or modification ofwetlands and to avoid direct or indirect support of newconstruction in wetlands wherever there is a practicablealternative, it is hereby ordered as follows:

SEcTioN 1. (a) Each agency shall provide leadershipand shall take action to minimize the destruction, loss ordegradation of wetlands, and to preserve and enhance thenatural and beneficial values of wetlands in carrying outthe agency's responsibilities for (I) acquiring, managing,and disposing of Federal lands and facilities; and (2)providing Federally undertaken, financed, or assistedconstruction and improvements; and (3) conductingFederal activities and programs affecting land use, includ-ing but not limited to water and related land resourcesplanning, regulating, and licensing activities.

(b) This Order does not apply to the issuance by Fed-eral agencies of permits, licenses, or allocations to private

tivity, hydrological utility, and environmental diversity,providing natural flood control, improved water quality,recharge of aquifers, flow stabilization of streams and

The problem of loss of wetlands arises mainly fromunwise land use practices. The Federal Government canbe responsible for or can influence these practices in theconstruction of projects, in the management of its ownproperties, and in the provisions of financial or technicalassistance.

In order to avoid to the extent possible the long andshort term adverse impacts associated with the destruc-tion or modification of wetlands and to avoid direct orindirect support of new construction in wetlands wher-ever there is a practicable alternative, I have issued anExecutive order on the protection of wetlands.

parties for activities involving wetlands on non-Federalproperty.

SEc. 2. (a) In furtherance of Section 101 (b) (3) of theNational Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C.4331 (b) (3)) to improve and coordinate Federal plans,functions, programs and resources to the end that theNation may attain the widest range of beneficial uses ofthe environment without degradation and risk to healthor safety, each agency, to the extent permitted by law,shall avoid undertaking or providing assistance for newconstruction located in wetlands unless the head of theagency finds (1) that there is no practicable alternativeto such construction, and (2) that the proposed actionincludes all practicable measures to minimize harm towetlands which may result from such use. In making thisfinding the head of the agency may take into accounteconomic, environmental and other pertinent factors.

(b) Each agency shall also provide opportunity forearly public review of any plans or proposals for new con-struction in wetlands, in accordance with Section 2(b) ofExecutive Order No. 11514, as amended, including thedevelopment of procedures to accomplish this objectivefor Federal actions whose impact is not significant enough

B-1

to require the preparation of an environmental impactstatement under Section 102(2) (C) of the NationalEnvironmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended.

Sac. 3. Any requests for new authorizations or appro-priations transmitted to the Office of Management andBudget shall indicate, if an action to be proposed wili belocated in wetlands, whether the proposed action is in ac-cord with this Order.

SEC. 4. When Federally-owned wetlands or portions ofwetlands are proposed for lease, easement, right-of-way ordisposal to non-Federal public or private partid, the Fed-eral agency shall (a) reference in the conveyance thoseuses that are restricted under identified Federal, State orlocal wetlands regulations; and (b) attach other appro-priate restrictions to the uses of properties by the granteeor purchaser and any successor, except where prohibitedby law; or (c) withhold such properties from disposal.

SiC. 5. In carrying out the activities described in Sec-tion I of this Order, each agency shall consider factorsrelevant to a proposal's effect on the survival and qualityof the wetlands. Among these factors are:

(a) public health, safety, and welfare, including watersupply, quality, recharge and discharge; pollution; floodand storm hazards; and sediment and erosion;

(b) maintenance of natural systems, including con-servation and long term productivity of existing flora andfauna, species and habitat diversity and stability, hydro-logic utility, fish, wildlife, timber, and food and fiberresources; and

(c) other uses of wetlands in the public interest, in-cluding recreational, scientific, and cultural uses.

Sac. 6. As allowed by law, agencies shall issue or amendtheir existing procedures in order to comply with thisOrder. To the extent possible, existing processes, such asthose of the Council on Environmental Quality and theWater Resources Council, shall be utilized to fulfill therequirements of this Order.

Sac. 7. As used in this Order:(a) The term "agency" shall have the same meaning

as the term "Executive agency" in Section 105 of Tide 5of the United States Code and shall include the militarydepartments; the directives contained in this Order, how-ever, are meant to apply only to those agencies which

perform the activities described in Section I which arelocated in or affecting wetlands.

(b) The term "new construction" shall include drain-ing, dredging, channelizing, filling, diking, impounding,and related activities and any structures or facilities begunor authorized after the effective date of this Order.

