Introduction
FIL-78-2024 is most useful as a bank operating playbook, not a short disaster-news summary. Issued on November 5, 2024, the FDIC guidance addressed FDIC-supervised institutions in the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe disaster area of South Dakota after severe storms, straight-line winds, and flooding, and it told banks to keep serving affected communities while using supervisory flexibility carefully.
For bank leadership, compliance teams, and counsel, the practical question is not whether the letter rewrites every rule. It is whether the institution can prove that borrower accommodations, temporary facilities, branch decisions, and reporting exceptions were tied to the South Dakota event and documented as part of a disciplined recovery plan.
This matters because disaster-response banking is rarely just a collections question. A severe storm can disrupt branch access, payment flows, collateral conditions, vendor performance, municipal projects, and basic customer communications all at once. In rural and tribal-service areas, those operational pressures can intensify because travel, infrastructure, and communications disruptions may last longer than in a typical urban market. FIL-78-2024 should therefore be treated as a framework for triage: preserve access to banking services, stabilize customer relationships, document exceptions carefully, and communicate early with the FDIC when normal reporting or facility rules are affected.
The guidance is also narrower than some summaries make it sound. The FDIC did not tell banks to ignore underwriting discipline or waive risk management. Instead, it acknowledged that borrowers facing disaster-related hardship often need structured accommodations, and that prudent accommodations should not automatically draw examiner criticism. That is an important distinction. The letter supports flexibility, but it still assumes the institution is tracking risk, identifying the reason for relief, and documenting why its response remains consistent with safe-and-sound banking practices.
What FIL-78-2024 Actually Covers
The FDIC’s November 5, 2024 guidance applies to FDIC-supervised institutions affected by the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe severe storm, straight-line winds, and flooding in South Dakota. The agency noted that the damage occurred from July 13 through July 14, 2024, and that FEMA declared a federal disaster for the affected area on November 1, 2024. The letter identifies the affected area as the Cheyenne River Indian Reservation and points institutions to the FDIC’s disaster-response resources.
At a practical level, the guidance highlights six operating themes. First, lenders should work constructively with borrowers whose difficulties are tied to disaster conditions rather than to ordinary credit deterioration. Second, banks may receive Community Reinvestment Act consideration for qualifying recovery-related activity. Third, management should monitor municipal securities and loans tied to local public projects that may now face delays or impairment. Fourth, institutions should notify the Kansas City Regional Office if disaster conditions delay Reports of Condition and Income or similar filings. Fifth, the FDIC may provide relief around certain publishing and branch-related requirements when damage interrupts normal compliance. Sixth, the regional office will expedite requests for temporary banking facilities where service continuity is at risk.
Those points are straightforward on paper, but they create real execution work inside the bank. Someone must decide which loan modifications are disaster-driven, which facilities need temporary alternatives, which deadlines are genuinely at risk, and what evidence supports each decision. That is where the article becomes more useful if it moves beyond summary language and into operational priorities.
The First 72 Hours: Continuity Before Cleanup
In the first phase after a severe storm or flood event, the bank’s priority is continuity, not perfect file cleanup. Management should identify which offices, ATMs, vendors, telecommunications systems, and records access points are affected. If customers cannot reach a physical branch, access online banking, or receive wire and cash-management support, a technically accurate internal memo will not solve the real problem. FIL-78-2024 is best read as permission to stabilize service first and document the disruption in parallel.
That means banks should quickly assign responsibility for customer communications, branch operations, credit administration, vendor escalation, and regulator contact. For institutions serving tribal communities or remote customers, the communication plan may need more than a website banner. Banks may need outbound calling, coordination with local community partners, or temporary changes in how account servicing is handled if transportation or connectivity issues are persistent. A bank that can explain how it prioritized deposit access, payment processing, and borrower communication will usually be in a stronger position than a bank that simply says it was waiting for conditions to improve.
