Virginia Natural Resources Secretary Issues Public Comment on FEMA Notice

WASHINGTON, May 12 -- Virginia Natural Resources Secretary Matthew J. Strickler has issued a public comment on the Federal Emergency Management Agency's notice entitled "Hazard Mitigation Assistance: Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities". The comment was written and posted on May 11, 2020:

* * *

The Commonwealth of Virginia appreciates the efforts of the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) work to bolster and improve its pre-disaster hazard mitigation programs to protect against natural hazards. As sea level rise, drought, wildfire and flooding increasingly threaten our communities, preparing to mitigate and withstand these natural hazards is imperative. For these reasons, the Commonwealth submits the comments below in response to the FEMA Proposed Policy Guidance: Hazard Mitigation Assistance: Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities, Docket ID FEMA-2019-0018.

Virginia's Most Urgent Natural Hazard - Flooding

Flooding is the predominant natural hazard in the Commonwealth of Virginia. It impacts public safety, environmental quality, local economies, and may destroy or devalue the most significant financial asset for many individuals - their home or business.

With more than 100,000 miles of streams and rivers, as well as 10,000 miles of estuarine and coastal shoreline, Virginia's flood risk is statewide. Flood risk comes in many forms, and is increasing because of climate change, accelerating sea level rise, increased rainfall intensity, duration, and frequency, and development in flood-prone areas. All told, Virginia has 2.3 million acres (9% of the state) currently identified as Special Flood Hazard Areas, areas where flood insurance is often required by the federal government. As sea levels rise, and storms become more frequent and more severe, Virginia must also plan for that area to move and expand. Climate change will exacerbate Virginia's flooding risk.

Over the past five years, Virginia property owners have filed more than 4,700 National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) claims and received $110 million in damage payments. Since the NFIP's creation in 1976, Virginia property owners have filed more than 49,000 claims and received more than $744 million in damage payments.

The 2018 National Climate Assessment anticipates that "[b]oth the frequency and severity of extreme precipitation events are projected to continue increasing in the [Southeast] region under both lower and higher scenarios. By the end of the century, projections indicate as much as double the number of heavy rainfall events (2-day precipitation events every 5 years) and up to a 21% increase in the amount of rain falling on the heaviest precipitation days (days with a 20-year return period)"./1

It is clear that this trend will continue, and flood risk will continue to impact Virginians.

Virginia has taken steps to prepare- by establishing a Commonwealth sea level rise planning standard using National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) 2017 data (Intermediate High Curve Scenario), establishing elevation standards for state-owned buildings, and establishing a strong flood risk management program. We believe including preparation for climate impacts is an essential consideration for future capital expenditures, and have and will continue to take action to ensure attention to such measures in the Commonwealth.

Now is the time to reconsider the future impacts of climate change in setting standards for national, state, and local responses to natural hazards and flooding in particular. To do so, the Commonwealth of Virginia makes three key recommendations, with detailed points related to each that will bolster and improve the proposed Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program.

1. The BRIC Program Should Prioritize Community Wide Flood Mitigation Projects Should be Prioritized

Too often, the majority of projects approved under the Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program (PDM), BRIC's predecessor, were focused on individual property response, including structural elevations and the purchase and protection of electric generators to mitigate loss of power. While these approaches are important and beneficial for the property owner, they are significantly less impactful than community scale mitigation. Elevated homes may withstand one or more flooding events, but roadways, public transit and utility systems, access for first responders, and other critical infrastructure may not. Under these circumstances, protecting individual homes as isolated islands is not the most constructive approach.

By contrast, appropriately designed and sited structural flood controls or nature-based features that promote functioning floodways not only protect individual structures, but also protect transportation and utility infrastructure, minimize service disruptions, and in the best cases also provide additional community benefits like open space and recreation areas. Community scale mitigation provides maximum protection for people and properties, and helps communities fully recover and return to normal life as quickly as possible.