(c) The term "wetlands" means those areas that areinundated by surface or ground water with a frequencysufficient to support and under normal circmstances doesor would support a prevalence of vegetative or aquaticlife that requires saturated or seasonally saturated soilconditions for growth and reproduction. Wetlands gen-erally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areassuch as sloughs, potholes, wet meadows, river overflows,mud flats, and natural ponds.

SEc. 8. This Order does not apply to projects presentlyunder construction, or to projects for which all of thefunds have been appropriated thiough Fiscal Year 1977,or to projects and programs for which a draft or finalenvironmental impact statement will be filed prior toOctober 1, 1977. The provisions of Section 2 of this Ordershall be implemented by each agency not later thanOctober 1, 1977.

Sac. 9. Nothing in this Order shall apply to assistanceprovided for emergency work, essential to save lives andprotect property and public health and safety, performedpursuant to Section 305 and 306 of the Disaster ReliefAct of 1974 (88 Stat. 148, 42 U.S.C. 5145 and 5146).

Sac. 10. To the extent the provisions of Sections 2 and5 of this Order are applicable to projects covered bySection 104(h) of the Housing and Community Develop-ment Act of 1974, as amended (88 Stat. 640, 42 U.S.C.5304(h) ), the responsibilities under those provisions maybe assumed by the appropriae applicant, if the applicanthas also assumed, with respect to such projects, all ofthe responsibilities for environmental review, decision-making, and action pursuant to the National Environ-mental Policy Act of 1969, as amended.

JIMMY CARTERThe White House,

May 24, 1977.

B-2

APPENDIX C

FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT PUBLICATIONS

In 1968 the Congress directed the President to prepare "AUnified National Program for Floodplain Management" (PublicLaw 90-448, §1302 (c)). Subsequently Federal agenciesworking together through the interagency FloodplainManagement Task Force (under the auspices of the WaterResources Council until 1982 and thereafter under theauspices of the Federal Emergency Management Agency) haveissued a series of publications in support of the UnifiedNational Program. A list of these publications, theirsource and cost are provided hereafter. Those publicationsmost frequently requested by local local, State andFederal agencies are marked by an asterisk (*) and anabstract has been provided herein courtesy of the NaturalHazards Research and Applications Information Center,University of Colorado.

The following abbreviations have been used:

PC ......... Paper Copy

MF ........ Microfiche

GPO .... ....U.S. Government Printing OfficeSuperintendent of DocumentsWashington, D.C. 20402

NTIS ..... ..National Technical Information Service5285 Port Royal RoadSpringfield, VA 22151

FR ........ Federal Register

UC ......... University of ColoradoNatural Hazards Research and ApplicationsInformation Center, Campus Box 482, Boulder,CO 80309

FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT PUBLICATIONS

1. General

A Unified National Program for Flood Plain Management*(September 1979) (May 1976 - out of print)GPO 052-045-00058-4 $5.50

Floodplain Management Guidelines for Implementing E.O. 11988*(February 10, 1978)43 FR 6030 Federal Register

Floodplain Management Handbook,* H. James Owen andGlen R. Wall (September 1981)GPO 008-022-00167-1 $4.75

Evaluating the Effectiveness of Floodplain ManagementTechniques and Community Programs,*Tennessee Valley Authoriy, (1984)UC Special Publication No. 10 P.C. $8.00

2. Regulation of Flood Hazard Areas

Regulation of Flood Hazard Areas to Reduce Flood Losses,Vol. III*; Jon A. Kusler (1982)UC $8.00

Strengthening State Floodplain Management*,Patricia A. BloomgrenUC $8.00

Local Innovations in Floodplain Regulation*, Jon A. Kusler(1982)UC $8.00

Floodplain Regulations and the Courts*, Jon A. Kusler (1984)UC $5.00

Regulation of Flood Hazard Areas, Vols. 1, and 2 (1971, 1972)U.S. Water Resources CouncilGPO Out of Print

C-2

3. Nonstructural Flood Loss Reduction

Nonstructural Floodplain Management Study: OverviewGilbert F. White (October 1978)NTIS PB 80 158538 PC $ 6.00 MF $4.00

Floodplain Acquisition: Issues and Options inStrengthening Federal Policy, Jon A. Kusler (October1978)NTIS PB 80 158090 PC $10.50 MF $4.00

Improved Formulation and Evaluation of NonstructuralElements for Water Resources Plans in Flood HazardAreasLeonard A. Shabman (October 1979)NTIS PB 80 160120 PC $ 7.50 MF $4.00

Options to Improve Federal Nonstructural Responses toFloodRutherford H. Platt (December 1979)NTIS PB 80 160146 PC $13.50 MF $4.00

Nonstructural Measures in Flood Damage ReductionActivitiesGerald E. Galloway, Jr. (July 1980)NTIS PB 81 180424 PC $ 9.00 MF $4.00

