Order Code RL34367
Side-by-Side Comparison of Flood Insurance
Reform Legislation in the 110th Congress
Updated May 2, 2008
Rawle O. King
Analyst in Financial Economics and Risk Assessment
Government and Finance Division

---

Side-by-Side Comparison of Flood Insurance Reform
Legislation in the 110th Congress
Summary
In 1968, Congress established the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) in
response to severe flooding following a series of hurricanes in 1963, 1964, and 1965.
The key policy objectives of the NFIP were threefold: (1) reduce the nation’s flood
risk through floodplain management; (2) improve flood hazard data and risk
assessment by mapping the nation’s floodplains; and (3) make affordable flood
insurance widely available in communities that adopt and enforce measures to make
future construction safer from flooding. Fiscally, the program had been self-
supporting from the mid-1980s until the 2005 hurricanes. These storms exposed
serious weaknesses, which Congress is attempting to address in an effort to return the
NFIP to financial soundness.
In the aftermath of the 2005 hurricanes, the NFIP faces unprecedented financial
and regulatory strains. The program had to borrow $17.535 billion from the U.S.
Treasury in order to pay claims and expenses. Those concerned about program
challenges in the wake of the 2005 storms cite the increasing need to borrow from the
U.S. Treasury, substantial premium discounts or cross-subsidies among classes of
policyholders, outdated flood insurance rate maps, allegations of uneven compliance
with mandatory purchase requirements, and questions as to the performance and
efficiency of private insurers operating under the NFIP’s Write Your Own program.
Policymakers are now examining ways to strengthen the NFIP. On July 19,
2007, Representative Maxine Waters introduced H.R. 3121 to restore the financial
solvency of the national flood insurance program. Chairman Barney Frank had
introduced H.R. 1682, an earlier version of H.R. 3121, on March 26, 2007. H.R.
3121 is designed to make the program satisfy traditional criteria for actuarial
soundness by phasing in actuarial premiums for owners of certain commercial
properties and some residential properties that are not the owners’ primary residence.
H.R. 3121 would also (1) raise civil penalties on federally regulated lenders who fail
to enforce mandatory purchase of flood insurance for mortgage holders, (2) increase
program participation incentives, (3) add coverage for wind as well as water damage,
and (4) encourage revisions to flood maps. The bill passed the full House on
September 27, 2007. On November 1, 2007, Senator Christopher Dodd introduced
S. 2284, a flood insurance reform bill designed to increase the amount of premiums
collected to reduce the cost of expected claims under the NFIP. S. 2284 is
substantially similar to H.R. 3121, except that the Senate legislation would forgive
the program’s outstanding debt to the Treasury and exclude coverage for wind
damages. Some stakeholder groups have expressed concerns about making abrupt
changes to the NFIP, particularly phasing out the subsidized premiums. They point
to a need for flood insurance reform but say changes should be made in the broader
context of program reauthorization. NFIP authority expires September 30, 2008.
This report will be updated as events warrant.

---

Contents
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Summary of H.R. 3121 and S. 2284 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
List of Tables
Table 1. Side-by-Side Comparison of Flood Insurance Reform Legislation:
H.R. 3121 and S. 2284 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

---

Side-by-Side Comparison of Flood
Insurance Reform Legislation in the
110th Congress
Background
In 1968, Congress established the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) in
response to rising flood losses and as an alternative to ad hoc federal disaster
assistance. The NFIP’s insurance operation was self-supporting from the mid-1980s
until the 2005 hurricane season when Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma exposed
serious flaws in the program. The 2005 Gulf Coast hurricanes were catastrophic
disasters that required an estimated $19.28 billion in claims payouts under the NFIP.
The program now faces unprecedented financial and regulatory challenges and a
$17.535 billion debt owed to the U.S. Treasury.
Congress is concerned about the financial challenges facing the NFIP and the
need to reauthorize the program before September 30, 2008. An important aspect of
the financial challenges facing the program involves the rebuilding of the Gulf Coast
region and the adequacy of the NFIP to meet the future commercial and multifamily
real estate mortgage financial needs of all other communities. Without federal flood
insurance, for example, lenders will often not be able to sell mortgages in coastal
areas and other regions prone to flooding. Without a reliable and uninterrupted
source of affordable flood insurance, mortgage credit and home ownership would be
more expensive.
The NFIP’s financial status has prompted policymakers to focus on the strengths
and weaknesses of the NFIP in managing and financing the nation’s flood risk.
Those concerned about program weaknesses typically cite the increasing need to
borrow from the U.S. Treasury, substantial premium cross-subsidies among classes
of policyholders, outdated flood insurance rate maps, allegations of uneven
compliance with mandatory purchase requirements, and questions as to the
performance and efficiency of the Write Your Own program.
Legislative efforts are now underway in Congress to reform the NFIP. On
March 26, 2007, Representative Barney Frank introduced H.R. 1682, the Flood
Insurance Reform and Modernization Act of 2007, in order to restore the financial
solvency of the national flood insurance program. On July 19, 2007, Representative
Maxine Waters introduced H.R. 3121 — a bill that is substantially similar to H.R.
1682. H.R. 3121 added two new sections to allow for the purchase of optional
insurance that would cover flood and windstorm losses and to extend the NFIP five
years through September 30, 2013. Section 4 of the bill was modified to reflect
minor changes of the phase-in of actuarial rates beginning on January 1, 2011. On
November 1, 2007, Senator Dodd introduced S. 2284, a flood insurance reform bill

