Dam Safety by State
Every state with dams in the national inventory: how many, how many are high hazard, how many lack an emergency action plan, and where the governing law lives. Requirements are published only for states verified against current primary sources — everywhere else this gives you the numbers, the citation, and a direct link to that state's programme contact, so no state is a dead end.
Full requirements means the statute and administrative code have been read and the obligations written up, with a last-verified date on the page. Inventory + citation means verified inventory data and a pointer to where the law lives, but no summary of what it requires — because a six-year-old paraphrase of a dam safety statute is worse than no paraphrase at all.
| State | Dams | High hazard | No EAP | Gap | Coverage | Contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | 2,266 | 228 | 178 | 78.1% | Full requirements | programme |
| Alaska | 112 | 31 | 2 | 6.5% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Arizona | 393 | 170 | 13 | 7.6% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Arkansas | 1,271 | 197 | 9 | 4.6% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| California | 1,534 | 877 | 53 | 6.0% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Colorado | 1,984 | 474 | 3 | 0.6% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Connecticut | 1,316 | 282 | 16 | 5.7% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Delaware | 83 | 57 | 4 | 7.0% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Florida | 1,080 | 104 | 54 | 51.9% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Georgia | 5,412 | 556 | 60 | 10.8% | Full requirements | programme |
| Hawaii | 125 | 118 | 3 | 2.5% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Idaho | 406 | 106 | 2 | 1.9% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Illinois | 1,633 | 252 | 50 | 19.8% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Indiana | 1,092 | 282 | 126 | 44.7% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Iowa | 4,128 | 95 | 7 | 7.4% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Kansas | 6,491 | 328 | 35 | 10.7% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Kentucky | 1,074 | 277 | 8 | 2.9% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Louisiana | 748 | 42 | 1 | 2.4% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Maine | 586 | 79 | 0 | 0.0% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Maryland | 425 | 107 | 69 | 64.5% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Massachusetts | 1,356 | 342 | 4 | 1.2% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Michigan | 1,039 | 161 | 4 | 2.5% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Minnesota | 1,156 | 59 | 0 | 0.0% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Mississippi | 6,092 | 349 | 40 | 11.5% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Missouri | 5,385 | 1,478 | 51 | 3.5% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Montana | 3,029 | 214 | 16 | 7.5% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Nebraska | 2,985 | 164 | 2 | 1.2% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Nevada | 513 | 163 | 0 | 0.0% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| New Hampshire | 665 | 163 | 3 | 1.8% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| New Jersey | 831 | 232 | 0 | 0.0% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| New Mexico | 420 | 255 | 115 | 45.1% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| New York | 1,941 | 451 | 3 | 0.7% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| North Carolina | 3,687 | 1,678 | 635 | 37.8% | Full requirements | programme |
| North Dakota | 950 | 55 | 3 | 5.5% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Ohio | 1,402 | 421 | 81 | 19.2% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Oklahoma | 5,011 | 446 | 31 | 7.0% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Oregon | 884 | 173 | 2 | 1.2% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Pennsylvania | 1,492 | 788 | 37 | 4.7% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Rhode Island | 235 | 95 | 46 | 48.4% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| South Carolina | 2,440 | 679 | 168 | 24.7% | Full requirements | programme |
| South Dakota | 2,549 | 93 | 4 | 4.3% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Tennessee | 1,232 | 275 | 0 | 0.0% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Texas | 7,421 | 1,648 | 328 | 19.9% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Utah | 879 | 283 | 5 | 1.8% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Vermont | 371 | 69 | 0 | 0.0% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Virginia | 2,712 | 452 | 37 | 8.2% | Full requirements | programme |
| Washington | 835 | 416 | 35 | 8.4% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| West Virginia | 564 | 448 | 115 | 25.7% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Wisconsin | 996 | 198 | 9 | 4.5% | Inventory + citation | programme |
| Wyoming | 1,498 | 102 | 9 | 8.8% | Inventory + citation | programme |
State by state
Verified inventory data and where each state's dam safety law lives. Each entry deliberately does not summarise what that law requires — those requirements have not been checked against current primary sources, and a stale paraphrase of a dam safety statute is worse than none. For a state written up in full, see North Carolina or the other states compared.
