Sample letter for requesting full-conveyance (zero surcharge) floodways
Dear FEMA Regional Director
_____________________ is a community that has joined the National Flood Insurance Program. To
maintain eligibility in the NFIP we have adopted and enforce flood plain management regulations based
on data (e.g. Flood Insurance Rate Maps) provided by the (FEMA) Administrator.
FEMA is in the process of updating the Flood Insurance Rate Maps for our community. FEMA’s mapping
standards allow natural floodways to be encroached to the extent that the FEMA regulatory floodway
would result in one foot of increased flooding above existing flood elevations.
§ 60.3 (d) states that communities shall: “Select and adopt a regulatory floodway based on the principle
that the area chosen for the regulatory floodway must be designed to carry the waters of the base flood,
without increasing the water surface elevation of that flood more than one foot at any point.”
We hereby indicate that we “select” a regulatory floodway based on the principle that the area chosen
for the regulatory floodway be designed to carry the waters of the base flood, without increasing the
water surface elevation of that flood.
Therefore, we officially request FEMA to map full conveyance floodways within our community because:
1. We are required to “review all permit applications to determine whether proposed building sites
will be reasonably safe from flooding” (§ 60.3). By definition one-foot rise floodways could
ultimately cause new building sites to be subjected to a foot of flooding and therefore would not
be “reasonably safe from flooding”. As a result we feel we cannot fulfill this requirement with a
mapped one-foot rise regulatory floodway.
2. We have a responsibility to owners of existing development in our community to ensure that
new development does not cause increased flooding to existing buildings. We cannot do that
unless full conveyance floodways are used to develop our flood maps.
Respectively Submitted,
CEO
____________ community
Cc: FEMA headquarters
Supporting documentation
A Summary of NFIP Policy for Local Officials, FEMA Region 10, July 2001 (Updated Jan 2004). P 83
More restrictive local floodways. Communities can and do enact more restrictive floodways. If a community
requests a lesser-rise floodway during the study process, FEMA will prepare a run with the one-foot rise floodway,
and another with the lesser-rise floodway. The one-foot rise floodway will be published on the FEMA maps vs. the
more restrictive floodway pursuant to a State law, but the community will have the data to enforce its more
restrictive floodway. Since only the community can adopt the floodway and the floodway map is separate, even if
only in Draft form, the community has all the tools it needs to enforce the stricter standard. Communities are
treated differently than States because it is more likely that a new community administration could change the
more restrictive floodway adopted by a previous administration (FIA Policy Notice 79-3). There are some
communities that have enacted zero-rise floodways on the basis of Draft or Work maps, though the published
FEMA maps show a one-foot rise floodway. Recently, FEMA has shown greater flexibility in terms of actually
publishing more restrictive floodways for communities that are Cooperating Technical Partners (CTP). Such
communities “now have considerable latitude on how their floodways are designated and could map zero-rise
floodways.” (FEMA Call for Issues, June 2000, page II-3-6.)
FEMA Call for Issues, June 2000, page II-3-6. Issue: Zero-rise floodway
Respondent’s Recommendation(s): Two respondents recommended that FEMA revise its floodway criteria to
require communities to designate a floodway that causes no increase in flood stages (also called a “zero-rise
floodway”).
FEMA’s Response: Evaluation/Study Required
Explanation: Currently, communities can designate a floodway that causes up to a one-foot increase in flood stage.
The one-foot rise criteria was a compromise that allowed some level of development to occur in the floodplain yet
minimized increased damages to upstream properties. Zero-rise floodways in effect limit development in the
floodplain to those areas that do not carry floodwaters. There are two concerns with the current requirement.
First, allowing a one-foot increase in flood stage causes additional damages to existing structures over current
conditions. Second, new construction must only be elevated to the BFE and would eventually be subject to up to
one foot of flooding during the base flood. Several States and many communities have adopted floodway
requirements that are more restrictive than NFIP minimum requirements (they commonly use no-rise, .1 feet, or .5
feet). In the past FEMA has mapped more restrictive floodways in those States that have a statutory or regulatory
provision requiring the use of a more restrictive standard. It generally has not mapped more restrictive floodways
in States that do not. Communities continue to be able to adopt a more restrictive floodways than that on the
FEMA map, although some may be reluctant to do so in the absence of a FEMA standard. However, communities
that are Cooperating Technical Communities (CTC) now have considerable latitude on how their floodways are
designated and could map zero-rise floodways. Communities receive credit under the Community Rating System
(CRS) for adopting a more restrictive floodways. Note that an alternative way to address this issue for new
construction would be to require freeboard or to incorporate the increase in flood stage into the regulatory BFE.
FEMA will consider adopting a more restrictive floodway standard or allowing communities to request that FEMA
map a more restrictive floodway. And we may consider, requiring one-foot freeboard in communities that have
floodways that allow a one-foot rise in the flood fringe. In the interim, FEMA will continue to map more restrictive
floodways in those States with higher regulatory requirements and encourage communities to adopt more
restrictive floodways through the Community Rating System (CRS).