49–006 

109TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 109–620 

REPLACEMENT OF COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCES SYSTEM MAP RELATING TO GRAYTON BEACH UNIT FL–95P 

IN WALTON COUNTY, FLORIDA 

SEPTEMBER 6, 2006.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State 

of the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. POMBO, from the Committee on Resources, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 479] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill 

(H.R. 479) to replace a Coastal Barrier Resources System map relating to Coastal Barrier Resources System Grayton Beach Unit 

FL–95P in Walton County, Florida, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that 

the bill as amended do pass. 

The amendment is as follows: 

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following: 

SECTION 1. REPLACEMENT OF COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCES SYSTEM MAP RELATING TO 

GRAYTON BEACH UNIT FL–95P IN WALTON COUNTY, FLORIDA. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The map described in subsection (b) relating to the Coastal Barrier Resources System unit Grayton Beach Unit FL–95P, located in Walton County, 

Florida, as included in the set of maps entitled ‘‘Coastal Barrier Resources System’’ 

referred to in section 4(a) of the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 3503(a)), 

is hereby replaced by another map relating to that unit entitled ‘‘Grayton Beach 

Unit FL–95P and Draper Lake Unit FL–96’’ and dated ‘‘July 24, 2006’’. 

(b) REPLACED MAP DESCRIBED.—The map replaced under subsection (a) is subtitled ‘‘COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCES SYSTEM GRAYTON BEACH UNIT FL– 

95P DRAPER LAKE UNIT FL–96’’ and dated October 24, 1990. 

(c) AVAILABILITY.—The Secretary of the Interior shall keep the maps referred to 

in subsections (a) on file and available for inspection in accordance with the provisions of section 4(b) of the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 3503(b)). 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with HEARING
2 

PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of H.R. 479 is to replace a Coastal Barrier Resources System map relating to Coastal Barrier Resources System 

Grayton Beach Unit FL–95P in Walton County, Florida. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

The John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources System is made 

up of coastal barrier units which are delineated on maps adopted 

by Congress. These units consist of undeveloped sections of coastal 

barrier islands and the associated aquatic habitat which lies behind these barriers. The System was created by the Coastal Barrier 

Resources Act of 1982 (CBRA) and was expanded in the Coastal 

Barrier Improvement Act of 1990. The System is administered by 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service of the Department of the Interior. Lands included within the System are not eligible for any federal development assistance, the most notable of which is federal 

flood insurance. 

The Coastal Barrier Resources System was initially comprised of 

186 units totaling 666 miles of shoreline and 452,834 acres of undeveloped, unprotected coastal barriers on the Atlantic and Gulf of 

Mexico coasts. Except for very minor technical changes to account 

for natural accretion and erosion, boundaries cannot be adjusted 

and units cannot be added or deleted from the System unless Congress passes a law adopting revised maps. Today, the entire Coastal Barrier Resources System has 856 units and more than 3 million 

acres of fastland and associated aquatic habitat. 

The 1990 Coastal Barrier Improvement Act added an important 

new category of units to the System called ‘‘Otherwise Protected 

Areas’’ (OPAs). These include undeveloped conservation areas such 

as national wildlife refuges, national parks and seashores, State 

parks, military bases and conservation lands owned by private organizations. While OPAs remain eligible for a variety of federal financial assistance programs, they are ineligible for participation in 

the Federal Flood Insurance Program. The 1990 Act created 271 

OPAs, comprised of approximately 1,786,000 acres, which more 

than doubled the amount of undeveloped coastal barrier lands covered under CBRA. When OPAs were included in the System, they 

were delineated with rudimentary mapping tools based upon preexisting boundary data. As a result of technological advancements 

in geographic information systems, databases and digital mapping 

techniques, OPA boundaries have been shown to have embedded 

flaws and inaccuracies. 

Specifically, the Grayton Beach Unit FL–95P would be modified 

to exclude four homes and six undeveloped lots from the prohibitions on federal flood insurance. When this unit was established as 

an ‘‘otherwise protected area’’ in 1990, each of the four homes were 

already fully constructed by 1983, there were hard packed roads 

within the community and all ten lots were plotted three years earlier. In fact, the Grayton Beach State Park was not created until 

1985. While these four homeowners obtained federal flood insurance prior to 1990, they were advised that ‘‘If your building is ever 

substantially damaged or substantially improved, the property will 

become ineligible for federal flood insurance, and your policy will 

have to be non-renewed’’. 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with HEARING
3 

These property owners believe they were mistakenly included 

within the Coastal Barrier Resources System because it was incorrectly assumed that their property was contained within the 

boundaries of the Grayton Beach State Park. H.R. 479 would allow 

them to retain federal flood insurance in the future by removing 

their ten lots, which comprise six acres of land from the system. 

