Rediscovering Water Resources and Responsibilities NAFSMA Annual MeetingFlood Management General Session – Levee Safety

Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Mitigation

Tuesday, December 10, 2013

2

Flood Hazard Mapping and FEMA’s Former ApproachAccredited levee system

When a levee was found to be in compliance with 44 CFR 65.10, the flood hazard was mapped to be contained within the levee system.

Non-accredited levee system

However, areas with non-accredited levees were mapped as if the levee system provided no flood hazard reduction (“without levee” analysis).

3

Developing the New Approach1. Suspended in-progress studies and revisions

of non-accredited levee systems

2. Sought an approach that would:• Comply with statutory and regulatory

requirements • Be cost-effective, repeatable, and flexible• Leverage local input, knowledge, and data• Align available resources

3. Convened a multidisciplinary project team to evaluate technical options for non-accredited levee systems

4. Sought and implemented feedback

1. Independent Scientific Body and Community Roundtable

2. Public Review

3. National Academy of Sciences (NAS)

4

New Approach to Levee Analysis and Mapping Published new approach Levee

Analysis and Mapping Procedures in July 2013 • Details how FEMA will analyze and map

non-accredited levee systems (not 44CFR65.10 Compliant)

• Replaces “Without Levee” designations

Hallmark Principles1. Interactive Stakeholder Engagement

Process

2.More Robust Levee Analysis and Mapping Procedures

3.Recognition of the Uncertainty Associated with Levee Systems

4.Analysis of Levee Reaches

5

Suite of Procedures There are five procedures that can

be applied to a non-accredited levee:• Natural Valley

• Sound Reach

• Freeboard Deficient

• Overtopping

• Structural-Based Inundation

A system can be broken up into multiple reaches in order to analyze the flood risk in its vicinity

1 System↓

Multiple Reaches

6

New Approach Pilot Projects 25 Pilot projects underway FEMA considered a number of factors to select the pilot

projects, including:• Projects that would likely employ a range of levee procedures, to

properly pilot the new approach;• Data availability; and/or• Need for continued flood risk communication.

• Purpose of Pilot Projects• Validate the new approach and demonstrate its merit• Evaluate technical procedures in a variety of flooding conditions• Evaluate whether the application/implementation of the new procedure

meets FEMA’s objectives and commitment to Congress• Determine baseline costs for major components of the new process • Document and compile “lessons learned”• Prepare educational and training materials for future communities, as

new approach is implemented nationwide

7

Pilot Projects: Current Status and Next Steps Phase I: Identify Pilots (Completed) Phase II: Outreach and Data Collection (Ongoing)

• Develop Local Levee Partnership Teams• Conduct Public Meetings and Outreach• Develop Final Approach Plan

Phase III (Future)• Conduct Analysis and Mapping• Projects to be Determined by Approach Plans

Pilot Outcomes• Usability of Technical Approaches• Identification of Mitigation Measures

8

Levee Analysis and Mapping Pilots

Region III: • Grant County • Hardy County, WV

Region IV: • Upper Tombigbee Watershed,

MS• Union County, KY• Richland and Lexington

Counties, SC

Region V: • Dearborn County, IN • Rock island County, IL• Ross County, OH• Tazewell County, IL• Kent County, MI• Morgan County, IN

Region VI: • Plaquemines Parish, LA• St. Charles Parish, LA• St. Tammany Parish, LA• Lafourche Parish, LA• Terrebonne Parish, LA• Brazoria County, TX• Nueces County, TX• Victoria County, TX

Region VII:• Franklin County, MO• Miami County, KS• Marion County, KS

Region VIII: Ward County, ND Region IX: Maui County, HI Region X: Bannock County, ID

9

Continued Evolution

10