COMMITTEE ON RULES - H.R. 5114 - Flood Insurance Reform Priorities Act of 2010

Jul 13, 2010
6:39PM

Summary of Amendments Submitted to the Rules Committee for
H.R. 5114 - Flood Insurance Reform Priorities Act of 2010

(summaries derived from information provided by sponsors)

Listed in Alphabetical Order
July 13, 2010 6:39 PM

Bachmann (MN)	#43	Would strike section 22 (relating to flood insurance advocate). It also would require the GAO to issue a report on common problems insured individuals have in their interactions with FEMA and on laws that impose compliance burdens on insurers or FEMA. This amendment would direct the GAO to identify potential legislative, administrative, or regulatory changes that may be appropriate to mitigate such problems.
Bachmann (MN)	#44	Would permit all homeowners insured under the NFIP to pay their flood insurance premiums in installments.
Bachmann (MN)	#45	Would phase in actuarial rates for any Severe Repetitive Loss property that has been awarded federal flood damage mitigation grant funding.
Baldwin, Tammy (WI)	#62	Would direct FEMA to immediately release the Disaster Relief Funds under the Stafford Act and give priority for such funds to individuals and businesses with claims previously approved by the Administrator.
Berry (AR)	#29	Would require FEMA to conduct an economic study for localities in which a map change has occurred. It would also require an arbitration panel for individuals or communities to challenge map revisions, as well as require FEMA to set up processes to distribute data and communicate with local communities.
Boswell (IA)	#16	Would ensure occupants have relevant information on appropriate evacuation routes, and ensure the outreach program under the bill includes relevant information on where to obtain coverage.
Brown-Waite (FL)	#57	Would strike section 5 from the bill, which pertains to actuarial increases for non-residential, pre-FIRM, and secondary homes.
Cao (LA)	#63	Would express the sense of Congress that Executive Order 11988, relating to floodplain management, should not be interpreted to apply with respect to contributions under Section 406 of the Stafford Act for the repair, restoration, and replacement of damaged facilities.
Cao (LA)	#64	Would require the Director and HUD Secretary to ensure that the Federal Housing Administration administers the NFIP for properties in low-income areas as determined by the Director and Secretary.
Cao (LA)	#65	Would direct FEMA to provide a minimum of $45,000 for the cost of implementing mitigation measures that are consistent with land use and control measures established by the community.
Cuellar (TX)	#5	Would require FEMA to study and report to Congress on whether new levee systems would address flooding of the Rio Grande River on the United States-Mexico border.
Driehaus (OH)	#41	Revised Would authorize the Administrator of FEMA to reimburse property owners, lessees, and communities for the engineering and surveying expenses that they incurred in order to file for a Letter of Map Amendment (LOMA) if they ultimately are successful in petitioning the exclusion of their property from a flood zone between fiscal year 2003 to the present, and in the future.
Flake, Jeff (AZ)	#4	Would prohibit funds made available for grants from being used for earmarks.
Garrett (NJ)	#30	Would extend the authorizations in the bill to 2012, instead of 2015 as is in the bill.
Hare (IL)	#42	Revised Would require FEMA to immediately update its Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for an area in which a State, a locality, the Army Corps of Engineers, or any other entity eliminates the risk of any levee system that protects an area located in an area having special flood hazards, and immediately make available to the public the updated FIRM. Would clarify that updated FIRMs that are issued based on the elimination of the flood risk will result in the elimination of the mandatory purchase requirement for persons in the affected areas.
Hensarling (TX)	#17	Would strike section 18 (Grants for Outreach to Property Owners and Renters).
Herseth Sandlin (SD)	#31	Withdrawn Would require GAO and FEMA to consider rural and Native American communities when preparing studies on increasing NFIP participation by low-income families and the building codes used in floodplain management criteria.
Herseth Sandlin (SD)	#32	Withdrawn Would require FEMA to consider the number of recent flood-related presidential disaster declarations under the Stafford Act in a region when determining recipients of competitive grants to educate communities about the value of flood insurance.