In addition, the new map would remove forty additional private 

lots representing twenty acres in the Towns of Grayton Beach and 

Gulf Trace that should not have been included within the system. 

These are genuine mapping errors. These lands were not held for 

recreation or conservation purposes, they are not inholdings and 

their exclusion is supported by the Fish and Wildlife Service. At 

the same time, the bill would add some 1,582 acres of state park 

land that was inadvertently left out of the unit when it was created 

in 1990. The net effect of this ‘‘technical change’’ would be to expand the size of this CBRA unit by 1,562 acres of land. 

COMMITTEE ACTION

H.R. 479 was introduced on February 1, 2005 by Congressman 

Jeff Miller (R–FL). The bill was referred to the Committee on Resources, and within the Committee to the Subcommittee on Fisheries and Oceans. On April 6, 2006, the Subcommittee held a hearing on the bill. On July 19, 2006, the Full Resources Committee 

met to consider the bill. The Subcommittee on Fisheries and 

Oceans was discharged from further consideration of the bill by 

unanimous consent. Chairman Pombo offered an amendment in the 

nature of a substitute that identified that the proper map reference 

for these changes is entitled ‘‘Grayton Beach Unit FL–95P and 

Draper Lake Unit FL–96’’ and dated July 24, 2006. The amendment was adopted by unanimous consent. The bill, as amended, 

was then ordered favorably reported to the House of Representatives by unanimous consent. 

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII 

of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee on Resources’ oversight findings and recommendations are reflected in 

the body of this report. 

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Article I, section 8, clause 3 of the Constitution of the United 

States grants Congress the authority to enact this bill. 

COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII

1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of 

the House of Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison by the Committee of the costs which would be incurred in carrying out this bill. However, clause 3(d)(3)(B) of that rule provides 

that this requirement does not apply when the Committee has included in its report a timely submitted cost estimate of the bill prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. 

2. Congressional Budget Act. As required by clause 3(c)(2) of rule 

XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with HEARING
4 

308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, this bill does not 

contain any new budget authority, credit authority, or an increase 

or decrease in revenues or tax expenditures. According to the Congressional Budget Office, enactment of H.R. 479 could affect direct 

spending, but any net change would be ‘‘negligible.’’ 3. General Performance Goals and Objectives. This bill does not 

authorize funding and therefore, clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the 

rules of the House of Representatives does not apply. 

4. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate. Under clause 

3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 

section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has received the following cost estimate for this bill from the 

Director of the Congressional Budget Office: 

H.R. 479—A bill to replace a Coastal Barrier Resources System map 

relating to Coastal Barrier Resources System Grayton Beach 

Unit FL–95P in Walton County, Florida 

H.R. 479 would update a map of the Coastal Barrier Resources 

System (CBRS) in Walton County, Florida. CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 479 would have no significant impact on the federal 

budget. The bill could affect direct spending, but we expect that 

any net change would be negligible. Enacting the bill would not affect revenues. 

The bill contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would 

impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 

H.R. 479 would revise the CBRS map for the Grayton Beach 

Unit to exclude 26 acres of private land and to include 1,562 acres 

of state park land. Excluding the private acreage would enable 

owners of about 50 home lots to retain or purchase federal flood insurance. CBO estimates that, relative to current law, implementing 

H.R. 479 would increase premium collections of the national flood 

insurance fund by less than $500,000 annually. Such collections 

would be partially offset each year by new mandatory spending for 

underwriting and administrative expenses. In addition, premium 

collections might be offset in some years by new flood insurance 

claims. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Deborah Reis. This estimate was approved by Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis. 

COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104–4

This bill contains no unfunded mandates. 

PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL OR TRIBAL LAW

This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or tribal law. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

If enacted, this bill would make no changes in existing law. 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with HEARING
(5) 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF HON. WAYNE T. GILCHREST AND 

HON. FRANK PALLONE, JR. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to comment on 

H.R. 479, amending the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) system unit FL–95P. As you know, the Resources Subcommittee on 

Fisheries and Oceans held a hearing on April 6, 2006, in which this 

bill and others were reviewed. We received excellent testimony 

from the USFWS and all sides of this particular issue. We understand the matter is complex, and there is dispute over the circumstances involved in the original inclusion of this property within an Otherwise Protected Area (OPA) in the CBRA system. We 

strongly support increases to the system, and we understand that 

H.R. 479 brings 1,500 fast land acres into the Coastal Barrier Resources system. However, we must point out our long-standing support for maintaining the integrity of the CBRA system and must 

stress that this bill cannot set a precedent for removing an 

inholding from an OPA or full unit under the system. 

Coastal barriers are islands and similar natural landforms that 

buffer the U.S. coastline from storms and provide important habitat for fish and wildlife. The geological composition of coastal barriers makes them highly unstable areas on which to build, yet 

many of these areas have undergone increased development. Some 

of this development has been encouraged by the availability of national flood insurance and other types of federal financial assistance. 

As the New York Times reported on July 25, 2006, climate experts are unified over their concern about what they term is a 

‘‘lemming-like march to the sea.’’ They are describing the intensifying pressure of development on our coasts, including the fragile 

geological features, like coastal barrier islands. They say, regardless of what we may believe about the relationship between climate 

change and the frequency or intensity of hurricanes, homes should 

not be built in the path of hurricanes. Specifically, 10 climate scientists, in a statement released during the week of the hearing, 

said that federal assistance programs encourage development in 

areas vulnerable to damage from strong storms. They stress that 

human lives and property are increasingly put at risk by these 

policies. 

In light of intense damage done to the Gulf Coast, communities, 

and human lives and the significantly protective role played by 

coast barriers in Hurricanes Rita and Katrina, Chairman Gilchrest 

has asked the Government Accountability Office to conduct an updated study on how well the CBRA system is protecting these areas 

from development. We plan to hold a hearing in the fall of 2006 

to review preliminary results of the study, which will review the 

federal role in encouraging coastal development within the system. 

This study will help Congress strengthen, when necessary, the 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with HEARING
6 

market-based approach of the CBRA system to minimize risks to 

human lives and property along our coasts. 

As a strong supporter of the Coastal Barrier Resources system, 

Mr. Gilchrest was pleased to introduce H.R. 3552, Coastal Barrier 

Resources Reauthorization Act of 2005, which will not only extend 

this valuable program but will require the completion of the digital 

mapping pilot project, authorize the digital mapping of all 856 

CBRA units in the system and establish a grant program to identify, assess and recommend new coastal barriers for inclusion within the system. Digital mapping, when completed, will help all 

coastal areas respond effectively to disputes about the inclusion or 

exclusion of CBRA units, and will increase the effective USFWS’s 

oversight of this program. We anticipate that the digital mapping 

product will help reduce the costs to the USFWS of reviewing constituent concerns about their inclusion in the system and that it 

will help inform more coastal property owners of their rights and 

responsibilities under the system. 

H.R. 479 removes approximately 20 acres from the CBRA system, including 6.4 acres of inholding, called ‘‘The Old Miller Place.’’ There are 10 lots on the site, and 6 are undeveloped. The USFWS 

opposes this bill because the inholding did not meet the criteria for 

exclusion from CBRA in 1990. To be part of an OPA under CBRA, 

the site cannot be developed and has to be held for conservation 

purposes. The issue over this area is whether or not it had paved 

roads—if the roads were paved, the area would have been excluded. 

The circumstances are sufficiently unclear to make a determination 

at this time. 

Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for your leadership and continued support of the CBRA system. Our Committee has consistently 

supported the integrity of the Coastal Barrier Resources System, 

and we have established a high threshold that must be satisfied before we will advocate for corrections to the system. During the past 

six years, we supported several technical correction bills when it 

became clear that relief was warranted because of honest mistakes 

and mapping errors. Although the record is not entirely clear in 

this case, we must stress that, as a federal policy matter, removing 

inholdings from existing CBRA units threatens the integrity of the 

system. 

WAYNE T. GILCHREST. 

FRANK PALLONE, Jr. 

Æ 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with HEARING