Citations were compiled from the 2020 ASDSO summary of state dam safety laws and checked to refer to the right state. They tell you where the law lives, not what it currently says: statutes get amended and renumbered. Read the current text, and contact the state programme for a determination that binds. Ranks are out of 50 states and territories.
Alaska
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 112 | 31 (50th) | 2 (6.5%, 41st largest) | 0 | 4 | 0 |
4 of its high-hazard dams (12.9%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Kodiak Island Borough (18), Ketchikan Gateway Borough (11), Aleutians West Census Area (9), Municipality of Anchorage (9), Kenai Peninsula Borough (8).
Governing law: Laws pertaining to the Alaska Dam Safety Program are found in Alaska Statutes (AS) Title 46 Chapter 17 effective May 31, 1987 (AS 46.17). Regulations are in the Alaska Administrative Code (AAC) Chapter 93 Article 3 effective October 2, 2004 (11 AAC 93).
Alaska dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Alaska dams in the NID
Arizona
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 393 | 170 (31st) | 13 (7.6%, 24th largest) | 0 | 26 | 8 |
34 of its high-hazard dams (20.0%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Apache (83), Maricopa (58), Graham (51), Coconino (47), Yavapai (35).
Governing law: The Arizona dam safety law is contained in the Arizona Revised Statutes Title 45 § Waters, Chapter 6, Article 1 § Supervision of Dams, Reservoirs, and Projects (A.R.S 45-1201). The rules pertaining to the dam safety program are found in the Arizona Administrative Code Title 12 § Natural Resources, Chapter 15 § Department of Water Resources, Article 12 § Dam Safety Procedures (A.A.C.
Arizona dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Arizona dams in the NID
Arkansas
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1,271 | 197 (29th) | 9 (4.6%, 25th largest) | 46 | 21 | 0 |
21 of its high-hazard dams (10.7%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Pulaski (96), Arkansas (74), Saline (56), Faulkner (39), White (38).
Governing law: Laws pertaining to the Arkansas dam safety program are found in the Arkansas Code Annotated Section 15- 22-201 through 15-22-222 (ACA §§ 15-22-201 § 15-22-222). Regulations are found in Title VII of the Arkansas Natural Resources Commission regulations (Rules Governing Design and Operation of Dams), which was adopted in October of 1993.
Arkansas dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Arkansas dams in the NID
California
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1,534 | 877 (4th) | 53 (6.0%, 12th largest) | 2 | 44 | 3 |
47 of its high-hazard dams (5.4%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Los Angeles (103), Modoc (76), Sonoma (64), Napa (59), San Diego (59).
Governing law: Laws pertaining to the California dam safety program were originally adopted in 1929 and are amended in the California Water Code Division 3, Section 6000-6612 (Cal. Wat.
California dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search California dams in the NID
Colorado
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1,984 | 474 (8th) | 3 (0.6%, 36th largest) | 0 | 0 | 37 |
37 of its high-hazard dams (7.8%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Larimer (156), Weld (129), Mesa (126), Delta (109), El Paso (107).
Governing law: Colorado's dam safety law is contained in Colorado Revised Statutes Title 37, Article 87, first enacted in 1879 (CRS 37-87-101). Regulations are found in the Colorado Code of Regulations Section 402-1, Rules and Regulations for Dam Safety and Dam Construction (2-CCR 402-1).
Colorado dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Colorado dams in the NID
Connecticut
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1,316 | 282 (20th) | 16 (5.7%, 23rd largest) | 0 | 16 | 1 |
17 of its high-hazard dams (6.0%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Litchfield (221), Fairfield (221), New Haven (217), Hartford (171), New London (138).
Governing law: Dam safety laws are found in Connecticut General Statutes, Sections 22a-401 through 411a (Conn. Gen.
Connecticut dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Connecticut dams in the NID
Delaware
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 83 | 57 (47th) | 4 (7.0%, 34th largest) | 19 | 3 | 0 |
3 of its high-hazard dams (5.3%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Sussex (37), New Castle (24), Kent (22).
Governing law: Delaware's dam safety laws were adopted in 2004 and are found in Delaware Code Title 7, Chapter 42 beginning with section 4201 (Del. Code tit.
Delaware dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Delaware dams in the NID
Florida
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1,080 | 104 (39th) | 54 (51.9%, 11th largest) | 0 | 3 | 8 |
11 of its high-hazard dams (10.6%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Polk (326), Hillsborough (93), Walton (55), Leon (42), Hamilton (41).
