To amend the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 to allow for the consideration of private flood insurance for the purposes of applying continuous coverage requirements, and for other purposes.
Summary
HB6620 would amend the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 to require the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s flood insurance administrator to treat certain periods of private flood insurance coverage the same as National Flood Insurance Program coverage for purposes of continuous coverage rules. In practical terms, if a property was continuously insured through a private flood policy that satisfied federal flood insurance requirements, that coverage period would count toward continuous coverage just as NFIP coverage would.
The bill is aimed at preventing policyholders from losing continuous-coverage status simply because they switched from a federal flood policy to a qualifying private-market flood policy. It would apply to statutory, regulatory, and administrative continuous coverage requirements, including the surcharge-related rule in section 1307(g)(1), and would affect how flood insurance lapses and premium treatment are evaluated under federal law.
Impact
The bill would amend section 1308 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 4015, by adding a new subsection directing the Administrator to recognize qualifying private flood insurance as continuous coverage. This would affect federal flood insurance administration, including how continuous coverage is determined under the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 and related NFIP rules. The practical impact would be on homeowners, lenders, insurers, and FEMA by reducing penalties or adverse treatment tied to perceived coverage gaps when a property was insured through the private market.
Sentiment
There is no recorded committee debate or vote history in the provided materials, so no formal partisan or procedural sentiment can be measured from the record. The bill’s introduction by Representatives Castor and Salazar suggests bipartisan interest, and the measure’s text reflects a technical, consumer-oriented fix rather than a broader policy overhaul. Overall, the available context indicates a likely pragmatic and favorable posture toward aligning federal rules with private flood insurance coverage.
Contention
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided transcripts or votes. Potential areas of debate, based on the bill text, could include whether private flood policies should be treated identically to NFIP policies for federal compliance purposes, how to verify that private coverage meets section 102(a) requirements, and whether expanding recognition of private insurance could affect NFIP participation or premium structures. However, none of these concerns are attributed to any named member or stakeholder in the available record.
To require the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the National Credit Union Administration to carry out an analysis to determine whether insurance coverage should be raised on covered transaction accounts, and for other purposes.