Management should also begin preserving a disaster file immediately. That file should track dates of disruption, affected offices, service outages, exception approvals, borrower accommodation categories, and any expected reporting or publishing issues. When examiners later review the period, they will want to see whether the institution used disciplined judgment under unusual circumstances. A clean disaster log can make that story much easier to tell.
Borrower Accommodations That Hold Up Under Review
The most important supervisory signal in FIL-78-2024 is that prudent efforts to adjust or alter loan terms in affected areas should not be subject to examiner criticism merely because the community is under stress. But that does not mean every accommodation is equal. The strongest disaster-response files clearly connect the relief decision to the borrower’s event-driven hardship, document the borrower’s pre-disaster condition where relevant, and show that management evaluated repayment prospects after the disruption.
In practice, relief may include short payment deferrals, temporary interest-only periods, maturity extensions, covenant waivers, fee relief, or revised draw expectations on construction and business lines. Agricultural, small-business, housing, and equipment borrowers can all present different fact patterns after a flood or wind event. The bank should avoid one-size-fits-all modification language. Disaster accommodations are more defensible when they reflect the type of collateral affected, the expected recovery timeline, insurance status, and whether the underlying business interruption is likely temporary or prolonged.
For internal governance, the credit memo should say why the accommodation is being granted now, what information management reviewed, and what follow-up trigger will be used to reassess the relationship. That keeps the file from reading like a blanket concession made for public-relations reasons. It also helps distinguish a prudent disaster accommodation from a quiet attempt to defer recognition of a deeper credit problem that existed before the storm.
Why the Tribal and Rural Context Matters
One reason this South Dakota guidance deserves its own page is that the affected area is the Cheyenne River Indian Reservation, not a generic statewide disaster zone. Institutions serving reservation communities or nearby rural markets may face a different combination of infrastructure disruption, insurance delays, contractor scarcity, and borrower cash-flow interruption than they would in a dense metro market. That does not change the legal standard, but it does affect how management should assess timing, documentation, and service delivery.
For example, the practical challenge may not be whether a borrower ultimately intends to pay. It may be whether inspections, repairs, title follow-up, vendor access, or ordinary mail and communication channels are functioning well enough to support normal processing. A bank that recognizes those realities and documents them is better positioned than one that applies urban-recovery assumptions to a reservation-serving footprint. The FDIC’s letter does not create a separate tribal banking regime, but it plainly acknowledges that banks in the affected area are operating under unusual conditions and should be supervised with that context in mind.
That is also why customer communications matter so much. A short, clear explanation of available payment relief, branch alternatives, emergency contacts, and documentation expectations can reduce confusion and limit the downstream compliance risk that often follows a chaotic recovery period.
Investments, Public Projects, and Collateral Monitoring
Most thin summaries of disaster FILs spend almost all of their time on borrower relief and skip the investment side. FIL-78-2024 expressly tells bankers to monitor municipal securities and loans affected by the disaster because local government projects can be disrupted. That matters for institutions with public-finance exposure, construction relationships, or local infrastructure credits tied to damaged roads, utilities, schools, or community facilities.
The point is not that the FDIC expects immediate write-downs. The point is that a natural disaster can change project timing, revenue assumptions, collateral conditions, and insurance-recovery timelines. Management should revisit what dependencies a credit has on local government performance, public access, or construction sequencing. If the bank holds loans or securities tied to projects now facing delay or physical damage, the file should show active monitoring rather than passive optimism.
On the lending side, collateral inspections and valuation assumptions may also need to be refreshed. A disaster does not automatically invalidate prior underwriting, but it can make older appraisals, inspection reports, and cash-flow assumptions less reliable. A practical post-disaster credit review asks what has actually changed, what evidence is available now, and what can only be confirmed later.
Reporting, Publishing, and Temporary Facilities
Another area where banks sometimes create avoidable risk is waiting too long to contact the FDIC about operational difficulties. FIL-78-2024 tells affected institutions to notify the Kansas City Regional Office if they expect delays in call reports or other required submissions. That is not a footnote. It is a reminder that the bank should communicate before a missed deadline turns into a credibility issue.