Herseth Sandlin (SD)	#33	Withdrawn Would add a requirement to the Flood Insurance Advocate Office that it work to facilitate the sharing of best practices of FEMA among all offices of the agency with respect to the creation and updating of floodplain maps.
Hill (IN)	#48	Would require FEMA to make individual disaster assistance available to adversely affected individuals in any county contiguous to a state that received a major disaster declaration from the same incident if 1) The state’s governor requested a major disaster declaration for that county, and 2) The ratio of affected homes to population is equal to or greater than the lowest ratio county in the state that already received individual assistance.
Hill (IN)	#49	Would include “identifying ways to assist communities in efforts to fund the accreditation of flood protection systems” as a function of the Office of the Flood Insurance Advocate.
Hinchey (NY)	#37	Would require FEMA to submit to Congress a community outreach plan for the updating of floodplain areas and flood risk zones. Would require FEMA to notify individual Members of Congress if their representative areas undergo any significant change to flood maps, including the issuance of preliminary maps.
Hinchey (NY)	#38	Withdrawn Would make the preferred risk rate method premium available for all homeowners in new flood zones for five years.
Hinchey (NY)	#39	Would require FEMA to reimburse property owners for costs incurred in requests to remove property from base flood elevations.
Holt (NJ)	#12	Would strike section 8 of the bill (relating to the increase in annual limitation on premium increases).
Jackson Lee (TX)	#34	Withdrawn Would require FEMA to conduct a study on the impact of excessive rainwater on residences located in areas of high risk from flooding of bayous and highways. The study would be submitted to Congress no later than five years after enactment.
Jackson Lee (TX)	#35	Withdrawn Would express the sense of Congress that it is important to provide the opportunity for homeowners to obtain flood insurance and to provide resources to address the devastating effects flooding has on communities in the United States.
Jackson Lee (TX)	#36	Would express the sense of Congress that state and local governments should not misinterpret federal and local flood insurance laws for the purpose of allowing for state and local governments to misuse authorities under such laws to disadvantage property owners.
Loebsack (IA)	#60	Would require FEMA to notify a local television and radio station of proposed flood elevation determinations in addition to the current requirement of publication in a prominent local newspaper. Would also require FEMA to make such notifications for communities that have not yet been issued a Letter of Final Determination through the flood insurance map modernization process at the time of enactment.
Markey, Betsy (CO)	#18	Would require FEMA to conduct a study on the effects of post-flood hazard identification on the financial soundness of the NFIP, only considering significant flooding events since January 1, 2000. Would require FEMA to endeavor to work with Water Resources Research Institutes to conduct the study.
McCarthy, Carolyn (NY)	#2	Would clarify that the notice requirement sent to a borrower regarding required NFIP coverage must also tell the borrower about the forced placement insurance coverage the lender will apply if the borrower does not comply with the purchase requirement. Would extend the period that a borrower has to purchase flood insurance from 45 days to 90 days. Would clarify that the time period a borrower has to purchase flood insurance (90 days) begins upon the borrower’s receipt of the notice, and that forced placement insurance coverage may not be apply until the 90 days have expired.
McCarthy, Carolyn (NY)	#3	Withdrawn Would clarify that a local governmental agency that receives a grant for outreach to property owners and renters (under Sec 18 in the bill), may coordinate or contract with other agencies and entities that have particular specialties or experience with respect to certain populations or constituencies.
McCarthy, Carolyn (NY)	#40	Withdrawn Would require that if a borrower demonstrates to a lender that they have purchased flood insurance, within 15 days of notification, the lender must terminate the force placed insurance and refund the borrower for premiums paid during the period the borrower had force placed as well as flood insurance coverage.
McMahon (NY)	#6	Would (1) permit federal grants to educate local real estate agents in communities participating in the NFIP regarding the program and the availability of coverage under the program for owners and renters of properties and (2) establish coordination and liaisons with such agents to facilitate purchase of coverage and increase awareness of flood risk reduction.
McNerney (CA)	#47	Would prevent FEMA from unfairly increasing rates for NFIP participants who must renew their policy when a gap exists in the availability of preferred rate coverage. Would require FEMA to reimburse participants who have paid a higher rate during such a time period within six months of enactment.
