Background to the PFRA European Overview UC10508

Transcription

1 Background to the PFRA European Overview UC10508 The individual Member State Reports reflect the situation as reported by the Member States to the European Commission in 2014 The situation in the MSs may have altered since then Assessment of Flood Hazard and Flood Risk Maps Member State Report: IT Italy Date that the assessment was completed: 17 December 2014 Information reported and assessed The schemas for electronically reporting/making information available to the Commission were filled in at a basic level, with some information left out. Italy made available links to its national flood risk and flood hazard maps for 47 of its 51 units of management: four UoMs were merged with another UoM for mapping purposes. Basic summaries were provided on the methods used to prepare the maps. Specific details of national maps for visualisation at the European level were reported for 46 UoMs, and a link to other relevant information on the preparation of the maps was provided for 2 UoMs. This report is structured according to a questionnaire that was completed for all Member States that reported on their flood hazard and risk maps. Questions 2 and 3 of the questionnaire were answered on the basis of a qualitative check of a subset of the Member State s flood hazard and flood risk maps located on national servers and/or web pages. All other questions (question 1 and questions 4 to 11) were answered on the basis of an assessment of numeric and summary information reported by the Member State on the methods used in the preparation of their maps. The report does not include indepth assessment of national background methodological reports which may have been referenced in the Member State s reports and/or provided with their electronic reports. This report includes information on what the Member State has included/considered or not included/considered in its flood risk and hazard maps and their development. This is a presentation of the facts on the electronic information reported to WISE by Member States and does not discuss which elements are mandatory according to the Directive and which are optional. Main outcomes of the assessment a) Good / current practices adopted: Of the assessed areas (these are Area 1 - ITI012 - Bradano river basin UoM; Area 5 - ITR051 - Veneto region UoM ; Area 6 - ITR091 - Toscana Region Coast UoM; Area 7 - ITR121 - Lazio Region UoM; Area 8 - ITR201 - Sardinia Region UoM; Area 9 ITN011 - Volturno UoM and Area 10 - ITN010 - Tevere UoM), the following good practices have been found: - Web GIS portal for the RBD Eastern Alps (ITA) (area 5) - PDF maps within the RBD Southern Apennines (ITF) (area 9), where hazard, risk and damage maps can be downloaded. Summary tables are added to the maps where the return period of water depths, water levels and flow velocity are shown. For these areas damage maps are also available, where exposed elements and protected areas can be identified. Mapping all three probability scenarios on one PDF map is a good practice, which enables the user to compare the impacts. Page 1 of 36

2 For the majority of the areas assessed, on the main webpage there is a content description regarding both hazard and risk maps; a clear legend is also available on all the maps. The explanatory information provided on the RBD website is clear on the content and purpose of the maps. The potential impact of IED installations on protected areas was evaluated when: 1) the installation and the protected area are located within the area of flooding and, in turn, the installation is located within one or more protected areas; 2) the installation is not located within the protected area but in an area hydraulically connected to the flooded areas affecting the protected area. b) Weaknesses: - Italy has reported several types of flood risk and hazard maps. Each River Basin District, national, regional or interregional authority, has followed a different approach. The institutional fragmentation in water management makes it difficult for the users to identify the website relevant to the interested area. - Only few areas have maps which can be viewed on a web GIS portal, while the majority of the areas have a basic web interface, where PDFs of the flood hazard and risk maps must be downloaded (no online view available), thus making the consultation of the maps less user-friendly. - The majority of the maps assessed consist of basic features (e.g. no hazard elements available, no exposed elements available, small scale, etc.). Only a few areas in the maps also include details on the hazard elements (water depths, levels, flow velocity, etc.). - Information on international cooperation for the two International UoMs is missing from the reported data. However, subsequent to the assessment, the IT authorities explained that information on international coordination has been formally sent to the Commission. - Although some explanation is provided on the main webpage of the RBD on the purpose and the content of the maps, it is noted that no explanation is provided as to how to use the maps. c) Lessons to be learnt: A more coordinated approach between the different RBDs/UoMs should be adopted. d) Questions seeking clarification from Member State: Subsequent to the assessment, the IT authorities provided responses to the questions below, as shown. 1. Depending on the region, maps have different content and are published in a different format, ranging from the web GIS-viewer of the Veneto region, to zip files that need to be downloaded prior to viewing the maps in PDF (e.g. ITR201 Sardinia, ITI012 Bradano). Do you have plans to translate all maps into a common format and content? How can you ensure that a common approach is or will be followed in each RBD? IT response: A homogenisation of maps at RBD level has just been applied. A total gradual transition to Web-GIS tools is in progress and is expected to be on time for the second cycle [of Floods Directive reporting]. 2. It is difficult to obtain an overview of the flood hazard and risk maps in Italy, not only at the national level, but also at the level of the river basin district (RBD). Will there be a portal that provides access to all the maps, organised at the national and RBD level? (The maps themselves could still be hosted by different organisations.) Page 2 of 36

