The forum was designed to encourage audience participation. The morning segments included two panel discussions; one panel reviewed the history of levee safety and resilience policy to answer the question, “How did we get here?” and the second panel discussed the draft recommendations offered in the report to Congress by the National Committee on Levee Safety and other proposals. Following lunch, the final 90-min were designated for the audience to address the panelists.
TISP Chairman Edward Hecker of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) moderated the first panel of speakers, which consisted of:
- · Brig. Gen. Gerald E. Galloway Jr., Ph.D., P.E., USA (Ret.), Glenn L. Martin Institute Professor of Engineering, University of Maryland, and Visiting Scholar, USACE Institute for Water Resources;
- · Doug Bellomo, P.E., CFM, Acting Chief, Hazard Identification Section, Mitigation Division, Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA);
- · Ted Illston, Council, Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, U.S. House of Representatives; and
- · Doug Plasencia, P.E., CFM, Assistant VP and Water Resource Manager (West Region), Michael Baker Corp.
The use and design of dams and levees was historically traced back to the early 16th century in the United States. Think of the non-structural methods to wall in water or redirect the path of a creek for a crop field, pond, or lake. The intention was to keep the farmer’s field moist without drowning the crop. What was discovered then by the farmer also applies to floodplain managers today: Levees only offer a nominal flood risk reduction. Levees are imperfect because they can fail or be overtopped.
Dr. Galloway, who recently co-chaired the World Water Assessment Program’s expert policy group, provided a history lesson that focused on the nation’s activities to improve levee safety and security throughout the 1900s. For several decades states, FEMA and USACE made independent statements regarding the issues of liability, poorly-designed, poorly-constructed and poorly-maintained levees. In the mid-1990s the federal government began to compile an inventory of dams and levees that included an assessment of current-state condition. Bellomo provided a history and overview of FEMA’s National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and how levees are treated in that program. He touched on FEMA’s role with respect to levees in this context and described the implications that communities might face through the NFIP certification program when levees are “accredited,” “de-accredited,” or “provisionally accredited.” He put this in greater context by talking about the differences between flood control projects and other forms of flood mitigation.
“We are at a watershed moment in levee history,” stated Plasencia, who said state and federal officials will need to determine whether to continue down the current path of federally-mandated levees or change direction and begin to plan a new course for the next 20 to 30 years. He recommended that we learn from history by treating levees as a product that needs a strong product safety program. In a common sense manner, product safety programs include initiatives for standards, education and training, certification, and investigation. Plasencia also recommended forming a new federal agency with the same investigative authorities as the National Transportation Safety Board. The new agency would be charged with investigating levee casualties, reporting to Congress on the needs for certification standards, operational and technology improvements, and correction to contraction and maintenance practices. It is important to note that a similar recommendation is made in the National Committee for Levee Safety’s report to Congress.
The points made by Plasencia provided a nice transition to Illston’s presentation. Following the submission of the committee’s report to Congress, there will be next steps. First, the subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment intends to conduct hearings to address the two main questions the report was called to answer: What would a levee safety program look like?, and What is needed to make levees safety and more resilient? It is expected that a freestanding bill addressing the recommendations of the National Committee for Levee Safety’s report and the testimony offered during hearings will be introduced, but it is too soon to be certain as to what the bill will include.
David I. Maurstad, a former Lieutenant Governor of Nebraska and former Assistant Administrator of FEMA, currently a VP at PBS&J, moderated the second panel of speakers. The following panelists discussed the way forward by reviewing the recommendations offered in the National Committee for Levee Safety’s report to Congress:
- · Eric Halpin, P.E., Special Assistant for Dam & Levee Safety, USACE;
- · Susan Gilson, Executive Director, National Association Flood and Stormwater Management Agencies;
- · Garret Grave, Director, Governor’s Office of Coastal Activities and Chairman, Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority, Office of the Governor of Louisiana; and
- · Mark Steiner, P.E., Senior Policy Director, Federal Programs, American Council of Engineering Companies.
TISP developed a well-rounded discussion with two speakers who participated in the drafting of the report to Congress and two speakers who have been observers of the committee’s activities: Halpin and Gilson served on the National Committee for Levee Safety, while Grave offered the perspective of a state and Steiner represented the perspective of private-sector engineering companies.
During the past two years multiple bills were presented in Congress and state legislatures such as Illinois and California to address gaps in levee policy. Panelists examined these proposed measures and discussed what policies and partnerships are needed to assure public safety. The ultimate goal of the discussion was to provide a springboard for timely and meaningful discussion for consideration by the new Congress and administration on the national policy related to levees.
