9/11-era security measures and climate change put thousands at risk from dams

The problem stems from a complex set of flood control policies and national security precautions taken after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

To get the best discount on flood insurance, FEMA’s point-based rating system requires communities to map all homes, businesses and critical facilities at risk from a potential dam failure and warn people of the risks. But that’s difficult or even impossible in some communities, because other federal agencies restrict the release of such information for the hundreds of dams they own or regulate across the United States, citing safety risks.

This dilemma has persisted for years, despite federal officials warning of its repercussions.

“Federal information sharing procedures on dams cost communities points, homeowners money, and potentially citizens’ lives,” a California emergency services official warned in a January 2020 presentation to FEMA’s National Dam Safety Review Board at a private meeting attended by dozens of federal and state officials.

Minutes of the meeting The documents were provided to The Associated Press this summer, nearly two and a half years after the news organization filed a Freedom of Information Act request for the information with the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

Since that meeting, the US Army Corps of Engineers has begun Publish maps publicly But similar information is still restricted by other federal agencies, including the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which regulates about 1,800 energy-producing dams, and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which has 430 dams in the western United States, some of the largest structures in the country.

The Land Reclamation Authority said in response to questions from The Associated Press that it is reviewing its policies and will begin sharing more information about areas flooded by dam failures in 2025, though it said the process could take more than eight years to complete for all of its dams.

Meanwhile, FEMA is Accept public comment Through Sept. 9, the Federal Emergency Management Agency will consider changes to its community rating system, which grants discounts on flood insurance to communities that take steps to reduce risk. At a public hearing held by FEMA on Wednesday, the floodplain official in Phoenix, the nation’s fifth-largest city, raised concerns that conflicting federal policies on levee flood zones were unfair to communities trying to get better insurance discounts for their residents.

“I think this is punishment for us,” Phoenix Floodplains District Manager Nizar Nabati told FEMA officials.

Frustration of one community

Another community affected by the information gap is Sacramento, California, which is among the most vulnerable places in the United States to catastrophic flooding. The California state capital sits at the confluence of two rivers and is about 25 miles (40 kilometers) from Folsom Dam, a massive Bureau of Reclamation facility with a capacity to cover the entire state of Rhode Island with a foot of water.

During a review about five years ago, Sacramento County achieved one of the highest scores ever on FEMA’s rating system. But the county didn’t qualify for the highest flood insurance discount because Bureau of Reclamation restrictions on the Folsom Dam made it impossible to meet FEMA’s standards for mapping and public communication about a potential dam failure, said George Booth, the county’s former floodplain manager.

“We’re in a tight spot,” said Booth, who is now executive director of the Floodplain Management Association, a professional organization focused on reducing flood risks in California, Hawaii and Nevada.

The city of Sacramento, which receives a separate rating for flood insurance, has had similar struggles meeting FEMA criteria for flood insurance discounts because of limited information about Bureau of Reclamation levees, according to Rosa Melino, the city’s community rating system coordinator.

For an individual homeowner, missed deductibles could mean a $100 difference in annual flood insurance premiums. When spread out city-wide, the extra cost could be several million dollars. Costs are higherFewer people are buying insurance. But there’s more at stake than just premiums.

“People should be aware of the potential risks of living in an area protected by a dam,” Melino said.

Flood risks and costs

As climate changes, heavy rains from severe storms have put communities at increased risk of flooding and put the country’s elderly at risk. Dams are at greater risk. This was evident when recent floodwaters damaged or breached levees in Georgia, MinnesotaNew York, South Carolina, Texas and WisconsinResulting in expensive evictions and repairs.

According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, floods have caused an estimated $108 billion in damage in the United States since 2000. Standard home and commercial property insurance does not cover flood damage.

But FEMA’s National Flood Insurance Program is available in 22,692 communities that have adopted and implemented floodplain management regulations. By the end of July, the program had provided $1.3 trillion in flood insurance coverage to about 4.7 million policyholders— About 1 million policies downSince the peak of participation in the program in 2009.

Insurance premium discounts ranging from 5% to 45% are available in jurisdictions that participate in the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Community Rating System, a voluntary program begun in 1990 that ranks flood mitigation and safety measures on a scale of 1 to 10. A Category 1 rating receives the largest discount.

Most communities aren’t looking for additional savings. Only about 1,500 local governments participate in the community rating system, even though they account for three-quarters of the policies issued under the National Flood Insurance Program. Only two communities—Roseville, California, and Tulsa, Oklahoma—have the highest deductibles for their residents.