The Influence of Regulations and Practices on theImplementation of Nonstructural Flood Plain PlansCME Associates, Inc. (November 1980)NTIS PB 81 231763 PC $ 9.00 MF $4.00

4. Integrated Floodplain/Wetlands Management

State and Local Acquisition of Floodplains and Wetlands*Ralph M. Field Associates (September 1981)NTIS PB 82 184805 PC $10,50 MF $4.00

Analysis of Methodologies Used for the Assessment ofWetland Values, (includes Appendices A-B) EnvironmentalLaboratory, U.S. Army Waterways Experiment Station(September 1981)NTIS PB 81 245664 PC $10.50 MF $4.00

c-3

Analysis of Methodologies used for the Assessmentof Wetland ValuesAppendices C-E (September 1981)NTIS PB 82 110362 PC $31.50 MF $4.00

Sources of Wetlands/Floodplain Research Information(October 1980)NTIS PB 81 112476 PC $ 6.00 MF $4.00

Workshop Report on Bottomland Hardwood WetlandsNational Wetlands Technical Council (June 1-5, 1980)NTIS PB 81 224974 PC $16.50 MF $4.00

Economic Aspects of Wildlife Habitat and WetlandsMidwest Research Institute (February 1979)NTIS PB 81 190654 PC $12.00 MF $4.00

Emerging Issues in Wetland/Floodplain Management --Summary Report of a Technical Seminar SeriesJon A. Kusler (September 1979)NTIS PB 80 129802 PC $ 7.50 MF $4.00

Emerging Issues in Wetland/Floodplain Management --Supporting Materials for a Report of a TechnicalSeminarJon A. Kusler (September 1979)NTIS PB 80 130404 PC $15.00 MF $4.00

5. Technical Studies

Cooperative Flood Loss Reduction: A TechnicalManual for Communities and Industry*, H. James Owen(September 1981)GPO 003-017-00501-1 $ 5.50

Guidelines for Determining Flood Flow FrequencyBulletin 17B (revised) Hydrology Committee (September1981)GPO 051-045-00084-3 $ 6.75

An Assessment of Storm Surge ModelingHydrology Committee (1980)NTIS PB 81 233785 PC $ 7.50 MF $4.00

Estimating Peak Flow Frequencies for NaturalUngaged Watersheds(A Proposed Nationwide Test) Hydrology Committee (1981)NTIS PB 81 239329 PC $27.00 MF $4.00

C-4

6. Abstracts of Frequently Requested Publications

U.S. Water Resources Council. 2120 L Street,NW. Washington, D.C. 20037 A Unified NationalProgram for Floodplain Management (Revised), 1979.

Available from the Superintendent of Documents,U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.20402. Stock Number is 052045-0058-4.

Since it was first issued in 1976, a number of factorshave prompted a revision of the report. These factorsinclude: the President's 1977 Environmental Message;Executive Order 11988 on Floodplain Management; ExecutiveOrder 11990 on the Protection of Wetlands; and thePresident's Water Policy Reform Message of 1978.The report describes a unified, cooperative effort byall levels of government and the private sector to minimizeloss of life, property and environmental values withinfloodplains. A conceptual framework is set out to guidelocal, State and Federal decision makers toward balancedconsideration of alternative goals, strategies, andtools. Improved comprehensive local floodplain managementefforts under the National Flood Insurance Program, theCoastal Zone Management Program, the Clean Water Act, andother programs are also described. At all governmentallevels, innovative floodplain management efforts en-compassing a wide range of tools and stressing non-structural mitigative approaches are being increasinglyemphasized.

Executive Order 11988 - Guidelines for Federal Agencies.Federal Register 43, no. 29, February 10, 1978.

A set of guidelines for Federal agencies to use inimplementing Executive Order 11988--FloodplainManagement--has been issued by the Water Resources Council.The objectives of the Executive Order are "to avoid tothe extent possible the long- and shortterm adverseimpacts associated with the occupancy and modifica-tion of floodplains and to avoid direct and indirectsupport of floodplain development whereever there is apracticable alternative..." Through their regulations andprocedures, the Federal agencies are required to take aleadership role in:

C-5

• avoiding the base (one per chance) floodplain if at allpossible;

° acting to adjust to the base floodplain; and

• keeping the public informed of proposed actions in thebase floodplain and encouraging public participationin floodplain decision making.