According to Halpin, it is commonly believed “there are two types of levees. Those levees that have failed, and those that will fail.” It was this belief that led to the passage of the National Levee Safety Act (Title IX) of the Water Resources Development Act of 2007, which mandated the formation of a National Committee on Levee Safety as a diverse group of professionals from federal, state and local governments and the private sector and required that the committee develop a congressional report of recommendations and a strategic plan for implementing a National Levee Safety Program (NLSP). The committee submitted the draft report to the Office of Management and Budgets (OMB) in the White House for a required 90-day review prior to submitting to Congress.
In essence, the report is a call to action for stakeholders of levee safety and committee resilience. The specific recommendations for a NLSP embrace three man concepts: (1) the need for leadership via a National Levee Safety Commission that provides for state delegated programs, national technical standards, risk communication and coordinating environmental and safety concerns; (2) the building of strong levee safety programs in and within all states that in turn provide oversight, regulation and critical levee safety processes; and (3) a foundation of well-aligned federal agency programs and processes.
As a member of the committee drafting the recommendations for the NLSP, Gilson focused her comments from the perspective of the flood and stormwater management agencies. She applauded the committee’s work and foresees the development and adoption of national safety standards having a great impact on the resilience of the communities. While the committee was not charged with studying all aspects of levee resilience, Gilson identified specific areas where more study is needed, such as emergency preparedness, public and agency outreach campaigns for flood preparations and response, and addressing the concerns of liability.
Louisiana has not fully recovered from the floods resulting from hurricane Katrina. Graves, who works in the governor’s office of the State of Louisiana, has greater faith in our levees and does not believe that all of them are fated to fail. He focuses on community resilience, ensuring that residents are able to maintain a constant quality of life, particularly after recovering from a disaster. Graves based his comments on these principle notions. The committee’s report makes several good recommendations, and Graves offered a few comments for improving it. For example, when new guidance is provided regarding the use of specific materials in the construction of levees, it should not deter the use of innovative materials found within the region of the levee construction. Using locally-available resources might reduce construction and maintenance costs.
Graves recommended that USACE and other engineers design smart levees using technologies to monitor the operations and condition of levees remotely on a regular basis. Using smart technology construction would reduce the frequency with which levees are inspected, saving time and money. Graves continued his thoughts on design and construction by recommending that FEMA and USACE work together to harmonize their standards and requirements. A review of the standards could help minimize confusion and make it easier to comply with safety, protection and operational federal requirements. Harmonizing levee rules with the rules protecting the environment is another suggestion made by Graves. While he admitted tackling standardizing levee and environmental protection requirements is a huge challenge, in the long run the environment and communities would benefit from the exercise.
Clarifying terms and procedures would benefit communities, as well. Graves said terms like “level of protection” should be better defined so structural improvements to reduce risk of flooding would receive federal support and would not be rejected for going beyond the 100-year requirement. Similarly, decertification policies and procedures should be revised to include a transition period.
Steiner admired USACE’s leadership in developing a true partnership among the federal, state and local governments and private-sector representatives on the NCLS. He stated “that report contains baseline recommendations and strategic planning for a National Levee Safety Program that all stakeholders agree on.” Steiner addressed five of the recommendations that are of significant importance to the success of the program from the private sector’s perspective.
Steiner recommended developing tolerable risk guidelines and getting the public involved through an interactive education and awareness campaign through the National Flood Insurance Program. According to Steiner, the public within a levee footprint or floodplain should be aware of the risks they face, just as the government is aware. Educating the public should result in the communities better understanding the risks and changing some behaviors within the identified areas.
The committee also should address growing concerns regarding liability for damages resulting from levee failure. Instead of the NFIP certifying levees, the program should make a “compliance determination.” These recommendations address the need for freeing the full resources and capabilities of our nation on the large backlog of levee insurance compliance evaluations without fear of unreasonable penalties as compared to work actually performed and required criteria, eventually leading to appropriate penalties for negligent performance not strict liability for any harm involved.
Lastly, Steiner recommended developing and adopting harmonized national safety and resilience safety standards. There is a need for consistent criteria and guidelines for levees and tolerable risk understanding, without creating rigid procedures that lose sight of the reasons for standardization. The goal is establishing guidelines, codes and finally standards through the International Code Council formal procedures and increasing levels of stakeholder involvement.
Sam Riley Medlock, Policy Council and Program Manager for the Association of State Floodplain Managers, facilitated a 90-min roundtable discussion between the panelists and the audience. A member of the National Committee on Levee Safety, Medlock participates in various initiatives to promote safer development standards and mitigate flood risk and co-authored “Mitigating Misery: Land Use and Protection of Property Rights Before the Next Big Flood,” published by the Vermont Journal of Environmental Law.
We look forward to Medlock continuing to facilitate this conversation during the drafting process of the educational white paper. The issues and recommendations identified by the forum will be documented and distributed via the white paper on the TISP Web site (
www.tisp.org) and shared with the U.S. House of Representatives committees on Homeland Security and Transportation and Infrastructure. The purpose of the white paper is to be informative; it will not take a position on specific levee policy.
]]>