The city of Roseville, also near the Folsom Dam, used FEMA grant money to create its own flood maps showing the effects of a potential dam failure. But the city still has trouble trying to share that information with residents. While presenting flood data at a public meeting more than a decade ago, Councilor Rob Flanner said he was interrupted by a Bureau of Reclamation official who told him to stop.

“It’s weird that one federal agency would fund this project,” Flanner said. “It was like, ‘Well, maybe you guys should talk to each other.’”

Since then, Roseville has met the federal agencies’ expectations by creating flood maps that show the overlapping flood potential of multiple dams without identifying the specific dam failure that would affect every home, business or important site, Flanner said. But Roseville is the exception, not the rule.

“There are a lot of jurisdictions that can’t meet the requirements because they can’t get the maps, or a federal agency says, ‘No, don’t connect downstream to the dam,’” said Flanner, who has worked with nearly 300 local governments over three decades, first as a community classification system specialist on behalf of FEMA and then as a hired consultant.

Security concerns

FEMA says it is important for communities to have access to flood maps in the event of dam failures in order to warn at-risk populations, because dam failures can spread floodwaters beyond normal high-risk areas and impact multiple communities downstream.

But after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, some federal agencies cited national security reasons for refusing to disclose certain information about the dams, saying that the dams could become targets if terrorists knew they could cause devastating flooding.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission continues to classify dam flooding maps as basic infrastructure information that “could be useful to anyone planning an attack” and requires those who receive such information to sign nondisclosure agreements, said FERC spokeswoman Celeste Miller. But the FERC cannot prevent a dam owner from sharing the information independently.

The Bureau of Reclamation also requires nondisclosure agreements when sharing dam flood maps and emergency action plans with local officials. As part of the upcoming policy change, the bureau will allow communities to publicly share information about dam flood areas, including potential flood travel times, flood depths and duration, said Sandy Day, the bureau’s chief of public affairs.

The Army Corps of Engineers, which had also withheld some information about its dams, began posting dam flooding maps online in late 2021 after determining that releasing the information was “more useful to the public than any risk of misuse,” according to Corps spokesman Gene Pawlik.

complex system

Three years ago, FEMA sought public input on how to revamp the community rating system to better incentivize communities to reduce flood risk. Several commentators highlighted the difficulties in getting credit for levee initiatives, including federal agencies’ reluctance to share information about areas at risk of flooding due to levee failures.

Nothing immediate has come from the 2021 review. Although FEMA again Search for general input Regarding potential changes to the community rating system, the company said it does not plan to make any changes until 2026.

The US Government Accountability Office has suggested that a comprehensive overhaul may be necessary. In a report Last year, the Government Accountability Office found that discounts on insurance premiums offered under FEMA’s rating system were actuarially unjustified. The report said that mapping projects, flood warnings and public awareness campaigns may be valuable, but they do not reduce flood risk to currently insured properties.

Some local officials argue that FEMA’s community rating system is too expensive and complex, especially for governments with small budgets and staff. The rating system has about 100 items that communities can earn points for, and often requires extensive documentation. The dam safety section is among the most challenging — only four communities earned any points for their local efforts in the most recent assessment, according to FEMA data.

In the most recent review, Fort Collins, Colorado, received more than 5,000 points on the community rating system — the highest of any city, according to Federal Emergency Management Agency data. However, the city failed to earn a top-tier rating because it did not meet criteria for potential levee failure or enhanced flood insurance. The area has about 20 high-risk levees whose failure could cost lives.

“We know where the dams are, but we don’t have the detailed information and we don’t have the direct coordination with many of the dam owners that would be required,” said Ken Sampley, the city’s water engineering director.

Thurston County, Wash., which includes the state capital of Olympia, spends about $200,000 a year to maintain its Class II flood insurance rating, which results in slightly lower group premiums for residents, said Mark Bever, who coordinated the county’s efforts from 2019 to 2023. But the county decided it wasn’t worth trying to get a Class I rating, in part because staff didn’t have the resources to compile all the information about the levees, he said.

The rating process was frustrating and incredibly time-consuming, Beaver said. Although it resulted in a 40 percent discount for about 600 flood policyholders, “no one called to say, ‘Thank you for all that extra effort.’”

None of Thurston County’s cities or towns participate in the community rating system, which means the county’s flood insurance discount is only available in unincorporated areas.

In Pocoda, a rural Thurston County town along the meandering Skokumchak River, the high cost of flood insurance means homeowners often skip it unless they’re required to buy it by their mortgage holder, said James Fowler, the town’s fire chief and planning commission chairman. Yet the town is just 10 miles (16 kilometers) from a levee downstream.

“If the dam on the reservoir fails, it will cause catastrophic flooding. Within two hours, the city will have 20 feet of water,” Fowler said.