REPORT on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the assessment and management of floods

15.5.2006 - (COM(2006)0015 – C6‑0020/2006 – 2006/0005(COD)) - ***I

Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
Rapporteur: Richard Seeber

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the assessment and management of floods

(COM(2006)0015 – C6‑0020/2006 – 2006/0005(COD))

(Codecision procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–   having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2006)0015)[1],

–   having regard to Article 251(2) and Article 175(1) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C6‑0020/2006),

–   having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure,

–   having regard to the report of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety and the opinion of the Committee on Regional Development (A6‑0182/2006),

1.  Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission.

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendments by Parliament
Amendment 1 Title
Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the assessment and management of floods	Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the assessment and management of flood risks (This amendment applies throughout the legislative act. Adoption of this amendment will necessitate technical adjustments throughout the text.)
Justification
The legislative act is essentially concerned with risks, rather than with actual flood events.
Amendment 2 Recital 1
(1) Floods have the potential to cause fatalities, displacement of people, severely compromise economic development and to undermine the economic activities of the Community.	(1) Floods have the potential to cause fatalities, displacement of people and damage to the environment, severely compromise economic development and undermine the economic activities of the Community.
Justification
In keeping with Article 1 of the Commission proposal (object of the directive), the environment should also be mentioned here.
Amendment 3 Recital 2
(2) Floods are natural phenomena which cannot be prevented. However, human activity is contributing to an increase in the likelihood and adverse impacts of flood events.	(2) Floods are natural phenomena which cannot be completely prevented. However, the massive reduction in the natural flood retention capacity of river basins, the mismanagement of human activities (such as increasing human settlements and economic assets in floodplains and the erosion and reduction of the natural water retention of land by cutting down forests and farming in river basins), droughts and global warming are contributing to an increase in the likelihood and adverse effects of floods.
Amendment 4 Recital 2 a (new)
	(2a) Traditional flood risk management strategies, centred on building infrastructures for the immediate protection of people, real estate and goods, have failed to ensure safety to the extent that they were supposed to.
Amendment 5 Recital 3
(3) It is feasible and desirable to reduce the risk of damage to human health, environment and infrastructure associated with floods, however, measures to reduce the risk of flood damage must be co-ordinated throughout a river basin if they are to be effective.	(3) It is feasible and desirable to reduce the risk to human health and life, the environment and infrastructure associated with floods. However, measures to reduce this risk must be co-ordinated between Member States, their national, regional and local authorities as well as organisations responsible for river management throughout river basins.
Justification
Floods are above all a risk to human life, as well as to human health. Between 1998 and 2004, 700 people died in floods in Europe, as is stated in the explanatory memorandum to this proposal (p. 1 – Grounds for and objectives of the proposal).
Amendment 6 Recital 3 a (new)
	(3a) Member States are encouraged to take measures which benefit flood risk management in upstream or downstream areas within and outside their territory, keeping to the natural course of the river wherever possible. Where this is not possible, Member States should endeavour to find compensatory areas on their own territory, or should seek such areas in cooperation with other Member States.
Justification
From a river basin approach it can be more efficient to take preventive measures in upstream areas, also when an upstream area falls within the territory of another Member State. The solidarity principle of the directive can be reinforced by providing an additional stimulant for cross-border cooperation to reduce cross-border flood risks.
Amendment 7 Recital 3 b (new)
	(3b) Scientists unanimously observe that the frequency of extreme precipitation has increased in recent years.
Amendment 8 Recital 3 c (new)
	(3c) Risk management and flood damage containment measures should respect the principle of solidarity. Consequently, flood risk management along the catchment basin of a river flowing between two or more neighbouring countries should be organised in such a way that no area faces flood risks as a result of non-sustainable river management.
Justification
Both Directive 2000/60/ΕC establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy and this proposal for a directive, which will be closely aligned with it, incorporate the principle of solidarity, which requires coordinated flood risk management over the entire area of a cross-border river catchment basin.
Amendment 9 Recital 3 d (new)
	(3d) The (Environment) Council acknowledged, in its conclusions of 14 October 2004, that 'human activity contributes to the increase in the likelihood and adverse impacts of (extreme) flood events and that climate change will cause an increase of floods as well'. In accordance with the principle of sustainable development as laid down in Article 37 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, a high level of environmental protection must be integrated into the policies of the Union The Commission and the Member States should therefore take measures to improve flood prevention, protection against flood risks and damage mitigation.
Justification
As the Council observes in its conclusions of 14 October 2004, there is a link between climate change and increased occurrence of floods. As this conclusion is undisputed, measures need to be taken to limit the impact of such flood events.
Amendment 10 Recital 4
(4) Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy requires integrated management plans to be developed for each river basin in order to achieve good ecological and chemical status, and it will contribute to mitigating the effects of floods. However reducing the risk of floods is not one of the principal objectives of that Directive, nor does it take into account future risks caused by climate change.	(4) At present there is no legal instrument at European level for protection against flood risks. Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy requires integrated management plans to be developed for each river basin in order to achieve good ecological and chemical status, and it will contribute to mitigating the effects of floods. However, reducing the risk of floods is not one of the principal objectives of that Directive. That risk, which will become more frequent in the future as a result of climate change, is not taken into account.
Justification
This amendment seeks to make clear that flood risk precautions must be stepped up in order to prevent the higher risk levels resulting from climate change; however, there is no need to carry out a detailed climate change forecast for each precautionary measure, since this would engender considerable and largely unjustifiable costs and would delay the drawing up of plans where no reliable data are available.
Amendment 11 Recital 7
(7) Under Council Regulation (EC) N° 2012/2002 of 11 November 2002 establishing the European Union Solidarity Fund it is possible to grant rapid financial assistance in the event of a major disaster to help the people, regions and countries concerned to return to living conditions that are as normal as possible, but it may only intervene for emergency operations, and not for the phases preceding an emergency.	(7) Under Council Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 of 11 November 2002 establishing the European Union Solidarity Fund it is possible to grant rapid financial assistance in the event of a major disaster to help the ecosystems, people, regions and countries concerned to return to living conditions that are as normal as possible, but it may only intervene for emergency operations, and not for the phases preceding an emergency.
Justification
Ecosystems in river valleys and coastal areas have specific habitat features and form biodiverse complexes, some of which are unique at European or world level (e.g. the Danube and Rhine deltas and the coast of Iceland, Rügen and Bornholm). During flooding, the hatching habitat of protected bird species can be irreparably damaged, thus diminishing Europe's biodiversity. The European Union Solidarity Fund ((COM(2005)108 final - 2005/033(COD) – SEC (2005)447) should therefore cover specific ecosystems damaged by natural disasters, including floods.
Amendment 12 Recital 7 a (new)
	(7a) Most river basins in Europe are split between Member States. Effective prevention of and intervention against floods requires, in addition to coordination at Community level, cross-border cooperation.
Amendment 13 Recital 7 b (new)
	(7b) The provisions on sustainable flood risk management should be taken into account by the Member States and the Community when laying down and implementing all their policies, including for example transport policy, spatial planning, urban development, and industrialisation policy, agricultural policy, cohesion policy, energy policy and research policy.
Justification
There is ample evidence that misdirected spatial planning, urban development, and industrialisation policies do much to increase the risk of floods.
Amendment 14 Recital 8
(8) Throughout the Community different types of floods occur, such as river floods, flash floods, urban floods, sewer floods and coastal floods. The damage caused by flood events may also vary across the countries and regions of the Community. Hence, objectives regarding managing flood risks should be based on the local and regional circumstances.	(8) Throughout the Community different types of floods occur, such as river floods, flash floods, urban floods, sewer floods, coastal floods and floods caused by heavy rainfall. The damage caused by flood events may also vary across the countries and regions of the Community. Hence, objectives regarding managing flood risks should be based on the local and regional circumstances.
Justification
Flooding caused by heavy rainfall is being added to the several types of flooding which are identified by the proposed directive's wording.
Amendment 15 Recital 9
(9) Flood risks in certain areas within the Community could be considered not to be significant, for example in thinly populated or unpopulated areas or in areas with limited economic assets or ecological value. A preliminary assessment of the flood risks in each river basin, sub basin and associated coastal zones should be undertaken at the level of the river basin district to determine the flood risk in each case and whether further action is needed.	(9) Flood risks in certain areas within the Community may be considered not to be significant, for example in thinly populated or unpopulated areas or in areas with limited economic assets or ecological value. Such areas may, however, be of significance in flood mitigation. A preliminary assessment of the flood risks in each river basin, sub-basin and associated coastal area should be undertaken at the level of the river basin district to determine the flood risk in each case, the flood mitigation potential and whether further action is needed.
Amendment 16 Recital 10
(10) In order to dispose of a valid tool for information, as well as a valuable basis for priority setting and further technical, financial and political decisions it is necessary to provide for the establishing of flood maps and indicative flood damage maps describing areas with different levels of flood risk.	(10) In order to dispose of a valid tool for information, as well as a valuable basis for priority setting and further technical, financial and political decisions, it is necessary to provide for the establishing of flood maps and indicative flood damage maps describing areas with different levels of flood risk including the risk of environmental pollution as a consequence of floods.
Justification
The flood maps should show the installations that might cause accidental environmental pollution as a consequence of flooding.
Amendment 17 Recital 10 a (new)
	(10a) In view of the existing capabilities of Member States and in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, considerable flexibility should be left to the local and regional level, in particular on organisation and responsibility of authorities, flood management plans and risk maps, the level of protection and the measures and the timetables to achieve the objectives set.
Justification
See the (Environment) Council's conclusions of 14 October 2004.
Amendment 18 Recital 11
(11) With a view to avoiding and reducing the negative impacts of floods on the area concerned it is appropriate to provide for flood risk management plans. The causes and consequences of flood events vary across the countries and regions of the Community. Flood risk management plans should therefore take into account the particular geographic, hydrologic and other relevant circumstances of the river basin, sub-basin or stretch of coastline, and provide for tailored solutions according to the needs and priorities of the river basin, sub-basin or coast line, whilst ensuring coordination with river basins districts.	(11) With a view to avoiding and reducing the negative impacts of floods on the area concerned it is appropriate to provide for flood risk management plans. The causes and consequences of flood events vary across the countries and regions of the Community. Flood risk management plans should therefore take into account the particular geographic, geological, hydrologic, topographical and other relevant circumstances including population density as well as the economic activities of the affected river basin, sub-basin or stretch of coastline, and provide for tailored solutions according to the needs and priorities of the river basin, sub-basin or coastline, whilst ensuring coordination with river basin districts. Flood risk management plans should also take into consideration industrial and agricultural facilities and other possible sources of pollution of the area concerned in order to prevent such pollution.
