HUD reconsidered its policy approach and now prefers the CISA methodology because it provides a forward-looking assessment of flood risk based on likely or potential climate change scenarios, regional climate factors, and an advanced scientific understanding of these effects. Since the initial proposed rule in 2016, the Federal Government has developed and made publicly available additional flood risk hazard information in coastal areas based on climate-informed...
↓ Read More. Federal Flood Risk Management Standard

HUD reconsidered its policy approach and now prefers the CISA methodology because it provides a forward-looking assessment of flood risk based on likely or potential climate change scenarios, regional climate factors, and an advanced scientific understanding of these effects.

Since the initial proposed rule in 2016, the Federal Government has developed and made publicly available additional flood risk hazard information in coastal areas based on climate-informed science, including sea-level rise predictions. Record storms have provided additional data on the flood risk faced by inland areas, and climate mapping efforts have proceeded at the Federal and State level. Although currently CISA maps are very limited, CISA mapping data will become more available as other areas are mapped. Additionally, a subgroup of the White House Flood Resilience Interagency Working Group is developing a web-based tool to help determine the FFRMS floodplain using CISA.

↑ Hide Federal Flood Risk Management Standard

CISA will generally have a similar result as the FVA and 0.2 percent flood approach, with the exception that the CISA may find the resulting elevation to be equal to, or lower than, the current elevation in some areas due to the nature of the specific climate change processes and physical factors affecting flood risk at the project site. However, as a matter of policy established in the U.S. Water Resources Councilís FFRMS Guidelines, CISA can only be used if the...
↓ Read More. Federal Flood Risk Management Standard

CISA will generally have a similar result as the FVA and 0.2 percent flood approach, with the exception that the CISA may find the resulting elevation to be equal to, or lower than, the current elevation in some areas due to the nature of the specific climate change processes and physical factors affecting flood risk at the project site. However, as a matter of policy established in the U.S. Water Resources Councilís FFRMS Guidelines, CISA can only be used if the resulting flood elevation is equal to or higher than current base flood elevation.

↑ Hide Federal Flood Risk Management Standard

HUD has worked closely with its interagency partners, including FEMA, throughout the development of this proposed rule. Our collaboration with FEMA and others through forums like the White House Flood Resilience Interagency Working Group has greatly informed our efforts as we developed the proposed rule. At this stage we are ready to publish our proposed rule and are doing so now so as to not delay FFRMS implementation at HUD.

Federal Flood Risk Management Standard

Yes. Over a 40-year period, HUD estimates the net present value of aggregate benefits would total $64.9 million to $356.6 million. Additionally, by elevating their homes some homeowners would see decreased flood insurance premiums.

Federal Flood Risk Management Standard

For existing single-family homes that have been previously occupied or that are beyond 12 months from the issuance the homeís certificate of occupancy, the home will not have to be elevated in order for a homebuyer with an FHA mortgage to be able to purchase the home. For new homes that have not been previously occupied or are less than twelve months from the issuance of the homeís certificate of occupancy, the home will be required to meet the new FHA Minimum...
↓ Read More. Federal Flood Risk Management Standard

For existing single-family homes that have been previously occupied or that are beyond 12 months from the issuance the homeís certificate of occupancy, the home will not have to be elevated in order for a homebuyer with an FHA mortgage to be able to purchase the home.

For new homes that have not been previously occupied or are less than twelve months from the issuance of the homeís certificate of occupancy, the home will be required to meet the new FHA Minimum Property Standards, which requires the home to be elevated to two feet above the base flood elevation (BFE) in order for a homebuyer to be able to purchase the home with an FHA-insured mortgage.

Generally, however, this is a requirement that the home builder will fulfil during construction and will not require action from a prospective FHA mortgage homebuyer. Note that under the proposed rule, homeowners wishing to substantially improve homes they purchased using an FHA mortgage, will be required meet this new standard as part of any substantial improvement.

↑ Hide Federal Flood Risk Management Standard

The table below, taken from the proposed rule, shows the applicability of the decisionmaking process to projects, based on the location and whether the action is critical or...
↓ Read More. Federal Flood Risk Management Standard

The table below, taken from the proposed rule, shows the applicability of the decisionmaking process to projects, based on the location and whether the action is critical or non-critical.

Type of proposed action (new reviewable action or an amendment)1	Floodways	Coastal high hazard and LiMWA areas	Wetlands or FFRMS floodplain outside coastal high hazard area, LiMWA area, and floodways
Critical actions as defined in § 55.2(b)(3)	Critical actions not allowed.	Critical actions not allowed.	Allowed if the proposed critical action is processed under § 55.20.2
Noncritical actions not excluded under § 55.12 or 55.13	Allowed only if the proposed non-critical action is not prohibited under § 55.8(a)(1) and is processed under § 55.20.2	Allowed only if the proposed noncritical action is processed under § 55.202 and is (1) a functionally dependent use, (2) existing construction (including improvements), or (3) reconstruction following destruction caused by a disaster. If the action is not a functionally dependent use, the action must be designed for location in a coastal high hazard area under § 55. 8(a)(3).	Allowed if proposed noncritical action is processed under § 55.20.2

1 Under Executive Order 11990, the decisionmaking process in § 55.20 only applies to Federal assistance for new construction in wetlands locations.