---

CRS-2
designed to increase the amount of premiums collected and reduce the cost of
expected claims. S. 2284 would also forgive the program’s outstanding debt to the
Treasury.
Summary of H.R. 3121 and S. 2284
In the first session of the 110th Congress, the House passed major flood
insurance reform legislation (H.R. 3121) on September 27, 2007. The full Senate has
yet to take up S. 2284; the Senate Banking Committee reported the legislation on
November 1, 2007.
H.R. 3121 is substantially similar to S. 2284 in that both bills would modify the
NFIP to bring more consumers into the system and gradually phase out premium
subsidies currently available for structures built prior to the mapping and
implementation of NFIP floodplain management requirements — the so-called Pre-
Flood Insurance Rate Maps (Pre-FIRM) structures.1 The bills would achieve these
outcomes in different ways.
Specifically, H.R. 3121 would (1) phase out subsidized premiums for some
policyholders; (2) require FEMA for the first time to map the nation’s 500-year
floodplain and areas that would be flooded if a dam or levee failed; (3) notify
borrowers of requirements making flood insurance potentially available to all
homeowners, and not just to those in the 100-year floodplain, as part of the Real
Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) process; (4) provide for the purchase of
optional insurance coverage for wind as well as water damage; and (5) extend the
NFIP five years through September 30, 2013.
S. 2284 like H.R. 3121 would phase out the premium subsidies on pre-FIRM
properties, require mapping the 500-year floodplain and areas behind levees, require
borrowers to be notified about the availability of flood insurance, and extend the
program through fiscal 2013. The Senate bill, however, would forgive the debt
owed to the Treasury and establish a reserve fund to pay extraordinary future claims.
Importantly, S. 2284 would continue to exclude coverage for wind damage. Several
Senators (Landrieu, Vitter, Cochran, and Wicker) have reportedly joined together to
ensure wind coverage is added to S. 2284 during debate on the Senate floor. Many
private insurers, however, oppose the inclusion of wind coverage, claiming the
insurance industry is capable of insuring wind coverage. Opponents also stress that
including the wind peril in the program would expose the program to unnecessary
future indebtedness to the Treasury.
Table 1 provides a side-by-side comparison of key provisions in H.R. 3121 and
S. 2284.
1 Pre-FIRM buildings pay heavily discounted rates on the first $35,000 of their structure’s
insured value, and full risk-based premium rates for the remaining insured value.