3 IT response: see comment above: a transition to Web-GIS tools is in progress and a central point with access to all maps will be created. 3. Most maps are not very user-friendly. Which initiatives are being pursued to ensure a clear presentation of the maps and their results to the general public? IT response: Some maps may not be very user-friendly. However more explanation is given in web pages dedicated to hazard and risk maps. It is likely that the transition to web-gis will make the presentation and explanation of maps and their results to the general public more clear and effective. 4. From the maps and the RBD websites, it is unclear how the UoMs are linked to the RBDs. Can this be clarified? IT response: In the CAUOM_WFDLink table the link between UoM and RBD is reported. Moreover the UoMs and CAs of each RBD are clearly explained in each RBD web site. Please see the following links: ITC: ITA: ITE: (click on Elenco completo ) ITF: (map of CA and UoM in the ITF river basin district) ITB: only one UoM: ITN008 ITD: only one UoM: ITSNP01 ITG: only one UoM: ITR201 ITH: only one UoM: ITR It is noted that for some of the Areas selected the weblink provided does not work (Area 2 - UoM ITI01319 and Area 3 - UoM ITI017), while for area 4 - UoM ITN008 it seems the website is protected and further content cannot be accessed. Could Italy explain why? For example, for Area 2 Italy explains that the portal was in the test phase and may have been subject to modifications and optimisations. In this case, could an update on the modifications be provided? Is the web GIS portal now up and working? IT response: UoM ITI01319 a web-gis service is active: please access from web page: UoM ITI017: - We tested it and it works well! Sometimes it may happen that an internet connection has temporary problems. UoM ITN008: the access to further information is no longer protected. Page 3 of 36

4 Mapping of areas of potential significant flood risk Question 1: What are the reasons reported in the FHRM schema for the non-inclusion of some APSFRs, elements or aspects in the flood hazard and flood risk maps? Italy has applied art (b) to all UoMs, therefore no PFRA/APSFR identification as required by Article 5 was carried out under the Floods Directive. Unit of Management Number of Areas of Potential Significant Flood Risk - a) Identified according to Article 5 b) with links to national maps c) with details of maps provided to WISE FHRM information reported at Unit of Management scale b) with links to national maps c) with details of maps provided to WISE Number of other areas with available national FHRM b) with links to national maps ITI012 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITI01319 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITI014 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITI015 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITI016 Article 13.1.b applied Merged with another UoM for mapping ITI017 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITI018 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITI019 Article 13.1.b applied Merged with another UoM for mapping ITI020 Article 13.1.b applied Merged with another UoM for mapping ITI021 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITI022 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITI023 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITI024 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITI025 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITI026 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITI027 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITI028 Article 13.1.b applied Yes 0 ITI029 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITN001 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITN002 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITN003 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITN004 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITN005 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITN006 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITN007 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITN008 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITN009 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITN010 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITN011 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITR051 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 Page 4 of 36

5 Unit of Management Number of Areas of Potential Significant Flood Risk - a) Identified according to Article 5 b) with links to national maps c) with details of maps provided to WISE FHRM information reported at Unit of Management scale b) with links to national maps c) with details of maps provided to WISE Number of other areas with available national FHRM b) with links to national maps ITR061 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITR071 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITR081 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITR091 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITR092 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITR093 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITR111 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITR121 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITR131 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITR141 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITR151 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITR152 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITR153 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITR154 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITR155 Article 13.1.b applied Merged with another UoM for mapping ITR161I020 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITR171 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITR181I016 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITR191 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITR201 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 ITSNP01 Article 13.1.b applied Yes Yes 0 Key: a) Article 5 requires the identification of areas of potential significant flood risk (APSFR) based on a new Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment or an existing one. b) Member States were asked to provide links to national web pages or viewers where maps of the flood hazard and flood risk associated with APSFRs could be viewed (column 1). Alternatively or additionally maps could be made available and reported at the level of the Unit of Management (column 2) or at other geographical scales (column 3), c) Member States were asked to provide numeric details (such as source of flooding, numbers of potentially affected inhabitants and types of potential adverse consequences) of the maps associated with the APSFR so that they could be depicted on a European map of flooding. The maps could be reported with the relevant APSFR code (column 1) and/or at the level of the Unit of Management (column 2). In some circumstances, (c) may be greater than (a), for example if additional APSFRs were identified after Page 5 of 36