The Commonwealth of Virginia seeks to implement nature-based approaches to community scale flood mitigation - such as stream, wetland, and floodplain restoration, living shorelines, and strategic relocation and buyouts of at-risk properties whenever possible. They are often the more cost-effective alternative, last longer, and provide additional ecosystem services including recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and pollution reduction. We recognize that structural approaches such as floodwalls, breakwaters, levees, and dams are also appropriate tools, particularly when used in combination with nature-based features.

To ensure that community wide flood mitigation projects are prioritized:

* BRIC Program Should Provide Technical Assistance Grants to States: Planning and oversight is essential to any endeavor of this size. Success on a community scale requires integrated, long-term planning, and the best available data upon which to act. Virginia, like many states, lacks the personnel required to provide this planning, integration, and data collection. Due to state budget shortfalls, the state lacks enough dam safety engineers and inspectors, floodplain managers, and hazard mitigation planners. These shortcomings create several complications. A lack of dam safety engineers and inspections jeopardizes the integrity of community-wide flood protection that is already in place. Data sharing and collaboration on a community scale will expose the risk associated with local dams and help enable a community to be better prepared for mitigation, response, and recovery from dam failures and incidents. It allows communities to incorporate information about dams into emergency operations planning, evacuation planning, mitigation planning, and other community planning efforts. Local dam safety programs and risk mapping related to dams also provide additional Community Rating System (CRS) credit for participating communities and helps to lower flood insurance premiums.

A shortage of floodplain managers inhibits localities from engaging with the CRS System to reduce risk and lower flood insurance premiums. It delays flood map upgrades and the flood-safe permitting of development. And finally, hazard mitigation planners help localities to create and update their mitigation plans. As we address climate change and a significant increase in flooding and extreme weather events, modernizing and adapting mitigation plans to encourage community-wide, nature-based mitigation whenever possible is imperative.

Providing states with needed funding to ensure proper coordination and leadership of flood-mitigation plans would play an important role in directing flood control efforts.

2. The BRIC Program Should Prioritize the Acquisition of Open Space, Relocations, and Reconstruction

Virginia believes that protecting naturally functioning floodplains is the preferred approach to ensure community-wide mitigation with an array of benefits. Floodplains support local economies and increase the quality of life by providing valuable ecosystem services and recreational opportunities. Natural floodplains and wetlands boost nearby property values and can provide recreational tourism opportunities, increasing personal and shared wealth in the community. These areas also provide a buffer against fast moving flood water, absorb and store excess runoff, and filter pollutants from our water resources. As a result, protected floodplains reduce flood damage and cleanup costs and allow for faster recovery from flood events. Community projects in floodplains can tie together multiple goals including hazard mitigation, open space, historic preservation, recreation, and quality of life. In addition, this gives these projects the potential to use multiple funding sources. Wetlands protect against flooding with one-acre typically storing one million gallons of water.

To prioritize the acquisition of open space, relocations, and reconstruction:

* Ensure BRIC Funds Can Be Used for Community Acquisitions- Virginia's groundbreaking land conservation model, ConserveVirginia, has identified 545,461 acres of floodplain and tidal wetlands that would reduce nearby flooding if they were permanently protected. Ensuring the BRIC program allows the state to work with partners to acquire or restrict development on those properties would ensure their long-term flood mitigation function and provide the various additional benefits mentioned above.

* Ensure Price Flexibility for Relocation and Reconstruction- There are several hindrances in the existing program that limit relocations and reconstruction, even when the property owner is interested. For Example, the $276,000 cap on relocations and $150,000 cap on rebuilds outlined are simply too low to allow these projects in certain parts of the country. In parts of coastal Virginia, home prices and construction costs far exceed these limits. To ensure the BRIC program encourages these actions across the nation, these limits should be removed.

* Ensure Location Flexibility for Reconstruction- The existing program will only allow for reconstruction within an existing property. If that entire property is in a special food hazard area, this accomplishes little. Coastal communities need the ability to relocate neighborhoods or communities to upland areas. This flexibility must be included in the BRIC program.