---

CRS-3
Table 1. Side-by-Side Comparison of Flood Insurance Reform Legislation: H.R. 3121 and S. 2284
H.R. 3121 (Waters)
S. 2284
Provision
(Passed House 9/27/07)
(Reported by Senate Banking Committee 11/1/07)
Title
Flood Insurance Reform and Modernization Act of 2007
Flood Insurance Reform and Modernization Act of 2007
Purpose
To protect the integrity of the NFIP by fully funding existing
To address the program’s debt to the U.S. Treasury and
legal obligations and increasing (1) incentives for homeowners
strengthen its solvency to ensure it can pay future claims.
and communities to participate in the program and (2)
(Sec. 2)
awareness of both flood risks and the quality of information
regarding such risks. (Sec. 2)
Program Extension
Would reauthorize the NFIP five years through September 30,
Same as H.R. 3121. (Sec. 4)
2013. (Sec. 27)
Reform of Premium Rate Structure
Phase-In of Actuarial
Would require the Administrator of FEMA (FEMA) to phase-
Would authorize the Director to impose annual average rate
Rates for Certain Pre-
in actuarial rates for nonresidential (commercial) pre-Flood
increases of up to 25% on certain properties — i.e., non-
FIRM Properties
Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) properties and pre-FIRM
residential structures, non-primary residences, severe repetitive
properties that are not the primary residence of either the
loss properties, properties that undergo improvements or
owner or a tenant by January 1, 2011. FEMA would be
renovations exceeding 30% of the fair market value of the
authorized to assess an additional 15% on top of routine annual
property, and any property that sustains damage exceeding 50%
rate increases for those properties until the actuarial rate is
of the fair market value of the property after enactment of the bill
achieved. Specifies that the aggregate increase in chargeable
— until the average risk premium rates for such properties are
premium rates during any 12-month period, however, may not
equal to the actuarial rates. (Sec. 6)
exceed 20% for non-residential properties and 25% for non-
primary residences. (Sec. 4)
Recently Purchased
Would require phase-in of actuarial rates on newly purchased
Would require actuarial assessed rates on all new flood insurance
Pre-FIRM Properties
pre-FIRM properties using the same phase-in structure that
policies, as of the date of enactment of this Act, or any policy that
nonresidential and non-primary homes would be subject to
lapses as a result of the deliberate choice of the holder of such
under the legislation. (Sec. 4)
policy. (Sec. 6)
Minimum Annual
No similar provision.
Would increase the annual deductible from $1,000 to $1,500 for
Deductibles for Pre-FIRM
pre-FIRM properties with coverage of less than $100,000, and
Properties
from $1,000 to $2,000 for pre-FIRM properties with coverage of
more than $100,000. Minimum post-FIRM property deductibles
will increase from $500 to $750 for coverage greater than
$100,000 and from $500 to $1,000 for coverage greater than
$100,000. (Sec. 13)

---

CRS-4
H.R. 3121 (Waters)
S. 2284
Provision
(Passed House 9/27/07)
(Reported by Senate Banking Committee 11/1/07)
5-Year Discount of Flood
Would clarify that people forced to purchase flood insurance
No similar provision.
Insurance Rates for
as a result of new flood insurance rate maps who have lived in
Properties in Formerly
an area where the levees were previously certified, and have
Protected Areas
now been decertified, will receive a grace period of five years
in which they will be entitled to a 50% reduction in insurance
premiums while the levees are being recertified. (Sec. 22)
Phase-In of Premium for
Would require NFIP to provide a 5-year phase-in of flood
Would require that properties mapped into the 100-year flood
Newly Covered Properties
insurance premiums for newly covered low-cost properties
plain must pay rates reflecting their new risk designation.
placed within a floodplain through an updating of the flood
Properties covered by flood insurance at the time of remapping
insurance rate maps if the value of the home does not exceed
will have the new rates phased in over 2 years. The practical
75% of the state median home value. (Sec. 22)
application of this provision would be a prohibition against
FEMA’s current practice of allowing properties that are mapped
into the 100-year flood plain to indefinitely pay rates that reflect
their old risk level. (Sec. 8)
Considerations in
No similar provision.
Would require NFIP to use actuarial principles in determining
Determining Chargeable
rates, and to consider catastrophic loss years in the calculation of
Premium
average losses. This would be a change from the current setting
of premiums to cover losses during an historical average loss
year. (Sec. 14)
Purchase Incentives
Expansion of Mandatory
Would require the Government Accountability Office (GAO)
Would mandate that the NFIP refrain from selling flood insurance
Coverage Requirement to
to conduct a study of the impact of amending the Flood
policies in states that do not require state-chartered lenders to
State Chartered Financial
Disaster Protection Act of 1973 to extend NFIP’s mandatory
ensure that certain loans are covered by flood insurance at certain
Institution
purchase requirements to properties in special flood hazard
levels. This requirement already exists for lenders insured by the
areas (SFHA) that are covered by a mortgage loan issued by a
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. (Sec. 9)
non-federally regulated lending institution. (Sec. 3)
Grants for Outreach to
Would authorize $50 million for each of fiscal years 2008
Would authorize the appropriation of $250 million over the 2008-
Property Owners and
through 2012 for FEMA to make grants to local government
2012 period for grants to communities participating in the NFIP
Renters
agencies for outreach activities designed to encourage and
to conduct educational and outreach activities to encourage the
facilitate the purchase of flood insurance. Local governments
purchase of flood insurance, and to raise awareness of flood risks
would use the grants to notify owners and renters about SFHA
as well as measures that can be taken to mitigate future flood
and the mandatory purchase requirement, and educate such
damages. (Sec. 15)
owners and renters regarding the flood risk and the benefits
and costs of maintaining or acquiring flood insurance. FEMA
shall submit a report to Congress identifying and describing
the marketing and outreach efforts under the NFIP. (Sec. 15)