Melancon (LA)	#46	Would provide discounted flood insurance rates for properties protected by a flood-protection system that provides protection for less than a 100-year frequency flood.
Michaud (ME)	#54	Would require FEMA to submit an annual report to Congress containing the dates on which flood insurance rate maps will be revised and updated for each community that participates in the flood insurance program.
Miller, Candice (MI)	#13	Would extend the National Flood Insurance Program until 2012, instead of 2015 as the bill prescribes.
Miller, Candice (MI)	#14	Would prohibit the issuance of a flood insurance policy for a property that has incurred flood-related damage in a cumulative amount equal to or greater than the fair market value of a property.
Miller, Candice (MI)	#15	Revised Would require that the Government Accountability Office conduct a study on ways the private insurance market can contribute to insuring against flood damage; the impact on the National Flood Insurance Program if states were to opt out; and the feasibility of regionalizing the National Flood Insurance Program so there is no cross-subsidization between regions.
Murphy, Scott (NY)	#11	Would require all funds authorized under the Act to be expended in a manner consistent with the manual on Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch.
Neugebauer (TX)	#58	Would apply the phase in of full actuarial rates that begins after three years for certain types of pre-FIRM properties (nonresidential properties, second homes, and newly sold pre-FIRM residences) to all pre-FIRM properties. The phase in period, effective date and transition period remain the same.
Pascrell (NJ)	#10	Withdrawn Would change to September 1, 2007 (from September 1, 2008), the date that flood maps must be in effect in order to delay the effective date of mandatory insurance purchases.
Putnam (FL)	#52	Would require the GAO to conduct a study on the impact and effectiveness of the National Flood Insurance Program's Community Rating System’s ability to prevent or reduce flood losses in communities.
Putnam (FL)	#53	Would require the FEMA to annually submit a report (no later than December 31 of each calendar year) to Congress on the effectiveness of grants awarded to local government agencies, the activities conducted and the effect of such activities on the retention or acquisition of flood insurance coverage.
Rohrabacher (CA), Sanchez, Loretta (CA)	#1	Would provide that, in a case in which a federally-funded flood control project, dating from January 1, 2000, to present, causes an area to become at greater risk of flooding than it otherwise would have been, residents in that area shall be provided flood insurance using the price formula that would have applied had the offending flood control project not been built. If no flood insurance would otherwise have been required, they shall be provided flood insurance at no cost.
Schock (IL)	#19	Would require a study by the Comptroller General on ways to help finance Levee Certification, Repair and Construction for Levee districts that protect historically under populated areas - levee districts of less than 15,000 people.
Schock (IL)	#20	Would prohibit the implementation of new flood maps in areas where a levee is not deemed deficient, but is only in need of a complete certification, as long as the local government has developed and submitted a plan to FEMA or the U.S Army Corps of Engineers on the steps it will take to complete the necessary certification.
Schock (IL)	#21	Would direct that 90 days after enactment the Administrator of FEMA, in conjunction with the Commanding General of the U.S Army Corps of Engineers, shall promulgate regulations to ensure that the U.S. Corps is the primary entity used to make 100 year Levee Certifications. Such certifications shall be funded through a combination of the U.S. Corps and FEMA’s generally appropriated funds. If a levee protecting a newly determined Flood Hazard Area is only in need of certification and is not deemed structurally deficient upon U.S. Corps assessment, the implementation of a new FEMA flood-map will be delayed for a period of no shorter than 5-years from the date of enactment. At the conclusion of such a period, the normal 5 year non mandatory purchase period begins, followed by the 5 year phase in.
Schock (IL)	#22	Would direct that if any resident (current residence at time of enactment) dwells within a newly drawn flood mapped area as designated by the National Flood Insurance Program, decides to purchase federal flood insurance during the period of non-mandatory purchase, then that household shall be entitled to the same cost share scale as laid out in section 7 of the bill, with the rate established being available in perpetuity or until the home is sold to a non-family Member.
Schock (IL)	#23	Would strike section 22 of the bill (establishing a National Flood Insurance Advocate) and insert a grant program for historically-underpopulated areas - those that have a total population of less than 15,000 persons.