The Guidelines, the result of a 12-month effort of aninteragency task force, spell out the responsibilities ofthe agencies to recognize that floodplains have uniqueand significant public values, and to evaluate the potentialeffects of any action which they may take in a floodplain.The agencies must take floodplain management into accountboth in formulating their own water and land use plans,and in evaluating the water and land use plans of others.Procedures for doing this are to be prepared in consulta-tion with the Water Resources Council, the Federal InsuranceAdministration, and the Council on Environmental Quality.

Floodplain Management Handbook. Flood Loss ReductionAssociates. Prepared for the U.S. Water Resources Council.1981. 69 pp. plus appendices. Available from theSuperintendent of Documents, U.S. Government PrintingOffice, Washington, D.C. 20402. Stock # 008-022-00167-1.

This handbook summarizes flood problems, their causes andwhat can be done to reduce losses. It is intended tohelp local officials, public interest groups, and concernedcitizens to assess the problems in their areas and initiateeffective management of the floodplain. Guidelines fordeveloping a floodplain management program are includedand sources of technical and financial assistance areidentified.

Special Publication #10, Evaluating the Effectivenessof Floodplain Techniques and Community Programs.133 pp. $8.00

This report grew out of a seminar sponsored in 1984 bythe Tennessee Valley Authority with the cooperation ofthe Interagency Floodplain Management Task Force. Thevolume has five parts: an overview of the issues; twoissue papers summarizing the state of knowledge on evaluatingthe effectiveness of nonstructural floodplain managementprograms and community programs; the papers presented by

C-6

speakers and panelists at the seminar; and conclu-sions and recommendations. The papers were givenby university researchers, Federal agency staff, Stateand local government representatives, and privateconsultants.

Special Publication #2, Regulation of Flood HazardAreas to Reduce Flood Losses, Volume 3. Jon A. Kusler.1982. 300 pp. $8.00

This volume was contracted for by the U.S. Water ResourcesCouncil to update and supplement Volumes 1 and 2 which werepublished by the Council between 1968 and 1971. Volume 3reviews accomplishments and problems of the 1970s in theuse of floodplain regulations as one element of floodplainmanagement. Strategies are suggested for improving thequality of regulations and for combining regulations withother management tools to achieve multiple State andlocal goals during the 1980's.

Special Publication #3, Strengthening State FloodplainManagement, Appendix A to Volume 3 (SP#2). Patricia A.Bloomgren.1982. 123 pp. $8.00

SP #3 reviews existing State floodplain management,makes suggestions for strengthening existing programs,and provides a framework for developing new ones. Statestatutes, their enforcement, and litigation based on themare analyzed. Profiles of State floodplain managementprograms provide specific information.

Special Publication #4. Innovation in Local FloodplainManagement, Appendix B to Volume 3 (SP#2). Jon A. Kusler.262 pp. $8.00

SP #4 examines innovative community floodplain managementregulalations with nonregulatory techniques. The volumeis supplemented by 75 case studies of communities withcreative floodplain management programs.

Special Publication #5. Floodplain Regulations and theCourts, 1970-1981. Jon A. Kusler. 51 pp. $5.00

C-7

SP #5 is a separate volume for attorneys, governmentofficials, researchers, and others with an interest inthe legal ramifications of floodplain management. Thepublication reviews conclusions from the 1970 and 1971reports on judicial response to floodplain regulations,examines the types of cases litigated during the 1970s,and analyzes judicial treatment given to specific claimsand issues. Additionally, the report provides descrip-tions of the rulings handed down during the decade by bothFederal and State courts in over 50 cases on floodplainand wetland regulations, flood insurance and Section 404permits. Complete with a bibliography.

State and Local Acquisition of Flood Plains and Wetlands:A Handbook on the Use of Acquisition in Flood PlainManagement, U.S. Water Resources Council, 1981. 137 pp.Out of Print.

Land acquisition is a nonstructural flood managementalternative which offers a number of distinct economicand social advantages. Directed at State and localplanning officials familiar with flood management problemsbut without experience in floodplain acquisition, thishandbook addresses economic, organizational, and managerialdifficulties associated with the acquisition process.Elements of an acquisition program discussed include fund-ing, the condemnation procedure, relocation assistance,and legal authority. Ten case studies of successful re-location projects disclose the features of each acquisitionprogram which contributed to its ultimate success. Thehandbook stresses that land acquisition is not an end initself, and that the process usually needs to be used inconjunction with other flood management tools to achievebest results.

Cooperative Flood Loss Reduction: A Technical Manual forCommunity and Industry, Flood Loss Reduction Associates.Prepared for the SEDA Council of Governments, U.S. WaterResources Council, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, FederalEmergency Management Agency, and National Weather Service.1981. 105 pp. plus appendices. $5.50. Available fromthe Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government PrintingOffice, Washington, D.C. 20402; Stock #003-01700501-1.

