CENTER TWP — Larry Vicario has lived at his home on Oneida Valley Road with his wife, Charlene, for more than 13 years.

Their 2,100-square-foot home with a basement and a scenic patio is by the Connoquenessing Creek. But the couple may soon lose it all.

The Vicarios' property is in the federal Flood Emergency Management Agency's flood plain and is one of 11,900 properties in the United States listed as a severe repetitive loss property.

As a result, his annual flood insurance premium has sharply increased from about $250 in 2002 to more than $5,000 today.

“I can't afford to pay for it,” Vicario said.

The Vicarios moved there in 2002. Originally, the house was only 800 square feet. But after an addition, that size increased by nearly three times.

“We loved the area. We loved the house. We knew we would make it into our retirement home,” said Larry Vicario, who is an apartment manager for Old Plank Estates. His wife works one day a week in personal home health care and will retire soon.

They have a son in Saxonburg.

The Vicarios were paying about $250 a year for flood insurance. However, after the first flood the couple experienced in 2003, the costs have increased sharply.

They were told before moving the home was “prone to flooding,” but they said they were unaware the home was in a flood plain.

He has been paying flood insurance to Franklin Homeowners Assurance. But after the start of this year, he began paying directly to FEMA.

FEMA said the Vicarios' flood premiums “must increase 25 percent each year until it reaches the full-risk rate.”

Vicario said, “They have increased it to over $5,000. Next year, they're increasing it another $1,900. The year after that, they're going to increase it another $2,300.”

At this rate, total insurance costs will amount to about $10,000 in the next two to three years for the Vicarios.

Over the years, Vicario has saved flood insurance cost notices from FEMA and Franklin Homeowners.

Debt caused price hike

The constant increase in flood insurance premiums for his property and others across the state is a result of the federal government being in debt from damaging hurricanes and other storms over the years.

The debt at one point was as high as $25 billion. Since then, it has decreased to about $18.5 billion.

“They (government) realized that when they were looking at it (flood program) previously, it wasn't sustainable,” said David Bollinger, FEMA mitigation outreach coordinator. “If you don't have enough money coming in, you can't pay money coming out for claims.”

The Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012 allowed for the government to charge people the full-risk rate. However, that soon became a problem after residents' insurance costs started to increase to where they couldn't afford it.

“What they didn't realize was when you have a program that is this complex, you get unintended consequences,” Bollinger said.

The Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act was introduced in 2014 to help homeowners with premium costs by setting a cap on yearly increases.

Although premiums can only increase each year by up to 18 percent, surcharges and other factors may bring that number higher such as in the Vicarios' case.

“People are generally upset about it. It's not something that anybody foresaw to be of this magnitude,” Bollinger said.

Selling is difficult

Selling the property has been next to impossible for the Vicarios.

“I can't even give it away to somebody because they would be paying the same thing,” he said. “Every time I tell them what the flood insurance is, (the prospective buyers) laugh and leave,” he said.

Their home was valued at $200,000 in July in an appraisal by James Keffalas of Keffalas Real Estate in July. However, because the property is in a flood hazard area “marketability and value would be diminished.”

“Flood insurance is a deterrent to buyers,” Keffalas said. “The price of the house has to reflect it. It has to be discounted.”

Keffalas noted it would be difficult for the Vicarios to sell their property.

If he simply moves out of the property, Vicario would “lose everything” to the bank. From there, he would have to declare bankruptcy.

Since moving into the house in 2002, the house has had five major floods. In his basement, Vicario has marks written on his walls indicating how high water rose each time.

In the 2003 flood, 1½ garbage bags of damaged items from the basement were thrown away. The washer, dryer and refrigerator in the basement were lost.

In 2004, the house was hit by two floods from remnants of hurricanes Frances and Ivan.

The biggest flood the house suffered was in 2010 when water filled nearly six and a half feet of his basement, almost as high as the basement's ceiling.

To help reduce flooding, he has three sump pumps in his basement. He also has floor jacks to help with support because the main support beam has not stopped the house from sagging.

Buyout a slow go

In January, FEMA sent a letter to Vicario saying his home met the criteria to be a repetitive loss property.

FEMA offered to buy the property from Vicario through Center Township with the repetitive loss program. The township at first didn't want to buy the property, fearing it would cost the township money.

However, after learning FEMA would reimburse it 100 percent, township officials began talks with FEMA.

But the deal was off after it was revealed the Vicarios have oil and gas rights to the property.

Under FEMA's mineral policy on hazard mitigation assistance adopted last year, properties with gas, oil and mineral rights that allow extraction by hydraulic fracking or horizontal directional drilling are ineligible for the grant program. This is because of new emerging technologies being used for drilling and extraction.

“FEMA must evaluate whether hydraulic fracturing/HDD is an allowable subsurface use of open space,” the policy states. “Based on available scientific information, FEMA is currently unable to determine the compatibility of hydraulic fracturing or horizontal directional drilling with open space requirements.”

Vicario leased his rights to Rex Energy for about $9,700. Then he had to pay about $4,500 in taxes.

However, there cannot be any mineral rights on the property.

“That's not a clear title,” said Thomas Hughes, state Emergency Management Agency hazard mitigation officer.

“The property would need to have the natural gas lease with RexEnergy extinguished and then township could resubmit for the anticipated flood mitigation assistance program, if and when it opens in 2016 within the applicable application window, as long as all items in the application meet the eligibility requirements of this FEMA administered program.”

Hughes said the Vicarios' case isn't unique “at all.”

“For the (Hurricane) Irene and (Tropical Storm) Lee disasters, we ran into a lot of title issues be it coal, iron and natural gas leases,” he said. “This is what led to FEMA coming out with the policy.”

A catch 22 case

Randy Brown, township emergency management coordinator, said this is the first case of its kind he or the township has had to deal with, calling it “difficult.”

“We just hit a wall, and he's working every avenue he can think of,” Brown said. “We're just sitting here waiting. There's nothing we can do at this point.”

The township requested an extension on the deadline for the grant this year, but it was denied. It will have to wait until next year's grant period, which opens in April or May, to reapply.

“The issue still remains that there can't be a gas lease to anybody. It has to be clear of everything,” Brown said.

But ending the lease means Vicario would have to pay back the money given to him and possibly be held for loss of production.

“I'm a Catch-22. I may be able to hold out for another year. My savings are drained,” he said. “If the insurance was lower and reasonable, we would be staying here.”