---

CRS-5
H.R. 3121 (Waters)
S. 2284
Provision
(Passed House 9/27/07)
(Reported by Senate Banking Committee 11/1/07)
Notification to Tenants of
Would require tenants to be notified of the availability of
No similar provision.
Availability of Contents
contents insurance and where to obtain coverage. (Sec. 10)
Insurance
Notice of Flood Insurance
Would amend Section 5(b) of the Real Estate Settlement
Same as H.R. 3121. (Sec. 11)
Availability and Escrow in
Procedures Act of 1974 (RESPA) to create a new notice
in RESPA Good Faith
provision to ensure that individuals who purchase homes in
Estimate
areas of elevated flood risk (whether or not the property is
located in a special flood hazard area) are made aware of the
risk and given an opportunity to purchase flood insurance.
Clarifies that the disclosure state that flood insurance is
available whether or not a property is in a flood zone. Would
require that lending institutions place flood insurance
payments into an escrow account on behalf of the borrower.
The requirement would apply to any mortgage outstanding or
entered into on or after the expiration of the 2-year period
beginning on the date of enactment of legislation. (Sec. 20)
Civil Penalties for Lending
Would increase the civil penalty from $350 to $2,000 for
Would increase the civil penalty from $350 to $2,000 for lenders
Institutions
lenders that do not enforce the mandatory flood insurance
that do not enforce the mandatory flood insurance purchasing
purchasing requirements. The annual cap on fines that can be
requirement. Would eliminate the current $100,000 annual cap on
levied against a lender would increase from $100,000 to
fines that can be levied against a lender. (Sec. 10)
$1,000,000. Would also add a “safe harbor” provision to
protect mortgage lenders from “technical noncompliance” with
flood insurance requirements and “unintended clerical errors”
by stating that no penalties may be imposed on lenders who
make good faith efforts to comply with the requirements. The
$1 million cap would not apply to regulated lending
institutions during a calendar year if, in any three of the five
calendar years immediately preceding that calendar year, the
institution was assessed a penalty of $1 million. (Sec. 6)
Study of Economic Effects
Would direct FEMA to study and report to Congress on the
No similar provision.
of Charging Actuarially-
economic effects of charging full actuarial risk premiums on
Based Premium Rates for
non-primary residence and non-residential pre-FIRM
Pre-FIRM Structures
structures. (Sec. 29)
Coverage
Maximum Coverage
Would increase coverage limits from $250,000 (structure) and
No similar provision.
Limits
$100,000 (contents) to $335,000 (structure) and $135,000
(contents) for any single-family dwelling and from $500,000
to $670,000 for structures and related contents of
nonresidential properties. (Sec. 8)

---

CRS-6
H.R. 3121 (Waters)
S. 2284
Provision
(Passed House 9/27/07)
(Reported by Senate Banking Committee 11/1/07)
Mandatory Coverage
Would require the GAO to study the regulatory, financial, and
Would require that homes located behind levees, dams, and other
Areas
economic feasibility (i.e., costs of home-ownership, actuarial
man-made structures become part of special flood hazard areas
soundness of program, lender compliance) of expanding the
(SFHA) and require property owners in these “residual risk” areas
standard for mandatory flood insurance purchase requirement
to purchase flood insurance once the NFIP updates its flood maps
to include properties in areas of residual risk that would flood
to include those new areas. (Sec. 7)
if not for the presence of structural flood control measures
such as levees, floodwalls, and dams. (Sec. 3(a)(2))
Availability of Insurance
No similar provision.
Would allow owners of residential properties of more than four
for Multifamily Properties
units to purchase flood insurance up to the commercial coverage
limits, currently $500,000 for the structure.
(Sec. 5)
Waiting Period for
Would make coverage immediately effective if a policy is
No similar provision.
Effective Date of Policies
purchased within 30 days of the purchase or transfer of a
property. (Sec. 5)
New Lines of Coverage
Would provide optional coverage for: (1) additional living
No similar provision.
expenses following a flood loss when the residence is unfit to
live in, (2) residential basement improvements (i.e., crawl
spaces and other enclosed areas under buildings), (3) business
interruption for commercial property, and (4) full replacement
cost of the contents of properties. New benefits would be
made available only at time of renewal or issuance of a new
contract, and only at actuarial rates. (Sec. 9)
Extension of Pilot Program
Would extend for three years the authorization of
Would authorize the appropriation of $240 million and extend
of Mitigation of Severe
appropriations ($40 million a year from the National Flood
the severe repetitive loss property pilot program through 2013.
Repetitive Loss Properties
Insurance Fund) for the mitigation pilot program that funds
(Sec. 30)
preventive measures for severe repetitive loss properties
(SRLP). SRLPs are defined as those that sustain four or more
losses totaling more than $20,000, or two or more losses that
cumulatively exceed the value of the property. (Sec. 17)
Payment of claims to
Would prohibit FEMA from enforcing penalties assessed
Same as H.R. 3121.
Condominium Owners
against individual condominium owners where the
(Sec. 17)
condominium association is underinsured. (Sec. 30)

