Letter to W. Craig Fugate, Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency - Oregon Delegation Fights to Protect Economic Development in Oregon Communities

Letter

In Oregon, 271 communities depend on the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) to provide flood insurance. The many waterways that contribute to Oregon's natural beauty and robust economy also make our state prone to flooding. Given the reach and importance of the NFIP in Oregon, it is essential that it is administered with the utmost transparency and clarity. We are deeply concerned about recent steps FEMA has taken to implement the Reasonable and Prudent Alternative (RPA) in the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Biological Opinion on changes to NFIP.

On June 13, 2016 FEMA Region X sent letters to National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) communities in Oregon addressing changes to Oregon's NFIP structure that would be occurring over the next four and half years. Although we understand this letter may have served to fulfill a requirement to provide notice of NMFS April 14, 2016 Biological Opinion and Reasonable and Prudent Alternative (RPA), the letter was confusing and alarming to many who received it.

We understand that FEMA is responding to NMFS's Biological Opinion and RPA, which assumes FEMA will exceed its congressionally authorized authorities by requiring communities to prohibit private development in order to participate in the NFIP. This is all the more reason for FEMA to work closely with Oregon's NFIP communities and state partners to establish mitigation and compliance measures that are not overly burdensome and do not exceed FEMA's legal authority.

The letter explains that there are two stages of implementation-- interim measures over the next two years and permanent program changes to the NFIP. It also suggests that NFIP communities have the following options: "voluntarily impose a temporary moratorium on all floodplain development that adversely impacts ESA listed species or their habitat, or voluntarily implement the interim measures found in RPA element 2." Voluntarily imposing a temporary moratorium on all floodplain development that could adversely impact Endangered Species Act (ESA) listed species or their habitat is not an option for Oregon NFIP communities. Communities cannot be expected to implement these or any other measures without thorough guidance and consultation with FEMA.

The letter is particularly disappointing because it threatens enforcement action against communities but does not offer a timeline for when that reporting requirement is expected to take effect or guidance on how communities can fulfill reporting requirements. Requirements to mitigate potential impacts to species and habitat, per the RPA, will be necessary, but responsibility for providing acceptable mitigation options falls to FEMA. FEMA needs to provide clear guidelines on how and when communities must comply with revised NFIP requirements.

Oregon is one of the first states affected by significant changes to the NFIP based on ESA, Section 7 consultations, but NFIP communities across the nation will also be subject to program changes in the future. Because Oregon is at the forefront of nationwide NFIP changes, it is in the best interest of FEMA to get implementation in the state right. Therefore, we suggest that FEMA increase staffing resources in Oregon throughout the implementation process in order to better communicate with every NFIP community in the state. We also ask that community input and concerns be considered and responded to at every step of the implementation process.

With some of the strongest land use laws in the country, Oregonians deserve a collaborative process with FEMA on NFIP RPA implementation-- one that addresses protection of salmon and steelhead habitat, but is also economically and socially feasible. Thank you for your attention to our concerns and taking leadership on establishing a clear, transparent, and collaborative process. We look forward to a response to this letter that includes an update on how FEMA plans to increase staffing resources, communicate more clearly, and seriously consider community input throughout this process.