Justification
Floods are natural phenomena. Floods pose a risk only to the human activities or uses undertaken in floodplains. Other areas, such as uninhabited areas, areas with low population or areas not subject to human use are not or less susceptible to flood risk. The negative effects of floods correspond to population density and the economic activity undertaken in the relevant area. These indicators should therefore feature in recital 11 that enumerates the underlying circumstances of flood prevention and protection.
As floods are often followed by accidental environmental pollution due to industrial, agricultural and other facilities on the area concerned, the flood risk management plans should take probable pollution sources into account.
Amendment 19 Recital 13 a (new)
	(13a) The Joint Research Centre of the Commission is developing a European Flood Alert System (EFAS) that is capable of providing medium-range flood simulations across Europe with a lead-time of between 3 to 10 days. EFAS data might contribute to increased preparedness in an upcoming flood event. Therefore EFAS should be further pursued once the testing phase is concluded. It could become operational presumably in 2010.
Justification
The European Parliament has substantially increased the budget for the development of EFAS, therefore the European citizens should benefit from it as soon as possible.
Amendment 20 Recital 13 b (new)
	(13b) River basin flood management should aim to create a common responsibility and solidarity within the basin. To that end Member States should endeavour to raise awareness and encourage cooperation among all stakeholders as well as in areas that are not, or are less, prone to flooding but which can contribute by their land use and practices to downstream or upstream floods.
Amendment 21 Recital 13 c (new)
	(13c) As to short-term forecasting, the Member States should base their plans on the best practice available and state-of-the-art technologies such as LAM modelling (two to four hours forecasting).
Justification
In order to protect European citizens from flood risks, the Member States should make use of advanced modelling techniques.
Amendment 22 Recital 15
(15) In cases of multi-purpose use of water bodies for different forms of sustainable human activities (e.g. flood risk management, ecology, inland navigation or hydropower) and impacts of these uses on the water bodies, Directive 2000/60/EC provides for a clear and transparent process for addressing such uses and impacts, including possible exemptions from the objectives of ‘good status’ or and of ‘non-deterioration’ in its Article 4(7)).	(15) Where water bodies are used for competing forms of sustainable human activities (e.g. flood risk management, ecology, inland navigation or hydropower) with impacts on the water bodies, Directive 2000/60/EC provides for a clear and transparent process for addressing such uses and impacts. In the event of conflicting rights, priority must always been given to the protection of human life and human health over the protection of the environment.
Amendment 23 Recital 17
(17) This Directive respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. In particular, this seeks to promote the integration into Community policies of a high level of environmental protection in accordance with the principle of sustainable development as laid down in Article 37 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.	deleted
Justification
See recital to am 10.
Amendment 24 Recital 18
(18) Since the objectives of the action to be taken cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can therefore, by reason of scale and effects of action, be better achieved at Community level, the Community may adopt measures in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Decision does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives,	(18) Since the objectives of the action to be taken cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can therefore, by reason of scale and effects of action, be better achieved at Community level, the Community may adopt measures in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Decision does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives. Member States may, therefore, in the first stage of the work, up to the date referred to in Article 6(2), use their existing plans if the minimum criteria set out in Article 4 are met.
Justification
For reasons of subsidiarity, the existing work carried out by Member States will be treated as complying with this Directive up until the first review of the preliminary flood risk assessment, if the minimum criteria are met.
Amendment 25 Recital 18 a (new)
	(18a) The provisions of Protocol No 30 annexed to the Treaty establishing the European Community on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality have been fully taken into account in the drawing up of this Directive.
Amendment 26 Article 1
This Directive lays down a framework for the reduction of risk to human health, the environment and economic activity associated with floods in the Community.	The purpose of this Directive is to establish a framework for the assessment and management of flood risks aiming at the reduction of the adverse consequences on human health, the environment and economic activity associated with floods in the Community. Furthermore it will help to attain the environmental objectives laid down in the Community legislation in force.
Justification
The aim of the Directive is not only the reduction of flood risks, but also the management of such risks.
Flooding per se is not a risk to the environment. Flood damage to the environment mainly occurs through damages to human property and the release of dangerous chemicals. Instead, human activities in flood prone areas increase the flood risk, the management of which then requires new physical changes to the water systems. In the national WFD Article 5 Reports authorities have judged that physical changes to the rivers and lakes lead to significant deterioration of the aquatic environment. The same reports conclude that these physical changes are one of the key reasons why 50% of Europe’s rivers and lakes are likely to fail to achieve legally binding WFD objective of reaching ‘good ecological status’ by 2015.
Amendment 27 Article 2, point 1
1. "flood" means temporary covering by water of land not normally covered by water.	1. "flood" means the temporary covering by water of land not normally covered by water, even as a result of heavy rainfall leading to the inundation of inhabited and/or industrial areas.
Justification
This amendment allows a broader definition of the concept of "flood", in line with the expansion of the concept to include heavy rainfall as another cause of this phenomenon.
Amendment 28 Article 2, paragraph 2
2. ”flood risk” means the likelihood of a flood event of a certain severity together with the estimated damage to human health, the environment and economic activity associated with a flood event of that severity.	2. ”flood risk” means the likelihood of a flood event together with the potential damage to human health and life, the environment and economic activity associated with that flood event.
Justification
In drafting terms, ‘of a certain severity’ is unclear.
Amendment 29 Article 3
For the purposes of this Directive Member States shall make use of the arrangements made under Article 3(1), (2), (3) and (6)of Directive 2000/60/EC.	For the purposes of this Directive Member States shall make use of the arrangements made under Article 3(1), (2), (3), (5) and (6) of Directive 2000/60/EC.
Justification
Where a river basin district extends beyond the territory of the Community, the Member States concerned shall endeavour to establish appropriate coordination with the relevant non-Member States, with the aim of achieving the objectives of this Directive throughout the river basin district.
Amendment 30 Article 3, paragraph 1 a (new)
	If Member States designate a different competent authority for the purpose of implementing this Directive, the provisions of Article 3(6), (8) and (9) of Directive 2000/60/EC shall apply.
Justification
Member States should be allowed a certain amount of flexibility in this connection.
Amendment 31 Article 4, paragraph 1
1. Member States shall, for each river basin district or the portion of an international river basin district lying within their territory, undertake a preliminary flood risk assessment in accordance with paragraph 2.	1. Member States shall, for each river basin district or the portion of an international river basin district lying within their territory, undertake a preliminary flood risk assessment in accordance with paragraph 2. Existing assessments prepared by Member States which meet the requirements of this Directive may be used for this purpose.
Justification
For the sake of (cost) effectiveness, existing assessments – which meet the requirements of this directive - should be used for the preliminary assessment of risks.
Amendment 32 Article 4, paragraph 2, point (a)
(a) a map of the river basin district including the borders of the river basins, sub-basins and where appropriate associated coastal zones, showing topography and land use;	(a) a map of the river basin district including the borders of the river basins, sub-basins and coastal areas, showing topography and land use;
Justification
Human activities tend to be concentrated in the coastal areas. With coastal areas being particularly exposed to the likely effects of climate change, all coastal areas without exception should be included into the preliminary flood risk assessment.
Amendment 33 Article 4, paragraph 2, point (b)
(b) a description of the floods which have occurred in the past;	(b) a description of the floods which have occurred in the past and which had significant adverse effects on human lives, economic activities and the environment;
Justification
For the sake of (cost) effectiveness, only significant floodings should be described.
Amendment 34 Article 4, paragraph 2, point (c)
(c) a description of flooding processes and their sensitivity to change, including the role of flood plain areas as a natural retention/buffer of floods and flood conveyance routes now or in the future;	(c) a description of flooding processes, including their sensitivity to change, particularly subsidence, and the role that flood plain areas play as a natural retention/buffer of floods as well as a description of present and future flood conveyance routes;
Justification
Subsidence has to be considered since it aggravates the flood risk.
Amendment 35 Article 4, paragraph 2, point (f a) (new)
	(fa) flood risk management measures, especially those related to building infrastructures, should be subject to a sound and transparent economic and environmental appraisal to ensure their long-term viability for citizens and businesses, taking into account the principle of cost-recovery, including environmental and resource costs.
Justification
In flood prone areas the development of new human activities must bear the costs of the risk management measures. This may result in citizens and businesses in flood risk areas taking precautionary measures to reduce damage. The recovery cost and who bears these costs need to be decided at national level.
Amendment 36 Article 4, paragraph 2, point (f b) (new)
	(fb) an assessment of the effectiveness of existing man-made flood defence infrastructures, taking into account their real capacity to prevent damage as well as their economic and environmental effectiveness;
Amendment 37 Article 4, paragraph 2 a (new)
	2a. Member States may decide, in respect of river basins, sub‑basins and stretches of coastline for which a sufficient potential risk may already be assumed, to dispense with the preliminary flood risk assessment referred to in paragraph 1, provided that:
	(a) flood risk maps or flood risk management plans are already available as of the date referred to in Article 6(1);
	(b) the Member States inform the Commission by the date referred to in Article 6(1) that they intend to make use of this derogation; and
	(c) the review of the preliminary flood risk assessment, of flood risk maps and of flood risk management plans in accordance with Chapters II, III and IV is carried out by the dates referred to in Articles 6(2), 8(2) and 10(2) respectively.
Justification
See justification to AM 31.
Amendment 38 Article 5, paragraph 1
1. On the basis of the assessment set out in article 4, each river basin, sub-basin or stretch of coastline covered by a river basin district shall be assigned to one of the following categories:	1. On the basis of the assessment set out in Article 4, each river basin, sub-basin, stretch of coastline or parts thereof covered by a river basin district shall be assigned to one of the following categories:
(a) River basins, sub-basins or stretch of coastline for which it is concluded that no potential significant flood risks exist or might reasonably be considered likely to occur or that the potential consequences to human health, the environment or economic activity are considered to be acceptably low;	(a) River basins, sub-basins, stretch of coastline or parts thereof for which it is concluded that no potential significant flood risks exist or that the potential consequences to the environment or economic activity are considered to be acceptably low, taking into account foreseeable land use or climate change;
(b) River basins, sub basins or stretch of coastline for which it is concluded that potential significant flood risks exist or might reasonably be considered likely to occur.	(b) River basins, sub-basins or stretches of coastline for which it is concluded that potential significant flood risks exist.
Justification
Effects on human health are never acceptable.
Areas for which land use changes are planned or where predictable changes in rainfall volumes and patterns due to climate change are expected, should be covered by more detailed assessment to ensure adequate planning information.
Amendment 39 Article 5, paragraph 2
2. The assignment under paragraph 1 of an international river basin or sub-basin or stretches of coastline of an international river basin district, shall be coordinated between the Member States concerned.	2. The assignment under paragraph 1 of an international river basin or sub-basin, stretches of coastline or parts thereof covered by an international river basin district, shall be coordinated between the Member States concerned.
Amendment 40 Article 5, paragraph 2, subparagraph 1 a (new)
	Member States shall ensure the relevant data transfer within shared river basins for the purposes of this Article.
Justification