---

CRS-7
H.R. 3121 (Waters)
S. 2284
Provision
(Passed House 9/27/07)
(Reported by Senate Banking Committee 11/1/07)
Clarification of
Would require the Administrator of FEMA to: (1) issue
No similar provision.
Replacement Cost
regulations to clarify the applicability of replacement cost
Provisions, Forms, and
coverage for contents in the Standard Flood Insurance Policy;
Policy Language
(2) revise any regulations, forms, notices, guidance, and
publications to more clearly describe the meaning of full cost
of repair or replacement under the replacement cost coverage;
and (3) revise the language in flood insurance policies
regarding rating and coverage, such as classification of
buildings, basements, crawl spaces, detached garages,
enclosures below elevated buildings, and replacement cost, to
make flood policy provisions consistent with language used
widely in homeowners policies. (Sec. 24)
Financial/Borrowing Authority
Reserve Fund
No similar provision.
Would establish in the Treasury the National Flood Insurance
Reserve Fund to meet the expected future obligations of the NFIP
in higher-than-average loss years. The Fund would be capitalized
in an amount equal to 1% of the sum of the total potential loss
exposure of all outstanding flood insurance policies in force in the
prior fiscal year. FEMA will be required to set aside an amount
equal to 7.5% of the required reserve in each year until the fund
is fully capitalized. Specifies that FEMA could not increase
premiums more than otherwise allowable for purposes of
capitalizing the fund. (Sec. 15)
Borrowing Authority
No similar provision
Would decrease the borrowing authority for the NFIP from
Limits
$20.775 to $1.5 billion. (Sec. 12)
Borrowing Authority Debt
No similar provision.
Would eliminate any obligations owed to the U.S. Treasury by the
Forgiveness
NFIP to the extent such borrowed sums were used to fund the
payment of claims resulting from the hurricanes of 2005. (Sec.12)
Repayment Plan for
Would require FEMA to submit a report to Congress that
Would require FEMA to submit to Treasury and Congress a
Borrowing Authority
includes a plan for repaying borrowed funds within 10 years.
detailed report of losses incurred under the NFIP and a repayment
(Sec. 12)
plan whenever the NFIP has to borrow from the Treasury.
(Sec. 16)
Report on Insurance
Would require FEMA to submit an annual report to Congress
Would direct the GAO to conduct a study and report to Congress
Program
on the financial status of the program. The report would
on the financial activities of the NFIP.
include information on the current and projected levels of
claims, premium receipts, expenses, and Treasury borrowing
under the program. (Sec. 14)

---

CRS-8
H.R. 3121 (Waters)
S. 2284
Provision
(Passed House 9/27/07)
(Reported by Senate Banking Committee 11/1/07)
Additional NFIP Staff
Would authorize to be appropriated such sums of money as
No similar provision.
may be necessary for the NFIP to hire additional staff to
implement the provisions of this Act. (Sec. 25)
Mitigation
Flood Mitigation
Would eliminate the limitation on aggregate amount of
No similar provision.
Assistance Program
assistance and allow for the use of Flood Mitigation Assistance
(FMA) funds to demolish and rebuild damaged property. (Sec.
18)
Mitigation Grants for
Would direct FEMA to provide grants to individual owners of
No similar provision.
Individual Repetitive
repetitive loss properties in communities that do not participate
Claims Properties
in the NFIP. These communities might not participate because
they have withdrawn from the NFIP or the community cannot
meet the federal requirements for qualifying for FEMA
funding. (Sec. 16)
Verification and
Would direct FEMA to develop a plan to verify that the
No similar provision.
Maintenance of Flood
recipients of Homeowner Assistance Grants in Mississippi and
Insurance on Homeowner
Road Home Grants in Louisiana, funded by Department of
Assistance Grants in
Housing and Urban Development Community Development
Mississippi and Road
Block Grants, maintain flood insurance on their properties as
Home Grants in Louisiana
required as a condition of receiving the grants. (Sec. 32)
Extension of Pilot Program
Would authorize an extension of the pilot program for
Same as H.R. 3121. (Sec. 30)
for Mitigation of Severe
mitigation of severe repetitive loss properties from FY2008
Repetitive Loss Properties
through 2012. (Sec. 17)
Claims
Administrative Expense of
Would require Write-Your-Own (WYO) companies to submit
Would require FEMA to develop a data collection methodology
Write-Your-Own
to FEMA an annual report of all administrative and operational
to gather expense information from WYO company to allow
Insurance Companies
costs of the program, along with a biennial independent audit
FEMA to collect consistent information on the expenses of WYO
conducted by a certified public accountant. Would require
companies. Would require WYO companies to submit 5 years of
FEMA review of the records and audits to determine if such
data based on that methodology. FEMA will then be required to
payments are reasonable. (Sec. 31)
evaluate the expense of WYO companies to ensure that they are
being reimbursed based on actual expenses. GAO would be
required to report to Congress on the expenses of the WYO
program. (Sec. 29)