C-8

This manual describes two categories of measures forloss reduction: those with community-wide effects,generally requiring the participation of local govern-ments; and site-specific measures that can be implementedby individual property managers. The mutual benefits tocommunities and industry of cooperative efforts to implementcomplementary measures are stressed. The manual describesthe procedure for developing such cooperative programsand includes a case study which has produced multi-milliondollar benefits.

C-9

APPENDIX D

TRENDS FOR FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT

July 1984

Prepared by the Federal Interagency Floodplain

Management Task Force

INTRODUCTION

Beginning in 1980, the Water Resources Council started toexamine the future direction for floodplain management.The Water Resources Council's effort coincided with asimilar undertaking by the National Science Foundation.That endeavor was continued by the Interagency FloodplainManagement Task Force after its reassignment to the FederalEmergency Management Agency because it was timely to defin-itively examine the appropriate direction for floodplainmanagement.

That effort required an exhausting review of the numerousfloodplain management documents which have been publishedover the past two decades and which set forth recommend-ations for floodplain management programs and activities.The following documents were examined in the context offuture direction for floodplain management activities, withoverall query of how they would tie into A "Unified NationalProgram for Floodplain Management."

House Document 465 (U.S. House of Representatives, 1966)New Directions in U.S. Water Policy (The National WaterCommission, 1973)Flood Hazard in the United States: A Research

Assessment (University of Colorado, 1975)The Water's Edge (Bureau of Outdoor Recreation,

League of Women Voters, National Association ofCounties, 1975)

Natural Hazard Management in Coastal Areas (NationalOceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),1976)

A Unified National Program for Floodplain Management(Water Resources Council, 1979)

A Report on Flood Hazard Mitigation (National ScienceFoundation, 1980)

Issues and Options in Flood Loss Reduction (Office ofTechnology Assessment, 1980)

The Federal Coastal Programs Review (National Oceanicand Atmospheric Administration, 1981)

Strengthening State Floodplain Management (WaterResources Council, 1981)

Developing Flood Hazard Mitigation Priorities(National Science Foundation, 1982)

Volume III, Regulation of Flood Hazard Areas to ReduceFlood Losses (Water Resources Council, 1983)

Local Innovations in Floodplain Management (WaterResources Council, 1982)

A Plan for Research on Floods and their Mitigationin the United States (Illinois State Water Survey,1983)

D-1

The Task Force focused on the National Science Foundationreport entitled "Flood Hazard Mitigation." That report,published in 1980, contained 34 conclusions and 67 recom-mendations. These recommendations encompassed recommen-dations proposed in various earlier documents, and wereconsidered adequate as a guide for assessing floodplainmanagement needs for the future.

A second National Science Foundation report entitled"Developing Flood Hazard Mitigation the planning andimplementation recommendations. These recommendationswere further divided into three strategies: (1) modifyingthe susceptibility to flood damage and disruption; (2)modifying the floods themselves; and, (3) modifying(reducing) the adverse impacts on the individual and thecommunity - discussed in "A Unified National Program forFloodplain Management." In addition, the recommendations inthe second classification were reviewed and several havebeen included in this document.

D-2

TRENDS OF FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT

Since 1965, when the Federal government recognized aholistic approach to contending with flooding, there hasbeen a significant set of developments. Floodplainmanagement is recognized as wise use of the nation'sfloodplains. An increased emphasis has been placed uponnonstructural approaches. Thousands of communities haveadopted floodplain management ordinances in order to par-ticipate in the National Flood Insurance Program. Federalagencies have expanded their efforts in providing financialand technical assistance. Acquisition of flood proneproperties has begun. Executive Order 11988, FloodplainManagement has been implemented by Federal agencies.Many warning and response systems have been developed.In post-flood disaster situations, interagency hazardmitigation teams have been established and activated.

The recent recommendations for improving floodplainmanagement must be examined in the context of thesedevelopments. As we proceed through the 1980's we mustdetermine whether these recommendations will further theadvances of the past 15 years and whether the end resultwill be a significant reduction in the future loss oflife and property from flooding as well as the retentionof natural floodplain values. In examining this report'srecommendations, several trends are evident. The remainderof this brief overview will address these trends in thecontext of the overall recommendations for future actionby Federal, State and local governments, as well as bythe private sector.