This amendment aims at facilitating the coordination referred to in paragraph 2.

Amendment 41 Article 7, paragraph 1
1. Member States shall at the level of the river basin district, prepare flood maps and indicative flood damage maps, hereinafter “flood risk maps”, for the river basins, sub basins and stretches of coastline identified under point (b) Article 5 paragraph 1.	1. Member States shall, at the level of the river basin district, prepare flood maps and indicative flood damage maps, hereinafter “flood risk maps”, for the river basins, sub-basins and stretches of coastline identified under Article 5(1)(b). Existing maps prepared by Member States which meet the requirements of this Directive may be used for this purpose.
Justification
For the sake of (cost) effectiveness, existing maps – which meet the requirements of this directive - should be used.
Amendment 42 Article 7, paragraph 2, subparagraph 1, point (a)
(a) floods with a high probability (likely return period, once in every 10 years);	(a) floods with a likely return period of once every 10-30 years;
Justification
In most Member States there is no need to map flooding events with a return period of 10 years, which in practice are generally less relevant. The Member States should therefore be allowed some discretion as to what investigation period or what likely return period they wish to use as the basis for their high-probability flooding maps.
Amendment 43 Article 7, paragraph 2, subparagraph 1, point (b)
(b) floods with a medium probability (likely return period, once in every 100 years)	(b) floods with a likely return period of once in every 100 years;
Justification
Terms like 'high/medium' probability have no place in water management terminology.
Amendment 44 Article 7, paragraph 2, subparagraph 2, point (c)
(c) areas which could be subject to bank erosion and debris flow deposition.	(c) areas which could be subject to erosion of flood terraces and slopes of river valleys and to bank erosion and debris flow deposition.
Justification
The previous version referred only to damage to coastal areas, whereas most flooding in Europe affects river valleys. During flooding, all parts of a valley - bed, flood terraces and slopes - are damaged.

Amendment 45

Article 7, paragraph 2, subparagraph 2, point (c)