6 Content of flood hazard and flood risk maps Question 2 Which types of flood, scenarios, hazard elements and potential adverse consequences have been mapped and visualised? te: t all of the maps prepared by Member States have been examined. Instead a subset was selected and reviewed by designated assessors. The maps for checking were selected on the basis of information provided by Member States with their Preliminary Flood Risk Assessments (PFRAs) in 2012 (where available) and the screening of the maps made available in the LinkToMS schema. The aim was to select a sufficient number of maps to reflect: Potential differences in methodologies, presentation and visualisation of maps between the Units of Management (UoM) within a Member State. Some Member States have a strong national approach, in others there are differences between administrative regions; Differences in sources of floods included in hazard and risk maps. Some APSFRs and UoM are associated with more than one source of flooding whereas others are not. The aim was to check maps associated with all possible types of flood associated with a Member State. For those Member States applying Article 4 and Article 13.1.a the selection of relevant flood types can be informed from the reporting of APSFR in March 2012; Differences in the Articles applied across a Member State and within UoMs. Whilst some Member States have applied only one Article across their whole territory and for all flood types, others have applied different Articles within a UoM and also according to flood types. The application of Article 13.1.b and Article 13.2 by some Member States in at least some of their UoMs. In these cases Member States may have provided UoM codes, other area codes or both: in these cases it was the flood maps associated with the areas that were checked. The objective was to check examples of maps within the linked areas in relation to all potential and relevant sources of flooding and that may have been mapped. Links to national web pages where examples of national maps can be viewed are given below. Unit of management ITI012 ITN010 ITN011 ITR051 ITR091 ITR121 ITR201 APSFR code t applicable t applicable t applicable t applicable t applicable t applicable t applicable The provided link went NA NA NA NA NA NA NA straight to the APSFR Map located by searching NA NA NA NA NA NA NA for name of APSFR Source(s) of flooding ne ne ne ne ne ne ne mapped Mechanism(s) of flooding ne ne ne ne ne ne ne mapped Characteristic(s) of flooding ne ne ne ne ne ne ne mapped Linked map available to Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes public Mapped scenarios Floods with a low probability Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Page 6 of 36

7 Unit of management ITI012 ITN010 ITN011 ITR051 ITR091 ITR121 ITR201 APSFR code t applicable t applicable t applicable t applicable t applicable t applicable t applicable mapped Floods with a medium probability mapped Floods with a high probability mapped Separate maps or layers for each probability scenario Separate maps or layers for each flood type More than one scenario shown on the same Map Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes More than one source of flooding shown on the same Map Hazard Elements shown on map Flood extents Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Water depth Yes Water levels Flow velocities Yes Relevant water flow Flood Hazard and Flood Yes Risk on the same map Separate maps of Flood Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Hazard and Flood Risk Potential adverse consequences shown on: Number of Inhabitants Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes potentially affected Human health The community Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Type and sectors of economic activity Land use Yes Point locations for storage of Yes Yes Yes Yes chemicals, vital networks and services Property Yes Yes Infrastructure Yes Yes Yes Location of Industrial Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Emissions Directive Page 7 of 36

8 Unit of management ITI012 ITN010 ITN011 ITR051 ITR091 ITR121 ITR201 APSFR code t applicable t applicable t applicable t applicable t applicable t applicable t applicable installations WFD Protected Areas Yes Yes Status of water bodies Areas vulnerable to floods Yes with high content of transported sediment and debris flow Other significant sources of pollution Cultural Heritage Yes Yes Yes Yes Other useful information Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Impacts of Climate Change Coastal protection defences in place Links to national maps: ARNO River Basin Authority: PIEMONTE Region: CALABRIA Region: LOMBARDIA Region: TOSCANA Region LIGURIA Region Page 8 of 36

9 biente=i&utente=&ruolo= Hazard maps Risk maps PUGLIA Region: Page 9 of 36

10 Contextual information provided with maps Question 3 What contextual information was generally provided with the maps? Unit of Management ITI012 ITN010 ITN011 ITR051 ITR091 ITR121 ITR201 APSFR code t applicable t applicable t applicable t applicable t applicable t t applicable applicable Title: brief description of the map Explanation to the public on how to understand and interpret the flood maps Yes Yes Yes Yes Responsible authority (organisation responsible for the Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes development and publishing of the maps, with contact details) Date of preparation / publication Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Legend (textual description of symbols, colours, line features, etc.) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Purpose of development and intended use Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Method of development Yes Yes Yes Yes Limitations of map and / or assessment of uncertainty Disclaimer (to enforce explanatory information and limitations, and provide legal protection to the responsible authority against adverse consequences of misuse) rth and scale: preferably using scale bar as this allows for changes in page size Scope and detail of the explanatory information: should be appropriate to the intended audience Intended audience & complexity: Maps intended for public use should be simple and self-explanatory and include a clear legend, such that as little supporting or explanatory information as possible is required for correct interpretation. Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Page 10 of 36