The same applies to publishing requirements and branch-related rules. If storm damage affects branch closings, relocations, or the use of temporary facilities, management should not assume that informal workarounds are enough. The guidance indicates that the FDIC understands disaster conditions may interfere with compliance and will consider relief, but institutions still need to raise the issue. Early communication generally creates more room for practical solutions than late explanations.
Temporary facilities are especially important when a damaged office would otherwise interrupt essential customer service. The Kansas City Regional Office may expedite requests, and in many cases an initial telephone notice can be enough to get the process moving. That means operations, legal, and compliance teams should know in advance who is authorized to make that contact and what information the regional office is likely to need.
Consumer Law Issues Are Narrow but Important
The guidance also flags a consumer-law point that can easily be overstated in marketing-style summaries. For principal dwelling-secured consumer loans, Regulation Z allows a borrower to waive or modify the usual three-day rescission period when there is a bona fide personal financial emergency and the borrower provides the required written statement. That is not a general invitation to skip consumer protections. It is a narrow emergency mechanism that can matter when time-sensitive recovery financing is needed after a disaster.
Banks should therefore treat this issue carefully. The emergency must be real, the file should contain the required consumer statement, and staff should understand when the exception does and does not apply. Used properly, the rule can help accelerate needed credit. Used loosely, it can create a truth-in-lending problem in the middle of an already difficult recovery effort.
Board, Compliance, and Counsel Checklist
For leadership teams, the right question is not simply whether the bank offered help. The question is whether the bank can prove that its help was organized, policy-aware, and risk-calibrated. A strong disaster-response review usually covers: who approved temporary exceptions; how disaster-related accommodations were coded; whether concentrations in affected sectors increased; what controls were applied to vendor changes and branch alternatives; whether any reporting delays were escalated promptly; and how customer complaints or servicing issues were tracked during the disruption.
Counsel and compliance officers should also review whether public-facing statements matched actual operational capability. In a disaster setting, institutions sometimes announce broad relief measures before operations teams can consistently deliver them. That gap can create customer confusion and UDAAP-style risk even when the bank’s intentions are good. Clear scope, clear timelines, and documented exceptions matter.
Read this FIL as supervisory context, not as a substitute for internal discipline. The banks that benefit most from regulatory relief are usually the ones that treat the relief as support for a serious operating plan rather than as permission to improvise indefinitely.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does FIL-78-2024 excuse ordinary credit administration?
No. The letter supports prudent borrower accommodations in unusual circumstances, but banks still need to evaluate risk, document decisions, and manage credits consistently with safe-and-sound practices.
Why is this South Dakota guidance different from a generic flood-recovery memo?
Because it is tied to a specific disaster declaration, a specific affected area, and a specific supervisory response involving the Cheyenne River Indian Reservation and the Kansas City Regional Office. The operational context matters.
What should a bank document first?
Service disruptions, affected facilities, customer communication steps, disaster-related loan accommodations, and any expected delays in required filings or compliance steps should all be logged early.
When should management contact the FDIC?
As soon as the bank expects a disaster-related delay in required reporting, needs help with temporary facilities, or sees branch and publishing requirements becoming difficult to meet because of storm damage.
Share your details and we’ll follow up shortly.
Related Legal Resources
- FDIC Rescinds Failed Bank Acquisition Policy | FDIC Guidance
- FDIC Memo: Regulatory Capital Rule: Category I and II Banking Organizations, Banking Organizations with Significant Trading Activity, and Optional Adoption for Other Banking Organizations
- FDIC Final Rulemaking on Signs, Ads, and Insured Status Guidance
- FDIC FAQs on Capital Treatment of Tokenized Securities
- FDIC Extends Comment Period for Proposed Rule on Payment Stablecoins
