2012/01/25 Council Agenda Packet

1 And if consultation on conditional letters proves to be a barrier,parties can simply proceed with 2 their project and obtain a map revision after the fact,thereby avoiding any ESA review. 3 FEMA also appears to have largely sidestepped RPA directives intended to require 4 additional actions that increase the accuracy of flood maps in salmon habitat. BiOp at 152. For 5 example, the BiOp called on FEMA to"revise map modeling methods to consider future conditions 6 and the cumulative effects from future land use-change," including climate change. BiOp at 152- 7 53.13 Even though FEMA itself drafted this RPA provision, Ex. 8 at 4-5,it now claims it lacks 8 authority to address these factors and has proposed a purely voluntary approach that allows 9 communities to develop better maps for their own floodplain management goals. Carey Letter at 3 10 ("FEMA cannot produce [FIRMs] based on future conditions"); Hasselman Decl.,Ex. 11 (voluntary 11 mapping guidance). Similarly,the BiOp calls for FEMA to"ensure that floodplain modeling 12 incorporates on-the-ground data to increase the accuracy of maps,"and to prioritize mapping 13 activities based on Tier 1 salmon populations. BiOp at 152. But FEMA has only pledged to"work 14 with"communities to prioritize flood maps, and proposed voluntary measures that can be adopted, 15 or ignored, by communities. Buckley Letter at 2; Ex. 11. While FEMA claims to have changed the 16 "algorithm"by which it establishes flood mapping priorities, the results are not evident: only one 17 Puget Sound jurisdiction has been prioritized for updated maps. Wald Decl.,¶ 14. FEMA's 18 approach may allow communities to develop their own more accurate maps for informational 19 purposes,but this does nothing to change the flood insurance requirement and other regulatory 20 consequences of FEMA's maps, and little to"ensure"more accurate maps that help avoid jeopardy. 21 22 13 Considering such"future conditions" is crucial, as studies predict a significant expansion of floodplain 23 size over the next century due to climate change. BiOp at 143-44(science predicts"a large negative impact of climate change on freshwater salmon habitat"); Wald Decl.,¶ 15. A draft national study 24 conducted by FEMA confirmed this prediction but has never been finalized. See id.; Evan Lehman, Flood Prone Land Likely to Increase by 45%-A Major Challenge to Federal Flood Insurance Program, 25 N.Y.Times,July 22,2011 (http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2011/07/22/22climatewire-flood-prone-land- likely-to-increase-by-45-a-19117.html). Despite this, FEMA's voluntary mapping guidance includes no 26 "specific consideration of changes in peak flow due to climate change." Ex. 11 at 4. 27 Earthjustice PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY 705 Second Ave.,Suite 203 Seattle, WA 28 INJUNCTION (Case No. 2:11-cv-02044-RSM) -17- 104 (206)343-734040