Governing law: Dam safety in Florida is the shared responsibility of local, regional, state, and federal entities, private dam owners and operators, and consultants. Staff within the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP or Department) and the five Water Management Districts (WMDs) who perform actions to secure the safety of dams and related structures and promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the public comprise the unofficial Florida Dam Safety Program (FDSP).
Florida dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Florida dams in the NID
Hawaii
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 125 | 118 (36th) | 3 (2.5%, 37th largest) | 0 | 75 | 13 |
88 of its high-hazard dams (74.6%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Maui (54), Kauai (48), Honolulu (13), Hawaii (10).
Governing law: Laws are contained in the Hawaii Revised Statutes § 179D (HRS § 179D). Rules are found in the Hawaii Administrative Rules § 13-190.1 (HAR § 13-190).
Hawaii dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Hawaii dams in the NID
Idaho
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 406 | 106 (38th) | 2 (1.9%, 42nd largest) | 0 | 2 | 2 |
4 of its high-hazard dams (3.8%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Owyhee (50), Valley (41), Washington (24), Franklin (21), Caribou (20).
Governing law: The Idaho dam safety statutes are enumerated in the Idaho Code Section 42-1709 through 42-1721 (IC §§ 42- 1710 § 42-1720). The regulations are contained in the Idaho Administrative Rules, Rules 37.03.05 37.03.06 (IDAPA r.
Idaho dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Idaho dams in the NID
Illinois
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1,633 | 252 (24th) | 50 (19.8%, 14th largest) | 5 | 0 | 0 |
None of its high-hazard dams carries a Poor or Unsatisfactory rating. Most dams by county: Macoupin (97), Madison (63), St. Clair (60), Fulton (56), Peoria (49).
Governing law: The dam safety statutes are contained in the Illinois Compiled Statutes, Chapter 615, Act 5, the Rivers, Lakes, and Streams Act (615 ILCS 5/). Regulations can be found in the Illinois Administrative Code, Title 17, Chapter 1, Subchapter h, Part 3702: Construction and Maintenance of Dams (17 Ill.
Illinois dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Illinois dams in the NID
Indiana
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1,092 | 282 (19th) | 126 (44.7%, 5th largest) | 0 | 89 | 2 |
91 of its high-hazard dams (32.3%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Brown (99), Morgan (70), Vigo (43), Bartholomew (43), Scott (37).
Governing law: The Indiana dam safety statutes are contained in the Indiana Code, Title 14, Article 27, Chapter 7.5: Regulation of Dams (IC 14-27-7.5). The regulations can be found in the Indiana Administrative Code, Title 312, Article 10.5: Regulation of Dams (312 IAC 10.5).
Indiana dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Indiana dams in the NID
Iowa
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4,128 | 95 (42nd) | 7 (7.4%, 29th largest) | 0 | 5 | 0 |
5 of its high-hazard dams (5.3%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Woodbury (311), Monona (198), Ringgold (167), Davis (146), Crawford (145).
Governing law: Dam safety is legislated and regulated as a component of floodplain management in the state of Iowa. The dam safety laws are spread across a large number of chapters within the statutes related to the Department of Natural Resources but are chiefly found in the Iowa Code Chapter 455B § Jurisdiction of Department of Natural Resources, and in Chapter 464B § Dams (Iowa Code §§ 455B and 464B).
Iowa dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Iowa dams in the NID
Kansas
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6,491 | 328 (17th) | 35 (10.7%, 19th largest) | 0 | 74 | 1 |
75 of its high-hazard dams (22.9%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Jefferson (339), Jackson (262), Butler (243), Brown (241), Nemaha (225).
Governing law: Kansas' dam safety laws are found in Kansas Statutes Annotated Chapter 82a, Article 3 § Obstructions in Streams (KSA § 82a-301 and onward). Regulations are found in the Kansas Department of Agriculture - Division of Water Resources (Agency 5) Regulations, Article 40 (KAR 5-40-1 through 5-40-106).
Kansas dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Kansas dams in the NID
Kentucky
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1,074 | 277 (21st) | 8 (2.9%, 28th largest) | 199 | 89 | 17 |
106 of its high-hazard dams (38.3%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Muhlenberg (36), Jefferson (36), Shelby (30), Christian (30), Graves (26).