2 Or those paragraphs of § 55.20 that are applicable to an action listed in § 55.14.

↑ Hide Federal Flood Risk Management Standard

While it is true that the cost-based threshold for substantial improvement may trigger elevation requirements more frequently in low-cost areas, there are other considerations that outweigh these concerns. Existing structures, for example, would only be required to elevate if the work meets the definition of substantial improvement. Funds committed for substantial improvement represent a significant enough outlay of HUD funds that incorporating additional flood...
↓ Read More. Federal Flood Risk Management Standard

While it is true that the cost-based threshold for substantial improvement may trigger elevation requirements more frequently in low-cost areas, there are other considerations that outweigh these concerns. Existing structures, for example, would only be required to elevate if the work meets the definition of substantial improvement. Funds committed for substantial improvement represent a significant enough outlay of HUD funds that incorporating additional flood resilience is a good investment to protect against future losses.

↑ Hide Federal Flood Risk Management Standard

The proposed rule would affect FHA programs in different ways. All FHA Multifamily programs other than 223(a)(7), are subject to Part 55 and so would be subject to the proposed rule. For example, under the proposed rule, new construction and substantial improvement of 221(d)(4) Multifamily projects would be required to elevate new construction and substantial improvement projects to the FFRMS floodplain. Additionally, the proposed rule would apply a new elevation...
↓ Read More. Federal Flood Risk Management Standard

The proposed rule would affect FHA programs in different ways. All FHA Multifamily programs other than 223(a)(7), are subject to Part 55 and so would be subject to the proposed rule. For example, under the proposed rule, new construction and substantial improvement of 221(d)(4) Multifamily projects would be required to elevate new construction and substantial improvement projects to the FFRMS floodplain.

Additionally, the proposed rule would apply a new elevation standard to certain Single-Family FHA properties. Generally, there is no HUD review or approval, or requirement under E.O. 11988, NEPA or Part 55,for HUDís single-family mortgage insurance programs. However, newly constructed single-family properties in HUDís mortgage insurance programs are generally required to meet HUDís Minimum Property Standards.

Under the proposed rule, HUD would be amend its Minimum Property Standards on site design to require the lowest floor, including basements and other permanent enclosures, of newly constructed and substantially improved structures within the 1-percent-annual-chance floodplain, to be at least two feet above the base flood elevation as determined by best available information. This change would add two feet to the required elevation but would not require consideration of the horizontally expanded FFRMS floodplain for single-family mortgage insurance projects governed by the requirements in the Minimum Property Standards. This proposed change would not affect existing homes that have been previously occupied or are beyond 12 months from the issuance of their certificate of occupancy that are purchased with an FHA-insured mortgage and are not being substantially improved.

↑ Hide Federal Flood Risk Management Standard

Generally, this rule would have minor administrative impacts on a typical environmental review of a HUD project. Because this proposed rule builds upon an existing framework and review process, it is not expected that the proposed rule would significantly extend the time required to complete an environmental review of a HUD project.

Federal Flood Risk Management Standard

For certain areas, the proposed rule would expand the floodplain both vertically (based on projections of increased flood height) and horizontally, by enlarging the horizontal area of interest to reflect the vertical increase. Higher elevations result in a larger horizontal floodplain as illustrated below. Using CISA to identify the FFRMS floodplain would allow HUD and responsible entities to account for changing conditions as a result of climate change and better...
↓ Read More. Federal Flood Risk Management Standard

For certain areas, the proposed rule would expand the floodplain both vertically (based on projections of increased flood height) and horizontally, by enlarging the horizontal area of interest to reflect the vertical increase. Higher elevations result in a larger horizontal floodplain as illustrated below. Using CISA to identify the FFRMS floodplain would allow HUD and responsible entities to account for changing conditions as a result of climate change and better protect against flood risk during the life of a project.

↑ Hide Federal Flood Risk Management Standard

§ 55.7 of the proposed rule would provide grantees and applicants a clear process for determining if a project is within the FFRMS floodplain, for both critical and non-critical actions. This process would provide grantees and applicants predictability in determining the floodplain, as well as flexibility in allowing them to utilize information from a variety of sources when climate-informed science information is unavailable for their project.

Federal Flood Risk Management Standard

Under the proposed rule, non-critical actions that are non-residential structures or multifamily residential structures that have no residential dwelling units below the FFRMS floodplain may floodproof the structure as an alternative to elevating it above the FFRMS floodplain.

Federal Flood Risk Management Standard

HUD would significantly expand step 5 of the 8-step process in § 55.20(e) to implement FFRMS. Section 55.20(e) of the proposed rule would provide that, in addition to the current mitigation and risk reduction requirements, all new construction and substantial improvement actions in the FFRMS floodplain subject to the 8-step process must be elevated or, in certain cases, floodproofed above the FFRMS floodplain.

Federal Flood Risk Management Standard

Critical actions are defined in § 55.2(b)(3)(i) as any activity for which even a slight risk of flooding would be too great, because such flooding might result in loss of life, injury to persons, or damage to property. These activities have been found to require additional resilience beyond the typical HUD project due to the severe consequences that can result from flooding. Critical actions include police stations, fire stations, roads providing sole egress from...
↓ Read More. Federal Flood Risk Management Standard

Critical actions are defined in § 55.2(b)(3)(i) as any activity for which even a slight risk of flooding would be too great, because such flooding might result in loss of life, injury to persons, or damage to property. These activities have been found to require additional resilience beyond the typical HUD project due to the severe consequences that can result from flooding. Critical actions include police stations, fire stations, roads providing sole egress from flood-prone areas, hospitals, and nursing homes, but not independent living for the elderly. When CISA maps are not available, critical actions will generally have a higher elevation standard. HUD invites comments on alternative approaches to define the FFRMS floodplain for critical actions.

↑ Hide Federal Flood Risk Management Standard