---

CRS-9
H.R. 3121 (Waters)
S. 2284
Provision
(Passed House 9/27/07)
(Reported by Senate Banking Committee 11/1/07)
FEMA Participation in
Would permit state insurance commissioners to submit a
Same as H.R. 3121. (Sec. 26)
State-Sponsored Disaster
request to the Director of FEMA to have the agency participate
Claims Mediation
in state-sponsored non-binding mediation of catastrophe-
Programs
related insurance claims that may result in flood damage
claims under the NFIP. All statements made and documents
produced during the mediation would be deemed privileged
and confidential settlement negotiations made in anticipation
of litigation. Participation in the mediation would not affect or
expand the liability or rights or obligations of any party in
contract. FEMA would not be required to pay additional
mediation fees. (Sec. 13)
Reiteration of FEMA
Under the Bunning-Bereuter-Blumenauer Flood Insurance
Would reiterate the responsibility of FEMA under the 2004 Act
Responsibility Under the
Reform Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-264; 118 Stat. 712), would
to establish minimum training requirements, and require that
2004 Reform Act
direct FEMA to establish an appeals process that
FEMA report to Congress within three months on the status of all
policyholders can use to resolve decisions of the Administrator
reforms
relating to claims, proofs of loss, and loss estimates.
(Sec. 27)
Would require the Administrator to continue to work with the
insurance industry, state insurance regulators, and other
interested parties to implement previously developed minimum
training and education standards for all insurance agents who
sell flood insurance policies. (Sec. 21)
Would require the Administrator to submit a report to
Congress within six months describing FEMA’s
implementation of provisions in the Reform Act of 2004. (Sec.
21)
Extension of Deadline for
Would extend to 180 days the period of time policyholders
No similar provision
Filing Proof of Loss
have to file proof of loss of property. (Sec. 26)

---

CRS-10
H.R. 3121 (Waters)
S. 2284
Provision
(Passed House 9/27/07)
(Reported by Senate Banking Committee 11/1/07)
Multiple Peril Coverage for Flood and Windstorm Losses
Multiple Peril Coverage
Amends Section 1304 of the National Flood Insurance Act of
No similar provision.
for Flood and Windstorm
1968 to enable the purchase of optional insurance against both
flood and windstorm losses. Requires communities that
participate in the NFIP to adopt adequate criteria for land
management and use. Also amends Section 1361 of the 1968
Act to authorize the Administrator to conduct a study and
investigation to determine appropriate measures (e.g., laws,
regulations, and ordinance relating) that could be adopted in
windstorm-prone areas with respect to windstorm risks, zoning
building codes, building permits, subdivision and other
building restrictions for such areas, and windstorm damage
prevention. The Administrator of FEMA shall use the results
of the study and investigation to establish comprehensive
criteria designed to reduce damages caused by windstorms.
Establishes limits on the amount of coverage to not exceed the
lesser of the replacement cost for covered losses or $500,000
for single-family dwelling and $1,000,000 for non-residential
structures and $750,000 for contents. (Sec. 7)
Would allow multiple peril and flood insurance coverage of
apartment buildings up to the total number of dwelling units
times the maximum coverage limit per residential unit (Sec. 7)
Prohibits a WYO company from including language in its own
homeowners’ and windstorm policies that would exclude
coverage of wind damage solely because flooding also
contributed to the damage. (Sec. 35)
Would require that the contract between the WYO and the
NFIP state that the insurer has a fiduciary responsibility to
federal taxpayers and will act in the best interests of the NFIP.
(Sec. 35)
Would authorize GAO to conduct a study of the effects of the
multiperil insurance program on enrollment and pricing of
state residual property and casualty markets or plans and state
catastrophe plans. (Sec. 33)

