Flood Standards Updated at HUD
Was the science-informed rule delayed by Trump?
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is the first agency out of the gate to finalize a rule updating how the agency determines the federal flood risk management standard (FFRMS). The agency’s preferred option for determining the FFRMS going forward will be the climate informed science approach (CISA). In other words, HUD will now rely on the best available climate science to inform flood-protection requirements on homes that are built or repaired with federal housing aid. “This is one of the first regulations the federal government has put out that is consciously and deliberately saying, ‘The future looks very different from the past, and we need to build for that future,’” said Rob Moore, director of flooding solutions at the National Resources Defense Council.
As someone who has worked to implement CISA, I find this rule a huge triumph. But one of the bigger lessons for me here is that this rule is demonstrative of why administration’s matter. HUD was likely working on this rule back in 2015 when the FFRMS was established and updated. However, the Executive Order that called for that update was rescinded by former President Trump in 2017. It’s great to see the rule out now, but in seven years how much federal funding poured into housing at-risk of flooding?
To truly understand the long journey of the FFRMS, we need to step back and look at what the FFRMS is and the executive orders that have defined it.
The FFRMS
The federal flood risk management standard (or FFRMS) is a tool that agencies use to consider and manage flood risks for federally funded projects. For the sake of simplicity to explain how it works, let’s imagine that a federal agency wants to construct a new building somewhere in Virginia. When considering the location for construction, the agency will need to consider flood risks. If the building can be constructed outside of an area with flood risks, then that’s the option that should be taken.
Executive Orders Relevant to the FFRMS
In May of 1977, President Carter signed Executive Order 11988, which requires federal actions to avoid supporting development in the floodplain. This executive order defines the floodplain as the 100-year floodplain for all federal actions, and the 500-year floodplain for critical actions (actions for which even slight flooding is too great). The nomenclature is a little odd here, so let me quickly just break this down. The 100-yr. floodplain is the flood height that has a 1% change of occurring annually in a given area, and it is based on historic weather data, local topography, and the best science available at the time. The 500-yr. floodplain is the flood height that has a 0.2% change of occurring annually.
In January 2015, President Obama signed Executive Order 13690, Establishing a Federal Flood Risk Management Standard and a Process for Further Soliciting and Considering Stakeholder Input. This executive order amended EO 11988 and established a FFRMS with a higher level of flood resilience given that floods are increasing in frequency and intensity with climate change. EO 13690 provided agencies with several options to redefine the floodplain, key among them was the Climate Informed Science Approach (or CISA). The CISA relies on the best available climate science to inform the projected flood height of a floodplain.
In August 2017, President Trump signed Executive Order 13807, which revoked EO 13690. I think it’s important to note that President Trump signed this EO on August 15, 2017, which was two days before Hurricane Harvey hit Texas - one of the costliest natural disasters in U.S. history.
In January 2021, President Biden signed Executive Order 13990, which revoked EO 13807. The order had intended to reinstate EO 13690 and its implementation guidance, but through an innocuous error had not done so legally.
In May 2021, President Biden signed Executive Order 14030 confirming EO 13690 and its’ guidelines for implementation were reinstated.
The executive order journey above doesn’t account for the time put in by the Mitigation Framework Leadership Group (MitFLG) and the Water Resources Council (WRC) in helping to development implementation guidance for EO 13690.
As you can see, it took over a decade to get climate inserted into federal flood risk planning, fully under executive orders.
The Trump Delay
Many agencies were working on the implementation of EO 13690 when former President Trump issued EO 13807. One of those people who had been involved was ME!
From 2015-2017, I was conducting research as a postdoctoral fellow for the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Office of Land and Emergency Management on implementation of EO 13690 for the Superfund program. Specifically, I was developing a geographic model to help Superfund remediation project managers implement the CISA for their sites. A tool in great need given the threat of toxic materials leaching from Superfund sites during an extreme flood.
Although I left the EPA as soon as the Trump administration took office in January 2017, I was hopeful that my model would see the light of day at the EPA. But as soon as Trump issued EO 13807, I knew that model was dead. So, that’s why I just did the work later in coordination with geographic researcher, Casey Kalman. The model shows hundreds of hazardous sites across the East and Gulf coasts are at-risks of future extreme coastal floods.
If my work was delayed, then certainly other agency work related to EO 13690 was delayed. I got out of the agency and published my work on my own, but folks who were stuck likely weren’t able to do anything related to EO 13690.
Four years of inaction on extreme flooding starting in 2017, then another year to get more executive orders out the door just to reinstate the same work that began in 2015, and another 3 years to get a rule finalized, which ultimately may end up in court. A long journey to get climate change considered in projections of future floods.
Administrations matter
I understand that this post is somewhat speculative - I have no idea when HUD began its work on this rule. Although I can’t imagine that they weren’t working on implementation of EO 13690 during 2015.
But what is certain is that Trump’s revoking of EO 13690 in 2017 prevented any work on climate change and flooding from proceeding, at least as laid out by EO 13690. This means that HUD’s rule was likely delayed by several years, at least four. Four years is a long time to act on the effects of climate change.
I think it’s worth remembering this kind of extended timeline for government progress on science-informed policies, especially this election year.