The advent of the National Flood Insurance Program in1968 has resulted in over 17,000 communities participatingin the program with approximately 1.9 million insuredproperties. The direct impact of the program has beenhazard identification and initiation of mitigation measuresin each participating jurisdiction. With floodplainidentification nearly completed, there is now a widespreadavailability of risk data. Utilizing this information,many communities have undertaken innovative and effectiveapproaches to managing their flood hazard areas. The States,themselves, have increased their resource commitment andunified support of floodplain management. Their commitmentis evidenced by the formation of and initiatives taken bythe Association of State Floodplain Managers. Growth andcommitment by the States and local communities are criticalfor the long term development and future of an overallprogram of floodplain management, a fact recognized in1976 when "A Unified National Program for FloodplainManagement" concluded that the Federal government alonehad progressed about as far as it could.

D-3

However, without increased public awareness and acceptance,the regulations cannot be implemented successfully.Therefore, it is necessary to provide greater informationto the local officials, private citizens, and the mediaon non-structural and structural approaches for achievingsound floodplain management. Without that increasedknowledge and endorsement, the local decisionmaker andimplementing official will be unable to enact and enforcethose measures and techniques designed to reduce the lossof life and property.

In order to enhance those floodplain management initiatives,financial and technical assistance by the Federal agencieshas been increased. This has particularly been demonstratedby the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the SoilConservation Service, Tennessee Valley Authority, FederalEmergency Management Agency and other agencies.

Some form of floodplain management regulations has beenadopted by all of the communities participating in theNational Flood Insurance Program, although the impacts ofthese regulations are not well documented. These floodplainmanagement regulation actions taken by local governmentsdemonstrate that awareness of and the ability to dealwith these flood problems has been increased. It cannot beemphasized enough that it is the adoption and enforcementof various floodplain measures by local governments thatwill ultimately lead to the reduction of flood losses.

Acquisition of flood-prone property has been recommendedas an alternative to be considered along with other floodhazard mitigation strategies. Over time, the purchase ofimproved and unimproved flood-prone properties and theirsubsequent dedication to open space or other less damageableuses should result in substantial cost savings to thetaxpayer. Within the past several years, the FederalEmergency Management Agency implemented Section 1362 ofthe National Flood Insurance Act, thereby commencing itsflooded property acquisition program. That program, inconjunction with other Federal land acquisition programs,will provide the basis for carrying out this recommendation.However, acquisition programs presently have limitedapplicability.

Continued compliance and implementation of Executive Order11988, Floodplain Management by all affected Federalagencies with endorsement by State and local governmentsare necessary if substantial savings from flood damagesare to be achieved. In 1982, the President's Task Force onRegulatory Relief requested that the Federal Emergency

D-4

Management Agency review the regulatory burdens imposedby Federal floodplain management policy as established byExecutive Order 11988. That Task force concurred with the1983 Federal Emergency Management Agency report whichconcluded that Federal floodplain management policy hassuccessfully guided unwise actions away from floodplainsand minimized the impact of those actions taken in flood-plains. Parallel efforts are now needed at the State andlocal level.

That same Task Force also concluded that the 100-year baseflood standard appeared to be working well, it has wide-spread use, and it would not be in the public interest toadopt another methodology. Nevertheless, with the rapidlydeveloping urban areas, the broader floodplain managementissues within the entire watershed must be addressed.Urban runoff must be examined and stormwater managementimplemented.

Traditionally, the emphasis of floodplain managementactions has been directed towards riverine flooding withspecial action given to coastal hazard areas. The CoastalBarriers Resources Act precludes the availability of mostFederal financial assistance, including flood insurance,on the Department of Interior's designated undevelopedcoastal barriers. More than anything else, passage ofthat Act signifies that there has been a reaffirmation ofthe basic Federal policy that floodplain occupants shouldbear the full cost of their occupancy. In recent years,the attention has begun to focus on other types of floodingsituations. Often characterized as "unique" hazardareas, it may be appropriate to refer to mudflood, mudflow,alluvial fan, erodable stream bed, flash flood, ice jam,etc., as "regional' high hazard areas.

Long term mitigation measures have been the basis for thefloodplain management provisions advocated by Federalagencies and adopted by State and levels of government.However, in order to more completely implement strategiesto reduce losses of life and property, greater attentionmust be given to flood warning and response systems.While warning and response systems are being incorporatedinto comprehensive planning for earthquakes, hurricanes,and other natural hazards, insufficient attention hasbeen placed on mechanisms for flooding events.

In December, 1980, 12 Federal agencies executed an inter-agency agreement for nonstructural damage reductionmeasures applied to common flood disaster planning andpost-recovery practices. Through the use of hazard

D-5

mitigation teams,'flood disaster recovery efforts havebeen coordinated and those efforts have given full con-sideration to nonstructural as well as structural measuresto minimize future flood losses. With the experience ofthe past several years, there is the demonstrated utilityfor continuing the hazard mitigation teams. However,insufficient attention has been given to developingprocedures with State and local representativesfor pre-disaster planning to avoid future losses.

