• A policy passed after the 2001 terror attacks allows dam owners to shield information in the name of national security
• The policy typically allows dam owners to decide what to keep private
• Critics say the public should know if they are in danger

---

How do the owners of a Cheboygan hydropower plant intend to keep it safe after malfunctions almost caused an adjoining dam to fail?  

How did Consumers Energy’s large dams withstand this spring’s record-breaking floods? 

And how qualified are the people who inspect those structures, which could kill thousands of people if they failed? 

That’s all confidential, according to facility owners and federal officials. 

The details lie in Federal Energy Regulatory Commission records exempt from public disclosure under rules meant to bolster security — but that critics see as an excuse for dam owners to conceal risks.

The lack of information frustrates Charlie Atkinson, who lives downstream of three century-old Consumers Energy dams on the Muskegon River, one of which is due for safety upgrades that Consumers has delayed as it looks to sell the structures.

Atkinson occasionally presses company officials for details about the dams’ condition and operations.

“They just always say, ‘Oh, we can’t answer,’” the Newaygo resident said. 

The shielding of so-called critical energy infrastructure information has become a political issue in Michigan, where a string of recent dam crises has fueled debate about just how much information dam owners should be allowed to withhold.

Security or an excuse?

The nondisclosure policy has its roots in the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, which prompted widespread efforts to bolster homeland security.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which oversees most of the nation’s hydropower dams, including nearly 100 in Michigan, responded by removing previously public records from agency dockets for fear that terrorists might access them.

FERC followed up with a 2003 rule exempting from disclosure “specific engineering, vulnerability or detailed design information” that “could be useful to a person planning an attack.”

Dam owners are typically first to decide what qualifies. 

For example, Consumers spokesperson Katie Carey said the utility claims an exemption on virtually anything related to dam safety. That includes inspection reports, repair plans and even the resumes of consultants hired to work at dams.

Much of the information routinely withheld from the public would appear to pose little threat to national security, said Jay Lund, a dam safety expert and vice director of the Center for Watershed Sciences at the University of California-Davis.

“It often seems that it has become an excuse for not releasing information that you don’t want people to scrutinize,” Lund said.

By contrast, any member of the public can access inspection records and other documents pertaining to Michigan’s roughly 1,000 state regulated dams. 

FERC spokesperson Celeste Miller said the agency follows a “formal, structured process designed to balance transparency with security” when determining what information can be shielded, but declined to answer questions about what that process entails.

Proponents of maintaining confidentiality for federally-regulated dams argue it keeps the nation secure while adequately informing the public about the condition of upstream dams.

“This is critical infrastructure that already exists and is under attack oftentimes by foreign adversaries, and so it truly is a national security issue,” said Mike Alaimo, legislative and external affairs director for the Michigan Chamber of Commerce, a business advocacy group with dam owners in its membership.

While the public can’t access inspection reports, for example, federal officials sometimes reveal details of those reports in publicly posted letters to dam owners. 

And FERC publicly rates each dam based on its physical condition — satisfactory, fair, poor or unsatisfactory.

Those ratings are only a general measure of safety, and they can mask problems. For instance, the Cheboygan Dam, which nearly failed this spring, was rated in fair condition despite yearslong concerns that its faulty private hydropower plant posed a failure risk.

When floodwaters rose in Cheboygan this spring, averting disaster took 17 high-pressure pumps and millions of taxpayer dollars spent on emergency repairs. 

Risk in the unknown

Even state dam safety regulators can’t access all shielded records — confidentiality that played a key role when two dams failed near Midland in 2020.

FERC had overseen the Edenville dam for decades when owner Boyce Hydro’s inaction on safety concerns prompted the agency to revoke its power generation license.

That abruptly shifted oversight to Michigan regulators, who struggled to understand the risks posed by the dam because safety records were kept classified.

State officials were still piecing together information when the dam failed in May 2020, causing more than $200 million in damage to 2,500 structures.

In the aftermath, an independent task force urged state lawmakers to expand Michigan’s access to records held by FERC, but lawmakers have not acted on the recommendation. 

In the years since, FERC has begun communicating with Michigan more frequently about problem dams, but obtaining classified records remains difficult, said state dam safety chief Luke Trumble.

Members of the public can petition FERC to declassify documents that dam owners have filed under seal, but it’s a time-consuming process that Trumble called “not practical if you need them right away.”

As part of broader dam safety reform initiatives in the state House and state Senate, lawmakers are considering whether to enact the dam safety task force’s proposed disclosure reforms.

A top industry lobbyist said he supports the spirit of that push. 

“There certainly needs to be better coordination between FERC and state regulators,” said National Hydropower Association CEO Malcolm Woolf.

Some dam safety advocates argue the general public should also have greater access. 

They note that while physical attacks on US dams are rare, the nation experiences dozens of dam failures annually, some of them stemming from issues first flagged in reports that are now off-limits.

“I don’t think Al-Qaida gives a rip about Tippy Dam,” said Bob Stuber, executive director of the Michigan Hydro Relicensing Coalition. 

“The public living downstream from those dams have a right to know if they’re safe. It shouldn’t just be the dam owner saying ‘trust us.’”

Thank you to our Michigan Environment Watch sponsors

Bridge Michigan Environment Watch is made possible by generous financial support from our sponsors. Sponsorship supports our independent journalism mission but does not constitute sponsor endorsement of individual articles or editorial content. Bridge Michigan journalism remains fact- and data-driven and independent at all times.

Please visit the About page for more information and to subscribe to Environment Watch. Interested in becoming a sponsor? Contact Emma Carr.

Republish This Story

Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under our Republication Guidelines. Questions? Email republishing@bridgemi.com