Governing law: Kentucky's dam safety law is contained in Kentucky Revised Statutes Chapter 151, Geology and Water Resources (KRS § 151). The administrative regulations are contained in Kentucky Administrative Regulations Title 401, Energy and Environment Cabinet § Department for Environmental Protection; Chapter 4, Water Resources (401 KAR 4).
Kentucky dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Kentucky dams in the NID
Louisiana
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 748 | 42 (49th) | 1 (2.4%, 44th largest) | 0 | 2 | 2 |
4 of its high-hazard dams (9.5%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Caddo (85), De Soto (83), Lincoln (39), Natchitoches (35), East Feliciana (35).
Governing law: The dam safety laws are codified in the Louisiana Revised Statutes, Title 38 § Public Contracts, Works and Improvements, Sections 21 through 28 (La. R.S.
Louisiana dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Louisiana dams in the NID
Maine
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 586 | 79 (44th) | 0 (0.0%, 45th largest) | 0 | 8 | 14 |
22 of its high-hazard dams (27.8%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Penobscot (67), Washington (57), York (54), Somerset (49), Oxford (48).
Governing law: The dam safety laws are found in Maine Revised Statutes Title 37-B: Defense, Veterans and Emergency Management, Chapter 24: Dam Safety (37-B MRS § 24). The dam safety regulations are found in the Code of Maine Rules, Agency 15: Department of Defense, Veterans and Emergency Management, Section 214: Maine Emergency Management Agency (MEMA), Chapter 3: Design and Construction Standards for New or Reconstructed Dams (15 214 CMR 3).
Maine dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Maine dams in the NID
Maryland
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 425 | 107 (37th) | 69 (64.5%, 9th largest) | 0 | 24 | 9 |
33 of its high-hazard dams (30.8%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Montgomery (60), Prince George's (48), Howard (34), Anne Arundel (25), Cecil (25).
Governing law: The Maryland dam safety statutes are contained in Maryland Code, Environment Article, Section 1-404 and Sections 5-503, 5-503.1, and 5-505 through 5-514. The dam safety regulations are found in the Code of Maryland Regulations (COMAR) Sections 26.17.04.01 through 26.17.04.13 (COMAR 26.17.04).
Maryland dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Maryland dams in the NID
Massachusetts
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1,356 | 342 (16th) | 4 (1.2%, 33rd largest) | 0 | 42 | 11 |
53 of its high-hazard dams (15.5%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Worcester (397), Middlesex (161), Plymouth (125), Berkshire (118), Essex (112).
Governing law: The Massachusetts dam safety statutes can be found in the Massachusetts General Laws, Part III, Title IV, Chapter 253, Sections 44 through 50A. The regulations are contained in the Code of Massachusetts Regulations, Chapter 302, Section 10.
Massachusetts dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Massachusetts dams in the NID
Michigan
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1,039 | 161 (35th) | 4 (2.5%, 32nd largest) | 4 | 15 | 4 |
19 of its high-hazard dams (11.8%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Oakland (69), Marquette (39), Lapeer (36), Schoolcraft (32), Washtenaw (29).
Governing law: Laws pertaining to the Michigan dam safety program can be found in the Michigan Compiled Laws, Chapter 324, Part 315 (Mich. Comp.
Michigan dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Michigan dams in the NID
Minnesota
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1,156 | 59 (46th) | 0 (0.0%, 48th largest) | 0 | 1 | 0 |
1 of its high-hazard dams (1.7%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Lyon (71), St. Louis (69), Itasca (60), Carlton (36), Fillmore (36).
Governing law: The Minnesota dam safety statutes are contained in Minnesota Statutes Chapter 103G: Waters of the State, Sections 501 through 561: Dam Construction and Maintenance (Minn. Stat.
Minnesota dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Minnesota dams in the NID
Mississippi
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6,092 | 349 (15th) | 40 (11.5%, 16th largest) | 0 | 81 | 59 |
140 of its high-hazard dams (40.1%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Hinds (301), Madison (275), Lauderdale (212), Pearl River (179), Yazoo (167).