Schock (IL)	#24	Would strike section 8 (increase in annual limitation on premium increases).
Schock (IL)	#25	Would make eligible any new structure built according to NFIP standards for a reduced rate of 40 percent of the mandatory flood insurance price.
Schock (IL)	#26	Would grandfather in any properties or structures that were owned and are still owned by the original owner of a pre-FIRM property from having to purchase mandatory flood insurance as well as give those owners the ability to purchase flood insurance at 40 percent of the mandatory price.
Schock (IL)	#27	Would direct that all people who reside (current residence at time of enactment) in a newly drawn flood mapped area as designated by the National Flood Insurance Program shall, after the time period set forth in Section 6, share 40 percent of the cost share of Flood Insurance in perpetuity or until a time when the residence is sold to a non-immediate family Member.
Schock (IL), Alexander, Rodney (LA)	#50	Would strike section 6 (5-year delay in effective date of mandatory purchase requirement for new flood hazard areas) and section 7 (relating to 5-year phase-in of insurance rates for newly-mapped areas). It would delay implementation of new flood maps for 5 years with the ability to grant an extension of 2 years if certain requirements are met. It would include a 5-year phased-in approach of mandatory flood insurance purchasing that will be incentivized during the initial 5-year phase through a stepped-in approach starting at 20% for year 1 and ending with 100% during year 5.
Stark (CA), Burton (IN)	#28	Would require written notification by first class mail to each property owner affected by a proposed change in flood elevations, prior to the 90-day appeal period. Notification would also be sent to the chief executive office of each community affected and published in a prominent local newspaper and the Federal Register. The notification would include an explanation of the appeal process and contact information for responsible officials.
Taylor (MS)	#7	Would prohibit the Write Your Own insurance companies that contract with NFIP from excluding coverage of wind damage under their own policies solely because flooding also caused damage to the property. It would establish requirements for adjustment by WYO insurers when there are claims on the same property, from the same event, for flood damage covered by NFIP and for wind damage covered by the WYO insurer.
Taylor (MS), Scalise (LA)	#8	Would add to the bill the text of H.R. 1264, the Multiple Peril Insurance Act, which creates an option for property owners to buy both wind and flood coverage from NFIP. It would require the new wind coverage to be actuarially sound and would make it available only where local governments require International Building Codes or the equivalent.
Taylor (MS)	#9	Would reduce the subsidy paid to Write Your Own insurance companies for their administrative expenses by 1 percent of written premiums and retains the savings to reduce the NFIP debt.
Teague (NM)	#56	Withdrawn Would require that if FEMA makes an error or oversight in its remapping of a given area, including failing to review and consider engineering, hydrological, or hydraulic data supplied to them by a local unit of government, and that error is discovered after new flood insurance rate maps for that area have gone into effect, the mandatory purchase requirement for flood insurance shall not apply for such area until a letter of map revision can be issued.
Thompson, Mike (CA)	#61	Withdrawn Would require that the Federal National Mortgage Association and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation adopt standards consistent with the Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) program of the Department of Energy.
Tiahrt (KS)	#59	Would authorize a regional director of FEMA to extend the Provisional Accredited Levee (PAL) period for up to 24 months from the date of the expiration of the original 24-month PAL period upon determining that the community, levee owner, or individual responsible for upgrading the levee has applied for a waiver and is making a good faith effort to complete the upgrade to the accredited level. Would require FEMA to suspend any mapping activities in the area surrounding the levee during any extension period granted.
Waters (CA)	#55	2nd Revised Would provide preferred rate premium for properties participating in NFIP during the newly established, 5-year delay in mandatory flood insurance purchase requirement. Would phase out subsidized premiums for severe repetitive loss properties, substantially damaged or improved properties and policy holders who voluntarily allow flood coverage to lapse. Would establish relevant flood insurance related studies and includes other technical improvements.
Welch (VT)	#51	Would allow homeowners who are in the 5-year delay in mandatory flood insurance purchase requirement period in section 6 to be reimbursed for costs associated with applying for a Letter of Map Amendment (LOMA) if the applicant is successful with the LOMA process.