Does not affect English version

Amendment 46 Article 7, paragraph 2, subparagraph 2, point (c a) (new)
	(ca) steeply sloping areas which could be subject to floods with a high flow velocity and large quantities of debris.
Justification
It is also necessary to allow for the floods in some Mediterranean regions caused primarily by short, sharp downpours of torrential rain, the effects of which are aggravated by steep slopes.
Amendment 47 Article 7, paragraph 2, subparagraph 2, point (c b) (new)
	(cb) agents potentially capable of causing floods that can or might be found in the area marked out on the risk map.
Justification
For flood assessment and management purposes it is necessary to define and analyse the causative agents, covering their full implications. As well as being mentioned in the management plans, they should be shown on the risk maps.
Amendment 48 Article 7, paragraph 2, subparagraph 2, point (c c) (new)
	(cc) floodplains and other natural areas that can serve as a retention/buffer area at present or in the future.
Justification
The undeveloped areas that can flood naturally (e.g. floodplains) and perform a valuable water retention function, if not considered in the flood risk maps and management plans, could be targeted for development. They would then loose or weaken their important function of reducing flood risk, and the new assets placed there would be at risk. It is thus important that a “no-deterioration” provision applies to these areas so that risks do not increase. Therefore, it is necessary that these areas and the functions they perform are included/considered in the relevant flood risk maps and management plans to be drawn under this Directive.
Amendment 49 Article 7, paragraph 3
3. The indicative flood damage maps shall show the potential damage associated with floods under the scenarios referred to in paragraph 2 and expressed in terms of the following:	3. The indicative flood damage maps shall show the potential adverse consequences associated with floods under the scenarios referred to in paragraph 2 and expressed in terms of the following:
(a) the number of inhabitants potentially affected;	(a) the number of inhabitants potentially affected;
(b) potential economic damage in the area;	(b) potential economic damage in the area;
(c) potential damage to the environment.	(c) potential damage to the environment - including areas designated as protected areas under Article 6 of Directive 2000/60/EC, taking into account location of point or diffuse sources of pollution and associated risks to aquatic or terrestrial ecosystems in the case of flood events – and risk to human health.
	(ca) technical installations as referred to in Annex I of Council Directive 96/61/EC of 24 September 1996 concerning integrated pollution prevention and control1 and covered by Council Directive 96/82/EC of 9 December 1996 on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances2 which might cause accidental pollution in case of flooding and protected areas identified by Article 6 of Directive 2000/60/EC.
	___________
	1 OJ L 257, 10.10.1996, p. 26. Directive as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 166/2006 (OJ L 33, 4.2.2006, p. 1).
	2 OJ L 10, 14.1.1997. p. 13. Directive as last amended by Directive 2003/105/EC (OJ L 345, 31.12.2003, p. 97).
Justification
The flood maps should show the installations that might cause accidental environmental pollution as a consequence of flooding. The tools to identify installations with potential risk are the classifications of the above mentioned Seveso II Directive and IPPC Directive. Protected areas identified in the Water Framework Directive should also be presented in the flood maps.
If, because given installations were sited in the area, floods were likely to cause particular environmental problems such as water contamination, that risk should be mapped from the outset.
Amendment 50 Article 7, paragraph 3, subparagraph 1 a (new)
	Flood risk maps may divide areas into zones according to land use and vulnerability to any likely damage.
Justification
The division of areas into zones according to land use (woodland, farmland, urban, industrial, etc.) and vulnerability to likely damage and the plotting of such zones on flood risk maps will be extremely useful in deciding on flood risk management procedures. See amendment 4.
Amendment 51 Article 7, paragraph 3 a (new)
	3a. Member States shall determine the specific points at which the flood risk is higher. That information must be taken into account in land use planning.
Justification
There are always particular points exposed to a higher risk. The information on that subject should be used in order to make for better land use planning for farming, industrial, urban development, and infrastructure purposes.
Amendment 52 Article 7, paragraph 3 b (new)
	3b. Depending on the particular characteristics of their regions, Member States may, if they think fit, include specific provisions on their risk maps.
Justification
The directive sets out some basic rules to observe. It might, however, be very useful for individual Member States to lay down specific measures for areas with special characteristics.
Amendment 53 Article 9, paragraph 1
1. Member States shall prepare and implement flood risk management plans at the level of the river basin district for the river basins, sub-basins and stretches of coastline identified under point (b) of Article 5 paragraph 1 in accordance with paragraphs 2 and 3 of this Article.	1. Member States shall prepare and implement flood risk management plans at the level of the river basin district, for the river basins, sub-basins and stretches of coastline identified under Article 5(1)(b) in accordance with paragraphs 2 and 3 of this Article and Directive 79/409/EEC and Directive 92/43/EEC.
Amendment 54 Article 9, paragraph 1 a (new)
	1a. In preparing these plans, Member States shall describe flooding processes and their sensitivity to change, including the role of flood plain areas as a natural retention/buffer of floods and flood conveyance routes now or in the future. They shall also describe development plans that would entail a change of land use or of allocation of the population and distribution of economic activities resulting in an increase of flood risks in the area itself or in upstream or downstream regions.
Amendment 55 Article 9, paragraph 1 b (new)
	1b. If maps or plans are already available for river basin districts or parts thereof which meet the requirements of this Directive, Member States may use the existing maps or plans for the purposes of this Directive. The requirement to review and update them shall still apply.
Justification
Member States which have already carried out work in this area must be able to make use of this.
Amendment 56 Article 9, paragraph 2
2. Member States shall establish appropriate levels of protection specific to each river basin, sub basin or stretch of coastline, focusing on the reduction of the probability of flooding and of potential consequences of flooding to human health, the environment and economic activity, and taking into account relevant aspects: water management, soil management, spatial planning, land use and nature conservation.	2. Member States, in close association with local and regional authorities, shall establish appropriate levels of protection specific to each river basin, sub-basin or stretch of coastline, focusing on a reduction of the potential consequences of flooding for human health, the environment and economic activity, using preferably non-structural initiatives, and, when necessary, the reduction of likelihood of flooding. These actions must take into account relevant aspects: water management, soil management, spatial planning, land use, the vulnerability of the area in question to any likely damage and nature conservation, as well as costs and benefits. In the case of shared river basins, sub-basins or stretches of coastline, Member States shall cooperate in the implementation of the above obligations. Human uses of floodplains should be adapted to the identified flood risks.
Justification
Floods are natural events in the river dynamics that play an important role. Therefore it is necessary to remark the importance of using preferably non structural actions. This means, the flood risk may be reduced by means of the reduction of vulnerability. Only when these actions result insufficient, the reduction of the likelihood of flooding should involve structural actions.
The amendment aims to ensure that in the case of shared river basins Member States are required to coordinate when determining the levels of protection. This is a particularly important safeguard for downstream countries. In addition, the range of conditions to be taken into account in the above exercise should be expanded to the costs and benefits of the measures.
Floods are natural phenomena. Floods pose a risk only to human activities or uses undertaken in flood plains. Therefore, minimising the potential consequences of flooding must also entail an adjustment of these human activities to the existing flood risks.
Amendment 57 Article 9, paragraph 3, subparagraph 1
3. The flood risk management plans shall include measures that aim at achieving the levels of protection established in accordance with paragraph 2.	3. The flood risk management plans shall include measures that: (a) work with natural processes such as maintenance and/or restoration of floodplains in order to give back space to the rivers wherever possible and promote appropriate land use, agricultural and forestry practices throughout the river basin;
	(b) contribute to the management of floods in upstream or downstream regions or at least do not affect the flood risks in such a way that upstream or downstream regions incur disproportionate costs in achieving the appropriate level of risk prevention and protection;
	(c) take into account the effectiveness of existing man-made flood defence infrastructure, including their economic and environmental effectiveness.
Justification
The water retention function of undeveloped areas that could flood naturally (e.g. floodplains) and of forests is valuable for mitigating flood risks and needs to be considered when developing the flood risk management plans - especially since the traditional flood management strategies, mostly based on engineering infrastructures are often ineffective and can cause severe problems further downstream.
Amendment 58 Article 9, paragraph 3, subparagraph 2
The flood risk management plan shall address all phases of the flood risk management cycle focusing on prevention, protection, preparedness, and taking into account the characteristics of the particular river basin or sub basin.	The flood risk management plan shall address all phases of the flood risk management cycle focusing on prevention, protection, preparedness, and taking into account the characteristics of the particular river basin or sub basin. The flood risk management plan shall also include an assessment of rescue and recovery measures.
Justification
Although the focus of risk management plans rests on prevention, protection and preparedness, a detailed assessment of rescue and recovery operations could help in spreading awareness of the cost of lack of prevention measures.
Amendment 59 Article 9, paragraph 3, subparagraph 2 b (new)
	The flood risk management plan shall include measures to prevent accidental pollution from technical installations as referred to in Annex I of Council Directive 96/61/EC and covered by Council Directive 96/82/EC as a consequence of flooding.
Justification
As floods often followed by accidental environmental pollutions due to industrial, agricultural and other facilities on the area concerned, the flood risk management plans should take probable pollution sources into account. The tools to identify installations with potential risk are the classifications of the above mentioned Seveso II Directive and IPPC Directive.
Amendment 60 Article 9, paragraph 3 a (new)
	3a. Flood risk management measures, especially those related to building infrastructures, should be subject to sound and transparent economic and environmental appraisal to ensure a long-term viability of their service for citizens and businesses, taking into account the principle of cost-recovery, including environmental and resource costs.
Amendment 61 Article 9, paragraph 4
4. Flood risk management measures taken in one Member State must not increase flood risks in neighbouring countries.	4. In light of the principle of solidarity, measures in upstream or downstream areas should be considered, where appropriate, as part of the flood risk management plans. Flood risk management measures, or any other measures, taken in one Member State must not increase flood risks in neighbouring countries.
Amendment 62 Article 9, paragraph 4 a (new)
	4a. Where a Member State intends to significantly change the implementation measures or the timetable set for implementation in between the review periods foreseen in Article 11(2), Member States shall take the appropriate action to ensure coordination with other Member States within an international river basin district, and public information and participation.
Amendment 63 Article 12, paragraph 2
2. In the case of an international river basin district falling entirely within the Community, Member States shall ensure coordination with the aim of producing one single international flood risk management plan.	2. In the case of an international river basin district falling entirely within the Community, Member States shall ensure coordination, for example by developing networks for the exchange of information between the competent authorities, with the aim of producing one single international flood risk management plan. Accession and candidate countries are strongly encouraged to cooperate actively in such coordinating actions.
Where such a plan is not produced, Member States shall produce flood risk management plans covering at least the parts of the international river basin district falling within their territory.	Where such a plan is not produced, Member States shall produce flood risk management plans covering at least the parts of the international river basin district falling within their territory. In drawing up such plans, they shall consult the Member States situated in the international river basin, shall report on the views of these Member States and shall take account of the impact of their plans on neighbouring Member States.
Justification
The development of a network for the exchange of information between the competent Member-State authorities sharing responsibility for an international river catchment area is one of the most fundamental steps towards flood risk management coordination and towards relations based on progressively greater mutual confidence.
To achieve full coordination it is necessary to draw up plans in consultation with the applicant Member States so that they can come into line as rapidly as possible with EU policies and the existing acquis. The second part of the paragraph is amended since the original wording leaves open the possibility of the measures contained in the first part not being implemented, thereby rendering the provision inoperative.
Consultation must take place at any event, even if there is no common plan.
Amendment 64 Article 12, paragraph 2 a (new)
	2a. Member States shall ensure that the requirements of this Directive are coordinated for the whole of the river basin district. For international river basin districts the Member States concerned shall together ensure this coordination and may, for this purpose, use existing structures stemming from international agreements.
Justification
Adaptation to Article 3(4) of the Water Framework Directive.
Amendment 65 Article 12, paragraph 3
3. In the case of an international river basin district extending beyond the boundaries of the Community, where one single international flood risk management plan including any third country concerned is not produced, Member States shall produce flood risk management plans covering at least the parts of the international river basin district lying within the territory of the Member States concerned.	3. In the case of an international river basin district extending beyond the boundaries of the Community, where one single international flood risk management plan including any third country concerned is not produced, the Member State or Member States concerned shall endeavour to establish appropriate coordination with the relevant third countries, with the aim of achieving the objectives of this Directive throughout the river basin district.
Justification
Adaptation to Article 3(5) of the Water Framework Directive.
Amendment 66 Article 12, paragraph 3 a (new)
	3a. With regard to any issues which have an impact on flood risk management in a Member State and which cannot be dealt with at Member State level, reference is made to Article 12 of Directive 2000/60/EC.
Justification
Adaptation to the Water Framework Directive
Amendment 67 Article 13, paragraph 2
2. The development of the first flood risk management plans and their subsequent reviews as referred to in article 10 of this Directive shall be carried out in close coordination with and, if considered appropriate, integrated into, the reviews of the river basin management plans provided for in Article 13(7) of Directive 2000/60/EC.	2. The development of the first flood risk management plans and their subsequent reviews as referred to in Article 10 of this Directive shall be carried out in coordination with, and may be integrated into, the reviews of the river basin management plans provided for by Article 13(7) of Directive 2000/60/EC.
Justification
Coordination with directive 2000/60/EC should always be carried out. The integration, however, should remain an option. Member States could also opt for having a separate plan.
Amendment 68 Article 14, paragraph 1
1. Member States shall make the preliminary flood risk assessment, the flood risk maps and the flood risk management plans available to the public.	1. Member States shall, in accordance with Directive 2003/4/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2003 on public access to environmental information1 :and with the Aarhus Convention, make the preliminary flood risk assessment, the flood risk maps and the flood risk management plans available to the public. ____ 1 OJ L 41, 14.2.2003, p. 26.
Justification
Applying the Aarhus Convention to the Community institutions and bodies and, by extension, to EU citizens, will ensure access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters, including in connection with floods and their impact.
Amendment 69 Article 14, paragraph 2 a (new)
	2a. Member States shall inform and actively involve the public to ensure a high level of preparedness as part of the flood risk management plans in order to minimise the damaging effects of floods.
Justification
Many adverse effects of floods can be minimised if the society knows about the risks and is prepared to respond to floods in a coordinated manner.
Amendment 70 Article 15, paragraph 2 a (new)
	2a. Member States shall provide the inhabitants of areas referred to in Article 7(2) with information and training on a regular basis, so as to enable them to take appropriate pre-flood precautions and post-flood action.
Amendment 71 Article 16 a (new)
	Article 16a
	1. Member States may decide not to draw up the preliminary flood risk assessment referred to in Article 4 for those river basins and stretches of coastline for which it has been established by [date of entry into force] that a potential significant flood risk exists or might reasonably be considered likely to occur to the extent that they must be identified as areas referred to in point (b) of Article 5(1).
	2. Member States may decide by [date of entry into force] to use current flood risk maps if they fulfil the requirements of the maps referred to in Article 7.
	3. Member States may decide not to draw up the flood risk management plans referred to in Article 9 if current plans as at [date of entry into force] are appropriate for achieving the objectives laid down in Articles 1 and 9.
	4. Member States shall notify the Commission of their decisions in accordance with paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of this Article within the deadlines provided for in Article 5(3), Article 8(1) and Article 11(1).
Justification
The new Article 16a bundles the rules on recognition of preliminary work carried out in the Member States so that such work may be recognised even if it does not comply with the precise wording of the directive but achieves the objective of its measures. Harmonised flood action plans meeting the objectives set out in the Directive already exist for many international waters . These existing plans must be allowed to stand and must be exempted from the formal provisions of the Directive.
Amendment 72 Article 17
Member States shall submit the preliminary flood risk assessment, the flood risk maps and flood risk management plans to the Commission within three months after their completion.	Member States shall submit the preliminary flood risk assessment, the flood risk maps and flood risk management plans, including cross-border flood risks, to the Commission within three months after their completion.
Justification
There must be express provision to include the cross-border risks which may arise both from neighbouring Member States and from non-Member States of the Union.
Amendment 73 Article 18
The Commission shall by 22 December 2018 submit to the European Parliament and to the Council a report on the implementation of this Directive at the latest and every six years thereafter.	The Commission shall, by 22 December 2018 at the latest and every six years thereafter, submit to the European Parliament and to the Council a report on the implementation of this Directive. The impact of climate change shall be taken into account in drawing up this report.
Amendment 74 Annex, section A, point 4 a (new)
	4a. a prioritisation of the measures that promote the prevention of damage according to the "non- deterioration" and/or "good ecological, chemical and quantitative status" objectives of Directive 2000/60/EC such as:
	- protecting wetlands and floodplains,
	- restoring degraded wetlands and floodplains (including river meanders), especially those that reconnect rivers with their floodplains,
	- removing obsolete flood defence infrastructures from rivers,
	- preventing further construction (infrastructures, housing, etc.) in floodplains,
	- promoting construction measures to upgrade existing buildings (such as pile foundation),
	- supporting sustainable land use practices in catchment areas, such as reforestation, in order to improve natural water retention and groundwater recharge,
	- prior authorisation or registration for permanent activities in floodplains such as construction and industrial development;
Amendment 75 Annex, Section B, point 2
2. an assessment of the progress made towards the achievement of the level of protection;	2. an assessment of the progress made towards the achievement of the level of risk prevention and protection;