11 Summary of findings from questions 2 and 3. Italy has reported several types of flood risk and hazard maps. For each River Basin District, the national, regional or inter-regional competent authority has followed a different approach. 1 Some areas have maps which can be viewed on a web GIS portal, other areas have a basic web interface, where PDFs of the flood hazard and risk maps can be downloaded. The legends and the scales used in the PDFs are different. For some areas, damage maps are also available, where exposed elements and protected areas can be identified, whilst for the others, any of these elements are shown. In addition, some maps also include details on the hazard elements (water depths, levels flow velocity, etc.), while the majority don t. One similarity is found in all maps, for all areas, in the fact that flood sources, flood mechanisms and flood characteristics are never delineated. The Legislative decree of 3 April 2006, n. 152 established eight river basin districts (Eastern Alps, Po, rthern Appenines, Central Appenines, Southern Appenines, Sardinia, Sicily, and Serchio) for which a river basin management plan must be prepared, in accordance with the WFD. Whilst waiting for the eight river basin districts and its corresponding authorities to be operational, the decree n. 208 of 30 December 2008, converted to law n. 134 of 27 February 2009, delegated the adoption of the RBMPs to the so called Institutional Committees of national river basin authorities integrated by the regional and inter-regional river basins members. Moreover, the regional governments have a strong role in implementing water management. The result is that water management is very fragmented. With regard to the implementation of the Flood Directive article 3.2 (b), in Italy there are 47 UoMs, according to information provided on EIONET, which do not directly correspond to the river basin districts. UoMs in fact include some of the river basin districts (ITB - Po, ITC - Serchio, ITH Sardinia and ITG - Sicily) - and in other cases, sub-basins (national, i.e. when the river basin covers more than two regions; regional, i.e. entirely within a single region; and inter-regional, i.e. when the river basis is shared between two regions). However, there is not a clear management responsibility for UoMs: each UoM has more than one Prime Competent Authority and some Competent Authorities have more than UoM to manage, reflecting a rather complicated, shared responsibility system. ( M_ xmlandconv=238andsource=remote#2). The UoMs are managed in total by 52 competent authorities. The Prime Competent Authorities are categorised as follows: 8 'interregional river basin authorities' (if the river basin covers two regions); 7 'national river basin authorities' (if the river basin covers more than two regions and thus has a 'national interest'). In addition to these two types of river basin, each region may establish 'regional river basin authorities' (for river basins within one single region). There are 16 'regional river basin authorities'. te that a region may establish more than one regional river basin authority: Campania has two (i.e. Regional river basin Campania Sud and Regional river basin Campania Centrale and Toscana has three (i.e. Toscana distinguished between 'Regional river basin Toscana Coast', 'Regional river basin Toscana rd', and 'Regional river basin Ombrone'), while Veneto, Sicilia, Sardinia, Marche, Liguria, Lazio, Friuli-Venezia Giulia, Emilia-Romagna, Calabria, Abruzzo have one each. te also that only five of these regional river basin authorities have integrated inter-regional river basin authorities to streamline the water management approach, while the others regional and inter-regional authorities remained separate bodies. These three different layers of river basins authorities all have responsibilities for the preparation of flood hazard and flood risk maps; the establishment of 1 Subsequent to the assessment, the IT authorities stated that at the RBD level, there is in fact good coherence: National River Basin Authorities perform the coordination task for each RBD, as established in Legislative Decree 219/2010. Page 11 of 36

12 Flood Risk Management Plans in accordance with article 7 and the Annex; and public consultation. In addition to these three layers of river basin authorities, the regional governments (there are 21 in Italy) are also Prime Competent Authorities, although they only share responsibilities with them over the establishment of Flood Risk Management Plans in accordance with article 7 and the Annex; and Public consultation. The information uploaded to EIONET indicates the responsibility for each Prime Competent Authority. This fragmented situation is reflected in the way flood maps are presented on competent authority s websites: while the LinktoMS excel file provides the UoM codes, the maps shown to the weblinks do not refer specifically to the UoMs, because UoMs and river basin authorities do not correspond. 2 The links instead go to one of the Prime Competent Authorities for each UoM: sometimes maps are hosted on the inter-regional river basin authority website, sometimes on the regional river basin authority website, while some other times it s the website of the regional government. (The research only checked the weblinks provided a search through all Prime Competent Authorities was not feasible.) Subsequent to the assessment, the IT authorities provided the following information: With regard to the implementation of the Flood Directive Article 3.2 (b), Italy identified 47 Units of Management and 54 Competent Authorities. The list of UoMs and CAs and all requested information were reported to Commission on 26 May 2010 and updated in April Moreover in accordance with the Legislative Decree 219/2010, Article 4, b): (entered into force on 4 January 2011) pending the constitution of River Basin District Authorities, responsibilities are specified. The complexity doesn t imply the overlapping of competences or roles in flood risk assessment and management. Moreover the Floods Directive does not establish a one to one correspondence between UoMs and CAs. 2 The IT Authorities subsequently explained that the presence of more than one Competent Authority in a single UoM is connected to the different institutional competences in the flood risk management cycle (e.g. Civil Protection activities, overall planning design, implementation and funding of measures regional and/or governmental). Page 12 of 36