Governing law: The Mississippi dam safety statutes are contained in the Mississippi Code, Title 51: Waters, Water Resources, Water Districts, Drainage, and Flood Control. Chapter 3: Water Resources; Regulation and Control, Article 1: General Provisions, Section 39: Construction, modification, and inspection of dams and reservoirs (Miss.
Mississippi dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Mississippi dams in the NID
Missouri
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5,385 | 1,478 (3rd) | 51 (3.5%, 13th largest) | 937 | 1 | 34 |
35 of its high-hazard dams (2.4%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Harrison (303), Lafayette (189), Sullivan (179), Lewis (167), Carroll (155).
Governing law: The Missouri dam safety statutes are contained in the Missouri Statutes Chapter 236 § Dams, Mills, and Electric Power (Mo. Rev.
Missouri dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Missouri dams in the NID
Montana
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3,029 | 214 (27th) | 16 (7.5%, 22nd largest) | 6 | 32 | 9 |
41 of its high-hazard dams (19.2%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Rosebud (270), Garfield (244), Phillips (178), Custer (176), Valley (145).
Governing law: The Montana dam safety statutes are contained in the Montana Code Annotated Title 85 § Water Use, Chapter 15 § Dam Safety Act (Mont. Code Ann.
Montana dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Montana dams in the NID
Nebraska
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2,985 | 164 (32nd) | 2 (1.2%, 43rd largest) | 0 | 10 | 0 |
10 of its high-hazard dams (6.1%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Gage (206), Lancaster (141), Otoe (141), Pawnee (94), Dawson (84).
Governing law: The Nebraska dam safety statutes are contained in the Nebraska Revised Statutes Chapter 46 § Irrigation and Regulation of Water, Sections 1601 through 1670 (Neb. Rev.
Nebraska dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Nebraska dams in the NID
Nevada
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 513 | 163 (34th) | 0 (0.0%, 47th largest) | 0 | 30 | 13 |
43 of its high-hazard dams (26.4%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Clark (121), Washoe (76), Elko (72), Humboldt (40), Eureka (33).
Governing law: The Nevada dam safety statutes are contained in the Nevada Revised Statutes Chapter 535 § Dams and Other Obstructions (NRS Ch. 535).
Nevada dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Nevada dams in the NID
New Hampshire
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 665 | 163 (33rd) | 3 (1.8%, 38th largest) | 2 | 60 | 0 |
60 of its high-hazard dams (36.8%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Hillsborough (105), Merrimack (90), Cheshire (89), Grafton (82), Rockingham (75).
Governing law: The New Hampshire dam safety statutes are contained in the New Hampshire Statutes Title L § Water Management and Protection, Chapter 482 § Dams, Mills, and Flowage (N.H. Rev.
New Hampshire dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search New Hampshire dams in the NID
New Jersey
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 831 | 232 (25th) | 0 (0.0%, 50th largest) | 0 | 58 | 0 |
58 of its high-hazard dams (25.0%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Sussex (139), Morris (109), Passaic (85), Burlington (74), Ocean (48).
Governing law: The New Jersey dam safety laws are found in New Jersey Statutes Annotated Title 58, Chapter 4 (N.J.S.A. § 58:4).
New Jersey dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search New Jersey dams in the NID
New Mexico
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 420 | 255 (23rd) | 115 (45.1%, 7th largest) | 18 | 136 | 9 |
145 of its high-hazard dams (56.9%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Doña Ana (49), Rio Arriba (42), Colfax (34), Sandoval (33), San Juan (30).
Governing law: Laws pertaining to the New Mexico dam safety program are contained in the New Mexico Statutes Annotated 1978, Chapter 72 § Water Law, Article 5 § Appropriation and Use of Surface Water (NMSA 1978 72-5). Regulations are found in the New Mexico Administrative Code Title 19 § Natural Resources and Wildlife, Chapter 25 § Administration and Use of Water, Part 12 § Dam Design, Construction, and Dam Safety (19.25.12 NMAC), last amended in 2010.
New Mexico dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search New Mexico dams in the NID
New York
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1,941 | 451 (10th) | 3 (0.7%, 39th largest) | 3 | 111 | 5 |
116 of its high-hazard dams (25.7%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Sullivan (132), Orange (115), Westchester (91), St. Lawrence (82), Dutchess (80).