• [1]  Not yet published in OJ.

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

Floods are the most frequently‑occurring natural disasters in Europe. The floods that happened in 2002 and 2005 had devastating consequences in the areas worst affected, resulting in fatalities, evacuation of people from their homes, and serious damage to homes and infrastructure. In some cases, there was also long-term damage to the environment as well as enormous economic damage. The rainfall in August 2005 alone cost more than 70 human lives.

Scientists are convinced that the frequency and intensity of heavy rainfall is increasing as a result of a number of factors associated with human activities:

· intensive urbanisation, above all in risk areas (development of urban areas and roads, changes to river courses, ill‑considered building on overflow areas);

· deforestation, in particular authorised felling in valleys, in order to build holiday homes and industrial and business parks on previously wooded banks of rivers in mountain areas;

· intensive agriculture, which has been criticised for leading to sealing of the upper layers of soil, reducing meadow land and overflow areas, building on pasture land and developing spring crops;

· soil erosion.

Following the floods in 2002, the Commission presented an EU flood action programme aimed, inter alia, at improving research and information. This was followed by a Commission communication on flood management (COM(2004)472) which presented an analysis and proposed concerted measures. Among the measures proposed was the current proposal for a Directive, which is essentially aimed at reducing and managing risks to human health, the environment, infrastructure and the economy associated with floods.

Your rapporteur welcomes the Commission initiative. In the face of the increasing risk of flood‑related damage, he considers it essential to establish a European regulatory framework. He also notes that, in view of the fact that the majority of European river basins are divided between two or more countries (see map on next page), a purely national approach to flood management is not enough.

In establishing this European regulatory framework, the strictest possible account should, in your rapporteur's view, be taken of the subsidiarity principle; many important decisions such as on the level of protection and choice of protection measures can, and should, be taken by the Member States themselves.

The obligations associated with this Directive are confined to the following steps: preliminary flood risk assessment, preparation of flood risk maps and preparation of flood risk management plans. The preliminary plausibility assessment (Article 4) will ensure that areas in which there is no flood risk are excluded, saving costs for example in connection with mapping.

Furthermore, the administrative and technical costs to Member States of implementing the Directive should be as low as possible. One of the most important aspects in this connection is the guarantee that existing work will be protected, i.e. that it will be possible for Member States to use work already carried out in the area of flood protection. The Directive should also be synchronised to a large extent with the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC), as the objectives of the two directives are complementary.