13 Methodologies used to prepare flood hazard maps Question 4 What methods and relevant information have been used to identify, assess or calculate flooding hazards for the relevant scenarios, and are these compliant with the requirements of the Floods Directive? The sources of flood for which flood hazard maps have been published, or which have been assessed but flood hazard maps have not been published, were: Source of flooding Fluvial Pluvial Published ITI012 - Bradano; ITN010 - Tevere; ITN011 - Volturno; ITR051 - Regionale Veneto; ITR091 - Regionale Toscana; ITR121 - Regionale Lazio; ITR201 - Regionale Sardegna ITN010 - Tevere; ITR201 - Regionale Sardegna. Coastal Coastal: ITI012 - Bradano; ITN011 - Volturno; ITR091 - Regionale Toscana. Groundwater Artificial water bearing infrastructure Sewerage systems Hazard assessed but not published Neither published nor assessed ITI012 - Bradano; ITN011 - Volturno; ITR051 - Regionale Veneto; ITR091 - Regionale Toscana; ITR121 - Regionale Lazio. ITN010 - Tevere; ITR051 - Regionale Veneto; ITR121 - Regionale Lazio; ITR201 - Regionale Sardegna. ITI012 - Bradano; ITN010 - Tevere; ITN011 - Volturno; ITR051 - Regionale Veneto; ITR091 - Regionale Toscana; ITR121 - Regionale Lazio; ITR201 - Regionale Sardegna ITI012 - Bradano; ITN010 - Tevere; ITN011 - Volturno; ITR051 - Regionale Veneto; ITR091 - Regionale Toscana; ITR121 - Regionale Lazio; ITR201 - Regionale Sardegna ITI012 - Bradano; ITN010 - Tevere; ITN011 - Volturno; ITR051 - Regionale Veneto; ITR091 - Regionale Toscana; t relevant Page 13 of 36

14 Source of flooding Other (described below if applicable) Published Hazard assessed but not published Neither published nor assessed ITR121 - Regionale Lazio; ITR201 - Regionale Sardegna ITI012 - Bradano; ITN010 - Tevere; ITN011 - Volturno; ITR051 - Regionale Veneto; ITR091 - Regionale Toscana; ITR121 - Regionale Lazio; ITR201 - Regionale Sardegna t relevant Other N/A Comments There are differences in the methodology used to prepare flood hazard maps for each UoM in Italy. Out of the seven UoMs assessed for IT, seven addressed fluvial, two explicitly addressed pluvial floods and three addressed coastal floods. On the other flooding sources, groundwater, artificial water bearing infrastructure and sewerage systems, no information has been found. According to the WISE summary report, only UoMs ITN010 - Tevere and ITR201 - Regionale Sardegna explicitly mentioned pluvial sources. Considering that HEC- RAS and MIKE11 models 3 were used, it is assumed that in UoMs ITI012 - Bradano; ITR121 - Regionale Lazio both fluvial and pluvial sources were modelled together. UoM ITR121 also reported details for hazard areas associated with pluvial floods in the FHRM schema: this is so these can be depicted on a European scale map. The information recorded under Question 4a. Fluvial Floods may therefore also applicable to Question 4b. Pluvial Floods as well. Only ITR121 - Regionale Lazio explicitly states that the probability scenario for coastal sources floods could not be calculated because historical data were not available. This UoM also states that groundwater floods did not occur. 3 The IT Authorities subsequently stated that although the two cited models are used it doesn t imply that pluvial sources are modelled. Moreover HEC-RAS is essentially a one-dimensional model that is not suitable for urban areas where pluvial flooding could happen. Page 14 of 36

15 A) Fluvial floods Scenarios mapped or assessed Scenario Low probability Medium probability High probability Return period e.g. 100 years HQ500 (ITI012 - Bradano; ITR091 - Regionale Toscana Costa; ITN010 Tevere; ITR201 - Regionale Sardegna), HQ300 (ITN011 - Volturno; ITR051 - Regionale Veneto), HQ (ITR121 - Regionale Lazio). HQ200 (ITI012 Bradano; ITR091 - Regionale Toscana Costa), HQ (ITN010 Tevere; ITR121 - Regionale Lazio; ITR201 - Regionale Sardegna), HQ100 (ITN011 - Volturno; ITR051 - Regionale Veneto). HQ50 (ITN010 Tevere), HQ30 (ITI012 Bradano; ITR091 - Regionale Toscana Costa; ITN011 - Volturno; ITR051 - Regionale Veneto), HQ20-50 (ITR121 - Regionale Lazio), HQ2-50 (ITR201 - Regionale Sardegna). Percentage e.g. 1% Decimal e.g Other expression Summary of the information found and in particular any differences between the UoMs in the Member State. Low probability: ITI012 - Bradano; ITR091 - Regionale Toscana Costa: 500 years; ITN010 - Tevere: 500 years; ITN011 - Volturno; ITR051 - Regionale Veneto: 300 years; ITR121 - Regionale Lazio: years; ITR201 - Regionale Sardegna: 500 years Medium probability: ITI012 - Bradano; ITR091 - Regionale Toscana Costa: 200 years; ITN010 - Tevere: years: ITN011 - Volturno; ITR051 - Regionale Veneto: 100 years; ITR121 - Regionale Lazio: years; ITR201 - Regionale Sardegna years High probability: ITI012 - Bradano; ITR091 - Regionale Toscana Costa: 30 years; ITN010 - Tevere: 50 years; ITN011 - Volturno; ITR051 - Regionale Veneto: 30 years; ITR121 - Regionale Lazio: years; ITR201 - Regionale Sardegna: 2, 50 years Elements mapped or assessed Scenario Flood extent Water depth/level Water/flow velocities Low probability Yes Yes Medium Yes Yes probability High probability Yes Yes Other Page 15 of 36