Governing law: Laws pertaining to the New York dam safety program are found in the New York Environmental Conservation Law Title 5 § Protection of Water (N.Y. ECL §§ 15-0501 § 15-0517).
New York dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search New York dams in the NID
North Dakota
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 950 | 55 (48th) | 3 (5.5%, 35th largest) | 5 | 12 | 0 |
12 of its high-hazard dams (21.8%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: McLean (45), Morton (44), Bowman (38), Ward (38), Adams (36).
Governing law: The North Dakota statutes relating to dam safety are contained in various sections of Title 61 § Waters of the North Dakota Century Code (N.D. Cent.
North Dakota dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search North Dakota dams in the NID
Ohio
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1,402 | 421 (13th) | 81 (19.2%, 8th largest) | 0 | 128 | 4 |
132 of its high-hazard dams (31.4%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Medina (57), Fairfield (47), Summit (46), Stark (41), Muskingum (39).
Governing law: The Ohio dam safety statutes are located in the Ohio Revised Code, Title XV, Chapter 1521 § Division of Water Resources (Ohio Rev. Code § 1521.01 and on).
Ohio dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Ohio dams in the NID
Oklahoma
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5,011 | 446 (12th) | 31 (7.0%, 21st largest) | 2 | 32 | 8 |
40 of its high-hazard dams (9.0%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Grady (234), Custer (208), Washita (199), Roger Mills (198), Garvin (185).
Governing law: Laws pertaining to the Oklahoma dam safety program are contained in the Oklahoma Statutes Title 82 § Waters and Water Rights, Section 110 § Oklahoma Dam Safety Act (82 OS §§ 110.1 § 110.30). The Oklahoma dam safety rules are contained in the Oklahoma Administrative Code, Title 785 § Water Resources Board, Chapter 25 § Dams and Reservoirs (OAC 785:25).
Oklahoma dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Oklahoma dams in the NID
Oregon
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 884 | 173 (30th) | 2 (1.2%, 40th largest) | 0 | 18 | 13 |
31 of its high-hazard dams (17.9%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Malheur (71), Harney (60), Jackson (56), Lake (49), Douglas (47).
Governing law: Oregon's dam safety laws that dated to 1929 have been repealed and replaced with a new law that will be fully operative on July 1, 2020. As a new law, it awaits specific Chapter and number references by Legislative Counsel to replace Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) 540.350 § 540.390, very likely in the same Chapter.
Oregon dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Oregon dams in the NID
Pennsylvania
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1,492 | 788 (5th) | 37 (4.7%, 18th largest) | 2 | 134 | 11 |
145 of its high-hazard dams (18.4%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Wayne (98), Pike (82), Monroe (79), Susquehanna (73), Washington (67).
Governing law: The Pennsylvania dam safety laws are contained in the Dam Safety and Encroachments Act (Act of Nov. 26, 1978, P.L.
Pennsylvania dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Pennsylvania dams in the NID
Rhode Island
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 235 | 95 (41st) | 46 (48.4%, 15th largest) | 0 | 34 | 0 |
34 of its high-hazard dams (35.8%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Providence (124), Washington (54), Kent (35), Newport (16), Bristol (4).
Governing law: Statutes governing dam safety in the state of Rhode Island are chiefly contained in the Rhode Island General Laws Chapter 46-19, "Inspection of Dams and Reservoirs" (R.I. Gen.
Rhode Island dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Rhode Island dams in the NID
South Dakota
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2,549 | 93 (43rd) | 4 (4.3%, 31st largest) | 0 | 16 | 7 |
23 of its high-hazard dams (24.7%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Jones (253), Haakon (207), Mellette (191), Meade (177), Perkins (157).
Governing law: Statutes governing dam safety in South Dakota are codified in the South Dakota Codified Laws Chapter 46-7 § Storage, Diversion and Irrigation Works (SDCL 46-7). The rules and regulations are found in the Administrative Rules of South Dakota Chapter 74:02:08 § Safety of Dams (ARSD 74:02:08).
South Dakota dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search South Dakota dams in the NID
Tennessee
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1,232 | 275 (22nd) | 0 (0.0%, 46th largest) | 67 | 1 | 4 |
5 of its high-hazard dams (1.8%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Shelby (84), Cumberland (68), Madison (47), Gibson (47), Fayette (46).