It is highly noticeable that the following recommendationsstress, almost in their entirety, nonstructural strategiesand solutions. In examining means for reducing floodlosses, all alternatives for totally integrated floodplainmanagement approach must be explored. In addition tofloodplain management regulations, insurance and floodpreparedness measures, due consideration must be given tothe full range of flood hazard reduction measuresincluding the structural solutions such as levees andchannel modifications and protection of natural floodplainvalues.

Notwithstanding the progress made in the past 15 years,problems still persist. Regulation of Flood Hazard Areasto Reduce Flood Losses, Volume III, concluded 'few measuresinitiated in the 1970's were used to their full potential."Major problems included:

o Regulations were only partially effective in many ofthe 12,000 emergency program communities that adopted orstated the intent to adopt regulations to qualify forthe National Flood Insurance Program.

O The National Flood Insurance Program studies and mapscales, levels of accuracy, and types of data were oftenpartially inadequate for regulation, acquisition, andother site-specific floodplain management because theywere developed to meet insurance rather than land usemanagement needs.

° Local governments and some State agencies lacked staffexperience to evaluate how individual permits wouldaffect flood flows. Neither were agency personnel ableto monitor or enforce State and local floodplain regula-tions.

o State and local regulations were relatively ineffective inreducing losses to existing uses except immediately afterflood disasters.

D-6

o Floodplain regulations were often poorly coordinated withother resource protection regulations and comprehensivezoning and planning.

° Federal subsidies for flood control works, disasterassistance, flood insurance, and public works sometimesencouraged continued floodplain development or discour-aged local government control of floodplain developmentand private damage reduction measures such as floodproofing.

o Court challenges to regulations were continued, althoughvery few were successful.

In evaluating the recommendations, it must be rememberedthat each level of government (Federal, State and local)has separate authorities and responsibilities in addressingthe potential loss to life and property from flooding andthe protection of natural floodplain values. Experiencehas shown that sound floodplain management cannot beimplemented in a vacuum; the various participants must bebrought together in order to collectively implement thetotal and integrated program.

Through the following recommendations, the Task Forceseeks to further the goal of a cooperative floodplainmanagement program with its partnership of State respon-sibility, local management, and Federal assistance.

D-7

RECOMMENDATIONS

STRATEGY A: MODIFY THE SUSCEPTIBILITY TO FLOOD DAMAGE ANDDISRUPTION

1. Floodplain management regulations should be developedin consonance with Federal and State law, and adoptedand enforced by local communities.

2. All levels of government and private entitites shouldmake increased use of alternatives of identifying andacquiring those 100-year floodplain areas for whichinundation would be particularly costly or which haveparticular value for other purposes. Generally,these lands should be dedicated to open space use.

3. There should be complete implementation of ExecutiveOrder 11988 by all affected Federal agencies. Incomplying with the Executive Order, Federal agenciesmust insure consistency within each agency, A newand effective approach, such as appropriate multiagencyreview for proposed projects and forseeable activitieson an area-wide basis, is strongly encouraged.

4. States should be encouraged to adopt Executive orderstsimilar to the Federal Executive Order, which willproperly guide investment of State monies away fromhigh hazard areas.

5. Planning, including standards, guidelines and proceduresfor dealing with urban storm runoffs, should includeconsideration of future changes in land use anddensity when estimating discharges and predictingfuture probabilities of flooding.

6. Storm water detention regulations are relatively recentand related planning, design, and legal issues shouldbe explored through a number of demonstrated projects.

7. Use of the 100-year flood standard as a minimum forregulation of flood hazard areas should be continued.In addition, critical facilities should be at a minimumprotected to the 500-year flood elevation. Theseinclude but are not limited to fire, disaster andpolice centers, hospitals, prisons, and facilitiesfor the elderly and handicapped. Both standards shouldbe checked periodically to determine the need forboundary adjustment.

D-8

8. The States should be encouraged to provide increasedfunding and staff for flood hazard mitigation infloodplain management, response planning, and stormwatermanagement. The Federal government should supportthe States in developing well defined legislative andadministrative provisions and staff to carry outflood hazard mitigation.

9. Complete and comprehensive flood hazard mitigation plansfor coastal areas, including barrier islands, should bedeveloped and implemented.

10. Greater emphasis should be placed on the consequencesof potential dam failures.

11. Flood warning and response systems should be expandedto the maximum extent practicable to cover occupiedflood-prone areas. The response plans must be developedlocally, and where practicable, linked to the regionaland national warning systems. Each system should betested at least annually, and where practicable, semi-annually, and be conducted under the ageis of anindependent organization.