16 Summary of the information found and in particular any differences between the UoMs in the Member State. t all UoMs included all hazard elements. ITI012 - Bradano; ITN011 - Volturno; ITR201 - Regionale Sardegna; ITN010 - Tevere: for low / medium / high probability, flood extent is included. Other hazard elements were not identified for these areas. ITR051 - Regionale Veneto: although hazard elements and their values are shown on the maps assessed under question 2 and 3, hazard elements are not specified in the methodology as reported on WISE summary report. Methods used What scenarios were considered and tested in the development of the published maps? What were the reasons for the exclusion or inclusion of certain scenarios for the final published maps? How were return periods and/or probabilities of flooding calculated, for example what was the length of measurement series used in the calculations? How was the most appropriate scale of the map determined? For example, flood maps intended to raise public awareness should enable anyone to find out where there are risks of flooding. Maps for this purpose may have a relatively larger scale e.g. 1: 10,000 to 1: 25,000 compared to those used for national or regional planning purposes (1:100,000 to 1: 500,000). Also the mapping of some hazard features such as flow velocity may require a more detailed scale such as 1:1,000 or 1:5,000. What was the resolution of digital terrain models used to calculate flood hazards? How were existing flood defences taken into account? ITI012 - Bradano; ITN010 - Tevere; ITN011 - Volturno; ITR051 - Regionale Veneto; ITR091 - Regionale Toscana Costa: all scenarios were considered and tested in the development of the published maps. ITI012 - Bradano; ITN010 - Tevere; ITN011 - Volturno; ITR051 - Regionale Veneto; ITR091 - Regionale Toscana Costa: no scenarios were excluded.. For all areas the probabilities of flooding were calculated based on both hydraulic models and historical data (to complete the analysis when the data necessary for the modelling were not available). ITI012 - Bradano: the most appropriate scale of the map determined using digital topographic cartography in scale 1:5,000. ITR201 - Regionale Sardegna: Basis CTR (technical Regional Map, Scale 1:10,000); I.G.M (Geographic Military Institute Map Scale 1: ). explanation on why these are appropriate though. ITN010 - Tevere; ITN011 - Volturno: information on the scale for this area was not reported in the WISE summary report. Subsequent to the assessment, the IT authorities explained that the Italian Legislative Decree 49/2010, which transposes the Floods Directive into Italian law, establishes that the preferable scale is 1:10,000 and a scale smaller than 1:25,000 has to be adopted. ITI012 - Bradano: DTM 5 x 5 m, specially designed with 1.5 m of planimetry and 0.8 m of altimetry. ITN010 - Tevere: DTM 4m x 4m resolution ITN011 - Volturno: DTM 10m x 10m resolution ITR051 - Regionale Veneto: DTM provided by the Ministry for Environment: 1m for interland and 2 m for coastal zones ITR091 - Regionale Toscana Costa: DTM resolution not specified ITR201 - Regionale Sardegna: DEM (digital evaluation model) 10m x 10m; DSM (Digital Surface Model ) 1m x 1m. For UoM ITI012 - Bradano; ITR121 - Regionale Lazio; ITN010 - Tevere and ITR201 - Regionale Sardegna the HEC-RAS numerical model was used. It is explained that Page 16 of 36

17 How were existing infrastructure or buildings taken into account? What other data sets were used? What are the key assumptions of the method? this model allows for the calculation of the evolutions of steady or unsteady flows in natural or artificial channels, including the evaluation of the effects on the flows caused by interaction with bridges, dams, weirs and any other hydraulic work found along the water course. ITI012 - Bradano: a two-dimensional hydraulic model is used in the lower part of the river basin (plain areas). ITN010 - Tevere: for the metropolitan area of Rome, two models were used: mono and bi dimensional. ITR051 - Regionale Veneto: when the modelling data were not available, data from the General Plan for Use of Public Waters or the Hydrogeological Plan. ITR121 - Regionale Lazio: historical data from the local authorities is used to cover the gaps of the hydraulic modelling (e.g. for minor watercourses where such models are not available). ITR201 - Regionale Sardegna: Basis CTR (technical Regional Maps); I.G.M (Geographic Military Institute Maps) and Soil Maps. ITI012 - Bradano; ITN011 - Volturno; ITR091 - Regionale Toscana Costa: the identification and delimitation of flood areas for different scenarios of hydraulic hazard result from the different level of analysis: 1. hydrogeomorphological and historical inventory; 2. hydraulic characteristics of the water course and hydrological characteristics of the water basin. Therefore the mapped areas contain geomorphological and / or historical inventory information (analysis of historical flood events) complemented by data from analytical hydrologic -hydraulic modelling, and taking into account the phenomena of dynamic channel and high sediment transport. ITN010 - Tevere: the hydrological model used requires the use of the IUH method based on the segmentation of the basin into 40 sub-basins, the generation of rainfall event calculated with the Monte Carlo method (Curve Number (Natural resources Conservation Service NRCS-CN) and calibration of the model parameters on the basis of 66 flood hydrograph. ITR201 - Regionale Sardegna: For the evaluation of the flow at the peak for the different return times, in the case of the catchment area of less than 60 km 2, reference was made to the indirect method through the application of rational method in which the heights of rain have been defined using regional analysis on short and intense rainfall (reported in VAPI Sardinia - Floods evaluation report). For catchment areas larger than 60 km 2 reference was made to the method of direct estimation of the flow peak rates based on the analysis of regional Page 17 of 36