* Ensure Flexibility of Open Space Rules- Current rules require that any property that has been bought-out or acquired must be dedicated and maintained in perpetuity for uses that are compatible with open space, recreational, or wetlands management practices. While the intent is clear, the limitations on development to support these uses provides a disincentive for communities to set aside open space. The requirement for regional approval of compatible structures has resulted in inconsistent allowances. If the rules allowed communities to have more flexibility for development to support the use of open space, providing an additional benefit for the community and the tax base, more communities may engage in these actions. We recommend loosening rules to allow limited, recreational development on these sites as long as they would not result in altered hydrology or significant losses if flooded.

3. The BRIC Program Should be Equitable and Encourage Equity

The current administration of the program inadvertently creates certain inequities regarding which communities receive pre-disaster mitigation funds. Often, we find that well-funded coastal communities that have large staffs and robust regional planning support submit the majority of applications and receive the majority of funds. Alternatively, property values in coastal communities are such that while they may receive funds for elevations and floodproofing, it is difficult to find funding for buyouts and strategic relocation. Removing barriers for all types of communities and income levels is imperative to ensure a just and successful statewide approach to flood and disaster mitigation.

To ensure an equitable allotment of funds:

* Address Requirements for Impoverished Communities- Under the proposed BRIC program, FEMA may provide up to 90 percent of the cost of eligible mitigation activities for small impoverished communities. Eligible communities must be a community of 3,000 or fewer individuals and be economically disadvantaged. Virginia has coastal communities in the Hampton Roads area of Virginia that meet the economically disadvantaged criteria but are larger than 3,000 people. These communities must have an opportunity to receive FEMA grants to protect against future flooding. Virginia suggests an alternative metric of "low income geographic area", to include any locality, or community within a locality, that has a median household income that is not greater than 80 percent of the local median household income, or, any area designated as a qualified opportunity zone by the U.S. Secretary of the Treasury.

* Ensure Tidal and Nontidal Flooding Are Addressed- Virginia faces two different types of flood risk. Virginia's coastal communities, and those along tidally influenced rivers face sea level rise and potential tropical storm surges. Nontidal communities, primarily in the western part of the state face riverine flooding and spring storms. Both regions are at risk and both have reported significant flood damages over recent years. Ensuring that both riverine and coastal flooding projects receive a minimum percentage of the available funds will ensure parity between smaller rural communities and more populous regions in the coastal zone.

* Ensure Socio-Economic Disparity Doesn't Impact Project Scores- The current program prioritizes grants for communities with the most NFIP policies or those with the most Severe Repetitive Loss properties. While this may bear the most impact on claims to the NFIP, it is not the best way to reduce regional or statewide risk. To ensure equity, the BRIC program should explore alternative metrics when choosing which communities to award grants. These could include: ability of individuals to afford their NFIP premiums; ability of communities to draw from other federal grant programs such as NOAA's coastal programs; amount of Special Flood Hazard Areas in a community, historic flood damages, etc.

Conclusion

The Commonwealth of Virginia understands the growing risk of natural hazards - particularly those associated with climate change - and that pre-disaster mitigation is imperative to ensure a continued thriving way of life and a strong economy for our citizens. FEMA's pre-disaster mitigation programs are among the primary sources of funding for this critical work, and we appreciate the opportunity to work collaboratively to grow and improve these programs. We hope you will consider these recommendations as you continue to refine the national approach to disaster mitigation.

Sincerely,

Matthew J. Strickler

* * *

Footnote:

1/ Fourth National Climate Assessment, Southeast Region Section https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/

* * *

The notice can be viewed at: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=FEMA-2019-0018-0001

TARGETED NEWS SERVICE (founded 2004) features non-partisan 'edited journalism' news briefs and information for news organizations, public policy groups and individuals; as well as 'gathered' public policy information, including news releases, reports, speeches. For more information contact MYRON STRUCK, editor, [email protected], Springfield, Virginia; 703/304-1897; https://targetednews.com