12. Policies should be developed to help prevent bias inthe benefit/cost analysis of alternative measures forflood loss reduction. Such bias may relate to non-structural/structural, governmental/private, anddevelopmental/environmental measures.

13. Federal, State and local authorities should study thepotentials for major coastal erosion, landslides, andmudslides, and should develop land-use plans and im-plement appropriate land-use regulations.

14. Liaison and coordination between government agenciesresponsible for flood hazard mitigation and otheraspects of water resources planning and managementshould be improved, or whenever appropriate be estab-lished, developed and used.

15. Further methodology to improve integration of planningdifferent aspects of flood hazard mitigation shouldbe developed. Such strategies may be effective ifthey reflect mixes of structural and nonstructuralapproaches appropriate to the circumstances.

16. Federal agencies, State offices and local communitiesshould improve the development, and updated maintenanceof pre- and post-disaster flood hazard mitigation plans

D-9

to facilitate timely local response, relief,rehabilitation and long term recovery.

17. Federal and State agencies and local communitiesshould make a determined effort to strengthen theexisting flood forecasting, warning and evacuationsystems.

18. Federal, State and local program standards,guidelines and regulations should be changed toprohibit any new development in floodway areas whichwill increase flood elevations. In circumstancesrequiring exceptions to this prohibition, apromising solution may be for the developer to purchaseall necessary property rights from all adverselyaffected property owners to compensate for increasedflood damage, increased building costs, increasedflood insurance and other costs.

19. Research should be undertaken to identify means avail-able to local governments to strengthen their re-sponsibilities for flood mitigation. Also, researchshould be undertaken to identify ways in which Stateand Federal agencies can carry out their respectiveprograms in order to strengthen the role of localgovernments and avoid pre-empting that localresponsibility.

20. Research should be supported to determine the generalbeneficial aspects of flooding to groundwater resources,recreation, water quality, commercial and sportfisheries, general wildlife resources, and othercomponents of riverine and coastal floodplain andwetland environments. Information from this researchshould be incorporated within the various flood hazardmitigation strategies.

STRATEGY B: MODIFY FLOODING

1. No funding for any Federal, State or local structuralflood control measures should be made availableunless accompanied by appropriate floodplain regulationsand flood preparedness plans.

2. The various Federal, State and local policies coveringthe design, construction, and use of levees andchannel modifications for flood control should bereviewed. Any problems associated with the policiesshould be identified and solutions should be recommend-ed.

D-10

STRATEGY C: MODIFY THE IMPACT OF FLOODING ON INDIVIDUALSAND THE COMMUNITY

1. The availability of Federal flood insurance in an areashould continue to be contingent upon appropriate localland use planning and implementation. Also, Federalflood control measures, financial assistance infloodplain land acquisition, and financial aid inrelocating floodplain occupants out of the floodplainshould be contingent upon effective local land-useplanning and implementation.

2. Policies and procedures should be developed to decreaseor eliminate the subsidy for flood insurance from theFederal government in high hazard areas after repetitivelosses.

3. To assure public awareness of flood potential, pastand potential flood heights should be prominentlydisplayed in developed and developing floodplains.

4. Information presented to residents in hazard-proneareas should stress the potential losses from futurefloods.

5. Research should be undertaken to better analyze thenature, size and trend of the Federal subsidy to theNational Flood Insurance Program.

6. The information on the probability of future floodsshould also be presented on the basis of the risk ofits occurrence over a time period such as 20 or 30years rather than a one year or 100-year time period;people are likely to pay more attention to, and takeprotective action for, an event which they see assomewhat likely to occur in their lifetime suchas their mortgage period.

7. The impact and effectiveness of different programsand procedures for disseminating information on floodhazards relative to individual and community adoptionof mitigation measures should be evaluated.

8. A national effort should be undertaken to disseminateboth structural and non-structural design informationto State and local governments and to the designprofessions. Much of this information is available,but it is not reaching the proper users.

D-11

9. Educational information and guidance manuals need tobe supplied to local officials and lenders in allflood-prone communities. They must be made aware ofthe opportunities to incorporate such informationinto local planning and development efforts.

10. An information packet should be developed for themedia which explains the nature of floods, therelationship between unwise development and damage,hazard mitigation methods, and available programs.

11. The important role that tax adjustments at the Federal,State and local level can play, both in influencingdecisions about floodplain occupancy and in providingrelief to individuals should be examined.

D-12

* U.S. G.P.O. 1998 - 621-037 / 93277