18 What were the identified uncertainties in the methods and resultant maps and assessments? What were the shortcomings of the method? What were the advantages of the method? parameters of the probability distribution TCEV (Two components Extreme Values), developed in the context of the project VAPI of the GNDCI - National Research Council. information ITN010 - Tevere: The only limitation identified in the stationary model used is the inability to make quantitative considerations on the flood volumes, including the identification of possible cases of expansion. ITN011 - Volturno; ITR201 - Regionale Sardegna: Climate change was not taken into account in the modelling. ITR121 - Regionale Lazio: flood prone areas identified on the maps that have not been subject to modelling have been signalled by local authorities. Subsequent to the assessment, the IT authorities explained that historical flood events and corresponding flood locations are used where hydraulic modelling is not available. ITN010 - Tevere: The use of the (mono dimensional) stationary hydraulic model has some advantages. These are presented in the WISE summary report for this area: The propagation model of a flood requires only to know the flow extent in correspondence of each river fluvial portion subject to the assessment, while the flood peak in general will be different from a fluvial portion to another so to take into account the confluences distributed along the watercourse and the flood peak will increase with the increasing of the return period chosen. ITR051 - Regionale Veneto; ITR091 - Regionale Toscana Costa: in some cases, the acquisition of additional information was possible by means of GPS surveys on site with regard to objects and structures not identified by the DTM. Page 18 of 36

19 B) Pluvial floods Scenarios mapped or assessed Scenario Low probability Medium probability High probability Return period e.g. 100 years information ITR121 - regionale Lazio 200 years information Percentage e.g. 1% Decimal e.g Other expression Summary of the information found and in particular any differences between the UoMs in the Member State. See fluvial floods for information on scenarios and elements mapped or assessed and the methods used. Page 19 of 36

20 C) Coastal floods Scenarios mapped or assessed Scenario Low probability Medium probability Return period e.g. 100 years HQ 500: ITI012 - Bradano; HQ100 ITN011 - Volturno HQ 100: ITI012 - Bradano; HQ50: ITN011 - Volturno: 50 years High probability HQ30: ITI012 Bradano; HQ20: ITN011 Volturno Percentage e.g. 1% Decimal e.g Other expression Summary of the information found and in particular any differences between the UoMs in the Member State. Each area has used different HQs as follows: - HQ500, HQ100, HQ30: ITI012 Bradano as shown on the hazard map. In the methodology, it is also stated that the probability scenario of sea storms has a return time 100 years. - HQ100, HQ50, HQ20: ITN011 Volturno. Higher return periods have not been considered significant in relation to the topographical and meteorological local conditions.. - ITR091 - Regionale Toscana Costa: for coastal flooding the only identified areas at risk are those with a sea storm return time of 50 years. This is because the time constraints on the historical data mean that only the high probability (50 years) scenario is statistically reliable. Elements mapped or assessed Scenario Flood extent Water depth/level Water/flow velocities Low probability Yes Yes Yes Medium Yes Yes Yes probability High probability Yes Yes Yes Other Summary of the information found and in particular any differences between the UoMs in the Member State. t all UoMs included all hazard elements. ITI012 - Bradano: all hazard elements were included for all scenarios. ITN011 - Volturno: no information found on the Wise summary, FD.9.0 FHRM A - Methodologies used to prepare flood hazard maps. The technical report (the flood management plan for the sub-river basin Liri-Garigliano e Volturno) states that the map for coastal source of flooding was prepared separately from the flood hazard maps. However, these maps could not be found and more information on the assessment hazard elements was not found either. 4 ITR091 - Regionale Toscana Costa: the only information available for this UoM is that for coastal flooding the areas at risk identified are those with a sea storm return time = 50 years. 4 Subsequent to the assessment, the IT authorities provided a functioning link to the relevant maps: The maps have not been assessed. Page 20 of 36