Your rapporteur proposes that the principle of protecting existing work should be expressly mentioned in the text of the act. He also advocates limiting the preliminary assessment to a number of key aspects; a highly scientific assessment of flood risk should not be carried out at this stage. It should also be sufficient to refer to flood events that have taken place in the past 30 years.

Your rapporteur would also like - as is already the case under the Water Framework Directive - to give the Commission a mediation role in conflicts between Member States. Other amendments are aimed at giving Member States greater flexibility or clarifying the wording.

OPINION of the Committee on Regional Development (26.4.2006)

for the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety

on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the assessment and management of floods
(COM(2006)0015 – C6‑0020/2006 – 2006/0005(COD))

Draftswoman: Jillian Evans

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

In its Explanatory Memorandum, the European Commission stresses the tragic consequences (more than 700 deaths in 2002) and the magnitude of the damage to the environment, to private and public infrastructure, and to the economic activity of the regions caused by floods. Flood volumes have been increased because of a massive reduction in the natural flood retention capacity of river basins. Despite the dangers, the building of both public and private dwellings and amenities in flood risk areas has been permitted. By way of example the Commission points to the 10 million people who live in areas at risk of extreme floods along the Rhine where the potential damage from floods totals Euro 165 million. Climate change will, in all probability, increase both the frequency and the intensity of such events. Consequently, in order to reduce and manage flood-related risks to human health, the environment, infrastructure and property, the Commission proposes that the European Parliament and the Council adopt a Directive on the assessment and management of floods.

The assessment and management of floods is not new. Most if not all Member States have implemented national policies to manage this phenomenon. However, most river basins in Europe are shared between two or more Member States and the management of floods in one region can affect flood risks in upstream or downstream regions. Consequently, concerted action at Community level would bring considerable added value and improve overall flood risk prevention and protection. Furthermore, legislation dealing with this aspect of water management fits well with the Water Framework Directive[1], which introduced the principle of cross-border co-ordination within river basins.

Under the new legislation governing the Structural Funds it is proposed that flood prevention measures should be considered eligible expenditure.

In your draftswoman's view however a number of changes to the Commission's draft are necessary if one is to:

· frame this proposal for a directive within a holistic sustainable flood risk management policy;

· put the accent on preventive action aiming at eliminating or reducing flood risks rather than emergency handling, since anticipatory and precautionary adaptation is more effective and less costly than emergency adaptation or retrofitting;

· limit or eliminate the knock-on effect in upstream or downstream regions of local flood protection measures by integrated action at river basin level, including transboundary river basin cooperation, with the involvement of all relevant authorities;

· promote the integration of all policies and financial mechanisms concerned, inter alia cohesion policy, in order to deliver sustainable flood risk management;

· integrate the implementation of this directive from the date it enters into force with the river basin management planning process of Directive 2000/60/EC (Water Framework Directive) in order to make flood risk management plans cost-effective and to promote their respect and support for the ecological sustainability conditions spelled out in the WFD;

· ensure sustainable water management by prioritising measures for the prevention of risk and damage through land use planning and increasing natural retention capacities;

· legislate in a clear and enforceable way by deleting legal ambiguity with regard to the scope of flood risk maps and management plans;

· make the market work for sustainable flood risk management with economic activities in flood risk areas bearing the costs of flood defence measures as well as the resulting environmental and resource costs and make persons living in flood risk areas responsible for taking to the best of their abilities precautionary measures that reduce damage (e.g. adaptation of buildings to flood risks).

Your draftswoman therefore proposes the following amendments:

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Regional Development calls on the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following amendments in its report:

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendments by Parliament
Amendment 1 Recital 2
(2) Floods are natural phenomena which cannot be prevented. However, human activity is contributing to an increase in the likelihood and adverse impacts of flood events.	(2) Floods are natural phenomena which cannot be completely prevented. However, the massive reduction in the natural flood retention capacity of river basins, the mismanagement of human activities (such as increasing human settlements and economic assets in floodplains and the erosion and reduction of the natural water retention of land by cutting down forests and farming in river basins) droughts and global warming are contributing to an increase in the likelihood and adverse effects of floods.
Amendment 2 Recital 2 a (new)
	(2a) Traditional flood risk management strategies, centred on building infrastructures for the immediate protection of people, real property and goods, have failed to ensure safety to the extent that they were supposed to.
Amendment 3 Recital 3
(3) It is feasible and desirable to reduce the risk of damage to human health, environment and infrastructure associated with floods, however, measures to reduce the risk of flood damage must be co-ordinated throughout a river basin if they are to be effective.	(3) It is feasible and desirable to reduce the risk of damage to human health, the environment and infrastructure associated with floods. However, measures to reduce the risk of flood damage must be co-ordinated between Member States, their national, regional and local authorities as well as organisations responsible for river management throughout river basins if they are to be effective and must give increased importance to nature-related measures in order to promote a shift away from the traditional short-term paradigm of "building to protect" and towards ecologically sustainable flood management.
Amendment 4 Recital 3 a (new)
	(3a) The integrated river basin management proposed should be based on (a) the particular environment's "carrying capacity", that is, the proper, long-term functioning of ecosystems and maintenance of biodiversity, as well as the associated socio-economic benefits for people, (b) joint assessment of the needs and expectations of all "water stakeholders" at basin-wide level and (c) the best possible information.
Amendment 5 Recital 3 b (new)
	(3b) Risk management and flood damage containment measures should respect the principle of solidarity. Consequently, flood risk management along the catchment basin of a river flowing between two or more neighbouring countries should be organised in such a way that no area faces flood risks as a result of non-sustainable river management.
Justification
Both Directive 2000/60/ΕC establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy and this proposal for a directive, which will be closely aligned with it, incorporate the principle of solidarity, which requires coordinated flood risk management over the entire area of a cross-border river catchment basin.
Amendment 6 Recital 7 a (new)
	(7a) The provisions on sustainable flood risk management should be taken into account by the Member States and the Community when laying down and implementing all their policies, including for example transport policy, spatial planning, urban development, and industrialisation policy, agricultural policy, cohesion policy, energy policy, and research policy.
Justification
There is ample evidence that misdirected spatial planning, urban development, and industrialisation policies do much to increase the risk of floods.
Amendment 7 Recital 8
(8) Throughout the Community different types of floods occur, such as river floods, flash floods, urban floods, sewer floods and coastal floods. The damage caused by flood events may also vary across the countries and regions of the Community. Hence, objectives regarding managing flood risks should be based on the local and regional circumstances.	(8) Throughout the Community different types of floods occur, such as river floods, flash floods, urban floods, sewer floods, coastal floods and floods caused by heavy rainfall. The damage caused by flood events may also vary across the countries and regions of the Community. Hence, objectives regarding managing flood risks should be based on the local and regional circumstances.
Justification
Flooding caused by heavy rainfall is being added to the several types of flooding which are identified by the proposed directive's wording.
Amendment 8 Recital 13
(13) To prevent duplication of work Member States should be able use existing flood risk maps and flood risk management plans for the purposes of satisfying the requirements of this Directive.	(13) To prevent duplication of work Member States should be able use existing flood risk maps and flood risk management plans for the purposes of satisfying the requirements of this Directive; to that end, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity and in so far as they are available, Member States should be afforded the full flexibility necessary to enable them both to use the maps and plans and to satisfy the above-mentioned requirements.
Justification
Given the varied nature of floods in the Member States, enough flexibility should be provided to make the directive genuinely useful, acting strictly in accordance with Directive 2000/60/EC establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy.
Amendment 9 Recital 13 a (new)
	(13a) River basin flood management should aim to create a common responsibility and solidarity within the basin. To that end Member States should endeavour to raise awareness and cooperation among all stakeholders, even those in areas that are not prone or are less prone to flooding, who nevertheless might otherwise contribute by their land use and practices to downstream or upstream floods.
Amendment 10 Article 2, paragraph 1
1. "Flood" means temporary covering by water of land not normally covered by water.	1. "Flood" means the temporary covering by water of land not normally covered by water, even as a result of heavy rainfall leading to the inundation of inhabited and/or industrial areas.
Justification
This amendment allows a broader definition of the concept of "flood", in line with the expansion of the concept to include heavy rainfall as another cause of this phenomenon.
Amendment 11 Article 4, paragraph 1
1. Member States shall, for each river basin district or the portion of an international river basin district lying within their territory, undertake a preliminary flood risk assessment in accordance with paragraph 2.	1. Member States shall, for each river basin district or the portion of an international river basin district lying within their territory, undertake a preliminary flood risk assessment in accordance with paragraph 2. Existing assessments prepared by Member States which meet the requirements of this Directive may be used for this purpose.
Justification
For the sake of (cost) effectiveness, existing assessments – which meet the requirements of this directive - should be used for the preliminary assessment of risks.
Amendment 12 Article 4, paragraph 2, point (a)
(a) a map of the river basin district including the borders of the river basins, sub-basins and where appropriate associated coastal zones, showing topography and land use;	(a) a map of the river basin district including the borders of the river basins, sub-basins and associated coastal areas, showing topography and land use;
Amendment 13 Article 4, paragraph 2, point (b)
(b) a description of the floods which have occurred in the past;	(b) a description of the floods which have occurred in the past and which had significant adverse effects on human lives, economic activities and the environment;
Justification
For the sake of (cost) effectiveness, only significant floodings should be described.
Amendment 14 Article 4, paragraph 2, point (e)
(e) an assessment of the likelihood of future floods based on hydrological data, types of floods and the projected impact of climate change and land use trends;	(e) an assessment of the likelihood of future floods based on hydrological data, including data obtained from telemetric real-time monitoring in each river catchment basin, and on the basis of the types of floods and the projected impact of climate change and land use trends;
Justification
The creation of a hydrometeorological telemetric network (measuring rainfall, temperature, humidity, river flow, etc.) could greatly facilitate flood risk assessment throughout the river catchment basin, providing both an early warning system and a vitally important database.
Amendment 15 Article 4, paragraph 2, point (f a) (new)
	(fa) an assessment of the effectiveness of existing man-made flood defence infrastructures, taking into account their real capacity to prevent damage as well as their economic and environmental effectiveness;
Amendment 16 Article 4, paragraph 2 a (new)
	2a. Member States may omit from the preliminary flood risk assessment those river basins, sub‑basins or coastal areas which, on the basis of the Member State's accumulated experience, may immediately be placed in the category of river basins, sub‑basins or stretches of coastline with a significant flood risk and which will require flood area mapping and management plans.
Amendment 17 Article 5, paragraph 1, point (a)
(a) River basins, sub-basins or stretch of coastline for which it is concluded that no potential significant flood risks exist or might reasonably be considered likely to occur or that the potential consequences to human health, the environment or economic activity are considered to be acceptably low;	(a) River basins, sub-basins or stretches of coastline for which it is concluded that no potential significant flood risk exists or that the potential consequences to human health, the environment or economic activity are considered to be acceptably low;
Amendment 18 Article 5, paragraph 2
2. The assignment under paragraph 1 of an international river basin or sub-basin or stretches of coastline of an international river basin district, shall be coordinated between the Member States concerned.	2. The assignment under paragraph 1 of an international river basin or sub-basin or stretches of coastline of an international river basin district, shall be coordinated between the Member States concerned. Member States shall ensure the relevant data transfer within shared river basins for the purpose of this Article.
Justification
This amendment aims at facilitating the coordination meant in paragraph 2.
Amendment 19 Article 7, paragraph 1
1. Member States shall at the level of the river basin district, prepare flood maps and indicative flood damage maps, hereinafter “flood risk maps”, for the river basins, sub basins and stretches of coastline identified under point (b) Article 5 paragraph 1.	1. Member States shall at the level of the river basin district, prepare flood maps and indicative flood damage maps, hereinafter “flood risk maps”, for the river basins, sub basins and stretches of coastline identified under Article 5(1)(b). Existing maps prepared by Member States which meet the requirements of this Directive may be used for this purpose.
Justification
For the sake of (cost) effectiveness, existing maps – which meet the requirements of this directive - should be used.
Amendment 20 Article 7, paragraph 2, subparagraph 1, point c) and subparagraph 2
(c) floods with a low probability (extreme events).	(c) floods with a low probability (extreme events) for significant communities and significant developed areas.
For each scenario set out in the first subparagraph the following elements shall be shown:	For each scenario set out in the first subparagraph the following elements shall be shown:
(a) projected water depths;	(a) projected water depths for significant communities and significant developed areas;
(b) the flow velocity, where appropriate;	(b) the flow velocity for significant communities and significant developed areas;
(c) areas which could be subject to bank erosion and debris flow deposition.	(c) areas which could be subject to bank erosion and debris flow deposition
Justification
The suggested Commission draft attributes the obligation to define projected water depths and flow velocity for all parts of the river flows. This is possible to be done only if there is a digital topographic model or two-dimensional mathematical model. However these measures are redundant in some areas for example in those used for natural inundation. Logically this will cost a substantial amounts of money where these tools do not exist at the moment though not necessary for all river parts.
Amendment 21 Article 7, paragraph 2, point (c a) (new)
	(ca) areas for natural floodplain storage and areas that can serve as a retention buffer either immediately or in the future.
Amendment 22 Article 7, paragraph 3, subparagraph 1 a (new)
	Flood risk maps may divide areas into zones according to land use and vulnerability to any likely damage.
Justification
The division of areas into zones according to land use (woodland, farmland, urban, industrial, etc.) and vulnerability to likely damage and the plotting of such zones on flood risk maps will be extremely useful in deciding on flood risk management procedures. See amendment 4.
Amendment 23 Article 9, paragraph 1
1. Member States shall prepare and implement flood risk management plans at the level of the river basin district for the river basins, sub-basins and stretches of coastline identified under point (b) of Article 5 paragraph 1 in accordance with paragraphs 2 and 3 of this Article.	1. Member States shall prepare and implement flood risk management plans at the level of the river basin district, for the river basins, sub-basins and stretches of coastline identified under Article 5(1)(b) in accordance with paragraphs 2 and 3 of this Article and Directive 79/409/EEC and Directive 92/43/EEC.
Amendment 24 Article 9, paragraph 2
2. Member States shall establish appropriate levels of protection specific to each river basin, sub basin or stretch of coastline, focusing on the reduction of the probability of flooding and of potential consequences of flooding to human health, the environment and economic activity, and taking into account relevant aspects: water management, soil management, spatial planning, land use and nature conservation.	2. Member States shall establish appropriate levels of flood risk management specific to each river basin, sub-basin or stretch of coastline, focusing on the reduction of the probability of flooding and of potential consequences of flooding to human health, the environment and economic activity, and taking into account relevant aspects: water management, soil management, spatial planning, land use, the vulnerability of the area in question to any likely damage and nature conservation.
Justification
’Protection’ is too narrow a term, whereas flood risk management implies a combination of prevention, protection, and preparedness for floods, as indicated in Article 9(3).
Amendment 25 Article 9, paragraph 3, subparagraph 1
3. The flood risk management plans shall include measures that aim at achieving the levels of protection established in accordance with paragraph 2.	3. The flood risk management plans shall include measures that aim at achieving the objectives of flood risk management established in accordance with paragraph 2.
Justification
This directive should make distinction between tasks of the Commission (providing framework for cooperation and setting objectives) and the Member States (meeting the objectives by introducing concrete measures which fit into their national situation).
Amendment 26 Article 9, paragraph 3, subparagraph 2 a (new)
	Implementation of flood risk management plans shall be tested by means of drills designed to assess the level of training and preparedness of the units involved, and adjustments shall be made to flood risk management plans where necessary.
Justification
In order to ensure the effectiveness of flood management plans it is necessary to carry out drills to test the level of training and preparedness of the units involved so that any necessary improvements to these plans can be made.
Amendment 27 Article 9, paragraph 3, subparagraph 2 b (new)
	Flood risk management plans shall pay special attention to risk management in urban areas and connected industrial zones as the economic damages in these areas are likely to be the greatest.
Justification
Urban areas and associated industrial zones should be given priority in the flood risk management plans as the damages in those areas are usually higher and potentially are able to impact more individuals than of the rural areas.
Amendment 28 Article 9, paragraph 3 a (new)
	3a. In order to draw up and implement the plans effectively measures shall be taken to ensure continuous liaison and cooperation between civil defence and regional water authorities.
Justification
Cooperation between the civil defence and regional water authorities is necessary to ensure the availability of all information necessary for the drawing up of sound management plans and their implementation.
Amendment 29 Article 12, paragraph 1
1. For river basin districts which fall entirely within their territory, Member States shall ensure that one single flood risk management plan is produced.	1. For river basin districts which fall entirely within their territory, Member States shall ensure that one single flood risk management plan, involving all relevant authorities and taking into account regional flood risk management planning, is produced.
Amendment 30 Article 12, paragraph 2
2. In the case of an international river basin district falling entirely within the Community, Member States shall ensure coordination with the aim of producing one single international flood risk management plan.	2. In the case of an international river basin district falling entirely within the Community, Member States shall ensure coordination, for example by developing networks for the exchange of information between the competent authorities, with the aim of producing one single international flood risk management plan. Accession and candidate countries are strongly encouraged to cooperate actively in such coordinating actions.
Where such a plan is not produced, Member States shall produce flood risk management plans covering at least the parts of the international river basin district falling within their territory.	Where the formulation of such a plan is delayed, Member States shall produce flood risk management plans covering at least the parts of the international river basin district falling within their territory.
Justification
The development of a network for the exchange of information between the competent Member-State authorities sharing responsibility for an international river catchment area is one of the most fundamental steps towards flood risk management coordination and towards relations based on progressively greater mutual confidence.
To achieve full coordination it is necessary to draw up plans in consultation with the applicant Member States so that they can come into line as rapidly as possible with EU policies and the existing acquis. The second part of the paragraph is amended since the original wording leaves open the possibility of the measures contained in the first part not being implemented, thereby rendering the provision inoperative.
Amendment 31 Article 12, paragraph 3
3. In the case of an international river basin district extending beyond the boundaries of the Community, where one single international flood risk management plan including any third country concerned is not produced, Member States shall produce flood risk management plans covering at least the parts of the international river basin district lying within the territory of the Member States concerned.	3. In the case of an international river basin district extending beyond the boundaries of the Community, where one single international flood risk management plan including any third country concerned is not produced, Member States shall produce flood risk management plans covering at least the parts of the international river basin district lying within the territory of the Member States concerned and shall establish networks for the exchange of information between the competent authorities of the Member States concerned.
Justification
The development of a network for the exchange of information between the competent Member States’ authorities sharing responsibility for an international river catchment area is one of the most fundamental steps towards flood risk management coordination and towards relations based on progressively greater mutual confidence.
Amendment 32 Article 13, paragraph 1
1. The development of the first flood risk maps and their subsequent reviews as referred to in Article 8 of this Directive, shall be carried out in close co-ordination with and, if considered appropriate, integrated into the reviews provided for in Article 5(2) of Directive 2000/60/EC.	1. The development of the first flood risk maps and their subsequent reviews as referred to in Article 8 of this Directive, shall be carried out so that the relevant information presented in accordance with Directive 200/60/EC is used and, if considered appropriate, may be integrated into the reviews provided for in Article 5(2) of Directive 2000/60/EC.
Amendment 33 Article 14, paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure an active involvement of all interested parties in the production, review and updating of the flood risk management plans referred to in Chapter IV.	2. Member States shall ensure the active involvement of all interested parties especially local and regional authorities in the production, review and updating of the flood risk management plans referred to in Chapter IV.
	On request, access shall be given to background documents and information used for the development of flood risk maps and flood risk management plans.