Governing law: Statutes concerning dam safety in Tennessee are contained in the Tennessee Code Title 69 § Waters, Waterways, Drains and Levees; Chapter 11 § Dams (Tenn. Code Ann.
Tennessee dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Tennessee dams in the NID
Texas
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7,421 | 1,648 (2nd) | 328 (19.9%, 2nd largest) | 2 | 105 | 112 |
217 of its high-hazard dams (13.2%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Montague (226), Collin (161), Ellis (125), Erath (123), Henderson (120).
Governing law: The Texas dam safety program derives its primary authority from the Texas Water Code Chapter 12, Section 052 titled "Dam Safety" (Tex. Wat.
Texas dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Texas dams in the NID
Utah
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 879 | 283 (18th) | 5 (1.8%, 30th largest) | 3 | 13 | 0 |
13 of its high-hazard dams (4.6%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Salt Lake (72), Utah (64), Summit (63), Uintah (55), Davis (53).
Governing law: The dam safety laws in Utah are contained in the Utah Code Title 73 § Water and Irrigation, Chapter 5a § Dam Safety (Utah Code § 73-5a-101 et seq.). Rules for dam safety are provided in the Utah Administrative Code Rules for Natural Resources, Water Rights, Sections 10 § 12 (Utah Admin.
Utah dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Utah dams in the NID
Vermont
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 371 | 69 (45th) | 0 (0.0%, 49th largest) | 16 | 19 | 1 |
20 of its high-hazard dams (29.0%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Windsor (68), Rutland (48), Addison (36), Windham (34), Orange (32).
Governing law: Following the 2018 passage of Act 161 - An Act Relating to the Regulation of Dams, 10 V.S.A. Chapter 43, Vermont has been engaged in dam safety rule development.
Vermont dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Vermont dams in the NID
Washington
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 835 | 416 (14th) | 35 (8.4%, 20th largest) | 0 | 48 | 5 |
53 of its high-hazard dams (12.7%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: King (93), Yakima (50), Grant (44), Snohomish (42), Chelan (37).
Governing law: The dam safety statutes are spread in a number of areas of the Washington Revised Code, with RCW 43.21A.064, 86.16.035, 90.03.350, and 90.03.470 forming the bulk of the pertinent laws. Rules concerning dam safety in the State of Washington are contained in Title 173, Chapter 175 of the Washington Administrative Code (WAC 173-175-010 et seq.).
Washington dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Washington dams in the NID
West Virginia
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 564 | 448 (11th) | 115 (25.7%, 6th largest) | 2 | 39 | 2 |
41 of its high-hazard dams (9.2%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Mineral (32), Harrison (25), Grant (21), Preston (20), Mercer (20).
Governing law: The West Virginia dam safety law is contained in the West Virginia Code Chapter 22, Article 14 § Dam Control and Safety Act (W. Va.
West Virginia dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search West Virginia dams in the NID
Wisconsin
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 996 | 198 (28th) | 9 (4.5%, 26th largest) | 0 | 2 | 4 |
6 of its high-hazard dams (3.0%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Juneau (45), Taylor (38), Price (37), Marinette (27), Oneida (26).
Governing law: The Wisconsin dam safety law is contained in the Wisconsin Statutes Chapter 31 § Regulation of Dams and Bridges Affecting Navigable Waters, originally enacted in 1917 under the Water Power Law (Wis. Stat.
Wisconsin dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Wisconsin dams in the NID
Wyoming
| Dams | High hazard | No EAP recorded | EAP not required | High haz. Poor | High haz. Unsat. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1,498 | 102 (40th) | 9 (8.8%, 27th largest) | 0 | 12 | 2 |
14 of its high-hazard dams (13.7%) are rated Poor or Unsatisfactory. Most dams by county: Johnson (178), Campbell (160), Carbon (114), Sheridan (113), Natrona (93).
Governing law: Dam safety laws for Wyoming are contained in the Wyoming Statutes Title 41 § Water, Chapter 3 § Water Rights; Administration and Control, Article 3 § Reservoirs (W.S. 41-3-307 § 41-3-318).
Wyoming dam safety programme (ASDSO) · search Wyoming dams in the NID
National totals and the downloadable dataset are on the high-hazard EAP gap page.
Data source. All counts computed from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers National Inventory of Dams national extract, stamped 2026-8-28.