21 Methods used What scenarios were considered and tested in the development of the published maps? What were the reasons for the exclusion or inclusion of certain scenarios for the final published maps? How were return periods and/or probabilities of flooding calculated, for example what was the length of measurement series used in the calculations? How was the most appropriate scale of the map determined? For example, flood maps intended to raise public awareness should enable anyone to find out where there are risks of flooding. Maps for this purpose may have a relatively larger scale e.g. 1: 10,000 to 1: 25,000 compared to those used for national or regional planning purposes (1:100,000 to 1: 500,000). Also the mapping of some hazard features such as flow velocity may require a more detailed scale such as 1:1,000 or 1:5,000. What was the resolution of digital terrain models used to calculate flood hazards? How were existing flood defences taken into account? How were existing infrastructure or buildings taken into account? What other data sets were used? What are the key assumptions of the method? What were the identified uncertainties in the methods and resultant maps and assessments? What were the shortcomings of the method? What were the advantages of the method? ITI012 - Bradano: only a medium probability scenario was indicated in the WISE reporting, although low and high probability scenarios have also been mapped. ITN011 - Volturno: all scenarios are considered. ITI012 - Bradano: no reason is given. ITN011 - Volturno: no scenarios were excluded. ITI012 - Bradano: the duration of the sea storm event considered was not less than 24 hours: no information was found on the length of historic record considered in calculating return periods. ITN011 - Volturno: information not found. ITI012 - Bradano: the map is the same as for fluvial flood and therefore the scale the same (1:5,000). ITN011 - Volturno: information not found. ITI012 - Bradano: DTM 5x5 resolution, with planimetry precision of 0.15 m and altimetry precision 0.4 m. ITI012 - Bradano: information not found ITI012 - Bradano: information not found ITI012 - Bradano: data from the Basilicata Regional Coastal management Plan. ITN011 - Volturno: information not found. Subsequent to the assessment, the IT authorities explained that data from the Regional Coastal Erosion Plan was used for ITN011. ITI012 - Bradano: the flooding extent was calculated taking into account the morphology derived from the DTM. ITI012 - Bradano: information not found. ITN011 - Volturno: information not found. ITI012 - Bradano: the extent of areas at risk of coastal flooding may vary when new data will be available. ITN011 - Volturno: information not found. ITI012 - Bradano: information not found ITN011 - Volturno: information not found. Page 21 of 36

22 D) Groundwater floods This source of flood was not considered to be significant. E) Floods from Artificial Water Bearing Infrastructure This source of flood has been assessed but not generally mapped.. A hazard area for flooding from artificial water bearing infrastructure was reported for UoM ITI028 (Tronto) for visualisation on the EU maps (ie.in the FHRM schema): this was the area downstream of Lake Campotosto (ITI028_HMP_046) where a potential dam breach had been reported as a potential hazard by the operator during the preparation of the Hydrological Plan for the region. A medium probability scenario with a 200 year return period was reported for the hazard area. The IT Authorities subsequently confirmed that in general Dams or artificial channel are considered in flood risk mapping and they also have special risk management plans based on dam break modelling and flood attenuation management manoeuvres. F) Floods from sewerage systems This source of flood has not been assessed or mapped. G). Other types of floods other source of flood has been assessed or mapped. Page 22 of 36

23 Methodologies used to prepare flood risk maps Question 5 What methods and relevant information have been used to prepare flood risk maps? Which potential adverse consequences are reported and how have they been identified and presented in flood risk maps? a) Risk to human health All UoM used a similar methodology. Except for ITR201 - Regionale Sardinia, which used the most recent ISTAT (National Institute of Statistics) data from 2011; all UoMs determined the indicative number of inhabitants affected on the basis of the 14th Population Census report compiled by ISTAT in The population data are reported and aggregated in elementary units, the cadastral sections. These sections are available as polygons on the map. The number of people falling in a single cadastral section was redistributed in proportion to the area of cadastral section directly affected from the scenario considered hazardous. In particular, it was assumed that, within each cadastral section, the population was evenly distributed. The number of inhabitants potentially affected by flooding was assigned to each river flood hazard and risk area, according to the following relationship: (surface area / risk area cadastral section ) * n. of resident in the cadastral section. For some UoM (i.e. ITI012 - Bradano; ITR051 - Regionale Veneto...) the different population density was also taken into account. For example: for ITI012 - Bradano, the estimate was modified taking into account the number of buildings for different uses present on the hazard area considered. The buildings have been given an indicative number (of people) in relation to the intended use. b) Risk to economic activity All UoM provide the same type of information. It must be noted, however, that such information only reports on the types of economic activities identified on the maps and the coding system assigned to them and not exactly on the methodology used to determine the risk to the types of economic activities in areas potentially at risk from flooding. All UoMs also provide information on the source of information used to locate the economic activities on the map. Most of the UoMs refer to the EEA Corine Land Cover 2006 inventory, integrated with data from the different sectoral regional / local authorities according to the type of economic activities concerned. The economic activities have been identified using the different possible shapes: polygon (ITN011 - Volturno), polygon and line (ITI012 - Bradano) and polygon, line and punctual (all remaining UoMs). The layers of polygonal type refer to land use. The assignment of codes from B41 to B46 with the corresponding classes of land use has been made in this way: B41 was assigned to continuous and discontinuous urban areas, B42 to strategic structures and infrastructure, B44 to economic activities (industrial, commercial and service areas), B43 to agricultural land (cropping systems, orchards, meadows, arable land, vineyards), mining areas, wooded areas (shrubs, conifers and deciduous forests, and bushes), B45 to land not used in urban areas and B46 of the waters and inland wetlands. The layers of linear type are related to roads and railways, which have been associated with the code B42. Layers of punctual type are related to public services such as schools, railway stations, hospitals, which have also been associated with the code B42. ITR091 - Regionale Toscana Costa is the only UoM which also includes, in addition to the above mentioned codes, cultural heritage assets (including worship places) with code B31. Page 23 of 36