Justification

Local and regional authorities throughout the EU are growing increasingly aware of the issue of floods and point out on the unsubstitutable role of subnational actors in the prevention, disaster management and alleviation of the impact of floods to the individuals. Their active and explicit involvement into the process of flood risk management and assessment is therefore crucial.

Amendment 34 Article 15, paragraph 2 a (new)
	2a. Member States shall provide the inhabitants of areas referred to in Article 7(2) with information and training on a regular basis, so as to enable them to take appropriate pre-flood precautions and post-flood action.
Amendment 35 Annex, section A, point 3
3. a description of the appropriate level of protection, established in accordance with Article 9 (2);	3. a description of the appropriate level of risk prevention and protection, established in accordance with Article 9 (2);
Amendment 36 Annex, section A, point 4
4. a description of the measures required to achieve the appropriate levels of protection including the measures taken in accordance with Article 9, and flood related measures taken under other Community acts;	4. a description of the measures, standard and non-standard, required to achieve the appropriate levels of protection including the measures taken in accordance with Article 9, and flood related measures taken under other Community acts;
Justification
According to European Environment Agency reports, flood risk management plans may include both standard flood protection mechanisms (flood containment barriers, reafforestation, fire escape routes, artificial diversion channels, runoffs, embankments, etc.) and non-standard methods (plant management, modified land use, infrastructural and structural safety regulations, early warning systems, etc).
Amendment 37 Annex, section A, point 4 a (new)
	4a. a prioritisation of the measures that promote the prevention of damage according to the "non- deterioration" and/or "good ecological, chemical and quantitative status" objectives of Directive 2000/60/EC such as:
	- protecting wetlands and floodplains,
	- restoring degraded wetlands and floodplains (including river meanders), especially those that reconnect rivers with their floodplains,
	- removing obsolete flood defence infrastructures from rivers,
	- preventing further construction (infrastructures, housing, etc.) in floodplains,
	- promoting construction measures to upgrade existing buildings (such as pile foundation),
	- supporting sustainable land use practices in catchment areas, such as reforestation, in order to improve natural water retention and groundwater recharge,
	- prior authorisation or registration for permanent activities in floodplains such as construction and industrial development;
Amendment 38 Annex, Section A, point 4 b (new)
	4b. a description of the involvement of all competent authorities;
Amendment 39 Annex, section B, point 1
1. any changes or updates since the publication of the previous version of the flood risk management plan, including a summary of the reviews carried out in chapters II, III and IV;	1. any changes or updates since the publication of the previous version of the flood risk management plan, including modifications following drills to test the level of preparedness of the units involved and a summary of the reviews carried out in chapters II, III and IV;
Justification
Modifications to the flood risk plans should be made if judged necessary following trial runs involving drills to test the level of preparedness of the units involved.
Amendment 40 Annex, section B, point 2
2. an assessment of the progress made towards the achievement of the level of protection;	2. an assessment of the progress made towards the achievement of the level of risk prevention and protection;

PROCEDURE

Title	Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the assessment and management of floods
References	COM(2006)0015 – C6-0020/2006 – 2006/0005(COD)
Committee responsible	ENVI
Opinion by   Date announced in plenary	REGI 1.2.2006
Enhanced cooperation – date announced in plenary
Drafts(wo)man   Date appointed	Jillian Evans 6.3.2006
Previous drafts(wo)man
Discussed in committee	6.3.2006
Date adopted	20.4.2006
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	37 1 1
Members present for the final vote	Alfonso Andria, Elspeth Attwooll, Jana Bobošíková, Graham Booth, Bairbre de Brún, Gerardo Galeote Quecedo, Iratxe García Pérez, Eugenijus Gentvilas, Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg, Ambroise Guellec, Marian Harkin, Konstantinos Hatzidakis, Jim Higgins, Alain Hutchinson, Mieczysław Edmund Janowski, Tunne Kelam, Miloš Koterec, Constanze Angela Krehl, Sérgio Marques, Miroslav Mikolášik, Lambert van Nistelrooij, Jan Olbrycht, Francisca Pleguezuelos Aguilar, Elisabeth Schroedter, Alyn Smith, Grażyna Staniszewska, Margie Sudre, Salvatore Tatarella, Oldřich Vlasák
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Inés Ayala Sender, Bastiaan Belder, Thijs Berman, Simon Busuttil, Brigitte Douay, Jillian Evans, Louis Grech, Marcin Libicki, László Surján
Substitute(s) under Rule 178(2) present for the final vote	Sharon Bowles
Comments (available in one language only)	...

• [1]  Directive 2000/60/EC of 23 October 2000.

PROCEDURE

Title		Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the assessment and management of floods
References		COM(2006)0015 – C6-0020/2006 – 2006/0005(COD)
Date submitted to Parliament		18.1.2006
Committee responsible   Date announced in plenary		ENVI 1.2.2006
Committee(s) asked for opinion(s)   Date announced in plenary		AGRI 1.2.2006		REGI 1.2.2006
Not delivering opinion(s)   Date of decision		AGRI 21.3.2006
Rapporteur   Date appointed		Richard Seeber 29.11.2006
Discussed in committee		21.2.2006	21.3.2006		4.5.2006
Date adopted		4.5.2006
Result of final vote	+ – 0	37 3 6
Members present for the final vote		Adamos Adamou, Liam Aylward, Irena Belohorská, Johannes Blokland, John Bowis, Frederika Brepoels, Dorette Corbey, Chris Davies, Avril Doyle, Mojca Drčar Murko, Edite Estrela, Jillian Evans, Karl-Heinz Florenz, Matthias Groote, Françoise Grossetête, Cristina Gutiérrez-Cortines, Satu Hassi, Gyula Hegyi, Marie Anne Isler Béguin, Dan Jørgensen, Christa Klaß, Eija-Riitta Korhola, Urszula Krupa, Jules Maaten, Linda McAvan, Riitta Myller, Péter Olajos, Miroslav Ouzký, Frédérique Ries, Guido Sacconi, Karin Scheele, Carl Schlyter, Richard Seeber, María Sornosa Martínez, Antonios Trakatellis, Thomas Ulmer, Anja Weisgerber, Åsa Westlund, Anders Wijkman
Substitute(s) present for the final vote		Sergio Berlato, Milan Gaľa, Erna Hennicot-Schoepges, Ria Oomen-Ruijten, Glenis Willmott
Substitute(s) under Rule 178(2) present for the final vote		Elisabeth Jeggle, Lapo Pistelli
Date tabled		15.5.2006
Comments (available in one language only)		...