---

CRS-11
H.R. 3121 (Waters)
S. 2284
Provision
(Passed House 9/27/07)
(Reported by Senate Banking Committee 11/1/07)
Flood Mapping
Modernization of Flood
Would require the Administrator in consultation with the
Would require FEMA to establish an ongoing mapping program
Maps and Elevation
Technical Mapping Advisory Council to establish an ongoing
to review, update and maintain flood insurance rate maps,
Standards
program to review, update, and maintain flood insurance rate
including all areas within the 100-year and 500-year floodplains
maps. Each map shall include a depiction of the 500-year
and areas of residual risk, including those protected by levees and
floodplain, as well as “residual risk” areas behind levees and
dams. (Sec. 22)
flood control dams. Updated flood maps would include
relevant information on coastal inundation provided by the
Army Corps of Engineers, storm surge modeling by the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
and stream flows, watershed characteristics, and topography
provided by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Would
require that no changes in flood insurance status can go into
effect until the remapping process is completed for the entire
Army Corp of Engineers district affected by the map. (Sec. 22)
Would require the Administrator to: (1) establish standards to
FEMA would be required to use the most accurate and consistent
ensure the adequacy and consistency of maps and methods of
data in mapping program. (Sec. 22)
data collection and analysis; (2) give priority to updating and
maintaining maps of coastal areas affected by Hurricanes
Katrina and Rita in order to provide guidance with respect to
hurricane recovery efforts; and (3) submit a report to Congress
that describes the flood map modernization activities by June
30 of each year.
Would require FEMA, when practical, to utilize emerging
Would require the various federal departments to work together
weather forecasting technologies, and consider the impacts of
to coordinate mapping and risk determination budgeting, and
global warming and the potential future impacts of global
requires the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), FEMA
climate change-related weather events, in assessing flood and
and other federal agencies to submit a joint report to Congress
storm risks.
within 30 days of the budget submission on the crosscutting
budget issues with respect to mapping. (Sec. 21)
After each flood map is updated, FEMA shall, in consultation
No similar provision.
with the chief executive officer of each community affected,
conduct a program to educate the community about the
updated flood insurance maps.
Would authorize the appropriation of $400 million for each of
Same as H.R. 3121. (Sec. 22)
fiscal years 2008 through 2013. (Sec. 22)

---

CRS-12
H.R. 3121 (Waters)
S. 2284
Provision
(Passed House 9/27/07)
(Reported by Senate Banking Committee 11/1/07)
Removal of Limitation on
No similar provision.
Would remove the current prohibition that prevents states from
State Contributions for
contributing greater than 50% of the cost of revising and updating
Updating Flood Maps
map modernization. (Sec. 20)
Nonmandatory
Would authorize FEMA to include a note on flood insurance
Would require the NFIP and regulated lending institutions notify
Participation for the 500-
rate maps identifying 100-year and 500-year certified levees
communities if they are entirely or partially located within the
Year Floodplain
and encourage property owners to evaluate their risk of
500-year floodplain (i.e., an area with at least a 0.2% chance of
flooding. Would clarify that the note shall not be considered
being inundated with water in any year). Owners of properties
a legal requirement of participation in the NFIP.
within the 500-year floodplain, but outside of the 100-year
(Sec. 36)
floodplain, would not be subject to mandatory purchase
requirements but might voluntarily purchase flood insurance upon
receiving notification of potential risk. (Sec. 23)
Technical Mapping
Would reestablish the Technical Mapping Advisory Council
Same as H.R. 3121. (Sec. 18)
Advisory Council
to provide direction and assistance to the Administrator of
FEMA concerning flood mapping activities. The Council
would include representatives from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, local and regional flood and storm water agencies,
state geographic information coordinators, and flood insurance
servicing companies. (Sec. 22)
Post-Disaster Flood
Would allow the Administrator of FEMA to issue interim
No similar provision.
Elevation Determinations
flood elevation requirements for any areas affected by flood-
related disaster. Interim elevation determinations would take
effect immediately upon issuance and may remain in effect
until FEMA established new flood elevations for such area.
(Sec. 22)
Interagency Coordination
No similar provision.
Would require FEMA to contract with the National Academy of
Study
Public Administration to conduct a study on how FEMA can
improve interagency coordination on flood mapping and funding,
and how FEMA can establish joint funding mechanisms with
federal, state, and local agencies to share the collection and use of
data for mapping. (Sec. 22)

