Villages  located on the coast or along rivers are subject to both annual and episodic  flooding and erosion. Coastal or River Flooding and Erosion Affects 86 Percent of Alaska Native Villages

Flooding and erosion affects 184 out of 213, or 86.4 percent, of Alaska  Native villages to some extent, according to studies and information  provided to us by federal and Alaska state officials. While flooding and erosion is a long-standing problem that has been  documented in Alaska for decades, various studies and reports indicate  that coastal villages in Alaska are becoming more susceptible. Small and remote Alaska villages often fail to qualify for assistance under  the Corps’ Continuing Authorities Program because they do not meet the  program’s criteria. Even villages that do meet the Corps’ cost/benefit criteria may still fail to  receive assistance if they cannot provide or find sufficient funding to meet  the cost-share requirements for the project. 6.) Four Villages in Imminent Danger Are Planning to Relocate, and the Remaining Five Villages Are Taking Other Actions

Four of the nine villages we reviewed are in imminent danger from flooding  and erosion and are making plans to relocate, while the remaining five are  taking other actions. The cost of relocating these villages is expected to be  high, although estimates currently exist only for Kivalina. Federal Agencies Are Investing in Infrastructure without Knowledge of Villages’ Relocation Plans

During our review of these villages, we found instances where federal  agencies invested in infrastructure projects without knowledge of the  villages’ plans to relocate. In addition, many of the federal programs to prevent and  control flooding and erosion are not a good fit for the Alaska Native villages  because of the requirement that economic costs of the project not exceed  the economic benefits. These alternatives include (1) expanding the role of the Denali Commission  to include responsibilities for managing a flooding and erosion assistance  program, (2) directing the Corps and NRCS to include social and  environmental factors in their cost/benefit analyses for projects requested  by Alaska Native villages, and (3) waiving the federal cost-sharing  requirement for flooding and erosion projects for Alaska Native villages. In  addition, GAO identified a fourth alternative—authorizing the bundling of  funds from various agencies to address flooding and erosion problems in  these villages. In response to this direction and subsequent  discussions with committee staff, we (1) determined the extent to which  Alaska Native villages are affected by flooding and erosion; (2) identified  federal and Alaska state programs available to respond to flooding and  erosion and assessed the extent to which federal assistance has been  provided to Alaska Native villages; (3) determined the status of efforts,  including cost estimates, to respond to flooding and erosion in the villages  of Barrow, Bethel, Kaktovik, Kivalina, Koyukuk, Newtok, Point Hope,  Shishmaref, and Unalakleet; and (4) identified alternatives that Congress  may wish to consider when providing assistance for flooding and erosion of  Alaska Native villages.
Why GAO Did This Study

Approximately 6,600 miles of Alaska's coastline and many of the low-lying areas along the state's rivers are subject to severe flooding and erosion. Most of Alaska's Native villages are located on the coast or on riverbanks. In addition to the many federal and Alaska state agencies that respond to flooding and erosion, Congress established the Denali Commission in 1998 to, among other things, provide economic development services and to meet infrastructure needs in rural Alaska communities. Congress directed GAO to study Alaska Native villages affected by flooding and erosion and to 1) determine the extent to which these villages are affected, 2) identify federal and state flooding and erosion programs, 3) determine the current status of efforts to respond to flooding and erosion in nine villages, and 4) identify alternatives that Congress may wish to consider when providing assistance for flooding and erosion.

What GAO Found

Flooding and erosion affects 184 out of 213, or 86 percent, of Alaska Native villages to some extent. While many of the problems are long-standing, various studies indicate that coastal villages are becoming more susceptible to flooding and erosion due in part to rising temperatures. The Corps of Engineers and the Natural Resources Conservation Service administer key programs for constructing flooding and erosion control projects. However, small and remote Alaska Native villages often fail to qualify for assistance under these programs--largely because of agency requirements that the expected costs of the project not exceed its benefits. Even villages that do meet the cost/benefit criteria may still not receive assistance if they cannot meet the cost-share requirement for the project. Of the nine villages we were directed to review, four--Kivalina, Koyukuk, Newtok, and Shishmaref--are in imminent danger from flooding and erosion and are planning to relocate, while the remaining five are in various stages of responding to these problems. Costs for relocating are expected to be high. For example, the cost estimates for relocating Kivalina range from $100 million to over $400 million. Relocation is a daunting process that may take several years to accomplish. During that process, federal agencies must make wise investment decisions, yet GAO found instances where federal agencies invested in infrastructure at the villages' existing sites without knowledge of their plans to relocate. GAO, federal and state officials, and village representatives identified some alternatives that could increase service delivery for Alaska Native villages, although many important factors must first be considered: (1) expand the role of the Denali Commission; (2) direct federal agencies to consider social and environmental factors in their cost/benefit analyses; (3) waive the federal cost-sharing requirement for these projects, and (4) authorize the "bundling" of funds from various federal agencies.