---

CRS-13
H.R. 3121 (Waters)
S. 2284
Provision
(Passed House 9/27/07)
(Reported by Senate Banking Committee 11/1/07)
Coordination of Flood
No similar provision.
Would require the Directors of DHS, OMB and other federal
Risk Determination Data
agencies to work together to ensure that flood risk determination
Sharing and Budgeting
data and geospatial data are appropriately shared among federal
Efforts
agencies in order to coordinate the effort of the nation to reduce
its vulnerability to flooding hazards. Would require the Director
of OMB, in consultation with FEMA, USGS, NOAA, and the
Army Corp of Engineers, to submit an interagency budget
crosscut report that displays the budget proposed for each of the
federal agencies working on flood risk determination data and
digital elevation models. (Sec. 21)
Office of Flood Insurance
Would authorize the creation of the position of National Flood
Would establish an Office of the Flood Insurance Advocate to
Advocate
Insurance Advocate in FEMA who would transmit a
assist policyholders with any problems they have with the NFIP
comprehensive report to Congress about the major problems
and claims. (Sec. 31)
facing the NFIP and report to Congress about the feasibility
and effectiveness of establishing an Office of the Flood
Insurance Advocate, headed by the National Flood Insurance
Advocate, to assist insureds in resolving problems with the
NFIP, including issues related to bureaucratic obstacles in the
event of a disaster. (Sec. 34)
Building Codes in
Would authorize FEMA to submit a report to Congress on the
No similar provision.
FloodPlain Management
regulatory and financial and economic impacts of including
Criteria
nationally recognized building codes as part of the floodplain
management criteria of the NFIP. (Sec. 28)
Notification of Appeal of
Would require FEMA to notify the chief executive officer of
No similar provision.
Map Changes and
local communities about their right to appeal projected base
Notification of
flood elevation determinations, and the contact information of
Establishment of Flood
the person who handles appeals at FEMA. The Administrator
Elevations
would also be required to publish a notice in the Federal
Register and local newspapers of such change and provide
written notification by first class mail to each property affected
by a proposed change in flood elevation, prior to the 90-day
appeal period. Notification would include an explanation of
the appeals process, the status of each property with respect to
flood zone and flood insurance requirements under the act,
and contact information for responsible officials. (Sec. 23)

---

CRS-14
H.R. 3121 (Waters)
S. 2284
Provision
(Passed House 9/27/07)
(Reported by Senate Banking Committee 11/1/07)
GAO Studies and Reports
GAO Study of Methods to
Would direct GAO to conduct a study of potential methods,
No similar provision.
Increase Participation of
practices, and incentives that would increase the degree to
Low-Income Families in
which low-income property owners living in high-risk areas
the NFIP
participate in the NFIP. The study would analyze the
feasibility of providing coverage to low-income families at
discounted rates, the amounts of the discount to make it
affordable, and the extent to which low-income families would
be affected by expanding the mandatory purchase
requirements. (Sec. 19)
GAO Report on
No similar provision.
Would require GAO to submit a report to Congress on: (1) the
Expanding the NFIP
number of flood insurance policyholders currently insured; (2) the
increased losses the NFIP would have sustained during the 2004
and 2005 hurricane seasons if the program had insured all policies
up to $417,000, and (3) the availability in the private marketplace
of flood insurance coverage in amounts that exceed the current
coverage limits. (Sec. 32)
GAO Review of FEMA
No similar provision.
Would require GAO to conduct a study and submit a report to
Contractors and Study of
Congress on NFIP’s activities and financial health, including the
NFIP’s Financial
amount paid in premiums, losses, expenses, number of policies,
Conditions
insurance in force, estimate of average loss year and a description
and amount of claims paid. (Sec. 32)
Would require GAO to conduct a study of pre-FIRM structures to
determine what types of properties are pre-FIRM, who owns the
properties, locations, and property values. (Sec. 32)
Would require GAO, in conjunction with the DHS Inspector
Generals Office, to review the three largest contractors FEMA
uses in administering the NFIP. (Sec. 32)
GAO Study Regarding
Would authorize GAO to issue a report on the status of the
No similar provision.
Status of Pre-FIRM
pre-FIRM properties including the number of properties, cost
Properties and Mandatory
of providing coverage, the rate at which such properties will
Purchase Requirement
cease to be covered under the program and the effects fo the
2004 Reform Act will have on pre-FIRM properties. (Sec. 3)
Source: Congressional Research Service.

---